Archive for the 'LCRM Project News' Category

4 Principles for E-book Discovery & Visibility

At the Charleston Conference, I attended an all-day preconference workshop on e-books organized by Sue Polanka of Wright State University (who runs the blog No Shelf Required), Carolyn Morris of Coutts Information Services, and Janet Fischer of Publishers Communication Group, Inc. I was especially impressed with the final talk of the day, given by Anh Bui of HighWire Press, Stanford University–probably because she said things that support the ideas in our Long Civil Rights Movement online pilot!

I would like to share my notes from Anh Bui’s talk here.  Keep in mind that they are rough; I was typing as fast as I could!  The underlining is mine.  Corrections from Ms Bui or others who attended are welcome.

4 principles for e-book discovery and visibility: Continue reading ‘4 Principles for E-book Discovery & Visibility’

The Charleston Conference

Trains and battleships were two of the most telling metaphors that presenters at last week’s Charleston Conference used in their attempt to describe the strength, speed, and scariness of the changes currently taking place in academic librarianship and scholarly publishing.  The news media and press outlets that focus on education and publishing seem to regard 2009 as a tipping point for public acceptance and business success of e-books.   The speakers at this conference attended by 1,000 academic librarians and scholarly publishers clearly recognized that this enormous change is upon us.

In a talk entitled “I Hear the Train A Comin’”  Kevin Guthrie, President of Ithaka, asked, “When the tracks and the cars come up to everyone’s door, what happens to the beautiful old train station?”  He was of course referring to the impact of the Web on libraries, many of which may no longer be needed as physical repositories of content duplicated down the street, across town, and online.

Responding to this year’s conference theme “Necessity Is the Mother of Invention,” several speakers urged librarians to act quickly and strongly for positive change.   Ivy Anderson of the California Digital Library said that reorienting libraries toward the future was “like turning a battleship around.”  In an inspiring keynote speech, David Lankes of the Information Institute of Syracuse memorably referred to the dubious efficacy of “conducting exit interviews on the deck of the Titanic“!

Lankes urged librarians to recognize their mission “to improve society through facilitating knowledge creation in their communities” and become innovative, proactive leaders.  When I described the speech to a colleague here at UNC Press, she immediately said, “That could also apply to publishers!”  I told her that in fact the first audience member to comment during the Q&A session said exactly that.  In another plenary speech, Douglas Armato of the University of Minnesota Press concluded, speaking of libraries and publishers, “If we’re not dealing with this evolution together, we should be.”

In an effort to digest my voluminous notes for my colleagues, I came up with the following list of 10 takeaways from the conference. Continue reading ‘The Charleston Conference’

XML Publishing Workshop

The Digital Production Specialist whom we hired as part of the LCRM project, Kenneth Reed, is off to Ann Arbor, Michigan to give a workshop on XML work flows for scholarly publishers as part of the Conference and Members’ Meeting of the TEI Consortium.

Kenneth’s position is the first to be shared between UNC Press and the UNC Library.  With experience in electronic publishing from Oxford University Press, where he worked on Oxford Scholarship Online, he has been working to help UNC Press establish an XML work flow, and in so doing has become a resource for the scholarly publishing community.  The Association of American University Presses (AAUP) is sponsoring his trip, and his co-presenter is David Sewell of the University of Virginia Press.

XML stands for Extensible Markup Language, a way of tagging the structure of digital content that is format neutral and therefore considered future proof.   Continue reading ‘XML Publishing Workshop’

LCRM Survey for Librarians

The LCRM project team would like you to participate in our new Survey for Librarians. The survey is designed to allow librarians a chance to offer their feedback on our latest activities and ideas for innovative publishing projects. And, to show our appreciation for those who participate, we are pleased to offer a free UNC Press book from a list of four specially selected titles for completing the survey.  We look forward to hearing from you!

Online Publishing Pilot

Today we sent letters to some 30 UNC Press authors to let them know that their books have been chosen to be included in our online publishing pilot and give them a chance to opt out if they wish.  This pilot will follow up the prototype that we demonstrated last Spring and incorporate some of what we have learned from our focus groups and survey so far.  The following description is adapted from the letter to authors.

One central initiative of the LCRM project is the development of an online publishing platform that will enable connections among secondary works and a variety of primary sources. We are now preparing to develop a pilot implementation of this platform, testing its potential with a small collection of UNC Press books.

Scope of the publishing pilot. The core function of the publishing platform we are developing will allow users to create connections between scholarly books and digital archives of primary sources. Continue reading ‘Online Publishing Pilot’

Survey Results: The Future of Print

This is the final post in a seven-part series in which we will share some of the results of our survey for scholars with you.

In our recent Faculty Survey, an interesting side debate developed in the scholars’ comments about the future of print. One respondent clearly thought that printed materials would be less important in the future. This respondent said:

-         “This seems to me to be a library or subscription like project.  Printing out is going to wane drastically. Kindle: yes! As for full-text monographs, I’d probably just ask them to buy the book. For a chapter, maybe access on line.”

But a few other scholars had drastically different views on the importance of print. Continue reading ‘Survey Results: The Future of Print’

Survey Results: Business Models

This is the sixth post in a seven-part series in which we will share some of the results of our survey for scholars with you.

In the final section of our recent Faculty Survey, we raised the issue of sustainability for the LCRM project’s proposed online publishing innovations, such as a bibliography, an online collection of LCRM-related content, and an online coursepack service and the importance of establishing effective business models. The scholars were asked whether they agreed or disagreed with several statements about ways the business model could be shaped. While there was no strong agreement on any of the specific issues, most respondent expressed a desire to see the project sustain itself in the long term while remaining “affordable,” which one scholar defined as a packet of online materials costing “the same amount as a published monograph.”

Here are a few things that our respondents said about a business model for the LCRM project: Continue reading ‘Survey Results: Business Models’

Survey Results: Coursepack Service

This is the fifth post in a seven-part series in which we will share some of the results of our survey for scholars with you.

In our recent Faculty Survey, the fifth topic that we asked scholars to give us some feedback about was the creation of a coursepack service. Building on the idea of an online collection, a coursepack service might allow scholars using the collection to aggregate materials together for teaching purposes and make them available as a single packet to students online or in print, with the main focus being on the online component. Interest was high in a coursepack service with 78% of the 279 respondents interested in using the service.

Here’s a sampling of the scholars’ reactions to a coursepack service: Continue reading ‘Survey Results: Coursepack Service’

Survey Results: LCRM Online Collection

This is the fourth post in a seven-part series in which we will share some of the results of our survey for scholars with you.

The fourth section of our survey asked scholars to evaluate the possibility of creating an online collection of LCRM-related works. The proposed collection could consist of either LCRM-related publications or LCRM-related publications along with primary-source documents. Scholars loved this idea with an amazing 96% of the 279 respondents supporting the creation of an online collection of LCRM-related publications and 97% of the 279 respondents requesting the inclusion of primary-source documents in the collection.

Here’s what some of the scholars had to say about an online collection: Continue reading ‘Survey Results: LCRM Online Collection’

Survey Results: Community Publications

This is the third post in a seven-part series in which we will share some of the results of our survey for scholars with you.

In our recent Faculty Survey, the third aspect of the LCRM project that we asked for the scholars’ input on was the idea of “community publications.” Community publications would contain all of the enhancements of multilayered publications (additional asides from the authors, additional sidebars, and links to multimedia primary sources used by the authors that are available on the internet), but they would go a step further by providing a space for conversations and communities to develop around the work to keep the conversation started by the author going after the work has been published. Once again we asked scholars if they were interested in writing or using community publications. Only 56% of the 284 respondents were interested in authoring a community publication, but 82% of the 284 respondents were interested in using community publications.

Continue reading ‘Survey Results: Community Publications’