Evolving Open Solutions (2)

  • Marilyn Billings Scholarly Communication & Special Initiatives Librarian, University of Massachusetts
  • Brett Bobley CIO, National Endowment for the Humanities
  • Aaron McCollough Head of Scholarly Communication and Publishing Unit, University of Illinois Library https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3067-8547
  • Alison Mudditt Director, University of California Press
  • Kamran Naim Lead Researcher, Open Access Cooperative Publishing Study, Stanford University
  • Frances Pinter Founder and Executive Director, Knowledge Unlatched and CEO, Manchester University Press
  • Richard Price Founder and CEO, Academia.edu
  • Tony Roche Publishing Director, Emerald Publishing Group
  • Lisa Sprio Executive Director of Digital Scholarship Services, Rice University
  • Micah Vandegrift Digital Scholarship Coordinator, Florida State University

Abstract

Are the scholarly publishing tools we’re using today still the right ones? Is the monograph still the best format in the humanities? Is the journal article still best in STM? These products can be difficult to produce and edit, nearly impenetrable to read, and—as in the case of clinical research information—they aren’t necessarily the best-suited formats for capturing every piece of necessary information (like protocols and datasets in medical research) and showing how this information is all connected to other scholarship. What other formats and options are being considered or used? What are the prospects of change? How about the stakeholder universe itself? How are roles, responsibilities and expectations changing (and where might they end up)? Are we “settling†on half-measures or on the best possible solutions?
Published
2016-04-22
Issue
Section
Questions