Group items tagged

The Scholarly Communication Institute at the University of Virginia has released Scholarly Communication Institute 8: Emerging Genres in Scholarly Communication.

"We write to communicate an untenable situation facing the Harvard Library. Many large journal publishers have made the scholarly communication environment fiscally unsustainable and academically restrictive"

A new way to define "digital scholarship" as a family of digital forms of scholarly communication (rather than e-science or e-social science, etc.)

Microsoft Research Connections and UKOLN, University of Bath, are working in partnership on an exciting and challenging new project to develop a Community Model for Data-Intensive Science.

Project from 2012, collaboration of UKOLN, University of Bath and Microsoft Research "to assist institutions, research funders and researchers in growing the capability of their communities to perform data intensive research "

Conference to be held at April 25-28, 2013 York University, Toronto, Canada. Deadline for submissions is November 12, 2012. Including the following topics: libraries and preservation in 2023; digital traces and archives new publics, movements going global and communities of the future manifestos for the next generation new stories for new screens: e-literatures, immersive/augmented worlds, future cinema, games ways of working - methodologies, code, communities, funding future classrooms, curricula, and pedagogies maker movements; -- tools we haven't built yet, but that we desperately need visualization and data-driven futures mobility, future city spaces, built and liquid architectures crowdsourcing (and/in) the future teleologies and their discontents new and imagined creative practices

"a study is undertaken of a selection of papers from the fie ld of c ommunication, comparing the number of cit ations received with their 2.0 i ndicators. The results s how that the most cited articles within recent years also have significantly hi gher altmetric indicators. Next follows a review of the principal empirical studies undertaken, centering on the correlations between bibliometric and al ternative indicators. To conclude, the main limitations of altmetrics are highlighted , alongside a reflective consideration of the role altmetrics may play in capturing the impact of research in Web 2.0 platforms"

The Journal of Digital Humanities is a comprehensive, peer-reviewed, open access journal that features the best scholarship, tools, and conversations produced by the digital humanities community in the previous quarter.

Complete multimedia ebook from the December 2011 conference featuring video and audio of keynotes and presentations, posters, tweets and blog content

The aims of the roundtable were to provide an international perspective on the likely impact of an open access future on librarians, to identify support and skills required for librarians in such a future, and to further current discussion on support for the library community from their institutions, publishers, funders and other parties.

THe report (UK) everyone in the OA community is talking about - proposes OA to all research outputs from publicly funded research

The sister organisation of W3C, the Web Science Trust (www.webscience.org) proposes to create a Create a global "Web Observatory".

Recently announced NSF requirement (that all grant proposal need to include a Data Management Plan (DMP) shows the importance of digital data as a foundation for the progress of science and replicability of research in the digital age. ..

Computers and the web have transformed homes and businesses, and could do the same for education and training. Known as "eLearning," this can be as simple as accessing a school timetable online, or as complex as running virtual communities for sharing and creating knowledge.

STAR METRICS programme - "The first aim of the programme is to build a 'clean' database of all federally funded researchers in the United States ... Later on, the plan is to track patents, citations and other metrics of the research's impact. ... researchers' use of the Internet to communicate and publish will enable STAR METRICS to track the creation and transfer of knowledge properly for the first time"

What was highly significant, however, was the pace of discussion and analysis, carried out in real time on blogs and a wiki that had been quickly set up for the purpose of collectively analyzing the paper. This kind of collaboration has emerged only in recent years in the math and computer science communities. In the past, intense discussions like the one that surrounded the proof of the Poincaré conjecture were carried about via private e-mail and distribution lists as well as in the pages of traditional paper-based science journals.

The Public Library of Science (PLoS) is the first publisher to place transparent and comprehensive information about the usage and reach of published articles onto the articles themselves, so that the entire academic community can assess their value. We call these measures for evaluating articles 'Article-Level Metrics', and they are distinct from the journal-level measures of research quality that have traditionally been made available until now.

Open Science Summit, which took place in July at Berkeley, is a good example of how "digital scholarship", "e-science" and "open science" and "scholarly communications" are terms from the same vocabulary we are creating to talk about the changes in academia, knowledge transfer, innovation, etc.

Abstract: The deluge of scientific research data has excited the general public, as well as the scientific community, with the possibilities for better understanding of scientific problems, from climate to culture. For data to be available, researchers must be willing and able to share them. The policies of governments, funding agencies, journals, and university tenure and promotion committees also influence how, when, and whether research data are shared. Data are complex objects. Their purposes and the methods by which they are produced vary widely across scientific fields, as do the criteria for sharing them. To address these challenges, it is necessary to examine the arguments for sharing data and how those arguments match the motivations and interests of the scientific community and the public. Four arguments are examined: to make the results of publicly funded data available to the public, to enable others to ask new questions of extant data, to advance the state of science, and to reproduce research. Libraries need to consider their role in the face of each of these arguments, and what expertise and systems they require for data curation.