Monday, April 27, 2015

OATP primary

OATP primary

GLOBAL OPEN KNOWLEDGEBASE (GOKb) EDITOR, VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 09:34 AM PDT

"The NCSU Libraries invites applications and nominations for the position of GOKb [Global Open Knowledge base] Editor. GOKb is a collaborative  project to develop an open source, community-managed knowledge base of electronic resources metadata...."

The manifesto of Leiden Indicators Research | WIT [CSIC-UPV] - Institute for Innovation Management and Knowledge

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 06:09 AM PDT

" ... For these reasons, we present the Manifesto of Leiden , which is named the conference where crystallized . The ten principles are not new to experts in scientometrics, but none of us would be able to recite in full since until now had not been encrypted. Celebrities in scientometrics, as Eugene Garfield (founder of ISI), have already submitted sometimes some of these principles, 3 but can not be present when evaluators inform university managers who are not experts in the relevant methodology. Scientists seeking literature to dispute or challenge evaluations only find the necessary information on what are, for them, opaque and inaccessible journals. We offer this summary of best practices based on metric indicators for researchers to hold accountable those evaluators evaluation and for evaluators to hold accountable those indicators ..."

Local Contexts | Local Contexts

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 06:03 AM PDT

"Traditional Knowledge licenses and labels recognize that Indigenous, traditional and local communities have different access and use expectations in regards to their knowledge and cultural expressions. These different expectations of access and use depend heavily on the material itself and the local context from which it derives. These TK licenses and labels help identify this material and establish culturally appropriate forms of managing control and access ... Local Contexts is an open forum for the testing and application of tk licenses and labels to digital cultural content. The licenses are designed to be legally defensible across multiple jurisdictions and directly address the specific needs of Indigenous, traditional and local communities whose needs are not met by current legal solutions. The labels are designed as a non-legal, educational strategy that can deal with cultural material already in the public domain.  We encourage users of Local Contexts to make comments, post ideas and exchange information about uses of and issues surrounding the TK licenses and labels. Sharing these experiences and stories will help everyone. The more information we have the better we will know how the licenses and labels work in your local context ..."

PLOS Biology: Beyond Bar and Line Graphs: Time for a New Data Presentation Paradigm

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 05:56 AM PDT

"Figures in scientific publications are critically important because they often show the data supporting key findings. Our systematic review of research articles published in top physiology journals (n = 703) suggests that, as scientists, we urgently need to change our practices for presenting continuous data in small sample size studies. Papers rarely included scatterplots, box plots, and histograms that allow readers to critically evaluate continuous data. Most papers presented continuous data in bar and line graphs. This is problematic, as many different data distributions can lead to the same bar or line graph. The full data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics. We recommend training investigators in data presentation, encouraging a more complete presentation of data, and changing journal editorial policies. Investigators can quickly make univariate scatterplots for small sample size studies using our Excel templates."

New Science Europe Principles on Open Access Publisher Services

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 05:53 AM PDT

"At its General Assembly meeting in Vienna on 15 April, Science Europe's members - comprising 50 major public research organisations in Europe - adopted four new common principles on Open Access Publisher Services. The Principles, which were prepared by Science Europe's Working Group on Open Access to Scientific Publications, complement the existing Science Europe 'Principles on the Transition to Open Access to Research Publications' published in April 2013. As scholarly publishing makes its transition to an Open Access system, and as service providers change their business models, the outcome of the transition will depend on the added value and quality of the services provided. The new principles adopted by Science Europe aim at setting minimum standards for Open Access publishing services provided by scholarly publishers. These general - and at the same time very practical - principles will help ensure scholarly and technical quality and cost-effectiveness of Open Access-related services in all fields, from sciences to social sciences and the humanities. Science Europe Member Organisations have adopted the following minimum expected services from publishers applicable when providing payments/subsidies for Open Access venues ..."

bjoern.brembs.blog » What should a modern scientific infrastructure look like?

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 05:47 AM PDT

"For ages I have been planning to collect some of the main aspects I would like to see improved in an upgrade to the disaster we so euphemistically call an academic publishing system. In this post I'll try to briefly sketch some of the main issues, from several different perspectives ..."

The public impact of open access research: A survey of SciELO users

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 05:12 AM PDT

Use the link to access the infographic from figshare.  "Summary of study conducted between March and July, 2014 by placing a series of single-question pop-up surveys on the SciELO Brazil, Chile, and Mexico open access journal portals. 17,575 responses were collected with a 49% response rate. Key findings: ~25% of use was found to be from non-academic users, and ~50% from students. This poster presents a summary of some of the findings of this study.   Poster presented at the ARCS Conference: Advancing Research Communication & Scholarship, Philadelphia, April 26-28, 2015.   JPA did the research; SP designed the poster. "

Walt at Random » Blog Archive » Feedback needed now: The Open Access Landscape

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 04:47 AM PDT

"If you think the work I'm doing related to The Open Access Landscape 2011-2014 (and potentially 2011-2015) is valuable, read on–understanding that I really need some form of feedback this week (by May 1, 2015). If you don't think it's valuable, feel free to skip the rest of this. Anybody still here? If so, then here's the moderately short version (followed by the three pieces of the longer version): I need feedback this week to decide how to proceed. Feedback can be a comment on this post, a message to me (waltcrawford@gmail.com), a response to the messages I'll probably put up on various social networks… It should reach me by May 1, 2015. Why by May 1, 2015? Because if I'm going to do something like an IndieGoGo campaign ... Positive feedback does not commit you to contribute to the IndieGoGo campaign or, alternatively, to buy the book (PDF or paperback) when it comes out, which it probably will whether I do the campaign or not. It only says that you might consider it ..."

Meet the Fellows - Peter Murray-Rust — Openforum Academy

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 02:05 AM PDT

"In this new series, we interview the Fellows of OpenForum Academy to talk about their current work, projects and how their research relates to the wider 'openness agenda'. The first interviewee is Peter-Murray-Rust, a chemist working at the University of Cambridge and interested in Open Access and Open Data ..."

Jisc Monitor – The Final Episode – From ideas to prototypes (by David Kay) | Jisc Monitor

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 02:01 AM PDT

"Completing at the end of May 2015, and with inputs from over 60 UK institutions, the 12 month Jisc Monitor project is tasked with developing designs and prototype software that indicate how institutions (and the broader supply chain) might go about supporting and tracking Open Access publication processes, especially with reference to compliance and costs. Since December's mid-point review of potential developments arising, the project has been focused on two related applications that commend themselves for consideration as key components in the Jisc OA offer – currently referenced under the working titles of 'Monitor Local' and 'Monitor UK Aggregator'.  As an enabler to these types of services, and OA management more generally, Monitor also is experimenting with a service to enable institutions to identify publications where their academics do not have a lead role as the corresponding author (GUIDE – Getting Useful IDs Early). You can read more about the intent of the prototypes in The Jisc Monitor Local UK GUIDE. The underlying requirements (over 200 in total!) for the broader OA management space collected in the earlier phases of the project are also available in navigable form at http://demonstrators.ostephens.com/monitor-reqs/ ..."

Introducing the Scholarly Markdown Bundle

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 01:56 AM PDT

"Using Markdown to author scholarly documents is an attractive alternative to the standard authoring tools Microsoft Word and LaTeX. The feeling shared by many is that Scholarly Markdown is 80% there, and that more effort is needed for the remaining 20% - moving markdown from a niche into the mainstream. What is mainly needed is building tools that connect the existing tools and ideas, resulting in one or more services attractive to a critical number of users. But maybe we also need to rethink the essential parts of Scholarly Markdown. In this post I propose that we expand the concept and define the Scholarly Markdown Bundle. It is becoming increasingly clear that scholarly work can't be adaequately described in a single text document, most commonly the journal article. Not only are there associated metadata, assets such as figures and supplementary information, but also the research data and software needed to produce the work described in the publication. The obvious next step is to think of scholarly work as a collection of objects, most clearly described by Carol Goble and others as Research Object Bundle ..."

Whole human genome data released under Creative Commons licence | Thoughts

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 01:48 AM PDT

"One of the things that I've been working a lot on over the last year is setting up pipelines to analyze whole genome sequencing data from human samples. This work is now coming to fruition and one part of that is that we (at the SNP&SEQ Technology Platform) have now released data for our users and others to see. It's still a work in progress, but most of the pieces are in place at this stage. The data is being release under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, so as long as you attribute the work to the SNP&SEQ Technology Platform you can do whatever you wish with it. You'll find the data here: https://export.uppmax.uu.se/a2009002/opendata/HiSeqX_CEPH/ Being a fan of open science working for an employer that will release data for the benefit of the community makes me jump with joy!  P.S. Like to have a look at the code that makes it all happen, checkout the National Genomics Infrastructure github repo."

Impact of Social Sciences – To what are we opening science? Reform of the publishing system is only a step in a much broader re-evaluation.

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 01:44 AM PDT

" ... In particular, it is crucial to avoid portraying 'openness' as a blanket strategy to deal with all knowledge production activities. All too often, Open Science is cast as a tool to enhance the transparency and accountability of research, with little critical reflection on the potential confusion and obscurity created by releasing large quantities of information without accompanying analysis and meta-data. Open Science can certainly be used to increase the fruitfulness and public understanding of research processes. This, however, requires support for expertise and infrastructures to make information intelligible and useable, as argued for instance by the Royal Society and the Open Knowledge Foundation.  Even more worryingly, openness is being invoked as a silver bullet to increase the productivity and cost-effectiveness of academic research in ways that hinder its integrity and reliability, and do not take account of its diverse goals and the variety of conditions under which it is performed. As the KLC-based network on 'Citizen Participation in Science and Medicine' argues here, budget cuts and austerity politics are tempting policy-makers to use Open Science as a cost saving strategy, which enhances the quality of research while also reducing the costs involved in disseminating its results and translating them into socially useful innovations ... To treat Open Science as a solution for the cost problem in this way buys into two misconceptions. The first is that there is a cost problem in the first place. By contrast, it can be argued that the cost problem is an artifact of current neoliberal policies. That less public money is spent on university-based research, that higher education has become a commodity, and that universities need to be run like enterprises, are not "natural" developments but political decisions. A reform of the publishing system and Gold model of open access is only a step in a much broader re-evaluation of how research should be evaluated and supported. Within such re-evaluation, we need to stop treating "the market" as a natural force. The market is not something that exists independent of human action and that can be influenced and steered at most, but not overcome or abolished ... The second misconception underpinning the view that Open Science could or should be a means to save costs is that it will save costs. This idea rests on the false premise that the work of those making science open – by cleaning, annotating, and publishing data, or by creating the infrastructures necessary for openness – is less valuable, and thus less 'costly', than the status quo. It is true that Open Science has the potential to do very good things, such as reducing the duplication of research, enabling people in less privileged institutions and world regions to access results that they could otherwise not access, or making sure that patients can engage with similar ranges and types of information as medical professionals. All this, however, involves its own costs, particularly for researchers and administrators who need to put time into keeping on top of Open Access mandates. As we argued in other places, researchers are often the best judges of how to and when to make their research open. Imposing rigid guidelines may hamper rather than facilitate the work of scientists who are already overstretched and underfunded, particularly if these guidelines come in the absence of adequate support, rewards and guarantees that their intellectual labour will be safeguarded against theft or abuse ..."

Ruđer Bošković Institute adopts Open Access Mandate (Croatia) : OpenAIRE blog

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 01:33 AM PDT

"As of April 17, 2015, all papers produced by Rudjer Boskovic Institute (RBI) researchers must be submitted to the institutional OA repository FULIR (which is OpenAIRE compliant)  upon acceptance for publication. The first institutional Open Access mandate in Croatia is based on  the Croatian Open Access Declaration (October 2012),  'Recommendation on access to and preservation of scientific information' by the European Commission(July 2012) , and best practices of the prominent research and academic institution across the world. The Mandate was signed by the RBI general director dr. sc. Tome Antičić.  All employees of the RBI are obliged to deposit in the institutional OA repository FULIR a digital copy of all their publications, and should provide Open Access whenever possible. Publication types include journal articles, conference proceedings papers, book chapters, books and textbooks, graduation theses and dissertations, presentations and posters from conferences, presentations and materials from lectures held at RBI and other institutions, educational materials and technical reports. All publications will be stored, preserved, and made available as soon as possible ..."

Some glimmers of hope from the granting councils | University Affairs

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 01:20 AM PDT

"For most of our time here on the Black Hole, we have been seen to be criticizing the granting councils, and I am the first to admit that we poke and prod much more than we shower with accolades. The reality is that the nature of scientific research has changed and massive changes are needed in terms of how we educate and train scientists. Today's post, however, is about some relatively new announcements from Canadian granting agencies that are real signs of encouragement. It looks like the noise made by postdoctoral fellows, graduate students and sympathetic senior scientists is finally being heard and some progressive policies are emerging from our main funding agencies. Two such policies that have come to light recently and worth sharing with our readers are: An open access requirement for all federally funded research ..."

Free the Textbook: reducing the cost of studying with open textbooks | The Reed Diaries

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 01:16 AM PDT

"I watched Cable Green's #OER15 keynote with great interest last week, and it brought me back to what I've been thinking about open textbooks for a few years now. When I've spoken with (or read) American educators, I've always got the feeling that 'open' and 'OER' relate more to textbooks than other resources, whereas over here in the UK the balance is more heavily distributed towards content and activities. That may not be the intention, or this may not even be 100% accurate, it's just the feeling I've got from being somewhat engaged (or on the fringes) in 'the open movement'. Opensourceway | CC BY:SA I read Martin Weller's post this morning which relates back to another of Cable Green's recent presentations where he tells a similar story to that at #OER15. The basic premise is that Washington State have been spending a ridiculous amount of money in buying textbooks, and because of the cost, they can only afford to buy a couple each year. Furthermore the students (K12 I think) don't own the books as they have to be passed on to the next intake. [Yeah crazy isn't it?]. So instead the idea is that rather than paying for those textbooks, the money can be used to fund the writing of new, current and open text books. These can be easily updated, and suspect they can be printed reasonably cheaply [that ebook master @hopkinsdavid used CreateSpace for the #edtechBook I contributed to]. This means all students can have their own copy, and the impact of this can spread beyond the Washington State area. Public funds = open textbooks = huge potential impact. Easy right? So why haven't we done this in the UK? ..."

On the Commodification of Human Discovery

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 01:12 AM PDT

"Not so long ago, the language of 'intellectual property' (IP) was the only serious way of talking about creative works and inventions.  Copyright and patents provided the default framework for explaining how someone's bright idea grew into a marketable product, and how that in turn contributed to economic growth and human progress. It was a neat, tidy, reassuring story.  It had an irresistible simplicity – and the endorsement of the ultimate authority, government.  And then…. the pluriversal realities of life came storming the citadel gates!  Over the past fifteen or twenty years, the monoculture narrative of IP has been attacked by indigenous cultures, seed activists, healthcare experts, advocates for the poor, the academy, and especially users of digital technologies.  It has become increasingly clear that the standard IP story, whatever its merits on a smaller scale, in competitive industries, is mostly a self-serving, protectionist weapon in the hands of Hollywood, record labels, book publishers, Big Pharma and other multinational IP industries.   We can thank the authors of a new anthology for helping to explain how the standard IP narrative is profoundly flawed, and how an array of challengers are showing how knowledge-creation so often emerges through social commons.  Free Knowledge:  Confronting the Commodification of Human Discovery, edited by Patricia W. Elliott and Daryl H. Hepting, provides a refreshing survey of the many realms in which corporations are enclosing shared knowledge -- and a sampling of commons that are democratizing the production and control of knowledge. (The book is published by University of Regina Press, and is licensed under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND license.)  It's an apt moment for this anthology, about fifteen years after the explosion of open source software, Creative Commons licenses and new genres of online collaboration like wikis, blogs and social networking. The world has changed immensely in this short period, and yet there haven't been many broad book-length appraisals of the IP scene for a while. So why not pause and reflect more deeply on the many 'other ways' of understanding knowledge?   Free Knowledge explores the social dynamics of indigenous cultures in maintaining agroecological knowledge and artistic design….the role of farmers in maintaining the biodiversity and robustness of seeds….the role of open access scholarly journals in liberating academic knowledge….and the ways in which freely shareable knowledge is important to our ecosystems, in helping us develop a post-carbon economy ..."

Kaplan University’s Peter Smith is Recipient of Leadership Award for Open Education Excellence - MarketWatch

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 01:02 AM PDT

"Founder and President of the Open College at Kaplan University (OC@KU), Dr. Peter Smith has been recognized with a Leadership Award from the Open Education Consortium (OEC). According to the OEC, "With 40+ years of experience as a higher education innovator and noteworthy advocate for higher education, Dr. Peter Smith was instrumental in the development and launch of Open College at Kaplan University (OC@KU). OC@KU is a unique initiative that merges education technology and customized service to help learners meet their academic and professional goals. By offering access to open courses, credit assessments, and faculty mentors, OC@KU provides resources to help learners reduce the cost and time to earn a degree." The award was bestowed at the Open Education Global Conference, in Banff, Alberta (Canada) last night. Dr. Smith is one of two Leadership Award recipients this year ..."

Kim Thanos Wants to Take Down the Textbook Industry - The Chronicle of Higher Education

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 12:57 AM PDT

Kim Thanos goes to work each day with one not-so-modest goal: 'Take $1 billion out of the textbook industry and give it back to students.' And if along the way her company, Lumen Learning, manages to fuel the burgeoning movement behind 'open education' ..."

Proteins and Wave Functions: The main reason I use OA? It makes my research better

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 12:52 AM PDT

"When I started publishing OA the answer was 'The people who payed for this research should be able to read about the results'.  Now the answer is more complex and difficult to fit into 140 characters. Hence this blog post. The OA movement has three important 'side effects': 1. Pioneered by PLoS ONE, many OA journals have removed perceived 'impact' as a review criterion 2. Pioneered by PLoS ONE, many OA journals are mega-journals where the appropriateness of the topic of the manuscript to the journal is not an acceptance criterion. 3. Most OA journals allow you to make your manuscript public prior to submission I have found that points 1-2 has made my research much less risk-averse.  I can focus on truly challenging and long-term research questions without worrying whether or where I will be able to publish ... I can share our work at any stage in any way I see fit.  We put all our manuscripts, MS and PhD theses on preprint servers such as arXiv and we get a lot of great feedback long before the 'official review' arrive ... "

Walt at Random » Blog Archive » The Open Access Landscape: 9. Ecology

Posted: 27 Apr 2015 12:45 AM PDT

"Ecology includes environmental fields. This topic includes 153 journals, which published a total of 8,295 articles in 2013 and 8,754 in 2014.  Table 9.1 shows the number of journals and 2013 articles for each grade; the free, pay and unkown numbers; and average articles per journal. Boldface percentages (grades) are percentages of all ecology journals, where others (Free, Pay, Unk) are percentages of the grade above. All A$ journals are pay, and the redundant row is omitted.  As seems fairly typical, particularly for STEM, the A$ journals publish by far the most articles per journal, and—with the exception of D journals, an odd group—journals with APCs generally publish more articles than those without.  The small number of journals with much smaller numbers of articles proportionally include these subgroups: C (apparently ceased), three journals and a total of one article; D (dying): five journals, 22 articles; E (erratic): one journal, 23 articles; H (hiatus?): five journals, 142 articles; S (small): three journals, ten articles ..."
Posted by at
Labels:

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)