Ellen Dubinsky

Interests

No activities entered.

Courses

No activities entered.

Scholarly Contributions

Books

• Sarli, C., Dubinsky, E., Engeszer, B., & Lewis, R. (2009). SPEC Kit 311: Public Access Policies. Washington, D.C.: Association of Research Libraries.
  More info

  The concept of a public access policy for research results is based on the premise that government-funded research results should be freely available without barriers to taxpayers who provide support for the funding. With the recent enactment of the US National Institutes of Health Public Access Policy and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Policy on Access to Research Outputs many academic and research libraries have developed resources and services to support authors who are required to comply with these policies. This survey is designed to highlight current practices related to public access policies, provide models for other libraries that are considering implementing similar activities, and offer examples of resources and services.

Journals/Publications

• Dubinsky, E., & Johnson, P. (2023). Campus OA Policies: Responding to the evolving landscape
  . Commonplace.
• Johnson, P., & Dubinsky, E. (2022). The Challenging State of University Campus and Library Open Access Policies. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 10(1). doi:10.31274/jlsc.13049
• Lohr, A. M., Van Gorden, N., McClelland, D. J., Dubinsky, E., Gerald, L. B., Wilkinson-Lee, A. M., & Carvajal, S. C. (2021). Updating Search Strategies for Literature Reviews with OUR2D2: An Open Source Computer Application. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 109(2), 317-322. doi:10.5195/jmla.2021.1105
  More info

  Background: While writing a scoping review, we needed to update our search strategy. We wanted to capture articles generated by our additional search terms and articles published since our original search. Simultaneously, we strove to optimize project resources by not re-screening articles that had been captured in our original results. Case Presentation: In response, we created Open Update Re-run Deduplicate (OUR2D2), a computer application that allows the user to compare search results from a variety of library databases. OUR2D2 supports Extensible Markup Language (XML) files from EndNote and comma-separated values (CSV) files using article titles for comparisons. We conducted unit tests to ensure appropriate functionality as well as accurate data extraction and analysis. We tested OUR2D2 by comparing original and updated search results from PubMed, Embase, Clarivate Web of Science, CINAHL, Scopus, ProQuest Dissertation and Theses, and Lens and estimate that this application saved 21 hours of work during the screening process. Conclusions: OUR2D2 could be useful for individuals seeking to update literature review strategies across fields without re-screening articles from previous searches. Because the OUR2D2 source code is freely available with a permissive license, we recommend this application for researchers conducting literature reviews who need to update their search results over time, want a powerful and flexible analysis framework, and may not have access to paid subscription tools.
• Paschke-wood, J., Dubinsky, E., & Sult, L. A. (2020). Creating a Student-Centered Alternative to Research Guides: Developing the Infrastructure to Support Novice Learners. In the Library with the Lead Pipe.
  More info

  Research and course guides typically feature long lists of resources without the contextual or instructional framework to direct novice researchers through the research process. An investigation of guide usage and user interactions at a large university in the southwestern U.S. revealed a need to reexamine the way research guides can be developed and implemented to better meet the needs of these students by focusing on pedagogical support of student research and information literacy skill creation. This article documents the justification behind making the changes as well as the theoretical framework used to develop and organize a system that will place both pedagogically-focused guides as well as student-focused answers to commonly asked questions on a reimagined FAQ/research page. This research offers academic libraries an alternative approach to existing methods of helping students. Rather than focusing on guiding students to a list of out-of-context guides and resources, it reconceptualizes our current system and strives to offer pedagogically-sound direction and alternatives for students who formerly navigated unsuccessfully through the library’s website, either requiring more support, or failing to find the assistance they needed.
• Dubinsky, E. (2019). Does open access make cents? Return on investment in the institutional repository. College & Research Libraries News, 80(5), 281-284. doi:10.5860/crln.80.5.281
  More info

  Access to information resources is a traditional library service. Public libraries were the first to provide unfettered access to print information resources to a general population. It is not a stretch to recognize those institutions as the earliest providers of open access (OA). Now the term open access is generally defined as the free and immediate online availability of research and scholarship, adapting to the widespread change in delivery format from print to digital. OA as a library service—most commonly in support of the scholarly communication process—has become a priority for most academic libraries. Academic libraries and librarians are increasingly engaged in both providing and promoting OA, primarily through institutional repository (IR) services with roles as creators, disseminators, publishers, and preservers of scholarly content.
• Wilson, R. T., & Dubinsky, E. (2018). Piloting a Homegrown Streaming Service with IaaS. Code4Lib.
• Dubinsky, E. (2014). A Current Snapshot of Institutional Repositories: Growth Rate, Disciplinary Content and Faculty Contributions. Journal of Librarianship & Scholarly Communication, 2(3). doi:10.7710/2162-3309.1167
• Sarli, C. C., Dubinsky, E. K., & Holmes, K. L. (2010). Beyond citation analysis: a model for assessment of research impact. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 98(1), 17. doi:10.3163/1536-5050.98.1.008
• Holmes, K. L., & Dubinsky, E. K. (2009). Integration of Web 2.0 technologies in the translational research environment. Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 28(4), 309-335.

Proceedings Publications

• Sult, L. A., Paschke-wood, J., Dubinsky, E., & Hennig, N. (2021). Learning from Failure: Creating Better Subject Guides and Course Guides Using Critical Information Literacy Practices. In LOEX 2021.

Presentations

• Gibney, M., Rainard, M., & Dubinsky, E. (2024, May). They Say “We Value Your Privacy,” But Do They?: A privacy and surveillance community of practice speaks out. Acquisitions Institute at Timberline Lodge 2024. Government Camp, Oregon: Acquisitions Institute at Timberline Lodge.
• Johnson, P., & Dubinsky, E. (2023, August 23). The Challenging State of University Campus and Library Open Access Policies. University of Pennsylvania Libraries Lecture Circus. Virtual: University of Pennsylvania LIbraries.
• Perry, A., & Dubinsky, E. (2023, October). Western Copyright Alliance: An Infomercial. Arizona Library Association 2023 Conference. Fort McDowell, Arizona: Arizona Library Association.
• Dubinsky, E., Rios, F., & Schultz, L. A. (2022, September). Digging Into DPIs. COGR Webinar SeriesCouncil on Governmental Relations.
  More info

  Digital Persistent Identifiers (DPIs) have emerged as a potential compliance tool for agencies and institutions in the area of research security, and NSPM-33 makes clear that federal research funding agencies must establish policies for funded researchers to register with DPI services.  So, it’s critical for research administrators to have a solid understanding of what DPIs are and how they work.  This webinar will provide essential information about how DPIs are used in SciENcv, data management and sharing, tracking scholarly activities, and tracking funding. This webinar was rescheduled to September 23 from its original date of August 25
• Meetz, J. K., & Dubinsky, E. (2022, May). Assessing Library Publishing Programs. Library Publishing Forum 2022. Virtual: Library Publishing Coalition.
  More info

  Assessment of library publishing programs can take many forms. It can be formal or informal, internally motivated or externally requested. In our presentation we share our experience with two different approaches to the assessment of library publishing programs at Ohio State University and the University of Arizona.
• Sult, L. A., Paschke-wood, J., Dubinsky, E., & Hennig, N. (2021, May). Learning from Failure: Creating Better Subject Guides and Course Guides Using Critical Information Literacy Practices. LOEX 2021. Online: LOEX.
• Dubinsky, E., McDow, K., Rutkowski, C., & Willinsky, J. (2020, February). Open Innovation, Open Access, and Open Source: How Copyright Law Can Facilitate Sharing. CSUSA Midwinter Meeting. Litchfield Park, Arizona: Copyright Society of the USA.
  More info

  The idea copyright can be used to facilitate open innovation appears to run counter to the traditional notions of copyright protection, but this idea is gaining ground in multiple fields. Different business models can support the economics of developing and distributing these copyrightable works. In academia, the open access movement facilitates the sharing of peer-reviewed articles. Technology companies are leveraging—and making available—open source software under different models that can help grow their business. Consumer brands use open innovation to bring their offerings more in line with customer desires.The panelists will share their lessons for deciding when, and how, to make certain intellectual property accessible and how to address the practical and legal challenges that these decisions create.
• Kirschner, J., Browder, R., Dubinsky, E., Swatscheno, J., & Wentworth, A. (2020, May). Decoding the Directory: Library Publishing Directory Focus Group Session. Library Publishing Forum. Virtual: Library Publishing Coalition.
  More info

  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.
• Agate, N., Buckland, A., Dubinsky, E., & Shockey, N. (2019, December). Flipping Open Access Away from APCs. CNI Fall 2019 Membership Meeting. Washington, D.C.: Coalition for Networked Information (CNI).
  More info

  The APC (article processing charge) path to an open access scholarly publication ecosystem has dominated the scholarly communication discussion since the release of PlanS in Europe in the fall of 2018. Though this path may be feasible for some, it is impossible for others, and the "transformative" nature of an author-pays model seems in doubt when it (a) perpetuates injustices and biases ingrained in the traditional scholarly publishing ecosystem and (b) does little to stem the flow of increasing amounts of money into the system. True and lasting change requires collective investment in new infrastructure models and a commitment to new community-based models of scholarly publishing that open up research communication for equitable participation and equitable access.Libraries from the University of Arizona, Columbia University, and the University of Guelph have recently redirected funding away from APCs and toward "investments" in open - projects and initiatives that have potential for impactful and substantial change for the many, rather than the few. These institutions are directing funding toward community-led, open infrastructure, advocacy, and other projects which might accelerate the transformation of the existing publication ecosystem to a more equitable and sustainable non-commercial open access model. Panelists will discuss their revised investment funds, describe other community-driven reinvestment opportunities, and detail the truly transformative possibilities of non-APC dependent open access publication models.