60 · Survey Results: Survey Questions and Responses
Faculty governance has passed a resolution on Open Access 11 20%
Institution has rearranged or gained physical spaces to better support SC services 11 20%
Faculty governance has passed a resolution on SC not related to Open Access. 5 9%
Examination of the impact of digital publishing on tenure and/or the institution’s publishing rewards
4 7%
Institution has adopted an Open Access self-archiving mandate 2 4%
Changes in promotion and tenure criteria 2 4%
Other institution outcome 16 30%
Please describe other institution outcome.
An open access committee is finalizing its report to the provost as of this writing. A recommendation should be
forthcoming soon.
Confusing question. We are starting an open access fund and have an institutional repository. But they are library
initiatives, not institutional.
Faculty will be voting on an OA policy in the fall.
Increased campus support for interdisciplinary research and new ways of doing scholarly communication.
Individual departments have passed OA self-archiving mandates.
Libraries faculty have passed an OA resolution. Size of institutional repository has grown substantially with new
contributors engaging constantly. Six OA journals are being delivered via library platforms. University press has made its
backlist OA in the institutional repository. Provost has joined public statements supporting reform of scholarly publishing
and new models.
Many of the above areas are under development right now.
MIT faculty adopted first permission-based, campus-wide open access policy of its kind in the US in 2009. 25% of
faculty scholarly articles completed since March 2009 are openly accessible under this MIT Faculty Open Access Policy.
MIT has launched MITx, an open online learning initiative, and is collaborating with Harvard on a joint system of the
same nature, edX. OpenCourseWare has become a standard concept in the academy, having been launched at MIT. The
Libraries are funding a new two-year fellow position in scholarly publishing &licensing, supporting development of new
professionals in this area and the creation of new SC-related projects and services at MIT.
NOTE: The Scholarly Communication Institute began in 2003, so it is not “new.”
NOTE: We have had ETDs since 1999, predating many other SC activities as defined for this survey.
Our repository was just established in March contributions and expansion to locally created journals are expected in the
next 18 months.
Our university passed a resolution in support of the institutional repository but not open access per se.
Pending: an open access funding initiative. Ongoing: discussions at system-wide and local faculty committees.
SC issues are being discussed at senate and at faculty councils. There is interest in SC issues from the office of research
services. The university is a leader in knowledge mobilization, which includes dissemination as part of its strategy.
Symposia &Open Access Week events.
Previous Page Next Page