Introduce graduate students and faculty in any discipline to the world of altmetrics and new ways to evaluate engagement with scholarly publications. The intention is to show not only new measurement techniques but to walk the learners through how to present their work in venues that will increase the visibility of their ideas and scholarly output.

Open access has been identified as a way to support diversity, equity and inclusion in new publishing models, compared to inequities in traditional publishing models.Despite the open movement being decades old, there is still a gap in research on Black, Indigenous, and faculty of color (BIPOC) in the context of open access. Understanding the motivations for and barriers against Open Access (OA) publishing (and the relationships between them) among BIPOC faculty helps LIS practitioners and Open advocates design incentives to increase participation and decrease lack of knowledge and stigma around OA.

In 2020, Camille Thomas served as co-PI on a research team that designed an original qualitative study (Perceptions of Open Access Publishing among Black, Indigenous, and people of color Faculty, forthcoming College & Research Libraries) that uncovers ways in which pre-tenure and tenured BIPOC perceive attitudes towards the legitimacy of open access publishing, especially as it relates to their own tenure and promotion processes. This study illuminates how their perceptions motivate or diminish their own interest in and adoption of open access as well as their level of advocacy for open access in their field, campus, and department, et al.

To foster practical application of outreach needs based on responses from the study, this resource includes:
- Readings
- Discussion questions
- Sample Scenarios, Events and Initiatives
- Assignments

Assignments were specifically created for developing strategic initiatives and outreach to support marginalized scholars. While these materials do not seek to solve systemic issues in academic research, they will encourage building equitable open infrastructure and an inclusive culture when discussing open access at institutions. This resource provides hands-on assignments to integrate inclusive practices in outreach and technical work. It will prepare students for practical experience with open advocacy and encourage deliberate outreach planning, execution and assessment as scholarly communication continues to evolve.

Learning Objectives
To understand diverse needs of researchers and scholars based on their positionality and intersectionality (student, post-doc, research topics, discipline and departmental culture, identities)
To identify when encouraging open may harm researchers or communities
To develop messaging that highlights social justice through open access’ benefits of transparency, access and non-traditional formats
To develop strategic initiatives that address the unique needs of an institution and its surrounding community
To develop advocacy, leadership and management skills by planning, executing and assessing strategic initiatives

This resource was created by Allison Kittinger, a library science master’s student at UNC-Chapel Hill, and Jennifer Solomon, an adjunct instructor at UNC-Chapel Hill. Allison and Jennifer are passionate about fostering bibliodiversity in scholarly communications and want to increase awareness of bibliodiversity among library science graduate students and early-career scholarly communications librarians. After engaging with this resource, learners will: gain an understanding of bibliodiversity, its urgency, and its importance; be able to articulate the concept of bibliodiversity in their own words/apply it in their work; and gain additional tools to apply DEI concepts in scholarly communications.

More background is available at https://lisoer.wordpress.ncsu.edu/2021/04/13/bibliodiversity-and-oer-a-student-perspective/.

Labor Equity in Open Science is an interactive lesson plan designed to introduce students to labor equity issues in open science practices. The lesson is designed for MLIS students, and assumes no prior knowledge. During the lesson, students are given a persona representing a researcher, encompassing various professional and personal identities. Students are then given multiple scenarios and asked to predict how their persona would respond and why. Through group discussion and personal reflection, students consider the ways that researchers in different positions engage with open science in different ways.

Knowledge of open access stakes and initiatives is critical for understanding and promoting the fundamental role of faculty and librarians in the scholarly information cycle as academia aims to become diverse, equitable, and inclusive and make scholarship more accessible. Despite the open movement being decades old, there is still a gap in research on Black, Indigenous, and faculty of color (BIPOC) in the context of open access. Understanding the motivations for and barriers against Open Access (OA) publishing (and the relationships between them) among BIPOC faculty helps LIS practitioners and Open advocates design incentives to increase participation and decrease lack of knowledge and stigma around OA.

In 2020, Principle Investigator, Tatiana Bryant and her research team designed an original qualitative study that uncovers ways in which pre-tenure and tenured BIPOC perceive attitudes towards the legitimacy of open access publishing, especially as it relates to their own tenure and promotion processes. To advance this research, select study instruments are available in the Scholarly Communication Notebook for reuse and adaptation as part of a lesson plan designed to teach LIS students and professionals to consider how qualitative research methods can support their praxis.

Short Description:
This book is a self-paced, open access training in peer review. In eight modules it asks readers to engage in a variety of activities to learn the who, what, why, and how of peer review. It is geared toward library professionals, library school students, or other academic professionals who must understand and/or engage with the peer-review process.

Long Description:
This book is a self-paced, open access training in peer review. In eight modules it asks readers to engage in a variety of activities to learn the who, what, why, and how of peer review. It is geared to library professionals, library school students, or other academic professionals who must understand and/or engage with the peer-review process. The modules are: What is Peer Review? Opportunities and Challenges in Peer Review Bias and Power Structures in Peer Review Critically Examining Established Peer-Review Practices Innovations in Peer Review Librarians and Peer Review Developing Peer Review Norms, Guidelines, and Expectations for LIS (or your discipline) Developing Your Peer Review Practice

Word Count: 7837

(Note: This resource's metadata has been created automatically as part of a bulk import process by reformatting and/or combining the information that the author initially provided. As a result, there may be errors in formatting.)

Project:

This project involves the experimental use of open pedagogy to teach the Scholarly Communication course in a graduate-level library and information science (LIS) program. Open pedagogy is variously defined, but generally understood as a framework that requires students to be active creators of course content rather than passive consumers of it. Proponents view this as a form of experiential learning in which students demonstrate greater understanding of content by virtue of creating it.

Students in this course learn by doing; that is, they learn about scholarly communication by participating in the process. Each student is required to develop a chapter—on a scholarly communication topic of their choosing—to be included in an open access monograph. Following the semester, the text is published under a Creative Commons license on the University at Buffalo’s institutional repository as an open educational resource (OER), allowing for reuse or repurposing in future sections of the course or in similar courses in LIS programs at other institutions. To date, students have created the following open monographs: Perspectives on Scholarly Communication, Volume 1 (2019), Perspectives on Scholarly Communication, Volume 2 (2020); and Perspectives on Scholarly Communication, Volume 3 (2021). Support for the development and production of the third volume was provided by way of the following grant:

Scholarly Communication Notebook (https://lisoer.wordpress.ncsu.edu/notebook/); Institute of Museum and Library Services (https://www.imls.gov/grants/awarded/lg-36-19-0021-19. Investigators: Will Cross (wmcross@ncsu.edu); Josh Bolick (jbolick@ku.edu); and Maria Bonn (mbonn@illinois.edu).

Outcomes:

Immediate outcomes of the “learn by doing” aspect are clear. The experience of publishing engages students in the applied side of concepts they are introduced to by way of lectures, readings, and other class activities. This experience is invaluable for those entering the field academic librarianship, and particularly for those who will have scholarly communication responsibilities.

Immediate outcomes of the open pedagogy aspect are compelling. Research shows that students ascribe a positive learning experience to the implementation of this framework, and they hold for its continued use in future sections of the course. Students are enthusiastic in their embrace of creating renewable versus disposable coursework. They express great satisfaction with contributing to the professional literature, building the discipline’s nascent OER record, and having a publication to feature in their curricular and professional dossiers. The experience also resonates with students on a philosophical level; LIS students are particularly inclined to support activities that align with the field’s abiding ethic of “free to all”.

Long-term outcomes for the course are emerging. Select chapters from these volumes are used as required readings. In this way, students are contributing to professional discourse and to the ongoing development of LIS curricula. A roadmap for this ongoing experiment is given by way of the syllabus, assignments, lectures, rubrics, and other related materials in this Open Science Framework project.

This open course introduces students to the scholarly communications system — with particular emphasis on the scholarly journal publishing mechanism — wherein new information is created, evaluated, disseminated, and preserved.

The course content is organized into three parts. First, The Fundamentals aims to acquaint students with the basic framework of contemporary scholarly publishing: how it operates, who is involved, what roles they play, etc., as well as asking students to consider how they themselves might engage with the system as consumers and producers of scholarly knowledge. Chapters include sample exercises to reinforce content, as well as recommended resources for further study. Next, (Some) Problems raises questions and issues that complicate contemporary scholarly publishing. While scholarship and research have the noble goal of building and sharing new knowledge for the public good, they are also inextricably bound to real-world economic structures and inequalities. This section examines how the scholarly publishing system intersects with money, power, and privilege. It asks students to grapple with the system’s structural, systemic failings, as well as contemplate ways in which it might be improved. Finally, the course culminates in two final Assignments that instructors can use as part of the curriculum, or that independent learners can work through on their own. These are open-ended in that there are no discrete right or wrong answers, but rather opportunities for students to grapple with and reflect on the content of the course.

Material in this course can be used in classroom settings or as self-paced tutorial. Appropriate audiences include upper-level undergraduate or graduate students who are interested in publishing their work; library & information science (LIS) students or early-career librarians interested in scholarly communications; and anyone else who wants a better understanding of the scholarly publishing system and the academic culture in which it is rooted.

The focus of this resource is primarily on the underrepresented area of publicly engaged scholarship. It addresses a wide range of MLIS students and LIS professionals based at universities, especially those whose mission explicitly encompasses engaged scholarship initiatives. The resource also spotlights publicly engaged publishing initiatives that provide examples of scholarly communications projects with social justice values such as equity, access, fairness, inclusivity, respect, ethics, and trust deeply embedded in their design. 

While examples shared in the first iteration of the resource will focus on model practices primarily in North America, the values-based nature of the resource will have global appeal. This resource describes the publishing challenges that publicly engaged scholars often encounter and offers a framework for tackling these challenges. Video interviews and insights are included to provide a range of viewpoints from scholars, advocates, and instructors.

This module dwells on a number of methods (including old and new) available for research evaluation. The module comprises the following four units:
Unit 1. Introduction to Research Evaluation Metrics and Related Indicators.
Unit 2. Innovations in Measuring Science and Scholarship: Analytical Tools and Indicators in Evaluation Scholarship Communications.
Unit 3. Article and Author Level Measurements, and
Unit 4. Online Citation and Reference Management Tools.
Brief overviews of the units are presented below.
Unit 1 encompassed and discussed citation analysis, use of citation-based indicators for research evaluation, common bibliometric indicators, classical bibliometric laws, author level indicators using authors' public profiles, article level metrics using altmetric tools. It is to be noted that author level indicators and article level metrics are new tools for research evaluation. Author level indicators encompasses h index, citations count, i10 index, g index, articles with citation, average citations per article, Eigenfactor score, impact points, and RG score. Article level metrics or altmetrics are based on Twitter, Facebook, Mendeley, CiteULike, and Delicious which have been discussed. All technical terms used in the Unit have been defined.
Unit 2 deals with analytical tools and indicators used in evaluating scholarly communications. The tools covered are The Web of Science, Scopus, Indian Citation Index (ICI), CiteSeerX, Google Scholar and Google Scholar Citations. Among these all the tools except Indian Citation Index (ICI) are international in scope. ICI is not very much known outside India. It is a powerful tool as far Indian scholarly literature is concerned. As Indian journals publish a sizable amount of foreign literature, the tool will be useful for foreign countries as well. The analytical products with journal performance metrics Journal Citation Reports (JCR®) has also been described. In the chapter titled New Platforms for Evaluating Scholarly Communications three websites i.e. SCImago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) [ScimagoJR.com], eigenFACTOR.org, JournalMetrics.com and one software called Publish or Perish (POP) Software have been discussed.
Article and author level measurements have been discussed in Unit 3. Author and researcher identifiers are absolutely essential for searching databases in the WWW because a name like D Singh can harbour a number of names such as Dan Singh, Dhan Singh, Dhyan Singh, Darbara Singh, Daulat Singh, Durlabh Singh and more. The ResearcherID.com, launched by Thomson Reuters, is a web-based global registry of authors and researchers that individualises each and every name. Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) is also a registry that uniquely identifies an author or researcher. Both have been discussed in this Unit. Article Level Metrics (Altmetrics) has been treated in this Unit with the discussion as to how altmetrics can be measured with Altmetric.com and ImpactStory.org. Altmetrics for Online Journals has also been touched. There are a number of academic social networks of which ResearchGate.net, Academia.edu, GetCited.org, etc. have been discussed. Regional journal networks with bibliometric indicators are also in existence. Two networks of this type such as SciELO – Scientific Electronic Library Online, and Redalyc have been dealt with.
The last unit (Unit 4) is on online citation and reference management tools. The tools discussed are Mendeley, CiteULike, Zotero, Google Scholar Library, and EndNote Basic. The features of all the management tools have been discussed with figures, tables, and text boxes.
This is Module Four of the UNESCO's Open Access Curriculum for Researchers.
Full-Text is available at http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002322/232210E.pdf

This lesson on the nature and cost of scholarly publishing could be taught by
itself, or as part of a series on scholarly communication, or as a small part of a larger lesson on
information privilege.

In ScholCom 202X, you'll take on the role of a new scholarly communication librarian at a small public university somewhere in the US in the "distant future" of the year 202X.

You'll be given a number of scenarios derived from activities and questions a real scholarly communication librarian might expect to receive. These scenarios fall into four general areas: copyright; publishing; institutional repositories; and open access.

The game has two versions, an interactive fiction format written in Ink (located in the "Ink source" and "playable" folders) and a static PDF version (in "printables").

In the interactive fiction version, after reading each scenario you'll be given a chance to consult your "augment," a smartphone-like device which contains a very brief annotated list of some relevant sources and a calendar that tracks how busy you are. In the PDF/print version, these sources are listed below the scenario text, and are open access whenever possible.

After you've read the scenario text and consulted these sources (or not), put yourself in the place of the librarian in the game and think about how you would respond. Would you try to help just the person you're currently talking to, or would you rather build resources and develop strategies that could make the question easier to answer the next time it comes up, and potentially even reach and educate people who don't know the questions to ask in the first place?

As you think through each scenario, ask yourself how you would balance the desire to do a good job against the threat of overwork. You're welcome to write out what you would do, or just think about it. The PDF versions of the scenarios can also be used to role play in a classroom setting, with one student taking on the role of the librarian and another the role of the person who needs their help.

Playable version at https://people.wou.edu/~bakersc/ScholCom202X/index.html. Additional background available at https://lisoer.wordpress.ncsu.edu/2021/05/18/new-to-the-scn-scholcom-202x-an-interactive-fiction-game/.

The OER, consisting of an Instructor’s Guide and accompanying presentation Slide Deck with speaking notes, emphasizes three primary themes:
- Principles and practices of community engagement for knowledge exchange;
- Meaningful access to research for non-academic audiences;
- Research ethics in historically marginalized underrepresented communities.

We have organized the OER to consist of a “core” module, “Community-based knowledge exchange and mitigating information privilege” and three pathways: 1) “Information access and alternative formats,” 2) “Supporting community led research,” and 3) “Community engagement and services.” Instructors can “mix and match” content from the pathways depending on available class time, course structure, and student interests. The core and pathway modules include learning objectives, a wide selection of open access academic and professional articles, books, blogs, websites, videos and multimedia, and active learning activities for in-person or online delivery.