Innovation & Research Practice

Paper: Research Abstract

From Global to Local, a Case Study in Using 101 Innovations in Scholarly Communication

Monday, May 6
2:20 PM - 2:35 PM
Room: Columbus GH (East Tower, Ballroom/Gold Level)

Objectives : This project set out to develop our research skills, inform our professional practice and strengthen our capabilities to align with the strategic objectives of a research intensive university. We embarked on practitioner based research, utilising a globally conducted survey to determine the tools used in the evolving scholarly communication workflows of our early career researchers in the health sciences.

Methods : Our project team contacted the creators of “101 Innovations in Scholarly Communication” and received permission to utilise their survey. Ethics approval was obtained and the survey re-created using Qualtrics. Permission was sought from the Faculties of Medicine, Nursing & Health Sciences, and Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences to distribute the survey. Approximately 1140 researchers received an invitation via the assigned faculty mailing lists. Eighty-five researchers initiated the survey and 84 completed it, yielding a participation rate of 7.36%. Survey results were analysed using SPSS software. Of those respondents who completed the survey, 18 indicated that they were willing to be contacted further, and eight semi-structured interviews have been conducted, recorded, and analysed in NVivo.

Results : Results indicated that although early career researchers are overwhelmingly in support of open access and open science, tension exists due to the expectations associated with advancing their careers. These attitudes signal that key developments in scholarly communication in coming years will foreseeably be related to open access. To remain relevant and prepare ourselves for future roles, librarians need to be cognisant of the big changes in practices ahead.
The project connected theory to practice and highlighted gaps in existing knowledge. By presenting the project to colleagues and sharing newly gained knowledge, the librarians initiated dialogue around new developments such as open peer review, preprints and reproducibility.

Conclusions : Librarians must increasingly adapt and take control of their professional development in order to remain relevant within a changing university environment. In addition to maintaining familiarity with scholarly communication tools and other factors that contribute to the openness of research, the project resulted in increased visibility and standing within the organisation. It enabled librarians to expand their networks and afforded opportunities to collaborate externally. The librarians have been invited to contribute and participate in a number of projects, committees and working parties, and to facilitate training sessions for peers and faculty.

Madeleine Bruwer

Subject Librarian
Monash University
Parkville, Victoria, Australia

Madeleine Bruwer’s current role is subject librarian at the CL Butchers Pharmacy Library, Monash University, Australia. She is an experienced health sciences librarian with a demonstrated history of working in biosciences, veterinary medicine, pharmacy and pharmaceutical sciences.

She has extensive experience in delivering specialist information services and working collaboratively with faculty to implement and embed information and research skills into the curriculum and has been actively involved in the new Bachelor of Pharmacy/Masters of Pharmacy degree program at Monash University employing active learning pedagogies.

Presentation(s):

Send Email for Madeleine Bruwer

Penny Presta

Presentation(s):

Send Email for Penny Presta

Cassandra Freeman

Presentation(s):

Send Email for Cassandra Freeman


Assets

From Global to Local, a Case Study in Using 101 Innovations in Scholarly Communication

Audio Slides Video

Attendees who have favorited this

Please enter your access key

The asset you are trying to access is locked. Please enter your access key to unlock.

Send Email for From Global to Local, a Case Study in Using 101 Innovations in Scholarly Communication