In the Spring of 2018 the authors administered the highly validated and reliable Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI) work-related sub-scale to 1628 academic librarians employed within the United States. Academic librarians reported a total work-related burnout score of 49.6. Overall, female participants who were 35-44 years of age reported the highest levels of work-related burnout with males and older individuals reporting the lowest levels of work-related burnout. This study also revealed some interesting information about nonbinary/third-gender librarians that suggests further research is warranted.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Academic publishing processes are shaped by the ways in which scholars within the field review and evaluate the work of their peers. In an ideal world, these methods would simply promote the publication of the best forms of research without prejudice or subjectivity. In reality, issues such as Knobloch-Westerwick, Glynn, and Huge’s Matilda effect, Merton’s Matthew effect, Blank’s institution bias, and Robert’s and Verhoef’s gender bias shape the ways that scholarly inquiry are evaluated. Knowing that the peer review process can introduce issues of bias, what then of other aspects of the publishing cycle? For example, what of the subvention funding provided by some institutions to support their faculty in pursuing dissemination of research in Open Access (OA) journals? This Open Educational Resource (OER) will present an overview of the OA landscape and provide learners with tools to develop their own inquiries into the inequities present within the OA publishing industry. All assignments include suggested grading rubrics and build upon one another in a cumulative manner.