The paper presents the activities and projects in library and information sphere initiated and carried out by the Russian Academy of Education. It emphasizes the role of the Academy President Olga Vasilieva, academicians Marina Borovskaya, Vladimir Filippov, Svetlana Ivanova, Mikhail Levitsky. The paper stresses the importance of the Russian Academy of Education Research Center based at the Moscow State Institute of Culture and “K. D. Ushinsky Library” Information Center. It also describes the role of the Russian National Public Library for Science and Technology and educational initiatives of the Academy.

The growing role of the Russian Academy of Education in the development of the Russian library education as an important component of education in the humanities is emphasized.

The paper addresses the methodological problems of evaluating the processes and outcomes of international integration of national science, using the case of Russian research in the field of media and communication. Within the study, several questions emerge that, while looking seemingly simple and straightforward under formal approaches, actually call for detailed and critical examination. In particular, the working definitions for the concepts “international integration,” “article on media,” “international journal,” “Russian author,” and “Russian article” had to be developed to ensure accurate data interpretation.

To select integration parameters, quantitative data from the Web of Science (WoS) were used. However, the analysis went beyond standard indicators of publication activity and citation. Combinations of different indicators were applied, e. g. differences in citation between all journals and foreign journals indexed in the core WoS databases, the ratio of publications in formally versus genuinely international journals, the pool of sources cited by Russian authors, and others.

The authors propose solutions to the key methodological challenges: refining publication selection criteria through combined search strategies and manual filtering; developing journal classification system to distinguish between formally and genuinely international publications; and creating typology of formally Russian authors based on their actual geographical affiliation. Several additional methodological issues were also addressed to obtain tangible results in the analysis of international ties, including authors chronological clusterization and countries grouping.

This part of the article focuses on the challenges of separating formally and genuinely Russia authors and articles, chronological clusterization of authors and cited sources, clusterization of countries by general research culture, national and international mainstream research organizations and institutions. The authors offer their conclusions.

The findings demonstrate that without in-depth analysis of these methodological issues, relying on the indicators of international databases may lead to significantly distorted representation of reality. The proposed approaches can be adapted to refine scientometric assessments in other academic fields, particularly in the social sciences and humanities.

The altmetrics are not utilized to the full extent despite their potential. The author discusses the findings of the survey of researchers’ and professionals’ awareness of altmetrics, and reviews in brief the history of altmetrics and changing attitude toward altmetrics in Russia and Worldwide. The purpose of the study is to define, based on the critical analysis of 2020 and 2025 surveys, the changes in the altmetrics perception among the Russian scientists. The survey revealed the gradual increase of the interest to altmetrics among Russian users in the national science in the past five years. However, a significant part of respondents (49.0%) is puzzled with the term definition which evidences on their unawareness. The key, in respondents’ opinion, alternative indicators are characterized, i. e. loads, recommendations, views. The author emphasizes that the respondents consider citation the most significant indicators as related to the altmetrics. She also discusses the most popular tools, e.g. Altmetric and Plum Analytics, used in the global practice and integrated into Russian information systems. To get altmetrics data, the researchers and professional access e-libraries and open information resources and services (e. g. Dimensions, Open Alex, etc.).

The study is completed within the framework of the R&D Plan of the State Public Scientific and Technological Library of the RAS Siberian Branch, project “Development of the model of scientific library operation within the information ecosystem of open science”, No. 122041100150-3.

In the study, the data on implementation of new digital technologies into Bulgarian regional libraries and their preparedness for digital transformation (DT) are analyzed. For this purpose, the set of indicators formed the foundation for the model of periodic monitoring of DT development degree. The study was conducted during July and August 2024 among 27 regional libraries in Bulgaria. The interest in this topic is driven by the ongoing process of modernization across various organizations, including libraries, and influenced by the rapid advancement of information and communication technologies (ICT) and the formation of a new intelligent information society (IIS). Today, the digital transformation is viewed as the final stage of integrating ICT into organisational structures and processes, which, in its turn, drives to significant changes in individual organizational subsystems or the organization as a whole. Thus, it could be argued that the achieved level of DT corresponds to the degree of engagement with the IIS. Besides, the issues related to DT and adaptation to IIS are crucial for understanding the prevailing social, societal and economic processes. Currently, there is a lack of specific data on the implementation and the effects of DT in organizations, particularly libraries.

The authors offer the comprehensive analysis of the "Scientific Heritage of Russia" digital library (DB SHR) as a model element of the Common Digital Space of Scientific Knowledge (CDSSK). Established under the initiative of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the library provides open access to digitized scientific publications, archival documents, museum collections, and multimedia resources related to the work of prominent scientists. The DB SHR developmental stages are discussed, including its transition to the modern technological platform based on ontological approach and linked data principles. This upgrade has enhanced search functionalities, enabled the integration of diverse scientific resources, and expanded navigation capabilities. Special attention is given to the library's structure, which comprises administrative and user modules, as well as unique features such as advanced search across interconnected objects. The analysis covers the library's content distribution across thematic areas (natural sciences, humanities, and technical sciences) and includes statistical data on content demand from 2022 to 2024, showing a significant increase in full-text publication access (over 200%). Future development prospects for the DB SHR include expanding multimedia content, broader utilization of named connections between diverse objects, and enhancing search interface. Particular emphasis is placed on long-term digital heritage preservation and ensuring sustainable access to scientific resources for future generations of researchers.

Samizdat (literally – self-publishing) is a pronounced and growing phenomenon of modern intellectual life, competing with the traditional publishing process. The authors of fiction and scientific works attempt to get their works to readers independently or via specialized online platforms, bypass the publishers not only as a production link, and personally promote them to the market. However, intrusion of self-publishing (samizdat) into modern public discourse inevitably leads to the degradation and oversimplification of publishing in the world: lower quality of literary and scientific works, lack of prior ethical and expert assessment, low art and polygraphic execution of finished products. The illusion of creative freedom and independence from the tight publishing standards, availability of inexpensive publishing technologies result in the vast arrays of poor-quality, pseudoscientific literature that violates every possible ethical norm and tradition. The author emphasizes the need to regulate samizdat production and distribution in the Russian Federation, in particular to re-introduce licensing of publishing activities. Another option would be to merge publishing houses and publishing organizations into self-regulatory organizations (SROs). These solutions would allow publishing entities in the country, that in one way or another, publish the intellectual output, to monitor compliance with high publishing, ethical and technological standards and to develop these standards. Self-publishing authors would interact with publishing companies, which would improve the quality of their literary and scientific works. These measures would slow down the decay of publishing culture and allow preserving the freedom of creative enterprise.

The author pays tribute to the late Professor Mikhail Glazkov (1966- 2025), Dr. Sc. in Pedagogy, prominent Russian historian of librarianship. He examines Glazkov’s contribution to the history of Soviet librarianship and national library policy, and its methodology. The general bibliometrical survey of Glazkov’s works is provided with the focus on systems analysis of Glazkov’s theoretical and methodological concepts of the history of national librarianship. The author points to the principle of scientificity and objectivity of historical studies as developed by the scholar. Mikhail Glazkov also contributed to overcoming of the theoretical and methodological crisis of the 1990-ies – early 2000-ies caused by political factors of 1960-2000-ies. The author argues that Glazkov’s approach toward reconstruction of Soviet librarianship as a social institution from the viewpoint of the government library policy is a promising one. M. N. Glazkov also contributed to the foundations of the post-Soviet librarianship history and suggested that the negative trends in librarianship of 1990-ies originated from the mid1980ies, and the starting point for post-Soviet librarianship studies were the “Regulations on librarianship in the USSR (1984).