Beyond Gatekeepers of Knowledge: Scholarly Communication Practices of Academic Librarians and Archivists at ARL Institutions

Librarians and archivists are intimately involved in scholarly communication systems, both as information providers and instructors. However, very little is known regarding their activities as scholars. This study seeks to examine the scholarly communication practices of librarians and archivists, the role that tenure plays in scholarly communication practices, and the degree to which institutional support is provided in librarians’ efforts to consume and disseminate research and reports of best practices. A questionnaire was sent to professional librarians and archivists at 91 ARL institutions. The responses demonstrate that ARL librarians and archivists are avid consumers and creators of scholarship, and use emerging technologies to stay up-to-date on the profession’s latest research. INTRODUCTION The duties of academic librarians and archivists are inherently tied to the world of scholarly research. By organizing, disseminating, and providing access to information, librarians and archivists act as gatekeepers of knowledge for countless students, researchers, and professors. The role of librarians and archivists in scholarly communication has expanded in recent years. In addition to their traditional job duties, librarians now perform liaison functions, wherein information professionals act as educators for both students and faculty. Modern librarians also advocate for “sustainable models” of scholarly communication, help faculty members to develop tools that facilitate scholarly communication, and work in the field of digital preservation. It has been argued that the “changing landscape of research, open access, and managing information and intellectual property rights has added urgency to the need to define the library's role in scholarly communication.” This role has been promoted as one of advocacy, wherein librarians should actively promote open access, institutional repositories, and other novel means of conducting scholarly communication. This transformation towards a dissemination and publication role moves librarianship “beyond a custodial role model” and into one which involves “active...contributi[ons] to the evolution of scholarly communication.” In many cases, this involves collaboration with existing publishing initiatives at the university (such as the university press). Proponents also argue that the library should be reconceptualized as a publisher in its own right. The increasing role of librarians within the scholarly communication process has not gone without challenge. Faculty members and other actors in the scholarly communication system have demonstrated reluctance to embrace the evolving paradigm. The rationale for engaging in new (particularly open) systems of scholarly communication seems obvious for those librarians who see the contemporary landscape as an opportunity to rid themselves of a 40year old serials crisis, but there is less of an incentive for other actors within the system to depart from the status quo. The number of librarians in tenure-track positions and the associated publishing responsibilities of these positions indicate an expectation on the part of universities for these professionals to engage in scholarly research. This is reflected in the growing number of academic librarians who receive some form of institutional support for their research. In addition, due in large part to emerging technologies and the changing expectations of patrons, the role of librarians (not to mention the term “library” itself) is in flux. This dynamic environment may provide a platform for information professionals to make it clear that they are information creators in addition to information providers. While there is a substantial body of literature regarding the manner in which librarians facilitate and (increasingly) engage in the process of scholarly communication, there is less literature dedicated to the idea of librarians and archivists as bona fide scholars. Therefore, this study seeks to answer two broad research questions: 1) What are the scholarly communication practices of academic librarians and archivists? 2) What types of institutional support are provided to facilitate the scholarly communication practices of academic librarians and archivists? CO LL EG E & RE SE AR CH L IB RA RI ES P RE -P RI NT It should be noted that the direct implications of this study are limited to the surveyed population of ARL librarians; any extrapolations must take this caveat into consideration. Nevertheless, the results of this study can inform the practices and policies surrounding the consumption and dissemination of research and reports of best practices by librarians and archivists at research universities. This field of inquiry is particularly relevant for administrators who are looking to formulate guidelines and policies relating to scholarly publishing and tenure. The results can also be used to inform educators and guide them in redesigning MLS curriculums in ways that more adequately prepare students for their future roles as academic librarians. LITERATURE REVIEW Disseminating and consuming scholarship. Academic librarians and archivists make substantial contributions to the Library and Information Science (LIS) literature, although there are indications that such contributions may be on the decline. Publications by librarians increasingly tend to be concentrated in a few journals and receive fewer citations than articles published by LIS faculty. The reading practices of academic librarians also reflect this concentration, with librarians consistently following only a handful of research journals; in one study, “only 15% read more than four research journals.” In general, librarians and archivists tend to read and publish research that has practical interest and is directly related to their job duties. This is also a factor when academic librarians consider venues in which they intend to disseminate their research; the perceived value of a journal in relation to the profession is seen as one of the most import criteria for selecting a publication venue. Even if academic librarians are not traditionally viewed as scholars, there is much evidence to suggest that such individuals are, in fact, quite productive, particularly when considering that research and publishing are generally considered ancillary to other facets of a librarian’s job. A 1999 survey of Pennsylvania State University librarians reported that “on average, the librarians spend 19.8 hours per month on their research, and fully 12 percent reported spending more than thirty hours per month.” In addition, at the time of the survey, 80% of the librarians at the university were working on research that was ultimately intended to be submitted for publication. This level of productivity was due to a number of factors; perhaps the most telling is that librarians at the university were expected to publish as part of their duties. A welcoming environment is also critical in order for librarians to engage in scholarly initiatives such as open access publishing. Although librarians are often seen as proponents of open access, research demonstrates that they do not submit their own research to open access journals with a greater frequency than other scholars do. This may be due to the current state of the academic climate with respect to scholarly publications and the role that librarians play in this process. As noted by Mercer, “academic librarians are not likely to adopt activist behaviors without support from library and college or university administrators.” Tenure and institutional support. Academic librarians are generally more likely to engage in scholarly communication if they are offered tenure and faculty status. xxiii xxii Such librarians tend to continue to publish even after they have been awarded tenure. Some librarians have reported that conducting and publishing research becomes habitual during the process of achieving tenure; others found that they genuinely enjoyed the process, and consequentially developed an enthusiasm for research that remained even after tenure had been awarded. Although the ACRL provides some basic recommendations, xxvii xxviii xxv “there are no clear-cut guidelines among institutions regarding what constitutes scholarship or service.” This is complicated by the fact that only 48.2% of ARL libraries “reported having written policies regarding tenure and promotion.” Despite this lack of formality, publications were required for tenure at a majority of institutions. Some have questioned whether the tenure model is appropriate, given the other demands placed on librarians and archivists. It is also questionable whether the requirement to publish is in line with “the ideal of the profession.” Finally, it is possible that it might be CO LL EG E & RE SE AR CH L IB RA RI ES P RE -P RI NT beneficial to all concerned if librarians were instructed to spend their energy on more traditional professional responsibilities, as opposed to focusing their efforts on the goal of achieving tenure. At the heart of the problem is a curious state of affairs in which pressure to publish is frequently melded with a lack of support from a library’s parent institution. Even when librarians are offered institutional support, the tricky business of balancing original research with other job requirements frequently proves to be a hindrance to productivity.