This is the QA environment of the MD-SOAR platform. It is for TESTING PURPOSES ONLY. Navigate to https://mdsoar.org to access the latest open access research from MD-SOAR institutions.
QA Environment
 

Yaukey, Suzanna

Permanent URI for this collection

http://hdl.handle.net/11603/27214

Browse

Recent Submissions

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Assessing scholarly communication programs
    (2021-07) Chan, Emily; Yaukey, Suzanna; Dickman, Daina; Lawson, Nicole; Towson University. Albert S. Cook Library. Administration; CSU Digital Repositories Meeting
    In August 2019 California State University, Sacramento and San Jose State University were awarded an IMLS National Forum Grant to identify standards and best practices in evaluating scholarly communication programs at M1 Carnegie-classified public universities.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    In-person to virtual in six weeks: moving a conference online due to COVID-19
    (2021-07) Chan, Emily; Yaukey, Suzanna; Dickman, Daina; Lawson, Nicole; Towson University. Albert S. Cook Library. Administration; Towson Conference for Academic Libraries
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Measuring campus engagement for scholarly communication services: A mixed methods study of U.S. public teaching institutions
    (International Conference on Performance Measurement in Libraries, 2021-11) Chan, Emily; Yaukey, Suzanna; Dickman, Daina; Lawson, Nicole; Towson University. Albert S. Cook Library. Administration
    Over the past several decades, new technologies and paradigms have impacted the creation and sharing of work; scholars across all fields have seen changes in research output, publication, and preservation of the scholarly record, as well as emergent publishing models and an emphasis on the measurement of impact. Libraries have broadly defined their efforts to support the research and dissemination lifecycle as “scholarly communication” services. Despite investing significant resources -- personnel, technological investments, and budget -- to develop scholarly communication programs, evaluation of the outcomes and impact of these activities has largely consisted of quantitative measures, like consultation counts, workshop attendance, or repository growth and usage statistics. A more comprehensive or holistic approach to scholarly communication assessment has remained elusive.