Search

About fifty years after the work that astronomer Tycho Brahe carried out while living on the island of Hven had made him world famous, King Christian IV of Denmark built the Trinity Buildings in Copenhagen. The Tower observatory was opened in 1642, and it housed the astronomers from the University of Copenhagen until 1861 when a new, modern observatory was built at {\O}stervold in the eastern part of the city. In 1996, all the University astronomers from the observatories at {\O}stervold and the small town of Brorfelde were relocated to the Rockefeller Buildings at {\O}sterbro, and the two observatories were closed. In this paper we focus on the library at the observatory in {\O}stervold, and its subsequent fate following the close-down of that observatory., Comment: 13 pages, 17 figures

There was a time when the purpose of libraries could be summed up as "being staffed by librarians and populated by books and users". Back then, it was easy to know what goal was being worked towards: there should be books on the shelves, librarians at the counters and a sufficiently well-functioning infrastructure to ensure that users were satisfied when they left the library. About 20 years ago, however, its reformulation began. The neoliberal currents that poured over the global North led to a thinking that the public sector was inefficient but could be made more efficient with the same tools that are typically used in the private sector. Termed ‘New Public Management’, the phenomenon washed like a tsunami across academia in the early and mid-2000s. Until then, concepts such as 'strategy', 'marketing', 'competition' and 'key indicator' were foreign words in the academic sector, but suddenly universities, like private companies, had to ensure that each university's production targets were met. Soon this also reached the heart of universities: Their libraries. Today, there is hardly a major research library in Europe that does not have a strategy that serves as guideline to reaching our production targets and many of us have already developed and run through one or more strategic cycles. In 2019 the University Library of Southern Denmark had to renew its strategy. The purpose of this presentation is to share our experiences with building a new strategy using a tool called Lego Serious Play (LSP) for our library and thereby to inspire your future strategy work. We will not report on the mistakes we made along the way and the detours we came up with, just give you the recipe for how, in retrospect, we can see that it can and should be done, thus giving you our "best practice". The concept behind LSP is based on the so-called 80-20 rule: that 80 percent of what is said at meetings is said by 20 percent of those present. The idea of LSP is to create a new common language: you build your thoughts in Lego, or rather metaphors thereof. We used a SWOT analysis to guide the construction of our current situation. The idea was to look into the future and rebuild the weaknesses into strengths and threats into opportunities. This little last feint in particular proved useful, because it got the attention of the participants towards the future: what obstacles should we overcome? What stood in our way? What would we like to achieve? What could we do ourselves? With this attention to the future and the shared insight and understanding that the construction and division of it had created, we were ready to formulate our library strategy. Our presentation will be richly illustrated with pictures from building sessions and in case time and the venues facilities allows for it we will be happy to make a short demonstration during QQML 2021.&nbsp

Der var engang, hvor bibliotekernes formål kunne sammenfattes til, at de ”skulle være bemandet af bibliotekarer og befolket af bøger og brugere”. Den­gang var det let at vide, hvilket mål man arbejdede frem imod: Der skulle være bøger på hylderne, bibliotekarer ved skrankerne og en tilpas velfunge­rende infrastruktur til at sikre, at bru­gerne var tilfredse. Men for cirka 20 år siden begyndte en reformulering heraf. De neoliberalis­tiske strømme, der væltede ind over ”Det globale Nord”, førte en tænkning med sig om, at den offentlige sektor var ineffektiv, men kunne effektiviseres med de samme værktøjer, som man typisk benytter i den private sektor. Fænomenet blev døbt New Public Ma­nagement, og det skyllede som en tsu­nami ind over den akademiske verden i begyndelsen og midten af 00’erne. Blandt de første synlige tegn var ”Den Nye Universitetslov” fra 2003, hvor universiteterne blev omdannet til selvejende institutioner med en be­styrelse som øverste ledelse. Man for­nemmer allerede her spejlingen af den private sektors logikker. Indtil da var begreber som ’strategi’, ’markedsføring’, ’konkurrence’ og ’nøgleindikator’ frem­medord i den akademiske sektor, men med den nye universitetslov var Fan­den løs i Laksegade: Pludselig skulle universiteterne i lighed med private virksomheder sikre, at forskerne ikke rendte i hver sin retning med deres frie forskningsfane højt hævet.

Den 26. januar bekendtgjorde Danske Universiteter, at Danmark havde indgået en aftale om øjeblikkelig og gratis adgang til danske forskningspublikationer med et stort forlag. Forlaget hedder ’Elsevier’, men kaldes i daglig tale ’Evilzevier’ og det er der en grund til. Djævlen er som altid i detaljen og har i dette tilfælde fortsat hænderne dybt begravet i universiteters lommer.

Ideally, calculating a scholar’s h-index with any confidence is possible if her citable publications are indexed correctly and exhaustively, and that the same is true for all potentially citing publications. However, no database meets these criteria and consequently the h-index for a scholar depends on the source.We present a heuristic approach to estimate of a scholar’s h-index even when her citation record is incomplete: Assuming a realistic citation distribution and a disciplinary publication practice, the model results in an estimated h-index depending only on the number of publications.Our model is based on the assumption that the chance of a paper at any given time having many citations is less than the chance of it having few citations. We model a highly cited author by a citation record leading to the total number of citations being proportional to a slowly increasing function of the number of papers. This allows the h-index to be calculated as a function of that number.Consequently, if a disciplinary sample are known and the model applies, it is possible to calculate the h-index. Thus, one can estimate the h-index for an author with a known number of publications, but an unknown number of citations.We test our model against publication data from different research departments and find a good agreement, which allows us to arrive at a disciplinary parameterization ultimately allowing us to predict the expected h-index of a scholar within any of these disciplines, knowing only their total number of publications.

COVID-19 has spawned a new reality for leaders. Research Libraries, like other organizations, are facing hard choices concerning which services to offer, to minimize the risk to their staff, communities, and users. Flexible leaders who can adapt and guide organizations and staff, offer hope, build communities, and see new possibilities, are needed more than ever.This poster is presenting Leadership skills, challenges regarding realigning library ambitions to the new operating environment and design the opportunity for leaders to how create clarity, build resilience, and catalyze positive change and new challenges likely to occur in the post-COVID-19 recovery period. The research question is “what are most significant challenges for leaders at research libraries during COVID-19 and what the new normal?” This research is a part of an international project conducted by a group of library emerging leaders from different countries who shared their experiences as the best perspective from which to present a worldwide on research libraries of the future and a framework for how they might be led. The project presented as a LIBER webinar series in November 2020 and will be published in a scientific journal.With this poster we focus on Leadership skills and challenges and precisely SDUB leadership team´s perspective as a case study.

These are the slides from the LIBER 2020 Session Crowd Powered Collaborations. Session Description: Closely tied to Open Science is the Citizen Science (CS) movement. CS is a “hot topic” and extremely interesting for research libraries, which function as an important link between science and society and, consequently, have a key role in the development of CS. In 2019, LIBER launched a CS working group to foster the participation of European research libraries in these projects. In this session, Crowd Powered Collaborations, we will focus on three research papers, linked by the theme of developments in the Open Science movement and with a particular focus on Citizen Science. The first presentation by Maria Cassella and Assunta Arte will discuss the emergence of Citizen Science in Italy on the basis of the first CS project launched in Italy: Transcribing Marconi. Transcribing Marconi is a project conceived by the Library of the Research Area of the CNR of Potenza, in collaboration with two CNR research institutes. The presentation will focus on the aims of “Transcribing Marconi”, including raising awareness on CS projects among school students and citizens and connecting the project with other outreach activities held by the Library of the Research Area of CNR of Portenza, as well as the different stages of the project. The second paper will argue that research libraries with strong competencies in knowledge-brokering, data management, open science, public outreach and more, could serve as the single point of contact for citizen science initiatives. The first part of the presentation will address the opinions of researchers and research libraries on CS projects and what they want from it, based on the findings of a Danish survey. The second part will focus on different services needed in order for libraries to become an integrated part of CS activities, using findings of best practices at the University of Denmark. The conclusion will present strategic recommendations and outline leadership skills needed for libraries to be in alignment with institutional strategy. Finally, Tiberius Ignat and Dr. Bertil F. Dorch will discuss their findings in regard to their analysis of the Open Science movement. They concluded that the Open Science movement has two conflicting agendas. Firstly, libraries and librarians aim to set science free for commercial exploitation while encouraging the practice of sharing, for the public good. Secondly, the agenda of the EU Competitiveness council and larger research infrastructures. For them, the aim of this new research approach is a) accelerate the translation of new discoveries in benefits for society and b) create better evidence for EU strategies and in this way keep Europe a competitive economy. As there are increasing voices against Open Science, they argue that it becomes crucial to overcome these misalignments and deliver a single agenda. Consequently, libraries and librarians might need to reconsider the fundamental philosophy of Open Science.

These are the slides from the LIBER 2020 Opening Address -Reflections on the impact of Covid-19 on Open Science. Session Description: Welcome to LIBER ONLINE 2020! LIBER President Jeannette Frey is looking forward to welcoming you to LIBER’s 49th Annual Conference. LIBER’s Vice President Julien Roche will, subsequently, present an introduction to the programme, after which he will chair the opening address. This year’s opening address is a collective presentation by our three Steering Committee Chairs, who will reflect on the impact of Covid-19 on Open Science. Dr. Bertil F. Dorch will use his research at the University of Southern Denmark to illustrate the managerial challenges during the covid-19 pandemic. Following, Dr. Birgit Schmidt will summarize the developments in the research field, from the perspective of open science and research data management. Finally, Dr. Giannis Tsakonas will conclude by discussing the current obstacles research library communities face regarding Open Access and copyright challenges.

These are the slides from the LIBER 2020 Session Cultural Change. Session Description: Continuous technological developments in communication and transportation mean the world is more globalized and connected than ever before. Libraries cannot afford to lag behind. It is crucial to keep up with the developments and strengthen our foothold in the research communities. But how do we achieve this? How do we cope with cultural changes? How do we adapt and organise our institutions so that we can face this new and dynamic environment? If these questions sound familiar to you, and you would like to know how others in the field have successfully tackled these issues, this session is relevant for you. Through three presentations, the theme of adapting our libraries, library collections and organisational strategies to the future will be addressed. Gyöngyi Karácsony will emphasize the importance of a library’s organisational culture. She believes that a strong, open culture is key and her presentation will elaborate on the forces shaping this culture, as well as introducing the Competing Values Framework (CVF), identifying and categorizing an institution’s culture. She will conclude by illustrating the differences between weak and strong cultures, and how these affect performance, innovation and engagement. Next, Justine Louise Rush will present her findings on the transformative power of library collections at the University of Kent. She will stress the importance of reflecting our academic communities in these resources. At the University of Kent, they achieved this by mapping out Special Collections and Archives collections to facilitate their use in supporting research-led teaching practices, and by engaging their academic community to address the need for a diverse curricula. This enabled them to reflect a greater proportion of global knowledge, increasing the levels of trust and belonging across their increasingly diverse academic community. Finally, Dr. Charlotte Wien and Dr. Bertil F Dorch will show how we can equip our modern libraries with a strategy to cope with a world of rapid change. They will introduce The LEGO® SERIOUS PLAY® methodology system, intended for strategy development, and will share examples from the University Library of Southern Denmark. This system increases the participation of the entire staff in formulating a successful strategy. They will conclude with presenting their resulting new strategy.

In the Wild West survival among gunmen was a matter of moving. Standing still would increase the probability of getting shot. In a world of rapid change, being on the move also increases one’s chances of survival. We – the research libraries - live in a world of rapid change. But will random walk save us? Hardly. Therefore, a modern library needs a strategy to steer and guide its path.In our paper we will start by challenging the assumption that a Strategy is a ‘must have’ for a modern research library. We will take our point of departure in presentation of the current management paradigm in most academic institutions (New Public Management) through this theoretical lens seek the raison d’être of strategic work in research libraries. We will then move on to a presentation of a comparative analysis of the vision statements of 17 European research libraries carried out in 2019. Our analysis will conclude that they lack vision, ambition, originality and creativity. We move on by introducing The LEGO® SERIOUS PLAY® methodology system intended for strategy development. We will demonstrate how we successfully managed to engage staff in literally building a new strategy. The LEGO® SERIOUS PLAY® methodology assumes that 80% of a meeting’s content is generated by 20% of the participants. The rest of the participants don’t contribute and leave the meeting with a negative experience. In a LEGO® SERIOUS PLAY® workshop all participants become engaged.We will finalize our presentation by showing examples of how it worked at The University Library of Southern Denmark and end up presenting our resulting new strategy.

Objective: Enabling PhD students to develop a viable publication strategy (PS) early on is an integral part of the mandatory research integrity course taught at most Danish universities. The purpose of this paper is to analyze to what extent PhD students follow their early stage PS and to identify what characterizes a successful PS.Method: 40 randomly selected PS assignments will be analyzed, from among the 2014 cohort of PhD students enrolled in the research integrity course at our university. The course is mandatory for all newly enrolled PhD students.We will identify similarities between early stage PSs that have been followed and those that have been abandoned. We will end up concluding whether it is meaningful to expect PhD students to come up with a viable PS at an early stage. The analysis will be carried out and finalized in early spring 2019. Results will be ready for presentation at WCRI 2019.David Kolb’s reference model for learning styles will be used as theoretical framework. The model depicts learning as an outcome of the dynamics of experience, observation, conceptualization and experimentation. We have selected this model since we consider it highly likely that PhD students meet all four modes when developing their PS. Results and conclusion: The publication pressure on young scientists has increased tremendously over the last decade. While publications ‘make or break’ a scientist, there is not much room for ‘trial and error’ and young scientists must have a relatively precise PS at a very early stage of their career. For these reasons, learning how to produce a PS, while considering the principles of responsible conduct of research, is a crucial part of doctoral training.The analysis will contribute evidence-based knowledge to further improve the quality of research integrity training targeted at PhD students.

We present a strategical approach for research libraries based on the experience accumulated through the strategical process (2013), organizational change process (2014-2015) and evaluation (2015-2016) at The University Library of Southern Denmark leading to the library’s current 2020 strategy. The approach in question utilizes a concept of balanced scales and assumes that research libraries emerge “naturally” from academia’s need to handle fundamental practicalities related to carry out efficient scholarly communication and teaching. We argue that framing libraries’ strategies as research-based supports research libraries’ mission in bridging academia (higher education and R&D) on the one hand, and efficient ressource administration, high level service and supporting infrastructure on the other hand. In order to co-evolve this bridge while maintaing fitness of purpose, libraries haveto manage a delicate balance, in our view best achieved by research-based service development.

Can we make a copy of Tycho’s “De Nova Stella” that can in fact survive a nova? At first, this may seem at best a nerdish, if not distinctly foolish question. However, it is also both a technological and a philosophical question: In fact, answering questions like this is linked to both technical, physical and sociological problems related to the long-term preservation and curation of objects from current and past civilizations. The undertaking presented here is two-fold: Firstly, we report on the results from a state of the art short-term project, in which we have digitized and analyzed three well-known rare books pertaining to astronomical observations by Tycho Brahe on the island of Hven. The project let to the creation of free ebooks, enabling open access to the sky as recorded by Tycho. Secondly, we discuss some long-term issues related to the digital and physical preservation of scientific knowledge and heritage in general, exemplified by e.g. the works by Tycho. Future work includes further physical analysis of the books and fragments, a systematic extraction and digitization of the astronomical observations, digital curation and dissemination, as well as research into the possibility of creating representations and replicas of the works, durable on extremely long time-scales.

Scholarly metrics and rewards are both part of the Open Science agenda, and next generation and open metrics are perceived as necessary for supporting transparency in research: E.g. the EC Expert Group on Altmetrics conclude that ‘next generation metrics should be underpinned by an open, transparent and liked data infrastructure’, and similarly LIBER has formed an Innovative Metrics Working Group to discuss the role and actions of libraries in this respect. In the context of Open Science metrics is often addressed as being related to rewarding a particular Open scholarly practise based on sophisticated evaluation and new metrics. However, experience shows that great care needs to be taken in order for new metrics not to introduce unwanted and unethical behaviour or to infringe freedom of research. To illustrate the potential danger of metrics actually working against the ideals of Open Science, I present the results of recent studies into the gaming incentives of metrics, and discuss possible pitfalls faced by libraries venturing into the business of developing and supplying metrics to research institutions., Presentation from ILIDE 2019: Innovative Library in Digital Era, Jasna, Slovakia April 8, 2019

Research librarians no longer need to perform as many of the traditional the chores of the research library. This is due to many factors like digitalization, changing research policies and changes in researchers’ behaviour. With these changes also comes a demand for new skills. We seek an answer to how this demand can be met. We argue that changes that has taken place in the research library has also led to a loss of prestige for the research librarians. We use Bourdieu’s field theory to analyse the power struggles in the academic field and in the field of the research library and to identify means of reclaiming the previous prestigious position in both fields. We end up creating a 60 ECTS framework for a flexible part-time master’s program for research librarians. The first cohort of students has already been enrolled and evaluate the program in very positive terms.

The h-index is an author-level metric that attempts to measure both the productivity, and the citation impact of scholarly publications. When proposing the h-index in his frequently cited 2005 paper, Hirsch stressed that the index could “never give more than a rough approximation to an individual's multifaceted profile”. Despite Hirsch’s original reservations, the h-index is indeed a very popular, and relatively simple measure. While simplicity may be the main reason for its popularity, it may at the same time be its vulnerability: A simple measure cannot incorporate the entire complexity of scholarly communication, or of the profile of an academic career.Our point of departure differs from the vast body of literature discussing the h-index, criticizing its merits, and/or suggesting alternative measures. We accept the existence, and use of the h-index, but are critical towards it being used as an impact indicator on its own. We focus on how individual researchers can in principle strategically optimize their own h-index, and on the strategies used by such “high h-index researchers”.To investigate researcher behavior, we extracted the publication data of 75 researchers affiliated with the Department of Clinical Research at the University of Southern Denmark (SDU). We created scatter plots of their publications and citations, and identified the outliers as either high h-index researchers, or low h-index researchers. Semi-structured qualitative research interviews were conducted with high and low h-index researchers to extract their respective publication strategies (if any). Indications are that the high h-index researchers reflect on their performance measures, and work strategically with increasing their own performance in accordance with such measures, while the low h-index researchers are less conscious about such measures. In our paper, we describe the differences between the two groups, and discuss the implications of our findings. The h-index is an author-level metric that attempts to measure both the productivity, and the citation impact of scholarly publications. When proposing the h-index in his frequently cited 2005 paper, Hirsch stressed that the index could “never give more than a rough approximation to an individual's multifaceted profile”. Despite Hirsch’s original reservations, the h-index is indeed a very popular, and relatively simple measure. While simplicity may be the main reason for its popularity, it may at the same time be its vulnerability: A simple measure cannot incorporate the entire complexity of scholarly communication, or of the profile of an academic career.Our point of departure differs from the vast body of literature discussing the h-index, criticizing its merits, and/or suggesting alternative measures. We accept the existence, and use of the h-index, but are critical towards it being used as an impact indicator on its own. We focus on how individual researchers can in principle strategically optimize their own h-index, and on the strategies used by such “high h-index researchers”.To investigate researcher behavior, we extracted the publication data of 75 researchers affiliated with the Department of Clinical Research at the University of Southern Denmark (SDU). We created scatter plots of their publications and citations, and identified the outliers as either high h-index researchers, or low h-index researchers. Semi-structured qualitative research interviews were conducted with high and low h-index researchers to extract their respective publication strategies (if any). Indications are that the high h-index researchers reflect on their performance measures, and work strategically with increasing their own performance in accordance with such measures, while the low h-index researchers are less conscious about such measures. In our paper, we describe the differences between the two groups, and discuss the implications of our findings.

Tavse forskere. Hvor er viljen til at dele og hvad med samfundssindet? Hvorfor deltager de ikke i debatten og hvorfor bidrager de ikke til Open Science?

Oversatt til spansk av María Elena Marquésa, Aitor Herreroa, Eduard Baladiaa, Rodrigo Martínez-Rodrígueza, Andrea Cerverac, Kristian Buhringa, Eliud Aguilar-Barreraa, Samuel Durán-Agüeroa, Grupo de trabajo de la Red de Nutrición Basada en la Evidencia (RED-NuBE). Opprinnelig utgave: Lund, H., Brunnhuber, K., Juhl, C., Robinson, K., Leenaars, M., Dorch, B. F., . . . Chalmers, I. (2016). Towards evidence based research. Bmj. doi:10.1136/bmj.i5440 MENSAJES CLAVE • Aventurarse en investigación sin revisar de manera sistemática lo ya conocido, especialmente cuando la investigación implica personas o animales, no es ético, carece de rigor científico y es un desperdicio. • Una revisión sistemática de pruebas imparciales (evidencias) relevantes puede determinar si la investigación es realmente necesaria. • Algunos organismos de financiación ahora requieren que los solicitantes hagan referencia a revisiones sistemáticas de investigaciones existentes. • El desperdicio en investigación también se puede reducir mediante la producción, actualización y difusión eficientes de revisiones sistemáticas.

Our research question is: How can adequate education in Library and Information Science be provided for subject specialists in research libraries under constant change?Research libraries may be one of the places where imprints of the transition from industrial society to knowledge society are most evident. In order to keep up, the library profession has had to incorporate numerous new disciplines and has become a highly specialized area with its own Ph.D. program. But while developing the curricula within the discipline of library and information science (LIS), the training programs for the subject specialists of the research libraries tend to have been neglected in Denmark.Until the turn of the millennium, a subject specialist in a Danish research library would typically start their career by applying for a vacancy in connection with a subject specialist’s MA or Ph.D. specialization. This is illustrated in the value compass below:◾Specialist Theorist◾Practitioner GeneralistThe vertical axis reflects the anticipated level of education in relation to handling different functions within the library. The horizontal axis reflects the degree of idealism vis a vis pragmatism in relation to handling the tasks in the library. The hypothesis is that the subject specialist previously found him or herself in the upper part of the compass, while the librarians would be placed in the lower part. Obviously, this created a field of tension between the subject specialists and the librarians.A useful tool in understanding and explaining fields of tension is Bourdieu’s Field Theory. It explains the structures in a given social world (i.e. a library), including the power struggles inside: These struggles are about how to obtain the positions that give the most prestige. No field is ever static since struggles for the power to decide exactly what is associated with power and what is not persist. With the upgrading of LIS the librarians have moved upwards on the vertical axis and thereby challenge the subject specialist’s position. At the same time developments within the academic world have brought about an undermining of the role of the subject specialists.And as the research libraries are in a rapid state of flux, it is no longer clear which positions provide maximum prestige in a modern research library. Therefore, we do not think that a single streamlined educational offer is the answer to our research question. Instead the point is that today’s competence needs are individualized.Taking this into account University Library of Southern Denmark has begun collaboration with The Department of Design and Communication at University of Southern Denmark, and The Royal School of Library and Information Science (RSLIS). We have developed a curriculum for a flexible Master’s program, where the students compose an individual portfolio. The first students will enroll in the autumn 2017. In our paper, we will discuss the applicability of field theory to Library and Information Science curricula development in more depth and will present our curricula in more depth to illustrate our points.

Using Scopus and national sources, I have investigated the evolution of the cost of publishing in Danish astronomy on fine scale over a number of years. I find that e.g. the number of publications per year from Danish astronomers increased by a factor of 4 during 15 years: naturally, the corresponding potential cost of publishing increased similarly. The actual realized cost of publishing in core journals are investigated for high profile Danish astronomy research institutions and compared to the corresponding library license expenditures for those particular core journals. It is illustrated that the situation is highly unstable if the current cost scenario continues, and I speculate that Danish astronomy is risking a catastrophic collaps due to the combination of increasing subscription cost, increased research output, and increased direct publishing costs related to Open Access and other page charges.