Category Archives: ScholCom Updates

New Addition to Ebook Collection

More and more across academia, students getting involved with scholarly publishing on their campuses. Whether this takes the form of contributing to research papers or authoring articles and submitting them to journals, young scholars are seeking opportunities to participating in developing discourse and add to the scholarly record. Boston College libraries in particular supports this in a variety of ways; all students are welcome to apply for funding via the Open Access Publishing Fund, which provides support with the coverage of Article Processing Charges for authors interested in submitting work to, and our Open Journal Systems platform, which currently hosts nine student journals publishing material.

Given the relative increased interest, the timing of this new title could not have been better. How to Edit and Manage a Successful Scholarly Journal: Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences was publishing in May of 2024 and consists of eighteen chapters covering a wide variety of central topics that any young scholar should keep in mind. From best practices around building an editorial team to how to judge questionable and predatory editorial behaviors, this helpful guide provides a foundation for higher education practitioners interested in guiding students through the process of being published or attempting to manage a serial. And indeed, the ebook is now fully accessible for rental through the Boston College libraries’ catalogue.

While there are eighteen chapters in the collection that cover a wide range of topics geared towards helping scholars think about publishing in the humanities, arts, and social sciences, Chapter 8 “Rebound and renewal: strategies and tactics for journal revitalisation” focuses on some ideas for picking up journals that may struggle to consistent gather and publish content on a quarterly or yearly basis. The chapter outlines best practices around communications with an editorial board and some suggested leadership roles, and also discusses ideas for attracting submissions, such as publishing “special issues” with a clearly defined focus – inviting a wider array of reviewers for a more non-committal approach to introduce young scholars to participating in scholarly publishing. Additionally, sticking to consistent timelines for the review process leads to more consistent positive relationships with authors, which can help provide sources of content when a journal is looking for submissions.

Here at Boston College, we have a number of journals that still enjoy tremendous global readership, but are no longer publishing current issues. Elements is a interdisciplinary undergraduate journal with a long history of publication at Boston College, but is currently not actively seeking submissions. Additionally, Lingua Frankly, another long time student publication, explores undergraduate work that has to do with language or linguistics, but has not had an active editorial board since the major disruptions of the pandemic. If you have interest in revitalizing or starting your own an open access journal at Boston College, please reach out to Gabriel Feldstein and the Scholarly Communications Team for more information. Click the images below to view the publications from the respective student journals.

*Elements* has been in publication since 2005 and has published 28 issues with Boston College Libraries.

OSTP Federal Research Funding update

The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) has received funding from Congress to continue its implementation of the Nelson Memo. This memo requires any federal agency that awards research grants to implement a policy requiring immediate public access to publications resulting from that research, as well as access to data and the use of persistent digital identifiers in article metadata.

During the lengthy Federal appropriations process, the House Appropriations Committee released a bill that specifically defunded any attempt to implement the memo. No individual or lobbying group ever came forward to take any credit for trying to kill the OSTP memo in the budget, nor was there much explanation of why it might have been included.

The final appropriation bill (technically the explanatory statement accompanying the bill) only included a requirement that OSTP produce a financial analysis of the impact of the memo, “including the policy’s anticipated impact on Federal research investments, research integrity, and the peer review process,” within 100 days of the bill passing. In other positive news, this was the only requirement. There is no trigger stopping development of policy depending on what the report says. This likely means that after the report, there would be a round of Congressional hearings before more action is taken. Being an election year, there may not be enough time for a truly adverse legislative action. Overall, this means plans will progress, and there should be some good reading on the state of scholarly publishing sometime in mid-June!

Coalition for Diversity and Inclusion in Scholarly Communication (C4DISC)

Earlier this year, the Coalition for Diversity and Inclusion in Scholarly Communication (C4DISC) held their first community meeting. The main mission of the coalition is “to work with organizations and individuals to build equity, inclusion, diversity, and accessibility in scholarly communication.” The coalition officially launched in 2020 – and January’s meeting was in fact the coalition’s very first community meeting. Among its members and partners, the coalition boasts Crossref, the Library Publishing Coalition, the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association, and more. As the push for more equitable models of publishing continues to be at the forefront of the minds of scholars and librarians, best practices around diversity, inclusion, and accessibility will lay a key foundation in assuring that scholarly publishing is not only published and consumed by the most privileged layers of our society.

To provide some context as the meeting started, coalition members presented on some of the priorities and outcomes from the past year – including toolkits and surveys developed by the coalition as a means of getting librarians and scholarly publishing practitioners thinking about their own roles in creating a more diverse scholarly record. Thee were also tools to help proactively change the culture around scholarly publishing so that marginalized voices can be centered, rather than continually obscured.

As the coalition continues to hold larger community meetings and launches its communities of practice, librarians and practitioners can start to think about best practices for ensuring diverse, equitable, and inclusive academic publishing that highlights marginalized voices and works as seminal parts of a collection or publishing portfolio.

Toolkits

As a means of providing helpful ways for institutions to build more equitable diverse models for themselves, the Coalition provides links to toolkits that have been put together by leaders in publishing and higher education.

In addition to the Toolkits above, the coalition is also currently working on an Equity on Editorial Boards toolkit – a resource that will aim to assist journal and editorial managers in figuring out the best ways to ensure an attitude and editorial board that reflects a global population.

Surveys

In addition to the toolkits, the Coalition also provides links to the 2018 and 2023 Workplace Equity Surveys. While the results and analysis from the 2023 is still being published, an article from Learned Publishing gets into some of the details from the 2018 survey.

Public Domain – 2024

On January 1st of each year, different cultural artifacts entire the public domain due to the expiration of their copyright – and indeed, 2024 is no different – as books, musical composition, plays, movies and more produced in the year 1928 find their way into the public domain, which means they are free to use and reference without having to acquire copyright permissions. Of course, if an author references or uses an artifact in the public domain, they should be sure to cite it, but items in the public domain are no longer constricted by any copyright law.

The 95 years rule is not a given, however, as Congress has determined this number based on finding a balance between protecting author and publisher rights during the course of their lives, and ensuring that important artistic and cultural artifacts are – after due time – able to be accessed more freely, rather than rotting away behind permissions paywalls or other copyright constrictions. And some types of content are protected for longer – sounds recordings, for instance, are currently released to the public domain after 100 years, but recordings produced between 1947 and 1956, protection will last 110 years. Since the first copyright laws were established, the trend has been to extend the time of protection in order to protect authors rights – the argument could be made, however, that this protected period is perhaps too lengthy, as it is certainly much longer than an average lifespan. The chart below shows the timelines produced by the differing copyright acts of their respective moments.

Graph showing length of copyright based on act. in 1790 act protections were 28 years, in 1831 Act protections are over 40 years. In 1909 act protections are over 50 years, 75 years in 1976 act, and over 100 years by the 1998 (or Sonny Bono) Act, — Tom Bell chart showing US copyright term over time created for Wikipedia: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tom_Bell%27s_graph_showing_extension_of_U.S._copyright_term_over_time.svg

Cover and spine of first edition copy of Virginia Woolf's Orlando. Light brown cover with ornate pattern; title and author.

In 2024, while sound recordings may be protected – there is a great deal to welcome into the public domain. Joining the public domain – among other items – are JM Barrie’s Peter Pan play, Virginia Woolf’s Orlando, and Charlie Chaplin’s silent film The Circus. Additionally, while the sound recording has not yet hit the public domain, the lyrics and music to Cole Porter’s “Let’s Do it, Let’s Fall in Love” have also entered into the public domain. And while Winnie the Pooh has been in the public domain for the past two years, he will now be joined by his longtime friend from the Hundred Acre Wood, as Tigger was introduced in The House at Pooh Corner, which was published in 1928.

As a result of some famous character and stories coming into the public domain, new artistic reproductions are taken up without having to pay for copyright permissions. As a result some very interesting titles have been released, including Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey and Mickey’s Mouse Trap, a pair of horror movies that certainly bring an alternative experience to the beloved characters. And indeed, the impact of cultural artifacts hitting the public domain means more than new inspired slasher films – items on the public domain are useable in teaching materials without the burden of securing copyright to acquire full versions of texts. Scholars can more readily and fully study bodies of work that are in the public domain without incurring expenses, which enhances the global scholarly discourse and allows for seminal work from our cultural past to freely accessible to those interested in studying it – and indeed, on the flip side, if copyright laws continue to get stronger, the ability for scholars and and librarians to make use of assets will be continually diminished in favor of protecting the copyrights for authors and creators who indeed deserve their due – but are more than likely passed on.

For more information on the public domain, please consult the resources below:

Duke Law: Center for the Study of the Public Domain