Left Navigation

Faculty Senate Home Agenda Faculty Senate Bylaws Committees General Faculty Items of Interest Mediation, Grievances & Hearings Meetings & Minutes Resolutions Senators

NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY
GENERAL FACULTY MEETING
Tuesday, January 9, 2001
Talley Student Center (Ballroom)
3:00 P. M.

1.    Welcome and Opening Remarks
The meeting was called to order at 3:00 p.m. by Frederick T. Corbin, Chair of the Faculty .

Chair Corbin welcomed everyone to the meeting and thanked the Executive Committees and Senators for their support during his tenure as Chair of the Faculty.

2.    Introduction of Guests
Chancellor Fox thanked everyone for attending and introduced the Administrators and Executive Officers of the university, and the Chair of the Board of Trustees.

3.    Comments from Peaches Simpkins, Chair of the Board of Trustees
Mrs. Simpkins brought greetings on behalf of the Board of Trustees.

Mrs. Simpkins is a graduate of NC State. She credited the faculty members of NC State for making a difference in her life, particularly Dr. Oliver Williams. She noted that being a part of NC State is fundamentally the biggest part of any success that she has had.

4.    Approval of the Minutes of the September 5, 2000 General Faculty Meeting
The minutes were approved without dissent.

5.    Life on the NC State Campus following the Passage of the Higher Education Bonds
Chancellor Fox stated that North Carolina State is one of the nation’s leaders in science, engineering and technology. "I am privileged to be the leader of this institution. I read a book by E. L. Wilson called Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge. There is a quotation in that book that captures very much what we are trying to do at an institution that does emphasize science, engineering and technology. He says every college student should be able to answer the following questions. What is the relation between science and the humanities, and how important is that relation for human welfare? How do we integrate the knowledge of the natural and social sciences? How do we allow the fluency across the boundaries to provide a clear view of the world? If our students could truly answer that question, they would be moving into the positions of leadership all over the country. As you know, they have done exactly that. It is very rare when I am entertaining someone on behalf of the university that I do not hear about the incredible skills of the graduates of NC State, about what fantastic students we have. Last night, for example, when I was with a group of Nortel executives, they told me that North Carolina State is the greatest source of their employees anywhere in the world. There are 1500 of them in Nortel establishments globally. The same is heard from IBM. You hear the same thing from many venues, whether it is politics or medicine, whether it is social sciences or the physical sciences. It is because of your contributions, because of the demands and the high standards that you suggest in your classroom every day that we have people of this sort all around the United States and abroad.

If we are such an institution, what are we thinking about as we go forward? I mentioned to you how important the compact plans have been and what stimulating discussions there have been in the last several months as Charles Moreland, Kermit Hall and I visited each one of the colleges to learn about what the School of Design called the day-after-tomorrow ideas. Do not think about today, think about the day after tomorrow and think about ways in which structures can be liberated in such a way that the organization of this entire university can come together and support what we are trying to do to improve the education of our students. As I have said many times, students are the center of this university.

One thing that makes it so positive for me to think about the future of this university is the wonderful event on November 7, namely the passage of the University-Community College Bond by 73%. We are now at a stage where we are thinking about project sequencing-- ways in which we can make that investment so that it will improve our national reputation, enhance student access, and promote growth that has the accompanying resources attached with it. It is a challenge to think about doing those three things simultaneously. How can we enhance student access to our programs and do it for a diverse student body whose talents are increasing every year as we become more and more selective, and how we can interact with our endowment which is the confidence of the state of the people of the State of North Carolina to have the resources that allow us to drive that growth? The compact planning process has contributed to that kind of future look. It has allowed shared governance to come through the Faculty Senate, which has served so effectively with the Staff Senate and Student Senate in participating and developing a community. The process has also embraced the principle of accountability. Continuous improvement, of course, is something that universities do, but the idea of discontinuous improvement in making something different so that we can become leaders is what will be the distinguishing quality of North Carolina State University. We are looking for things that are opportunistic. We are looking for things that have high risk and high payoff, because that will be the characteristic that the university can embrace as a way of obtaining the improved national reputation that we all see.

We know that we can do that in a number of ways by looking for new degrees. We have had new degrees in genomic sciences and in networking. We can go to the Centennial Campus and see the physical manifestation in which a single building is occupied by faculty in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, the College of Natural Resources, and the College of Physical and Mathematical Sciences. There are many more on the horizon. We expect to have dual degrees between Textile Technology and Art and Design in the next couple of years. We expect to have a doctor of architecture degree involved in our future planning. We have thought about ways in which the scholarly mission of the faculty in interacting with our students and developing the new frontiers of knowledge can be addressed in a completely new way. I think about the compact plan in the College of Physical and Mathematical Sciences. We heard in the College of Engineering about new centers that would focus on smart materials that respond to particular demands. A parallel kind of achievement in the College of Textiles is the non woven research center. There are proposals on the table about new kinds of collaborations like an institute for intracellular engineering between the College of Engineering. We have a newly approved Professional Golf Association program–a golf management program that is going to be very appealing to a lot of people. This is the last one that will be approved anywhere in the United States, and is one that is grounded in management as well as the whole idea of what is involved in running a country club.

One can go to the library and see that this nexus of research and scholarship and community has expanded in incredible ways responding to the opportunities of the digital age. You will see as well that Susan Nutter’s leadership has allowed us not only the traditional ways of accessing information, but also major advances in putting together collections which are relevant to the history and culture of North Carolina. Jim Graham’s papers, for example, are going to be a chronicle of the achievements that have taken place in agriculture in North Carolina over a very long period. Dallas Herring’s papers, which are also located in the library, will map for the entire nation the construction of the community college system and this important way by which education is delivered. There are many other things that one could say. When Vice Chancellor Moreland and I visited the College of Management, we learned about the extensive program in electronic commerce and how it is leading to new degrees.

When we think about compact plans, I must say that there is no limit to how excited I get about the opportunities that this university has. We are at a stage where the structure has been set to allow for interdisciplinary opportunities that cannot be achieved nearly so easily elsewhere. The participation of the faculty in every stage of this planning and moving from planning to implementation shows the people of North Carolina that we are serious about our scholarship and about the quality of education and the high standards we hold up for our students.

With respect to student recruiting in the last year, we have had a number of impressive accomplishments. We have discussed in the past what an incredible achievement it was to have completed a capital campaign. We raised $128 M for endowments for merit scholarships, which will attract students who are going to be the ones who can respond to these intellectual opportunities. That was during a time when the feasibility study suggested that at most this institution could raise forty. The spirit that allowed us to triple the investment is going to propel this university to the next level. Last year we initiated a scholarship program by which we can provide on a need basis support for students of the staff here. We know that we are constrained in terms of the reward structure for our staff. I am very proud that the least that we could do is to put together a need-based scholarship system that will allow some of the children of our staff to come to this university and partake of the wonderful education that their parents and grandparents help support. We have as well joined the National Merit Scholars Program and we now have students who are national scholars counted among our student body. These are in addition to the programs that have become so significant for the university. The Park Scholars have now expanded to a full complement–seventy students coming in this fall. The Caldwell Scholars continue to enrich our student body. We are becoming recognized throughout the United States as an increasingly selective institution in which quality students are emerging as our graduates.

During the same last year we have been assigned peers by the UNC General Administration. I am pleased that among those peers are private institutions as well as public institutions, because it allows us to respond to new chances and new ideas that are being generated. Although the university excels among our peer institutions, there are still areas in which we can improve our performance. We are not in the top twenty in terms of federal support. Nor are we in the top twenty of national universities in annual giving, or in the endowment that we have, or in the number of post doctoral fellows, or in the number of faculty awards. I challenge you as members of our faculty to address these areas, because if we can make significant progress in these, I truly believe that the national recognition and the inclusion of this university among the top twenty universities in this country are going to be very straight forward. One of the things that distinguishes this university from those with whom we compare ourselves in this peer listing is our Centennial Campus. We are very pleased that within the last year, we continued to build out the Centennial Campus from twenty-two partners when I first came to NC State in August 1998 to sixty- nine private partners. We have also been able to designate the land at the College of Veterinary Medicine as a bio-park, subject to the same structural opportunity as the Centennial Campus. Perhaps even more importantly, just in the last month we have been able to add one hundred twenty-five acres adjacent to Centennial Campus so that we can continue to build the kind of community as well as the industrial partnerships that the Centennial Campus has involved. The investments that we have made at the Centennial Campus are at the heart of our graduate education programs. Not only do we have the College of Textiles and the Graduate Research Center on the Centennial Campus, but we also have the genomic science building, the toxicology building that is in final stages of being completed and a number of programs in which research centers are being located in proximity to those in the private sector.

One of the measures that we have that this is working is the success of our students. It is a very unusual situation when we have a student who is not very well employed before graduation. I encourage you to come to the receptions immediately before the commencement ceremonies and ask them what they are going to do. They are so sophisticated and so well trained and so energetic that you will see exactly why the people in the private sector are so happy with NC State graduates. Another indicator that follows on our student success is that we are ranked among the best institutions in the partnership development that does take place on the Centennial Campus. We were seventeenth last year in licensing revenues, and that is in comparison with every other institution in North Carolina ranking below fortieth. For example, Chapel Hill was fifty-first on that listing in which we were seventeenth. In addition, we are fourth in the nation in the number of startups that have resulted from intellectual property developed by NC State faculty and students–fourth in the nation behind Stanford, MIT and the entire University of California system.

In addition to having this kind of measure about how effective our intellectual property is being generated and translated, we have also been able to do it in such a way that we have fostered the development of a diverse community. Part of what we are doing on the Centennial Campus, involves relationships between the partnerships developed at this economic level with others. For example, we have been very active in mentoring the historically black colleges and universities so they too can partake of technology transfer. We have had minority law clerks fulfilling internships through our technology transfer office and observing how their own achievements can be translated back into the African American community. Finally, we have had an agreement with the Southeast Raleigh community; because this is an enterprise zone, we are able to offer tax advantages to our partners for participation in diversity community activities. That will be a very important means by which we hope to improve the city.

At the same time that we have had all of these achievements, we have placed an emphasis on administrative restructuring. We have had new names for a number of departments. The Departments of Biochemistry and Toxicology no longer exist . The College of Forestry Resources no longer exists. In addition to those kinds of restructurings, we have also had restructuring in the Provost Office: an emphasis on diversity, an emphasis on distance education (The DELTA Program), and a new emphasis on disability student services. By developing the infrastructure that we need to build our community, we can excel not only in the classroom and the laboratory, but in building the kind of intellectual home that allows all of our people to succeed.

I want to mention as well that we had a tuition increase. The University of North Carolina, after we offered to do so, required us to maintain one third of that tuition increase for financial aid for students. It is an important thing to recognize that we were the first ones who said that we will not initiate a tuition increase on the backs of our students. We wanted to make sure that any tuition increase would not inhibit access to this campus. One third of that tuition increase money went to enhance financial aid. In addition, approximately 2.2 million went to faculty salaries with the ability of the Provost to allocate that additional money in a way to make up for past inequities and to initiate a program in which promotions from one academic rank to another would be accomplished with an influx of salary support, i.e., equity and promotion became possible because of what students were able to bring as a resource. Finally, what the students did with the last third was to enhance the kind of life that the students have intellectually. There were contributions made to a new Honors Program. There were contributions made to the quality of classrooms, and to the Chancellor’s Leadership Award, which recognizes leadership potential in a diverse environment.

Let me also tell you about a couple of accomplishments in some of the areas that report to the Chancellor’s Office. Academic Affairs has had a renewed emphasis on diversity. There has been an external review of the African American Cultural Center to bring that very important institution on this campus in better alignment with the scholarly mission of the university. The book store has been instrumental in developing months which celebrate the achievements of faculty, African Americans and women. The Honors Program has been reinvigorated and was assigned a residence home so that there could be a place for seminars, interactions among our undergraduate students, and opportunities for undergraduate research or for study abroad. We started discussions about an honor code for students, so that their personal and professional skills as well as their intellectual skills would be developed during the time they are here. The Center for Teaching and Learning has been expanded. We are in the process of developing a campus-wide student evaluation instrument. Part of the idea of evaluation, of course, is this emphasis on accountability–our own determination to give the best quality education to our students. Kermit Hall initiated a departmental teaching award to show that teaching is not only an individual activity, but also one that involves entire curriculum development. The entire persuasion that

develops as one goes through these programs can be effected and enhanced by team work. The libraries have developed a center for learning and research in the digital age, taking advantage of the incredible resources available from the Internet. We have been able to think about ways in which the tenure procedure could be made clearer and more systematic, both by updating the Faculty Handbook and by having input from a faculty committee on the way that tenure is conducted. In Advancement, we know that we have a significant need. Not only does this institution have insufficient financial aid for its students, it has an insufficient endowment to allow us to have the discretion to make selective investments in opportunities as they arrive-- whether that is fellowships for graduate students, endowed professorships, or chairs for our faculty. We hope to make this a central theme for an invigorated capital campaign. Under Terry Wood’s leadership, we are in the process of extending the question about feasibility for a major capital campaign in which we will raise approximately $870 M in the next decade. That will in another way provide a transformation at this university.

The third unit that reports to me is Athletics. I want to specifically acknowledge one faculty member for the important contribution that he has made over many years to the athletics program. That is Art Cooper, who has served as our Faculty Athletic Representative. I can truthfully say that I have slept soundly many nights knowing that the information that I got from Art Cooper was keeping our Athletics Program on track. Art Cooper is going to be replaced by Donn Ward and I anticipate that the same security for our Chancellor will result. Donn will be working with our new Athletic Director, Lee Fowler, to assure that academics are a credible and an important part of the athletic experience, that our student athletes truly are student athletes. We have twenty-two sports now. Last year we added one sport in women’s golf. Our emphasis in gender equity suggest that we will be adding more women sports in the next several years as we are more and more successful in encouraging young women as students to become part of our community. We had ninety-one student athletes who were on the Deans list. We had two hundred student athletes who had greater than a 3.0 GPA and two student athletes on scholarships who are members of Phi Beta Kappa. We had several teams who were all American academics, and once again NC State received the maximum possible number of ACC post- graduate fellowships on the basis of our student athletes performances. We can hold our heads high about the quality of our athletics program and the quality of our student athletes.

We are at a stage where we need to make a major investment in facilities, and part of the reason that we have been able to become a partner in the arena is because an investment was made by boosters outside the university in allowing that to transpire. I can assure you that there is every effort made to maximize the independence of the Athletics Department, and that no dollar from the academic budget goes into the athletics budget. It is entirely supported by tickets and by contributions from fans. It helps when we are having a winning season. It helps when you have enthusiastic coaches who are supporting the aspirations of our student athletes. The Wolfpack Club as well is providing these incremental investments in facilities and has also increased their scholarships this year by 15%. That 15% means that we can have student athletes who can be successful both in their sports and in their studies. I want to thank you for your support in that regard.

Athletics is in many ways an auxiliary enterprise, and we are very pleased that other sorts of auxiliary enterprises help us with our academic mission. For example, the Kenan Institute in which Ruben Carbonell from the Department of Chemical Engineering has assumed the directorship in the last year, has been able to make important investments--seed investments into new opportunities that can bring together disparate groups on this campus. The Emerging Issues Institute, for example, is going to be home for the Emerging Issues Forum now that Governor Hunt is no longer in office. It will coordinate with the newly located North Carolina Progress Board to find a home so that social sciences and progress monitoring social issues in North Carolina can continue. At the same time investments are being made in these kinds of activities, Ruben has been able to hire a director who will work on K-12 programming: one who is acting to put together programs to generate outside support from NASA for a space institute and a proposal for Astro Biology, one who is developing ideas for conferences in non-traditional academic topics. Last year for example, they held a conference on Industrial Hemp as a way of helping the farmers in North Carolina recover. They have also been instrumental in providing support for the Gordon Research Summer Schools. What they are trying to do is to facilitate proposal development by high impact, high visibility investments that allow outside resources to come to the university. At the same time the Kenan Institute is doing this kind of activity, Legal Affairs has been helpful in putting together a way in which you can access policies and regulations so that you can know whether it is possible to do something on this campus if you do some out-of-the-box thinking. They have also been very active in preventative law workshops around the campus and in allowing things to come forward very effectively.

In Finance and Business we have continued to struggle with People Soft, as has every institution that has introduced People Soft. Of course it has been a challenge this year. We are now at a stage where the efficiencies are going to be coming. We also put together a Physical Master Plan that will guide not only the investments that come from the bonds but other investments into our capital future. At the same time we have made major changes to address problems that have been identified. I am particularly happy that Tom Younce has joined our public safety office and has introduced the concept of community policing to improve the health and safety on this campus as well as other means by which health and safety are promoted: for example, working with the Department of Transportation in developing a new bike path on Western Boulevard and working with the City of Raleigh as well as the Department of Transportation in finding ways in which signals can be improved on Hillsborough Street.

The Vice Chancellor for Research and Graduate Studies has in the last year put a major emphasis on the graduate student support plan. I must say that as Charlie and I went around to the compact plan visits, we heard again and again how important that graduate student support plan is in order to build the excellence, the truly outstanding character of our graduate programs that we need to go to the next level. I can assure you that is going to be a very high priority in terms of our discretionary funding and that a recent report by a faculty committee about how to address the graduate student support plan will be very seriously considered. The Graduate School has been instrumental in putting together a new consortium with Oak Ridge National Laboratory in which we, in collaboration with a number of universities, are acting as managers for new kinds of collaboration to be supported by the Department of Energy.

Student Affairs has been instrumental in the last year in integrating the University Scholars Program with the new Honors Programs, and at the same time allowing new honors seminars to evolve for ROTC students. The Center for Student Leadership Ethics and Public Service has been very important in the personal growth of our students, as has been the new investment in arts at NC State in which we have had a portfolio of opportunities in theater, dance, crafts, and music on this campus. We have finished air conditioning our halls and we have increased the amount of alcohol and smoke-free space that is available to our students in the residence halls.

University Planning and Analysis has been helpful not only in developing these compact plans, but also in thinking ahead as we face accreditation three or four years down the road. Many of you have gone through accreditation at the departmental or college level, but the university is going to face re-accreditation in a few years in a time in which the criteria for re-accreditation is changing, from simple statistical analysis of GPA’s, distributions, and graduation rates to one in which the university is going to be called on to develop and maintain portfolios on student outcomes. We are in a good place because the outcomes that we have for our students are outstanding. It is reflective of what a great university North Carolina State has been. I am grateful as well for the leadership that Karen Helm has provided and will continue to provide as we think about how to address that accreditation. If you think about this talk as a state of the university, I can conclude for you that this is a great university. It is one in which a community of scholars can truly be brought together, one in which I am proud to say that we are trying to put together the infrastructure that will facilitate the kind of intellectual changes that will keep us among the best universities in the United States. It is because of all of you that I can make statements of that without exaggeration. Thank you so much for being here today."

5.    Discussion of "Principles for Emerging Systems of Scholarly Publishing"
(Tempe Principles)

Comments from Charles Moreland, Interim Provost
Interim Provost Moreland commented on intellectual property at a university. He stated that intellectual property is generated out of our research efforts, which we generally put on the patent side of intellectual property question. "We have a very secure policy throughout the university with regards to patents. NC State with the Research Office and working with a lot of the faculty has come forward with a good model for how to handle intellectual property on the research side, how to start up companies and how to use Centennial Campus’s working partners to take advantage of the intellectual property generated through the research of the university." Interim Provost Moreland stated that last year NC State received an award from the National Science Foundation to take the model to the remainder of the university system. "The university is connected not only with other universities, but also with the business community and the people who promote venture capital investment at the university. NC State is really in a leadership role in this area in the United States, and it seems that it keeps growing, which is very positive for the state in terms of its economy."

The other side of this has to do with intellectual property which falls in the domain that people would put under a copyright policy. Interim Provost Moreland stated that a new copyright policy has come forward from General Administration that has been approved by the Board of Governors. That policy will be accessible via the Internet. Work is being done with Peggy Hoon from the Libraries and staff from Legal Affairs to develop the implementation form of that policy.

Comments from Susan Nutter, Vice Provost and Director of Libraries
Vice Provost Nutter stated that serial prices are driven by intellectual property. "Intellectual property is what is fueling the prices, and the problem is that you do not own your intellectual property. It is owned by the publishing companies. We have at this university played a very active role nationally and internationally trying to address these issues in a print environment. We have the first Scholarly Communication Center at any library in North America, and the first intellectual property attorney on a library staff to work with faculty and students--working particularly in the online environment with your original work and using others original work. I think we have come to the conclusion that we have lost the battle in the print environment, where we are not going to be able to win. The issue now is whether or not we can take some control in the digital environment. It is not just the library here today. It is our Scholarly Communication Subcommittee of the University Library Committee, which is a committee of faculty and students that advises the Provost and Chancellor on the libraries. They have encouraged us to come forward today to engage you in a discussion on the topic. Since we have concluded that we really have not been successful in the print environment, last May the Association of American Universities (AAU) finally stepped into the picture. The Association is trying to play more of a leadership effort-- particularly in bringing together all the stakeholders who are involved in this project. They sponsored a major meeting in Tempe, Arizona, last spring to facilitate discussion among the various academic stakeholders. They came to the conclusion that they had to build consensus around the country and around the world on a set of principles that would in fact guide the transformation of scholarly communications processes as we move into an increasingly electronic environment. Out of that they came up with nine principles. The signatories include the Chancellors and Presidents of a number of major colleges and universities including Stanford, Indiana University, and UCLA. One of the disappointments was that NC State could not be at that table because we are not a member of AAU. Also the American Chemical Society, the American Mathematical Society, the American Historical Association, and the Association of American University Presses were involved in this effort. The next step is to generate discussion on these principles on campuses across the country. What we are trying to do today is to engage you in that discussion, and we are holding other meetings across campus to try and allow you to have the opportunity to hear the principles and to discuss them."

Presentation by Peggy Hoon, Scholarly Communication Librarian
Peggy Hoon stated that traditionally under the copyright law in the employer/employee situation, the employer owns the work that is created by the employee within the scope of their employment. However, in the academic setting, there has been what is known as the academic exception to this. Traditionally faculty members have held the copyright to works that they create such as scholarly monographs. Journal articles are the traditional works that fall under academic exception. That has not changed in the new UNC copyright ownership, and it is unlikely that this situation will change for journal articles that are written at NC State.

Hoon stated, "You have that copyright until you transfer it to someone else. It has to be in writing for a copyright transfer to occur. It is in all of your publishing contracts that you sign, particularly in the journal area. There will be a copyright transfer to the publisher in writing. When this transfer occurs, you are actually transferring a number of rights to them including the right of reproduction, the right to make derivative work of your own work, to display the work to perform it, and to transmit it. These rights can be unbundled. They do not have to be an all or nothing type of thing. I suggest to you that you may in some of your negotiations with your publisher try to retain some of these rights for yourself–for your own ability to use your own figures in portions of what you are publishing in subsequent articles and works that you write, for the ability to copy your own article for your own teaching purposes. There are examples of that kind of language on our website. If you want to use your works again, you are going to have a fair use argument.

The term of copyright for works created now is the life of the author plus seventy years. It was life of the author plus fifty years until 1998, when the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act was passed. There will be another copyright term extension act in twenty years.

The university that has supported all of the creations of these works is really paying for them in the library subscriptions and purchases.

Association of Research Library Statistics between 1986 and 1999

1)    Consumer price index has increased 52% during this time period while the cost of monographs have gone up 65%.
2)     The cost of health care, up 107%
3)    Journals, up 207%
4)    The average ARL budget 100%

The NCSU Libraries’ materials budgeted in this same time period increased 158%, while the total expenditures increased 172%.

If your serials budget in libraries were $10M, in 1986 your budget would have to be $27.5M to buy the same number of serial in 1998. This is particularly hitting universities like NC State hard, because a monopoly occurs in the science, technology, and medical journals. Consequences are that the ARL overall serial subscription rates have dropped 6% even with this tremendous increase in library spending, and the monographs have dropped 26%. Frequently you have to make adjustments in the library. Therefore, the library is moving money from different places."

University or Faculty Retention of Copyright
Peggy Hoon stated, "We do have a provision in the UNC policy that the university will be able to use, such as fair use through fair use traditional or non-directed work created by their faculty. It was an attempt to make a statement at the system level about this situation that our institutions can make use for course pak purposes for works that they are supporting through their faculty.

SPARC is the Scholarly Publishing Academic Resources Coalition, which is a world wide alliance of research libraries and organizations in institutions that encourages some competition in this area through introducing new scientific journals. Servers like Pub-Med at NIH began accepting peer reviewed journal articles in January of last year. Many of you are familiar with pre-print servers that have been functioning at Las Alamos since 1991. This works particularly well for a subset of high energy physics for which print was not functioning well. Another suggestion has been open archives organized by university discipline.

Some of the sci-tech publishers are predatory type publishers, whose bottom line is a profit margin between 35 and 40%, and not the dissemination of your research which is the academic’s totally different outlook on this. Scholarly associations are not in this group. We are not lumping all publishers together in this to encourage the scholarly associations to retain publication of their own journals, as opposed to selling them to publishers that practice predatory pricing. Some suggest that scholarly associations may be thinking more about the quality of publishing as opposed to simply counting the numbers."

Comments from Susan Osborne, Professor, Curriculum and Instruction
Dr. Osborne stated that Hoon talked about the first of the principles: that we work together as a community to find a number of different thrusts that we can use to try to contain costs. "In addition there are a number of other kinds of not-for-profit publishers that have been created in the last few years that may be a good source of support for people who are looking for fair use publishers. This information is available in more detail on the ARL website.

The second principle has to do with electronic capability. We can promote electronic publication. There are a number of electronic journals that are now published on this campus. When such journals meet your scholarly and academic needs, that we may select these over publishing outlets that are owned by predatory publishers. Gordon and Breech is a large one. They went after a faculty member who actually published a study of their profit margins and growth. They sued him in just about every country in which people read Gordon and Breech journals. The suit was still in progress at the time of his death, but he is now being exonerated in every one of those countries. However, it cost him his life savings. Fortunately ARL did step in to help with legal fees.

We need to be able to tell these people that we do have other options and will create them if they are not there now. In fact, Michael Rosenwieg who was here last fall was a publisher of Evolutionary Ecology which was originally published by a small family owned publishing firm in Great Britain. When it was that family’s publishing firm, they really saw themselves as a link in a scholarly communication community and made a decent profit, but they were not sharks. However, they were eventually eaten up and the people that ate them eventually were eaten up and at each point the journal prices became dramatically higher to the community. So what Rosenwieg did was to contact his editorial board and they all quit and formed a new journal (an electronic journal). Within a couple of years, it has developed as high a reputation as the original print journal. We are not saying that people cut their throats academically, but we are saying that there are choices out there and that it is important to us as a community to identify those choices and to make our selections wisely. These selections will not end up hurting us as faculty members in the long run.

The Las Alamos pre-print server, I think, is a good example of how a community really took upon itself with relatively little support to provide a tremendous service to the community in making research information available very quickly and to a very wide public. That is a great model for some other organizations which have been doing similar things perhaps on a smaller scale. There is no reason why we cannot have sites that have the same level of peer review as the print journals traditionally have had.

A third concern is archiving. As we move into electronic environment, there has not been a standard established for making sure that all of these things are available and will be forever. We do go back to those classic studies forty and fifty years ago, and we need again as a scholarly community to be sure that the organizations who are serving as repositories of this information do not let it deteriorate. Libraries are working very hard on that now. Some scholarly societies are doing the same to make sure that information continues to be available into even the next century.

The fourth principle is that we need to continue with peer review, that we need to assure the quality of information that is going out. We need to continue to do that as more and more information moves into electronic or digital format.

Another concern that we have is fair use of information in the electronic medium. Just because we are moving to information transmitted digitally does not mean that the predatory publishers are not out there trying to charge us for every view. There have been proposals that not only would charge libraries every time a scholar in the community looked at the article on line, but kept a record of that so that they would know and be able to send advertising to individual people based on what you looked at. Or presumably they could sell that information to your competitors or anything else.

The last principle deals specifically with issues of privacy. We have lost the battle in the print medium. We need to hold onto it to the extent that we possibly can in the electronic medium, because we can not expect students to pay every time they look up an article in the library.

This is another place that I think members of the scholarly community can really be effective in working with their professional organizations. I know that in the humanities and social sciences there is a data base that I use all of the time. It is important to me now. That organization has dramatically raised the cost of their database. So it is not only the original articles that we need to be aware of, but also other aspects of scholarly information that we need access to. Since we are the people that are those organizations, we have say in what kinds of policies they establish.

The next one has to do with negotiating fair use for your materials, continuing to own some of those copyright rights so that we and our students have access to that work. Several years ago, I assigned an article that I had written that had originally been published in a Springer Verlag journal as part of a course pak. We had permission to reproduce and use most of the articles that I used in that course pak. Springer, however decided to charge $3.00 per student. If you are assigning four or five additional articles per class period or per week, your students are shelling out an extra $15.00 or so per week. My students are school teachers and on top of a $75 text book and what ever else, another ten or fifteen dollars a week is a large sacrifice for them, and it is an unreasonable one. We need to hold on to those rights and to make sure that we have within our university communities fair use to the information that we produce.

Another concern for the Tempe group was time from submission to publication. In many fields you may submit a journal article, and it may not be published for a year or more. That means what is in the literature and what is available to our colleagues and students is often out of date by the time it is out there. It is a concern that we can probably handle more effectively in a digital environment than we can in print. Again, as faculty and editorial members, we can set standards for these things and encourage our peers and colleagues to hold those standards up and improve that.

Another concern has been what I jokingly referred to as the least publishable unit. That is the notion that you take any particular project that you have done and instead of publishing it as a very complete article, you break it down. You can get lots of publications–none of which say very much. In some fields, departments, and universities that is truly rewarded. We need to guard against that. We need to have sensible approaches to publication. Harvard and Stanford have been moving in this direction. What they have done with promotion and tenure is to ask people to submit their five most significant influential pieces to try to move away from filling up electronic pages often with redundant information. That is something that an individual faculty member cannot do, but it is certainly something that as a community we can discuss–that this university can work with other universities around the country to find ways to promote publication of reasonable amounts of information which would perhaps reduce the proliferation of journals. In my field there are three or four more journals that pop up every year. Many of them have not been long lived, but it means that there is a tremendous problem in archiving that information and having ready access to it and even knowing where it is, because things come and go so quickly. If we had fewer journals that contained more of the body of the field, it would make accessing that information easier for everyone.

The last principle has to do with privacy rights and the access of commercial publishers to information about what we read. That is something that we need to address in the very beginning when libraries are negotiating for access that they are really in the forefront of negotiating for us that we retain privacy or confidentiality over those things. We need to understand that we need to be behind the libraries–that they have been doing this for a while and we need to support them in those efforts."

6.    Questions & Comments
A faculty member commented that he does not see why a collective group of libraries cannot get together to put out guidelines stating that they are not going to pay more than X amount per page. "Simply say that we are not going to do it collectively and let their faculty know what journals are black listed at that point."

Dr. Osborne stated that there are some pieces that are in place. "One thing is that the libraries do work in consortia to purchase things and to purchase collections of journals. As far as being able to group together with other libraries to say that they refuse to pay X number of dollars starts to run into monopoly and anti-trust things."

A faculty member wanted to know if anyone is out there to suggest that a mistake was made in transferring the ownership, that universities should keep some kind of ownership. He noted that if that was possible, the university would have control over how that was used. He said that when he sees the difference between copyright and patent on the patent side the university does not give up ownership. "When we deal with people who are supporting research in this university, the number one principle is we never give up ownership."

Dr. Osborne said that is something that Hoon and the UNC Committee has dealt with. There might be joint copyright between the creator of the property and the university. "It never ceases to surprise me that federal agencies that provide our grants out of tax dollars have not stepped in to say you cannot give this information to someone who is going to make a huge profit out of it."

A faculty member commented that one problem that makes it even more complex is that the very technology that is giving us some hope is also giving the publishers hope. These pressures are also coming to bear on the professional societies and scholarly societies. "It is very important for those of us who are active within those societies to educate ourselves on these issues and to try to educate the organizations to the pressures that are being brought to bear on the academic communities. Sometimes these traditionally non-profit publishers begin to look more and more like for-profit publishers."

Dr. Osborne suggested that the faculty talk to the people in their professional organizations. She stated that, "The first thing that we have to do is to educate ourselves. Then we have to start doing things like saying, "I will not sign away all of our rights to the work that we have produced."

7.    Adjournment
Chair Corbin thanked the presenters and adjourned the meeting at 5:00 p.m.

Footer Nav