And what is wrong with that? Sally Sally Morris, Chief Executive Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers South House, The Street, Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex BN13 3UU, UK Tel: +44 (0)1903 871 686 Fax: +44 (0)1903 871 457 Email: sally.morris@alpsp.org ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Christensen" <John_Christensen@BYU.EDU> To: <SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 8:58 PM Subject: Re: [SERIALST] Open Letter to Research Councils UK: Rebuttal of ALPSP Critique > Albert Henderson's own credibility has for years been suspect as he has > worked for organizations in the pocket of the "big money" publishers. > > John O. Christensen > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum > [mailto:SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU] On Behalf Of Marsha M Aucoin > Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 1:24 PM > To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU > Subject: [SERIALST] Open Letter to Research Councils UK: Rebuttal of ALPSP > Critique > > Sent on behalf of Jane Kleiner: > > > > Janellyn P Kleiner > 08/26/2005 02:08 PM > > To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU > cc: Jennifer Cargill > > Subject: Re: [SERIALST] Open Letter to Research Councils UK: Rebuttal > of > ALPSP Critique > > Response to Albert Henderson's comments on the LSU Libraries: > > Chuck Hammaker has already provided an accurate response to Henderson's > attack on the LSU Libraries based on the circumstances at LSU a decade > ago. > As the lead author of the article Chuck cited and Associate Dean of > Libraries, I feel compelled to update that information and offer my own > response. In a nutshell, your information is inaccurate, dated, and a > total misrepresentation of LSU and the Libraries then and now. > > The journal project in the early nineties was a cooperative one, supported > by the University administration with faculty participation. We are an ARL > library and LSU is a Carnegie Research Extensive University. Institutions > are included in those groups based on hard data. In the past decade, > Library support has increased substantially, nearly doubling. Today, we > have more than 30,000 electronic journals, 300+ databases, and over 60,000 > e-books plus more than 3 million volumes. LSU research funding exceeded > $100,000,000 annually several years ago and totaled $132,886,000 in FY05. > This represents substantial improvement for a state university with a > relatively small population. In comparison with most flagship > universities, LSU has fewer faculty, researchers, and students but that > size has not diminished the progress we have made. Our research would not > be growing as the rate it is if 'LSU financed its library appropriately > for a voc-ag or trade school' as you stated in your message. In addition > to > our growing materials budget enriched by annual supplements of one-time > monies, the University allocates a percentage of indirect cost monies to > the Libraries. As LSU's sponsored research programs grow, so does our > funding and this is not the only source of increased funding. Obviously, > we > have a supportive University administration and that support was > recognized in that nineties' article. > > At the time of those cuts more than a decade ago, our strategies to > contain > serial expenditures were commended by more than one accreditation agency. > Many ARL libraries, including at least one Ivy League, looked to us for > assistance in implementing similar programs at their institutions.Our > advice has also been sought internationally. Yes, we canceled numerous > subscriptions but we also added new ones and expanded our electronic > resources and access to other information sources. That article won an > ALA > award that year. Both, Chuck and I have had numerous invitations to speak > at conferences and universities on our project. Obviously, it was an > action > plan that succeeded without alienating faculty or negatively impacting > research and instruction. More insight into how to implement that plan was > sought by other university libraries and other countries. The article was > reprinted in the Chinese equivalent to College and Research Libraries. > That > suggests the project was not the disaster you claim. > > The grants the Libraries were awarded then and since have supported a > statewide academic library network, library resources, and digital > collections. In this area too, our advice has been sought on funding and > building a statewide library network. LSU Libraries took the lead in these > grant funded projects and the benefits to our library and other state > academic institutions have been enormous. The network achieved funding > from > the state legislature when federal funding ended. It has been supported > by > the state for more than a decade funding online library systems and > numerous databases. It covered network costs for a new ILS system, a > federated search package, and a software application that links users > directly to articles cited in their searches. The success of our grants > and > network programs enabled us to free funds to acquire costly electronic > resources not possible a decade ago -- the Web of Knowledge, IEEE Xplore, > SciFinder, JSTOR, ARTStor, and many others. We have not had to make > significant cuts since that time. We continue assessing faculty needs and > ridding the Libraries of titles not used while adding new journal > subscriptions & databases that are in demand. > > There are no truths or facts in your message. I suggest that you refrain > from commenting about our library and university since you have no > connection with either and to my knowledge never have. > > Jane Kleiner > Associate Dean of Libraries for Collection Services > The LSU Libraries > Louisiana State University > Baton Rouge, LA 70803 > Phone: 225-578-2217 > Fax: 225-578-6825 > E-Mail: jkleiner@lsu.edu > ---------------------- Forwarded by Janellyn P Kleiner/jkleiner/LSU on > 08/24/2005 07:56 AM --------------------------- > > > Marsha M Aucoin > 08/24/2005 07:26 AM > > To: Janellyn P Kleiner/jkleiner/LSU@LSU > cc: > > Subject: Re: [SERIALST] Open Letter to Research Councils UK: Rebuttal > of > ALPSP Critique > > > > > > > ---------------------- Forwarded by Marsha M Aucoin/maucoi4/LSU on > 08/24/2005 07:26 AM --------------------------- > > > Albert Henderson <chessNIC@COMPUSERVE.COM>@LIST.UVM.EDU> on 08/23/2005 > 07:46:20 PM > > Please respond to "SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum" > <SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU> > > Sent by: "SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum" > <SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU> > > > To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU > cc: (bcc: Marsha M Aucoin/maucoi4/LSU) > > Subject: Re: [SERIALST] Open Letter to Research Councils UK: Rebuttal > of > ALPSP Critique > > on 23 Aug 2005 "Hamaker, Chuck" <cahamake@EMAIL.UNCC.EDU> wrote: > >> As usual in mentioning LSU's cancellations Al Henderson mis-represents >> key elements of what was achieved. LSU subscribed to new journal titles >> AND enhanced access to other titles through unmediated document delivery >> as a result of the cancellations. There was little evidence that the >> cancelled titles harmed the collection in any way. > [snip] > > Congratulations to Chuck for making the > best of a miserable, selfish management > policy. > > LSU financed its library appropriately > for a voc-ag or trade school while getting > federal research grants designed to > generate more and more publications. > > Unlike any other research university that I > reviewed, LSU held its library spending at > zero growth, around $3.3 million for years > while its sponsored research grew from $18 > to $68 million. > > Library Federal > Year Materials R&D > ($000,000) ($000,000) > 1983 3.31 18.79 > 1984 2.89 20.82 > 1985 3.13 26.09 > 1986 3.39 27.81 > 1987 3.49 36.50 > 1988 3.37 38.88 > 1989 3.31 39.09 > 1990 3.35 40.89 > 1991 3.30 55.95 > 1992 4.48 49.21 > 1993 3.15 58.20 > 1994 2.98 67.69 > > When I first published these figures > years ago, some assistant-provost-type > claimed my figures were wrong. I sent > my data and never heard another word. > > I certainly would think twice about > sending any serious student or > researcher there. If I were at a federal > science agency I would look closely to > ascertain if collections were up-to-date > and complete, if research proposals were > based on the latest research, and if > research in progress was responsive to > latest developments. > > LSU's financial achievements as a 'research > university'were at the expense of: > > (A) the commons, since its strategy caused > subscription rates paid by other libraries > to rise: > 1. because remaining subscribers > had to share the burden, > > 2. by generating increased numbers > of articles, adding to production. > > (B) serious researchers who were forced to > find articles through secondary publications > rather than browse each incoming issue -- > or to pay for their own subscriptions with > grant monies. > > Thanks for the comment. > > Best wishes, > > Albert Henderson > Former Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY 1994-2000 > Contributor HIGHER EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES. AN ENCYCLOPEDIA > (ABC-CLIO 2002) > > -----Original Message----- > From: SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum > [mailto:SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU] On Behalf Of Albert Henderson > Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 9:08 AM > To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU > Subject: [SERIALST] Open Letter to Research Councils UK: Rebuttal of > ALPSP Critique > > Dear Serialst > > While sharing a vision of open access to information by > researchers at no cost beyond belonging to a library, I > believe that the behavior of university budget managers > over the last 50 years contradicts the following claim: > >> The disastrous scenario predicted by ALPSP is that an RCUK mandate > would cause >> libraries to cancel subscriptions, which would in turn lead to the > financial failure >> of scholarly journals, and so to the collapse of the quality control > and peer review >> process that publishers manage. >> >> Not only are these claims unsubstantiated, but all the evidence to > date >> shows the reverse to be true: not only do journals thrive and co-exist > alongside >> author self-archiving, but they can actually benefit from it -- both > in terms of >> more citations and more subscriptions. > > The fact is that the four percent of academic libraries > that control 40% of spending provide an economic base > for the scientific record. > > As soon as plain paper photocopies became available and > interlibrary borrowing became legal substitutes for > paid subscriptions, these major research universities > cut their library spending, systematically whittling it > by more than half. One engineering school, Stevens > Institute, bragged it had cut all subscriptions, intending > to exist on loans. LSU turned down the same path. Not only > have subscriptions been decimated, the viability of the > scholarly monograph has been called into question. Perhaps > the worst insult to libraries was the closing of its > historic school of library science by Columbia University, > on grounds of poor profitability. > > The claim of finance managers to have no money is simply > bogus in very many cases. As a matter of public record, > the profitability of all higher education institutions > increased by roughly the same percentage as they saved > by cuts to library spending, as reported to the US > Department of Education (see upcoming AGAINST THE GRAIN). > > Albert Henderson > > Former Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY 1994-2000 > Contributor HIGHER EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES. AN ENCYCLOPEDIA > (ABC-CLIO 2002) > <70244.1532@compuserve.com> > > > More reading: > > Henderson, Albert. 1999. Information science and information policy. > The use of constant dollars and other indicators to manage research > investments. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. > 50,4:366-379. > Online PDF version > http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext?ID=55001184&PLACEBO= > IE.pdf > DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(1999)50:4<366::AID-ASI15>3.0.CO;2-3 > > Day, Colin. 1999. The economics of publishing: the consequences > of library and research copying. Journal of the American Society > for Information Science. 50(14):1346-1349. > > > > > > > > > > . > . > . > . > > ______________________________________________________________________ > This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. > For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email > ______________________________________________________________________
