Open Access Statement of Support FAQ
This FAQ accompanies the OA Statement of Support (proposed and passed by the University Senate Library Committee in May 2018, and passed by Senate Executive on 9/19/18), to address concerns and to provide information on the benefits of depositing research in the UND Scholarly Commons.
Will placing my research in the UND Scholarly Commons (“the Commons”) cause copyright problems?
No, for many reasons. First, we try to deposit pre-prints (author’s copies, before publisher mark-up). Over 94% of publishers allow deposit of pre-prints into non-profit institutional or disciplinary repositories (such as the Commons or arXiv). An online service, SHERPA-RoMEO, provides publisher policies on pre- and post-print deposit in institutional repositories (IRs); we consult it before all deposits. If a tiny publisher lacks a SHERPA-RoMEO entry, we write them directly. Many publishers also allow deposit of post-prints (published versions) in a non-profit educational institution’s IR; this is very different from deposit in for-profit services like Academia.edu or ResearchGate. We also have staff who are well-versed in copyright. If there are questions, we consult with counsel. Finally, if a publisher ever disputed our right to post an item, we’d simply remove it.
Does posting my research help me in any way?
Absolutely! Your research will be globally available. Open research is more heavily cited; an article in arXiv.org cites the advantage in research impact of OA journal articles as 36%-172% depending on the discipline.1 Authors who deposit work in the Commons get monthly research impact updates with maps showing where work was downloaded. We also have a CV review service: submit your CV to Zeineb Yousif, Digital Initiatives Librarian, and she’ll review your publication history and let you know what we can upload to increase your research impact! Also, the Commons is integrated with Digital Measures, and you’ll see a check box asking if you’d like to upload this research to the Commons if feasible. If you check it, we’ll investigate any possible copyright issues and work with you to ensure anything that can be made available is uploaded.
Most federal (and some state) granting agencies now require that research done with federal funds be made available openly. Does this satisfy that requirement?
Yes. In fact, having an institutional unit mandated to gather research, like a Library, is preferred by most agencies. For example, say Prof. Smith promises to keep his research on a website, then gets a great job in Japan. However, if Prof. Smith says "I'll deposit my research with the Library" and the Library asserts an institutional commitment to make it permanently available, including ongoing file conversion so it’s never unreadable, this is more favorably regarded. Also, libraries offer more services. Recently, a UND professor wrote an NSF grant. The Library committed to placing research in the IR, permanently retaining it, backing it up, and making it accessible using metadata schema. NSF asked for more details on metadata, which we provided. The grant was successful.
What about the deposit requirements for research data that funding agencies are now also starting to insist upon? And the research data management (RDM) plans?
We can help here too! Dean Walker has written 6 RDM plans. Two librarians (Zeineb Yousif and Will Martin) have formal RDM training, and there’s an online Data Management guide. For accessibility/ metadata help, contact a metadata librarian – Shelby Harken, Stephen Nonte, or Drew Lewis. We partner with High Performance Computing and are the campus back-up for Globus. We have datasets in the Commons, and can provide indexing/records for data on other servers, so all research data can be searched from one location.