© 2016 Christine Fruin and Shan Sutton, Attribution-NonCommercial (http://creativecommons. org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) CC BY-NC. Recognizing the paucity of quantitative and qualitative data from North American educational institutions that have pursued open access policies, the authors devised a survey to collect information on the characteristics of these institutions, as well as the elements of the open access policies, the methods of promoting these policies, faculty concerns about the policies, and how those concerns have been addressed. The data collected through survey results from fifty-one institutions can inform the strategic decisions being made by other institutions considering an open access policy and illustrates the essential roles that academic libraries can play in the development and passage of open access policies. he establishment of open access policies at North American universities and colleges can be traced back to 2008 when open access emerged as a viable topic of policy development. At that time, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) enacted a policy requiring all published research funded by the NIH to be available in the publicly accessible database PubMed within twelve months of commercial publication. 1 That same year, Harvard University's College of Liberal Arts and Sciences became the first North American institution to enact an open access policy, which granted Harvard a nonexclusive license to make the scholarly works of the faculty in that college available for noncommercial use through Harvard's institutional repository. 2 More recently, most of the major federal funding agencies impacted by the 2013 executive order by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy directing the development of public access plans have adopted such plans. At the state government level, California, Illinois, and New York have proposed or enacted laws to ensure public access to publicly funded research. 3 Meanwhile, well over fifty educational institutions, including MIT, Duke University, and the University of California system, have enacted or are in the process of developing open access policies at institutional, college, and departmental levels. 4 To support these institutions, the Coalition of Open Access Policy Institutions was formed in 2011 to share information and illuminate opportunities for moving faculty-led open access policies forward at member institutions and advocate for open access nationally and internationally. 5 Further, the persons instrumental in drafting and implementing the Harvard open access policy have released a living

INTRODUCTION The U.K. library community has implemented collaborative strategies in key scholarly communication areas such as open access mandate compliance, and U.S. librarians could benefit from learning in greater detail about the practices and experiences of U.K. libraries with respect to how they have organized scholarly communication services. METHODS In order to better understand the scholarly communication activities in U.K. academic and research libraries, and how U.S. libraries could apply that experience in the context of their own priorities, an environmental scan via a survey of U.K. research libraries and in-person interviews were conducted. RESULTS U.K. libraries concentrate their scholarly communication services on supporting compliance with open access mandates and in the development of new services that reflect libraries’ shifting role from information consumer to information producer. DISCUSSION Due to the difference in the requirements of open access mandates in the U.K. as compared to the U.S., scholarly communication services in the U.K. are more focused on supporting compliance efforts. U.S. libraries engage more actively in providing copyright education and consultation than U.K. libraries. Both U.K. and U.S. libraries have developed new services in the areas of research data management and library publishing. CONCLUSION There are three primary takeaways from the experience of U.K. scholarly communication practitioners for U.S. librarians: increase collaboration with offices of research, reconsider current organization and delegation of scholarly communication services, and increase involvement in legislative and policy-making activity in the U.S. with respect to access to research.

A decade ago, East (2008) examined the coverage of major museum studies journals by two major databases and one academic search engine, concluding that bibliographic control of the museum studies literature was inadequate and posed a barrier to further development of the field. In this article, we revisit the issues raised by East. We reevaluate the availability of core journals in museum studies through traditional venues and identify alternative access and discovery points, including academic citation search engines, journal content alerts, social media, and field-specific websites. We then consider the open access movement and present five recommendations for leveraging open access to enhance discovery and access for the museum studies literature: maximize authors' rights to their own content; publish scholarship in open access or hybrid journals; develop an open access fund for museum studies researchers and scholars; deposit work in open access repositories; and create new open access resources.

Supporting Effective Library Management for Over 40 YearsCommitted to assisting research and academic libraries in the continuous improvement of management systems, ARL has worked since 1970 to gather and disseminate the best practices for library needs. As part of its commitment, ARL maintains an active publications program best known for its SPEC Kits. Through the Collaborative Research/Writing Program, librarians work with ARL staff to design SPEC surveys and write publications. Originally established as an information source for ARL member libraries, the SPEC Kit series has grown to serve the needs of the library community worldwide. What are SPEC Kits?Published six times per year, SPEC Kits contain the most valuable, up-to-date information on the latest issues of concern to libraries and librarians today. They are the result of a systematic survey of ARL member libraries on a particular topic related to current practice in the field. Each SPEC Kit contains an executive summary of the survey results; survey questions with tallies and selected comments; the best representative documents from survey participants, such as policies, procedures, handbooks, guidelines, Web sites, records, brochures, and statements; and a selected reading list-both print and online sources-containing the most current literature available on the topic for further study. Subscribe to SPEC KitsSubscribers tell us that the information contained in SPEC Kits is valuable to a variety of users, both inside and outside the library. SPEC Kit purchasers use the documentation found in SPEC Kits as a point of departure for research and problem solving because they lend immediate authority to proposals and set standards for designing programs or writing procedure statements. SPEC Kits also function as an important reference tool for library administrators, staff, students, and professionals in allied disciplines who may not have access to this kind of information.SPEC Kits are available in print and online. The executive summary for each kit after December 1993 can be accessed online free of charge. For more information visit: http://www.arl.org/publications-resources. This compilation is copyrighted by the Association of Research Libraries. ARL grants blanket permission to reproduce and distribute copies of this work for nonprofit, educational, or library purposes, provided that copies are distributed at or below cost and that ARL, the source, and copyright notice are included on each copy. This permission is in addition to rights of reproduction granted under Sections 107, 108, and other provisions of the US Copyright Act.The paper used in this publication meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY IntroductionThis survey investigated the level and variety of services ARL libraries are providing to support, facilitate, and participate in the publishing activities of the faculty and researchers they serve. The survey was distributed to ARL member libraries in June 2014. Seventy-one libraries at 70 of the 125 member instituti...

No abstract