Zerkee (2016)
Contents
Source Details
| Zerkee (2016) | |
| Title: | Approaches to Copyright Education for Faculty in Canada |
| Author(s): | Zerkee, J. |
| Year: | 2016 |
| Citation: | Zerkee, J. (2016). Approaches to copyright education for faculty in Canada. Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, 11(2). |
| Link(s): | Open Access |
| Key Related Studies: | |
| Discipline: | |
| Linked by: | |
| About the Data | |
| Data Description: | “Copyright contacts or heads of libraries for the 63 English-speaking and bilingual Universities Canada member institutions with such contact information available on their websites were emailed an invitation to participate with a link to the survey in early March 2016.” “Thirty-two responses were received for a 50.8% response rate.” 9 respondents exited the survey through two branch points, and two respondents stopped answering the questions during the survey. “The majority of the remaining 21 respondents answered nearly every question.” 14 of them “further were asked three to six additional questions” by email and telephone. |
| Data Type: | Primary data |
| Secondary Data Sources: | |
| Data Collection Methods: | |
| Data Analysis Methods: | |
| Industry(ies): | |
| Country(ies): | |
| Cross Country Study?: | No |
| Comparative Study?: | No |
| Literature review?: | No |
| Government or policy study?: | No |
| Time Period(s) of Collection: |
|
| Funder(s): | |
Abstract
“This study surveyed copyright administrators at Canadian universities about their methods of providing copyright training to faculty and non-faculty instructors, the frequency and topics of education provided, and the modes of communication used to reach instructors. Copyright administrators were also asked to rate the perceived effectiveness of their educational opportunities. Respondents feel that in-person education is most effective for providing copyright training to instructors, though a significant number of respondents do not believe that all instructors at their institutions are made adequately aware of copyright educational opportunities. Lack of time and staffing resources affect many copyright administrators. These challenges are leading many to develop more systematic approaches to reaching instructors. Communication and education are being provided directly to individual departments and by working with administrators and others at the department level. Considering the siloed nature of many copyright offices and positions, this study aims to share the approaches being taken by copyright administrators to educate instructors about their rights and responsibilities with regard to copyright and teaching.”
Main Results of the Study
• Demographic overview: Half of them (50.0%) have a dedicated copyright office or an equivalent department. More than one-third (37.5%) do not have a dedicated copyright office but have one or more positions explicitly responsible for copyright. The remaining 12.5% do not have any centralized responsibility for copyright administration and handle copyright issues on an ad hoc basis. Most copyright offices and positions (70.4%) are located within the institution's library. A smaller percentage of them are situated in a legal office (3.7%) or within the institution's administration (3.7%). Six respondents (22.2%) indicated shared responsibility for copyright between multiple departments, often involving one or more of the three locations. As a result, the library oversees copyright offices and positions to some extent in 88.9% of the cases. • Copyright education: A few respondents (17.9%) exited the survey when asked if they provide copyright education or training, as they indicated that they do not offer such education. For the majority of respondents (81.8%), providing copyright education is a mandated or explicitly stated purpose of their copyright office or position. While not many institutions require instructors (13.6%), staff (13.6%), or students (4.5%) to undergo copyright training, all responding institutions (100.0%) provide copyright education for instructors, 90.9% for staff, and 72.7% for students. A small number (9.1%) also provide education for other audiences, such as researchers, authors, and online course developers. Most respondents provide in-person workshops, and over half offer drop-in sessions. Some use online methods like webinars or interactive tutorials, and a few are developing online tutorials. Respondents mentioned various topics that they found most useful for instructors, including teaching with copyright-protected works, fair dealing, Copyright Act provisions, open resources, author rights, changes to the Copyright Act, and finding and using library-licensed sources.Larger institutions and copyright offices tend to offer a wider variety of topics compared to smaller institutions and individual positions. Almost half of the respondents (45.5%), especially small institutions (90.0%), offer in-person education irregularly or upon request. Attendance at educational opportunities fluctuated for 30% of respondents, with 25.0% reporting a decrease and 15.0% reporting an increase. Some institutions have reduced or modified specific types of education due to varying interest or attendance levels. • Effectiveness of their educational opportunities: About 30.0% of respondents use surveys to gauge the effectiveness of their educational programs. Some survey workshop attendees to collect feedback, including feedback specific to the workshop or webinar content. The majority of respondents (60.0%) do not use any assessment tools to evaluate the effectiveness of their educational programs. • Perceived effectiveness of their educational programs: Respondents were asked to rate their confidence on a scale of one to five regarding how well instructors are familiar with and comfortable applying specific subjects after attending their educational opportunities. Respondents expressed the highest confidence in their coverage of fair dealing and other Copyright Act provisions. Small institutions, on average, rated their confidence slightly lower in their educational programs compared to medium and large institutions. However, there was only a very slight difference in confidence levels in one subject—license terms for library materials.The topic with the lowest confidence rating overall was open access (OA) and Creative Commons licensed material. Small institutions had the lowest confidence rating in this area, followed by medium institutions, with large institutions having the highest confidence level.
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
The study does not make any explicit policy recommendations. However, it recommends that copyright offices and librarians take a strategic approach with some examples to reach more members of the academic community when mandatory training is not available.
Coverage of Study
Datasets
{{{Dataset}}}
