CFP: Contributions to the Scholarly Communication Notebook

We are pleased to announce a call for proposals for materials to be included in the Scholarly Communication Notebook. Successful proposals will contribute openly-licensed educational materials (OER) about scholarly communication that reflect the broad range of people, institution types, and service models in scholarly communication and specifically fill gaps of representation in the current body of materials. With generous support from IMLS, we are able to offer $2,500 financial awards in recognition of the expertise and labor required to develop these resources. You can see the full application as a Google doc, read more below, and submit here.

Call for Proposals

The Scholarly Communication Notebook (SCN) team is excited to invite proposals for the development of open educational resources (OER) that reflect and encourage diversity in scholarly communication. The SCN is an online community/repository that is explicitly intended to support and educate a diversifying workforce of LIS professionals and to extend social justice values to all participants by intentionally and thoughtfully reflecting the broad range of people, institution types, and service models in scholarly communication.

With generous support from IMLS, we are able to offer $2,500 financial awards in recognition of the expertise and labor required to develop these resources.

We are particularly interested in proposals from authors from a broad range of institutions and intersectional identities, particularly emphasizing marginalized and underrepresented perspectives.

The Materials

The OER should be a learning object or collection of objects that is ready to be used in both a formal classroom setting and as a resource for self-guided learning. For the first of three rounds, we are leaving space for a variety of approaches to the design of the core resource and pedagogical apparatus. We are also committed to working with contributors to develop proposals before they are submitted and continuing to support development and refinement throughout creation.

Example Projects

Because this is a new project we invite proposals that reflect a variety of approaches to building open resources and supporting open practices. These examples reflect a small set of gaps in the literature that a proposal might help fill:

  • A lesson introducing a model open education program being run at an HBCU
  • An exercise exploring strategies for supporting open and public access at a community college
  • Narratives and discussion questions that highlight unique work being done on archiving and supporting engagement with local materials at a regional college or university
  • A podcast or videos describing a tribal college’s work developing tools that support digital scholarship that engages the college’s history and the communities it serves

Selection Criteria

Proposals are open-ended but should address the following areas:

  • An overview of the topic being presented (copyright, OER, digital scholarship, etc.)
  • The need for this resource and the gaps that it fills. Why is it important? Are you building on existing openly licensed content or creating something new?
  • Your approach to presenting this material. What methods are you using? How are you addressing the need you identified above?
  • The format of the learning object? Is it a selection of readings? A video? A podcast?
  • What sort of pedagogical apparatus will be included? Will you include discussion questions? A structured assignment? What will you add to make this an educational resource, not just a document? If you have concerns about this area we are happy to work with you to refine these through discussion.
  • What are the learning outcomes/objectives for these materials?
  • Suggested (foundational/canonical) further reading? What are the most important readings, either necessary or optional for a learner to engage with these materials?

Submission Process

Review of proposals will begin on October 20, 2020 and continue throughout the fall until awarded proposals are selected. Work on selected proposals will be conducted in the late fall and early winter, with specific deliverable due dates determined among SCN leads and awarded proposal authors according to needs of project.

Please direct questions to Josh Bolick (jbolick@ku.edu), Maria Bonn (mbonn@illinois.edu), and/or Will Cross (wmcross@ncsu.edu).

Note: this CFP is also available as a Google Doc with comments enabled. Feedback on the CFP itself (including suggestions for improving it) is welcome and appreciated.

“Voices from the Field” CFP Results

On January 19 we closed the CFP for Unit 3 of our to-be-published open book, Scholarly Communication & Open Culture. We are calling this unit “Voices from the Field” which consists of field-based Perspectives (on scholcomm issues), Intersections (of SC between adjacent areas and stakeholders), and Case Studies (on implementation of scholcomm initiatives, and lessons learned). We honestly didn’t know what the response might be, but were floored by the number and quality of proposals submitted!

We received 48 submissions, representing 64 authors from 45 institutions, including a couple of government agencies and one corporation. There wasn’t a lemon among them, which made the selection process very difficult. Given enough space, we could have accepted all of them. Space isn’t infinite, however, so we did our best to balance format, topic, relationship to the book as a whole, institutional type, career status, and diversity/representation. In late January, we communicated our sincere regrets to our peers whose proposals we declined. We’ve all been accepted and rejected, but being in the position to accept and reject is a responsibility we took seriously. We hope all the authors know we were deeply impressed with the quality of the work and didn’t make decisions lightly.

We were able to accept 26 proposals from 38 authors from 28 institutions. The R1s are there, of course, but so are smaller and more teaching focused institutions (where a great deal of excellent scholcomm work happens despite the frequent over-representation of R1s in scholcomm discussions). There’s a private institution you’ll recognize, too, as well as a community college (where a lot of the best open ed work is taking place). Overall there are ten Intersections, eight Perspectives, and eight Case Studies.

The big topics are present: open access, library publishing, open education, copyright, etc. There are also interesting reflections and connections with public libraries, collections as scholcomm work, university presses, DEI in SC work, and others. There are a number of essays that engage with interpersonal skills (communication, collaboration) as well as a group of them that we think of as “nature of the work” (accepting and learning from failure, dealing with challenges, working across knowledge and/or priority gaps). The interpersonal and “nature of the work” pieces are important, as those issues have arisen in many conversations we’ve had with colleagues over the last few years as this project has taken shape.

Writing is underway, and we can’t wait to see and share the finished products. When this project is done (in the sense that it’s really ever “done”), one of the things we will be most proud of is the people who contributed their knowledge and time to enrich it. We feel very grateful and lucky to be at the helm of this, but without a doubt, this work will belong to the community that is working together to make it happen.

More soon.

-Maria, Will, and Josh

Unit 3 CFP Proposals Under Review

Colleagues!

We are so excited and grateful to have received almost 50 proposals in response to the CFP we posted in mid-November! That’s more than twice as many as we can accept, and we have hard choices to make (a great problem to have). There are so many fantastic ideas and projects. We are carefully reviewing each proposal and will communicate with authors as soon as possible. In the meantime, please know that we take this responsibility very seriously and are so appreciative of the time our peers invested in their proposal. Gratitude also to folks who amplified the CFP!  High fives to all of you!

Very best,

Maria, Will, and Josh

CFP: Scholarly Communication Librarianship and Open Culture: Law, Economics, and Publishing

UPDATE: due to holidays and related downtime, feedback from peers, and respect for everyone’s work/life balance (including our own), we’re extending the CFP by 2 weeks, to Jan. 19. We will begin reviewing submissions on the 5th in an attempt to maintain the timeline below, but we hope this takes a little heat off and encourages more folks to submit.

We are pleased to announce a call for proposals for Unit 3 contributions (see more details below) in our upcoming edited open book, Scholarly Communication Librarianship and Open Culture: Law, Economics, and Publishing, to be openly published by the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) in electronic and print formats. Authors retain copyright of their contributions, but commit to open publication in the CC-BY-NC book.

Proposals will be accepted in three areas:

  • Perspectives – situated and self-reflexive discussions of topics of importance in scholarly communication
  • Intersections – examples of and reflections on the intersection of scholarly communication with other areas of academic librarianship or other stakeholders
  • Case Studies – stories and lessons learned drawn from experience by librarians engaged in scholarly communication work

Edited by (in alphabetical order)

Josh Bolick, University of Kansas Libraries, jbolick@ku.edu

Maria Bonn, School of Information Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana Champaign, mbonn@illinois.edu

Will Cross, North Carolina State University Libraries, wmcross@ncsu.edu

Proposal Deadline: January 5, 2020 

Notification of Selected Authors/Contributions

January 24, 2020

Authors Submit Completed Contributions

March 30, 2020 (editors may provide feedback and make revision suggestions and will work with selected authors to set timeline for resubmission)

Description

Scholarly Communication and Open Culture was conceived as an open textbook of scholarly communication librarianship, which we hope may be a vehicle to increase instruction on SC topics in LIS programs, as well as serve as a resource for continuing education. The book consists of three units. Unit 1 defines scholarly communication and scholarly communication librarianship, and provides an introduction to the social, economic, technological, and legal backgrounds that underpin and shape scholarly communication work in libraries. Unit 2 begins with an introduction to “open”, broadly conceived, followed by guest-edited sections on Open Access (Amy Buckland), Open Education (Lillian Hogendoorn), Open Data (Brianna Marshall), and Open Science & Infrastructure (Micah Vandegrift). Unit 3, the subject of this CFP, will consist of concise (approx. 1,000 words) Perspectives, Intersections, and Case Studies.

Perspectives, Intersections, and Case Studies should serve to stimulate discussion and reflection on theory and implications for practice. They might dive into more niche subjects/topics, or emerging areas. Suggested further reading, discussion questions, and reference to existing resources for more information/training are welcome.

Perspectives

Perspectives are intended to offer situated and self-reflexive discussions of topics of importance in scholarly communication and the ways in which libraries or librarians respond to those topics. Scholarly communications work inevitably leads to engagement with issues upon which opinions vary, as do the courses of action that address those issues. Personal and professional experience, as well as institutional context, and personal and community identity inform and shape the opinions and approaches of scholarly communication professionals.

Examples of Perspectives might include reflections from a solo scholarly communication librarian asked to spin up a new program, a community college librarian working to support open access with faculty that do not prioritize publishing in scientific journals, or a scholar working on politically contested topics balancing a commitment to openness with safeguarding themselves from hostile alt-right trolls and doxxing.

Intersections

Intersections invites examples of and reflections on the intersection of scholarly communication with other areas of academic librarianship, obvious or otherwise. Almost all work in academic libraries is arguably and ultimately in service of scholarly communication. While libraries increasingly designate scholarly communications specialists, those specialists often collaborate with colleagues throughout their organizations to provide their expertise in addressing scholarly communication opportunities and challenges. Conversely, any area of library work might turn to a scholarly communications specialist for an informed perspective and expertise. Intersections will explore how scholarly communication work can or should interface with other areas of academic librarianship, such as undergraduate engagement, public services, tech services, DEI work, and so on.

Examples of Intersections might include exploration of library-press partnerships for sharing nontraditional research, open pedagogy work done as a collaboration between the library and a center for academic support, or a scholarly project that connects with the knowledge, innovations, and practices of indigenous and local communities.

Case Studies

Case Studies present stories and lessons learned drawn from experience. Case Studies should provide specific, contextualized examples of the kinds of tasks and questions librarians working in scholarly communication encounter and strategies for response. A case study will describe and evaluate a case, reflecting upon the issues involved and their implications for scholars and scholarship. It will suggest possible responses to the case and evaluate the effectiveness and possible challenges of those strategies. A case study grounded in actual experience might also describe the actions that were taken and reflect upon subsequent outcomes.

Examples of Case Studies might include a specific course marking project done at an institution working to support OER and textbook affordability, a digital humanities project that used interdisciplinary expertise in the libraries, or a library research data management initiative that helps researchers meet funder mandates for open data.

Selection Criteria
Proposals will be selected based on:

  • Alignment with goals and theme of book
  • A clear sense of intent/purpose
  • Quality of writing
  • Feasibility
  • Basis in theory, research, and/or practice
  • Contribution to book as a whole
  • Offering a new or underrepresented perspective on scholarly communication and scholarly communication librarianship

Acceptance of a proposal does not guarantee inclusion in the book. In addition to the above criteria, editors are keen to include contributions from a variety of institutional types, from authors at different career status, and with diversity and representation in mind. Co-authoring is welcome but not required, particularly where senior authors can partner with rising/early career authors.

Proposal Information required:

  • Section (Perspective, Intersection, or Case Study)
  • Title of contribution
  • Keywords
  • Proposal abstract (up to 250 words)
  • Justification: tell us why it’s important, including links to any supporting documentation (materials, sites, news stories, etc.)
  • Author(s) name, title, institution, and preferred email
  • Author bio (up to 100 words)
  • Acknowledgement of Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial license of the entire book

Submission Process:
Authors interested in submitting Unit 3 contributions should complete the proposal form on or before January 5, 2020. UPDATED: CFP open until January 19, 2020.

Please direct questions to Josh Bolick (jbolick@ku.edu), Maria Bonn (mbonn@illinois.edu), and/or Will Cross (wmcross@ncsu.edu).

Note: this CFP is also available as a Google Doc with comments enabled. Feedback on the CFP itself (including suggestions for improving it) is welcome and appreciated.