Dissemination of theses (fwd)

[Richard Plant]

Hello All:

I have just received the following message containing news of steps taken
by HSSFC and a copy of Louise's letter requesting action be taken. The
letter seems to me forceful and a clear indication of the concerns
expressed very generally among the scholarly community.

Richard Plant Dept
of Drama, Queen's University and
Graduate Centre for Study of Drama,
University of Toronto

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 10:01:56 -0400
From: Fedcan <fedcan at hssfc.ca>
To: @hssfc.ca
Subject: Dissemination of theses

The Humanities and Social Sciences Federation of Canada is calling on the
National Library to undertake a national consultation on the subject of the
dissemination of theses.  Given the unknowns surrounding the electronic
publication of scholarly manuscripts, the President of the Federation, Dr.
Louise Forsyth asked the National Librarian, Mr. Roch Carrier, to carry out
a consultation with all the stakeholders including students, university
presses, researchers, administrators and CANCOPY, among others.

-------

September 12, 2000


Mr. Roch Carrier
National Librarian
National Library of Canada
395 Wellington Street
Ottawa, ON   K1A 0N4

Dear Mr. Carrier,

As President of the Humanities and Social Sciences Federation of Canada, an
organization that represents 69 universities and 68 learned societies, I am
writing to express a number of concerns in regards to the National
Library's contractual agreement with UMI and their subcontractor
Contentville's on-line posting of theses' abstracts and offer of sale.  I
have read the National Library's position on your web site and followed
recent developments.  Many social scientists and humanists think it
imperative that the National Library play the central role in this delicate
issue and be the institution ultimately responsible for the dissemination
of Canadian theses.  For those reasons I would like to call on the National
Library to organize a country-wide consultation with academic stakeholders.

I would also like to bring to your attention several concerns raised by the
academic community.  Our first concern is the historical understanding that
students have about signing the release form when they table their theses.
For years, the gesture meant no more than handing the thesis to the
National Library for archiving and allowing the National Library the right
to distribute, for scholarly purposes, a limited number of copies of the
thesis.  Signing the non-exclusive license was never understood by graduate
students and university administrators as giving permission to the National
Library to sub-license without limit to other distributors.  Rather the
dissemination aspect of the work was and is still considered to be the
focus of a negotiated contract between an author and an editor for
publication - in hard copy - of a scholarly work.

Our second concern is that, following the purchase of UMI by Bell and
Howell, the National Library failed to inform universities that signing the
release meant that students were agreeing to have a Corporation make
available their theses on-line for profit.  Considering that universities
require students as a condition of degree completion to sign a NL release
and a release to their institution, the Federation recommends that the
National Library make an immediate public announcement to all university
campuses and libraries.

We further recommend that the National Library amend its release to give
future graduates the choice between allowing the National Library to
maintain a copy of their theses on deposit for scholarly review and/or to
allow the National Library to have a license with the right to sub-license
to reproduce the theses for distribution.

Under the National Library's present agreement with Bell and Howell, it is
unclear who collects the copyrights and who collects the profits.  Could
the National Library be more specific about the financial arrangements and
make it clear how scholars go about getting their copyrights and who stands
to make money from the sales.  For instance, Mr. Joel Duff, Chairperson of
the National Graduate Council of the Canadian Federation of Students, in a
letter to Mr. Balatti, reports that copyrights can only be collected if
seven copies of a thesis are sold in one given year.  If this is the case,
scholars are unlikely to collect any.

...2

Page 2


Furthermore, the National Library should clarify what monitoring and
enforcing devices have been put in place to protect Canadian intellectual
property in this instance.

Notwithstanding the details of the contractual agreement, the matter raises
a central issue in the life of a scholar:  the publication and
dissemination of his/her academic work.  Publishing one's scholarly work is
central to the life of an academic and affects one's career.  Not only is a
book or an article the base for performance assessment, promotion and
tenure as many universities require a book for short listing in job
interviews; it also establishes an author's reputation and academic
standing in a community of peers.  A doctoral thesis is, for many, the
basis of a first book which situates an author in his or her field.
Publishing a thesis or an article is more than just a negotiated contract.
It is an author's chance at peer review which is the only process accepted
and valued by academics as a true measure of merit.  Publishing a thesis or
an article is much more than just disseminating a text.  Herein lies the
biggest complication of the National Library's agreement with UMI because
university presses - the major publishers of theses - advise us that, in
some cases, they may refuse to publish in hard copy a thesis available
on-line.  In such a case, the National Library's agreement with UMI may
unwittingly impair the career of certain scholars.

Another matter that was not considered by the parties involved is the
uneasy relationship that social scientists and humanists have with
scholarly texts on-line.  To some university faculty and scholars, on-line
publications lack the credibility of other media and it is doubtful that a
text published on-line carries, for the time being, the same weight as a
book for academic evaluation.  Peer review is not accepted on-line as it
poses particular problems that are known by the National Library since your
institution participates with the Federation on a research project studying
the credibility problems related to electronic publishing.  Altogether,
there are many problems to be sorted out before that form of dissemination
becomes an accepted part of academic culture.

Although I know that a moratorium has been put in place, I urge you to
start a national consultation on the subject with all the interested
parties.  As the national institution responsible for safeguarding the
intellectual patrimony of Canadians, the National Library is a natural and
important leader in understanding the notion of IP.  We would like to
suggest that a consultation bring together graduate student organizations,
scholars, professors and university administrators.  Other organizations
who serve the interest of academic researchers and research such as AUCC,
CAUT, university presses and learned journals as well as CANCOPY ought to -
under your leadership - make a thorough assessment of the issue with the
goal of providing the National Library with guidelines and recommendations
thoughtful of intellectual property and electronic publications to assist
the protection and dissemination of scholarly works.

Yours truly,



Louise H. Forsyth, PhD
President

cc:     David Balatti, Director, Bibliographic Services, National Library       of
Canada
        Marc Renaud, President, Social Sciences and Humanities Research         Council
        Alan Bernstein, President, Canadian Institutes of Health Research
        Tom Brzustowski, President,  Natural Sciences and Engineering   Research
Council
        Joel Duff, Chairperson, National Graduate Council, Canadian     Federation of
Students
        Robert Giroux, President, Association of Universities and Colleges      of Canada
        James Turk, Director, Canadian Association of University Teachers
        Robert Cavanagh, National office coordinator, Canadian Association      for
Graduate Studies
        John Service, President, Canadian Consortium for Research
        University Vice-Presidents (Research and Academic)
        University Deans of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences
        Presidents of member learned societies
        HSSFC General Assembly members