With the advent of electronic publishing, the scholarly communication landscape at universities has become increasingly diverse. Multiple stakeholders including university presses, libraries, and central IT departments are challenged by the increasing volume and the rapidity of production of these new forms of publication in an environment of economic uncertainties. As a response to these increasing pressures, as well as the recent publication of important reports and papers on the topic, the Center for Studies in Higher Education (CSHE) convened a meeting of experts titled, The University as Publisher. The event was sponsored as part of the A.W. Mellon Foundation-funded Future of Scholarly Communication project at CSHE.

Our goal was to explore among stakeholders -- faculty, publishers, CIOs, librarians, and researchers -- the implications of the academic community, in some structure, taking over many, if not all, aspects of scholarly publishing. Two themes were the focus of the public panels: Institutional Roles in Evaluation, Quality Assessment, and Selection and Structuring and Budgeting Models for Publishing within the University Community. Our discussions included the importance of distinguishing between informal dissemination and formal publishing and the challenges that each presents to the university community. The harsh economic realities of high-quality formal scholarly publication, not least of which are managing peer review and editorial processes, were emphasized. Understanding disciplinary needs was cited as paramount throughout the discussions; the needs and traditions of scholars in the sciences and humanities, as well as among myriad disciplines, will likely demand different dissemination and publishing models and solutions. An additional theme that emerged was acknowledging the diverse forms electronic dissemination takes in the academy and the need to foster a spectrum of alternatives in publication forms, business models, and the peer review process. Budgetary and academic freedom concerns were explored as well. Regarding the expensive infrastructure required for electronic dissemination and publishing, it was agreed that there is enormous duplication among the university press, IT, and the library. Complete listing and access info »

A "build it and they will come" approach to many university digitization initiatives has precluded systematic investigations of the demand for these resources. Those who fund and develop digital resources have identified the general lack of knowledge about the level and quality of their use in educational settings as pressing concerns. This full report describes our research and the complete results of a large 2-year study. The purpose of our research was (1) to map the universe of digital resources available to a subset of undergraduate educators in the humanities and social sciences, and (2) to investigate how and if available digital resources are actually being used in undergraduate teaching environments. We employed multiple methods, including surveys and focus groups. Our definition of digital resources was intentionally broad and included rich media objects (e.g., maps, video, images, etc.) as well as text. Complete listing and access info »

This Educause Quarterly article draws on an in-depth study of humanities and social science (H/SS) faculty and their attitudes about use and nonuse of digital resources in teaching undergraduates. It explores in some detail faculty attitudes about digital resources use in teaching environments. It also summarizes the larger research we conducted on the universe of digital resources available to undergraduate educators in a subset of users in H/SS and suggests how understanding use, users, and nonusers might benefit the integration of these resources into scholarly environments. Complete listing and access info »

This rights assessment evaluates the feasibility of converting the contents of WGBH's free online educational resource collection Teachers' Domain (http://www.teachersdomain.org) to open content status. It employs a two-pronged approach -- (1) categorizing and determining licensing costs for the website's already-existing media assets, and (2) researching and identifying challenges and solutions to licensing issues.

For this report, WGBH identified all of the media assets and elements (the pieces that comprise a given asset) within the Teachers' Domain science collections, researched the rights holders and licensing agreements associated with each one, and created a classification system to identify rights status. This made it possible to determine the action necessary to shift each asset toward open content status, and to estimate the associated costs (if any). This research also mapped the potential difficulties and the opportunities for progress in this area. Complete listing and access info »

What makes an educational resource "open"? Is it enough that resources are available on the World Wide Web free of charge, or does openness require something more?" These questions have become more urgent as the open education movement has gained momentum and as potential users of open educational resources (OERs) increasingly face uncertainty about whether permission is required when they translate, reuse, adapt, or simply republish the resources they find.

With the support of The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, ccLearn surveyed the copyright licensing policies of several hundred educational projects or organizations on the Internet to assess whether these legal conditions limit the usefulness of self-designated open resources from the user's perspective.

The study reveals three principal findings:

• The copyright licenses or terms of use associated with some OERs are difficult to find or to understand;
• The majority of OER projects or organizations have adopted a standardized license created by an independent license provider, and of these, the large majority have adopted one or more of the six Creative Commons copyright licenses ("CC licenses") to define the terms of openness. But, a sizable minority of OER providers have chosen to craft their own license -- often borrowing terms from one of the standardized licenses. Thus, as a group, OER providers have adopted a diverse, and often customized, set of license conditions that in some cases require significant work by users to understand;
• The usefulness of OERs as a group is limited by incompatible license conditions that functionally prohibit combination or adaptation of OERs provided by different sources.

This report concludes with a recommendation that creators of open educational resources consider using CC licenses to provide users with readily found, standardized terms of use. It recommends further that OER creators consider adopting the most open of CC licenses, the Attribution-only License (CC BY), to nourish the creativity of educators and learners alike by allowing the adaptation, combination, and republication of OERs from multiple sources.

Complete listing and access info »