Academic Libraries – DigitalKoans

Paywall: “Bridging the AI Gap: Comparative Analysis of AI Integration, Education, and Outreach in Academic Libraries”

This study examines AI integration, education, and outreach in academic libraries across Europe, North America (Canada and USA), Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean. An environmental scan of 40 academic library websites from the Times Higher Education 10 highest-ranked libraries in each region was conducted. Results show that more than 50% of the libraries offered educational materials and 42.5% conducted educational activities, while only 12.5% included AI policies.

https://doi.org/10.1177/03400352251325274

“Opinion: A Librarian’s Summary Of, and Response to, the Clarivate Announcement”

Furthermore, the transition to subscription-only access represents more than a change in purchasing models – it fundamentally undermines the ability of academic libraries to build collections that serve their specific institutional needs. . . . As the existing ProQuest One collections have demonstrated (causing great frustration), content can be removed without library input or prior announcement. Clarivate states: “We will continue our bi-annual schedule of title removals from subscriptions in June and December. There may be occasional off-cycle removals due to legal reasons or loss of publisher rights.” . . . The loss of Evidence-Based Acquisition (EBA) and Demand-Driven Acquisition (DDA) is also likely to be another blow to institutions whose budgets do not allow for the up-front purchase of all texts on lists.

https://tinyurl.com/4wy3eyc9

“AI Is Reigniting Decades-Old Questions Over Digital Rights, but Fair Use Prevails”

A publisher recently provided UC Berkeley’s Library with an elusive explanation for their AI ban on a subset of their licensed materials, claiming that they would “require new and different AI terms [that] would be significantly higher in price,” and that “individual client requests [would] need to be evaluated [to] determine whether or not they will be permitted.” However, when prompted to provide said new terms and price, the publisher was unable, or perhaps unwilling, to provide any additional information, noting that there is “no set pricing model or terms to share.” . . .

Charging extra to secure AI rights is likely to be cost-prohibitive due to increased financial burdens on libraries and institutions of higher education; if publishers are successful, it could lead to less academic output as researchers may have to independently foot the bill for the right to conduct research using AI.

https://tinyurl.com/42nmfwm2

Paywall: “Implementing Read and Publish Agreements at the College of Charleston Libraries”

Focusing primarily on the Read and Publish agreements with Cambridge, Wiley, and Springer Nature, this article gives insight into managing Read and Publish agreements, specifically for academic libraries with no designated scholarly communications librarians.

https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2025.2471077

Paywall: “Digital Humanities in Us Academic Libraries: Case Studies”

This case study highlighted key areas of academic library DH practices including Space, Technology, Staff, Instruction and Collaboration. Practices in these areas were compared against each other and literature to comment on the current state of DH library practices and offer some recommendations for select areas.

https://doi.org/10.1108/DTS-03-2024-0040