International Survey of Research University Faculty: Means of Scholarly Communications and Collaboration (ISBN No:978-157440-446-3 )
The survey data is based on a survey of more than 500 scholars drawn from more than 50 major research universities in the USA, Canada, the UK, Australia, New Zealand and Ireland. Data is broken out by various criteria, such as type of university, scholar’s country, gender, political views, academic subject specialty, academic title and other criteria.
- 50.69% of respondents are currently collaborating or coordinating research with scholars or other researchers from other universities or colleges outside of their country.
- Web based meetings were most common in the Engineering, Mathematics, Computer Science, Physics, Chemistry and other Science and Technology fields, 33.70, and least common in the Literature and Languages fields, 2.92.
- 7.72% of respondents routinely use Adobe Connect to communicate with scholars at other locations.
- 87.52% of respondents have co-authored a journal article with one or more other authors. Co-authorship was most common in Australia/New Zealand, 96.77%, followed by Canada, 93.10%, and the UK/Ireland, 89.83%. It was least common in the USA, 85.07%.
more on collaboration in academia in this IMS blog
p. 4. digital literacies (including teaching new technologies and rights issues, and the emergence of
multiple types of non-textual content);
p. 7. every librarian has a role in teaching, whether formally or informally, about scholarly
p. 11. Librarians play a unique role in teaching faculty, graduate students, and undergraduate students about
the complete life cycle of information through educational programs geared to different disciplines and
levels of student learning. Undergraduates are now likely to be required to work collaboratively on a
wiki or to write a blog for a class as the first steps in a writing or research assignment or even as the final
p. 12. ALA OITP Digital Literacy Task Force defined digital literacy as, “the ability to use information and communication technologies to find, evaluate, create, and communicate information, requiring both cognitive and technical skills” (2012, p. 1). In its statement of recommendations to governments and organizations, the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions noted that, “media and information literacy includes all types of information resources: oral, print, and digital” (IFLA 2011). Comprehending all kinds of content, including data, statistical, financial, and visual, as well as text, is a critical outcome intended by media and information literacy programs.
p. 13. Data literacy is an area where the impact of external forces, ranging from the increasing demand on students to find and use data to funder mandates to have data management plans, point to a critical area of intersection between scholarly communication and information literacy.
p. 14. Transliteracy is an emerging concept that challenges the current structures of information literacy and scholarly communication programs alike. The definition indicates that this is a key area where scholarly communication and information literacy intersect:
The essential idea here is that transliteracy is concerned with mapping meaning across different media and not with developing particular literacies about various media. It is not about learning text literacy and visual literacy and digital literacy in isolation from one another but about the interaction among all these literacies. (Ipri, 2010, p. 532)
p. 15. Intersection 3: New Roles for Librarians