Recommendations for Revamping Endnotes NMRT’s Peer-Reviewed Journal
Peace Ossom Williamson, Nik Dragovic, Sarah LeMire, Beau Bradley, Stacey Nordlund
2015 Emerging Leaders Group H
Abstract
Endnotes is the ALA New Members Round Table’s peerreviewed journal. Its purpose is to serve as “a peer-reviewed,
scholarly journal that addresses issues faced by new
librarians.”
In order to broaden Endnotes authorship and readership,
NMRT and Endnotes leadership requested that Emerging
Leaders Group H review the existing journal, solicit feedback
from the profession, and to make recommendations for a
redesigned journal and a marketing plan to increase the
number of submissions to the journal.
EL Group H is providing the following recommendations:
•
•
•
Upgrade from the existing platform to a more robust ejournal platform with the features that appeal to authors
and readers
Redesign layout of published articles for a more polished
appearance
Increase marketing efforts via social media and work with
ALA-accredited programs to market directly to library
school students
Survey
In order to make effective recommendations, we needed to
gather data about how early-career librarians are accessing
and using Endnotes and other scholarly literature. The survey
developed assessed the following:
• Awareness and use of Endnotes
• Publishing habits and interests
• Reading interests and access
• Current information sources being used
We distributed a survey to a wide variety of respondents,
including the following email lists:
• ALA distribution lists
• State and local library association distribution lists
• ALA-accredited library school programs’ distribution lists
• Related social media accounts
The overwhelming response supported the idea of this being a
major topic of interest. The survey results were coded and
analyzed and helped inform our SWOT analysis, and
marketing, platform, and design recommendations.
Methods
In an effort to assess the needs of the journal, the group
conducted a number of literature reviews by searching library
databases including Library, Information Science and
Technology Abstracts (EBSCO, 1965- ) and Library Literature
and Information Science Full Text (EBSCO, 1980- ) , and
searched using search engines, including Google and Google
Scholar, to find research done by other institutions into epublishing software, marketing, and customizing journal
content and websites. The group also looked at libraries, like
Purdue Libraries, with much developed in regards to their epublishing services.
Survey of librarians and library students
The research began by a survey of current and potential
readers of Endnotes, and assessed what information they find
relevant, how they access that information, and their use of
NMRT’s Endnotes journal.
Research has indicated that librarians and library staff differ from
their patrons in the way that they search for information (Turner,
2011). Behaviors for seeking library profession-related information
include personal communication, online discussion, and distribution
lists (Brown & Ortega, 2005).
Research also indicates that readers have specific desires and
expectations when accessing e-journals, and we have incorporated
many of these elements into our recommendations. Vilar and
Zumer (2005) conducted a study comparing and evaluating
different e-journal user interfaces, and in a follow-up study (2007)
noted that user friendliness is connected to specfic features and
functions of e-journal systems. Dyson and Jennings (2014)
published a study examining user responses to sixteen e-journal
interfaces and their expected features, and found that inconsistency
among e-journal interfaces makes it challenging for users to
transfer their knowledge of one interface to use of another.
Additional research declares that the basic needs of a publishing
system are an institutional domain, preservation through
CLOCKSS, DOIs, indexing, an ISSN, and maintenance and training
(McMahon, 2015; Robertson & Simser, 2013).
Open-source platforms were preferred as they aligned well
with the ideological standpoint of libraries. It is also beneficial
to involve a streamlined process for peer-review for both
editors and authors. Features like clear navigation and
transitions between elements are needed.
Platforms that were found to be most useful include Digital
Publishing System (DPubS), Open Journal Systems (OJS),
and Berkeley Electronic Press (Bepress) Digital Commons,
and the final recommendation is for OJS with affordability
winning out and Digital Commons for ease of setup and
management. See Table 1 for more information on the two
platforms.
Open Journal Systems (OJS)
BePress Digital Commons
Back-end
Users
Open source system
PHP scripts for content
management in MySQL
database
Web-based forms
Compliant with OAI-PMH
Usage statistics
Five-step publishing process
Documentation & tutorials
Open access system
Integrated institutional repository
system
Very little DNS work
EdiKit peer-review & editorial
management system
Rights-checking
Compliant with OAI-PMH
Usage statistics
Support, training, and hosting
Front-end
Users
Findable through Google, Bing,
Google Scholar, etc.
Sharing articles via social media
& distribution lists
Full-text searching
Multilingual support
Persistent URLs
RSS feeds
Bookmarking articles
Findable through Google, Bing,
Google Scholar, etc.
Sharing articles via social media &
distribution lists
Full-text searching
Multilingual support
Persistent URLs
RSS feeds
Bookmarking articles
Recommendations for design customization include making
the issues and articles easier to find through links, browse,
and search features on every page; the addition of abstract
pages, an RSS feed, DOI, and a redesign of the article
template.
SWOT Analysis
Strengths
Weaknesses











Peer review
Low barrier to entry
ALA link
Interdisciplinary / diverse
More people passing through committee contribute to
awareness
Indexed
Experience is good for future publishing work
The committee is flexible and can easily change practices
Prior contributors have interest in collaborating with the journal
again
Opportunities











Publication requires NMRT membership
Administrative structure weakens
operations
Internal and public documentation is
lacking
Biased toward academic libraries
Obtaining content is difficult
Journal is not widely read or known
Threats
There is demand for a publication that supports writing

development
May be demand for a publication that addresses multiple library
types cohesively

Collaboration with other journals and publishing venues is a
possibility

Differentiation from other library student and new librarian media
venues
ALA has new online infrastructure that might be leveraged
Feedback on potential changes is easy to obtain from the
community
There are a number of emerging platforms for journal
publication, many of which are open-source, widely adopted,
and well-supported
There is a wide proliferation of competing
library resources that are more visible
and more widely read
Evolving models of scholarship threaten
traditional journal implementations
NMRT has other publications that are not
well-differentiated
Marketing Recommendation
Design & Platform
Recommendations
Data from the literature review, survey, and direct interviews
of library staff were used to develop recommendations for
marketing practice, an e-publishing platform, and journal
formatting.
Literature Review
Mockup 1. Home page of the Endnotes journal includes the
current issue content, the past issues listed to the right, and
search and browse features.
Increase Visibility
• Add features that allow readers to subscribe to content,
including RSS and email subscription options. Also push out
content, both complete issues and individual articles, via
social media.
Networking
• Engage NMRT members with Endnotes by inviting NMRT
presenters at conferences to contribute content. Also
consider offering a year’s free NMRT membership to authors.
Conferences
• Market Endnotes at conferences, including making materials
available in programs and on the exhibit floor.
Library School Students
• Expand branding to include aspiring librarians, and increase
direct outreach efforts to ALA-accredited library programs.
De-mystify the Publishing Process
• Develop materials that make the process of submitting to
Endnotes transparent and unintimidating. Consider offering a
mentorship program to support first-time authors.
Issues of Interest
• Consider developing theme issues that highlight specific
areas of the profession (e.g. cataloging or public libraries).
References
Brown, C. M., & Ortega, L. (2005). Information-seeking behavior of physical science librarians: Does research inform
practice? College & Research Libraries, 66(3), 231-247.
Dyson, M. C., & Jennings, E. M. (2014). Examining the interfaces to e-journal articles: What do users expect? (Vol. 8519, pp.
164-172).
McMahon, M. L. (2015). The library as publisher? Is it possible for a small library? Theological Librarianship, 8(1), 4-6.
Retrieved from https://journal.atla.com/ojs/index.php/theolib/article/view/365/1132
Robertson, W. C., & Simser, C. N. (2013). Managing E-publishing: Perfect harmony for serialists. Serials Librarian, 64(1-4),
118-128. doi:10.1080/0361526X.2013.760399
Mockup 2. Redesigned article template
For more mockups, visit elendnotes.weebly.com
Turner, N. B. (2011). Librarians do it differently: Comparative usability testing with students and library staff. Journal of Web
Librarianship, 5(4), 286-298. doi: 10.1080/19322909.2011.624428
Vilar, P., & Zumer, M. (2005). Comparison and evaluation of the user interfaces of e- journals. Journal of Documentation,
61(2), 203-227.
Vilar, P., & Žumer, M. (2008). Comparison and evaluation of the user interfaces of e-journals II: perceptions of the users.
Journal of Documentation, 64(6), 816-841.