Does Tenure Matter? Factors Influencing Faculty Contributions to Institutional Repositories

INTRODUCTION Institutional repositories (IRs) provide colleges and universities a way to ensure stability of access to and dissemination of digital scholarly communications. Yet, many institutions report that faculty willingness to contribute to IRs is often limited. This study investigates faculty attitudes about IR contributions by tenure status and category of material. METHODS Two focus group interviews were conducted in the spring of 2009 among English department faculty at a large Midwestern university. One group consisted of tenured faculty and the other of tenure-track and adjunct faculty. RESULTS Both groups recognize the benefit of open access to research materials but expressed concern about their intellectual property rights. Untenured faculty spoke more about nonprint research. Both groups also shared concerns about contributing instructional materials, primarily in regard to plagiarism and outdated materials. In regard to faculty service, the tenured group discussed many items they would contribute, while the untenured faculty mentioned very little. DISCUSSION Some minor differences emerged related to experience and tenure status in regard to contributing research and instructional artifacts, but the major variation was the strong support tenured participants gave for contributing service items, compared to the untenured faculty, who did not view this category positively. Tenured faculty viewed the IR as a way to document their own service activities, investigate those of colleagues, and had fewer concerns about plagiarism or other negative effects in the service category. CONCLUSION Promoting faculty contribution of service-related items to an IR may be a way to encourage larger numbers to participate.

[1]  E. Boyer Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate , 1990 .

[2]  Zelda F. Gamson,et al.  Disciplinary Adaptations to Research Culture in Comprehensive Institutions , 2017 .

[3]  D. Cohen Chronicle of Higher Education , 1998 .

[4]  Judith Ryan,et al.  The Future of Scholarly Publishing , 2002 .

[5]  Raym Crow,et al.  The case for institutional repositories : a SPARC position paper , 2002 .

[6]  Susan Gibbons,et al.  Understanding Faculty to Improve Content Recruitment for Institutional Repositories , 2005, D Lib Mag..

[7]  James Allen,et al.  Interdisciplinary differences in attitudes towards deposit in institutional repositories , 2005 .

[8]  Diane Harley,et al.  The Influence of Academic Values on Scholarly Publication and Communication Practices , 2006 .

[9]  A. Nir,et al.  Planning for academic excellence: tenure and professional considerations , 2006 .

[10]  Howard Carter,et al.  Library Faculty Publishing and Intellectual Property Issues: A Survey of Attitudes and Awareness , 2007 .

[11]  Holly Mercer,et al.  A multifaceted approach to promote a university repository: The University of Kansas' experience , 2007, OCLC Syst. Serv..

[12]  Jingfeng Xia,et al.  Assessment of Self-archiving in Institutional Repositories: Across Disciplines , 2007 .

[13]  Philip M. Davis,et al.  Institutional Repositories: Evaluating the Reasons for Non-use of Cornell University's Installation of DSpace , 2007, D Lib Mag..

[14]  Jihyun Kim,et al.  Motivating and Impeding Factors Affecting Faculty Contribution to Institutional Repositories , 2007, J. Digit. Inf..

[15]  Certifying Online Research. , 2008 .

[16]  Aaron Lercher,et al.  A Survey of Attitudes about Digital Repositories among Faculty at Louisiana State University at Baton Rouge. , 2008 .

[17]  Ronald C. Jantz,et al.  Institutional Repositories: Faculty Deposits, Marketing, and the Reform of Scholarly Communication , 2008 .

[18]  Paul Parrish Comments on the Report of the MLA Task Force on Evaluating Scholarship for Tenure and Promotion , 2008 .

[19]  Executive Summary,et al.  Assessing the Future Landscape of Scholarly Communication: An Exploration of Faculty Values and Needs in Seven Disciplines - Executive Summary , 2010 .

[20]  Jihyun Kim,et al.  Motivations of Faculty Self-Archiving in Institutional Repositories , 2011 .

[21]  R. Cullen,et al.  Institutional Repositories, Open Access, and Scholarly Communication: A Study of Conflicting Paradigms. , 2011 .

[22]  Kathleen Fitzpatrick,et al.  Peer Review, Judgment, and Reading , 2011 .

[23]  David Seaman,et al.  Discovering the Information Needs of Humanists When Planning an Institutional Repository , 2011, D Lib Mag..

[24]  David Green,et al.  An Open Access Overview , 2012 .

[25]  Jr. Charles W. Bailey Institutional Repositories SPEC Kit 292 , 2013 .