Category: Open Access

OA2020 Transformation Workshop | ICOLC

This year at the International Coalition of Library Consortia conference in Detroit, there will be a post-conference workshop focused on Open Access on 4/18/2018. It’s open to all in the academic library community:

“This workshop provides participants with a clear understanding of the strategic and practical aspects of transitioning to open access, enabling them to create and implement their own OA2020 roadmap to drive open access within their local community and have impact on a global scale.”

Learn more and register here:
Source: OA2020 Transformation Workshop

Presented to PALNI | Disciplinary Differences in Scholarly Communication: Awareness, Attitudes, and Practices

We had an engaging and productive meeting of the PALNI Scholarly Communications Advisory Group last week . It kicked off with a very interesting talk presented by Jere Odell and Emily Dill, drawing on their research recently published in the Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication. Abstract here:

“Access to scholarship in the health sciences has greatly increased in the last decade. The adoption of the 2008 U.S. National Institutes of Health Public Access Policy and the launch of successful open access journals in health sciences have done much to move the exchange of scholarship beyond the subscription-only model. One might assume, therefore, that scholars publishing in the health sciences would be more supportive of these changes. However, the results of this survey of attitudes on a campus with a large medical faculty show that health science respondents were uncertain of the value of recent changes in the scholarly communication system.”

Read more:

Slides from PALNI talk:Disciplinary Differences in Scholarly Communication: Awareness, Attitudes, and Practices

Source: Faculty Attitudes toward Open Access and Scholarly Communications: Disciplinary Differences on an Urban and Health Science Campus

It’s Gonna Get a Lot Easier To Break Science Journal Paywalls | WIRED

From Adam Rogers at WIRED, an interesting piece about Google Scholar and paywalls:

“Anurag Acharya’s problem was that the Google search bar is very smart, but also kind of dumb. As a Googler working on search 13 years ago, Acharya wanted to make search results encompass scholarly journal articles. A laudable goal, because unlike the open web, most of the raw output of scientific research was invisible—hidden behind paywalls. People might not even know it existed.”

Read more here:

Source: It’s Gonna Get a Lot Easier To Break Science Journal Paywalls | WIRED

Focusing on Value – 102 Things Journal Publishers Do (2018 Update) – The Scholarly Kitchen

From the Scholarly Kitchen:

“The first version of this list was created back in the summer of 2012, at a time when publishers were being challenged repeatedly to prove they added value beyond managing peer review and some basic copy editing and formatting….This update is a reframing and expansion of the list. I’ve changed the motif from the cost perspective (expense, level of difficulty, and duration) to the value perspective (uniqueness, value, importance). The list has always been implicitly a list of things journal publishers do, so this year I’ve made that explicit in the headline. “

Read more here:

Source: Focusing on Value – 102 Things Journal Publishers Do (2018 Update) – The Scholarly Kitchen

Format Aside: Applying Beall’s Criteria to Assess the Predatory Nature of both OA and Non-OA Library and Information Science Journals | Olivarez | College & Research Libraries

From CR&L (with thanks to The Idealis):

“Abstract: Jeffrey Beall’s blog listing of potential predatory journals and publishers, as well as his Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access (OA) Publishers are often looked at as tools to help researchers avoid publishing in predatory journals. While these Criteria has brought a greater awareness of OA predatory journals, these tools alone should not be used as the only source in determining the quality of a scholarly journal….”

Read more here:

Source: Format Aside: Applying Beall’s Criteria to Assess the Predatory Nature of both OA and Non-OA Library and Information Science Journals | Olivarez | College & Research Libraries

Of note in College and Research Libraries News Vol 78, No 11 (2017)

There are several Scholarly Communications related topics in the latest issue of C&RL news:

The University of Southern California Voltaire Letters: A polymathic multimodal digital project

Danielle Mihram

Textbooks on open reserve: A pilot project

Dolores Skowronek

Beyond buttonology: Digital humanities, digital pedagogy, and the ACRL Framework

John E. Russell, Merinda Kaye Hensley

Open access, power, and privilege: A response to “What I learned from predatory publishing”

Shea Swauger

Read more here:

Source: Vol 78, No 11 (2017)

Open Access: What should the priorities be today? | Open and Shut

From the Open and Shut blog by Richard Poynder:

This year marks the 15th anniversary of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI), the meeting that led to the launch of the open access movement, and which defined open access thus:

“By ‘open access’ to this literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain, should be to give authors control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited.”

A great deal of water has passed under the bridge since 2002, but as 2017 draws to an end what should the stakeholders of scholarly communication be doing now to fully realise the vision outlined at the Budapest meeting? That is a question I have been putting to a number of people, inviting them to say what they believe the priorities should be going forward for the following stakeholders: researchers, research institutions, research funders, politicians and governments, librarians and publishers.

Read more here:

Source: Open and Shut?: Open Access: What should the priorities be today?

OJS is not for sale | Public Knowledge Project

From Kevin at PKP:

With the recent acquisition of bepress by multinational publishing giant Elsevier, we’ve been asked by a number of people, some in jest, others less so, if OJS is next, given its substantial share of the journal platform market. As the title of this piece indicates, OJS is most definitely not for sale.

Read more below:

Source: OJS is not for sale | Public Knowledge Project

Federal Trade Commission and National Institutes of Health Take Action Against Predatory Publishing Practices – The Scholarly Kitchen

From Rick Anderson via the Scholarly Kitchen:

In an interesting and potentially significant move for the scholarly publishing world, the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada has granted a preliminary injunction against a major journal publisher and conference organizer in response to a complaint by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The injunction was granted on the basis of the Court’s analysis of evidence provided by the FTC and its finding that the FTC’s complaint, if allowed to proceed, “is likely to succeed on the merits” and that the public interest would be served by granting it.

Read more here:

Source: Federal Trade Commission and National Institutes of Health Take Action Against Predatory Publishing Practices – The Scholarly Kitchen