The American Library Association, the Association of College and Research Libraries, and the Association of Research Libraries will file an amicus brief authored by Jonathan Band about the Google Book Search Settlement.
Read more about it at "Library Organizations to File Amicus Brief in Google Book Search Settlement."
In an NPR podcast (Librarian Opposes Google's Library Fees), Robert Darnton, Director of the Harvard University Library, says that the Google Book Search Copyright Class Action Settlement "raises the danger of a monopoly" and calls for a public debate on the settlement.
The Association of Research Libraries has released Ad Hoc Task Force to Review the Proposed OCLC Policy for Use and Transfer of WorldCat Records: Final Report to the ARL Board.
Here's an excerpt from the press release:
OCLC's release of the policy elicited serious concern from the ARL community, as well as the broader library community. As a result, ARL established an ad hoc task force to review the policy and identify issues of particular interest to research libraries. The task force report includes a brief overview of the policy and the task force's understanding of the policy's intent. This is followed by an explication of specific issues and the task force's findings regarding both the policy itself and the implementation process. The report concludes with recommendations for OCLC and the library community.
The Association of Research Libraries has released "ARL Statement to Scholarly Publishers on the Global Economic Crisis."
Here's an excerpt from the press release:
The ARL statement includes a set of recommendations that are based on the belief that scholarly publishers who are committed to enhancing the effectiveness of the scholarly communication system are prepared to act to minimize negative impacts on the system resulting from economic conditions. Among other strategies, the statements calls for publishers and vendors to adopt flexible approaches to pricing and avoid reducing content or access as libraries seek to renegotiate expenditures. ARL encourages publishers to consult widely with research libraries in developing responses to the current economic environment. Small, not-for-profit publishers are of particular concern, and ARL member libraries welcome conversations regarding new publishing models that can reduce the cost and vulnerability of established publications of high value.
One of the recommendations is:
Libraries serving research organizations are increasingly receptive to models that provide open access to content published by their affiliated authors in addition to traditional subscription access to titles. This kind of model can form a bridge from subscription models to models incorporating author-side payments
The University of Tennessee Libraries and the Office of Research have established an Open Publishing Support Fund.
Here's an excerpt from "Fund for Open Access Publishing Offers Opportunities for Faculty":
The fund, which was founded in the fall semester of last year, provides money to faculty and graduate students wishing to publish in an open access journal. According to the Web site, the open access publishers charge money to the authors rather than the readers to cover the costs of publishing.
The money for the fund comes from an opportunities fund used for the pursuit of various research and scholarly opportunities, said Gregory Reed, vice chancellor for research administration. The Open Access Fund, at the moment, contains $20,000 for assistance.
David W. Lewis, Dean of the University Library at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, has been named Assistant Vice President for Digital Scholarly Communications in the Indiana University Office of the Vice President for Information Technology. Lewis will serve for two years in this capacity while retaining his duties as Dean of IUPUI's University Library.
Here's an excerpt from the press release:
In his new role, Lewis will provide university-wide leadership for Recommendation 12, "Recapturing the Scholarly Record," which is described as a grand challenge in Empowering People, IU’s strategic IT plan.
Recommendation 12 envisions a set of actions for IU to "pursue a position of leadership in the development (with partners) of new, sustainable models for scholarly publication, dissemination, and curation that enable scholars—and their collective communities—to re-assert control over rights to the scholarly record and its institutional preservation."
The plan, developed with the involvement of more than 140 members of the university community in response to a charge from President McRobbie, was endorsed by the IU Trustees in December 2008.
In announcing the appointment, IU Vice President for IT Brad Wheeler said, "The complexities and challenges for economically sustaining scholarly communications are great, and this is a timely opportunity for IU to assess a full range of options for the future. David's appointment assures the focused effort we need to help coalesce many ideas into actionable plans."
As assistant vice president, Lewis will engage in extensive dialogue with IU's faculty and research scholars, librarians, faculty council committees, the IU Press, UITS, and other research universities.
"Libraries are at the center of the many complex issues regarding scholarly publication and dissemination," said Patricia Steele, Ruth Lilly Dean of University Libraries. "We've worked diligently help find solutions. Having David in a leadership role leverages his knowledge of these issues and the critical understanding he brings as a librarian."
Lewis joined Indiana University in 1993 as the head of public services at IUPUI University Library and has served as dean since 2000. He has a bachelor's degree in history from Carleton College, a master's of library science degree from Columbia University, and certificates of advanced study in librarianship from the University of Chicago and Columbia University.
Ten associations and advocacy groups, including AALL, ACRL, ALA, ARL, and GWLA, have sent a letter to House Judiciary Committee members opposing the Fair Copyright in Research Works Act (H.R. 801).
Here's an excerpt:
The U.S. government funds research with the expectation that new ideas and discoveries from the research will propel science, stimulate the economy, and improve the lives and welfare of Americans. Public support for science is enhanced when the public directly sees the benefits from our nation's investment in scientific research. Yet H.R. 801 would reverse the only U.S. policy for public access to research, at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and make it impossible for other agencies to enact similar policies.
Scientific research is advanced by broad dissemination of knowledge, and the subsequent building upon the work of others. To this end, the NIH Public Access Policy ensures that the results of our nation's $29 billion annual investment in research reach the broadest possible audience. The Policy requires that, in exchange for receiving federal research dollars, grantees deposit the final electronic manuscript of their peer-reviewed research results into PubMed Central, NIH’s digital archive, to be made publicly available within 12 months—and was specifically implemented in full compliance with current U.S. copyright law.
The NIH Policy achieves several notable goals: First, it ensures broad public access to the results of NIH's funded research, allowing scientists and researchers to collaborate and engage in cutting-edge research. Such access allows for greater sharing of information, speeding discovery, medical advances, and innovations.
Second, the NIH Policy ensures that the U.S. government has a permanent archive of these critical, publicly funded biomedical research results, ensuring that results can be built upon by not only this generation, but also future generations, of researchers.
Finally, the Policy creates a welcome degree of accountability and transparency, which enable us to better manage our collective investments in the NIH research portfolio and ensure the maximum possible benefits to the public in return.
At the direction of Congress, the NIH Public Access Policy, in place as a voluntary measure since 2005, was recently strengthened to a mandatory policy. As a result, the rate of eligible manuscripts being deposited for public accessibility quickly increased from 19% to 60%. This requirement proved crucial to ensuring that the more than 80,000 articles resulting from NIH funding each year are, for the first time, available to any researcher, physician, faculty member, student, or member of the public who wants them.
H.R.801 presupposes that the NIH Public Access Policy undermines the rights of the author and conflicts with U.S. copyright law. As library organizations and allies we fully respect copyright law and the protection it affords content creators, content owners, and content users. NIH-funded research is copyrightable and copyright belongs to the author. The NIH Policy requires only the grant of a non-exclusive license to NIH, fully consistent with federal policies such as Circular A- 110 and Circular A-102. This policy leaves the author free to transfer some or all of the exclusive rights under copyright to a journal publisher or to assign these anywhere they so choose. Attached please find an issue brief detailing how the NIH Public Access Policy does not affect copyright law [see the letter for the brief].
The NIH Public Access Policy advances science, improves access by the public to federally funded research, provides for effective archiving strategies for these resources, and ensures accountability of our federal investment. Given the proven success of the revised NIH Public Access Policy and the promise of public access to federally funded research, we firmly oppose H.R.801 and ask that you do the same. Thank you for considering the stake and position of the key constituencies in this discussion.
Read more about it at "Conyers Introduces H.R. 801, "The Fair Copyright in Research Works Act."
In "ALA, ARL, ACRL Host Meeting of Experts to Discuss Google Book Search Settlement," District Dispatch reports on the numerous questions raised about the Google Book Search Settlement in a recent meeting on that topic.
Here's an excerpt :
- Access. What will the settlement mean for protecting the public’s ability to access and use digital resources from the nation’s libraries? Since the Book Rights Registry established as a condition of the settlement will represent the interests of the authors and publishers, who will represent the interests of libraries and the public? What are the financial implications of participation? Could the settlement create a monopoly that threatens the mission of libraries by raising the prices to an unreasonable level that limits public access?
- Intellectual freedom. Are there academic freedom issues to consider? What are the implications of Google’s ability to remove works at its discretion? Will there be notification of their removal? What are the issues regarding possible access and use restrictions on the Research Corpus?
- Equitable treatment. Since not all libraries are addressed in the settlement, what impact will it have on the diverse landscape of libraries? In light of tight economic times, will this negatively affect libraries with lean budgets? Will it expand the digital divide?
- Terms of use. Under the terms of the agreement, will library users continue to enjoy the same rights to information under copyright and other laws? Will the settlement impact the legal discussions and interpretations of library exceptions that allow for library lending, limited copying and preservation?
The University of Pennsylvania Libraries and Kirtas Technologies will offer a new service that allows customers to request that public domain books in Penn's collection be digitized and printed on request.
Here's an excerpt from the press release:
Today, Kirtas announces a partnership with the University of Pennsylvania Libraries to make over 200,000 titles available to the public in a unique way.
Using existing information drawn from Penn's catalog records, Kirtas is able to offer out-of-copyright books for sale through its own retail site, www.kirtasbooks.com. What makes this initiative unique is that the books can be offered for sale before they are ever digitized, so there is no up-front printing, production or storage cost.
"This partnership allows us to gauge reader interest in on-demand digitization and printing services," said Carton Rogers, Vice Provost and Director of Libraries at the University of Pennsylvania. "That frees us from difficult selection decisions and lets the digital collection grow in response to user demand. The model is efficient and minimizes the risk as we develop new ways of addressing information needs."
Through www.kirtasbooks.com, customers will be able to search for a desired title, and when found, place a "digitize for me" request. The desired book will be pulled from Penn's shelves, digitized, processed by Kirtas for optimal reading and printing, and a newly-printed copy will be shipped to the initiator. Or, the customer can purchase access to an online-only version of the book. Once the book has been digitized, it is returned undamaged to the library shelf. . . .
Through this unique partnership with Kirtas, the Penn Libraries will also earn income on orders of its books. Distribution rights are non-exclusive so the books can be made available through the Penn Libraries, as well as other distribution channels at the library's request.
ARL has released Transformational Times: An Environmental Scan Prepared for the ARL Strategic Plan Review Task Force.
Here's an excerpt:
In looking across the key trends that are described below, some common threads recur.
- Libraries need to change their practices for managing traditional content and develop new capabilities for dealing with digital materials of all types, but especially new forms of scholarship, teaching and learning resources, special collections (particularly hidden collections), and research data.
- Content industries inevitably seek to extend control over the copyright regime and over content, in general, while libraries, authors, and research institutions endeavor to provide more access to and active management of the intellectual assets produced by the academy.
- Accountability and assessment are essential for data-driven decision making within libraries, on campus, and with funders and policy makers.
- Collaborative approaches are being applied to new activities both with regard to traditional operations as well as emerging functions.
- Radical reconfiguration of research library organizations and services is needed coupled with an increasingly diverse and talented staff to provide needed leadership and technical skills to respond to the rapidly changing environment.
- New relationships must be formed with library users to support rapid shifts in research and teaching practices.
- ARL and its member libraries must cultivate alliances and partnerships to advance all strategic arenas identified as important for the Association.
The Cornell University Library is increasing its print-on-demand books on Amazon.com to over 80,000 titles.
Here's an excerpt from the press release:
By the end of 2009, tens of thousands of new books will be added to the approximately 6,000 items in Cornell’s collection already available on Amazon. All of the books are in the public domain in the United States, and many are currently out of print.
"Although demand for online access to digital books has been growing, books as artifacts continue to have a real value," said Oya Rieger, Associate University Librarian for Information Technologies. "This initiative supports the reading and research patterns of users who prefer the affordances provided by physical books—they support deep reading, underlining and writing comments in the margins. The Web is great for easy access and browsing, but because digital content can sometimes be ephemeral, physical books continue to serve as valuable reference sources on your shelf."
Positive feedback from users helped contribute to the decision to expand the number of titles available. "The publication of this little book adds valuable primary source material for students of the War of 1812. Bravo to Cornell for making it available," one customer wrote. Another said, "Words cannot express how grateful I am that Cornell University saw fit to republish these two papers."
The books that will be added throughout 2009 were digitized with the support of Microsoft over the last two years. These new volumes represent a substantial part of the Library’s rare and unique offerings printed before 1923.
They will reflect Cornell’s subject strengths, including American history, English literature, astronomy, food and wine, general engineering, the history of science, home economics, hospitality and travel, human sexuality, labor relations, Native American materials, ornithology, veterinary medicine and women's studies. Collections already available for reprint from Amazon include New York state historical literature, core historical literature in agriculture, historical math monographs and materials related to home economics.
Cornell University Library has been a cutting-edge participant with print-on-demand services and mass digitization initiatives, partnering with multiple outlets to make its collections available to the public. The partnership with Amazon began in 2006, and the Library is currently engaged in a large-scale digitization initiative with Google that will create 500,000 digitized books over the next six years.
For a sample of the titles offered on Amazon, go to bookstore.library.cornell.edu, and check Amazon.com throughout the year to see new titles as they are added.
The Association of Research Libraries Digital Repository Issues Task Force has released The Research Library's Role in Digital Repository Services.
Here's an excerpt from the press release:
The report, "The Research Library's Role in Digital Repository Services," identifies key issues surrounding repository development, explores common strategies that libraries are using, analyzes relevant environmental trends, discusses issues where ARL and its member libraries should focus attention, and recommends the following actions for research libraries to undertake:
- Build a range of new kinds of partnerships and alliances, both within institutions and between institutions.
- Base service-development strategies on substantive assessment of local needs rather than blindly replicating work done at another institution.
- Engage with key local policy issues and stakeholders to encourage institutional engagement with national and international policy issues.
- Develop outreach and marketing strategies that assist "early adopters" of repositories to connect with the developing repository-related service system.
- Define a scope of responsibility to guide the development of repository services for varied forms of content.
The report focuses on repository services generally, rather than concentrating on repository technologies or content. Repository services include services to authors, contributors, and users, particularly of university-created content. Some examples of repository services provided by research libraries include long-term archiving and migration of content, dissemination and access management, metadata and format management, search and discovery tools, publishing, data mining, etc. Illustrations drawn from a variety of digital repositories are used throughout the report.
The task force notes that, due to repository services' powerful potential to enable key work and enhance the effectiveness of functions across the research enterprise, research institutions cannot afford to do without such services, even in difficult economic times. Researchers and scholars with access to a spectrum of repository services possess a substantial advantage in conducting cutting-edge research, delivering high-quality teaching, and contributing valuable services to society. Libraries have key strengths and missions requiring them to undertake various roles in repository service development. This report presents a fresh perspective on the digital repository environment and is intended to inspire ARL member libraries and others to assess their views and plans for service development.
The Association of Research Libraries has released a new guide: "Developing a Scholarly Communication Program in Your Library."
Here's an excerpt from the press release:
The guide provides background information and outlines steps for setting up a scholarly communication program at your library and on your campus.
Scholarly communication initiatives can take many forms and focus on different issues, such as the University of California’s innovative recruitment of faculty publications into its eScholarship Repository, the University of Minnesota’s author’s rights education program, or SPARC’s student-focused "Right to Research" campaign. Whatever the issues particularly relevant to your institution, librarians can engage faculty members, students, and administrators to make a significant impact on the scholarly landscape.
This online guide offers both generic tools you can adapt locally under a Creative Commons license and examples of how these tools have been implemented at other schools. The guide provides you with help at your point of need, and leverages the expertise and experience of library colleagues everywhere.
The guide offers advice on the following stages of creating and managing a scholarly communication program:
- Establish Structure
- Build Knowledge
- Scan Environment
- Go Public
- Evaluate Program
- Learn More
The Association of Research Libraries has released "Establish a Universal, Open Library or Digital Data Commons."
Here's an excerpt:
Deepening our understanding of our Nation and its culture and history, advancing scientific discovery, tackling environmental, economic issues and more, all depend on scientists, researchers, students, scholars, and members of the public accessing our Nation's cultural, historical and scientific assets. A large-scale initiative to digitize and preserve the public domain collections of library, governmental, and cultural memory organizations will support research, teaching and learning at all levels, will help stem the current economic crisis by equipping and employing workers in every state with 21st Century skills, and it will lay a foundation for innovation and national competitiveness in the decades ahead. The goal is to establish a universal, open library or a digital data commons.
Gerry Bayne has made available podcast interviews with selected participants at the Coalition for Networked Information's Fall 2008 Task Force Meeting.
Here are three of podcasts of special interest:
The Association of Research Libraries has published Manuscript Collections on the Web, SPEC Kit 307.
Here's an excerpt from the press release:
This SPEC survey investigated how many manuscript collections are held in ARL member libraries; what percentage of these collections are represented on the Web; what types of information about the collections are available in finding aids and on the Web; what formats are used for finding aids on the Web; how many library staff are working on manuscript collections; the challenges and benefits of migrating collection information to the Web; and whether and how usage of manuscript collection information is tracked.
Of the 123 ARL member libraries, 72 completed the survey by the March 2008 deadline for a response rate of 59%. All of the survey respondents indicated that they are managing to post at least some information about their manuscript collections on the Web. Most of the comments indicated that the respondents want to post more information online, but are unable to do so for a variety of reasons, primarily staff and time constraints. Almost all respondents are creating MARC records for their collections; fewer are creating EAD finding aids. A select few represent all of their manuscript collections on the Web in some way, either as MARC records, brief blurbs in HTML, or EAD finding aids.
The survey results also show that librarians and archivists squeeze arrangement and description duties in between a multitude of other responsibilities. They are not the only staff in these institutions who perform these tasks, but they do spend larger percentages of their time than anyone else on actually adding information to the Web.
This SPEC Kit includes documentation from respondents in the form of manuscript collection Web sites, finding aid Web sites, Web sites of collaborative online resources, arrangement and description guidelines, and Web processing procedures.
The table of contents and executive summary from this SPEC Kit are available online at http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/spec307web.pdf.
The Association of Research Libraries has released Current Models of Digital Scholarly Communication by Nancy L. Maron and K. Kirby Smith, plus a database of associated examples.
Here's an excerpt from the press release:
In the spring of 2008, ARL engaged Ithaka’s Strategic Services Group to conduct an investigation into the range of online resources valued by scholars, paying special attention to those projects that are pushing beyond the boundaries of traditional formats and are considered innovative by the faculty who use them. The networked digital environment has enabled the creation of many new kinds of works, and many of these resources have become essential tools for scholars conducting research, building scholarly networks, and disseminating their ideas and work, but the decentralized distribution of these new-model works has made it difficult to fully appreciate their scope and number.
Ithaka’s findings are based on a collection of resources identified by a volunteer field team of over 300 librarians at 46 academic institutions in the US and Canada. Field librarians talked with faculty members on their campuses about the digital scholarly resources they find most useful and reported the works they identified. The authors evaluated each resource gathered by the field team and conducted interviews of project leaders of 11 representative resources. Ultimately, 206 unique digital resources spanning eight formats were identified that met the study’s criteria.
The study’s innovative qualitative approach yielded a rich cross-section of today’s state of the art in digital scholarly resources. The report profiles each of the eight genres of resources, including discussion of how and why the faculty members reported using the resources for their work, how content is selected for the site, and what financial sustainability strategies the resources are employing. Each section draws from the in-depth interviews to provide illustrative anecdotes and representative examples.
Highlights from the study’s findings include:
While some disciplines seem to lend themselves to certain formats of digital resource more than others, examples of innovative resources can be found across the humanities, social sciences, and scientific/technical/medical subject areas.
Of all the resources suggested by faculty, almost every one that contained an original scholarly work operates under some form of peer review or editorial oversight.
Some of the resources with greatest impact are those that have been around a long while.
While some resources serve very large audiences, many digital publications—capable of running on relatively small budgets—are tailored to small, niche audiences.
Innovations relating to multimedia content and Web 2.0 functionality appear in some cases to blur the lines between resource types.
Projects of all sizes—especially open-access sites and publications—employ a range of support strategies in the search for financial sustainability.
In "The LJ Academic Newswire Newsmaker Interview: Georgia Harper," Harper, Scholarly Communications Advisor at the University Libraries of the University of Texas at Austin, discusses the Google-AAP/AG copyright settlement and the part that research libraries played in it. Also see her blog posting ("Google Book Search—and Buy").
Here's an excerpt:
Brewster Kahle has chastised public libraries for working with Google under a cloak of secrecy. Can libraries realistically refuse NDAs?
I think Kahle’s point, and others raise this point too, is more about the deleterious effects of secrecy on the negotiation process itself. Secrecy tends to be isolating. If you don’t consult with your colleagues at other institutions, your leverage may be diminished. Of course, a library could also hire a business and/or legal consultant to help, and bind the consultant to the NDA. Yes, Kahle has identified a very thorny problem, but it’s one we can ameliorate. I don’t think it’s workable simply not to do business with companies whose assets are ideas and information just because they feel compelled to protect them through secrecy. Either way, consultation does increase information, and information is power—in fact, the power of information is also the source of the [NDA] problem in the first place.
EDUCAUSE has made available a podcast recorded at the CNI 2008 Spring Task Force Meeting: "Library Publishing Services: An Emerging Role for Research Libraries—An Interview with Karla Hahn." Hahn is the Director of the Office of Scholarly Communication at the Association of Research Libraries.
Dan Lee has been named Director of the new Office of Copyright Management and Scholarly Communication at the University of Arizona Library.
Read more about it at "UA Opens New Copyright Office."
The Association of Research Libraries has published the ARL Annual Salary Survey 2007–08.
Here's an excerpt from the press release:
The 2007–08 data show that ARL librarians’ salaries outperformed inflation for the fourth consecutive year. The combined median professional salary in US and Canadian ARL university libraries was $61,833—a 3.7% increase from the previous year. Over the same period, the Consumer Price Index rose 2.4% in the US and 2.5% in Canada.
The ARL Annual Salary Survey 2007–08 analyzes salary data from a number of different perspectives, including race, ethnicity, and gender. Minority librarians make up 14.1% of the professional staff in US ARL university libraries; the percentage of minorities in managerial or administrative positions is lower. Women comprise 69.4% of minority staff members.
Gender-based salary differentials persist in ARL libraries in 2007–08. The overall salary for women in the 113 ARL university libraries is 95.4% of that paid to men; this figure compares to 95.7% in 2006–07. While the data show a marked closure of the gender gap in ARL libraries over the long term—in 1980–81, women in ARL libraries were paid roughly 87% of what men were paid—the data also raise the possibility that the closure has peaked, and that a 5% gap between men’s and women’s salaries may persist.
The Committee on Institutional Cooperation and the University of California System's university libraries have launched the HathiTrust, a shared digital repository.
Here's an excerpt from the press release:
A group of the nation’s largest research libraries are collaborating to create a repository of their vast digital collections, including millions of books, organizers announced today. These holdings will be archived and preserved in a single repository called the HathiTrust. Materials in the public domain will be available for reading online. . . .
Launched jointly by the 12-university consortium known as the Committee on Institutional Cooperation (CIC) and the 11 university libraries of the University of California system, the HathiTrust leverages the time-honored commitment to preservation and access to information that university libraries have valued for centuries. UC’s participation will be coordinated by the California Digital Library (CDL), which brings its deep and innovative experience in digital curation and online scholarship to the HathiTrust.
"This effort combines the expertise and resources of some of the nation’s foremost research libraries and holds even greater promise as it seeks to grow beyond the initial partners," says John Wilkin, associate university librarian of the University of Michigan and the newly named executive director of HathiTrust. Hathi (pronounced hah-TEE), the Hindi word for elephant incorporated into the repository’s name, underscores the immensity of this undertaking, Wilkin says. Elephants also evoke memory, wisdom, and strength.
As of today, HathiTrust contains more than 2 million volumes and approximately ¾ of a billion pages, about 16 percent of which are in the public domain. Public domain materials will be available for reading online. Materials protected by copyright, although not available for reading online, are given the full range of digital archiving services, thereby offering member libraries a reliable means to preserve their collections. Organizers also expect to use those materials in the research and development of the Trust.
Volumes are added to the repository daily, and content will grow rapidly as the University of California, CIC member libraries, and other prospective partners contribute their digitized content. Also today, the founding partners announce that the University of Virginia is joining the initiative.
Each of the founding partners brings extensive and highly regarded expertise in the areas of information technology, digital libraries, and project management to this endeavor. Creation of the HathiTrust supports the digitization efforts of the CIC and the University of California, each of which has entered into collective agreements with Google to digitize portions of the collections of their libraries, more than 10 million volumes in total, as part of the Google Book Search project. Materials digitized through other means will also be made available through HathiTrust.
Read more about it at "University Libraries in Google Project to Offer Backup Digital Library."
Paolo Mangiafico, Digital Projects Consultant at the Duke University Libraries, has been named Director of Digital Information Strategy in Duke's Provost office.
Read more about it at "Digital Info Boss Added to Top Brass."
Meg Bellinger, Associate University Librarian for Integrated Access and Technical Services at the Yale University Library, has been named Director of the Office of Digital Assets and Infrastructure at Yale, a new position in the Provost's office that is responsible for university-wide digitization.
Read more about it at "Bellinger to Direct Digitizing Office."
Joan A. Smith has been appointed the Chief Technology Strategist in the office of the Vice Provost and Director of Libraries at Emory University (Richard E. Luce holds that position).
Smith holds a Ph.D. in Computer Science from Old Dominion University. Her 2008 dissertation was on "Integrating Preservation Functions into the Web Server." She also holds an M.A. in Computer Education from Hampton University, a B.A. in Natural Science from the University of the State of New York, and a Ph.B. (Bachelor of Philosophy) from the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.
Smith has held a variety of technical positions since 1988 at Owenworks, Blue-I Technology, Northrop Grumman, the Inter-National Research Institute, and the Electronic Institute of Technology.
