ETD Policies - Fair to MFA Graduates?

Earlier today, I received a forwarded email that has been making the rounds, and being added to, by University of Iowa MFA students and alumni.  It seems a few individuals noticed some language they didn't appreciate on the bottom of their Thesis First Deposit Checklist.  My understanding from these emails is, without signing this checklist and turning it in, there is no forthcoming degree.

The language in question? 

"The University of Iowa Library has recently adopted an “open access” policy in regards to electronic theses and dissertations (ETD). “Open access” is generally defined to mean that a document is freely available over the internet at no cost to the enduser, and can be located via search engines such as Google. The internet availability of University of Iowa electronic theses may occur in as little as 6 weeks after final degree clearance. As a consequence, it is unnecessary to pay UMI/Proquest $95 for open access of your ETD.The absence of the embargo form and a supporting letter from your advisor will be taken as evidence that you desire open access publication of your thesis or dissertation."

The University of Iowa Library ultimately intends to scan hard-copy theses and dissertations, too, and make them open-access documents. Currently, non-electronic theses and dissertations are available through UMI/ProQuest within 4 - 5 months after final degree clearance. Most students will not need an embargo; an embargo should only be requested when there is a definite need. You may need an embargo if you have not finished writing journal articles, filing patents, or negotiating a book contract.  To request an embargo, please submit the thesis/dissertation embargo form (available on the Graduate College website) to the Graduate College along with a supporting letter from your major advisor. Both of these documents must be submitted at the time of your final deposit.

I've emailed some University of Iowa students, professors and alumni asking questions and received the following from Kembrew McLeod - Department of Communication Studies:

"This letter regards a UI policy that requires students to sign off on a form that states that the University of Iowa library could, if it desires, post MFA theses online. In order to graduate, an MFA student has to sign a Thesis Deposit form (found here: http://www.grad.uiowa.edu/pubs/forms/FirstDepositChecklist.pdf). This form states, in part, "The University of Iowa Library ultimately intends to scan hard-copy theses and dissertations, too, and make them open-access documents. ... Most students will not need an embargo; an embargo should only be requested when there is a definite need."

I have heard that the UI embargo period lasts for two years, but I haven't gotten a confirmation about that from the library yet. Nor have I heard back about how long this policy has been in place, but I 
was told today that it "is not new," which is troubling. In other words, previous students (I don't know how far back ... one year, two, more?) have had to sign off on this policy. Paul A. Soderdahl, 
Director, Library Information Technology, wrote to me in an email, "I can safely state that we are not presently handling MFA print theses any differently than we had in the past, which I hope provides some reassurance. I’m certainly not in a position to guarantee that that won’t change over time." That last sentence doesn't "reassure" me.

Nor was I put at ease by the phrasing of an email by Edward Shreeves, Associate University Librarian & Director, Collections and Scholarly Communication. In his email to a Workshop alum that was forwarded to me, the final sentence reads, "The bottom line is that your thesis is not going to be digitized in the foreseeable future." What, exactly, is the "foreseeable future"?

Let me make this clear, I don't ascribe any ill intentions to the UI library. I think for the most part librarians are beyond reproach and have our best interests in mind; heck, I've even received a book 
award from the American Library Association, so it's not like I have an axe to grind. I just think this situation has been handled very poorly, and with no transparency.

I also spoke with an attorney who is administering contracts for a documentary I'm working on. When I sent him the form, here is what he wrote, 'I think this language could reasonably be construed as a 
license permitting the University of Iowa to publish their hard copy theses on the internet unless an embargo form is filed. What bothers me is there is no guarantee that submission of an embargo form by a student will prevent the University from publishing it, for instance, if they decide the 'need' is not sufficient.'"

I took a quick peek at the University of Iowa's Electronic Theses and Dissertations Library and scrolled through everything they have for 2006 and 2007, and found absolutely nothing that shows they've digitized anything for at least the last full year (2007) that is not scholarly.  No creative writing at all.

In continuing to think about how this could cause creative writers difficulty, seeing their thesis papers and/or dissertations published online, and agreeing it would most certainly cause difficulty for them to find a tradiational publisher to, in effect, republish the work in hard copy form.  I was reminded that when researching Brad Vice a couple of years back in regards to his alleged plagiarism (and I'll lean on that word alleged), I was able to find a copy of his PhD dissertation from the University of Cincinnati fairly easily online, though it's really a link to a pdf version, and I'm not altogether just how similar situation it is.

Another professor kindly pointed out to me the fact that this topic has come up at other schools - Bowling Green State University for one, and was written about (by 2 of their students) in the March/April 2007 issue of Poets & Writers (though this is only an abstract, it's a print ONLY file).  This particular article was also blogged about at the Politics, Technology and Language blog.

Both this post, and Kembrew, seem to agree on one thing - while it's a win/win situation for an author of a scholarly essay to have his/her material online, and quoted, it's not the same thing while writing in the creative arena.  There's supposed to be some meetings later this week to determine the path that the University of Iowa is going to go.

Comments

[KKB]

Obviously it's crazy for MFA students to be forced into online publication they cannot control, on work that may be damaging in - - how shall I say it? - - the prematurity of its author's potential. For most writers, of course, our first stories are practice, and embarrassingly bad. But it's also interesting how this whole "new media" angle is being played, especially as here in LA we've just enduring Hollywood's power-players scoffing at screenwriters' concerns about new media. While, you know, vying to control it.

New media matters, and everyone knows it. It's a farce to pretend otherwise.

When I was a student at Iowa, I specifically remember a friend looking up Kevin Brockmeier's thesis and his incredulity that a story collected there (near ten years earlier) had just that month appeared nearly unchanged in the New Yorker. Clearly it was better that the story was not in print online before that, or it would not have been eligible for the NYer.

[Sarah]

As a future librarian, I can't say that this is necessarily shocking nor does it concern me. Essentially, it means that I will have a job when I graduate--at least one that would include digitizing PhD dissertations. Although, I am really crossing my fingers for a cataloging job. No really. I'm nerdy like that.

As a (future?) creative writer... I suppose if someone is reading my work now, I would wonder a) why they were doing so, b) feel a bit sorry for them, or c) think "Hey, that's kind of neat."

Open source is something that is happening. More and more technology keeps pointing toward it, and while the humanity side of me really wants to fight this. The technologist side thinks, "No. This could be cool. It might be a bit clunky at first, but this could work."

[Kyle Minor]

KKB is right, and we worried about this at Ohio State, too, where, fortunately, only doctoral dissertations, not master's theses, were forced into electronic dissemination.

For fiction writers, the best venues will only accept work that has not been previously published. These electronic rights agreements constitute publication available worldwide. It is a poor publication to be sure -- no built-in audience, no method for promotion, no participation in the monetary rewards for your labor. If my novella "A Day Meant to Do Less," for example, had been first made available through one of these library schemes, The Gettysburg Review would not have published it, and then it would not have been eligible for Best American Mystery Stories 2008, which will be, for me, an opportunity to reach the largest number of readers I've ever had.

So, yes, the consequences are huge, and the people making the decisions are not mindful of the interests of the people doing the work.

I should hasten to add that this does not just impact fiction writers, but academics, too. I know several recent Ph.D.'s, for example, whose dissertations would have been published as first books by scholarly presses if they hadn't already been available electronically. The consequence is that the work, which could have been used as currency for the pursuit of the jobs and tenure that would make possible more good work, has instead been devalued. It won't aid the author who gave years to its making; it won't appear between covers on library shelves; it will simply go away.

This is a sad state of affairs, and what's saddest about it is that the very universities who ought to have the best interests of their graduates at heart have sold them out for the pittance (money, yes) that these compulsory digital rights agreements have netted the universities, in return.

[metaphor]

Sarah, I don't know why you say KKB is right, when you clearly disagree (and when he or she is clearly wrong!).

It's a huge mistake to think of this in terms of open source (or, still wrong, but better, open content). It's about control of first publication.

For example, The Gettysburg Review could decide on a policy of open content. That wouldn't have affected Sarah's decision to submit there, or her pleasure at her work being accepted, or the "Best Mystery" outcome, nor - and this is the key fact - the inability for all of that to have happened if the story had been published by her university first as part of an ETD policy.

Of course it's cool and great that creative writing master's theses and everything else gets online, as part of a university archive. It would be permanently available and easily found. What could be cooler than that? I have any number of online acquaintances who might think to themselves, one lazy Sunday afternoon, "Hey, where did he say he graduated from? I think it was The New School. I think I'll just go check out his master's thesis."

The problem is one of timing. The author of the work needs to be able to decide if that's its first or the second publication. That's the only issue here that anyone seems to have.

[Dan Wickett]

Metaphor,

I just want to be clear here - it appears that you actually agree with KKB, and with Kyle, but wonder why Sarah (who doesn't appear to) agrees with KKB.

Kyle, agrees with KKB, that to put these online is wrong, that it will harm his, and other author's chances of seeing these stories (or poems) they work on as their theses, ever having a chance at publication elsewhere.

Sarah, as the future librarian, isn't very concerned.

[dissertation help]

I had my orals on Friday of last week and everything went well! I’m referring dissertation-help.co.uk to my classmates who will be needing help soon. they did an excellent job with me and I take pride in referring you to friends.
_____________________________

http://www.dissertation-help.co.uk/

[Frank]

Isn't publication of a thesis, creative or otherwise, a requirement for graduation? And come on, "library schemes?" Printed theses and disserations cost libraries money, and they're already facing extreme budget cuts. Also, it takes up needed space and hinders scholarly communication. In the old model, anyone could visit your institution's library, view your thesis, and photocopy it, image it, or write about it. The work is not yours to control, but a requirement for graduation. Why not have a longer embargo period?