1. Part of the fan-studies stigma is, I hate to say it, perpetuated by academic hierarchies. Of course it’s a chicken-and-egg phenomenon, but it’s hard to break out of. So many fan studies scholars—many of the people doing the most interesting, crucial work, are adjunct or non-TT (tenure track). I do see this changing.

    (…)

    Anne is right, but it is a generational thing. Adjuncts are young scholars, as they age they will bring fan art into the discourse. I have watched this happen over the years in Mechademia.

    — 

    Anne Jamison and Frenchy Lunning from the “Future of Fanworks” chat with fan studies authors, going on right now. Join in! (via fanhackers)

    Academic tumblarians, are you collecting fan fiction or building a fan fiction studies collection?

  2. the pinakes: The Resignation of the Editorial Board of the JLA →

    thepinakes:

    There’s a breaking story in the world of scholarly journals and library science that’s worth tuning into. It kicked off with a post by Brian Mathewson his Chronicle of Higher Education blogThe Ubiquitous Librarian, in which he revealed that the entire editorial board of the prestigiousJournal of Library Administration(or JLA) had resigned due to the publisher’s onerous author requirements regarding copyright and access.

    Mathews is the Associate Dean for the Virginia Tech Libraries, and had been asked to serve as guest editor for a special, speculative issue of the journal on the academic library in fifteen years. This is how he described it:

    This special issue explores the possibilities of what libraries might become or cease to be. Experts from different sectors of academia, publishing, technology, and design will share their thoughts, dreams, fears, and hopes about the future. The intention is to produce insights that ignite the imagination — to leapfrog the adjacencies of the coming years and land on a strategic plateau of the near future. This is an opportunity to speculate on the arriving advances as well as to warn of potential loss due to these changes.

    Invited authors included not only academic librarians such as Kelly Miller (UCLA), Michael Levine-Clark (University of Denver), and Steven Bell (Temple), but also Google engineer and search educatorDan Russell, Lennie Scott-Webber, an educational environment expert at Steelcase Furniture, and two authors affiliated with electronic resource vendors. It’s a compelling mix, but with the resignation of the JLA’s board, it’s not going to happen — at least in that venue.

    Mathews had also invitedJason Griffeyto contribute, but in a move that anticipated the decision made by the editorial board, he declined participation due to the publisher’s restrictions. After Mathews broke the news, Griffeyposted on the subject himself:

    On Feb 14, I got an intriguing email from Brian Matthews [sic] about a special edition of the Journal of Library Administration he was editing. It was a request for a chapter for an edition of the journal called Imagining the Future of Libraries, and the Brian’s pitch to me was enough to make me very interested:

    [Brian]: “I’d love for you to contribute an essay around the topic of technology. Beyond most digital collections. Beyond everyone and everything mobile— what unfolds then?”

    I mean, if I have a specialty, this is it. I love nothing more than I love a good dose of futurism, and told him so. My one concern was the Journal’s publisher, Taylor & Francis, and the fact that I refuse to sign over my copyright on work I create. I’m happy to license it in any number of ways that gives the publisher the rights they need to distribute the work, but I won’t write something for someone else to own.

    Thefinal post covering the story(so far; there will be more, I’m sure) is from Chris Bourg, who had recently joined the editorial board of theJournal of Academic Librarianshipand resigned along with her colleagues. She describes the lengths editor Damon Jaggars had gone to convince the publisher to change its practices:

    In the meantime, Damon continued to try to convince Taylor & Francis (on behalf of the entire Editorial Board, and with our full support), that their licensing terms were too confusing and too restrictive. A big part of the argument is that the Taylor & Francis author agreement is a real turn-off for authors and was handicapping the Editorial Board’s ability to attract quality content to the journal. The best Taylor & Francis could come up with was a less restrictive license that would cost authors nearly $3000 per article. The Board agreed that this alternative was simply not tenable, so we collectively resigned.

    Look for more to emerge on this subject, as librarians start to assert their demand for change in the world of scholarly publishing. And hopefully, somewhere, Brian Mathews’ special issue will find a home — since it sounded fantastic.

    Sources:

    So I’m editing this journal issue and…| Brian Mathews, The Ubiquitous Librarian

    The Journal of Library Administration| Jason Griffey, Pattern Recognition

    My short stint on the JLA editorial board| Chris Bourg, Feral Librarian

    Great round up!

  3. The unpleasant truth is that the phenomenon I’ve been describing isn’t just how academia works, it’s how everything works. People want themselves and their publications to be judged on their inherent qualities, but the overwhelming amount of judgment people receive is based on external factors. Where you live, where you work, what you do, where or if you went to school, how you dress, how you talk, what kind of car you drive, and where or if you publish: the majority of people judge you by these signs regardless of what they reveal about your “true” self and its quality. Sometimes that’s the only thing they can do.

    — He’s talking about academic publishing, and so much more. From The Academic Librarian. (via johnxlibris)

  4. Staying student-centered on campus takes more than providing one-shot course-related instruction, quiet study rooms, or flexible seating. It will require us to be engaged with more components of the student experience, educate other campus faculty and administrators as to why we should have a seat at the table to influence and affect student programs and services, and talk with students to find out what challenges currently exist.

    — Courtney L. Young, “I Plan To Be in the Library. A Lot.” (via johnxlibris)

  5. Congress must see the Federal Research Public Access Act as an important part of the country’s research endeavor, and a crucial component of the public’s access to knowledge.

    — Congress Has a Role to Play in Making Research Public - Commentary - The Chronicle of Higher Education (via arlpolicynotes)

  6. JSTOR makes early content free →

    fragmentsshoredagainstmyruin:

    “JSTOR, an online system for archiving academic journals, has announced it is making journal content published prior to 1923 in the United States, and prior to 1870 elsewhere, freely available to the public for reading and downloading. This includes nearly 500,000 articles from more than 200 journals, representing approximately 6% of the total content on JSTOR. Making this content freely available is a first step in a larger effort to provide more access options to independent scholars and others without access to an institutional subscription….” (JSTOR, Sept. 6 ) [text via American Libraries Direct]

    (Source: princessmeanypants)