Institutional Repositories and Library Publishing: 
A Selected Annotated Bibliography
Georgia Westbrook, Syracuse University

Abstract
Open access publishing is not a new concern of academic libraries; instead, it remains an issue highlighting continued conversations related to the scholarly communications landscape. This annotated bibliography engages with those conversations, presenting a study of institutional repositories at colleges and universities and more general library publishing efforts across higher education institutions.
Keywords: peer review of teaching; teaching observation; academic libraries; instruction 
librarians; academic librarians

In July 2019, J. Murrey Atkins Library launched an institutional repository, Niner Commons (calling on the name of the university’s mascot, the Forty Niners). Atkins Library sponsors five or six Atkins Fellowships each summer, across the library, and in 2019, the author was selected as the Atkins Fellow for Scholarly Communications and Digital Publishing. In that role, she aided the ingestion material into the library’s institutional repository, and, in support of the ultimate work of creating an outreach video for the institutional repository (IR), prepared an annotated bibliography, found here, considering the launches and outreach strategies employed by institutional repositories, primarily in the United States and Canada, and the library publishing landscape in general. Institutional repositories are an increasingly common and expected service and collection in academic libraries. Despite varied choices in proprietary and open platform options, engagement and outreach efforts by libraries in support of their IRs share commonalities. These patterns will be explored in depth through this bibliography. This bibliography will also discuss attitudes toward IR deposit and use across campus constituencies, and the perceived and actual roles and responsibilities of faculty and librarians in administering the IR. The latter half of the bibliography will concern the library publishing landscape, including the role of libraries in the traditional publishing infrastructure and scholarly communications environment and their role in supporting open access publishing as a service.
About UNC Charlotte
The University of North Carolina at Charlotte is a growing public research university serving a population of approximately 30,000 students. UNC Charlotte is a member of the University of North Carolina system, along with 15 other university campuses. In 2017, several goals were laid out for the institution to strive for over the following five years. These priorities include supporting degree completion by low income students and rural students, improving five-year graduation rates, increasing critical workforce credentials and research funding, and decreasing the achievement gap between minority and non-minority students.
J. Murrey Atkins Library at UNC Charlotte is the only library on campus, aside from a small satellite location serving the architecture program. Like the university as a whole, Atkins is growing quickly. In fall 2018, Area 49 opened, supporting spaces including a makerspace, EZ video studio, gaming lab, visualization lab, and technology desk; many staff positions are being transitioned to faculty positions to meet the needs of students and institutional standards. Though data is not yet available for the most recent academic year, a gate count for 2015-2016 indicated 1,374,882 total library visitors, and 33,168 questions answered through several service points. Atkins maintains a five-year strategic plan, as well as one for each current academic year. For 2018-2019, physical spaces related to the library and its services were major focuses, as well as engaging with the community through library interfaces and working with community partners.
Target Audience
The target audience for this annotated bibliography is scholarly communications professionals, including librarians and publishers. Faculty and researchers engaged in publishing their scholarship and those seeking to use various forms of published scholarship might also find this bibliography useful in considering where and how to make their work available.
Materials Selection
	The materials for this bibliography were found through Google Scholar, relevant databases, and the general catalog of Atkins Library at UNC Charlotte, in support of the work of the position described in the introduction. The keywords used in these searches included institutional repository, library publishing, outreach, faculty attitudes, and open access, both on their own and in combination.
References
Bailey, D.R. (2017). Creating digital knowledge: Library as open access digital publisher. College & Undergraduate Libraries, 24(2-4), 216-225. doi:10.1080/10691316.2017.1323695. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/10691316.2017.1323695
Bell, S., Foster, N.F., & Gibbons, S. (2005). Reference librarians and the success of institutional repositories. Reference Services Review, 33(3), 283-290. doi:10.1108/00907320510611311. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1802/1965
Colman, J. (2017). Sustainable book publishing as a service at the University of Michigan. IFLA 2016 Satellite Meeting Proceedings - Libraries as Publishers: Building a Global Community, 20(2). doi:10.3998/3336451.0020.214. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0020.214
Conrad, K.M. (2017). Public libraries as publishers: Critical opportunity. The Journal of Electronic Publishing, 20(1). doi:10.3998/3336451.0020.106. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0020.106
Covey, D.T. (2011). Recruiting content for the institutional repository: The barriers exceed the benefits. Journal of Digital Information, 12(3). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1184/R1/6472595.v1
Ghinazzi, C. & Hanson, M. (2018). Communication is key: Positioning the repository as a cornerstone of campus collaboration. The Serials Librarian, 74(1-4), 170-175. doi:10.1080/0361526X.2018.1427980. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2018.1427980
Hertenstein, E. (2014). Student scholarship in institutional repositories. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 2(3), p.eP1135. doi:10.7710/2162-3309.1135. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1135
Kim, Y. & Oh, J.S. (2018). Disciplinary, institutional, and individual factors affecting researchers’ depositing articles in institutional repository: An empirical analysis. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 44(6), 824-832. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2018.09.013. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2018.09.013
Miller, A. (2017). A case study in institutional repository content curation: A collaborative partner approach to preserving and sustaining digital scholarship. Digital Library Perspectives, 33(1), 63-76. doi:10.1108/DLP-07-2016-0026. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/DLP-07-2016-0026
Passehl-Stoddart, E., & Monge, R. (2014). From freshman to graduate: Making the case for student-centric institutional repositories. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 2(3), p.eP1130. doi:10.7710/2162-3309.1130. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1130
Sandy, H.M., & Mattern, J.B. (2018). Academic library-based publishing: A state of the evolving art. Library Trends, 67(2), 337-357. doi:10.1353/lib.2018.0040. Retrieved from https://muse.jhu.edu/article/715066
Tracy, D.G. (2017). Libraries as content producers: How library publishing services address the reading experience. College & Research Libraries, 78(2), 219-240. doi:10.5860/crl.78.2.219. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.78.2.219
Wirth, A.A. (2017). Distributed publishers: Collaborating & facilitating publishing across campus. IFLA 2016 Satellite Meeting Proceedings - Libraries as Publishers: Building a Global Community, 20(2). doi:10.3998/3336451.0020.215. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0020.215
Yang, Z.Y., & Li, Y. (2015). University faculty awareness and attitudes towards open access publishing and the institutional repository: A case study. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 3(1), p.eP1210. doi:10.7710/2162-3309.1210. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1210
Zhang, H., Boock, M., & Wirth, A. A. (2015). It takes more than a mandate: Factors that contribute to increased rates of article deposit to an institutional repository. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 3(1), p.eP1208. doi:10.7710/2162-3309.1208. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1208 

Annotated Bibliography - Institutional Repositories
Bell, S., Foster, N.F., & Gibbons, S. (2005). Reference librarians and the success of institutional repositories. Reference Services Review, 33(3), 283-290. doi:10.1108/00907320510611311. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1802/1965
Bell, Foster, and Gibbons provide an early touchstone for the study of institutional repositories and the role of librarians in their administration. The researchers visited and recorded faculty in five disciplines at the University of Rochester, querying them about their publication activities and use of grey literature. The article provides a description of the six major findings of this research, including that faculty members are slow to deposit, but that they respond to individualized attention; and that grey literature is important to all disciplines, but different types matter more in each. Each of these findings is paired with a new strategy; for example, with the two findings above, the suggestions are to establish library liaison positions to connect with faculty on a more individual scale and to learn more about and target discipline-specific forms of grey literature.
Covey, D.T. (2011). Recruiting content for the institutional repository: The barriers exceed the benefits. Journal of Digital Information, 12(3). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1184/R1/6472595.v1
Covey combines a literature review and institutional data review with a series of faculty focus groups to determine the awareness, understanding, and prevalence of self-archiving work among faculty at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU). Covey’s focus groups revealed that faculty are generally concerned about the amount of time required to deposit work in an institutional repository and the time and effort required to evaluate copyright for their work. A lack of awareness and understanding about institutional repositories is prevalent, and Covey asserts that aggressive and diversified marketing is necessary, including “peer pressure,” offering support services like checking copyright, and education around open access publications and quality. Covey suggests plans to provide the engineering faculty, in particular, with metrics related to their work, as well as an access-restricted space for intra-unit collaboration in the repository.
Ghinazzi, C. & Hanson, M. (2018). Communication is key: Positioning the repository as a cornerstone of campus collaboration. The Serials Librarian, 74(1-4), 170-175. doi:10.1080/0361526X.2018.1427980. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2018.1427980
	Ghinazzi and Hanson provide a case study and reflection on the process of implementing an institutional repository at Augustana College, a small, private liberal arts college in Rock Island, Illinois. Their writing is positioned as a collection of suggestions for similar schools looking to launch their own institutional repositories. The recommendations in the article include finding a few key units to get on board early and to get them on board by framing the institutional repository with the end user goals for the parties involved. They then suggest turning those first stakeholders into "ambassadors" for the IR and publicizing the repository, with their help, at faculty retreats, a college technology fair, and other events on-campus. At Augustana, these efforts were paired with the creation of flyers, posters, bookmarks, and "how-to" guides. Finally, the authors describe their work hosting group uploading sessions and describe other ideas generated by the audience at a NASIG conference at which they presented. These ideas included visiting new graduate students at various programs, hosting a lunch and learn about the institutional repository, and collecting faculty testimonials to share.
Hertenstein, E. (2014). Student scholarship in institutional repositories. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 2(3), p.eP1135. doi:10.7710/2162-3309.1135. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1135
Elizabeth Hertenstein surveyed librarians at academic libraries in the state of Ohio and across the ACRL community to determine how student scholarship is presented in institutional repositories and any attendant issues librarians have encountered when adding student scholarship to their institutional repositories. Hertenstein found the biggest barrier to respondents’ efforts to build a collection of student work in their repositories was a fear of plagiarism, followed by a lack of institutional buy-in. Hertenstein identifies several other potential issues on campuses which might lead to challenges, including a general disconnect between faculty and students. According to Hertenstein’s survey, more than a quarter of respondents do not know students' opinions about institutional repositories, but generally think students are more responsive to them than "entrenched faculty." Despite this assumption, those who answered the survey suggested that faculty can check the quality of student deposits and may be called upon to do so. It remains to be seen how these attitudes and expectations might be reconciled.
Kim, Y. & Oh, J.S. (2018). Disciplinary, institutional, and individual factors affecting researchers’ depositing articles in institutional repository: An empirical analysis. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 44(6), 824-832. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2018.09.013. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2018.09.013
	Kim and Oh use a combination of methods to work toward understanding the context, settings, and motivations that inform why and how scholars deposit work into institutional repositories; those methods are a literature review, theoretical framework application, and a survey of biologists and biology researchers who belong to the U.S. Community of Scientists scholar database. The authors of this article found that a perceived community benefit, institutional support, and career benefit all positively correlate to depositing into an institutional repository, and that the opposite is true as well. They also found that establishing deposit as a community norm is not a significant factor in widespread deposit activity, and that if deposit is neither mandated nor encouraged and publicized, deposits will not be made. Kim and Oh offer a few pieces of advice to their readers, including to tailor approaches when working with those who know about institutional repositories and those who do not, articulating the difference between institutional repositories and other scholarly repositories, and, particularly when reaching out to those in a community of scientists, highlighting research data management opportunities.
Miller, A. (2017). A case study in institutional repository content curation: A collaborative partner approach to preserving and sustaining digital scholarship. Digital Library Perspectives, 33(1), 63-76. doi:10.1108/DLP-07-2016-0026. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/DLP-07-2016-0026
Miller presents a case study report of the work done at Middle Tennessee State University to establish a collaboration between the library and one of the colleges on campus in order to increase the deposit of materials into the institutional repository; Miller suggests several actionable items based on that experience. The author expresses the importance gaining a deep understanding of the needs and climate of one’s campus before embarking on an institutional repository project. Instead of focusing on the whole campus, for example, Miller suggests establishing small scale partnerships with targeted units or groups; these will ideally become exemplar situations that can be promoted as such. Depending on the campus, Miller also suggests offering or positioning the institutional repository as an alternative to using a system like Open Journal System to publish campus scholarship. Because the partnership Miller highlights in the article is between the library and the Honors College, providing adequate training to the staff of the Honors College and ensuring the responsibilities of each party were clear were both important steps in sustaining the partnership and deposit of work.
Passehl-Stoddart, E., & Monge, R. (2014). From freshman to graduate: Making the case for student-centric institutional repositories. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 2(3), p.eP1130. doi:10.7710/2162-3309.1130. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1130
The deposit of student scholarship in institutional repositories seems to be an afterthought at most institutions mentioned in the literature reviewed for this bibliography; rather, there is a focus on encouraging faculty deposit, sometimes with a hope that this will encourage a trickle-down effect garnering materials from other constituencies. Like Miller above, however, Passehl-Stoddart and Monge argue for a student-centered approach in populating an institutional repository. The authors provide a case study of the work done at Western Oregon University and provide information about how their experiences might translate to other institutions. The authors begin by tying their approach to "high impact educational practices identified by the Association of American Colleges and Universities" and mapping key curriculum areas at their institution to areas of student scholarship. Various librarians are included at almost every step of the institutional repository process and attached to almost every unit or group. In this positioning and other efforts, the library emphasizes five values or goals in centering student scholarship in the repository: increase student academic confidence; provide access and distribution to hidden student scholarship and research; introduce scholarly communication theories and practices to students and faculty; encourage internal and external promotion of programs and students; and provide inclusive opportunity and documentation of student scholarship.
Yang, Z.Y., & Li, Y. (2015). University faculty awareness and attitudes towards open access publishing and the institutional repository: A case study. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 3(1), p.eP1210. doi:10.7710/2162-3309.1210. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1210
Yang and Li surveyed faculty at Texas A&M University to provide a case study of the awareness faculty have of their campus institutional repository, OAKTrust. They learned that tenured faculty are more interested in open access publishing in general, including sharing work in institutional repositories, while tenure-track faculty (not yet tenured) are more interested in adopting open access textbooks for use in their courses. Despite these favorable attitudes, the faculty surveyed did not think positively of open access mandates or deposit mandates. Yang and Li write that being unaware of the institutional repository was the biggest barrier to use, followed by copyright concerns and the perception of institutional repositories as low quality. The researchers used the survey as a tool for education as well, with embedded definitions and links about scholarly publishing and institutional repositories; they learned that workshops on relevant topics are needed, as well. They stated that they plan to conduct a follow-up survey in two years.
Zhang, H., Boock, M., & Wirth, A. A. (2015). It takes more than a mandate: Factors that contribute to increased rates of article deposit to an institutional repository. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 3(1), p.eP1208. doi:10.7710/2162-3309.1208. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.1208 
The authors of this article share a case study of the scholarly communications ecosystem at Oregon State University (OSU) through a consideration of metadata from deposits into the institutional repository. They seek to understand the impact of a campus open access policy and "mediated solicitation" on rates of deposit over time, particularly whether some faculty from specific academic units will deposit more often than others. At the time of writing the article, a college-level policy allowed staff to deposit works without the authors’ approval, but citations and data still needed to be checked and cleaned before they were ultimately ingested. Zhang, Boock, and Wirth describe the approval of an open access policy by the OSU Faculty Senate, but explained that this policy did not cause an increase in deposit rate; anecdotal evidence suggests that this was because of a lack of awareness or understanding about the policy. Despite this, a separate program called the Web of Science and various outreach efforts have managed to have a positive effect on deposit rate. Moving forward, the authors say they plan to continue to request articles from authors and to deposit them on their behalf, to support faculty in meeting federal deposit policies, and to use these sorts of interactions to promote open access policy.
Annotated Bibliography - Library Publishing
Bailey, D.R. (2017). Creating digital knowledge: Library as open access digital publisher. College & Undergraduate Libraries, 24(2-4), 216-225. doi:10.1080/10691316.2017.1323695. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/10691316.2017.1323695
	Through a careful literature review, D. Russell Bailey explores the role of libraries in the open access publishing landscape, and, with a focus on digital humanities work, how higher education initiatives are being implemented to address a shifting role. Bailey writes that although research is now more often conducted online, there is a persistent privileging of physical and print output of scholarship. Bailey discusses the tenets of digital humanities work that make it appropriate as a case study for library publishing efforts. These include a shared sense of collaborative teamwork and initiatives, shared values, and adaptability. Along the same lines, workflows for digitization projects related to digital humanities effectively mix automation with a team approach. Bailey suggests project success across the publishing landscape might mirror project success in the digital humanities world; this project success is the result of a combination of strong interest, high visibility, and successful promotion.
Colman, J. (2017). Sustainable book publishing as a service at the University of Michigan. IFLA 2016 Satellite Meeting Proceedings - Libraries as Publishers: Building a Global Community, 20(2). doi:10.3998/3336451.0020.214. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0020.214
Colman provides a first-hand account of his work with the Michigan Publishing Service (MPS), out of the University of Michigan, particularly its book publishing arm. In this transcript of a talk given by Colman, he notes that, “only a fairly narrow band of the scholarly output of a university finds a home with commercial publishers of university presses." Because of this, varied models are needed to fully capture and share scholarly output. Colman suggests that books are where the publishing model tends to break down; as a result, MPS emphasizes open access, flexible Creative Commons licensing, print on demand and eBook publishing. There are three components to the mission driving the work at Michigan: increase impact, lower cost, and support new publishing. Colman also places an emphasis on leaving room for experimentation in scholarly publishing, particularly in relation to open access, accessibility, diversity, and student learning. In its consideration of work towards lower cost and experimentation, MPS practices white label publishing support, meaning it will publish materials on behalf of a unit and only the unit’s name will appear on the publication. There is a financial cost to this service, and, in general, MPS "charges back" for publishing work to support staffing and other costs; Colman describes some of the notable aspects of this model.
Conrad, K.M. (2017). Public libraries as publishers: Critical opportunity. The Journal of Electronic Publishing, 20(1). doi:10.3998/3336451.0020.106. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0020.106
	Though academic libraries are often the heavy-lifters in the library publishing world, public libraries may also fill a need in supporting publishing for their patrons, albeit on a different scale. Conrad describes public library publishing efforts as "community based self-publishing programs" and she positions them as "traditional library service delivered in a new way." She cites examples of libraries in which self-publishing is tied into makerspaces and entrepreneurship in some cases, noting some of the popular machines and technology used, like Espresso Book Machines. The article suggests the titular “critical opportunity” can be met by offering editing and design workshops to boost the quality of self-published materials, tailoring a focus to local topics, and addressing discoverability and preservation issues inherent to such publishing models.
Sandy, H.M., & Mattern, J.B. (2018). Academic library-based publishing: A state of the evolving art. Library Trends, 67(2), 337-357. doi:10.1353/lib.2018.0040. Retrieved from https://muse.jhu.edu/article/715066
With a combination of a literature review and a survey of academic librarians, Sandy and Mattern consider how and why libraries are challenging the traditional scholarly communications patterns. Sandy and Mattern found that libraries, in the role of publishers, can accommodate non-traditional publications and research data effectively. Among the literature, they learned that libraries and their staff operating in the existing scholarly communication are associated with technical expertise, but not necessarily publishing expertise; beyond conventional publishing work, librarians also must take on additional tasks like graphic design and financial management to ensure publications meet professional standards. Most librarians who responded to the survey sent by Sandy and Mattern did not have a publishing initiative at their institution, but said they were curious about or hoped to establish one. Anxieties and concerns about establishing a publishing program are also discussed in the article.
Tracy, D.G. (2017). Libraries as content producers: How library publishing services address the reading experience. College & Research Libraries, 78(2), 219-240. doi:10.5860/crl.78.2.219. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.78.2.219
Tracy sent a survey to more than 150 institutions to determine how library publishing operations are integrating studies of their users into operations and what the barriers to such efforts are. The author identifies some issues with publishing attitudes underlying the library publishing landscape: "responses overrepresent library publishing services that publish at least some electronic journals, e-books, or experimental forms — in other words, those that have most expanded into traditional scholarly publishing or have taken on experimental publishing projects." User experience efforts are increasingly common in libraries, but there is still disconnect between a “traditional” library UX and UX in library publishing, and the work is varied, but not consistent. A major reason for this is that, in publishing, back end user experience (i.e., for authors and editors) competes with front end user experience (i.e., students and researchers) and there is not a clear solution to establishing a balance. The survey revealed that libraries are collecting a variety of data related to the experience of users engaging with library publishing services, but most of it goes unused. Tracy also notes that, although many libraries are purportedly student-driven, students received publishing-related education less consistently than faculty and non-student authors or editors.
Wirth, A.A. (2017). Distributed publishers: Collaborating & facilitating publishing across campus. IFLA 2016 Satellite Meeting Proceedings - Libraries as Publishers: Building a Global Community, 20(2). doi:10.3998/3336451.0020.215. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0020.215
Wirth cuts straight to the heart of the matter with her questions: are libraries publishers? What are libraries, if not publishers? She begins to answer these questions with a case study of the work being done to support journal publishing at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV).  UNLV is a public institution with no university press, so the academic units serve as publishers and the library serves as the host for publications. In the article, Wirth translates the experience of working within this paradigm to making suggestions that might be applied for current work and future expansion in institutions with similar concerns. She describes how libraries might harness shared energy and enthusiasm, be advocates of change to the publishing landscape, provide system features expertise to faculty and staff on campus without those skills, and assist with indexing scholarship and providing evidence of impact to disrupt current schemes of scholarly validation.