Several years ago, we conducted an “overlap analysis” of our periodical collection at the OWHL.  We had been systematically acquiring electronic access to databases of journals, and, as good stewards of Academy resources, it seemed inappropriate to purchase the materials in redundant formats.  Our decision in each case was based on expected use.  Titles that were routinely browsed in the Freeman Room (like Scientific American and The Economist)  were kept in print even if we had full text leectronic access through one of the databases.  On the other hand, if the titles were predominantly used for research, we dropped the print subscription.  Frankly, electronic access is far superior for research, and in limiting our print holdings we were able to free up valuable space.  Obviously we were not alone.

In a perfect world of unlimited resources, all libraries would acquire multiple formats in order to serve the needs of diverse users.  But this is an imperfect world, where subscription prices are rising and budgets are shrinking.  From the perspective of the publisher, the economics of an all-virtual publication are simple.  The “fixed costs” are the costs attendant to producing one issue.  The “variable costs” are essentially zero.  The question then becomes, will this model be a boon to scholarship?  Will publishers drop journal prices to acknowledge the economic reality of the new model?  Or will they cling to an outmoded model of pricing that no longer reflects the costs of production?  Additionally, what impact on the outcome of this revolution will the Open Access movement have?  Most of the authors of scholarly journal articles are educators and scientists who are not being directly compensated for their work.  The NIH model has demonstrated the benefits of providing open access to work produced by scientists receiving federal support.  The only thing that is certain, is that the model will change.  It is a very interesting time to be in this profession.

The speaker line up was really high-powered.  Ken Panko and Yianni Yessios from Yale spoke about how they have used WordPress to implement student-created podcasts, video and images.  In addition, they have created an implementation supporting a virtual paper mill inside Second Life.

Representatives of Wesleyan University spoke of their experience successfully using  WordPress  as a complete course management system, instead of expensive and less flexible products like Blackboard.

Casey Bison, of Plymouth State University, spoke about Scriblio, a WordPress based library catalog and digital archives system.

Scriblio is an “award winning, free, open source CMS and OPAC with faceted searching and browsing features based on WordPress“.  In a nutshell, Scriblio runs over a library automation system, providing Library 2.0 functionality like faceted browsing and user tagging.  The NOBLE consortium is seriously considering open source alternatives or amendments to our current library automation system, so it was great to see Scriblio in action.

Another very interesting presentation was offered by Holladay Penick, of CommentPress.

CommentPress is an open source theme for the WordPress blogging engine that allows readers to comment paragraph by paragraph in the margins of a text.   Imagine the implications for the teaching of close reading!  Read more about this excellent tool, developed by the Institute for the Future of the Book, at The Chronicle of Higher Education.