OK call me grumpy, but I just received the communication from Tamara, the Finance Officer asking our (I'm presuming everyone in the salutation to 'valued members, colleagues and subscribers' emphasis added). Here, for general consumption and consideration, is my response:
Dear Tamara (reposted to the ning and to the archives and records google group)
I’m very sorry, but I find that this inappropriate. Before I, or I suggest, any of your other correspondents comment on this, I would like to have a considered opinion of the body we delegate to make such decisions – that is, the Editorial Board via Council. The Editorial Board is a professionally recognized and duly delegated body to oversee Archives and Manuscripts. Any such decisions by the membership should be informed by an appropriately thought out strategy for electronic publishing of our premier, peer reviewed, internationally respected journal.
What is the proposition on electronic publishing? Who would host it, where will it be made accessible? Will the back issues be available electronically, how, in what cost structures? How will you deliver A&M in pdf format – one huge pdf file, or as individual articles in pdf format? Are you proposing an opt in – some paper, some electronic – strategy? Is there likely to be a different strategy for our obligations to deposit libraries and university libraries? What impact will this have on subscription/membership costs/rates?
It is inappropriate to send this half baked, unsupported and ill thought out questionnaire to our members in the absence of such information. The Editorial Board, NOT the finance officer should be in charge of this potential policy change.
You should remember that this is a society of archivists. We do know a thing or two about preservation of digital information. Our past experience with the current administration and digital information in the form of the accumulated list serve postings does not lend itself to much faith in this area.
Replies
Aside from the important and relevant arguments as already outlined:
PDF back copies of A&M would also add to the knowledge and learning of newer Archivists who cannot easily gain access to back copies that are no longer available by the ASA.
It would be good to have a complete set available and accessible - by purchase or not.
For those who may not have seen, I have posted an update about the eA+M subcommittee to the Ning with the title Putting Archives and manuscripts online. This has two pdf documents attached in case the formatting does not come through for you.
If anyone wishes to make comment on the content of this preliminaryreport, then please feel free to do so.
Cheers
Joanna
Probably a bit late into this discussion but I think that at least the Editorial Board if not all members should get all relevant information and options put before them in order to make this decision.
I would love to see something done about making old issues of A&M available online. As I said on the google group earlier, it's an incredibly rich resource that should be more accessible.
Cheers
Cassie
I'm not a member of the ASA but I'm a keen reader of A & M and the University library I work for is a long time subscriber. Our hard copy set is the only one available in my geographic area and is used from time to time by archivists and students from all walks of life. I am not aware that our institution has even received the survey, but it may have got lost in transit through the bureacracy.
I think for subscribers like my Library we would certainly have more questions than answers with the survey as it stands. If the journal was to be provided through one of e-journal services that we already subscribe to, that would be great but we would still want the hard copy as e-journal services are only available to staff and students of the University, and not to the members of the public that also use our service. Could we get both for the same price? If it was just emailed as a PDF, that wouldn't meet our needs at all - how would we provide access to it for our readers apart from me?
And I support Cassie's suggestion - it would be great to have the older issues available freely online perhaps from the ASA website.
Cheers - Anna
As a long time society member, web applications developer and someone who has taken an active interest in online publication of A&M, I fess up to having chewed Sebastian’s ear (as no doubt others have) on this issue:-
1. There is nothing per se wrong with seeking member reaction to pdf as a delivery format. Regardless of the larger debate, some of us are looking at bookshelves collapsing under the weight of hard copy, others are concerned about climate change and the ecological footprint of printing – Please may I have my copy as pdf?
2. The move to an online channel is overdue. A&M as we know it, will likely disappear unless this change is made. Briefly, the reasons for this are:
*Peer reviewed journal publication in information management and information science is now mostly online. If A&M remains the odd man out, it will fail, because Australian peer reviewed publication in archival science will move to online journals. For various reasons, academics require their work to be cited. Citation now mostly happens with online journals. The cost burden in tracking stuff down in offline journals is something that users of peer reviewed literature are increasingly un-prepared to do, hence content will not be cited and A&M will be ignored;
*Discovery tool interfaces that provide access to the full text of journals online are the user preferred method of information retrieval. We know from the review of web logs, that abstracting services are dying – cost burden kicks in again – once you have found the article in which you are interested, why should you have to hop on your bike or bus to access copy? Same argument applies to VDX and other forms of document delivery.
Sure it would be great if ASA Council revealed its plans for online. At the moment it’s like the Gillard Government’s prosecution of the carbon tax – deficient in detail and hence a big tempting target for detractors.
Mark Brogan | www.brogan.id.au | mbrogan@iinet.net.au
Dear All
At the last ASA Council meeting (20 May 2011) Council asked the National Office to survey members as to what their thoughts were on how they would like Archives and Manuscripts delivered (paper, digital, both).
The National Office has actioned that request very swiftly and the National Office is now collating those responses.
Cheers
Pat Jackson: President Australian Society of Archivists
Hi Barbara
Perhaps Alice-Anne can let us know whether the intention was to force a particular path. I understand your concern - that collecting a simple response to whether you are open to receiving online vs print as part of your subscription does not address the detailed questions you pose and that the information collected might then be interpreted in promoting a particular course of action which has not been foregrounded in the survey which was the initial source of the information collected.
In my view, the survey is asking a threshhold question - to get a sense of whether there is an openness to receiving the publication as an online publication as occurs with many other publications of its kind. There are some people in the profession who think that this is the only viable way for a refereed journal to be run in the current publishing environment, but we have to bear in mind that many people are still attached to receiving print publications. But again, Alice-Anne might want to talk about what she was aiming to do by collecting this information.
cheers
Sebastian
Hi Sebastian
At the risk of repeating myself and boring everyone stupid, yes, I think that the importance of A&M is such that if we ask people a question on 'distribution' which then forces a certain path without having the ongoing strategy in place, it is a backwards process. And people will make different choices (or at least I am likely to) with full information vs partial - or extremely little - information. I'm not sure 'improper' is the right word, and I'm not applying it.
barbara
Hi Barbara
Your questions are valid, and I think that the work being done hitherto by Alice-Anne and the editorial subcommittee will be addressing those sorts of considerations. I will draw their attention to them to make sure that they have taken them into account. Are you saying that it was improper to consult the membership without having all of those questions worked out prior to asking them whether they have a preference for receiving electronic or print copies of the journal as part of their subscription?
cheers
Sebastian
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next