Research Libraries – DigitalKoans

“The Research Data Management Workbook: Building a Collection of Data Management Exercises to Bridge Data Information Literacy and Data Management Implementation”

Objective: There are limited opportunities and resources for data information literacy at small universities, requiring instructors to make the most of the time they have in the classroom. This article describes the creation of a collection of data management exercises, collectively called The Research Data Management Workbook, which supplement one-shot instruction and help students implement specific data management tasks.

Methods: Exercises were developed using backward design and authentic assessment, with the goal of scaffolding data management implementation yet allowing for customization to research workflows. Exercises cover activities across data lifecycle and take the form of worksheets, checklists, and procedures. The exercises were collectively formatted as a book using the tool bookdown.

Results: For a one-hour library session, students can work through one or two exercises during class and the instructor can refer to specific exercises for follow up on various data management topics. The exercises have also proved useful for consultation, as a researcher can develop an understanding of a way to address the data problem ahead of a more in-depth consultation.

Conclusions: The workbook has been a useful supplement to limited data management instruction time at a small university. Further work needs to be done to quantify the efficacy of this form of data information literacy.

https://doi.org/10.7191/jeslib.937

Paywall: “A Study of Data-Focused Roles in Leading North American University Libraries”

Text analysis underscores the prominence of more general data terms within job titles, reflecting a broad focus on the entire data lifecycle in most institutions, while some more advanced and niche technical skills are supported in a few institutions. Furthermore, this study proposes a three-stage model of data services maturity: (1) basic Research Data Management (RDM) essentials, (2) general data support, and (3) specialized data expertise, with most AAU libraries occupying Stages 2 or 3, reflecting their readiness to address complex data needs.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2025.103102

“CNI as an Idea Factory:An Appreciation of Clifford Lynch”

Innumerable times over this 30-year period, I have witnessed Clifford’s superpowers: his capacious intellect; his extraordinary ability to identify and clearly communicate issues of strategic importance; and his unfailing generosity of spirit in working with others to generate ideas and stimulate efforts to address these issues. In this essay, I highlight some of the key issues on which I think CNI has been especially influential under Clifford’s leadership. Context and history help explain this influence, and I begin this expression of my deep appreciation of Clifford as a friend and colleague by referring to this origin story, which he himself recounted in a rare moment of personal disclosure.

https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/pla.2025.a964196

Paywall: “Mind the Gap!: How Do We Ethically Bridge the Divide Between the Cataloging/Metadata Community and the World of AI?”

How can cataloging/metadata professionals at academic institutions incorporate general frameworks and standards about ethical AI implementation into policies for AI use. . . . How can technical services/cataloging departments. . . provide accurate and culturally sensitive metadata? More importantly, how do cataloging/metadata professionals ethically fill the gap. . . without sacrificing job security?

https://doi.org/10.1080/19386389.2025.2525720

“The Current State of Female Representation in Library Leadership: A Comprehensive Analysis of Over 13,000 Open U.S. Libraries by Library Type, Collection Size, and State”

Women are underrepresented in leadership by 8.2 percentage points (pp) at academic libraries, 5.5 pp at special libraries, 10.7 pp at school libraries, and 14.7 pp at government libraries. This corresponds to a male being 28.6%–185.5% more likely to be director.

https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2025.2518008

“Generative AI and Open Access Publishing: A New Economic Paradigm”

The integration of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in scholarly publishing presents both opportunities and challenges for open access. AI can streamline workflows, reduce costs, and enhance the discoverability of research, potentially making open access more financially sustainable. However, the same AI capabilities also raise concerns about exclusivity and the creation of a tiered system that limits access to knowledge. Publishers face a strategic decision between embracing open access and leveraging AI for proprietary content and services. Libraries play a crucial role in advocating for open access and ethical AI use, building expertise, and influencing policy development. Balancing the benefits of AI with the principles of equity and inclusivity requires collaboration among stakeholders. By working together, publishers, librarians, and policymakers can harness the power of AI to democratize access to knowledge while upholding ethical standards, fostering a more inclusive and equitable academic community.

https://tinyurl.com/2d52e37d

“How Are Us Institutions Putting Public Access Into Practice? Insights from Our ‘Reasonable Costs’ Institutional Research”

Today, we [Invest in Open Infrastructure] are releasing the results of this collaboration in three documents:

“Between the Memo and the Mandate: Institutional Perspectives on Public Access Readiness”: a summary of the survey responses, including which policies and practices institutions already have in place, and what units are responsible for different actions.

A packet of workflows, constructed in collaboration with colleagues at each institution, illustrating a variety of approaches to sponsored project administration for different institution sizes and types. . . .

“Preparing for Public Access: Mapping Institutional Workflows for Sponsored Research Success”: a full methodology and results summary from conducting the surveys and interviews and constructing the workflows. . . . This document also contains four appendices containing the text of each of the two surveys and two interviews.

https://tinyurl.com/bdzptfkk

Paywall: “AI and Systematic Reviews: Can AI Tools Replace Librarians in the Systematic Search Process?”

Focusing on the search stage of the systematic review process, the author examines the features and viability of select AI-based tools, evaluates their integration into existing systematic review workflows, and addresses issues related to transparency, reproducibility, and trustworthiness. The study also assesses whether these AI tools can be effectively and reliably incorporated into systematic review processes and discusses the evolving roles and responsibilities of librarians in using these technologies.

https://doi.org/10.1080/0194262X.2025.2521519

“From Building a First-Generation Digital Library Infrastructure to Reimagining Discovery”

Twenty-five years ago, Harvard University was in the early stages of a project to build a first-generation digital library infrastructure. The project was carefully named the Library Digital Initiative (LDI), signifying that ‘digital’ would be an integral and integrated aspect of ‘library’ and not a separate entity. The initiative aimed to develop knowledge and expertise relating to digital objects, as well as technical infrastructure to create, curate, access and preserve them, and to integrate the new digital collections with Harvard’s extensive tangible collections.

Today, we still benefit from the foresight of this first-generation development and the subsequent ones it spawned, but we are also at a pivotal point of reflecting on lessons learned and opportunities to be seized as we rebuild and reimagine our digital infrastructure and services in a vastly expanded data ecosystem. Predicting what libraries will look like two decades ahead is always conjecture. What we do know, however, is that while the themes and challenges from the past two decades endure, the way we are tackling them is different. This paper examines what has changed since early library digital initiatives, and the imperatives we see for the future.

https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v19i1.1068

“Why Engage with Transformative Agreements in Scholarly Publishing? Analysis of Customer and Publisher Press Release Statements”

How open access (OA) should be supported has been a frequent point of debate during the last three decades as different pathways have been created and evolved. One particular point of contention has been the use of institutional contracts between customer institutions and academic journal publishers, so-called transformative agreements (TAs), where subscription-based reading access is bundled with OA publishing rights. This study explores the motivational reasonings given by customers and publishers engaging with TAs. This study provides a thematic content analysis of customer and publisher statements from 95 press releases announcing new TAs involving five large scholarly journal publishers. Existing literature on motivational reasoning for open science, OA, and TAs was reviewed in order to create an initial set of codes to be used, which was complemented with an inductive process producing additional codes based on categorisation of reasonings that did not fit within the initial codes.The study found that TAs were supported for a variety of reasons, where both customers and publishers stressed better research dissemination, facilitating a transition towards OA publishing, and improved workflow management for publishing and invoicing. Customers emphasized economic and equality aspects while publishers did so to a notably lesser degree. This study complements the active area of bibliometric studies on TAs with a rich qualitative study based on a set of press releases that have not been used for this type of research, establishing a solid foundation for future studies to build upon.

https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/crxn3_v1

Paywall: “The More Things Change: Tracking Social Media Platform Shifts in Academic Libraries (2019–2025”

The research findings indicate that academic libraries continue to use well-established platforms with only a limited number of reviewed libraries demonstrating early adoption of newer tools. Instagram led as the platform with the most active accounts linked from the reviewed libraries’ current websites, narrowly prevailing over Facebook. . . . The most added platform was LinkedIn, and the most removed platform was X.

https://doi.org/10.1080/19322909.2025.2502930

“Reeling Them In: Using TikTok and Video Content to Leverage Engagement Between Academic Librarians, Libraries and Students”

TikTok is the video-sharing social media platform of the moment. Young people, most often of the age of undergraduate students, are its primary users. Creating a library TikTok profile and sharing video content on the platform is consequently an excellent way for academic librarians and their libraries to engage with their student users. This case study explores the strategy employed at the Ferriss Hodgett Library at the Grenfell Campus of Memorial University for creating and sharing engaging videos on our library’s TikTok and other social media channels. Providing a critical evaluation of TikTok use and discussing themes and ideas for video content alongside best practices, this article outlines how short-form videos can be leveraged via TikTok and other video-based platforms to make the academic library and its staff more relevant and approachable, and lay the foundation for building stronger and more meaningful relationships with students.

https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.693

“Guest Post: Will JAG’s New Models Give Libraries and Publishers a Better Seat at the Federal Funding Table?”

On June 12, the Council on Governmental Relations (COGR) hosted a town hall webinar on behalf of JAG [Joint Associations Group]. The group of subject matter experts, with an eye to American leadership in science and technology, presented two provisional models for reforming indirect cost reimbursement. Described as “bookends,” the two recommendations represent the ends of a spectrum, leaving open the possibility of a hybrid model somewhere in between.

Both models aim to eliminate frequent indirect cost rate negotiations while ensuring taxpayer accountability for research investments. They also attempt to increase transparency, reduce administrative burdens, and provide more accurate accounting of recoverable costs.

https://tinyurl.com/yn48c7wj

“Prospects of Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) for Academic Library Search and Retrieval”

This paper examines the integration of retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems within academic library environments, focusing on their potential to transform traditional search and retrieval mechanisms. RAG combines the natural language understanding capabilities of large language models with structured retrieval from verified knowledge bases, offering a novel approach to academic information discovery. The study analyzes the technical requirements for implementing RAG in library systems, including embedding pipelines, vector databases, and middleware architecture for integration with existing library infrastructure. We explore how RAG systems can enhance search precision through semantic indexing, real-time query processing, and contextual understanding while maintaining compliance with data privacy and copyright regulations. The research highlights RAG’s ability to improve user experience through personalized research assistance, conversational interfaces, and multimodal content integration. Critical considerations including ethical implications, copyright compliance, and system transparency are addressed. Our findings indicate that while RAG presents significant opportunities for advancing academic library services, successful implementation requires careful attention to technical architecture, data protection, and user trust. The study concludes that RAG integration holds promise for revolutionizing academic library services while emphasizing the need for continued research in areas of scalability, ethical compliance, and cost-effective implementation.

https://tinyurl.com/43d97fe5

“Is AI Literacy the Trojan Horse to Information Literacy? Insights from our AI Literacy Cohort Workshops”

Participants observed several key differences. First, the ACRL framework is more conceptual while other AI literacy frameworks like Choice 360 and Educause are more practical in nature. Second, the ACRL framework is modular with no definitive entry point while other AI literacy frameworks like UNESCO’s and the Digital Education Council’s are more hierarchical with a sequential structure. These differences lead to tangible disparities in implementation. While the ACRL framework might be adopted as higher-level conceptual guidance, the more practical AI frameworks are relatively more actionable and ready for curriculum integration.

https://tinyurl.com/mrybzjcn

“Robert H. McDonald Appointed Senior Vice Provost and Director of the University of Texas Libraries”

The University of Texas at Austin announces the appointment of Robert H. McDonald as Senior Vice Provost and Director of the University of Texas Libraries, effective August 16, 2025. McDonald currently serves as Dean of University Libraries and Senior Vice Provost of Online and Extended Education at the University of Colorado Boulder, where he has led transformative initiatives in digital scholarship, online learning and library services. . . .

At CU Boulder, McDonald has overseen strategic initiatives in digital library services and online program development, including the expansion of alternative credentialing programs and learning technologies that support researchers and students across disciplines. He guided adoption of an open-source, community-based Library Services Platform to secure sustainable and affordable software for CU Boulder’s Libraries. . . .

Prior to his time at CU Boulder, McDonald served in leadership roles at Indiana University Bloomington, where he helped build national infrastructure for digital preservation and cyberinfrastructure initiatives, including work with the HathiTrust Research Center and the IU Data to Insight Center, and has held positions at the San Diego Supercomputer Center at UC San Diego, Florida State University and Auburn University. He holds a Master of Library and Information Science from the University of South Carolina and a Master of Music from the University of Georgia.

https://tinyurl.com/5aj3p9p6

“Navigating Data Science and Artificial Intelligence Integration in Library and Information Science: Insights from Four National Libraries”

This chapter examines the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and data science in library and information science, using insights from four national libraries: the British Library, the National Library of France, the Royal Library of Belgium, and the Royal Danish Library. . . . This study adopts a qualitative approach, drawing on in-depth interviews with key personnel and analyses of strategic documents to explore the challenges and opportunities posed by AI. The findings highlight critical organizational issues such as resistance to change, cross-departmental collaboration, resource allocation, and the need for skill development.

https://tinyurl.com/2s4ahcta

Paywall: “A Checklist to Publish Collections as Data in GLAM Institutions”

The purpose of this study is to offer a checklist that can be used for both creating and evaluating digital collections, which are also sometimes referred to as data sets as part of the collections as data movement, suitable for computational use.

https://doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-06-2023-0195

“Diamond Open Access and Open Infrastructures Have Shaped the Canadian Scholarly Journal Landscape Since the Start of the Digital Era”

Scholarly publishing involves multiple stakeholders having various types of interest. In Canada, the implication of universities, the presence of societies and the availability of governmental support for periodicals seem to have contributed to a rather diverse ecosystem of journals. This study presents in detail the current state of these journals, in addition to past trends and transformations during the 20th century and, in particular, the digital era. To this effect, we created a new dataset, including a total of 1265 journals, 943 of which appeared to be active today, specifically focusing on the supporting organizations behind the journals, the types of (open) access, disciplines, geographic origins, languages of publication and hosting platforms and tools. The main overarching traits across Canadian scholarly journals are an important presence of Diamond open access, which has been adopted by 61% of the journals, a predominance of the Social Sciences and Humanities disciplines and a scarce presence of the major commercial publishers. The digital era allowed for the development of open infrastructures, which contributed to the creation of a new generation of journals that massively adopted Diamond open access, often supported by university libraries. However, journal cessation also increased, especially among the recently founded journals. These results provide valuable insights for the design of tailored practices and policies that cater to the needs of different types of periodicals and that consider the evolving practices across the Canadian scholarly journal landscape

https://doi.org/10.5206/cjils-rcsib.v48i1.22207

“A Survey of AI Tools in Library Tech: Accelerating Into and Unlocking Streamlined Enhanced Convenient Empowering Game-Changers”

This article presents the current status of AI tools in library resources and systems, such as those licensed by Clarivate, Elsevier, and EBSCO. It also offers thoughts on the utility of the tools, how they work, their problems, and their context within the offerings of the companies that own them. With this information, library workers will be able to make better informed decisions about which, if any, AI tools to subscribe to, activate, or opt out of in their library resources and systems.

https://tinyurl.com/5xzc9d5d

“Exploring Faculty Understanding of Scholarly Research Metrics on One Campus: Using a Survey and Analysis to Strengthen Library’s Scholarly Communication Outreach”

Introduction: In recent years, the library has received inquiries from faculty on how departments on campus use scholarly research metrics to measure the impact of publications. The library provides training opportunities for faculty through individual consultations and sessions sponsored by the university’s Office for Faculty Excellence. However, librarians did not know comprehensively and specifically what metrics were being used across departments and disciplines in the university.

Methods: A 14-question survey was emailed between February 2022 and March 2022 to 959 tenured, tenure-track, and fixed-term faculty in non-health science departments at a regional public doctoral institution in the southeast. One hundred and fifty-two responses were collected and analyzed.

Results: Faculty responded from a wide variety of departments and disciplines. The most frequently reported tools used to personally track research impact were Google Scholar and h-Index. Respondents noted that online modules and instruction documents/infographics provided by the library would be most helpful to them.

Discussion: The majority of respondents acknowledged that scholarly metrics reflect at some level the importance of a researcher’s scholarly work. Respondents indicated that the use of these metrics to measure impact was helpful when equitably and transparently applied. Faculty perception of the significant challenge in measuring impact across disciplines was noted.

Conclusion: Guided by survey responses, the library’s Scholarly Communication Department will expand options for consultation and instructional support at different times of the year. Because faculty indicated that they selectively use these metrics in their annual evaluation and tenure and promotion cycles, the library will share resources and support ahead of these deadlines.

https://doi.org/10.31274/jlsc.18030

“Use of Generative AI in Aiding Daily Professional Tasks: A Survey of Librarians’ Experiences”

This study examines how librarians are using third-party generative AI (GAI) tools such as ChatGPT to aid their daily professional tasks. An online survey of 272 librarians found that text-generating AI tools were the most popular. The majority of respondents felt that GAI tools were effective in improving productivity. Key challenges included ensuring content accuracy and designing effective prompts. Top suggestions for better preparing librarians to use GAI include practical training on using GAI, establishing AI policies and guidelines, fostering collaboration and communities of practice, and providing access to useful GAI resources. The study highlights popular use cases that can inform professional development, while underscoring the need for hands-on training, institutional policies, opportunities to experiment with GAI, and access to enhanced tools. As GAI evolves, supporting librarians’ adoption will be crucial for harnessing its potential benefits.

https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/lib.2025.a961200

“Identifying Open Access Practices in Librarianship Journals”

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Policies around open access (OA) models, open peer review, and open data are often not transparent or consistent, leading to barriers in understanding for scholars, particularly those new to publishing; therefore, librarians and editors should take care to learn about OA models ahead of the publishing stage of their writing process.

Diamond OA is the most common method of publication in librarianship journals, and librarianship journals are most commonly published by association or society publishers. Librarians can highlight how this positively impacts authors and readers while being conscious of the workload and power imbalances possible in editorial environments where labor is not directly remunerated.

Following diamond, hybrid (green) OA is the most commonly offered publication option by all types of publishers in librarianship journals. Librarians can advocate for deposit in institutional repositories and support researchers in doing so.

A very low number of the analyzed librarianship journals (14 of 133) were either closed or required an APC for OA publication; therefore, librarians and editors can note that the field has strong adoption of no-fee publication and readership models.

To inform their own publication choices and to better engage with and guide other researchers at their institutions, librarians should develop competencies in OA literacy by following industry trends and changes and considering critically the structure of academic publishing.

https://doi.org/10.31274/jlsc.17778

Paywall: “Technical Standards Within Socio-Technical Systems: An Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST) Paper”

The paper presents interdisciplinary viewpoints to discuss key aspects of the literature, including how standards reflect political, financial, and cultural motivations, how standards are often implemented in different ways, challenging their effectiveness, and how standards structure work as much as they structure information. These various disciplinary perspectives are also used to highlight standardization issues related to emerging technologies, such as social media and generative artificial intelligence.

https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.25017

“Estimating Transformative Agreement Impact on Hybrid Open Access: A Comparative Large-Scale Study Using Scopus, Web of Science and Open Metadata”

This study of over 13,000 hybrid journals shows a substantial rise in open access due to transformative agreements between 2019 and 2023, although most articles remained paywalled. While transformative agreements accounted for the majority of open access, many articles continue to become open through the payment of individual publication fees. Hybrid open access and transformative agreements remain concentrated among a small group of large commercial publishers, with European countries—alongside South Africa—showing high adoption rates. In contrast, the three most productive countries, China, the United States, and India, show a substantially lower adoption in transformative agreements. Open questions remain as to whether this uneven distribution reflects temporary implementation gaps, inherent inequities in the transformative agreement model, or deliberate avoidance of such agreements.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.15038