University presses and the impact of COVID‐19

University presses occupy a distinctive field of publishing, heavily tied to the fortunes of the universities and colleges in which they are usually situated. COVID‐19 has catalysed their adoption of digital technologies; focused their commitments to social justice; and given new impetus to business models and formats that fully leverage the Internet, especially open access. Economic pressures on higher education that seem set only to increase are also driving university presses to more interdependent approaches and an emphasis on the contributions of the university press network to knowledge infrastructure for the humanities and social sciences. This article explores how university presses have reacted to the COVID‐19 pandemic, with particular reference to the experiences of the University of Michigan Press. It concludes that the diversity of types of university presses is one of the greatest strengths of this field of publishing and makes it resilient in a time of unprecedented change.     

Humanities and Social Science Dissertations Published by University Presses: 2010–2014, Exploratory Observations

This study of humanities and social science dissertations published by university presses considers revised dissertations [RD’s] and their salient characteristics. Often dissertations in the humanities and social sciences become the sine qua non for advancement in academia; therefore, it is instructive to ascertain the ecology of dissertations published by university presses. Only revised dissertations [RD’s], and English language presses were surveyed from proprietary data provided by a North American book distributor [Yankee Book Peddler, Inc.] and were triaged for bibliographic aspects as well as for intellectual coverage. Disciplinary alignment, subject specializations, geographical distribution, as well degree of interdisciplinarity, and series publication highlight findings. Library of Congress Classification further articulated disciplinary orientation. Oxford and Cambridge University Presses, but presses are specialized by subject emphases. A significant number of RD’s are interdisciplinary, Eurocentric in subject and geographical coverage, historically oriented across LC Classes, and appear as titles in monographic series.     

Two Sides of the Same Coin? Trade and University Press Publishing of Revised Dissertations, 2007–2016: Some Observations

In academia, humanists, social scientists, and those in the various sciences, write books that assume major cultural capital for promotion, tenure, and for dissemination of scholarship. For the beginning academic, doctoral education is the acculturative process by which nascent scholars achieve competence in their respective disciplines. The capstone research experience culminates in the doctoral dissertation in the humanities and social sciences, often, and with substantial revision, the first book in professorial life. This study attempts to frame the production, illustrative bibliographic characteristics, and major publishers of revised dissertations published by university and scholarly trade presses. This study is grounded in data provided by YPB’s Gobi database and further articulated by utilization of the Library of Congress Classification system, and further frames the degree of interdisciplinarity, pricing, geographical concentrations, and other aspects of these books and investigates the similarities and dissimilarities between university press and scholarly trade presses. Illustrative examples display trends and provides suggestions for future analysis and research.     

An interview with Sanford G. Thatcher,director, the Penn State Press

This interview was conducted at The Pennsylvania State University Libraries on April 30, 1992. Sanford G. Thatcher candidly comments on issues relating to university presses, the current state of the publishing world, and his views regarding scholarly communication and the future of scholarly journals.     

The next ten years in publishing: National,international, and educational perspectives

In describing the Renaissance-style publisher of the 1990s, this article emphasizes the craft and skills needed to maintain quality. Ian Montagnes suggests that these skills must now be taught formally, rather than by apprenticeship. He also describes one such training program that he has conducted for editors in developing countries. Ian Montagnes is assistant director and editor-in-chief of the University of Toronto Press. He has served continuously as either associated editor or editor ofScholarly Publishing: A Journal for Authors and Editors since its inception in 1969. He has also been active in the Canadian and American associations of university presses and the Society for Scholarly Publishing     

One university press

Harvard University Press developed from modest beginnings to its current status as one of the largest North American university presses. This article describes the operations of the Press and outlines some of the problems and questions facing the university press in the modern publishing environment.     

Op. cit.: publishing in the humanities and social sciences

Do the humanities and social sciences have the same publishing requirements as the sciences? What can be done to counter perceptions that acquisition funds have migrated away from publications in the fields of the humanities and social sciences to meet the escalating cost of electronic and print journals in the natural and applied sciences? With university presses, non-profit publishers, and the academy itself under strain, we examine the problems, discuss the continuing requirements of scholarship, the implications for funding strategies, and the role of technology, and give examples of new ventures that suggest possible solutions to the problems. We conclude that the primary values that scholars in the humanities and social sciences hold are not dramatically different from those of other academic disciplines and make recommendations for building a broader base of support for scholarship in these areas.     

Which worked better for Mississippi State: standing orders or an approval plan?

When Mississippi State University Libraries established a university press approval plan, the Collection Development Department was asked to decide whether to cancel existing standing orders with seven university presses or block these presses from the approval plan. Books were received through both avenues for eight months so that cost, timeliness of delivery, and receipt of titles most appropriate for the Libraries’ needs could be compared. Findings showed a 4.72% cost savings with the approval plan, but 82% of the titles were received earlier through the standing orders. Of books received through the standing orders, 29% were not received through the approval plan, with more than half not matching departmental profiles. Return privileges with the approval plan meant unsuitable titles could be returned, a significant advantage not possible with the standing orders. As a result of the study, the libraries chose to cancel the standing orders and receive books selectively through a university press approval plan.     

美国大学出版社与图书馆的多元化合作

学术出版物价格的攀升和学术传播电子化发展趋势促使美国大学出版社与图书馆开展合作,共同促进学术传播。双方合作方式灵活多样,主要涉及:图书馆帮助出版社进行印刷版图书的电子化;合作建立电子出版平台或合作出版学术期刊;图书馆帮助出版社建设有关图书、编辑等的论坛;共同举办学术活动;出版社帮助图书馆销售电子产品或与图书馆共同出版学术著作等。     

对大学出版社体制改革的几点认识

2007年4月,争议颇多的大学出版社改革终于开始了破冰之旅。本文从大学出版社改革的背景入手,首先指出大学社的改革不能也不应该是政治决策的产物,而应是政策推动下大学出版社基本属性的回归和对现实的考量。其次,指出大学社改革中在观念上存在的几个认识误区。最后,探讨了大学社改革之路,涉及改戍新的事业体制还是企业体制、整体改制还是部分改制以及改制怎样实施等问题。     

剑桥大学智库建设管窥

文章基于2018-2019年在剑桥大学的实地调查和浸入式体验中获得的第一手资料,对剑桥大学及剑桥市多个智库开展基于案例分析和现场调查的实证研究。研究结果表明,剑桥大学智库的发展呈现出鲜明的横向联合发展、综合体协同成长、国际化、开放性、多学科融合、数理研究背景等特征。以剑桥大学智库为代表的英国高校智库对中国高校智库发展的启示在于:发挥中国特色新型高校智库在国家治理能力现代化和区域发展中的重要作用;构建地方高校智库群体的横向联合发展模式;构建高校内部的智库综合体协同发展格局;建设人文社科数理等多学科融合的综合性高校智库。     

高校科技期刊应努力转变办刊理念

高校主办的科技期刊是我国科技期刊的重要组成部分,为我国科技学术交流、科技进步、人才培养等做出了突出贡献;但是,一些高校科技期刊固有的办刊理念和模式限制了期刊的进一步发展.认为不同类型的高校应根据具体情况科学、准确定位,努力办出与高校科研实力相应、层次相当的科技期刊,建立新的期刊出版机制.     

University press publishing and the ecology of disciplinary fluidity: General observations

Academic book and journal publishing constitutes the majority focus of university presses. Besides commercial scholarly publishers, academic scholars and researchers view the opportunities provided by university presses as important venues for the dissemination of their research. This discussion focuses on the disciplinary imperative to publish scholarship that is ever more fluid and specialized as academic disciplines continue to become further nuanced in their response to the increasing knowledge produced by humanities and social science inquiry. The focus is on university presses and not commercial scholarly presses, although constitute a significant locus of scholarly publishing. What are the general characteristics of academic specialization and university press publishing? Further, how is disciplinary fluidity, especially evolving specialization, reflected in university press book publishing nomenclature and how scholarship is tied to the intellectual preoccupations of academic specialization? Multi- and inter-disciplinarities further articulate disciplinary publishing, accelerating disciplinary fluidity. Examples from disciplinary and emerging configurations of disciplinary nomenclature utilized by university presses offers insight into specialization and publishing. Academic history publishing is used to illustrate newly emerging fluid disciplinary configurations.     

The Price and New Title Output of Scholarly Books: 2009–2016

The majority of scholars in the humanities and the social sciences, the scientific, technical, and medical, and the legal, tax, and regulatory fields are interested in the state of scholarly book publishing because these books often play a pivotal role in the often-opaque tenure, promotion, and grant application process. In the past, several studies analyzed new title output and scholarly book prices. However, no one investigated the impact of the Recession of 2007–2009 on scholarly books. This study looks at the impact of this recession, its impact on scholarly book prices and new title output between 2009 and 2016, and makes a series of recommendations for university presses.     

大学出版社发展问题研究

大学出版社经过30多年的发展,已走到一个新的历史关口,本文系统阐述大学出版社的发展问题。在揭示当前市场环境新特征的基础上,研究大学出版社的产品构成和取向、制度安排与创新、现阶段营销策略重点,以及发展路径选择等问题,并对大学出版社发展的困惑给予现实的解读与思考。     

Which worked better for Mississippi State: standing orders or an approval plan?

When Mississippi State University Libraries established a university press approval plan, the Collection Development Department was asked to decide whether to cancel existing standing orders with seven university presses or block these presses from the approval plan. Books were received through both avenues for eight months so that cost, timeliness of delivery, and receipt of titles most appropriate for the Libraries’ needs could be compared. Findings showed a 4.72% cost savings with the approval plan, but 82% of the titles were received earlier through the standing orders. Of books received through the standing orders, 29% were not received through the approval plan, with more than half not matching departmental profiles. Return privileges with the approval plan meant unsuitable titles could be returned, a significant advantage not possible with the standing orders. As a result of the study, the libraries chose to cancel the standing orders and receive books selectively through a university press approval plan.     

Changing sales and markets of American university presses, 1960–1990

Have university presses shifted their focus toward trade books? It so, when did this shift occur and why? Changes in funding of research and education, in consumer spending and publishers' sales, and in trade publishers' attitudes toward “midlist” books are discussed as influential factors. The article also examines the way university presses define trade books and the impact of publishing trade books on university press lists. Finally, the article describes current trends in university press publishing.     

Journals Pricing

A significant new study has been conducted at Cornell University. The Mann Library surveyed several hundred titles in Agriculture and Biology, in order to analyse their prices (per page and per thousand characters) over time, comparing university presses, commercial publishers, society publishers and government agencies. They aimed to develop a methodology, using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) technology, which could be used elsewhere, and to use their findings to examine the patterns of article ownership and pricing of published scientific research.     

关于大学出版社体制改革的思考

本文分析了大学出版社体制改革的必要性及特殊性,指出大学出版社的改革需要争取政府和学校的支持,并应根据各个大学出版社的不同情况,因地制宜,循序渐进.