DOCSLIB.ORG

Ctwatch Quarterly

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ctwatch Quarterly ISSN 1555-9874 AVAILABLE ON -LINE AT http://www.ctwatch.org/quarterly/ VOLUME 3 NUMBER 3 AUGUST 2007 The Coming Revolution in Scholarly Communications & Cyberinfr astructure GUEST EDITORS LEE DIRKS AND TONY HEY 1 Introduction Lee Dirks and Tony Hey FEATURED ARTICLES 5 The Shape of the Scientific Article in the 42 Incentivizing the Open Access Research Web: Developing Cyberinfrastructure Publication-Archiving, Data-Archiving and Clifford Lynch Scientometrics Tim Brody, Les Carr, Yves Gingras, Chawki Hajjem, Stevan Harnad, and Alma Swan 11 Next-Generation Implications of Open Access 51 The Law as Cyberinfrastructure Paul Ginsparg Brian Fitzgerald and Kylie Pappalardo 19 Web 2.0 in Science Timo Hannay PERSPECTIVES 26 Reinventing Scholarly Communication for the 58 Cyberinfrastructure For Knowledge Sharing Electronic Age John Wilbanks J. Lynn Fink and Philip E. Bourne 32 Interoperability for the Discovery, Use, and 67 Trends Favoring Open Access Re-Use of Units of Scholarly Communication Peter Suber Herbert Van de Sompel and Carl Lagoze http://www.ctwatch.org/ AUGUST 2007 1 Introduction By now, it is a well-observed fact that scholarly communication is in the midst of Lee Dirks tremendous upheaval. That is as exciting to many as it is terrifying to others. What Director, Scholarly Communication is less obvious is exactly what this dramatic change will mean for the academic Microsoft Corporation world – specifically what influence it will have on the research community – and the Tony Hey advancement of science overall. In an effort to better grasp the trends and the potential Corporate Vice President, External Research impact in these areas, we’ve assembled an impressive constellation of top names in the Microsoft Corporation field – as well as some new, important voices – and asked them to address the key issues for the future of scholarly communications resulting from the intersecting concepts of cyberinfrastructure, scientific research, and Open Access. All of the hallmarks of sea-change are apparent: attitudes are changing, roles are adjusting, business models are shifting – but, perhaps most significantly, individual and collective behaviors are very slow to evolve – far slower than expected. That said, each of the authors in this CTWatch Quarterly issue puts forward a variety of visions and approaches, some prac- tical considerations, and in several cases, specific prototypes or break-through projects already underway to help point the way. Leading off is Clifford Lynch’s excellent overview (“The Shape of the Scientific Article in the Developing Cyberinfrastructure”) – an outstanding entry point to the broad range of issues raised by the reality of cyberinfrastructure and the impact it will have on scientific publishing in the near-term. His paper is an effective preview to the fundamental shift of how scholarly communication will work, namely how the role of the author is changing in a Web 2.0 environment. A core element in this new world is the growing potential benefit for inclusion of data in submissions (or links to data sets). Lynch thoughtfully addresses the many implications arising in this new paradigm (e.g., papers + data) – and how policies and behaviors will need to adapt – most especially the impact this will have on the concept of peer review. He astutely raises the issue of the importance of software/middleware in this new ecosystem – namely in the areas of viewing/reading and visualization. This is a critical point for accurate dissemination to facilitate further research – and is also integral to discoverability as well as the ability to aggregate across multiple articles. In his piece, “Next-Generation Implications of Open Access,” Paul Ginsparg pro- vides an invaluable perspective on the current state of affairs – a “long view” – as one of the originators of the Open Access movement. Having in essence invented the Open Access central repository when he launched arXiv.org in 1991, Ginsparg’s brief retro- spective and forward-looking assessment of this space is a useful look at the features and functionality that open repositories must consider to stay relevant and to add value in this changing environment. Indeed, it is a testament that arXiv.org has been able to remain true to its original tenets of remaining low-cost, selective, and complimentary/ supplemental to other publishers or repositories. However, Ginsparg’s treatment hints at several new directions and areas for enhancement/improvement relating to the issues of (a) storage and access of documents/articles at scale, (b) the social net- working implications for large-scale repositories as well as (c) a discourse on how to handle compound objects, data and other related supporting documentation. Also insightful are Ginsparg’s musings of the economics of Open Access, and he surfaces the important theme highlighted by several of the authors in this issue—the notion that a generational shift is required to enable the necessary behavioral change, and the recognition that our field(s) may not progress until this reality is brought about. AUGUST 2007 2 Introduction Timo Hannay’s extremely useful survey of the Web 2.0 landscape is an especially valuable landscape map. In this environmental scan, Hannay takes a snapshot of the current state-of-the-art and provides not only definitions but also definitive examples/ applications that demonstrate the reality, the potential, and the remaining hurdles faced by the social-networking phenomenon. Now that we’ve finally begun to realize the power and potential that had been promised us with the “web-as-platform” – we’re also understanding the many benefits and the driving-force of the network effect: the more who participate, the richer the experience. (Yet, Hannay also points out the cruel truth that the scientific community has been miserably late to the game, when it should have been first – considering the Internet was initially constructed to facilitate the sharing of scientific data.) As exciting as it might be at this point in time, a core tenet of this article is to point out that – as a community – we have yet to realize the full potential of Web 2.0, as we are still so very early in the initial phase. Considering the very medium we are using changes/alters the methods we employ, Hannay stresses that is “impossible to predict” the future, but the hints he provides promise us a very exciting journey. Lynn Fink and Phil Bourne’s “Reinventing Scholarly Communication in the Electronic Age” is an especially compelling article in that it lays out examples of research and projects currently in progress to enact Web 2.0 principals. Echoing the irony from Hannay’s paper, the authors note that scientific and scholarly articles have not evolved at the same pace as other developments on the Internet. In an effort to change that, the University of California, San Diego is undertaking two projects to catalyze developments in this space: (1) the “BioLit” project relating to the semantic mark-up of journal articles enhanced during the authoring stage – not after the fact – and, (2) the launch of “SciVee.com”, a new online resource for augmenting scientific papers with brief video presentations. Also striking is that the article raises a theme that appears in several of the other papers related to the “generational change” that is a crucial underlying factor to the success of these types of projects. There is clearly agreement among the authors that the newer, younger generation is going to carry the scientific world forward in a way that the existing, established community cannot. So, changes that are being implemented now will begin to have greater and greater impact as this new generation of scientists and scholars shift the behavior of the community. It is an exciting prospect – but the groundwork to ensure this occurs is only being laid now with enabling research projects such as these from UCSD. Herbert Van de Sompel and Carl Lagoze’s “Interoperability for the Discovery, Use, and Re-Use of Units of Scholarly Communication” is an exciting look at the seminal work now underway related to the Open Archives Initiative’s “Object Reuse & Exchange” (ORE) project. Building upon a concept initially referenced in Hannay’s paper, they point out the need to understand “the change in the nature of the unit of scholarly communication” – meaning we can no longer effectively think about an article or paper as the primary vessel of conveying knowledge within the academic world or across scientific disciplines. The transmission of knowledge has grown, broadened, and now spans a range from atomic data to entire datasets, from a single paragraph to a series of articles about specific concept, to presentations, videos, or other modes/ formats related to the dissemination of a given concept. Since our ability to commu- nicate information has exploded, we must likewise evolve our effort to describe, find, and utilize these new “compound objects.”. This paper is an in-depth “nuts-and-bolts” presentation, and Van de Sompel and Lagoze explain why there is a crucial need to re-architect scholarship on the internet and how they propose to enact this to ensure that we maximize the intent and the value of what is made available for scholars and researchers. Accompanying their article is an illustrative, online demonstration of their prototype ORE implementation in the form of a screencast referenced in the Appendix of their article; this companion piece provides useful context and a quick AUGUST 2007 3 Introduction overview with examples to their work in progress. The screencast can be found here: http://www.ctwatch.org/quarterly/multimedia/11/ORE_prototype-demo/. In the article by Stevan Harnad et al. entitled “Incentivizing the Open Access Research Web: Publication-Archiving, Data-Archiving and Scientometrics,” we see a bold proposal for employing a new application of research metric across multiple sources (defined as “scientometrics” – the collection, measurement and analysis of full-text, metadata, download and citation metrics) to drive author self-archiving, encourage data-archiving, and enhance research quality overall.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • March 2010, Corrected 3/31/10 ISSN: 0195-4857
    TECHNICAL SERVICE S LAW LIBRARIAN Volume 35 No. 3 http://www.aallnet.org/sis/tssis/tsll/ March 2010, corrected 3/31/10 ISSN: 0195-4857 INSIDE: Technical Services Law Librarian From the Officers OBS-SIS ..................................... 3 to be added to HeinOnline! TS-SIS ........................................ 4 AALL Headquarters and William S. Hein & Co. signed an agreement Announcements on December 2, 2009 that will permit TSLL to become available in a Renee D. Chapman Award ....... 31 fully-searchable image-based format as part of HeinOnline’s Law Librarian’s TS SIS Educational Grants ...... 13 Reference Library. TSLL to be added to Hein ........... 1 The Law Librarian’s Reference Library, currently in beta version, is accessible by subscription at http://heinonline.org/HOL/Index?collection=lcc&set_ as_cursor=clear. At present if a library subscribes to Larry Dershem’s print Columns version of the Library of Congress Classification Schedules it has free access Acquisitions ............................... 5 to this reference library. As part of this HeinOnline library TSLL will join such Classification .............................. 6 classic works as Library of Congress Classification schedules, Cataloging Collection Development ............ 8 Service Bulletin, Subject Headings Manual, and the Catalog of the Library of Description & Entry ................... 9 the Law School of Harvard University (1909). For more information about the The Internet .............................. 10 Law Librarian’s Reference Library see Hein’s introductory brochure at http:// Management ............................. 14 heinonline.org/HeinDocs/LLReference.pdf. MARC Remarks....................... 15 OCLC ....................................... 18 We’re hopeful TSLL will be accessible on HeinOnline in time for the AALL Preservation .............................. 19 Annual Meeting in July, but no timetable has yet been set … so stay tuned! Private Law Libraries ..............
    [Show full text]
  • Download Book of Abstracts
    Complex Nanophotonics Science Camp cumberland lodge Windsor Great Park Berkshire, SL4 2HP, UK 27th–30th August 2013 Bringing together early career scientists to bridge Nanophotonics, Plasmonics & Biophotonics of complex media. Jacopo Bertolotti Twente University, The Netherlands [email protected] www.jacopobertolotti.com Otto Muskens COMMITTEE Southampton University, UK [email protected] www.ottolmuskens.info Sylvain Gigan Langevin Institute, ESPCI, France [email protected] www.institut-langevin.espci.fr/Sylvain-Gigan,510 Riccardo Sapienza SCIENTIFIC King’s College London, UK [email protected] www.sapienzalab.org Conference Secretary Julia Kilpatrick [email protected] www.sciencecamp.eu Niek van Hulst ICFO, The Institute of Photonic Science tracking nanoScale coherent energy tranSfer in Single light harveSting complexeS p16–17 SPEAKERS Stefania Residori Institut Non Lineaire de Nice , INLN–CNRS Self-adaptive holography in nonlinear media p18–19 Aristide Dogariu CREOL, Florida mechanical action in complex electromagnetic fieldS KEYNOTE p20–21 Rashid Zia Regine Frank Brown University KIT, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology a multipolar emitter: can 1 tranSition the quantum nature illuminate 2 pathS? of random laSerS p22–23 p42–43 SPEAKERS Tomas Cizmar Jaesuk Hwang University of St. Andrews Imperial College photonicS in Single organic dye diSordered moleculeS aS Single environmentS and photon SourceS fibre baSed imaging and large optical nonlinearitieS on a photonic chip p28–29 p44–45 Wonshik Choi Andrea
    [Show full text]
  • The Political Methodologist
    The Political Methodologist Newsletter of the Political Methodology Section American Political Science Association Volume 23, Number 1, Fall 2015 Editor: Associate Editors: Justin Esarey, Rice University Randolph T. Stevenson, Rice University [email protected] [email protected] Editorial Assistant: Ahra Wu, Rice University Rick K. Wilson, Rice University [email protected] [email protected] Contents eight political scientists comment on their experiences as au- thors, reviewers, and/or editors dealing with the scientific Notes from the Editors 1 peer review process and (in some cases) offer suggestions to improve that process. Our contributions come from authors Special Issue on Peer Review 2 at very different levels of rank and subfield specialization Justin Esarey: Introduction to the Special Issue / in the discipline and consequently represent a diversity of Acceptance Rates and the Aesthetics of Peer viewpoints within political methodology. Review . .2 Additionally, some of the contributors to this issue will Brendan Nyhan: A Checklist Manifesto for Peer participate in an online roundtable discussion on March Review . .4 18th at 12:00 noon (Eastern time) as a part of the Interna- Danilo Freire: Peering at Open Peer Review . .6 tional Methods Colloquium. If you want to add your voice Thomas J. Leeper: The Multiple Routes to Cred- to this discussion, we encourage you to join the roundtable ibility . 11 audience! Participation in the roundtable discussion is free Thomas Pepinsky: What is Peer Review For? and open to anyone around the world (with internet access Why Referees are not the Disciplinary Police 16 and a PC or Macintosh). Visit the IMC registration page Sara McLaughlin Mitchell: An Editor's Thoughts linked here to register to participate or visit www.methods- on the Peer Review Process .
    [Show full text]
  • Bioinformatics
    Bioinformatics Bioinformatics is the combination of biology and information technology. The discipline encompasses any computational tools and methods used to manage, analyze and manipulate large sets of biological data. Essentially, bioinformatics has three components: The creation of databases allowing the storage and management of large biological data sets. The development of algorithms and statistics to determine relationships among members of large data sets. The use of these tools for the analysis and interpretation of various types of biological data, including DNA, RNA and protein sequences, protein structures, gene expression profiles, and biochemical pathways. The term bioinformatics first came into use in the 1990s and was originally synonymous with the management and analysis of DNA, RNA and protein sequence data. Computational tools for sequence analysis had been available since the 1960s, but this was a minority interest until advances in sequencing technology led to a rapid expansion in the number of stored sequences in databases such as GenBank. Now, the term has expanded to incorporate many other types of biological data, for example protein structures, gene expression profiles and protein interactions. Each of these areas requires its own set of databases, algorithms and statistical methods. Bioinformatics is largely, although not exclusively, a computer-based discipline. Computers are important in bioinformatics for two reasons: First, many bioinformatics problems require the same task to be repeated millions of times. For example, comparing a new sequence to every other sequence stored in a database or comparing a group of sequences systematically to determine evolutionary relationships. In such cases, the ability of computers to process information and test alternative solutions rapidly is indispensable.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Us Research Program Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI)
    All of Us Research Program Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI) Research Priorities Workshop June 24–25, 2019 Executive Summary The All of Us Research Program’s Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI) Research Priorities Workshop was held on June 24–25, 2019. The workshop convened ELSI professionals and All of Us participant ambassadors to help identify ELSI research opportunities using the All of Us Research Program, provide feedback on how to advance ELSI research by using the program and its data resources, and suggest ELSI-related research use cases.1 On Day 1, attendees received information on the program’s research platform, scientific framework and priorities, commitment to diversity, participant engagement strategy, data access and privacy policies, and new activities that are being planned. They also received a demonstration of the All of Us public data browser. Attendees then divided into working groups organized around three themes: (1) genomics; (2) social determinants of health; and (3) legal, regulatory, and policy issues. In these groups, attendees participated in a facilitated activity where they discussed and recorded ELSI research questions of interest and the data needed to answer them, including data with planned availability through the program’s Research Hub. During an open discussion on Day 2, attendees raised significant concerns about the structure of Day 1 and asserted that the program could make better use of their deep and varied expertise by reframing the workshop to allow for exploration of some important ELSI considerations that the program raises, including protecting participants’ rights and privacy and ensuring that participants have a real voice in the program.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenges in Sustaining the Million Book Project, a Project Supported by the National Science Foundation
    Clair / J Zhejiang Univ-Sci C (Comput & Electron) 2010 11(11):919-922 919 Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE C (Computers & Electronics) ISSN 1869-1951 (Print); ISSN 1869-196X (Online) www.zju.edu.cn/jzus; www.springerlink.com E-mail: [email protected] Personal View: Challenges in sustaining the Million Book Project, a project supported by the National Science Foundation Gloriana St. CLAIR wisely invested in bringing educational and cultural Director, Universal Library Project resources to a large segment of their constituents. The Dean, Carnegie Mellon University Libraries, Pittsburgh, disadvantage is that, as government budgets tighten, Pennsylvania, USA the funding necessary to sustain a project can be lost. E-mail: [email protected] One great advantage of government funding is that the government wants to serve the whole public. doi:10.1631/jzus.C1001011 Beginning this year, in the U.S., the National Science Foundation now requires principal investigators to explain how the data they have collected will be made One of the main roles I have played as a director available to the larger research community and how it of the Universal Digital Library has been to write will be sustained. In the U.S., the government also grant proposals to support our work. Both for this wants free-to-read access and at the same time allows project and for another project, Olive.org, an archive creators to charge for enhanced versions. of executable content, how to sustain the final product Foundations and other not-for-profit organi- is the most difficult challenge. This paper discusses zations.
    [Show full text]
  • Digital Scholarship 2009 (PDF)
    DIGITAL SCHOLARSHIP 2009 CHARLES W. BAILEY, JR. DIGITAL SCHOLARSHIP HOUSTON, TX Digital Scholarship 2009 Copyright © 2010 by Charles W. Bailey, Jr. Cover photographs (before alteration) by NASA. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, PO Box 1866, Mountain View, CA 94042, USA. http://www.digital-scholarship.org/ The author makes no warranty of any kind, either express or implied, for information in Digital Scholarship 2009, which is provided on an "as is" basis. The author does not assume and hereby disclaims any liability to any party for any loss or damage resulting from the use of information in Digital Scholarship 2009. Table of Contents Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography: 2009 Annual Edition 1 Dedication 1 1 Economic Issues 3 2 Electronic Books and Texts 16 2.1 Case Studies and History 16 2.2 General Works 24 2.3 Library Issues 36 3 Electronic Serials 44 3.1 Case Studies and History 44 3.2 Critiques 54 3.3 Electronic Distribution of Printed Journals 56 3.4 General Works 59 3.5 Library Issues 72 3.6 Research 90 4 General Works 115 5 Legal Issues 135 5.1 Intellectual Property Rights 135 5.2 License Agreements 163 6 Library Issues 174 6.1 Cataloging, Identifiers, Linking, and Metadata 174 6.2 Digital Libraries 204 6.3 General Works 247 6.4 Information Integrity and Preservation 265 7 New Publishing Models 296 8 Publisher Issues 341 8.1 Digital Rights Management and User Authentication 350 9 Repositories, E-Prints, and OAI 359 Appendix A.
    [Show full text]
  • A Fool's Errand
    COMMENT by the madness of mobs. Will a crowd- sourced scholarship be dominated by pro- vocative pap that fills without nourishing? Here we must recall first that schol- arship has always been a community MONROE BRENDAN enterprise, driven by building consen- sus among experts10. So the question is not ‘Should we crowdsource?’ but ‘How should we crowdsource?’. Second, we must dispose of the straw-man argument that hundreds of uninformed readers’ opinions will count for more than one Fields medallist’s recommendation. Authority and expertise are central in the Web era as they were in the journal era. The difference is that whereas the paper- based system used subjective criteria to identify authoritative voices, the Web- based one assesses authority recursively from the entire community. We now have a unique opportunity as scholars to guide the evolution of our tools in directions that honour our val- ues and benefit our communities. Here’s what to do. First, try new things: publish new kinds of products, share them in new places and brag about them using new metrics. Intellectual playfulness is a core scholarly virtue. Second, take risks (another scholarly virtue): publishing more papers may be safe, but scholars who establish early leadership in Web- native production will be ahead of the curve as these genres become dominant. A fool’s errand Finally, resist the urge to cling to the trap- pings of scientific excellence rather than Objections to the Creative Commons attribution excellence itself. ‘Publication’ is just one mode of making public and one way of licence are straw men raised by parties who want open validating scholarly excellence.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fourth Paradigm
    ABOUT THE FOURTH PARADIGM This book presents the first broad look at the rapidly emerging field of data- THE FOUR intensive science, with the goal of influencing the worldwide scientific and com- puting research communities and inspiring the next generation of scientists. Increasingly, scientific breakthroughs will be powered by advanced computing capabilities that help researchers manipulate and explore massive datasets. The speed at which any given scientific discipline advances will depend on how well its researchers collaborate with one another, and with technologists, in areas of eScience such as databases, workflow management, visualization, and cloud- computing technologies. This collection of essays expands on the vision of pio- T neering computer scientist Jim Gray for a new, fourth paradigm of discovery based H PARADIGM on data-intensive science and offers insights into how it can be fully realized. “The impact of Jim Gray’s thinking is continuing to get people to think in a new way about how data and software are redefining what it means to do science.” —Bill GaTES “I often tell people working in eScience that they aren’t in this field because they are visionaries or super-intelligent—it’s because they care about science The and they are alive now. It is about technology changing the world, and science taking advantage of it, to do more and do better.” —RhyS FRANCIS, AUSTRALIAN eRESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURE COUNCIL F OURTH “One of the greatest challenges for 21st-century science is how we respond to this new era of data-intensive
    [Show full text]
  • The Machine That Would Predict the Future
    TECHNOLOGY SPECIAL REPORT The Machine That Would Predic t the If you dropped all the world’s data into a black box, could it become a crystal ball that Futurewould let you see the future—even test what would happen if you chose A over B? One researcher thinks so, and he could soon get a billion euros to build it By David Weinberger In the summer and fall of last year, the Greek financial crisis tore at the seams of the global economy. Having run up a debt that it would never be able to repay, the country faced a number of poten- tial outcomes, all unpleasant. Efforts to slash spending spurred riots in the streets of Athens, while threats of default rattled global financial markets. Many economists argued that Greece should leave the euro zone and devalue its currency, a move that would in theory help the economy grow. “Make no mistake: an orderly euro exit will be hard,” wrote New York Universi- ty economist Nouriel Roubini in the Financial Times. “But watching the slow disorderly implo- sion of the Greek economy and society will be much worse.” No one was sure exactly how the scenario would play out, limit the spread of infectious disease. Altered trade routes could though. Fear spread that if Greece were to abandon the euro, disrupt native ecosystems. The question itself is simple— Spain and Italy might do the same, weakening the central bond Should Greece drop the euro?—but the potential fallout is so of the European Union. Yet the Economist opined that the crisis far-reaching and complex that even the world’s sharpest minds would “bring more fiscal-policy control from Brussels, turning found themselves unable to grasp all the permutations.
    [Show full text]
  • The Legal Framework for Reproducible Scientific Research Licensing and Copyright
    R EPRODUCIBLE RESEARCH The Legal Framework for Reproducible Scientific Research Licensing and Copyright As computational researchers increasingly make their results available in a reproducible way, questions naturally arise regarding copyright, subsequent use and citation, and ownership rights in general. The author proposes the Reproducible Research Standard for all components of scientific researchers’ scholarship, which should encourage replicable scientific investigation through attribution, the facilitation of greater collaboration, and the promotion of the engagement of the larger community in scientific learning and discovery. n the US, when scientists put their original computational work because researchers often research on the Web, it automatically falls need more than just the published article to re- under copyright. However, copyright is produce the results. an unsuitable legal structure for scientific Although this trend seems to be changing, the Iworks. Scientific norms guide scientists to repro- typical journal publishing format doesn’t allow for duce and build on others’ research, and default transmission of supporting files such as accom- copyright law by its very purpose runs counter panying images, source code, or demonstrations to these goals. In this article, I present a meth- of work to interested readers—although some odology for scientists to rescind copyright from journals are beginning to require that code or their work in such a way that it realigns scientific data be released as a precondition for publication, information sharing with long-established scien- (for example, Nature [www.nature.com/authors/ tific norms. editorial_policies/availability.html], The Insight Journal [www.insight-journal.org], and Annals of Options for Researchers Internal Medicine [www.annals.org/cgi/content/ Computational research is becoming more per- full/0000605-200703200-00154v1]).
    [Show full text]
  • NAME: Mary-Jo K. Romaniuk
    CURRICULUM VITAE NAME: Mary-Jo K. Romaniuk PLACE OF BIRTH: Columbia, Missouri USA Citizenship: Canadian and American UNIVERSITY EDUCATION: • PhD Candidate, Queensland University of Technology (expected completion 2012) • Masters of Library and Information Science – San Jose State University • Bachelor of Commerce (With Distinction) - University of Saskatchewan RELATED EDUCATION: 2012 Harvard Graduate School of Education-Leadership Institute for Academic Librarians - August 2012 (accepted - forthcoming) 2007 Frye Leadership Institute, Frye Fellow 2003 Public Participation Certificate Program, International Association of Public Participation 2000 University Management Course, University of Manitoba, Centre for Higher Education 1999 Library Management Skills Institute, Library Manager, Association of Research Libraries 1997 Advanced Facilitation Skills Course, Dr. Donald Carmont 1995 Competitive Intelligence Program, Dr. Jonathan Calof, University of Ottawa 1990 Alberta Best, Government of Alberta 1988 Finalist - Uniform Final Examination, Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants 1984 – 1987 Student Education Program, Institute of Chartered Accountants of Alberta AWARDS & HONOURS: • Library Journal - 2010 Mover and Shaker • Student Convocation Speaker, San Jose State SLIS – Convocation 2009 • Fellow of the Frye Leadership Institute (2007) • Deans Scholarship – College of Commerce (1982) • Government of Saskatchewan Scholarship (1978) • Catholic Women’s League Scholarship (1978) PROFESSIONAL AND WORK EXPERIENCE University of Alberta,
    [Show full text]