1 2 3 Previous Next

Discover the Future of Research

717 posts
     Rachel Becker
Rachel Becker
Copyright & Emerging Technologies Librarian, Madison Area Technical College

Can I use this author’s paragraph in my work? Can I tweet a copy of this article to someone? What about this form I need to sign to publish my article or conference presentation?



Whether you’re a librarian, author or both, you’ve probably encountered a copyright question at some point. The subject can seem intimidating and the risk of doing something illegal is especially frightening. But not to worry; understanding basic copyright concepts is pretty easy and can even, (gasp!), be fun!


No copyright background? No problem!


Some librarians who specialize in copyright and scholarly communications have advanced degrees which provide training in these areas. However, many do not and are self-taught. I fell into copyright not too long ago and have built my skills through several avenues:


  • Online resources: There are many excellent library guides on copyright created by libraries specifically for librarians at the institutional level. These guides are great places to get quality information from basic copyright concepts to authors’ rights to streaming media guidelines. In addition to providing a solid starting place for your own research, the links can be sent to others who ask copyright questions.


  • Free courses: Who doesn’t like free stuff? Coursera has two online courses specifically on copyright for librarians and educators. Both offer video lectures and course content from some of the most knowledgeable copyright experts around. The self-paced lessons make fitting the content into busy librarian life a snap. Even if you aren’t interested in learning all the nitty gritty details of copyright, the different modules make skipping around easy. CopyrightX is another online course offered by the Harvard Law School. Enrollment is by application and is currently free. If you’re feeling extra ambitious, consider taking the exam at the end to earn the certificate.


  • Conferences: There are a few conferences that concentrate on copyright law specifically. The Kraemer Copyright Conference held in Colorado Springs is one of the best I’ve attended. Whether you’re a novice looking to learn basics from the best of the best or a seasoned copyright expert, this free conference offers an always stellar program on a diverse set of cutting edge topics. Registration is competitive so be sure to register early! Other conferences such as ALA, ACRL, and the Charleston Conference often have sessions on copyright as well.


  • Networking: The field of copyright law in librarianship is a small but engaged group. Many of the most knowledgeable experts in the field have Twitter accounts and contribute to blogs. Following conference presenters on Twitter and live tweeting can be great ways to stay engaged with the copyright community. Copyright basics rarely change but much like any area of the law, many aspects are constantly changing and evolving. Following copyright law news online is useful for staying engaged in the community and finding ways to engage your community around copyright.


Engaging Campus Authors


So how will you apply your newfound copyright skills? Your campus authors can range from graduate students to faculty, or anyone else looking to publish their works. This is where becoming comfortable with copyright law as it pertains to authors’ rights can become extremely useful.


Often, author agreements provision that copyright be transferred from the original author to the publisher as part of the publication. The following rights, among others, can be transferred in an author agreement:


  • Reproduce and make copies of the work
  • Distribute and sell copies to the public
  • Transfer these rights to others


This can mean that actions such as posting the article to research sharing websites, social media, and even password protected course management systems could put the author in violation of their author agreement. Depending on the specific provisions, these restrictions could apply to not only the final published version but also prior versions they might have written before the final published one.


Knowing what they might want to do with their work in the future is helpful when the author is thinking about their agreement. From a copyright perspective, some important points to consider include:


  • Using the work in future courses or classes they might be teaching
  • Composing subsequent works based on this publication
  • Whether the work has been published in whole or in part in the past
  • If their employer or other relevant party has certain stipulations on what rights they must retain
  • Whether they are either required or would like to deposit the work into your institution’s digital repository


Once the author knows what they wish to do with their work in the future and other requirements, it’s time to request the author agreement from the publisher. If the agreement is not available on their website, contact them for a copy preferably in a format that can be edited (e.g. Microsoft Word). Read the agreement carefully several times through and mark any concerning sections. Make suggested changes and include comments, explaining as thoroughly as possible, the reasoning behind the edits. For the author’s own records, make note of any edits which are non-negotiable and which must be included in the final agreement. This will assist them in the negotiation process moving forward.


Once they have reached a version which is satisfactory for all parties, it’s time to sign. Retain a copy for their records and refer to it when they have a question about using the work in the future.


Creating a page dedicated to basic copyright concepts, scholarly communications, and issues specific to instructors is another great way for the library to engage with the campus community. Unless the librarian creating it has a law degree, it’s important to remember that nothing on the website nor during instructor interactions constitutes legal advice.


Copyright CAN be fun and your librarians are a friendly group who are happy to answer questions and share their passion with you!


Rachel Becker is the Copyright and Emerging Technologies Librarian at Madison Area Technical College in Madison, Wisconsin. Her library experience started in public libraries and has expanded to include government, law, and archives. Rachel’s specific area of interests include copyright and fair use as it applies to libraries and scholarly publications as well as how technology is shaping the student experience. In her spare time, she enjoys spending time with her horse and binge watching TV shows.


Image Credit: iStock

    Gabby Oberman
Gabby Oberman
Marketing Coordinator, Wiley

In November 2018, over 100 society executives, librarians, journal editors, researchers, and Wiley colleagues gathered for one of our favorite annual events, the Melbourne Research Seminar. Together, we discussed five current big issues in research publishing under the theme Fast Forward: Research Communications and Publishing in an Age of Disruption:



  1. Planning now for the (unknown) future
  2. The opportunities and challenges in the evolving Open Research landscape
  3. The changing business models of Open Access
  4. Remaining relevant as a society and adapting to your members’ needs
  5. Embracing gender diversity in research


1. "How are you preparing now for what’s next?”


Michael McQueen, an Australian futurist, author, and award-winning speaker, opened the day with this thought-provoking question. Michael’s creative ideas for how we can prepare for that as-yet-unknown future left us in awe, if not a little apprehensive, and got everyone talking with one of his favorite inspirations for how to think about change:


Dig the well before you get thirsty.

’The best time to reform business is when business is good’

Hiroshi Okuda. Toyota chairman 1999-2006


2. Open Science: Beyond the business models 


Nick Talley, Editor-in-Chief of the Medical Journal of Australia and Australia’s most-cited researcher, kicked off the main program with a discussion about some of the big changes in store for journals and academic publishing. According to Nick, the biggest challenges include the rise of predatory journals and the disruptive effects of Open Access. He challenged us all to question the ongoing value of journals.


David Tovey, Editor-in-Chief of Cochrane Library, shared his Strategy to 2020, The Cochrane Library’s answer to global demand for better data dissemination and access to support the trend toward personalized healthcare. David argued that we’ve made real strides in content dissemination (e.g. better marketing, not just ‘throwing the PDFs off a cliff and hoping for the best’) and he explained how hard Cochrane works to ‘liberate the data’ and grow the access, reach and impact of its content.


The conversation really heated up in a ‘behind the scenes’ open science panel, moderated by Simon Goudie (Senior Journal Publishing Manager, Wiley), where Nick and David were joined by Davina Ghersi (Senior Principal Research Scientist Research Translation, NHMRC) and Justin Withers (Director of Policy and Integrity Australian Research Council) who spoke about the policies that may need to change to support open research. Natasha Simons (Associate Director, Skilled Workforce Australian Research Data Commons) spoke about the importance of data and DOIs, and Anne Harvey (Managing Director Asia Pacific, Digital Science) discussed metrics and accountability. The provocative conversation focused on the ethics of sharing data, particularly from vulnerable populations, as well as the potential for open research to help uncover scientific fraud or misconduct.


3. How will the Open Access business model affect your organization?


For many society publishers, OA2020 and Plan S have put Open Access and changing funding requirements in the spotlight. To explore the issues, Garry Cannon, Wiley’s Sales Manager for Australia and New Zealand, moderated a lively panel on Open Access business models. Simon Beale (SVP, Research Customer & Revenue, Wiley), Roxanne Missingham (University Librarian, Australian National University), Frances O'Neill (Associate Librarian, Scholarly Information Services, Victoria University) and Justin Withers (ARC) discussed the variety of OA business models in different parts of the world.  Our panelists agreed that we must work together with researchers on the common goal of improving research outputs, including in the humanities and social sciences, where funding and ability to pay for APCs may be different. Constant change in the world of OA means that business partners need to stay in close communication, and this session was a great example of how to put that into action.


4. How will societies and associations stay relevant and keep members happy in an increasingly digital world?


Julia Ballard (Senior Marketing Manager, Asia-Pacific, Wiley), moderated a panel exploring how professional societies and associations need to adapt to a digital future. Lyn Goodear (CEO and Managing Director of the Australian HR Institute), Lyndal Macpherson (CEO of the Australasian Society for Ultrasound in Medicine), Emma Livingstone (PhD Candidate, Institute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland), and Dr Gary Veale (Founder of Geri and The Nature of) discussed what societies need to do to stay fresh, especially with millennials. According to our panelists, it’s two things: advocacy, and connectedness. Societies need to advocate for research externally on behalf of the profession, academics, and student members in order to impact practice and policy at the government, institutional, and public levels. Internally they must provide clear paths to learning and networking opportunities in order to keep and attract members.

5. How is your organization working to increase diversity?


Empowering all young researchers and improving the inclusion and visibility of women, especially from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds, is essential to ensure a fair, holistic and vibrant research community. Marguerite Evans-Galea (CEO of Women in STEMM Australia), described how we can change practices in STEMM so that more women can lead and excel, and pointed toward some inspiring initiatives already underway in Australia. Madhu Bhaskaran (Associate Dean of Higher Degrees by Research, School of Engineering at RMIT and winner of the 2018 APEC ASPIRE Prize), talked about her personal experience and shared some of the strategies she has used in building her own career.


What’s next?


Given how much the world of scholarly publishing is changing, Bill Deluise (Vice President, Wiley Partner Marketing) reaffirmed how Wiley provides publishing partners with dedicated counsel and specialist expertise to make the most of exciting changes in technology. He also stressed how faster and more open forms of research communication are encouraging researchers across the globe to better collaborate with each other. This is good news for advancing knowledge and research discovery!


So, while there’s a lot on the horizon, Deb Wyatt (Vice President, Wiley Asia-Pacific, Society Publishing) assured us that even though “the pace of change can feel daunting…together, we’re designing a new future.”


Follow the conversation from the day using #wileyseminarANZ and you can find our speakers on Twitter:


Michael McQueen, @michael_mcqueen

Nick Talley, @MJA_Editor

Davina Ghersi, @nhmrc

Natasha Simons, @n_simons

Roxanne Missingham, @rmissingham

Lyn Goodear, @LynGoodear

Lyndal Macpherson, @asumultrasound

Emma Livingstone, @EK_Livingstone

Marguerite Evans-Galea, @MVEG001

Madhu Bhaskaran, @madhu_bhaskaran

Bill Deluise, @wdeluise

Deb Wyatt, @dwyatt_deborah


What topics would you like to learn more about in 2019? Drop us a note at auswileyforum@wiley.com.


For more information, including updates about the 2019 event, visit the seminar website.


Image Credit: Lindsay Matthews
    Matthew Ragucci
Matthew Ragucci
Library Solutions Architect, Wiley

Almost all academic libraries use vendor knowledgebases to perform general electronic resource management tasks such as determining entitlement access or augmenting content discovery.



99 knowledgebase problems


These global knowledgebases (or KBs for short) require content providers to provide title lists, (known as KBART files to the uninitiated) to library solutions vendors. Vendors like OCLC, EBSCO, Ex Libris and ProQuest ingest these files and create specific collections, which are made available for librarians to accept as is or customize to match local holdings.


Often, this can be a confusing or frustrating process for librarians.


There is no standard solution when questions arise. There is almost always some level of uncertainty about what is the most appropriate collection, whom to contact for data integrity issues, how to manage pesky transfer titles, or how to customize collections.


Let’s talk (and listen) KBs


The NISO KBART Standards Committee and KBART Automation Working Group have made great strides in this area, but the experience is far from uniform between the content provider and vendors. When you multiply these issues for every content provider, an electronic resource librarian’s job can seem impossible.


To address these issues, we are focusing on improving communication with stakeholders to streamline the process. For instance, we recently decided to hold level-setting calls with all our vendor partners. This helps us better understand our collection representation in vendor KBs and establish workflows around resolving issues.


We also created a content discovery page on Wiley Online Library, which helps explain our vendor practices and serves as a hub for Wiley sales package KBART files.


Happier library users? Yes, please.


In addition to our vendor partnerships, we collaborate with libraries to help optimize the KB experience. Libraries are usually the first to notice any data integrity issues within collections and report them to their vendors or Wiley directly. We then work to correct them as quickly as possible. Occasionally, requests come in for institution-specific, customized KBART files to upload to vendor knowledgebases. Until an automated KBART holdings delivery process (currently in development) is established, we’re happy to oblige these requests and help assist with library workflows.


Vendors and libraries also have their own practices for maximizing workflow efficiency. The key objective is to optimize the discovery to delivery experience for library users. All stakeholders have worked decisively and graciously on this front. While there is still work to be done, we can now say with confidence that we’re on the right path.


To learn more, join us on Monday, March 4th at 11AM at the 2019 Electronic Resources and Libraries Conference for the breakout session Forming a More Perfect Knowledgebase: A Tale of Publisher, Vendor and Librarian Collaboration. Discover how librarians, publishers and vendors are collaborating in this space to finally kick those KB blues.


Image Credit: iStock

    Andrew Tein
Andrew Tein
Vice President, Global Government Affairs, Wiley

Last week, Wiley posted an official response to the proposed implementation of Plan S, the multi-funder effort to ensure immediate open access to scientific publications from 2020 onwards. The group of funders (known as cOAlition S) issued a call for feedback in November 2018, which was a great opportunity for reflection here at Wiley and continued dialogue as a global community.



Here at Wiley we’re incredibly proud to help our customers succeed – to empower researchers to communicate the amazing work they do every day, to enable our society partners to continue publishing powerful journals, and to promote the dissemination of knowledge as widely as possible. We recognize that the research landscape is quickly evolving, and we’re fully supportive of the growing movement to make research more open. Arguably, we are in a time where the need to collaborate is stronger than ever. We want to keep this conversation going across our community because at the end of the day, we share the same belief that research drives growth and human advancement.


We know that as a scholarly publisher we have an essential part to play in supporting open research. Open access is an essential feature of our approach now and moving forward – over 90% of our journals provide an open access publishing option, whether that be through our 100+ fully open access titles, or our 1400+ hybrid journals. Many of the manuscripts we accept are also freely available under green open access policies.


We work closely together with our 800+ publishing partners and the thousands of inspirational researchers who publish their work with us. It’s only with their input, along with that of other stakeholders such as libraries, funders and universities, that we can innovate and move forward in this challenging research landscape, meeting their needs and ensuring that research is more open.


Earlier this year, we announced our exciting new agreement with Projekt DEAL that will enable authors at more than 700 German academic institutions to publish open access articles in our journals. We believe this kind of transformative agreement represents a vital opportunity and pathway to meet the ever-changing needs of our customers. The communities we serve are diverse and have their own interests and needs. A one-size fits all approach just isn’t sustainable, which is why, in our feedback on Plan S, we emphasize our commitment to maximizing choice for authors, and the importance of tailoring our services to the specific requirements of the institutions and funders who seek a transition to open access via transformative deals.  Academic freedom is of the utmost importance.  We are working towards breaking down barriers and do not want to build new ones as we advance an open research future.


We’re pleased that Plan S has heightened interest in scholarly publishing, and we appreciate the opportunity provided by cOAlition S to provide feedback on its initial ideas. We will continue to support and work closely with researchers, funders, institutions and other stakeholders to ensure a sustainable way forward in the transition towards a more open and fair research landscape.


You can read Wiley’s full feedback statement on the implementation of Plan S here.


Do you have any questions or comments relating to Wiley’s feedback on Plan S? Leave your feedback in the comments section below.

Capture (59).PNG

    Katy Sforza
Katy Sforza
Marketing Manager, Wiley

Primary source digital archives are fundamentally changing traditional research, bringing new insight into the backstories behind the theories; and the thought process leading to the final analyses. But, who is really using these primary source materials? How do researchers, students, and faculty learn about the availability of new digital archives—and how to effectively navigate their content? And what role do librarians play in driving adoption?Primary Source Digital Archives_Whitepaper_Cover Image.png


We went directly to the sources to find out.


In August of 2018, the Wiley Digital Archives team conducted an in-depth survey that included 1,496 researchers, students, and faculty members, as well as 272 librarians worldwide. All had either used or purchased primary sources in the past.


Here’s a high-level recap of what we learned from their responses.


Who Uses Primary Source Digital Archives?


Although some believe that archives are only valuable to researchers specializing in humanities or social sciences, nothing could be further from the truth. The archive users we surveyed pursued areas of study that were almost equally dispersed among health sciences, life sciences, physical sciences, and social sciences/humanities. That user diversity is reflective of the larger community now utilizing these archives.


As more of these resources are constructed with a multi-disciplinary focus, the more interest they’re generating across a wider berth of students, researchers, and faculty. So, a single archive could have a profound impact on an institution’s entire research community, each approaching the content from their own, unique perspective.


How Do Users Find These Archives?


Although 31 percent of the librarians surveyed offer on-demand, ad-hoc services for primary sources, or will orchestrate time-consuming inter-library loans when these sources aren’t available, users, for the most part, aren’t taking advantage of these services. While they aren’t shy about recommending specific archive purchases to librarians, when they start searching for available materials, their approach is largely self-service. If they can’t find what they’re looking for, they consult friends and colleagues.


In our survey, 21 percent of users sought out digital archives through Google searches; 14 percent through lead follow up and 13 percent by consulting the online library catalog. With only a fraction of the research population contacting their librarians for help, librarians might not realize the extent to which primary source materials are needed in specific areas.  Just as important, researchers may not be taking full advantage of the resources the library already has.


How Do Users Find Out about New Primary Sources?


Sixty-five percent of the librarians surveyed purchased primary sources within the past two years, signifying the fact that the purchase of digital, as well as print resources, has become a mainstream practice.


Although the majority of the librarians we surveyed sent out emails when a new journal or archive is added to existing resources, the Wiley survey indicates that, although faculty members read email, the majority of undergraduate and graduate students do not. As a result, they could miss out on accessing the vital content they need. 


To ensure these students stay informed, some librarians are placing banners on library web sites or even engaging social media to get the word out.  Because the foundation of social media is sharing information, this is an excellent vehicle for quickly increasing awareness of new resources among the research community.


What Role Do Librarians Play in Archive Adoption?


The survey results also underscored the critical role that librarians play in archive use and adoption—both outside and inside the classroom.


For example, the overwhelming majority of users cited accessing primary source materials as their biggest challenge, with analyzing and interpreting these sources as a close second. Those results illustrate the fact that, although researchers and students recognize the need for digital archives, they’re also looking for help on how to effectively use them.


While the need for help varies by individual and the complexity of the research project, the role of the librarian is mission-critical to maximizing the value of these resources.


The same is true when it comes to increasing the formal use of primary source materials in the classroom.


The survey indicated that, although faculty members encourage their students to use primary source materials, few formally make it part of their courses’ learning objectives.


Librarians have a real opportunity to offer workshops, blogs, and instructional sessions to help researchers navigate and effectively use archived content. By proactively reaching out to faculty members, librarians can also help them formally incorporate primary source research into their course work—and even provide in-class events on how to use digital archives for specific projects.


All these efforts increase adoption, but, more importantly, expose researchers and students to a world of possibilities and perspectives they may never otherwise experience.


These are just a few of the insights gleaned from our recent survey. For more detailed information on the survey, you can download free digital archives whitepaper, based on survey findings.


    Jennifer Wilhelm
Jennifer Wilhelm
Business Librarian, Texas A&M University


By now, you’ve probably heard enough about the STEM movement to quickly recite that it stands for “Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math.” Perhaps you’ve taken your child to a STEM-themed event at your local public library, like a chemistry road show? Maybe you’ve checked out a book on coding to encourage your teenager to pick up a STEM-focused hobby.


What about you, as an adult? When was the last time you sat down at an event or program and learned for the sake of learning, or were able to ask questions of a scientist without feeling intimidated? If your answer is never or rarely, read on because this post is for you.


Why do adults need informal STEM? Why do librarians need it?


Adults desire and need lifelong learning opportunities and lack a non-politicized space to discuss issues such as climate change. As important as it is to introduce children to STEM, it is just as important to allow adults to explore and learn in a welcoming space. Informal STEM is an inexpensive and easy way to address these issues. Librarians, particularly public librarians, must continue to prove their value to the community, and offering new and innovative programs for adults can help them reach that goal and remain relevant.


How can public & academic libraries incorporate informal STEM?


Collaborations between public libraries and academic institutions are not as prevalent as they should be, considering how similar the missions of the institutions are. Informal STEM provides a low-risk, high-reward entry point for creating strong partnerships. For example, colleges and universities can contribute graduate students or faculty in STEM fields to attend science cafés at public libraries. The public has the opportunity to learn in a low-stress environment, and scientists can promote their field of study while practicing their science communication skills.

As one example of such a collaborative program, in 2017 I worked with the Bryan + College Station Public Library to produce adult-focused informal STEM programs centered on climate change and extreme
weather events. These programs, funded by a $1,000 grant from NOAA, combined a book club run by a librarian with a science café facilitated by a STEM faculty member from Texas A&M University. The programs were well attended by local adults of all ages, integrated information literacy effectively, and were a win-win for both the public library and the university.


How can you bring STEM education to your community?


Whether you are a parent, a curious individual, a public librarian, or a STEM scientist, I encourage you to explore the idea of informal STEM in your community. We need to address the fact that adults are just as curious and just as eager to learn as children, but may not have the same opportunities to explore and grow. Remember, adults need STEM, too!


Jennifer Wilhelm has been a Business Librarian at Texas A&M University since 2018. She previously worked as an Adult Reference Librarian at the Bryan + College Station Public library system and continues to work collaboratively with the public library on programs and projects. Her research topics center on informal STEM in libraries and collaborating with university career centers to improve students’ job search capabilities.




    Claire O'Neill
Claire O'Neill
Library Services, Wiley

iStock-182853979.jpgAs we look towards the future, early career librarians represent a new kind of librarianship; one that’s accustomed to rapid change, quickly-advancing technology, and the need for instant digestible answers.


These emerging professionals bring new skills, new perspectives, and a modern take to their libraries, enabling them to face challenges that are unique to those faced by previous generations. They are armed with the ability to adapt to change and anticipate the complex needs of researchers, students and everyday readers.


Empowering early career librarians to have a voice within the community is critical to paving the path forward and ensuring a strong base of thought leaders for the future.


That’s where we want to help.


The Wiley Librarian Scholarship Award


A couple months ago, Wiley offered $1,000 travel grants (each) to two early career librarians to attend the 2018 Charleston Library Conference. The Wiley Librarian Scholarship Award not only provided these individuals with the chance to engage and network at the Conference, but it also gave them the opportunity to leverage The Wiley Network as a platform to address the library topics that are meaningful to them.


Announcing the Winners and the Early Career Librarian Blog Series


Congratulations to Rachel Becker and Jennifer Wilhelm, the winners of the 2018 Wiley Librarian Scholarship Award! Rachel and Jen attended the Charleston Conference in November and after meeting them, we are even more excited to share their insights on current library topics with The Wiley Network!


On every other Friday of the next four months, Rachel and Jen will share their perspectives as early career librarians on a variety of topics that are important to the community, including copyright, STEM, the digital age and more.



About the Authors



Rachel Becker recently accepted a new position as the Copyright and Emerging Technologies Librarian for the Madison Area Technical College Libraries in Madison Wisconsin. Rachel’s personal academic passion is copyright and fair use, and she believes strongly in advocating for the campus library and the collaboration between technical and public services librarians.









Jennifer Wilhelm.JPG

Jennifer Wilhelm is the Business Librarian for Information and Operations Management as well as an assistant professor at Texas A&M University. Jen believes in the collaboration between academic and public librarians, and she’s passionate about various topics including the need for STEM for adults and meeting students where they are digitally so they can participate in instruction at the most successful level.





Stay tuned!


We are excited to learn more about these current topics and expand our perspectives with the help of these early career librarians. Thank you, Rachel and Jen!

     Lila Huizenga
Lila Huizenga
Marketing Manager, Wiley


NCFR1.pngMany academic societies have a mission that includes interpreting and disseminating research to inform legislators and other decision-makers about the possible effects of policy initiatives on their fields. Depending on the society’s goals, there are quite a few ways that societies can engage their members around policy. One way is to create materials illustrating the various ways individual members can become advocates. Another is to highlight how published research in the society’s journals has already impacted policy, as illustrated through policy document citations, and to invite researchers to continue publishing their research in the society’s journals.


There are also opportunities to help society members communicate directly with policymakers through letter-writing campaigns, phone-a-thons, or in-person visits to members of Congress to convey messages about specific legislative issues. Beyond this, societies can create easy-to-understand briefs of published research that could be shared with members, as well as publishing policy reports on specific topics written for policymakers.


A shared vision


Whilst working with the US-based National Council on Family Relations (NCFR) on the editorial and marketing strategy for the society’s three academic journals, it was clear that NCFR’s mission matched Wiley’s closely. There was a resolute agreement that evidence-based policy is key to making well-informed decisions, and that it is crucial to place the best available evidence from academic research at the heart of policy development and implementation. NCFR wanted to highlight how research from their international scholarly journals has impacted policy, and encourage their members to become active in fostering dialogue among Family Scholars and policymakers. Educating legislators about public policy initiatives impacting families is crucial to the NCFR mission, and we wanted to support researchers who are looking to effect lasting change.


Taking steps to influence policy


As part of NCFR’s annual conference, Wiley and the NCFR collaborated on an ‘I Believe in Family Science’ campaign with the goal of encouraging members of the U.S. Congress to use Family Science research to inform and guide family policymaking decisions. The campaign was aimed at creating a dialogue between Family Scientists and the U.S. House of Representatives and Senators, as well as showcasing the use of Family Science research in policymaking to help create innovative programs that produce effective results and reduce wasteful spending.


“Wiley’s interactive exhibit that showcased NCFR’s impact on policy decisions around the world and invited the conference attendees to communicate directly with their policymakers aligned perfectly with NCFR’s mission and was a bright addition to our exhibit area.” – Diane Cushman, Executive Director of NCFR



Using conferences to inform and drive action


Colorful postcards were pinned to our booth wall at the NCFR conference, and with each postcard that a delegate took to write to their representative in Congress, part of an infographic was uncovered showing how research published in the three NCFR journals has impacted policy across the globe. Delegates loved the postcards, with more than 10% of the conference delegates using them to write to their representatives. They were also intrigued by the infographic, and many came back throughout the week to see the exhibit as more pieces of the infographic were revealed. At the end of the campaign, we mailed all the postcards on behalf of the delegates, and we’re looking forward to seeing the response they create in Washington. We hope to collaborate further with NCFR by creating more materials that help support individual NCFR members taking an active role in informing policy, as well as attracting academic research with a potential to impact public policy.



Finding the Funny in Science

Posted Jan 25, 2019
    Julia Ballard
Julia Ballard
Society Marketing, Wiley

lego crowd.jpgAt the end of 2018, a paper was making the rounds through Twitter, and even scored a mention on the Tonight Show and the Late Late Show. When I first read it, I couldn’t stop laughing. What helped this paper stand out and jump to being one of the top 500 most talked about papers of all time in one week? A research topic that resonated with the public combined with a sense of humor. We talked with authors of “Everything is Awesome: Don’t Forget the Lego”, published in the December 2018 issue of Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health (JPCH), about what set them on the path to studying whether or not it is safe for children to swallow Legos, and the role they think humor can play in science communication.


Q. At what point during the research or publication process did your team decide to approach this paper with its current humorous tone?


TESSA: It was always going to be humorous. We specifically sat down together to come up with a light-hearted (but relevant) topic in the run-up to Christmas.


DAMIAN: The tradition in some journals of having Christmas fun editions was a perfect opportunity to undertake research (it was a core principle that the work would be undertaken using study conditions) which would be educational, but also fun.


HENRY: I think it’s also in keeping with our core values that we want to engage and educate our readership. A positive way to engage is to entertain, and well-considered, thoughtful humor can play an important role in this.


Q. What was the editorial reception to your paper's tone?


ANDY: We were rejected by four journals prior to JPCH picking us up. But after going through the process of swallowing the Lego we couldn't just give up!


GRACE: The wonderful editorial response from JPCH byDavid Isaacs was both amusing and told us that we had found a team whom we were able to make smile and who appreciated our bit of creative research.


                     Dear Tessa


Your paper is outrageous. However, few people were more scatological than Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, one of my musical heroes. I, therefore, have great pleasure in informing you that your manuscript entitled "Everything is awesome" has been accepted for publication in the Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health.




Q. Do you think that using humor and different styles of communication can open up new audiences for academic research?


TESSA: At Don’t Forget the Bubbles  (DFTB), we work particularly hard to achieve knowledge translation. That is making scientific info accessible to healthcare professionals and relevant to their clinical practice. Using humor in the paper helped with knowledge translation to the public. It allowed the mainstream media to use the comedy element of the paper to deliver an important message to the public about the safety of various ingested objects.


ANDY: But humor can be overdone. You don’t want every single paper to read like a Monty Python skit. The paper was written in simple language, which meant most journalists could parse the abstract with ease. This allowed a gateway into the paper itself.


GRACE: I agree that being open to using different styles of communication will help to broaden the ability of wider audiences to understand and appreciate research that has been performed. In the written word, we should strive to develop clarity and stay aware of the difference between using technical terms appropriately vs slipping into paragraphs of jargon.

We also disseminated knowledge about this paper in other ways: as an infographic, via our blog and with the video teaser which Damian put together. These strategies have been and could be applied to other, more serious research.


Regarding the use of humor: harnessing the emotive response is a great way to help engage audiences. Like Tessa said, it is great to be able to use it as a pathway towards delivering a public message. We had a lot of fun in the intentional creation of humor through things like the scoring system. The goal of the paper primarily was to make people smile. I don't think humor should be utilized at random when crafting a paper. It should have a clear intent and purpose and it is important that it does not distract or confuse the key message.


DAMIAN: I think there is lots of learning here. Not all papers can strike this tone, but the imagery captured imagination. I think it’s imperative for research that could have widespread public impact for the authors to think about how their narrative might best reach patients. I also liked the shoe-horning of the message of the dangers of button batteries onto this. The interviews I did with radio stations also seemed to enjoy this mix of humor with a serious message.


Q. Any advice for other research teams that want to approach an upcoming paper or project with humor or levity?


ANDY: Don't try and force it. Most people who read scientific papers are nerds (myself included) so subtle in-jokes are a great way in.


HENRY: Humor is another tool for engagement; people won’t laugh at a joke they’re not listening to! That is, humor can be the hook that promotes thinking about your work. Humor seems to work when it augments the message rather than smothering it and is congruent with the desired readership.


Q: This paper has seen an amazing reception in popular media - did this surprise your team? Do you think this kind of exposure will help improve this paper's impact, and the impact of future projects?


TESSA: We thought our peers would find it amusing, but the spread to popular media came as a lovely surprise. We tried to make the most of it and enjoyed it all hugely. Featuring in the opening monologues for The Late Late show and The Tonight Show was truly amazing (and a very unexpected consequence!)


ANDY: The global exposure certainly seems to have helped the paper’s Altmetric score and we made sure most of the newspapers/blogposts would link back to the original paper.


GRACE: We had hoped for a good response but the response we received well exceeded my expectations and was both wonderful and a little surreal!

One of the reasons why I think our paper had such reach is that the topic is familiar and well known to many - I've heard and seen radio presenters, journalists and people online sharing their family’s (including their pets’!) personal experiences with swallowing objects and how Lego was a part of their life (whether via play or the pain of stepping on it!)

I think that the uptake with the paper means many more people are now aware of DFTB as a group and will hopefully translate into more subscribers and uptake of our other work.


DAMIAN: It will be interesting to see if the paper is cited and what for. I suspect it will be cited in relation to its social media impact but very possible it won’t be cited at all for its scientific impact (potentially not unjustly!). It does beg a question about the balance of Altmetric scores with more traditional metrics.


Regardless of future citations, it’s clear this paper had an impact that will help its authors, the journal, and the general public who now know just how much to panic if a child swallows an object they shouldn’t! Our thanks to the authors, Andrew Tagg, Damian Roland, Grace SY Leo, Katie Knight, Henry Goldstein, and Tessa Davis.


    Rachael Wolley
Rachael Wolley
Research Marketing, Wiley

ORCID, the researcher persistent digital identifier, reliably connects researchers to their contributions and affiliations to increase discoverability, recognition, and research collaboration. ORCID saves time for editors and societies by disambiguating authors and peer reviewers and helping them become more compliant with a growing industry standard.


Since we adopted the ORCID mandate in 2016, submissions have increased across Wiley titles, indicating that mandating ORCID had no negative effect on submissions. More than 955 Wiley journals have adopted Wiley’s recommended ORCID policy, and now require ORCID as a condition for submission. We have not seen an impact on submissions and have received positive feedback from editorial partners and stakeholders overall.


ORCID enables open recognition and reward – Here at Wiley we’re working with our partners towards a more open future and ORCID aligns with that mission by enable open recognition and reward. If you want to consider additional open practices for your journal, use our How Open is Your Journal? checklist to guide you and your discussions towards open research strategies.  We urge you to speak to your JPM about moving to mandating ORCID at submission.


Check out the infographic below for an overview of how ORCID benefits society members and the research community.


ORCID PrintReady_NoCrops (003).jpg


    Samantha Green
Samantha Green
Society Marketing, Wiley

Across Borders.jpgResearch is always becoming more collaborative but working with new people means learning how to listen and communicate effectively. We chatted with Adrienne Sponberg, Director of Communications at the Association for the Sciences of Limnology and Oceanography (ASLO), about a new program they’re launching to send graduate students around the world to conduct research: LOREX (Limnology and Oceanography Research Exchange).


Q. The Limnology and Oceanography Research Exchange enables researcher collaboration around the world. Why is this important to ASLO?

A. We live on a blue planet – water covers more than 70% of the Earth’s surface and does not respect political boundaries! As a result, our membership is very international (4,300 members in over 80 countries) and frequently collaborates across borders. The problems facing the world’s waters are global in scope and will require the cooperation of researchers across the globe to understand them. As a professional association dedicated to advancing aquatic science, providing training and international research opportunities is a logical, and necessary, step forward. Associations are in a unique space to connect researchers from around the globe at different institutions, and with the funding through NSF’s IRES program, we’ll be able to do that in a meaningful way.  Our President wrote an article about our steps towards internationalization that outlines our path towards becoming more international.


Q. You mention how important communication and cultural sensitivity is to collaboration. Can you go into a little more detail about how this program builds skills in these areas?


A. It’s funny because when you use the term “science communication”, most people will automatically associate that with some form of outreach – communicating science to the public or policymakers. But, communication is the bedrock of research collaboration – you can get all of the best minds together on a team, but if they can’t figure out how to communicate with each other, the project will go nowhere. Likewise, if a researcher can’t explain to reviewers why their idea is important, they won’t get funded!


Back in 2013, we started trying to bust this myth that communications training is just for outreach by offering a workshop at our conferences demonstrating how communication tips from Hollywood can improve scientific presentations. We focused on how things like creating narrative structure, connecting emotionally with the audience, and other easy changes can make a big difference in keeping an audience’s attention. With the LOREX program, we’ll be able to expand this training to include other aspects of conducting international research such as how to initiate contact with a potential collaborator. 


A second myth about science communication is that it’s all about figuring out what to say to different audiences. That’s only half of it, though. The other half – the much harder half! – is listening. For the past five years, we’ve offered Improv training to scientists at our conferences to help members achieve real two-way communication. Participants in these workshops consistently tell us afterwards what a game-changer the Improv exercises were for them – if for no other reason it raised their own awareness of how critical listening is to the communications process. 


Perhaps the biggest advantage of using Improv training for scientists is it helps people get past their scientist-training in order to build a partnership. As scientists we are taught to always be critical of what we are reading and hearing - we are trained to negate! While this is excellent for reviewing papers, it can create serious barriers to building partnerships or working on a collaborative project. What better way to train scientists to be better collaborators than through Improv’s core principal of “Yes, and”? The Improv exercises that our Improv instructor Brian Palermo uses also help participants look for non-verbal communication cues. In an international research environment, those will be key to overcoming language and cultural barriers.


Beyond that, we have a faculty coordinator at each host institution who will help orient the LOREX students both prior to and during their research exchange. The LOREX students will travel to the host institution as a group and will participate in cultural activities organized by the host institution. In future years, there will be a peer-to-peer mentoring aspect as well, with prior participants serving as mentors.


Q. How long have you been developing the program? What was the process like? 


A. The LOREX program was conceived as a direct response to a new track specifically for professional societies in NSF’s long-standing International Research Experiences for Students (IRES) program. One of our members, Adina Paytan at the University of California at Santa Cruz, led a successful IRES program before and approached us about putting in a proposal for the new track with ASLO as the society partner. The proposal built upon Adina’s experience with running an IRES program and ASLO’s experience providing training in science communication to our members to create LOREX. As I mentioned earlier, ASLO really strives to be an international association. The opportunity to provide training and research experiences to foster international collaboration was really a golden one, so we jumped at the chance to submit a proposal.


Q. You’ve recently announced the first cohort of LOREX students. What are you most excited about for this new group?


A. The number of new connections between labs in different countries that are being forged through LOREX is really exciting. Our first cohort will connect students from 24 U.S. institutions with 25 different labs in Canada, Israel, Australia and Sweden. We’re thrilled to be able to give students a multi-week international research experience. While our conferences help connect our members, students in particular can get overwhelmed in the whirlwind of a weeklong science conference. ASLO’s involvement helps students take this difficult step into international research collaboration by identifying host institutions, providing travel funding, and conducting a multi-day orientation program at the ASLO conference. We had an introductory webinar in December and we’re really eager to see how their research projects progress!


Thanks so much for sharing details about this exciting program! I’m looking forward to seeing what comes out of these cohorts. 


Image credit: Getty Images


    Elizabeth Moylan
Elizabeth Moylan
Publisher, Research Integrity and Publishing Ethics, Wiley

Here at Wiley, we’re committed to moving towards greater openness and reproducibility of research, including increasing transparency in peer review. As part of the movement to make research more open, a transparent peer review workflow shows readers the process behind editorial decision making, increases accountability, and helps recognize the work of editors and peer reviewers. EMBO Press, one of Wiley's publishing partners, introduced transparency into their processes in 2009.


Back in September, we announced an initiative to pilot an automated, scalable transparent peer review workflow, in collaboration with Publons and ScholarOne (both part of Clarivate Analytics). The first journal to join the pilot was Clinical Genetics (check out our Q&A with the Editor-in-Chief here).


How does transparent peer review work?


The pilot offers authors the choice of transparent peer review when they submit to the journal. If their article is published and authors have elected for transparent peer review, the peer reviewers’ reports, authors’ responses, and editors’ decisions will then accompany their published article. Reviewers also have the option to disclose their names alongside their reports, if they so choose.

The peer review history is openly available on a page hosted by Publons via a link from the published article (see an example here). Each component has a DOI, ensuring each element is fully citable. For those reviewers who choose to sign their reviews, the DOIs can also be added to their ORCID records.


This policy also reflects findings from a survey revealing support for more openness into peer review and a recent call to publish peer reviewer reports advocated by the UK Wellcome Trust, Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) and ASAPbio (a non-profit organization encouraging innovation in publishing). Their open letter - in support of the benefits of increased transparency in peer review - currently has over 300 journal signatories.


How are authors responding?


Since launching the pilot, the feedback from the Clinical Genetics community has been extremely positive. This is reflected in 83% of authors opting for transparent peer review (278 of 336 submissions). The percentage of peer reviewers signing their reports is low at 19% (of 86 reports posted, 16 had identities). We will be sharing more detail on our findings at the Open Science Conference taking place in Berlin in March 2019. It is heartening to see that other publishers are also reporting positive results from their pilot initiatives to publish peer review reports (see findings from BMC and Elsevier).


“The 83% opt-in rate to publishing the contents of peer reviews is phenomenal and reflects a real demand for more transparency in the publishing process. I hope this success encourages many additional journals to offer the option to their own authors.”

Jessica Polka, Director, ASAPbio


Next steps toward transparency


To change the conversation around transparent peer review and learn more, it’s vital that any initiative has the capability to scale and be compatible with different peer review models, across diverse subject disciplines and publisher workflows.

We are therefore delighted to announce that a further ten journals are joining the pilot (see Table 1 below). Some of these journals already mandate transparent peer review (read about European Journal of Neuroscience’s experience here). By joining the pilot, these journals are benefitting from more efficient workflows, ease of navigation of the pre-publication history, and assigned DOIs for each element of peer review.


Table 1. Journals participating in the next phase of the transparent peer review pilot

The other journals joining the pilot did not previously offer transparent peer review as an option for authors. By joining the pilot, these journals have the flexibility to incorporate transparency into their existing workflows and processes without making other major changes to how they conduct peer review. When combined with author choice (and peer reviewer choices) this approach provides a very flexible way to open-up peer review.


“While this sounds like a radical idea, and in certain respects it is, it’s a first step in the direction of real open science.”

Paul Kirschner, Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning


We hope offering transparent peer review for journals across a wide range of subject disciplines will bring many benefits to peer review. However, we recognize that these changes may take time to be fully supported across different disciplines. We will continue to share our findings on how this initiative is progressing—our goal is that this initiative can continue to scale, involving more journals and other publishers in the future.


Thank you to the dedicated team who contributed so much time and energy to scale this initiative: Erin Arndt, Tiago Barros, Simon Bell, Josh Dahl, Faith Garrison, Chris Graf, Laura Harvey, Matthew Hayes, Mark Domingo, Elizabeth Matson, and Elisha Morris.


For Wiley editors, we’re hosting a waitlist for the next group of journals that would like to introduce more transparency to the peer review process. To add your journal, please speak with your Wiley Journal Publishing Manager. 


Looking to become a peer reviewer? Check out our hints and tips.

Are you an active peer reviewer? Join over 150,000 Wiley Peer Reviewers on Publons to help you record, verify, and showcase your peer review contributions.



Image Credit: gettyimages

    Claire O'Neill
Claire O'Neill
Library Services, Wiley

Happy New Year! We’re excited for 2019, because with it comes a new cycle of library conferences!


We’re gearing up to attend lots of events in new places this year, and this month, we’re looking forward to visiting our friends in Toronto for the 2019 Ontario Library Association (OLA) Super Conference!


To get in the Canadian spirit, we’ve taken a deep dive into the Wiley Digital Archives collections to see what fun facts we could uncover about the about the history of the Great White North. Let’s check them out, eh?


Mother Nature, indeed…


Did you know that segments of the Apache and Navajo Indians are originally from northwestern Canada?


Though popularly associated with the southwest region of the United States and the northwestern area of Mexico, the ancestral tribes of the Apache and Navajo apparently migrated from up north!


North American Indians, a manuscript which contained notes, drafts, and papers related to the “culture, classical studies, economics, family welfare and sexual matters in various societies,” offers an interesting insight into the historic roles of both men and women in these tribes.


While men assumed the role of protector, supporting women with the “product of the chase” and fighting on the warfront, women handled the domestic affairs; they were responsible for the “care of children, making mats, mattresses, pots of clay, utensils of bark,” and “storing edible roots, seeds, berries, and plants.”


Fun fact: the “sowing of seeds by women was supposed to render such seeds more fertile and the earth more productive than if planted by men. For they think that woman has and controls the faculty of reproduction and increase.”


A Canadian’s gift to the nation

Canadian's Gift to the Nation Image.png


In 1911, Mr. Joseph Bowles Learmont of Montreal, a collector of all things “in any way connected with Canadian history,” purchased the early home of General James Wolfe “with the object of founding a national museum and headquarters for all things relating to Wolfe and Canadian History in general."


General James Wolfe was a British Army officer known for his training reforms and remembered chiefly for his victory in 1759 over the French in Quebec during the Seven Year’s War. His victory led to him being posthumously dubbed "The Hero of Quebec", "The Conqueror of Quebec", and also "The Conqueror of Canada", since the capture of Quebec led directly to the capture of Montreal, ending French control of the country.


In other words, he was kind of a big deal.


Today, the house contains an exhibition on the battle and on Wolfe's life, showcasing memorabilia and paintings connected to him.


The first comprehensive study of an Aboriginal tribe in Canada


In 1940, Thomas Forsyth McIlwraith completed and returned the Census of British Anthropologists as a professor at the University of Toronto and associate of the Royal Ontario Museum. His area of study? The Bella Coola Indians in Canada, specifically from the coast of British Columbia.


At the University of Toronto, McIlwraith built a department in which archaeological, linguistic, physical and ethnological anthropology all found a place. He was primarily interested in the effect of change on Canadian native peoples; in 1922, he came to Canada as a field assistant of the National Museum of Canada in order to undertake the first comprehensive study of the Bella Coola Indians. According to the census, he used ethnological methods and archeological techniques to focus on the “social, religious and economic lives of primitive peoples.” His two-volume work on the Nuxalk Nation, titled The Bella Coola Indians, published in 1948.


McIlwraith also served as Chairman of the Social Science Research Council, president of the Royal Canadian Institute and the Royal Society of Canada, a fellow of the Royal Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, and remained a research associate of the National Museum and Royal Ontario Museum.


Studier of Insanity in General image (002).pngA studier of “insanity in general”

Canadian doctor William Julius Mickle, M.D. received his Bachelor of Medicine from the University of Toronto in

1868 and was associated with the study and care of mental diseases.


The original manuscript of a Presidential address to the Royal College of Physicians in 1918 after Mickle’s death claims, “a great number of his articles are concerned with general paralysis of the insane, and with the relations of syphilis to that disease, and to insanity in general; indeed, he was one of the first to discuss fully the connection between syphilis and general paralysis.”


Mickle was made President of the Neurological Society and dealt with Syphilis of the Nervous System in his Presidential address. He was also a member of the British Medical Association, and when it held its annual meeting in Toronto in 1906, “Mickle was again President of the Section and the Honorary Degree of LL.D. of the Toronto University was conferred upon him.”




This season on Survivor: French Canada


Did you know that the survival of French Canada was once the subject of great debate?


The May 1959 edition of Man, a journal published by the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, discusses this desire to understand and categorize the culture of French Canadians.


While some researchers at the time believed that French Canada was merely operating as a feudal state that was bound to “disappear completely in the growing conflict between rural and urban societies,” others, like Professor Philippe Garigue, argued that French Canada would prosper, and that it was “complex, in good part urban, with a maritime population of fisherfolk and a substantial element dedicated to the fur trade.” 


Interestingly, folklorists of the National Museum and the Archives de Folklore agreed that French Canada might “endure beyond one year” due to their extensive culture, claiming, “we know from experience that the social character of the French Canadians is under all these captions [songs, tales, dances, legends, sayings, and proverbs] most richly endowed and that they derive from these ancestral sources still alive among them the framework of their personality, sociability, and continuity.”


Vive la French Canada!


Where do you start when you’re researching…a whole country?


Where do you start when you're researching...image.jpg

In the midst of the Second World War, Tracy Phillips, a British intelligence officer, moved to Canada, where he was an adviser to the Canadian Government on immigrant European communities. In the 1944 document “The Continental-European Ethnic and Cultural Composition of Canada,” Phillips described his job as the advisor for the Canadian Government’s Department of National War Services on “Canadian Communities of Recent European Origin” as fostering “a wide knowledge and appreciation of the best traditions of Canadian life” amongst these distinct communities.


No small task, eh? Phillips acknowledged that the work required “some first-hand experience of the ethnic and cultural backgrounds of the countries-of-origin of the now Canadians who, in time of national crisis, such as war, required and require to be inspired and woven into the fabric of a United Nation.”


Phillips eventually wrote his conclusions after “frequent travel” and “constant contact with all the ethnic groups and culture-communities in Canada.”


All aboard!


Now a relic of the past, the Canadian Northern Railway System (CNoR) was once a historic Canadian transcontinental railroad, owning a main line between Quebec City and Vancouver.


So what happened?


In the 1880s, The Canadian Northern Railway System began as a response to the monopoly of the Canadian Pacific Railway—but its creators had a lot of work cut out for them in justifying the expense!


Despite the infamous construction folly in 1913, when blasting for a passage triggered an enormous landslide that partially blocked the Fraser River and caused so much damage to Pacific Salmon runs that it took the government decades to fix the system, one advocate contacted The British Empire Trust Company Limited to defend the system.


“We think that the enormous extent and importance of this great Railway undertaking is not generally understood,” the letter reads, “and we should not hear it suggested from time to time that the Railways comprised in the System have borrowed too largely.”


Despite the railway system’s loud supporters, financial issues for the CNoR came to a head during the height of conflict in the First World War, when the majority of wartime traffic was moving on the Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) instead. The company was also saddled with ongoing construction costs that they were unable to repay without additional revenue.


In the end, money talks, and the Canadian Northern Railway System was nationalized in 1918 to become part of the Canadian National Railway.


A hit-and-miss approach to science coverage

Hit-and-miss aproach to science coverage Image.jpg

The people want more science!


Executive Committee Minutes, 1970-1976 from the Wiley Digital Archives: New York Academy of Sciences Collection illustrates a topic still relevant today: public understanding and appreciation of science and science news. Though a “hit-and-miss approach to science coverage in general” was acknowledged, the focus was around the issues with “the coverage of Canadian science in particular.”


Noting that “the system of science popularization is not working as well as it should,” the committee described a stronger demand for “more and better science popularization” in the media.


“Throughout our study of science communication,” the committee continued, “we find that 75% of all Canadians want to keep abreast of science news. Yet 54% of these people feel that not enough science is being made public (through all sources) and 43% feel that the media are not providing sufficient science coverage.”








So, what do you think of these stories and fun facts from Canada’s history, all of which can be found within Wiley Digital Archives? Let us know at the 2019 OLA Super Conference – we’re excited to see you there!









Images Source: Wiley Digital Archives

    Claire O'Neill
Claire O'Neill
Library Services, Wiley

In order to effectively understand and respond to the current challenges we face as a modern society, it’s critical that researchers have access to the holistic scholarly record – one that goes beyond an article or its conclusions – encouraging deeper understanding or even reinterpretation of findings through the lens of historical context.



At this year’s Charleston Conference, we brought together a panel of library leaders from a diverse group of institutions to share strategic insights on acquiring primary source collections and offer best practices to promote information literacy, enrich classroom instruction, and bolster research outcomes.


“There is a broad appeal that expands beyond the history department to all levels of research.”


As the Librarian for History, History of Science and African Studies at Princeton University, Alain St. Pierre is no stranger to the value of historical context in education and learning. As part of his collection strategy, he has invested in a range of primary and secondary materials to support relevant subject areas, including reference works, rare books and manuscripts, microfilm and microfiche, and digitized print and archival sources like Wiley Digital Archives.


Significant value is derived from the interdisciplinarity of primary source collections in particular, as they “don’t just apply to undergraduate researchers studying history,” but rather to all levels of research. From freshman writing seminars and senior theses to dissertations and research papers, graduate students and faculty researchers also have a “voracious appetite for primary sources in all formats.”


“Primary sources took us from show-and-tell to hands-on learning.”


Maureen Maryanski, Education and Outreach Librarian at Indiana University’s Lilly Library, added a unique perspective to the conversation as the coordinator of classes and tours that visit the rare books area of her library.


Providing tangible “evidence of lives lived,” primary sources are a vital component of original research across many disciplines at IU, helping researchers develop critical thinking skills, find, interpret, evaluate and ethically use items, and promote active, engaged inquiry-based learning.


Maryanski places immense value on the shift towards experiential learning that is a result of exposure to “hands-on” original sources, as one student described being “struck by the humanness of the documents” after visiting the Lilly Library’s special collection. It’s this visceral connection to original materials that opens the door for students and researchers to achieve a deeper, more personal understanding of their research topics and approach learning through a new lens.


When it comes to evaluating primary sources, it’s important not to think about them in isolation.”


Despite the clear value of primary source materials in research, the suggestion isn’t that researchers abandon all other sources, but rather that they learn how to balance them. Sarah Horowitz, Curator of Rare Books and Manuscripts and Head of Quaker and Special Collections at Haverford College, reflected on the need to integrate the use of primary sources with other scholarly materials.


“Critical engagement and context are important no matter how you’re working with primary sources,” Horowitz stressed, “and both primary and secondary sources need to be evaluated in a multitude of ways.”


As print primary source collections are augmented by their newly digitized counterparts, “it’s important,” Horowitz notes, “to interrogate the format, to ask why things were included in an archive collection in the first place,” and “to see the collection as a whole.”


The digitization of physical collections from across the globe certainly allows scholars to discover, search and explore content previously unknown or inaccessible, but it also offers a comprehensive look at the historical context and materiality.


In addition, secondary sources provide useful facts surrounding historical events and offer existing interpretations through published literature.


“It’s important to collect materials for the future, not just for right now”


Of course, building and marketing a robust collection of primary source materials comes with an array of challenges. First, there is pressure to maintain historical strengths and collect exhaustively in select fields across multiple formats – which can be costly and difficult to find.


Secondly, librarians are also faced with the challenge of foresight. When it comes to meeting research needs at the highest level, “we need to buy it before the researchers even know they need it,” explains St. Pierre.


Furthermore, it’s incumbent on the librarian to not only invest in these original collections, but to also ensure their proper use and engagement in classroom and research activities.


So where to start? Panelists strongly emphasized collaboration, as building relationships with new and existing faculty is imperative to both acquiring the right collections and ensuring successful learning outcomes. Consulting with researchers directly is also paramount in order to support use of archive finding aids and help identify the print and digital collections available.


To learn more about the value of primary sources and discover newly digitized archive collections, visit www.wileydigitalarchives.com.


Image Credit: Istockphoto

    Morgan Kubelka
Morgan Kubelka
Library Services, Wiley

Opening Keynote Audience .jpg“We still have a lot to learn about how research could work better than it does today.”


CEO of Scientific & Academic Research at Clarivate Analytics, Annette Thomas set the tone for the 2018 Charleston Library Conference—inspirational, motivational, and at times, downright sobering.


There are challenges that need to be put into perspective—i.e. she’s “not talking about flat library budgets”—challenges that extend from the existential (who and what are universities for?) to the very exact (why is so much research impossible to reproduce?)


The message? We can do better. This year’s conference sessions were, in large part, a manifestation of the core guiding principles Thomas outlined in her opening plenary—connectedness, openness and seamlessness.


The top 10 takeaways from this year’s Charleston Conference illustrate what Thomas says we need most of all: “talent, diversity of thinking, and creative approaches.”

1. “We need to be open to a wider range of indicators beyond citations…”


For the last several years, evidence-based decision making has dominated library conversations nationwide. With information more available than ever, we’ve amassed an incredible wealth of knowledge to help understand user behavior and preferences while identifying gaps to aid in critical collection decisions.


How data is being used though is becoming increasingly nuanced and complex, as librarians are emboldened by their evolving familiarity with spreadsheets and experimenting with more creative methods of analysis.  This is enabling librarians to look beyond the traditional indicators of “success,” transcending circulation and usage statistics to include a whole range of factors when determining the value of library investment.


In Data Expeditions: Mining Data for Effective Decision Making, Ivy Anderson of the California Digital Library (CDL) presented CDL’s newly-developed journal value analysis algorithm that’s informing cancellation and retention decisions at the journal and package level. The more holistic approach to assessment allows a more objective view of the return on their investment. Similarly, Gwen Evans of OhioLink described how the consortium is currently scaling their data models to “help members make the decisions that work for them.”


In Is High Use a Big Deal, Jason Price of SCELC discussed how after spending a lot of time looking at sheer usage data, he decided there may be an even more telling indicator of value—how journals are being used.


Determining research-use to be the most significant indicator of ROI for SCELC members, Price analyzed COUNTER data with a mind towards separating the usage of journals for instructional purposes versus research purposes. Through this type of analysis, Price determined that the proportion of research-oriented journals accounted for 17.5% of the usage, and that those titles were the ones that they’re paying the most for; demonstrating a positive return on their investment.


Like many others at the conference, this session illustrated the significance of estimation and modeling that, while not 100% perfect, represents tremendous progress in the library’s ability to understand the value of their collections.


2. What’s my job again?


The role of the librarian is continuing to evolve almost as quickly as the number of wide-ranging skills necessary to be one. With so many emerging needs and areas of support, new positions continue to be created while existing ones continue to be redefined.


For more nascent areas like scholarly communications, no clear standard has been set for what specific skills this type of librarian should have. Whether it be expertise in publishing and data management, or law and copyright, there’s no central training or continuing education resources available to chart a certain course.


Even more traditional collection development roles are departing from what was once found in the MLS curriculum. In fact, Head of Collection Strategies at University of Rochester, Lindsay Cronk, noted that “even if we did learn this in library school, it wouldn’t have been enough.” Citing the lack of fund codes, the amount of math, the need to be a lawyer, an accountant and a statistician, she describes what it’s like to be in collections today: “you get to do everything but it’s impossible to know everything.”


But Tyler Walters, Dean of University Libraries at Virginia Tech, urges librarian leaders to “help employees see that today’s practices aren’t etched in stone.” He describes the library as a village that’s now expanded beyond the MLS to include web developers, software engineers, digital library architects, user experience specialists and more. Walter encourages, “believe you and your library can make the changes and focus on that.”


3. Catching up with Collections


The world of collections has never been more complex. The increase in procurement options, collaboration with academic departments, and interdisciplinary content are just a few of the factors driving strategic organizational change.


In terms of the collection department’s structure, it seems more libraries are moving away from the liaison model in favor of a more functional approach. The shift reflects the academic liaison’s ever-broadening range of duties--including subject-focused information literacy, course-embedded research support, individual research consultations and more. This shift requires greater flexibility and the need for a more sustainable approach. A more functional model enables agility and a broader [GA1] view of collection development that allows for greater budget consolidation.


However, current collection models are far from perfect. Samuel Cassady of Western University describes the challenges of moving to a fully-functional model, as acquiring material for users is more difficult when you have less interaction with them. The model also requires new skill development, as collection librarians move away from subject expertise to more specialized areas of functional knowledge.


Other traditions are being questioned as well, including the common approach of allocating budget based on format and subject. Increased interdisciplinarity has complicated this approach, creating more splitting of funds and greater complexity for acquisitions and financial services staff.


In Budgets on My Mind, Associate Dean Denise Pan of University of Washington expressed the need for a better collections model, with her own institution allocating from 70 subject funds based on historical percentages that haven’t changed in 20 years. After conducting a survey of 91 libraries, Pan shared that she’s not alone: roughly half of the respondents said that they’re using historical allocation patterns. And, with half of the respondents reporting that they’re making changes now or in the future to move to more agile models, it’s clear that librarians are still seeking a better answer.


4. “Librarians are increasingly working in a seamless way across the institutions—supporting communications between scholars, assessing the research and communication of research discoveries…”


One of the most noticeable changes to this year’s agenda was a discernable increase in the number of sessions surrounding scholarly communications. From author identity management and publishing training support to intellectual rights and citation management, librarians are embedding themselves more deeply across the research lifecycle.


In large part, the increase in these services reflects the mounting pressure researchers are under to publish, combined with a gap in the education and training needed to become a published author.


“Researchers don’t know how to navigate through all of the steps to successfully publish,” says Assistant Dean Beth Bernhardt in Preparing Researchers for Publishing Success. As a result, UNC Greensboro’s Library is proactively acquiring the research tools and services faculty are requesting and supporting these solutions with active outreach.   Further, by investing in these multidisciplinary solutions, it enables the library to get “the biggest bang for their buck” since their value extends across campus and disciplines.


UNC Greensboro and other academic libraries are also developing homegrown programs to address these needs.  One large research institution, the University of Minnesota, offers an entire suite of author support tools, including Research Services as well as Instruction and Production services. [GA2] [KM3] Director of Content Services Kate McCready described the range of programs available to help researchers achieve publishing success, including coauthoring systematic reviews, individual consultation, grant funding workshops, data management training and more.


Libraries are also drawing support from their commercial partners, helping to get “real-life” publishing professionals in front of their researchers. In Marketing is Not a Four-Letter Word, Scholarly Communications Librarian Krystie Wilfong described working with a publisher to bring in an editor to speak at an author workshop that addressed the fundamentals of how to get published.


“It’s not something they’re taught in school,” Wilfong explained, adding that “faculty need to publish to stay at the institution.”


5. Matters of privacy


Librarians have long been concerned with protecting user data, as the increasingly digital landscape of information and the open nature of the web continue to expose networks to a wide range of significant cyber threats.


Several conference sessions addressed traditional IP-based access, expressing concerns related to piracy and illegal harvesting, network security, remote access, and negative user experiences.  Straightforward and Secure: Subscription Access Matures – a Milestone Report-Out from RA21 underscored these factors motivating change, and explained the joint STM and NISO initiative’s project to improve streamlined access while protecting user privacy. Further to their mission, RA-21’s alternative would allow publishers to only see attributes—not identities—of users, allowing them to provide libraries with more granular usage statistics and information.


It’s precisely this issue that remains to be balanced—how to protect patron privacy while also providing the best services and right collections to users? Dean of Libraries at the University of Denver, Michael Levine Clark meditated on these issues in Walking the Critical Line Between User Privacy and Leveraging Knowledge for Greater Library Impact, illustrating both the “utopian view” and the “dystopian view.” On the one hand, “by knowing exactly which students used which resources, we can intervene to ensure success, use that success to improve other services for other students, tailor recommendations to those students and provide better services.” On the other hand, collecting or sharing student data could yield dangerous consequences were it to fall into the wrong hands.


It's clear that opportunities to achieve a happy medium remain, but the road is still fraught with peril.


6. Discover, Deliver and Delight


With more options than ever to discover and access information, technology plays an enormous role in meeting researchers’ needs. To accommodate for an increasing number of access points, libraries are embedding search beyond the library’s website to other applications, like campus apps, eResource access tools and content management systems.


Metadata 2020, a collaboration of over 120 librarians, publishers, service providers, data publishers and repositories, and researchers and funders, is working tirelessly to address multiple challenges with metadata in scholarly communications, including the need for best practices and principles, mapping between schema, assessing evaluation tools, creating a common list of definitions and more.


In All Roads Lead to Rome: Uncovering New Paths to Discovery, linked data was cited as a way of driving users to the library after performing a search in Google and Google Scholar. This initiative targets users beginning their search off-campus, a trend that reflects a growing number of places in which researchers begin their discovery journey. In order to bridge this gap, thought leaders suggest a range of ways to improve user experience, from sharing subscriber holdings with Google and participating with CASA to exploring browser extensions and integrating with the institution’s LMS.


User centricity is and will continue to be a prevailing focus of technical librarians as they feverishly work to understand the choices and preferences of their users as it relates to access and discovery. In Meeting Customers Where They Are, Lisa Janice Hinchcliffe’s assertion that “discovery should be delivery,” reflects consumers’ expectation of seamlessness and immediacy that’s fueling evolving library services.


7. Libraries Lead Textbook Affordability Initiatives


A continuing trend from last year’s conference is the library’s leadership role in developing and offering alternative solutions to costly course materials.


Open Educational Resources (OERs) continue to gain support from the library community, as librarians are steadfastly working to increase the adoption of these materials.  In many cases, targeted marketing efforts like customized web pages are being implemented to reach as many students and instructors as possible. Despite this progress, librarians are still competing with faculty opposition and the challenges of operating the OER model at scale.


Meanwhile, inclusive access programs are growing in popularity with report of over 400 institutions now working with publishers directly to get deeply discounted digital textbook editions. This more recent trend not only solidifies the library’s position as king when it comes to large-scale publisher negotiations, but also demonstrates their contribution to core institutional objectives like student success.   


8. Research was founded on openness. It’s about transparency between individuals and between organizations, including services providers.”


Like confetti out of a cannonball, Open Access (OA) littered the Charleston agenda with a colorful splash. From the opportunities and challenges, to the rise of transformational business models and the need for sustainability, any question of OA’s arrival here in the US can be put to rest.


So here’s what librarians and vendors can agree on: the inevitable impact open access will have on our community.


Julia Gelfand of UC Irvine considered how OA will act as an equalizer to access for those libraries that currently cannot afford pricey collections. Reduced inter-library loans, increased collaboration of discovery and support systems, and a heightened role in institutional repositories and publishing itself will, she predicts, also be likely byproducts of the movement.


Conference sessions also focused heavily on the transformation of publisher business models, with more OA content driving down the cost of traditional subscriptions. But from knowledge innovation and author recognition to tenure and academic freedom, Kevin Sayar of ProQuest reminds attendees “there’s a lot at stake in this ecosystem” and “we must preserve the right activities if we’re going to achieve the same outcomes.” This means considering OA’s impact on the quality of publishing—predatory journals, lower rejection rates and a higher volume of articles could compromise the researchers’ ability to discover the right materials for their work.


Further, OA publishing is not self-sustainable. Conversely, it’s funded by grants, institutions, libraries and, most frequently, authors themselves, who represent the highest funding source of APCs (article processing charges). As a result, both libraries and publishers are looking at ways to contribute to a sustainable balance. Some libraries are adjusting their cost structures to help authors, while publishers are considering how they can help their library partners by using the library’s investment to reinvest in OA.


With OA cost models still in their infancy, there’s still many questions to answer. For the library, will OA really mean paying less, or just be a redistribution of funds? For publishers, if subscription fees are no longer offsetting the cost that’s required for peer-reviewed publication, how will that compromise the quality of output? All this, and we’re still largely waiting with bated breath to hear from faculty and researchers themselves. What will their careers look like without the credibility, recognition and prestige that publishing in high-impact journal brands brings?


Which brings us to the next point…


9. Open Access and the Big Deal


With Europe driving a huge paradigm shift from subscriptions to transitional OA models, one of the biggest conversations at the conference surrounding OA is how this impacts the “big deal.”


For instance, if OA is becoming more mainstream, why shouldn’t the library just stop investing in expensive journal packages and redistribute those costs to OA? In the panel Open Access, Open Research and the Future of the Big Deal, a diverse panel of publisher and library representatives explained the inherent challenges of this.


For one, OA investment does not benefit every researcher nor every discipline. Chris Bennett of Cambridge University Press provides mathematics as an example of “low usage, niche journals which do not have a clear economic model in this new world but are key to development in these communities.” Humanities is another area that faces huge challenges in this space: with fewer articles in these journals each year, the output doesn’t lend itself to APC charges.


“We still see demand for our publishing from authors in our subscriptions program--more than OA. We need to find ways to engage with authors who APCs don’t work for,” said panelist Liz Ferguson, Vice President of Editorial Development at Wiley.


Another reason for the untenability of subscription extinction is the inconsistent consequences it has across the globe. Liz Ferguson provides China as an example of one region “looking at open access with wide eyes” because, as the largest leader in publishing, they see better value through the subscription model. Research-intense institutions across the world also face similar issues, as the OA transition is contingent on the “funders’ willingness to engage with the issue.”


So what will the future hold? “A lot of continued experiment and change,” says Ferguson, but “we all share the same destination—the challenge is how we work together to get there in a way that is sustainable for all of us and the researchers that we serve day in and day out.”


10. The Art of Negotiation and Communication


Perhaps a promising sign of good things to come is an increased focus on more pragmatic issues like negotiation and communication.


In Throwing Back the Curtain: a Candid Conversation about Negotiating, vendor and library panelists discussed the importance of mutual trust and empathy in order to work more effectively together. So how to achieve this?


For one thing, it’s about transparency. Librarians want vendors to “do their research” and spend time getting to know their portfolios. Vendors want librarians to understand the cost associated with making content available and the risks being assumed on both sides during the negotiation process.


Above all, successful partnerships are not about one side winning or getting the best price; it’s about compromise, mutual fairness, and an explicit understanding that both are working towards a common goal.


In an age where library budgets are not likely to skyrocket and subscription rates unlikely to significantly diminish, it’s imperative that common goals and outcomes are openly outlined to make negotiations work for both sides of the table.


That’s a Wrap on Charleston 2018


Above all else, this year’s Charleston Library Conference confirmed the overarching commitment of librarians, vendors and publishers to experimenting with new approaches that better satisfy the increasingly diverse needs of researchers today. And, with increased transparency and a shared vision of the future, they might just be able to achieve more--together.


*From 2018 Charleston Library Conference, Opening Keynote – The Future of Research Information: Open, Connected, Seamless, featuring speaker Annette Thomas, CEO of Scientific & Academic Research at Clarivate Analytics

Filter Blog

By date:
By tag: