One dystopian potential outcome would be that, despite the best efforts of many institutions of all kinds, we could see a devolution back to a distinctly two-tiered system like what existed in 19th Century Britain. In this negative projection one can envision a very small number of well-endowed institutions that cater to the wealthy, well-prepared class as well as a small number of carefully picked representatives from various groups. These students would receive a world-class education, while most students would be at risk of receiving a much lower quality education that is overly-reliant on poorly built computerized teaching systems or online learning courseware that does not provide the kind of encouragement and motivation that is required to help students through the many challenges encountered when learning. Following this path could well lead to a self-perpetuating system across generations where a small elite group benefits from a compounding level of social capital, while most students are left out, leading to a widening of social, political, cultural, and financial gulfs.

What is the objective, what is the definition of success, as academia and its libraries engage in issues of scholarly communication? Answering this question crisply and with a clear sense of priority may allow libraries to evaluate their investments, and to organize, staff, and run their operations, with greater focus.

Who Owns Digital Science?

When is a Publisher not a Publisher? Cobbling Together the Pieces to Build a Workflow Business

Putting the Red Light, Green Light Model Into Practice

Red Light, Green Light Aligning the Library to Support Licensing

Reflections on “Elsevier Acquires bepress”