In practical terms, one approach to make purchasing decisions that support future publishing practices is to focus on the research priorities of the institution, alongside the external funding opportunities the university has bid for – ideally including both successful and unsuccessful bids. The risk is that for a large research-inten- sive university with broad research strategies such as the University of Nottingham, there are simply too many disciplines to support fully.
A reading list, once created, is a semi- fixed point for at least a full taught course cycle (i.e. a three-year degree). There may be new books or journal
articles that are added to a reading list, but quality processes such as checking for new editions are undertaken as part of the review cycle. In contrast, research is developing and fluid, and dependent on different institutional factors such as specialisms, funding, and research centres.
Corresponding author
Another author-related VFM problem is already inherent in academia and academic publishing. In order to be eligi- ble to publish under the terms of TA, the corresponding author must be affiliated to an institution that is part of the agree- ment. TAs also base their publishing costs on rates of corresponding authorship.
Authorship decisions are made during the research process based on discussions amongst individuals and are determined by and reliant upon the academic norms of the discipline(s) and local research cul- ture at the time. In addition to creating an article pricing model determined by corresponding author (a responsibility previously unknown to authors), in prac- tice predicting levels of corresponding authorship becomes unquantifiable for the university.
Whether or how this practice is skewing research more broadly is the bigger underlying question we have encountered when attempting to evalu- ate VFM for the Publish element.
Conclusions and opportunities There is recognition across the sector that the TA model is not fulfilling its intended function, specifically as the mechanism that would bring about a global transition from paywalled content and collections to open access. As noted in Jisc’s A review of tran- sitional agreements in the UK report, this needs to be balanced alongside the positive outcomes from TAs, such as extended access to subscriptions and OA publishing, increase in publishing and publishing venues for authors, and open access compliance with funder policies. In the long-term this may all mean stepping away from the article model en- tirely and Jisc, universities and publish- ers are having discussions about future equitable models. Whilst this is happen- ing, we’re working out how to measure and achieve VFM within the current model. We would say that’s the crux of our work – how do we make the model work for readers and authors; and for us as librarians working with publishers, academics and funders?
Achieving transparency on the publish- ing side will only be the first step towards a solution when dealing with already unsustainable cost increases. Whilst TAs remain in place, we must keep exploring these questions to measure and under- stand their value.
University Library, Nottingham.
We think establishing and implement- ing Publish data standards will improve the effectiveness and transparency of TAs; and allow institutions, funders, and publishers to be confident in the quality and reliability of the data used in decision making. We also see scope for institutions to integrate this data into their planning and decision making when focusing on the research priorities and external fund- ing opportunities the university has bid for. This holistic approach will go some way to mitigate the risks and challenges we face in supporting our authors and promoting institutional research strate- gies, whilst continuing to work towards an open future for the sector. BG
9
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64
