Perry, Anali Maughan
A collection of scholarly work created by Anali Maughan Perry. orcid.org/0000-0001-7173-4827
Anali Maughan Perry is the Head of the Open Science and Scholarly Communication (OSSC) Division and the Scholarly Communication Librarian at ASU Library. In this role, she leads efforts to provide outreach and education to the ASU community regarding open science and scholarship, scholarly publishing and copyright, open access to scholarly information, and open and affordable education initiatives. The OSSC Division includes Research Data Services and Course Resource Services, and manages the ASU Research Data and KEEP institutional repositories.
Anali has worked full-time at the ASU Library since 2000. Her previous positions include working in Interlibrary Loan, Acquisitions, Collections, and as the Head of the Learning Services Division.
Anali's research interests are the application of personal productivity techniques and tools, scholarly communication, and copyright and intellectual property issues.
This discussion will guide you through the wild landscape of open access journal publishing, the advantages and disadvantages for libraries and authors, and give tips on sizing up the good, the bad, and the ugly.
In this case study, we reflect on our journey through a major revision of our streaming video reserve guidelines, informed by an environmental scan of comparable library services and current copyright best practices. Once the guidelines were revised, we developed an implementation plan for communicating changes and developing training materials to both instructors and internal library staff. We share our navigation strategies, obstacles faced, lessons learned, and ongoing challenges. Finally, we map out some of our future directions for improving and streamlining our services.
Although they have distinct missions, public libraries and academic libraries serve overlapping populations and can leverage their institutional strengths through collaboration. These diverse partnerships include sharing resources through consortia, joint-use libraries, and shared programming, such as introducing students to public library collections as resources for theses. For the scholarly communication librarian, collaborating with public libraries provides opportunities to educate about the ethical and legal use of information, advocate for the promotion and use of open resources and pedagogies, and interact with communities, particularly in rural areas, that are traditionally underserved by academic libraries. We’ll share two personal examples of the intersection between scholarly communication and public libraries.
As libraries are increasingly asked to do more with less, we all have more things to do and less time to do them. Sometimes, the tools we have to help - like email and smartphones - actually make things worse! The trick is connecting technology and techniques that can best help us to manage our time and productivity effectively.
In this presentation, Anali will lead an intrepid party on the eternal quest of improving personal productivity. Together, we’ll fight the email dragon, vanquish the time stealing goblins, and explore an arsenal of tools that help us get things done. By sharing ideas and best practices, we can each make connections to the techniques and tools will help us succeed on our quest!
Purpose: In spring of 2007, Arizona State University Libraries held a focus group of selected faculty to discover their perceptions and use of electronic books (e-books) in their research and teaching.
Methodology/approach: We employed the services of the Institute of Social Sciences Research to recruit and moderate the focus group. The following major themes were explored:
1) Use of e-books as textbooks.
2) Use of e-books for personal research.
3) Comparison between e-books and print.
4) Disciplinary differences in perceptions of e-books.
5) Motivators for future use
Findings: Overall, the focus group revealed that faculty had generally unsatisfactory experiences in using e-books in their research and teaching due to the unreliability of access, lack of manipulability, and the steep learning curve of the various interfaces. However, most faculty agreed that e-books would be a very viable and useful alternative if these issues were resolved.
Research limitations/implications: The focus group consisted of only six faculty members and hence is not representative of faculty as a whole. A larger survey of a more diverse faculty population would greatly serve to clarify and expand upon our findings.
Practical implications: The implications for academic libraries include providing better outreach and training to faculty about the e-book platforms offered, provide better course support, and advocate to e-book vendors to consider faculty's teaching and research needs in their product development.
Originality/value of paper: To the best knowledge of the authors, this is the first published study of faculty opinions and use of e-books utilizing focus group methodology and offers detailed information that would be useful for academic libraries and e-book vendors for evidence-based decisions.