Librarian-faculty

Scenarios - Librarian-faculty

Scenario (Ljung, Anderson)
Dr. Ljung has decided to submit a paper to the Scholarly Publishing Office detailing a new strategy in researching high-frequency micromechanical resonators. He had originally planned to publish the paper to his own website, but decided that the Scholarly Publishing Office would be able to help him resolve his copyright issues and reach a more precise audience for his work. He contacted Tyler Anderson about submitting an article with numerous copyright questions, and they decided to work together to make decisions about copyright and refine the content to be publishable.

Since both Dr. Ljung and Tyler are concerned primarily with quality, they agreed that Dr. Ljung should write the paper initially without consideration for copyright and only quality. After receiving a Microsoft Word document with a draft of the article and numerous images and content objects, Tyler began extracting those images and organizing them according to his initial judgment of whether or not they would be publishable.

Tyler began looking at and evaluating each object according to a set of copyright guidelines written several years ago by the Scholarly Publishing Office. He remained in constant correspondence with Dr. Ljung by email, usually sending at least 5 emails a day. Dr. Ljung was often unable to give immediate responses because he often needed to check for himself where he originally found the content.

Dr. Ljung also found that much of his content was created by colleagues, and he was unsure of the proper protocol for obtaining permission from his own co-authors and colleagues. He asked Tyler to provide the necessary documents for obtaining permission, but Dr. Ljung felt it was a very time consuming and difficult task to track down some of the people he had worked with years ago and ask them to fill out a form just to publish a simple graph they had drawn.

In a few instances, permission could not be obtained and Dr. Ljung and Tyler decided to look for new content to replace the unusable objects. The constant movement of files and logging changes and rationales proved very time consuming for Tyler, who struggled to keep things organized and accurate. Tyler found himself searching and re-searching through his email for attachments, comments and questions between himself and Dr. Ljung and other copyright holders.

Eventually, a new draft was completed with entirely publishable content. Dr. Ljung was pleased with the quality of the article but dissatisfied with the excessive time he put into issues of copyright. Tyler also felt the article was of high quality, but frustrated at the scattered and disorganized way he had gone about clearing content.

Goal 1
Collect materials from Dr. Ljung and upload to OERca

Goal 2
Clear all content in the article


 * 1) Goal: Create a collection of cleared content from which Dr. Ljung can remake or adjust his article.
 * 2) Intention: Run all content, as well as potential replacement content, through OERca for to determine copyright and status and other obstacles for publishing, replacing or re-creating objects when necessary.
 * 3) Action: Each object needs to be run through a workflow to determine the correct action to take. The action must then be executed, including obtaining permission for third party objects, re-creating them or finding replacements.
 * 4) Execute: Dr. Ljung did not provide detailed information about any of the content in his article when he submitted it to the Scholarly Publishing Office. Therefore, Tyler must ask Dr. Ljung about each object individually. He does this using OERca's ASK form, hoping to obtain information about the provenance, copyright status, permission and anything else he can about each content object. He sends an email to Dr. Ljung to remind him to look through this form and answer each question. It takes several reminders and status checks, and after 1 week Dr. Ljung has answered all the initial questions. Tyler then starts looking at the workflow for each object and recommending actions. Tyler has many questions and is unsure that he is always recommending the correct action, but he is unsure about where to find assurance for his decisions and just continues to work through the content. Tyler begins to be able to quickly make decisions based on common characteristics and specific information provided by Dr. Ljung. After 2 days Tyler has recommended actions for all objects. Most can be published because Dr. Ljung holds the copyright and has given permission. There are 2 images which were created by Dr. Ljung's colleague at Stanford for which permission must be obtained or they must be replaced. Tyler again uses the ASK form to show these questions to Dr. Ljung, but he doesn't immediately get a response and resorts to calling him. Eventually, permission is obtained via a signed permission form faxed by Dr. Lee at Stanford.


 * Gulf of Execution: In this case, the person most familiar with the content and who holds most of its metadata is not the person directly interacting with OERca and uploading material. This lead to a situation where Tyler had to retroactively input metadata by using the ASK form and sending questions about each object to Dr. Ljung.
 * 5. Perceive
 * 6. Interpret
 * 7. Evaluate:

Goal 3
Create publishable document

Goal 1
Submit article of highest possible quality, disregarding copyright restrictions.

Goal 2
Communicate and work with SPO to resolve copyright issues.

Goal 3
Finalize article which meets his high standards and all legal requirements for publishing.