Past Forum Info

LPC Forum 2020
March 10, 2020

Experimental Session: Editorial Control in Library Publishing: Who Does What and Why?

Day: Wednesday, May 6, 1:30 PM to 2:30 PM
Room: TBD

Discussion Leader: Robert Browder

Description: Let’s talk about editorial control and productive capacity in library publishing environments. Here are several observations to prime the conversation.

  1. Editorial control can be seen as a continuum. Authors or project owners exist at one end of the continuum and publishers exist at the other.
  2. Who holds editorial control determines how the productive capacity of library publishing departments is spent.
  3. The less editorial control publishing departments have, the more of their productive capacity is spent in supporting the authors and project owners who do have editorial control. Authors and project owners have more freedom to make choices about editorial and production processes.
  4. In the context of a publishing department that does not have editorial control, productive capacity is initiated through budget and staffing, but determined by the authors and project owners the department chooses to support. The productive capacity of such departments is subject to the skills and experience that project owners bring with them to collaborations. Thus, partners must be chosen carefully.
  5. The more editorial control publishing departments have, the more they are able to standardize their production processes, thereby creating the ability to publish higher volumes of scholarship.
  6. In the context of a publishing department that does have editorial control, productive capacity is initiated through budget and staffing, but maintained through carefully chosen workflows and a commitment to strictly adhere to those workflows.
  7. When publishers hold editorial control and enforce a systematic process, opportunities for creativity and experimentation in the publication process are diminished for authors/project owners while the ability to publish higher volumes of scholarship is increased.

LPC Forum 2020
March 10, 2020

Plenary: Career Development Lab: Professional Development and Transferable Skills in Library Publishing

Day: Tuesday, May 5, 8:45 AM to 9:45 AM
Room: TBD

Moderator: John W. Warren, George Washington University

Panelists: Kyle Gipson, Assistant Acquisitions Editor, Johns Hopkins University Press; Gita Manaktala, Editorial Director, The MIT Press; Hanni Nabahe, Resident Librarian, Scholarly Resources and Content Strategy, University of Virginia Library; Elizabeth Scarpelli, Director, University of Cincinnati Press & CLIPS; Laurie N. Taylor, Senior Director for Library Technology and Digital Strategies, University of Florida; Editor-in-Chief, LibraryPress@UF

Description: The Career Development Lab provides discussion, strategies to employ, and possible answers to the following questions: What are the key skills needed for successful careers in library and university press publishing in the next ten years? Has scholarly and academic publishing shifted from a ‘trade’—an apprenticeship, learned mostly on the job—to a ‘profession’—learning and applying a body of relevant skills and best-practices? What is the value of a master’s degree in publishing master’s in library and information science, MBA, or other graduate degree? How can we be inclusive of diverse voices and perspectives, so that they integrated seamlessly into the fabric of library and academic publishing, and what can individuals in the profession do to welcome new voices? We will engage audience participants in some of these questions in an interactive format, and will actively seek input and comments from participants. This event welcomes early career professionals as well as those further along in their publishing career.


LPC Forum 2020
March 10, 2020

Full Session: Sharing, Learning, and Supporting Across Institutions: Experiences from the Pilot Year of the LPC Mentorship Program

Day: Monday, May 4, 4:15 PM to 5:15 PM
Room: TBD

Presenters: Chelsea Johnston (University of Florida), Sarah Wipperman (Villanova University), Ian Harmon (West Virginia University), Jody Bailey (Emory University), and Ally Laird (Pennsylvania State University)

Description: While mentoring is common within librarianship, the structure of mentoring programs varies widely. Mentor/mentee relationships may be casual or formal; participants may or may not belong to the same institution or follow similar career paths; the goal may be career-focused or may be to foster a sense of support and belonging. Whatever the structure of a mentoring program, establishing and communicating grounded expectations determine the success of the relationship.

In 2019, the Professional Development Committee of the Library Publishing Coalition launched its pilot Mentorship Program. The Program aims to orient mentees to the LPC and enrich mentors’ experiences with the LPC, building relationships between the two, and to further the development of library publishing through a professional, semi-structured mentorship program. Mentors and mentees were paired up in late February 2019 and provided with suggestions and guidelines on meeting throughout the year.

In this presentation, two pairs of mentors/mentees from the LPC Mentorship Program will discuss shared and separate experiences with establishing a trusted and productive mentoring relationship. We will also recommend strategies for successful mentoring, such as discussing preferred outcomes/goals and being upfront about limitations. There will be ample time for audience questions, and other LPC mentor/mentee pairs are encouraged to attend and share their experiences during this time. Through our session, we hope to host an open conversation that encourages attendees to examine their connections to mentoring, growing a stronger practice within the LPC community.

Learning Outcomes

Through this session, attendees will:

  • Learn more about the LPC Mentorship Program
  • Discover strategies for establishing a successful mentoring relationship
  • Engage in a discussion about mentorship and share experiences

LPC Forum 2020
March 10, 2020

Experimental Session: Decoding the Directory: Library Publishing Directory Focus Group Session

Day: Wednesday, May 6, 10:15 AM to 11:15 AM
Room: TBD

Presenters: Jessica Kirschner, Virginia Commonwealth University; Robert Browder, Virginia Tech; Ellen Dubinsky, University of Arizona; Janet Swatscheno, University of Illinois at Chicago’ Amanda Wentworth, SUNY Geneseo

Description: The Library Publishing Directory provides an overview of the activities, technologies, organizational structure, partnerships, and priorities of library publishers worldwide. In the seven years since the first Directory was released, the library publishing landscape has evolved, with changes to the types of publications produced, services provided, platforms used, and more. In preparing for the most recent edition, the LPC decided to revisit the directory’s data model, asking whether the data we collect reflects the current state of the field and meets the purposes originally outlined for the Directory: introduce readers to library publishing, facilitate collaboration between publishers and other publishing entities, and enable benchmarking. To this end, the LPC formed a task force in the Spring of 2019 to evaluate the current data model and the survey used to collect such information. Led by the LPC Directory Committee, this session aims to continue the work of this task force, turning directly to LPC members for feedback on the directory’s data model and survey. After briefly reviewing the recent changes made to the 2020 Directory as a result of the task force’s work, this interactive session will ask attendees (the focus group) to share thoughts on additional considerations for future Directories, including:

  • How to best capture the evolving relationship between university presses and library publishing programs
  • How to best capture the full breadth of what we publish, such as emerging publication types and legacy journals
  • Identifying a subset of Directory questions that are more broadly applicable than the current in-depth survey
  • General feedback on any gaps in data collection or responses to the directory’s purpose.

Feedback from participants will help shape the data model and survey process moving forward.

LPC Forum 2020
March 10, 2020

Full Session: Creative Staffing Solutions for Library Publishing: Layout, Graphic Design, Copyediting, Project Management, and More

Day: Tuesday, May 5, 10:15 AM to 11:15 AM
Room: TBD

Presenters: Marianne Reed, University of Kansas; Johanna Meetz, The Ohio State University (formerly Pacific University); Chelsea Johnston, University of Florida

Description: Like many areas of librarianship, the library publishing community is increasingly challenged to do more with less. As library publishers, we aim to offer traditional publishing services such as consultation about the publishing lifecycle, hosting of content and its long-term preservation, along with more uncommon services such as copyediting, layout, graphic design, and project management. Library publishing programs also face new demands for support for digital scholarship and digital humanities programs.  In this panel, three institutions will discuss staffing solutions for their publishing programs. These programs range from new to established; support ranges from one librarian to a department with several staff positions. Representatives from the University of Kansas, Pacific University, and the University of Florida will share strategies, lessons learned, and planned next steps for future initiatives.

LPC Forum 2020
March 10, 2020

Panel: Customizing Technology to Meet Editorial and Production Challenges

Day: Wednesday, May 6, 2:45 PM to 3: 45 PM
Room: TBD

Serving the Niche: Choosing Monograph Production Workflows to Suit Library Publishing Needs

Presenters: Lauren Stachew, Michigan Publishing, University of Michigan; Patrick Goussy, Michigan Publishing, University of Michigan

Description: Michigan Publishing Services, a division of Michigan Publishing within the University of Michigan Library, provides publishing services to the University of Michigan community, including faculty, faculty emeriti, students, and others campus-wide. After an approval process, when a monograph is accepted and moved into production, how do we determine the best workflow for the book—and author’s—needs?

Serving the Niche: Choosing Monograph Production Workflows to Suit Library Publishing Needs will outline various production workflows utilizing different resources and expertise: external production vendors, internal tools and partnerships, and collaborative publishing platforms, using example monographs from our open access Maize Books imprint. In examining our workflows, we will discuss determining a book’s complexity, associated production costs, and managing expectations and timelines.

We hope that this presentation will encourage other library publishers to consider operating their own service-based monograph publishing division. For libraries who already publish monographs, we hope that sharing our production workflows will be helpful in determining and/or streamlining their own workflows going forward.

Migrating Journals: Working with Editors

Presenter: Johanna Meetz, Pacific University

Description: In 2019 Pacific University migrated all journals published via Digital commons to Ubiquity Press’ journal publishing platform. This presentation will discuss that process, with a focus on working with faculty editors who are both located locally as well as across the country. It will focus on:

  • Communicating with stakeholders about the migration, including journal editors (timing, testing the new platforms, and deciding when to go live)
  • Training editors to use a new platform (this was a challenge because I never use the same features of the site as the editors do)
  • Working with editors on site designs (some editors were very particular with the design, others were less invested and both present unique challenges)
  • Working through growing pains (general dissatisfaction with platform idiosyncrasies)

In addition to these issues, I will also briefly discuss some of the more technical/logistical obstacles, like:

  • How we chose to handle articles that were still in review in the old platform after the new platform went live
  • How we chose to handle training for an editor who came on board as we were transitioning to the new platform
  • Making changes to article templates (including cover sheets) to reflect new information (titles, websites, etc) of journals

LPC Forum 2020
March 10, 2020

Experimental Session: Help Me Plan a Publishing Program: A Collaborative Discussion on Developing or Expanding Library Publishing Services

Day: Wednesday, May 6, 3:15 PM to 5:15 PM
Room: TBD

Presenter: Emily Stenberg, Washington University in St. Louis

Description: Are you developing or expanding a library publishing program? Do you attend presentations and leave with great ideas you’re not sure how to implement at your institution? How do you take practical steps while incorporating larger philosophical goals? This will be a chance for participants to brainstorm together and participate in discussion groups to address how to move forward with program development. The session will focus on 2-3 discussion topics, voted on by participants. Depending on the size of the group, there may be smaller breakout sessions. Takeaways will include a version of the 3-3-3 Action Plan for participants to work from after the conference.

LPC Forum 2020
March 10, 2020

Panel: Discovering Best Practices Through Research and Assessment

Day: Wednesday, May 6, 10:30 AM to 11:30 AM
Room: TBD

How are we doing? Annual survey of University of Florida journal publishing program serves to educate and assess DEI practices

Presenters: Suzanne Cady Stapleton, University of Florida; Chelsea Johnston, University of Florida

Description: Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) is a strategic direction of importance to the University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries, throughout library services and activities. In 2019, the journal publishing team at the UF Libraries retooled its annual survey of publishing partners to explore the current status and understanding of DEI in scholarly publishing. The survey instrument served not only to assess current practice, but also to inform and educate responders on DEI practices. In the survey, DEI was broadly defined to include composition of contributors (authors, reviewers, editors) as well as content and format of published material. Questions in the survey included multiple choice, ranking, and open-ended responses for current and anticipated practices. A selection of questions were repeated from the 2018 survey to review trends over time. Results from both years indicate satisfaction with the ability to find the journal online (discoverability), journal usage, and archiving as well as the quality and promptness of the service team. Open-ended comments enabled nuanced responses, important for questions such as “In your opinion, what can editors and publishers do to reduce barriers faced by under-represented or marginalized scholars in academic publishing?” Survey results are shared with participants, while respecting privacy, and inform publishing program development. The survey introduced a number of DEI practices and considerations for journal publishers. Related topics were featured during the Libraries’ Publishers Round Table series before and after the survey was distributed. This annual assessment tool impacts the journal publishing program policies and educational programs, and guides development of future services.

LPC Forum 2020
March 10, 2020

Panel: Publishing Services That Leverage Open Access and Scholarly Communications Expertise

Day: Monday, May 4, 4:15 PM to 5:15 PM
Room: TBD

(Re)defining a library’s journal hosting service

Presenters: Mariya Maistrovskaya, University of Toronto; Graeme Slaght, University of Toronto

Description: Whether your library is currently planning a journal hosting service or has been offering one for a while, you may find yourself wondering if this service truly reflects the goals of your institution and best practices in scholarly publishing. For example, does your service support subscription journals as well as open access journals? Is there a requirement that journals distribute their content under an open license? Is there an expectation that hosted journals would follow best practices and publishing standards that would facilitate their inclusion in indices, directories, and databases, such as the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)? At the University of Toronto Libraries (UTL), a journal hosting service was offered long before the library’s Open Access Support criteria were formalized, and as a result the two were rather out of sync. In this presentation we will go over the UTL’s collaborative cross-campus project to examine the two sets of criteria and align its hosting service with the library’s goals for open access support and with best practices in scholarly publishing.

Conducting a copyright audit on hosted journals and best practices for training and documentation

Presenters: Jessica Lange, McGill University, Ana Rogers-Butterworth, McGill University

Description: Many small journal programs operate on a ‘hosting and advising’ model. In such models, the publisher provides hosting and technical support and acts as an advisor to journals on issues such as indexing, copyright etc. While this model has its benefits (streamlined, easy, low cost) it has some challenges, particularly as journal editors may or may not take the advice, read documentation, or follow through on the publisher’s suggestions. In reviewing the copyright information on the library’s journals sites, it was apparent that although the library was providing copyright advice to their hosted journals, many were not following through on their recommendations. To confirm this suspicion, the librarian conducted a ‘copyright audit’ of the journals in their publishing program based on the recommendations of Vanderjagt (2017). In line with the findings of Scholsser (2016), the audit revealed that most journals were not following suggested best practices. This has led the librarian to re-evaluate the publishing program’s training and onboarding program as well as its documentation.

This session will discuss how to conduct a copyright audit at your own institution and will describe the revised training model for the library’s hosted OJS journals. The session will also include a brief discussion of how small journal-publishing programs can get their journals to act on the publishing program’s copyright advice and incorporate it into the journal’s publishing practices.

Schlosser, M. (2016). Write up! A study of copyright information on library-published journals. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 4. DOI:

Vanderjagt, L. (2017). Bridging the Gap: Best Practices for OA Journals Articulating Policies for Open Repository Archiving. Presentation at the Public Knowledge Project Conference, Montreal, Canada.

LPC Forum 2020
March 10, 2020

Experimental Session: XML Publishing Workflows: Tools, Practices, and the Future

Day: Tuesday, May 5, 10:15 AM to 11:15 AM
Room: TBD

Presenter: James MacGregor, Public Knowledge Project (PKP)

Description: Publishers, hosting institutions and upstream services are increasingly investing in XML as part of the scholarly publishing process, and new tools are being developed to reduce both the cost and complexity of publishing in XML. Public Knowledge Project (PKP) has been incredibly active in this space, and is working with other leading community members to establish the best standards and tools for editors, authors and readers. We are very happy to now be able to present the tools available today, and present our plans for the future.

Included in this experimental session will be a demonstration of our Texture JATS editor integration in OJS; a demo of some of the JATS publishing and display tools we have been working on; and an update on our work in the Word->XML conversion space (focusing on Grobid and meTypeset in particular). We will also discuss our current development roadmap, including a review of the gaps in the workflow we have already identified, and then invite discussion on any aspect of this publishing workflow and associated set of tools. Finally, we will provide a test environment for session participants to use at their leisure throughout the rest of the conference, and will be available for follow-up questions.