Learning the Basics of Scholarly Communication: 
A Guide for New Subject Liaison Librarians
Madeline Cohen, Lehman College/CUNY
Abstract
Academic librarians are playing a greater role in scholarly communication at their institutions. Scholarly communication has become a part of every academic librarian’s work. In particular, the role of subject liaison librarian often includes responsibilities related to advising discipline faculty on scholarly publishing, open access, institutional repositories and copyright. Liaison librarians might take on these responsibilities without having a firm grasp of the landscape of scholarly communication due to lack of experience or education in this area. This article is a guide to the key issues and concepts of scholarly communication for librarians new to this facet of academic librarianship. A guide to readings and resources is offered for librarians to educate themselves quickly on these basic issues.
	Keywords: scholarly communication, scholarly publishing, open access, copyright

Introduction
	Over the past decade, academic libraries have played a more significant role in scholarly communication on their campuses. The Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) Scholarly Communications Committee defines scholarly communication as:
…the system through which research and other scholarly writings are created, evaluated for quality, disseminated to the scholarly community, and preserved for future use. The system includes both formal means of communication, such as publication in peer-reviewed journals, and informal channels, such as electronic listservs. (2003, June 24)
The term “scholarly communication” may be defined to encompass scholarly publishing, authors’ rights, copyright, open access, institutional repositories, data research management, open educational resources (OER) and information literacy (Gilman, 2013). Larger colleges and universities maintain offices of scholarly communications staffed by librarians, legal counsel, information technology and publishing professionals. Increasingly, academic libraries are hiring at least one “Scholarly Communications Librarian” with responsibilities to develop and manage an institutional repository in partnership with other campus stakeholders such as information technology, legal counsel and academic affairs officers (Gilman, 2013). Academic libraries without positions devoted exclusively to scholarly communications are increasingly requiring knowledge of scholarly communications for other library positions such as reference and instruction (Finlay, Tsou & Sugimoto, 2015). Librarians with primary responsibilities in other areas such as reference, special collections, instructional technology and technical services must take on responsibilities for the institutional repository, plus educating faculty on open access, authors’ rights and copyright. These librarians act as liaisons to subject discipline departments as well, and it is in this capacity that much of the outreach and education about the institutional repository and open access will take place (Buehler, 2013; Gilman, 2013).
	This article is a guide for academic librarians who are new to scholarly communications, and nevertheless are expected to work on scholarly communications issues in their roles as subject liaisons, reference and instruction librarians. Regardless of whether there is a scholarly communications office or dedicated scholarly communications librarian, there is a growing need for subject liaisons to educate and mentor discipline faculty on issues related to scholarly publishing and to encourage depositing of publications into institutional repositories (Buehler, 2013; Malenfant, 2010). Academic libraries such as the University of Minnesota (Malenfant, 2010; Miller et al., 2015) have included scholarly communication responsibilities in job descriptions for liaison librarians, and in many libraries this is happening on a more informal basis (Finlay, Tsou & Sugimoto, 2015).
	In this article, I will recommend some of the best resources for self-education and professional development to get up to speed quickly to communicate with discipline faculty, and to gain confidence in understanding scholarly communications issues such as open access from the points of view of various stakeholders (discipline researchers, libraries, publishers, students, and scholars worldwide).  This article is based on the belief that scholarly communications is, to some extent, part of every academic librarian’s work (Kirchner & Malenfant, 2013; Lankes, 2016). Librarians need to educate themselves about the issues facing the academic community to further the open and free dissemination of research and scholarship. Can this be done while also fulfilling the traditional functions of the academic library to further research and learning? My answer is yes if scholarly communication is adopted as a shared responsibility of academic library positions, particularly subject liaisons (Kirchner & Malenfant, 2013). Above all, I would like to emphasize the collaborative nature of the scholarly communication enterprise. It is unrealistic to expect subject librarians who are first becoming involved in the work of an institutional repository to be able to answer complex questions on copyright, fair use, and authors’ contracts. Hopefully, liaison librarians will seek and receive expert training and guidance from the community of scholarly communications librarians on or beyond their campuses, as well as legal counsel and publishing specialists at their universities. My goal is not to suggest that librarians become experts who function independently; this would require more experience and knowledge than the self-education recommendations presented here. Instead, this article points the way for librarians who are new to liaison responsibilities to raise their level of awareness of scholarly communications issues related to scholarly publishing, open access, and institutional repositories, and to be ready to participate, even on a small scale, in advancing open access to scholarship produced on their campuses. 
	If academic libraries are to lead the way in promoting open access scholarship on their campuses, then academic librarians must be committed to the major principles of scholarly communications that are evolving rapidly. Therefore, in the literature review below, I outline what these principles are, and in the guide to resources I suggest key resources for librarians’ self-education in order to participate actively in conversations surrounding scholarly communication. It is most important for librarians who are new to scholarly communications to understand the big picture of the complex environment in which changes are taking place in access to scholarship, before concentrating on learning the details of areas such as copyright, authors’ contracts, data management plans, and other areas requiring more in-depth study and experience.
	Scholarly communications in academic libraries encompasses a wide range of issues and activities including, data management, altmetrics, and open educational resources. In this article, I decided to focus on a smaller group of basic concepts and activities that academic librarians, who are new to their positions, or first taking on roles such as subject liaisons, will encounter. These are: scholarly publishing, open access, institutional repositories, authors’ rights, copyright,   information literacy and librarian-faculty relationships. As stated in a recent article on new skills and competency profiles for librarians:
Libraries’ activities in scholarly communication and open access typically fall into one of these categories: scholarly publishing services; copyright and open access advocacy and outreach; scholarly resource assessment. Some level of subject knowledge is required in most of these roles. In particular, librarians will need to have a broad perspective and understanding of the traditional (commercial, society) and open access models of publishing, intellectual property issues, and economics of scholarly publishing
(Schmidt,  Calarco,  Kuchma, & Shearer 2016).
This article will provide a guide to gaining a broad perspective and understanding of these activities and issues for librarians developing new competencies.
Background
	My own experience at the Leonard Lief Library at Lehman College, one of 24 libraries at the City University of New York (CUNY) is as Head of Reference. Subject liaison responsibilities are included in my job description. Approximately two years ago, I became a coordinator of institutional repository activities on our campus. My co-coordinator is the Instructional Technologies Librarian. We represent Lehman College on a university-wide committee made up of repository coordinators from each of the 24 campuses of CUNY, and led by the Scholarly Communications Librarian of the University Office of Library Services (OLS). The University Office of Library Services serves all 24 CUNY libraries by providing a university institutional repository hosted by Digital Commons. In 2010 the CUNY University Faculty Senate passed a resolution calling for the establishment of a university institutional repository for scholarly work by faculty and students of the university. OLS hired a Scholarly Communications Librarian in 2015 whose primary function is to direct and manage the institutional repository, as well as to coordinate scholarly communications programs and policies for the university libraries.  The repository, CUNY Academic Works http://academicworks.cuny.edu , is composed of one unified database with user interfaces for each of the 24 campuses. 
The Scholarly Communications Librarian heads a committee of repository coordinators from each campus. Each of the campus coordinators is responsible for developing and maintaining collections in the repository for their campus. In addition, the coordinators work on subcommittees to develop policies for repository collection development, privacy and open access. The content and structure of the repository is managed by the Scholarly Communications Librarian at OLS in consultation with the committee of repository coordinators. The technology infrastructure of the repository is also managed by OLS.
	At the time of the launch of CUNY Academic Works, campus repository coordinators were charged with working with their library faculties to decide on the content to load into the repository, and to promote the repository on their campuses. Repository coordinators anticipated that there would be a variety of approaches to the types of content selected for the repository depending on the priorities at each college. For example, some schools have large graduate programs with policies in place for electronic deposit of theses and dissertations. Other campuses considered hosting journals on the repository platform. Most campuses started collections for faculty scholarship as the centerpiece of their repository. As the repository grew, each campus coordinator, in consultation with the OLS Scholarly Communications Librarian, developed collections suitable for their unique types of materials.
	Coordinators on each campus would be responsible for acquiring and loading content into the repository. For back file collections, such as dissertations, batch uploads were done. For collections such as faculty research and publications, individual self-deposit via an electronic upload form is available on all campus repositories. In addition, batch upload of selected publications can be done by coordinators. Workload is a key issue for coordinators on each campus because they are likely to be the sole librarian assigned to working on the repository. Until this year, most coordinators encouraged self-deposit by discipline faculty, with support from coordinators. In order to populate the repository with open access publications of selected faculty, some coordinators did “CV reviews” to batch upload publications with permission of faculty. However, this is a time-consuming task, which realistically can only be very selectively.
	In less than two years, over 12,500 items have been added to CUNY Academic Works and the repository is now recognized as an essential vehicle for scholarship at the university. As described above, scholarly communication at CUNY is an endeavor that is distributed among the campus libraries and coordinated by a Scholarly Communications Librarian. While the university administration makes efforts to enhance the repository, at present the campus coordinators, with the support of their libraries and the OLS Scholarly Communications Librarian, continue to take on the challenge of promoting the repository and open access on their campuses. 
	Professional development for the campus repository coordinators is a high priority of  OLS. In 2011, CUNY hosted an ACRL Scholarly Communication Roadshow, which I attended. The OLS Scholarly Communications Librarian visited each of the 24 CUNY libraries prior to the launch of CUNY Academic Works give presentations to library faculty. Several libraries requested workshops for librarians and campus stakeholders on authors' rights, public access mandates, and uploading content to the repository. Ongoing, the Scholarly Communications Librarian continues to offer workshops on CUNY campuses, and in conjunction with the Library Association of the City of New York (LACUNY), ACRL/New York Chapter, and Metropolitan New York Library Council (METRO). Monthly online conferences are conducted on topics such as public access mandates, adding and removing content from the repository, copyright, reporting impact, OER, CV review, and data management. In addition, an annual day-long retreat is held at OLS to provide face-to-face discussion of key issues among all the repository coordinators.
Literature Review on Fundamental Issues of Scholarly Communications
	The scholarly literature of library and information science of the past decade has become replete with papers related to scholarly communications in academic libraries. This review of the literature published from 2000 through 2016 is a selective overview of key articles on: (1) institutional repositories as the structure for electronic scholarship collection and dissemination; (2) academic libraries as leaders in scholarly communication; (3) new roles and competencies for all academic librarians; (4) changing role of liaison librarians in particular.
	Two seminal publications frame the beginning of the discussion of scholarly communication in academic libraries. Raym Crow (2002) prepared a position paper for the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) entitled The Case for Institutional Repositories: A Position Paper for SPARC. In this paper, Crow makes the case that institutional repositories are a critical component in reforming the scholarly publishing model by providing access to academic institutions of their scholarly output, and shifting economic power away from publishers to universities and their libraries. By providing access to the scholarly work of universities, repositories have the potential to add to their societal value (Crow, 2002). The position paper highlights the forces of change affecting researchers, publishers, universities and librarians over the decade leading up to its publication. These are: (1) technological change (digital publishing and networked information); (2) increased volume of research; (3) greater expectations for rapid dissemination of research results; (4) rapidly escalating journal prices and flat library budgets (Crow, 2002). All of these factors stimulated the desire for change in the “production, distribution, and interchange of scholarly communications and to force a rethinking of the relative roles of authors, librarians, and publishers…” (Crow, 2002, p. 5).
	One year after the SPARC position paper came out, Clifford Lynch (2003) published a paper entitled Institutional Repositories: Essential Infrastructure for Scholarship in the Digital Age. In this paper, Lynch defines an institutional repository as a “set of services that a university offers to the members of its community for the management and dissemination of digital materials created by the institution and its community members” (Lynch, 2003, p. 2). The repository is not a fixed set of software and hardware. Rather, the repository serves as the basis for partnership between faculty as authors and librarians as curators who provide access to the scholarly output of the university community (Lynch, 2003). The growth of institutional repositories reported by OpenDOAR (The Directory of Open Access Repositories) went from 128 in 2005 to over 3,000 in 2015, indicating a strong commitment by universities worldwide to disseminate their institutions’ scholarship by setting up institutional repositories (Myers, 2016). 
	There is a significant amount of literature on the leadership role that libraries should take in promoting institutional repositories and scholarly communication on their campuses. From the growth in the number of repositories, we see that academic libraries have successfully positioned themselves as key players in the curation and stewardship of the scholarly output of their institutions. However, developing a repository is only one part of the overall mission of enhancing open and free access to scholarly work. As Myers points out in her literature review article on librarians’ response to scholarly communication, “liaison librarians have become open access ambassadors, catalogers have become metadata providers, and reference librarians have become policy makers and content recruiters for new digital repositories” (2016, p. 18).
	Every two years, ACRL publishes the “Top Trends in Academic Libraries” (ACRL Research Planning and Review Committee, 2016-2010). In each of the past four “Top Trends” affecting academic libraries, scholarly communication issues and activities were highlighted. In 2016, research data services, altmetrics and open educational resources were discussed; in 2014, data and altmetrics; in 2012, scholarly communication and data curation; in 2010, scholarly communication (ACRL Research Planning and Review Committee, 2016-2010). As early as 2004, the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) Office of Scholarly Communication published a resource guide called Framing the Issue: Open Access to help librarians and library and campus stakeholders discuss open access and scholarly communication (2004). In  Support for the Research Process: An Academic Library Manifesto published by OCLC Research in 2009, the authors list ten activities that academic libraries should undertake to support the research process.  The following activities are particularly important:   
(1) Commit to continual study of the ever-changing work patterns and needs of researchers…(5) Reassess all library job descriptions and qualifications to ensure that training and hiring encompass the skills, education, and experience needed to support new modes of research…(10) Offer alternative scholarly publishing and dissemination platforms that are integrated with appropriate repositories and preservation services. (Bourg, Coleman, & Erway, 2009)
	In the September 2016 column on scholarly communication in College & Research Libraries News, Irene Herold emphasizes a continuing need for academic librarians to increase their knowledge and awareness of scholarly communication issues to play a leadership role. To help colleagues step into changing roles in scholarly communication, library leaders must provide training and reskilling (Herold, 2016). Finlay, Tsou & Sugimoto (2015) analyzed job advertisements for librarians between 2006 and 2014, concluding that over a third asked for knowledge of scholarly communications issues: “Another large fraction of the sampled ads required that the employee stay abreast of scholarly communication issues…Given the rising number of positions in this category, it seems there is a need for more continuing education on this subject.” (p. 19)
	The importance of every academic librarian knowing something about scholarly communication is emphasized in several key articles. Bell, Foster and Gibbons (2005), in their research paper on a study of the institutional repository at the University of Rochester, state the following on librarians’ role in content recruitment: “We want everyone to know what the IR is, how it works, and what it is for so that we take full advantage of those serendipitous occasions on which a wonderful set of materials becomes available to us” (p. 288). In a chapter on ACRL’s Scholarly Communication Roadshow, Kirchner and Malenfant (2013) emphasize that scholarly communication has been one of ACRL’s strategic priorities for over a decade, and that professional development in this area continues to be fundamental to achieving its goals in this area. In the current ACRL Plan for Excellence, the goal for the research and scholarly environment strategic area is: “Librarians accelerate the transition to more open and equitable systems of scholarship” (ACRL, 2016, October). 
	Chan, Kwok and Yip (2005) describe the role of reference librarians in the development of the institutional repository at Hong Kong University. All reference librarians are subject liaisons to departments and engage in advocacy, education, advisory roles, impact reporting and public relations (Chan, Kwok, & Yip, 2005). Buehler and Boateng (2005) stress the role of librarians as change agents at the Rochester Institute of Technology. They make the point that libraries will become more relevant to academic communities as they support the digital publishing activities of their faculty by deemphasizing their role in traditional collection development, and emphasizing their “content expertise,” including educating faculty on open access, negotiating with publishers on behalf of faculty, and depositing works in the institutional repository (Buehler & Boateng, 2005, pp. 293-294).	
	In a report for the Association of Research Libraries, Jaguszewski and Williams (2013) discuss new roles for librarians in issues of copyright, intellectual property and scholarly communication, as well collaborative roles for liaisons who are “expected to have a general understanding of copyright law, fair use, authors’ rights, and the unique copyright considerations that media present” (p. 12). This basic knowledge is requisite to librarians’ fostering digital scholarship at research universities, even though specialists, such as legal counsel, will likely serve most large universities in advising on more complex copyright and intellectual property issues (Jaguszewski & Williams, 2013). Collaboration is essential between library liaisons, information technology, the university’s office of research, and other campus units, on scholarly communications initiatives involving content and copyright expertise such as open access policies, scholarly publishing and online learning. (Jaguszewski & Williams, 2013). 
	Understanding the needs of faculty is critical to the success of an institutional repository. Despite the growing number of repositories, Nancy Fried Foster and Susan Gibbons (2005) make the point that there is a dearth of content deposited in them.  Foster and Gibbons conducted a work-practice study of faculty at the University of Rochester to explore the disconnect between the benefits of the institutional repository and the actual needs and work practices of the faculty. A key conclusion of this study was that it is essential for the repository to meet the needs of faculty. For example, the term “institutional repository” did not resonate with most faculty in this study. Faculty were more interested in a system that would handle multiple versions of their work than a system for storage and preservation of their work that would enhance the reputation of their institution. Faculty were very interested in sharing their work with a community of scholars. A repository needs to be a safe, secure place to store their work in progress, as well as a place to share their finished work for exposure to the scholarly community. The results of this study of University of Rochester faculty gave rise to a new model for teams of liaison librarians to talk about the institutional repository and to recruit content. These liaisons adopted a personalized approach that focuses on faculty interests and needs. Even more significant were the development of self-publishing and self-archiving features that mesh with the repository system to satisfy the need of faculty to manage their own work, and then upload it seamlessly to the repository.  This result, which led to the development of an interface for faculty called “Research Page/Researcher Tools,” was a valuable model for all librarians working on institutional repositories: the repository must aim to serve scholars’ needs and work practices (Foster & Gibbons, 2005).
	As stated above, the aim of this paper is to provide an outline of fundamental concepts and resources for academic librarians new to scholarly communications. In most cases, librarians who will need to acquire basic knowledge of scholarly communication are reference librarians or subject liaisons without expertise or experience in issues such as open access, scholarly publishing, institutional repositories, authors’ rights and copyright. Liaison librarians have frequent communication with discipline faculty concerning research and scholarly publishing and therefore are in the strategic position to support institutional repositories and open scholarship on their campuses. The literature supports this view that liaison librarians are critical to the advancement of scholarly communication through their work educating, advising and assisting faculty in publishing and depositing their work in open access repositories (Kirchner, 2009; Williams, 2009; Malenfant, 2010; Kenney, 2014; Miller, 2015).  Kirchner (2009) reported the results of a scholarly communications project developed at the University of British Columbia that placed liaison librarians at the front line of communication with discipline faculty to gather data on scholarly communications activities and workflows. Malenfant (2010) studied how liaison librarians at the University of Minnesota (UMN) incorporated scholarly communications reform into their core responsibilities. Important to the subject of this article is her introductory comment: “The initial stages of a library-led scholarly communication outreach program often include educating librarians on the issues and training them in techniques to be effective advocates. Engaging library staff to carry out the various components of the outreach program plan is a key element to its success.” (Malenfant, 2010, p. 63). Karen Williams, formerly Associate University Librarian for Research and Learning, UMN Libraries, restructured the job role of liaison librarians by changing job descriptions, providing support, and incorporating assessment of scholarly communications activities (Malenfant, 2010; Williams, 2009). Williams sought to change the “mental model” of liaison librarians’ relationship to discipline faculty by encouraging librarians to think of themselves as “partners” rather than “servants” in the research process (Malenfant, 2010, p. 74). Among the key features of the change process at UMN Libraries was the “large investment in learning” in scholarly communications issues (Malenfant, 2010).
	Rebecca Miller, in the 2015 ARL SPEC Kit called Evolution of Library Liaisons, highlights the directions of the shifts that have taken place in the roles of library liaisons (Miller, 2015). This comprehensive survey delineates key areas of scholarly communication in which liaisons are playing leadership roles: scholarly communication education, scholarly impact and metrics, promotion of the institutional repository, open access, data management, and intellectual property.  In the report, Leveraging the Liaison Model: From Defining 21st Century Research Libraries to Implementing 21st Century Research Universities, Anne R. Kenney, then University Librarian at Cornell University recommended strategies for research libraries that would shift the focus away from the work of librarians to that of scholars and to develop engagement strategies based on their needs and success indicators (Kenney, 2015). Cornell University conducted a  survey of academic libraries’ liaison roles and concluded that “most liaison programs…are informal, fluid, with no dedicated funding, no formal training, no assessment tools, and no measures of performance” (p. 15). Following this report, Cornell developed a program for library liaisons to work in teams with other specialists on campus, including information technologists and copyright specialists. In conjunction with this program, “expectations for those who are not experts and suggested best practices for liaisons who are experts in particular areas” have been prescribed (p. 15). Emphasis was placed on beginning and advanced training in scholarly communication, publishing, copyright protection and academic computing (Kenney, 2015).
Guide to Learning About Scholarly Communication
	In this section, I recommend key sources for learning about scholarly communication issues and concepts that will provide a solid foundation for all academic librarians. This is not meant to be a comprehensive guide to resources and literature. Rather, my aim is to suggest organization websites, books and articles that will enable beginning librarians to quickly learn basic concepts, and to acquire a roadmap for future education in their specific roles. The sources are grouped under the major topics that are fundamental to scholarly communications work in all academic librarians’ job functions: Scholarly Publishing, Open Access, Institutional Repositories, Authors’ Rights, Copyright, Information Literacy, Faculty Relationships. Sources on specialized topics such as research data management and citation metrics are not listed individually but are covered within many of the organizational websites and LibGuides on scholarly communication.
Scholarly Communication Overview
	The following three websites provide basic knowledge in all aspects of scholarly communication for the beginner, as well as provide an ongoing reference to keep up in these fields:
ACRL Research and Scholarly Environment Committee. (2017, January 18). ACRL Scholarly Communication Toolkit. Retrieved January 27, 2017, from http://acrl.libguides.com/scholcomm/toolkit
Association of Research Libraries. (n.d.). Focus Areas: Scholarly Communication. Retrieved from http://www.arl.org/focus-areas/scholarly-communication#.WIusJPArLcu
Keener, M. W., Kirchner, J., Shreeves, S., & Van Orsdel, L. (2013). 10 Things You Should Know About Scholarly Communication. Presented at the ACRL 14th National Conference. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/issues/scholcomm/docs/ten_things_you_should_know.pdf
The ACRL Scholarly Communication Roadshow (http:ala.org/acrl/issues/scholcomm/roadshow) is designed to empower attendees with both practical and theoretical knowledge of areas of scholarly communication such as Access, Emerging Opportunities, Intellectual Property and Engagement. The following article provides an evaluation of the Roadshow in professional development in scholarly communication:
Kirchner, J., & Malenfant, K. J. (2013). ACRL’s scholarly communications roadshow; Bellweather for a changing profession. In Common Ground at the Nexus of Information Literacy and Scholarly Communication, Stephanie Davis-Kahl & Merinda Kaye Hensley, eds. (pp. 299–303). Chicago: ACRL. Retrieved from http://www.alastore.ala.org/detail.aspx?ID=4387
Scholarly Publishing

	The websites and articles in this section provide an overview of scholarly publishing in general, publishing on academic campuses, new publishing models, and the role of librarians in scholarly publishing. These websites and articles point to additional resources and contain useful bibliographies.
Association of Research Libraries. (n.d.). Focus Areas: Publishing Models. Retrieved from http://www.arl.org/focus-areas/scholarly-communication/publishing-models#.WIaC7PkrLIU
Bonn, M., & Furlough, M. (2015). Getting the word out: Academic libraries as scholarly publishers. Association of College and Research Libraries, a division of the American Library Association. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/publications/booksanddigitalresources/digital/9780838986981_getting_OA.pdf
Boughman, M. S. (2015). Issue on the transformation of scholarly publishing. Research Library Issues: A Report from ARL, CNI and SPARC, 287. Retrieved from http://publications.arl.org/rli287/1
Bourne, P. E., et al. ..eds. (2012, February 19). Force11 White Paper: Improving the Future of Research Communications and e-Scholarship. FORCE11. Retrieved from https://www.force11.org/sites/default/files/files/Force11Manifesto20120219.pdf
Library Publishing Coalition. Professional Development Committee. (2017, Jan. 19). Library Publishing Coalition Professional Development Guide: Courses and Webinars.  Retrieved from http://libguides.uky.edu/libpub
Lowry, C. B. (2012). Scholarly communication: A lament and a call for change. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 12(3), 237–258. https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2012.0025
SPARC. (n.d.). Campus-Based Publishing Resources. Retrieved from http://sparcopen.org/our-work/alternative-publishing-models/campus-based-publishing-resources/
Open Access Resolutions

	The Berlin, Bethesda and Budapest statements on Open Access provide definitions and explanation of Open Access as a core value of scholarly communication in academia:
Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities. (2003, October 22). Retrieved from http://oa.mpg.de/lang/en-uk/berlin-prozess/berliner-erklarung/.
Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing. (2003, June 20). Retrieved from https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/4725199/suber_bethesda.htm?sequence=1
Budapest Open Access Initiative. (2002, February 14). Retrieved from http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read
Budapest Open Access Initiative: Frequently Asked Questions. (2012, September 14). Retrieved from http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/boaifaq.htm
Open Access
	The following ARL and SPARC websites offer excellent overviews of Open Access, with references to key papers and articles. The books and articles by Peter Suber are essential to a basic understanding of Open Access:
 Association of Research Libraries. (n.d.). Focus Areas: Open Scholarship. Retrieved from http://www.arl.org/focus-areas/open-scholarship#.WIuuU_ArLcs
SPARC. (n.d.). Setting the Default to Open. Retrieved from http://sparcopen.org/
Suber, P. (2012). Open access. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/oa-book
Suber, P. (2016). Knowledge unbound: Selected writings on open access, 2002–2011. Retrieved from https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/26246071
Suber, P. (2003). Removing the barriers to research: an introduction to open access for librarians. College & Research Libraries News, 64, 92–94, 113. Retrieved from http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/writing/acrl.htm
	The two articles below offer cogent guidance on evaluating quality journals, and making scholarly work Open Access. These articles will be useful in educating faculty and students:
Berger, M., & Cirasella, J. (2015). Beyond Beall’s list: Better understanding predatory publishers. College & Research Libraries News, 76(3), 132–135.  http://crln.acrl.org/content/76/3/132.full
Rubow L., Shen R., Schofield B., & Samuelson Law, Technology, and Public Policy Clinic. (2015). Understanding open access: When, why, & how to make your work openly accessible. Retrieved from http://www.authorsalliance.org/resources/open-access-portal/open-access-guide/
Institutional Repositories

	Librarians need a basic understanding of institutional repositories, whether or not their campus has its own, or if they are advising faculty on depositing works in a subject repository. The foundational sources below have been selected to provide this understanding and to lead to sources for further investigation. 
Callicott, B.B., Scherer , D., & Wesolek, A. (Eds.) (2016) Making institutional repositories work. West Lafayette, IN:  Purdue University Press. 
Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR). (2013). Incentives, integration, and mediation: Sustainable practices for populating repositories. Retrieved from https://www.coar-repositories.org/files/Sustainable-best-practices_final2.pdf
 Crow, R. (2002). The case for institutional repositories: a SPARC position paper. ARL Bimonthly Report, 223. Retrieved from http://sparcopen.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/instrepo.pdf
 Crow, R. (2002). SPARC institutional repository checklist & resource guide. Retrieved from http://sparcopen.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/IR_Guide__Checklist_v1_0.pdf
  Johnson, R. K. (2002). Institutional repositories; Partnering with faculty to enhance scholarly communication. D-Lib Magazine, 8(11). Retrieved from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/november02/johnson/11johnson.html
  Lynch, C. (2003) Institutional repositories: Essential infrastructure for scholarship in the digital age. ARL Bimonthly Report, 226. Retrieved from https://www.cni.org/wp-content/uploads/2003/02/arl-br-226-Lynch-IRs-2003.pdf
  Salo, D. (2008). Innkeeper at the roach motel. Library Trends, 57(2). Retrieved from http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1793/22088
Authors’ Rights
The area of Authors’ Rights will impact all academic librarians as scholars and educators. Faculty in all disciplines are in need of expert guidance on questions of ownership of intellectual property in all forms of electronic and print media. The sources below provide an excellent framework for gaining an understanding of basic concepts:
Association of Research Libraries. (n.d.). Focus Areas: Authors Rights. Retrieved from http://www.arl.org/focus-areas/copyright-ip/author-rights#.WIZzSfkrLIV
Authors Alliance (2014, May 20). FAQ: Authorship and ownership in U.S. copyright law. Retrieved January 29, 2017 from http://www.authorsalliance.org/2014/05/20/authorship-and-ownership-faq/
Cirasella, J. (2013).  Open access to scholarly articles: The very basics. CUNY Academic Works. Retrieved from http://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_oers/1
Creative Commons. (n.d.). About the licenses; What our licenses do. Retrieved from https://creativecommons.org/licenses/
SPARC. (n.d.). Author Rights: Using the SPARC Author Addendum. Retrieved from http://www.sparc.arl.org/resources/authors/addendum
Copyright
	Copyright rules impact all areas of librarianship. With the increasing amount of e-publishing and creation of open educational resources (OER), copyright has become even more important to understand. The two sources below are provided as educational tools:
Bonner, K. M., & The Center for Intellectual Property. (2006). The Center for Intellectual Property handbook. New York: Neal-Schuman. Retrieved from http://www.alastore.ala.org/pdf/0052-the-center-for-intellectual-property-handbook.pdf
Duncan, J., Clement, S., & Rozum, B. (2013). Teaching our faculty: Developing 
copyright and scholarly communication outreach programs. In S. Davis-Kahl & M. K. Hensley (eds.), Common Ground at the Nexus of Information Literacy and Scholarly Communication (pp. 269-285). Chicago, ACRL. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/lib_pubs/117
Fisher, W. (n.d.). CopyrightX. Retrieved from http://copyx.org/lectures/
Information Literacy
	In teaching information literacy to students, and in advising faculty on publishing and repository deposits, librarians are imparting an understanding of scholarly communication in its broad and particular aspects. The readings below provide case studies and thematic articles on the overlap of information literacy and scholarly communication:
Association of College and Research Libraries. Working Group on Intersections of Scholarly Communication and Information Literacy (2013). Intersections of Scholarly Communication and Information Literacy: Creating Strategic Collaborations for a Changing Academic Environment. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/publications/whitepapers/Intersections.pdf
Davis-Kahl, S., & Hensley, M. K. (2013). Common Ground at the Nexus of Information Literacy and Scholarly Communication. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/publications/booksanddigitalresources/digital/commonground_oa.pdf
Warren, S. and Duckett, K. (2010). Why does Google Scholar sometimes ask for money? Engaging science students in scholarly communication and the economics of information. Libraries' and Librarians' Publications. Paper 78. http://surface.syr.edu/sul/78
Librarian - Faculty Relationships
	The bottom-line of academic librarianship is collaborating with faculty in a variety of discipline on teaching, research and publishing. Liaison librarians are on the front lines of outreach to faculty. The publications below present recent developments in the role of liaison librarians in working with faculty on scholarly communications issues:	
Assessing the Future Landscape of Scholarly Communication: An Exploration of Faculty Values and Needs in Seven Disciplines. (2010). Center for Studies in Higher Education, UC Berkeley. Retrieved from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/15x7385g
Association of Research Libraries. (n.d.). Focus Areas: Campus Engagement. Retrieved from http://www.arl.org/focus-areas/scholarly-communication/campus-engagement#.WIaCiPkrLIU
Kenney, A. R. (2014). Leveraging the liaison model: From defining 21st century research libraries to implementing 21st century research universities. New York, NY: Ithaka S+ R. Retrieved from http://www.sr.ithaka.org/wp-content/mig/files/SR_BriefingPaper_Kenney_20140322.pdf
Kiel, R., O’Neil, F., Gallagher, A., & Mohammad, C. (2015). The library in the research culture of the university: A case study of Victoria University Library. IFLA Journal, 4(1), 40–52.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0340035214561583
Malenfant, K. J. (2010). Leading change in the system of scholarly communication: A case study of engaging liaison librarians for outreach to faculty. College & Research Libraries, 71(1), 63–76. Retrieved from http://crl.acrl.org/content/71/1/63.full.pdf
Miller, R. K., Pressley, L., Dale, J., Kellam, L. M., Tedford, R., Gilbertson, K., & McCallum, C. J. (2015). SPEC kit 349: Evolution of library liaisons. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries. 
Scholarly Communication Working Tools
Open Access Directory. Retrieved from http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Main_Page
“The Open Access Directory (OAD) is a compendium of simple factual lists about open access (OA) to science and scholarship, maintained by the OA community at large.”
Open Access Directory. Disciplinary Repositories. Retrieved from 
http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Disciplinary_repositories
“This is a list of OA disciplinary repositories (also called central or subject repositories).”
SHERPA Services. (n.d.). OpenDOAR. Retrieved from http://www.opendoar.org/
	“OpenDOAR is an authoritative directory of academic open access repositories.”
SHERPA Services. (n.d.). SHERPA/Romeo. Retrieved from http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/index.php
	“RoMEO is a searchable database of publisher's policies regarding the self- archiving of journal articles on the web and in Open Access repositories.”
  University of Southampton UK. (n.d.). ROAR (Registry of Open Access Repositories). Retrieved from http://roar.eprints.org/
	“The aim of ROAR is to promote the development of open access by providing timely information about the growth and status of repositories throughout the world.”
Keeping Up With News and Developments in Scholarly Communication
ACRL Scholarly Communication Discussion List
http://www.ala.org/acrl/issues/scholcomm/scholcommdiscussion
ARL on Twitter
https://twitter.com/ARLnews 
College & Research Libraries News. Columns on Scholarly Communication.
http://bit.ly/1CoTPKO
In The Open (Blog)
http://intheopen.net/
Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication
http://jlsc-pub.org/
Open and Shut (Richard Poynder’s Blog)
http://poynder.blogspot.com/
Re:Create Coalition Blog
http://www.recreatecoalition.org/blog/
SPARC OA Forum
https://groups.google.com/a/arl.org/forum/#!forum/sparc-oaforum
The SPARC Weekly
http://paper.li/SPARC_NA/1334596809#/	
Conclusion
	All academic librarians will play a greater role in scholarly communication on their campuses as new models of scholarly publishing and dissemination of research evolve. This changing landscape will require a basic knowledge of scholarly communications issues: scholarly publishing models, open access, institutional repositories, authors’ rights, copyright, and knowledge of the research culture of scholarly disciplines. It is hoped that this overview, literature review and guide to resources will assist librarians in gaining knowledge of these fundamental issues as they begin to incorporate scholarly communication into their professional roles. In this way, librarians will be equipped to collaborate with discipline faculty in advancing open access to scholarly work produced at their academic institutions.

References
ACRL. (2016, October). ACRL plan for excellence. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/aboutacrl/strategicplan/stratplan
ACRL Research and Scholarly Environment Committee. (2016). Advancing the plan for excellence. ACRL. Retrieved from http://connect.ala.org/node/255840
ACRL Research Planning and Review Committee. (2016 - 2010). Top trends in academic libraries: A review of the trends and issues affecting academic libraries in higher education. College and Research Libraries News. Retrieved from http://crln.acrl.org/content/77/6/274; http://crln.acrl.org/content/75/6.toc; http://crln.acrl.org/content/73/6.toc;  http://crln.acrl.org/content/71/6.toc
ACRL Scholarly Communications Committee. (2003, June 24). Principles and strategies for the reform of scholarly communication 1. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/publications/whitepapers/principlesstrategies
ACRL Working Group on Intersections of Scholarly Communication and Information Literacy. (2013). Intersections of scholarly communication and information literacy: Creating strategic collaborations for a changing academic environment. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/publications/whitepapers/Intersections.pdf
Association of Research Libraries (ARL). Office of Scholarly Communication. (2004, May). Framing the issue: Open access. Retrieved from http://www.arl.org/storage/documents/publications/framing-issue-open-access-may04.pdf
Bell, S., Fried Foster, N., & Gibbons, S. (2005). Reference librarians and the success of institutional repositories. Reference Services Review, 33(3), 283–290. https://doi.org/10.1108/00907320510611311
Bourg, C., Coleman, R., & Erway, R. (2009). Support for the research process: An academic library manifesto. Report produced by OCLC Research. Retrieved from http://www.oclc.org/content/dam/research/publications/library/2009/2009-07.pdf
Buehler, M.A. (2013). Demystifying the institutional repository for success. Oxford, Chandos. 
Buehler, M. A., & Boateng, A. (2005). The evolving impact of institutional repositories on reference librarians. Reference Services Review, 33(3), 291–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00907320510611320
Callicott, B.B., Scherer , D., & Wesolek, A. (Eds.) (2016) Making institutional repositories work. West Lafayette, IN:  Purdue University Press. Retrieved from http://www.thepress.purdue.edu/titles/making-institutional-repositories-work
Chan, D. L. H., Kwok, C. S. Y., & Yip, S. K. F. (2005). Changing roles of reference librarians: The case of the HKUST institutional repository. Reference Services Review, 33(3), 268–282. https://doi.org/10.1108/00907320510611302
Crow, R. (2002). The case for institutional repositories: A SPARC position paper. Retrieved from http://www.sparc.arl.org/sites/default/files/ir_final_release_102.pdf
Finlay, C., Tsou, A., & Sugimoto, C. (2015). Scholarly communication as a core competency: prevalence, activities, and concepts of scholarly communication librarianship as shown through job advertisements. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1236
Foster, N. F. & Gibbons, S. (2005). Understanding faculty to improve content recruitment for institutional repositories. D-Lib Magazine, 11(1). Retrieved from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january05/foster/01foster.html
Gilman, I. (2013). Library scholarly communication programs: Legal and ethical considerations. Elsevier Science. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?id=TGREAgAAQBAJ
Herold, I. M. (2016). Supporting scholarly communication: Considerations for library leadership. College & Research Libraries News, 77(8), 385-388. Retrieved from http://crln.acrl.org/content/77/8/385.full
Jaguszewski, J. M., & Williams, K. (2013). New roles for new times: Transforming liaison roles in research libraries. Report produced for Association of Research Libraries. Retrieved from http://www.arl.org/component/content/article/6/2893
Kenney, A. R. (2014). Leveraging the liaison model: From defining 21st century research libraries to implementing 21st century research universities. Report produced for Ithaka S+ R. Retrieved from http://www.sr.ithaka.org/blog/leveraging-the-liaison-model-from-defining-21st-century-research-libraries-to-implementing-21st-century-research-universities/
Kirchner, J. (2009). Scholarly communications: Planning for the integration of liaison librarian roles. Report produced for Association of Research Libraries. Retrieved from http://publications.arl.org/rli265/23
Kirchner, J., & Malenfant, K. J. (2013). ACRL’s scholarly communications roadshow; Bellweather for a changing profession. In Common ground at the nexus of information literacy and scholarly communication, Stephanie Davis-Kahl & Merinda Kaye Hensley, eds. (pp. 299–303). Retrieved from http://www.alastore.ala.org/detail.aspx?ID=4387
Lankes, R. D. (2016). The new librarianship field guide. Kindle edition. MIT Press.
Lynch, C. A. (2003) Institutional repositories: Essential infrastructure for scholarship in the digital age,” ARL Bimonthly Report, 226. Retrieved from  https://www.cni.org/wp-content/uploads/2003/02/arl-br-226-Lynch-IRs-2003.pdf
Malenfant, K. J. (2010). Leading change in the system of scholarly communication: A case study of engaging liaison librarians for outreach to faculty. College & Research Libraries, 71(1), 63–76. Retrieved from http://crl.acrl.org/content/71/1/63.full.pdf
Miller, R. K., Pressley, L., Dale, J., Kellam, L. M., Tedford, R., Gilbertson, K., & McCallum, C. J. (2015). SPEC kit 349: Evolution of library liaisons. Report prepared for Association of Research Libraries. Retrieved from http://www.arl.org/component/content/article/6/3784
Myers, K. L. (2016). Libraries’ response to scholarly communication in the digital era.  Library Publications. Paper 3. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/lib_facpubs/3
Schmidt, B., Calarco, P., Kuchma, I., & Shearer, K. (2016). Time to adopt: Librarians’ new skills and competency profiles. In Positioning and Power in Academic Publishing: Players, Agents and Agendas, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-649-1-1

Smith, K. L., & Dickson, K. A. (2016). Open Access and the Future of Scholarly Communication: Policy and Infrastructure. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?id=FvnwDAAAQBAJ
Williams, Karen. (2009). A framework for articulating new library roles. Research Library Issues: A Report from ARL, CNI and SPARC, (265), 3–8. Retrieved from http://publications.arl.org/rli265/4