Chapter 16 ACRL’s Scholarly Communications Roadshow Bellwether for a Changing Profession Joy Kirchner University of British Columbia Library Kara J. Malenfant Association of College and Research Libraries Introduction At its heart, the ACRL Scholarly Communications Roadshow program highlights the need to redefine what it means to be a librarian in the twenty-first century. For over a decade, the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) has been committed to its scholarly commu- nication initiative as one of its highest strategic priorities. Professional development and continuing education for academic librarians are cor- nerstones of the initiative. The Roadshow’s responsive curriculum has grown to support academic librarians as they stretch their professional muscles in new ways. Attuned to a changing community, Roadshow presenters continuously update the curriculum, and it has shifted focus from imparting a basic awareness of the dynamics in the current system of scholarly communication to facilitating participants’ deeper under- standing and engagement or commitment to changing the system. More than meeting the community where it is, the Roadshow program challenges participants to assume ever more active roles in accelerating the transition to a more open system of scholarship. The Roadshow program has set goals to stimulate new thinking about the future of library services, to provide practical ideas on developing services, and to discuss emerging themes, such as the use of alternative metrics in reward systems and the intersections of scholarly communi- cation and student learning. Through the Roadshow, ACRL not only reached those who may not attend national conferences or work at large research universities, 299 [ ] Creative Commons attribution-nonCommercial (CC BY-nC) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ 300 Common Ground at the nexus of InformatIon LIteraCy and sChoLarLy CommunICatIon but also asserted that scholarly communication issues are central to the work of all academic librarians and all types of institutions. In this chapter, we describe how the program has evolved to support academ- ic librarians as they assume new roles as contributors of knowledge creation, advocates of sustainable models of scholarship, and partners of faculty in both research and educational processes. Background and Context Within ACRL’s current strategic plan, there are three primary goal areas of focus for 2011–2016: the value of academic libraries, student learning, and the research and scholarly environment. The goal for the research and scholarly environment strategic area is, “Librarians accelerate the transition to a more open system of scholarship.” The specific objectives are: 1. Model new dissemination practices. 2. Enhance members’ ability to address issues related to digital scholarship and data management. 3. Influence scholarly publishing policies and practices toward a more open system. 4. Create and promote new structures that reward and value open scholarship. (ACRL 2011) This commitment to hastening a more open system of scholarship is not new. ACRL has long endeavored to reshape the system of schol- arly communication, focusing on the areas of education, advocacy, coalition building, and research. Starting in January 2000, an ACRL task force on scholarly communication began discussing how ACRL might contribute to shaping the future of scholarly communication and stated that such discussion “requires envisioning what such a fu- ture might be like” (English et al. 2002, 4). In the task force’s January 2002 report to the ACRL board, they had determined that the issues surrounding scholarly communication and publishing were of major import to ACRL members. The task force recommended that ACRL, as one of its highest strategic priorities, be actively engaged in working to reshape the current system of scholarly communication, with activi- ties to include educational work, political advocacy, coalition building, and research. In describing the broad-based educational work, the task force identified a new role for ACRL: Given the complexity of these issues, and the impor- tance of working on them in a sustained way over time, we believe there is a critical need for ACRL to mount ongoing programs to educate academic librarians about aCrL’s sChoLarLy CommunICatIons roadshow 301 scholarly communication issues and for ACRL to create support mechanisms, programs, and publicity efforts to help make faculty researchers and higher educa- tion administrators more aware of the importance of these concerns. ACRL’s broad membership base and its strong record in programming and continuing education puts the association in a unique position to be effective in these areas. (English et al. 2002, 6) Based on the recommendations in the report, ACRL launched its scholarly communication initiative in spring 2002 as one of its highest strategic priorities. ACRL’s new standing committee of the Board, the Scholarly Communications Committee, then focused on continuing education for academic librarians by developing a preconference for the ALA Annual 2004 in Orlando, Florida: Scholarly Communication 101: An Introduction to Scholarly Communication Issues and Strate- gies for Change. Presentations from this preconference included: • Anatomy of a Crisis: Dysfunction in the Scholarly Communi- cations System (by Lee Van Orsdel) • Copyright, Licensing, and Information Policy: Mine, Mine, and Well, Mine! (by Dwayne Buttler) • Fostering a Competitive Market (by Ray English) • Open Access (by Karen Williams) • Scholarly Communication: Legislative and Political Advocacy (by James G. Neal) • Scholarly Communication: Strategies for Change (by James G. Neal) These presentation materials became the foundation of the ACRL Scholarly Communication Toolkit, which was launched in March 2005 to support advocacy efforts for academic and research libraries. The path from this initial preconference to creating a sustained Roadshow workshop with a “101” basic level approach was not entirely linear, and next we will describe in the stages leading up to it. In addition to offering this very first preconference in 2004 aimed at a basic 101-level education, members of the Scholarly Communications Committee, together with staff, began exploring a new project with the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) to jointly promote the development of library-led outreach programs. The two organizations recognized a shared concern for supporting academic and research libraries in their growing efforts to develop campus outreach pro- grams. Through the ARL/ACRL Institute on Scholarly Communication (ISC), the organizations have sought to aid libraries in developing their outreach programs by offering websites with resources and plan- ning guides, topical webcasts, workshops, and an immersive learning experience. This signature two-and-a-half day event, first offered in 302 Common Ground at the nexus of InformatIon LIteraCy and sChoLarLy CommunICatIon July 2006, prepares participants to become local experts within their libraries and provides a structure for developing a program plan for scholarly communication outreach that is customized for each partici- pant’s institution. Many of the members of ACRL’s Scholarly Communications Com- mittee worked as faculty to design and deliver initial offerings of the immersive event for the ISC. In this capacity, they recognized the wide variance in background understanding and engagement in scholarly communications as a critical perspective for academic libraries and li- brarians. They saw a strong need to provide librarians with contextual understanding in order to help them take action and develop campus outreach programs. While many librarians understood that copyright, information economics, business models, open access, and other schol- arly communications issues are important, they did not have enough background in these issues to begin taking action in their own library and campus settings. Many academic librarians, therefore, continued to require a basic approach before being able to benefit from the more advanced work on program planning offered via the ISC. To help this segment of the community, ACRL committee members decided in 2008 to return to the “101” idea and develop a workshop specifically targeting librar- ians who were new to scholarly communications issues. It was felt that such a program could serve as a bridge course toward more advanced opportunities such as the ISC. As one way to understand the varying levels of readiness within the community, we looked to an article by Joyce Ogburn (2008), which has served as a cornerstone text for the ISC. In it, she proposes a series of five stages through which libraries, by programmatic efforts, will advance: 1. Awareness: having basic knowledge of the issues 2. Understanding: higher order of knowledge, intelligence, and appreciation 3. Ownership: commitment and obligation 4. Activism: goal-directed, concerted, and purposeful action 5. Transformation: attainment of a profound alteration of as- sumptions, methods, and culture Defining and applying these stages, she wrote, “can help establish and guide a program by setting direction and goals, tracking progress, identifying landmarks, and noting achievements…The stages reflect an evolution from local action to collaborative efforts with the goal of achieving widespread change” (Ogburn 2008, 45). These stages provide a useful theoretical framework against which to consider how ACRL’s curriculum for the Roadshow has evolved to support a com- munity in transition, as we’ll describe next. aCrL’s sChoLarLy CommunICatIons roadshow 303 From Conference Workshop to Roadshow The Roadshow curriculum was initially developed by members of the ACRL Scholarly Communications Committee in a proposal for a basic half-day workshop offered in person as part of the ACRL 14th Na- tional Conference, Push the Edge: Explore, Engage, Extend, in Seattle, Washington, March 12–15, 2009. Workshop leaders, known experts from the committee, developed the curriculum based on learning out- comes and speaker guidelines delineated in the proposal. Two mem- bers of the committee, Joy Kirchner (University of British Columbia) and Lee Van Orsdel (Grand Valley State), worked in consultation with staff liaison Kara Malenfant to lead and guide the development of the program in accordance with the committee’s goals and in keeping with ACRL’s commitment to continuing education in this area. They created a twofold vision for the workshop: • Develop an ACRL educational offering that provides the library community with well-developed basic scholarly com- munications program. • Use the workshop as an opportunity to broaden expertise in scholarly communications by seeking out new, but knowl- edgeable and engaged, librarians for whom this opportunity to present would be good national-level exposure. Partner these new librarians with seasoned Scholarly Communications Committee experts or faculty from the ISC. The workshop was titled “Scholarly Communication 101” and was developed with the possibility of future offerings in mind. Two other presenters joined Kirchner and Van Orsdel in Seattle: Sarah Shreeves (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and a faculty member with the ISC), and Molly Keener (Wake Forest University), a newcomer. The four presenters worked together to develop the follow- ing modules for the half-day workshop: 1. Introduction and economic issues 2. Open access and openness as a principle 3. Copyright and intellectual property 4. New modes and models of scholarly communication While it was in development, the presenters discussed the upcom- ing workshop with the ACRL Scholarly Communications Commit- tee at a January 2009 meeting. Then-ARL staff member Karla Strieb (née Hahn) commented that librarians at the workshop may eagerly approach the presenters and invite them to offer a reprise on their campuses. Sensing an opportunity to further ACRL’s strategic goals1 by taking the workshop out and extending its reach, Malenfant suggested the committee develop an ACRL-subsidized Roadshow program that institutions could apply to host. This plan was enthusiastically 304 Common Ground at the nexus of InformatIon LIteraCy and sChoLarLy CommunICatIon endorsed by the ACRL Scholarly Communications Committee and implemented quickly thereafter. In early March 2009, ACRL announced that it would carry the costs to take the workshop, “Scholarly Communications 101: Start- ing with the Basics,” on the road to five locations, chosen through a competitive process, in summer 2009. Promotion was queued up so that the Roadshow was advertised with flyers and announcements at the ACRL 14th National Conference in Seattle. In preparing to take the workshop on the road, presenters adapted the curriculum based on what they had learned. Additional presenters were recruited from available ISC faculty: Kevin Smith (Duke Uni- versity) and Terri Fishel (Macalaster College). When announced, the Roadshow was promoted in this way: Led by two expert presenters, this structured interac- tive overview of the scholarly communication system highlights individual or institutional strategic planning and action. Four modules focus on new methods of scholarly publishing and communication, copyright and intellectual property, economics and open access. As a result of the workshop, participants will understand scholarly communication as a system to manage the results of research and scholarly inquiry, enumerate new modes and models of scholarly communication and select and cite key principles, facts and messages relevant to current or nascent scholarly communica- tion plans and programs at their institutions. “Scholarly Communication 101” is appropriate for those with new leadership assignments in scholarly communication as well as liaisons and others who are interested in the issues and need foundational understanding. (ALA 2009) Mentoring New Presenters In addition to developing programming that would educate librarians with new responsibilities for scholarly communication, the Roadshow has also served as a vehicle for directly mentoring newer librarians by expanding the presenter pool to bring in different areas of expertise within scholarly communication at large. To that end, a call went out to both faculty members of the ISC and the ACRL Scholarly Commu- nications Committee asking for recommendations for new presenters. These calls resulted in recruiting a newer librarian, Keener, to be part of the group designing and delivering the workshop at ACRL National Conference 2009. Once the Roadshow was launched, more presenters aCrL’s sChoLarLy CommunICatIons roadshow 305 were needed, resulting in a similar call to ISC and committee members to recruit an additional newer librarian, Molly Kleinman (University of Michigan). Members of the committee mentored Keener and Klein- man as appropriate in both developing the curriculum and in teaching. As the Roadshow continued, the team of expert presenters was enlarged to accommodate an expanded program and replace those who discontinued their service to the program. A model for expand- ing the pool was discussed by the ACRL Scholarly Communications Committee, where it was decided that a formal selection process and mentorship program should be integrated into the Roadshow pro- gram, with specific funding earmarked for this purpose. ACRL sent out an announcement seeking expressions of interest from prospec- tive presenters to all major scholarly communication lists in March 2011. This opportunity was also widely advertised at the ACRL 2011 conference, and a formal selection and interview process took place for two new presenters over a two-year period. Ada Emmet (University of Kansas) was selected in 2011, and Stephanie Davis-Kahl (Illinois Wesleyan University) was selected in 2012. Program Revision in 2012 Constant revision and updates to the program have been a critical staple in the Roadshow curriculum development. Workshop presenters are active in developing the program because they are keenly aware of how quickly the scholarly communication arena is evolving. They collaborate frequently to reflect on the program deliverables, deter- mine what improvements are necessary, and revise the program and handouts as new information emerges in this arena. They are attuned to the shifts they are observing in the community over time as library programs evolve through Ogburn’s stages. Recognizing this evolution relies on more than just a tacit sense; there is data to support the observation that libraries are becom- ing more engaged and taking on more activities related to scholarly communication education and outreach. Prior to each Roadshow, participants are asked to identify one person from each library to answer a series of questions—a census if you will. The purpose is to better understand the state of scholarly communication education and outreach efforts at the library level in the short term and the long term. The online questionnaire presents a checklist of some eighteen scholarly communication activities (e.g., outreach events for faculty on scholarly communication topics, an institutional repository, a fund to pay author fees for open access journal publishing, etc.) and asks the submitters to identify their library’s current activities and its future plans. In nearly all cases, there has been an increase in the number of 306 Common Ground at the nexus of InformatIon LIteraCy and sChoLarLy CommunICatIon libraries offering these activities over the last four years. (For complete text of questions and data underlying the graph in Figure 16.1, see Ap- pendix 16.1: Responses to Pre-Workshop Questionnaire on Library- Level Engagement.) Given this evidence that libraries felt a sense of ownership and were increasingly committing resources to implement education and outreach activities, it was felt that the community had largely moved beyond Ogburn’s first stage of awareness of the issues and that it was time to shift the program offerings from a 101-level curriculum aimed at basic knowledge deliverables to a more advanced program. ACRL sought to marshal resources to do this work well and named Kirchner, who had been acting as coordinator of the presenter group, as ACRL visiting program officer to lead that change. After three years of revi- sions, in 2012 the Roadshow was substantially modified and renamed, “Scholarly Communications: From Understanding to Engagement.” This title dropped the 101 designation and the term basics to reflect the transition from the program’s earlier goal of providing a base-level understanding of scholarly communication. As of 2012, the program is now a more robust professional development offering and has extended from a half-day to a full-day workshop. New learning objectives were crafted to better reflect new deliverables (see Appendix 16.2.). Have held outreach events for faculty on SC topics Have held outreach events for students on SC topics Have held education events for library staff on SC topics Include SC topics in info lit instruction sessions Have a library web presence on SC aimed at campus Have a library web presence on SC aimed at library staff Job descriptions for library staff include SC duties Have assigned library staff members to be responsible for SC Have a library committee on SC that includes library staff Have a library committee on SC that includes other campus Offer services, such as copyright, author rights, etc., Offer services on open access mandates compliance Offer services that support data management plan Have an institutional repository Have a fund to pay author fees for open access journal Library serves as publisher for new models of SC Discussions with faculty leadership regarding open-access Member of SPARC (the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Member of the Alliance for Taxpayer Access 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 2009 Yes 2010 Yes 2011 Yes 2012 Yes Figure 16.1 Library-level activities of roadshow participants aCrL’s sChoLarLy CommunICatIons roadshow 307 The Roadshow is now aimed at those with administrative respon- sibilities or new leadership assignments in scholarly communication or digital publishing, as well as liaisons and any others who are seeking to advance their professional development in scholarly communica- tion. Broad goals of the revised program are designed to stimulate new thinking about the role of scholarly communication in the future of library services, to provide practical ways for participants to develop service models for scholarly communication in their libraries, and to empower participants to help accelerate the transformation of the scholarly communication system. As the program matured, ACRL introduced a cost-sharing model to align the program more closely with other ACRL professional development opportunities. (ACRL is committed to underwriting the bulk of the costs for delivering the Roadshow, and the cost for the five successful host institutions is $2,000. Separate from this competitive application process, ACRL will now offer the program at full cost to institutions wishing to license it.) The revised workshop was piloted at the ALA Midwinter Meeting 2012 and was one of the best-attended ACRL daylong offerings at an ALA Midwinter Meeting in several years. In evaluating this offering, a standard ACRL instrument was used to allow data to be collected in a way that would tie the data back to ACRL’s key performance indicators for professional develop- ment programs. Looking Back The program was initially developed to help libraries that were just starting to consider how to develop campus outreach programs, with an aim of supporting Ogburn’s first stage (awareness: having basic knowledge of the issues). However, it quickly evolved to assist participants in thinking through service models for their scholarly communication activities and rapidly began to incorporate a higher level of knowledge and appreciation of the more nuanced aspects of scholarly communication. For instance, while open access awareness and education was the chief discussion point in the first Roadshow, by 2012, presenters became aware that open access is largely well under- stood and that there was a need to shift that segment of the workshop to focus more on emergent areas and the politics of open access and openness in practice. The presenters have been increasingly challenged with developing a curriculum to suit all library types. They have increasingly recog- nized, throughout the four years of the Roadshow, that scholarly com- munication is no longer the focus of just large, research-intensive in- stitutions. Accordingly, the program evolved to broaden the discussion 308 Common Ground at the nexus of InformatIon LIteraCy and sChoLarLy CommunICatIon from a publishing and research perspective to encompassing more of a teaching and learning perspective. This redesign allows it to resonate more with librarians undertaking scholarly communication activities at institutions with a primary focus on undergraduate education. The curriculum also evolved to include more material designed to assist liaison librarians who are working with students and with faculty as teachers, not just researchers. The presenters further redesigned the material to be applicable to any size institution. To further understand how the Roadshow could better support liberal arts colleges, Kirchner recruited Davis-Kahl (prior to her selection as a new presenter) to help the committee gather information about scholarly communication activities, priorities, needs, and current programs at small liberal arts colleges as a way of guiding our future training efforts. This work is currently underway in summer 2012. In addition to adjusting the curriculum to meet the needs of librar- ians at different types of institutions, the presenters have discussed how to address the differences within disciplines regarding scholarly communications. It seems very important, and still more aspirational than real, for the Roadshow to help librarians deal with the actual conditions and variance in attitudes regarding scholarly communica- tion in art history, English, biology, or physics, for example. While presenters have declared themselves anxious to address disciplinary differences, the best method of doing so is unclear. They see disciplin- ary differences as an important aspect of the intersection between scholarly communication and information literacy, and it is a recurring theme during debriefing calls and retreats. Emerging Themes in 2012 In 2012, the curriculum was reshaped to build in more engagement with participants on how their libraries could create value-added services in the system of scholarship. This included thinking beyond open access and institutional repositories to consider other mecha- nisms to enhance knowledge exchange and mobilization, new forms of both creation and dissemination of scholarship, and means for tracking those developments on our own campuses. The presenters more deliberately included case studies in the curriculum to both instigate discussion and showcase how other institutions created such value-added services as supports for the open exchange of scholar- ship, open education services, publishing services, and copyright services. Several emerging themes surfaced by 2012. These include e-science, data management, scholarly communication as it relates to student learning, and how emerging alternative metrics to evaluate scholarship may change faculty reward systems (e.g., promotion and aCrL’s sChoLarLy CommunICatIons roadshow 309 tenure). While this chapter cannot explore each of these emerging themes in depth, we chose to focus on two that are relevant, given the subject of this book. First, we look at the emerging theme of scholarly communication and student learning. The 2012 Roadshow program saw an increased interest in developing scholarly communication programs that fo- cused on undergraduate publishing support as a result of the increased number of institutions placing strategic emphasis on undergraduate research. As a result, the Roadshow provided more emphasis on ways in which scholarly communication programming can support such in- stitutional imperatives. The Roadshow presented case studies on how scholarly communication librarians or liaison librarians are working with faculty to provide avenues to give their undergraduate students publishing experience, typically through open access avenues. Exam- ples include faculty who have created assignment-based models rang- ing from student article submissions to open access student journals to the launching of a student open access journal where students are assigned specific editorial roles as defined in such open access journal programs as Open Journal Systems. Other examples include student submission of exemplary undergraduate student work in institutional repositories. Still other faculty are providing their students with oppor- tunities for publishing experience through other “open avenues,” such as wikis or through submission to Wikipedia.2 Next we look at another emerging theme around the use of alternative metrics in rewarding and valuing open scholarship. The Roadshow has always addressed the role of promotion and tenure in the segments on the system of scholarly communication and as an influencing factor in the economics of traditional scholarly publishing. However, in the most recent cycle of Roadshows, there was increased interest in delving more deeply into exploring programmatic roles for libraries and librarians in promotion and tenure arenas. Through facil- itated dialogue, presenters and participants explore a role for libraries in assisting promotion and tenure committees with the evaluation of newer forms of scholarship. As promotion and tenure committees are increasingly faced with evaluating newer forms of digital scholarship, libraries could potentially play a role in providing context and un- derstanding of new models of scholarship and supporting alternative metrics (altmetrics) on their own campuses as a means of offering sup- port for scholarship or promotion and tenure cases that are not well supported by traditional citation metrics. Discussion included how libraries can play a role in supporting or creating altmetrics to provide other avenues to demonstrate impact of an author’s or creator’s work beyond traditional avenues and how such models would be especially useful for those faculty seeking to demonstrate value for new models 310 Common Ground at the nexus of InformatIon LIteraCy and sChoLarLy CommunICatIon of scholarship. Presenters and participants have also discussed col- lections statistics, institutional repository statistics, and how libraries can utilize, support, or contribute to the growing number of emerging altmetric tools in development.3 Looking Forward To a large degree, the Roadshow program focuses on transitions occurring in research, publishing, teaching, and learning practices brought about by new technologies. Those changes and the need to both respond and proactively shape a future that fully leverages the affordances inherent in new technologies, is at the heart of the Road- show programming. The Roadshow curriculum is likely to evolve to capture more thinking about the following trends: 1. Value-added library services and mechanisms to enhance knowledge exchange, translation, dissemination, and mo- bilization, especially to support open exchange of research and scholarship. Linked to this discussion is the growing importance of the accessibility and reuse of research data as an important emergent and complex new arena in scholarly communication as libraries begin to develop service models in support of data management. The intersection of scholarly communication and data curation will need to be explored. 2. The intersection of information literacy and scholarly commu- nication. ACRL has begun to explore this trend through this book and a forthcoming white paper. Likely the Roadshow program will evolve as these investigations continue. 3. The growing value of “personal collections,” open educa- tion models, and open research data. How these collections contribute to scholarship and scholarly practice will likely be tracked in the Roadshow program. 4. How actively institutions wish to support, preserve, and promote new forms of scholarship. As colleges and universi- ties are faced with the challenges of reviewing emerging forms of scholarship and scholarly communication for promotion and tenure considerations, they (perhaps with help from their libraries) will need to this issue. Key questions for future scholarly communication programming will likely include tracking and thinking through the following: • How is the emerging landscape of scholarly communication and contribution shifting? • How might promotion and tenure processes be adapted to support knowledge production, transmission, and preserva- tion in an increasingly participatory culture? aCrL’s sChoLarLy CommunICatIons roadshow 311 • What approaches to promotion and tenure review are be- ing adopted and used by leading institutions in light of the changing landscape of scholarly communication and contri- bution? Are there emerging best practices at the disciplinary level that might serve as a model for others? • What metrics of scholarly communication and impact will be relevant for promotion and tenure committees in a shift- ing landscape of scholarly communication? How will this differ by discipline? What role can librarians play in pro- viding altmetrics in support of new models of scholarship? • What is the role of community engagement in emerging forms of scholarly communication? • In what ways can libraries assist with supporting sustain- able scholarship in both its emerging formats and tradi- tional formats? Conclusion In its fourth year, and with the 2012 workshops completed, the Roadshow will have visited seventeen different states, the District of Columbia, one US territory, and one Canadian province. The twenty workshops offered over these four years will have reached 1,272 participants from 344 different colleges and universities. (For a break- down, see Appendix 16.3.) Participants have given consistently high evaluations with comments such as these: • “I liked how simple the presenters made a very complex sub- ject appear…I hope that I can do the same in the future.” • “It helped me connect issues in a coherent way—the relation- ship between open movement, copyright, economics etc.— good to have a conceptual framework.” • “My epiphany moment was how much faculty plays a role and how, as a library, we can engage faculty in these discus- sions.” • “I came away with concrete ideas to take back to my campus. Many time [sic] at conferences or workshops I come away inspired but lacking in concrete solutions or initiatives. This time I was not only informed and inspired, but came away with ideas appropriate for my institution.” • “The two presenters were stunningly knowledgeable, but also very accessible and willing to field questions as they arose. Great information presented. I came back energized and fired up.” While it is clear that the Roadshow has been a catalyst for many participants to create or expand scholarly communication programs 312 Common Ground at the nexus of InformatIon LIteraCy and sChoLarLy CommunICatIon in their own libraries (Vandegrift and Colvin 2012), there have also been some positive unexpected outcomes. Presenters have heard that simply seeing the advertisement itself spurred some institutions to take scholarly communication more seriously. Some prospective hosts, whether selected or not, reported that the act of applying (and secur- ing partners for their application) has been a springboard for begin- ning their own local scholarly communication educational programs. Several unsuccessful applicants, for instance, went ahead and launched their own local “Roadshow” workshops. We have encouraged this by adding Roadshow materials to the ACRL Scholarly Communication Toolkit 4 under a Creative Commons license. In extending the reach of the Roadshow this way, we hope that librarians will make use of these tools, including short videos, presentation templates, and handouts, to enhance their own knowledge or adapt them to offer related work- shops on their own campuses. From a library association perspective, the Roadshow has been an extraordinary opportunity to support members in a much-needed way. It has directly supported ACRL’s strategic priorities, and the responsive curriculum is a model for how the association can meet the changing reality of our work as academic librarians. By subsidizing the Road- show, ACRL has reached those who may not attend national confer- ences or work at large research universities. Through the Roadshow, ACRL intends to send a clear message that scholarly communication issues are central to the work of all academic librarians and all types of institutions. ACRL challenges all librarians to extend their curios- ity and be more responsive to their community, finding appropriate insertion points where there is a need on their campus. Through the combination of excellent presenters and forward-thinking curriculum, ACRL is supporting members of our profession as they assume new roles as contributors of knowledge creation, advocates of sustainable models of scholarship, and partners of faculty in both the research and educational processes. Acknowledgements The authors wish to acknowledge the excellent work of members of the Roadshow presenter team who have undertaken the efforts described in this chapter with dedication and verve. They are Ada Emmett, Stephanie Davis-Kahl, Molly Keener, Joy Kirchner, Sarah Shreeves, Kevin Smith, Lee Van Orsdel, and past presenters Molly Kleinman and Terri Fishel. 20 09 60 re sp on se s 20 10 57 re sp on se s 20 11 50 re sp on se s 20 12 37 re sp on se s* Ye s n o N o, b ut pl an ne d in th e ne xt 1 2 m on th s Ye s n o N o, b ut pl an ne d in th e ne xt 1 2 m on th s Ye s n o N o, b ut pl an ne d in th e ne xt 1 2 m on th s Ye s n o N o, b ut pl an ne d in th e ne xt 1 2 m on th s h av e he ld o ut re ac h ev en ts fo r f ac ul ty o n sc ho la rly c om - m un ic at io n to pi cs 32 % 40 % 28 % 36 % 36 % 27 % 37 % 55 % 8% 57 % 30 % 14 % h av e he ld o ut re ac h ev en ts fo r s tu de nt s on s ch ol ar ly c om - m un ic at io n to pi cs 15 % 73 % 12 % 25 % 68 % 7% 22 % 76 % 2% 35 % 49 % 16 % h av e he ld e du ca tio n ev en ts fo r l ib ra ry s ta ff on s ch ol ar ly co m m un ic at io n to pi cs 36 % 47 % 17 % 43 % 46 % 11 % 48 % 46 % 6% 59 % 32 % 8% In cl ud e sc ho la rly c om m un ic at io n to pi cs in in fo rm at io n lit er ac y in st ru ct io n se ss io ns fo r s tu de nt s 43 % 47 % 10 % 52 % 44 % 4% 54 % 44 % 2% 51 % 35 % 14 % h av e a lib ra ry w eb p re se nc e on s ch ol ar ly c om m un ic at io n to pi cs a im ed a t c am pu s co m m un ity 27 % 50 % 23 % 33 % 43 % 24 % 29 % 57 % 14 % 51 % 32 % 16 % h av e a lib ra ry w eb p re se nc e on s ch ol ar ly c om m un ic at io n to pi cs a im ed a t l ib ra ry s ta ff on ly 12 % 78 % 10 % 4% 82 % 15 % 12 % 86 % 2% 11 % 81 % 8% Jo b de sc rip tio ns fo r l ib ra ry s ta ff in cl ud e sc ho la rly c om m u- ni ca tio n du tie s 23 % 68 % 8% 25 % 62 % 13 % 24 % 70 % 6% 47 % 44 % 8% h av e as si gn ed li br ar y st af f m em be rs to b e re sp on si bl e fo r sc ho la rly c om m un ic at io n ac tiv iti es 38 % 50 % 12 % 46 % 41 % 13 % 52 % 44 % 4% 62 % 24 % 14 % h av e a lib ra ry c om m itt ee o n sc ho la rly c om m un ic at io n th at in cl ud es li br ar y st af f o nl y 18 % 73 % 8% 9% 89 % 2% 14 % 86 % 0% 27 % 68 % 5% a pp en dI x 16 .1 Re sp on se s t o P re -W or ks ho p Q ue st ion na ire on Li br ar y-L ev el En ga ge me nt 20 09 60 re sp on se s 20 10 57 re sp on se s 20 11 50 re sp on se s 20 12 37 re sp on se s* Ye s n o N o, b ut pl an ne d in th e ne xt 1 2 m on th s Ye s n o N o, b ut pl an ne d in th e ne xt 1 2 m on th s Ye s n o N o, b ut pl an ne d in th e ne xt 1 2 m on th s Ye s n o N o, b ut pl an ne d in th e ne xt 1 2 m on th s h av e a lib ra ry c om m itt ee o n sc ho la rly c om m un ic at io n th at in cl ud es o th er c am pu s st ak eh ol de rs (e .g ., fa cu lty , e di to rs , un iv er si ty p re ss , r es ea rc h of fic e) 8% 82 % 10 % 20 % 67 % 13 % 2% 90 % 8% 16 % 68 % 16 % o ffe r s er vi ce s, s uc h as c op yr ig ht , a ut ho r r ig ht s, a nd /o r op en a cc es s m an da te s co m pl ia nc e ad vi si ng 45 % 45 % 10 % 52 % 34 % 14 % 58 % 42 % 0% n/ a n/ a n/ a o ffe r s er vi ce s on o pe n ac ce ss m an da te s co m pl ia nc e or ad vi si ng n/ a n/ a n/ a n/ a n/ a n/ a n/ a n/ a n/ a 24 % 49 % 27 % o ffe r s er vi ce s th at s up po rt d at a m an ag em en t p la n co m pl i- an ce o r a dv is in g n/ a n/ a n/ a n/ a n/ a n/ a n/ a n/ a n/ a 16 % 57 % 27 % h av e an in st itu tio na l r ep os ito ry 40 % 50 % 10 % 41 % 46 % 13 % 47 % 43 % 10 % 57 % 32 % 11 % h av e a fu nd to p ay a ut ho r f ee s fo r o pe n ac ce ss jo ur na l pu bl is hi ng 0% 10 0% 0% 11 % 87 % 2% 12 % 86 % 2% 19 % 70 % 11 % Li br ar y se rv es a s pu bl is he r f or n ew m od el s of s ch ol ar ly co m m un ic at io n (e -jo ur na ls , e tc .) 12 % 88 % 0% 16 % 73 % 11 % 16 % 72 % 12 % 32 % 59 % 8% di sc us si on s w ith fa cu lty le ad er sh ip re ga rd in g an o pe n ac - ce ss re so lu tio n fo r m y ca m pu s 13 % 62 % 25 % 20 % 53 % 27 % 24 % 70 % 6% 35 % 51 % 14 % M em be r o f S pa rC (t he S ch ol ar ly p ub lis hi ng a nd a ca de m ic re so ur ce s Co al iti on ) n/ a n/ a n/ a n/ a n/ a n/ a 17 % 83 % 0% 35 % 65 % 0% M em be r o f t he a lli an ce fo r t ax pa ye r a cc es s n/ a n/ a n/ a n/ a n/ a n/ a 0% 10 0% 0% 5% 95 % 0% aCrL’s sChoLarLy CommunICatIons roadshow 315 appendIx 16.2 2012 Roadshow Learning Objectives Overall Program Learning Objectives Participants will: • Enhance understanding of scholarly communication as a sys- tem to manage the results of research and scholarly inquiry. • Increase their ability to examine, and initiate or support new models of scholarly communication (e.g., research and social interaction models such as blogs, new ways of peer review). • Select and cite key principles, facts, and messages relevant to their own scholarly communication plans and programs (cur- rent or nascent). • Identify concrete actions that they may take back to their in- stitutions and in their positions to help accelerate the transfor- mation of the scholarly communication system. Module Learning Objectives 1. Scholarly Communication System Module Participants will: 1.1 Understand that the scholarly communication systems is made up of many interlocking systems 1.2 Understand the basic, traditional iterations in the life cycle of scholarship 1.3 Identify how disruptions are changing the traditional system of scholarly communication 2. Economics Module Participants will: 2.1 Understand some of the basic economic realities of the traditional scholarly publishing system 2.2 Recognize the connection between authors’ copyright management practices and monopolistic pricing in the scholarly journal market 2.3 Consider and reflect on alternative models and funding sources for scholarly publishing 3. Copyright Module Participants will: 3.1 Understand how copyright arises and identify types of ma- terial that are likely to be subject to copyright protection 316 Common Ground at the nexus of InformatIon LIteraCy and sChoLarLy CommunICatIon 3.2 Identify the likely copyright owners of academic works and have a reasonable awareness of the rights attendant on such protection 3.3 Be familiar with rights transfer and retention language commonly used in publishing contracts 4. Open and Openness Module Participants will: 4.1 Understand the conceptual underpinnings of open move- ments 4.2 Understand what the open access and public-access movements are 4.3 Identify current events within the open- and public- access movements 4.4 Identify other open movements 5. Faculty and Student Engagement Module Participants will: 5.1 Identify and examine current models and programming that support “openness” 5.2 Explore new models and tenure and promotion consid- erations 5.3 Explore models that you might consider piloting or experimenting with 5.4 Consider what next steps you might take aCrL’s sChoLarLy CommunICatIons roadshow 317 appendIx 16.3 Roadshow Hosts and Participants Year Host Location # Participants # Institutions 2012 atlanta University Center robert w. woodruff Library atlanta, Ga 69 18 Colorado State University pueblo, Co 27 13 James Madison University harrisonburg, Va 49 18 University of new Mexico albuquerque, nM 62 5 University of toronto toronto, on 58 19 2011 City University of new York (23 colleges) Brooklyn, nY 81 29 washington research Libraries Consortium washington, dC 73 13 University of hawaii at Manoa honolulu, hI 51 8 St. thomas University St. paul, Mn 45 10 academic Library association of ohio Columbus, oh 95 38 2010 auraria Library denver, Co 71 17 Bryan College dayton, tn 33 12 Florida State University tallahassee, FL 93 30 Kansas State University Manhattan, KS 60 27 Lehigh Valley association of Independent Colleges Bethlehem, pa 43 18 2009 aCrL Louisiana Chapter Baton rouge, La 81 21 State University of new York Buffalo, nY 79 22 texas tech University Lubbock, tx 46 4 University of puerto rico at Mayagüez Mayagüez, pr 67 4 washington University St. Louis, Mo 89 18 TOTAL 1,272 344 318 Common Ground at the nexus of InformatIon LIteraCy and sChoLarLy CommunICatIon Notes 1. When the workshop was offered in March 2009, ACRL was op- erating under its previous strategic plan, “Charting Our Future: ACRL Strategic Plan 2020” (ACRL 2004). That plan contained forty strategic objectives, and in order to focus energies, in May 2009 the board identified six as strategic priorities for 2009– 2013 (see ACRL 2009). Identifying the top priorities further supported ACRL’s decision to invest in offering the workshop as a Roadshow because it directly addressed one of these six: “En- hance ACRL members’ understanding of how scholars work and the systems, tools, and technology to support the evolving work of the creation, personal organization, aggregation, discovery, preservation, access and exchange of information in all formats.” 2. Examples showcased include University of British Columbia’s Dr. Jon Beasley Murray’s undergraduate Wikipedia assignment for his Spanish literature class (Jbmurray 2009). 3. See Altmetrics at http://altmetrics.org/tools for a growing list of alternative metric tools in development. 4. The ACRL Scholarly Communication Toolkit is available at http://scholcomm.acrl.ala.org/. References ALA (American Library Association). 2009. “ACRL Offers Scholarly Commu- nication 101 Road Show.” News release. March 3. http://www.ala. org/news/news/pressreleases2009/march2009/acrlscroadshow. ACRL (Association of College and Research Libraries). 2004. “Charting Our Future: ACRL Strategic Plan 2020.” Approved June 26. Last updated May 13, 2009. http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/ aboutacrl/strategicplan/ACRL-SP-5-09.pdf ACRL (Association of College and Research Libraries). 2009. “Strategic Pri- orities: 2009–2013.” Last updated May 18. http://www.ala.org/acrl/ sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/aboutacrl/strategicplan/priorities0913. pdf. ACRL (Association of College and Research Libraries). 2011. “ACRL Plan for Excellence.” April. http://www.ala.org/acrl/aboutacrl/strategicplan/ stratplan. Buttler, Dwayne. 2004. “Copyright, Licensing, and Information Policy: Mine, Mine, and Well, Mine!” Presentation at Scholarly Communica- tion 101: An Introduction to Scholarly Communication Issues and Strategies for Change, preconference for the ALA Annual Meeting, aCrL’s sChoLarLy CommunICatIons roadshow 319 Orlando, FL, June. English, Ray. 2004. “Fostering a Competitive Market.” Presentation at Schol- arly Communication 101: An Introduction to Scholarly Communi- cation Issues and Strategies for Change, preconference for the ALA Annual Meeting, Orlando, FL, June. English, Ray, Karyle Butcher, Deborah Dancik, James Neal, and Catherine Wojewodzki. 2002. Report of the ACRL Scholarly Communications Task Force. Chicago: ACRL, January. http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ ala.org.acrl/files/content/issues/scholcomm/doc12.0.pdf. Jbmurray. 2009. “User:Jbmurray/Madness.” Wikipedia user page. Last updated May 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jbmurray/Madness#First_ steps:_.22our.22_project_. Neal, James G. 2004a. “Scholarly Communication: Legislative and Politi- cal Advocacy.” Presentation at Scholarly Communication 101: An Introduction to Scholarly Communication Issues and Strategies for Change, preconference for the ALA Annual Meeting, Orlando, FL, June. Neal, James G. 2004b. “Scholarly Communications: Strategies for Change.” Presentation at Scholarly Communication 101: An Introduction to Scholarly Communication Issues and Strategies for Change, precon- ference for the ALA Annual Meeting, Orlando, FL, June. Ogburn, Joyce L. 2008. “Defining and Achieving Success in the Movement to Change Scholarly Communication.” Library Resources and Technical Services 52, no. 2 (April): 44–53. Vandegrift, Micah, and Gloria Colvin. 2012. “Relational Communications: Developing Key Connections.” College and Research Libraries News 73, no. 7 (July): 386–389. http://crln.acrl.org/content/73/7/386.full. Van Orsdel, Lee. 2004. “Anatomy of a Crisis: Dysfunction in the Scholarly Communications System.” Presentation at Scholarly Communica- tion 101: An Introduction to Scholarly Communication Issues and Strategies for Change, preconference for the ALA Annual Meeting, Orlando, FL, June. Williams, Karen. 2004. “Open Access.” Presentation at Scholarly Communica- tion 101: An Introduction to Scholarly Communication Issues and Strategies for Change, preconference for the ALA Annual Meeting, Orlando, FL, June.