Library Committee

Voting members present: Dawn Marie Alapisco, Marit Bovbjerg, Dianna Fisher, Jenny Hutchings, Tim Jensen, Stephen Summers, Tim Zuehlsdorff
Voting members absent: Bradley Boovy, Roberto Albertani
Ex-Officio members present: Anne-Marie Deitering (AMD) – OSU Libraries
Guests:  Kerri Goergen-Doll (KGD), Andrew Valls

abbreviations--OA, open access. APC, article processing charge (may or may not be an OA fee)

Update from the Dean of Libraries – Anne-Marie Deitering

1. Library—The census is getting back to 2019 levels. Yay! Tutoring space may be expanded on the third floor. Looking at a refresh of the first-floor computer lab/study space. Library will get feedback from students on what that space could/should be—the space was last updated in 2008, time for a re-think. Deitering thinks they need fewer desktop computers, for instance--students all have laptops now. Docking stations and monitors, maybe? Study tables? Time will tell.
2. The Valley Library turns 25 this year, so there’ll be a celebration in fall 2024.
3. The Marine Science Center library in Newport is hiring a new director. Interviews were this week, excellent pool.
4.  There are issues with preprints, like version control. Plus, some publishers now are trying to charge for preprints (!).
   • Member, long-term – can we think more about self-publishing?
     • Deitering – maybe. Also, a bigger reckoning is coming; we need to hang on until then.
   • Goergen-Doll – Also need to think about keeping a record and preserve what’s already there. Some large bodies of work (content available online only) have been “lost” as small journals cease publication.

Deitering – The Library is well aware of the version issues; there currently isn’t a good solution since there are no standards. Suggests researchers check the official published version (library can get, if needed) for anything on which they’re heavily relying.

Elsevier Negotiations

• This round of negotiations has gone “very well”--price transparency is good, but still have sticking points (like the stuff around AI, publishers don’t want their stuff scrapped, but saying “no one can use this for any AI” doesn’t work either because things like Grammarly are AI), Elsevier backed down on non-disclosure of contract details. Goergen-Doll will update the Faculty Senate on this at the March meeting.

Requests for Feedback

1. The Strategic Plan calls for increased research productivity, including capacity for new and existing faculty.
   • Goergen-Doll noted that one issue is the proposed metric is an input (how many grants) – but success is measured via output (papers, books and stuff).
     • We (faculty, library faculty, administrators) need to talk about publication barriers. Lots of discussion on campus recently on “getting grants” barriers, but not much discussion on publishing barriers (OA fees, etc.). Request from library:  if faculty have publication barriers, please speak up! Talk to library, talk to deans, associate deans for research, OSU research office, put it in your annual review as a barrier, etc. Might help with allocation of resources for the new strategic plan.

2. Deitering wants to start an APC fee-paying program. It would only be for OA fees, not paywalled page charges or whatever (she hopes these fees will go away eventually but, for now, we’re stuck). We’ll have a pilot fund, with $200-300k, and we’ll pay the fees for folks. BUT criteria are needed because, at $4k a pop, the dollars will go quickly. What should the criteria be? E.g., graduate students only? Graduate students and junior faculty? Each person gets one fee per year? Each person gets a certain dollar amount? Request from Library staff, to be discussed March 6: think about the criteria, and come with ideas.
   • Deitering noted an=n alternate way to paying OA APCs is via “read & publish” agreements with publishers. This means that all researchers on a campus can publish open in that publisher’s journals. This is not going to work for OSU, because each publisher has different requirements – other universities have had to hire compliance officers. Furthermore, publishers require that you buy ALL their stuff to get these kinds of things, and OSU has no current contracts wherein we buy ALL of someone’s stuff – there is no way OSU could afford it. Also, technically, these should come out of grant funds/university budget as a cost of doing research, not the library budget as a cost of getting content. Hiding them in the library’s budget makes it harder for people (faculty, administrators, legislatures) to see just how much price gouging is going on. Deitering  hopes our pilot project will raise awareness, among other things.

3. New (2022) memo says federally funded stuff has to be OA immediately, no embargo period. YIKES. This is an issue for everyone (OA fees), but especially graduate students, who don’t have grant funding.
   • One asked how sustainable is this? These fees keep going up. Plus, why is it OK to spend taxpayer dollars enriching publishers?
   • Another asked if this means we have to pay the APCs for every article? It used to be you could pay it for some of them, and the rest, wait for the embargo to be over then post OA, in ScholarsArchive or Pubmed Central or whatever. Now it’s paying fees for everything?
     • Deitering responded that there are now fees for everything – it’s not sustainable. Notably, though, this memo didn’t come with implementation advice – each agency is supposed to create a policy and invite public comment. Request from library:  find out when the public comment period is for your funding agency(s), and comment! Get your professional societies to comment!