Group items tagged

In this article Abby Clobridge discusses the Scholarly Publication landscape today as it relates to open access journals, and how we need to re-think some of our standards for publishing (both my authors and by publishers).

Part 2 of this article addresses OA and journal impact factors, and part 5 give examples on how libraries/librarians can contribute in spreading OA acceptance.

This article does a nice job of approaching the subject of the history of open access scholarly publishing from the library perspective. It also lays out some of the views of stakeholders (publishers, researchers, institutions, librarians, and consumer groups) in a nice, easy to digest way. The article is brief, so they probably don't hit all the issues, but I found it a helpful and interesting introduction.

One way of understanding the open access, knowledge, and source.

Young, K. (2004). Internet Addiction: A new Clinical Phenomenon and Its Consequences. American Behavioral Scientist. 48:402

a. Although this is a psychology article, it poses an important concern over the rise of internet addiction in connected populations. This article is relevant to this course, as it relates to the notion of critical consumption; some users are unable to filter information effectively, which should be recognized as a concern. Young states many statistics from educators and researchers discounting internet use in the classroom as it is far too distracting and the loss of productivity (in both students and the workforce) is immense.

Some might argue that this article shows the downside of connected learning and e-resources, however this is not the case. Certain web activities mentioned in the paper such as chat rooms, social media, and video games are not the focus of this course. Open Knowledge deals with the light side of the internet, which is the interconnectivity, the accelerated learning, and the ability to publish ones own content. The internet can definitely be misused, but not every web activity is "junk food". If someone obsessively became a mathematician and ultimately ended up being the best mathematician in the world due to "addiction" people would call him or her a genius. The trick is to filter which content and activities one engages in.

Of the 255 papers that underwent the entire editing process to acceptance or rejection, about 60% of the final decisions occurred with no sign of peer review. For rejections, that's good news: It means that the journal's quality control was high enough that the editor examined the paper and declined it rather than send it out for review.

This article is certainly controversial, and I believe in some way did a service to the Open Access community by highlighting the practice of predatory journals. However, the irony of Bohannon's article, being an example of the kind of "bad science" he describes in his own article is inescapable. First, there is no randomization of his "experimental group", and there is no control group; second, there was elimination of non-responders; third, there was no application of the intention to treat principle in the analysis; and finally there were no inferential statistics and no references! Using his own standard, there is nothing that can be concluded from his study. For the criticism regarding Bohannon's targeting of OA journals exclusively, it is important to note that this experiment has been done before with 'traditional' journals as well- and many of them failed the test of peer review. http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/02/27/how_nonsense_papers_ended_up_in_respected_scientific_journals.html

I think Bohannens "study" should be considered more "investigative journalism" than scientific study. While it may have some flaws if held against the standards of a scientific study, as a journalistic piece it goes a long way to justify its central accusation that there are predatory open access journals. He does not claim that there are no or evwen less predatory journals in the tradional sector (although it seems reasonable to believe that it might seem easier to predatory publishers to dupe unsuspecting scientists rather than subscription paying librarians). It demonstrates that open access is not a cure for all the problems besetting acacemic publishing. I think more deeply about it, it shows that author fees for publication may create a buisiness model just as open to abouse as the traditional subscription system. One answer might be to make the peer-review process more transparent, i.e. name the reviewers But that of course has other drawbacks.

Compares the cost of articles from society and non-profit publishers to those of the major commercial publishers.

Its crazy. The numbers (of profit and control) for the publishing companies is astronomical!

Universities have received a poor deal from the system of private, subscription-based access to knowledge production since the port WW2 commercialization of the scientific publishing industry. It is absurd that the university or research funder supplies the content (the research), pays for the authoring (the time of the researcher writing the article), and provides and pays for the time of peer reviewers and academic editors. In addition, it often pays page charges or formatting charges to publishers. It then cedes copyright and finally buys back its own research at prices that have escalated at four times the rate of inflation in the past decade and a half! Considering most of this research is conducted using public funds, it becomes a moral argument when public resources are used once again to purchase access to the outputs of this research. The commercial model of disseminating research does not obey the rules of supply and demand. A relatively small number of 'core' journals occupy monopoly positions, in that university libraries have to subscribe to access their content, whatever the cost, because these journals have been established as 'must-have' resources. While the practice of 'bundling' offers the advantage of bulk pricing, it reduces room for choice, as bundles consume large chunks of library budgets, making it difficult to subscribe to smaller, individual titles. In addition, the inflexibility of indexing systems makes it difficult for new journals to establish themselves; thus compromising the potential for smaller niche subjects and newer interdisciplinary areas. Thankfully the global inequalities engendered by the commercialization of scholarly publishing are being challenged by open access.

An interesting opinion/confessional piece on one academic's experience of publishing in the developing world. The author points out cultural pressures and differences that could possible contribute to the expanding knowledge gap.

It is very fascinating articles, thank you for posting this. I myself, most of the times, focus on the publisher issues rather than the author himself. However, after read this I realise how important it is to pay attention to the authors because their contribution can really affect the quality of researches that they involved in. Regardless how successful the authors are, they are still human beings who are also affected by the national cultures.

This is an interesting piece but raises the question - why is the institution placing the pressure? It says, tacitly, a lot about the culture of the academic institutions in the country as a whole - and this culture is often shaped by funding patterns from central government, or major funders. The institution then responds to these funding patterns by pressuring staff to produce what is funded. In South Africa this is very much the pattern, with central government funding articles published in selected journals (see the readings for the module 11). However, there has been a rethink and there is proposed changes in now supporting book publication to a much greater degree. So whereas the pressure was on to produce articles, now the universities are looking at book production to a greater extent. As has been said as a truism; "Follow the money" - and in this case we see how this affects what should be, in effect, academic freedom.

Publishing has transited from traditional to Electronic format making information resources available to users without much subscription. E-publishing is engendered by the introduction of information and communication technology (ICT), this development has brought about increase in the number of scholarly communication in circulation. The awareness and rate of e-publishing differs among faculties, it based on this that this study was carried out to survey the situation of e-publishing and open access of librarians in three federal universities in Southern Nigeria, five research questions were formulated to guide the study. The methodology adopted is descriptive survey, questionnaire was given to a total population of 64 librarians consisting of librarians from the institutions understudy, the data collected from the study shows that though librarians are aware of e-publishing but they have not being publishing as should have been expected in University of Nigeria Nsukka (UNN) out of the 95% that aware of electronic publishing only 30% have published there articles electronically, in University of Lagos (UNILAG) 100% indicated that they have published electronically while in University of Benin (UNIBEN) 45.4% percent indicated yes while 54.5% said they have not published their articles electronically. On availability of open access it was discovered that they have access as a total of 84% from UNN responded Yes, UNILAG 100% said Yes while in UNIBEN 90.9%. The following problems based on their scoring militating against e-publishing and open access in Nigeria. Inadequate power supply; inadequate computer terminals; inadequate funding for subscription payment.

A very good article on library role in encouraging and supporting the student publishing. It deals mainly with student scientific writing and not so much with student journals, but certainly writing scientific articles is a part of it. The article includes a real-life case study, which to my mind is added value of it. Including scholarly communication skills as part of library training program is a very good idea.

This weeks module 6 is about Open Science and Open Data. Within the course provided videos and readings do not provide much on Open Data. This article dives into why Open Data is relevant in Open Science. Citation: Molloy JC (2011) The Open Knowledge Foundation: Open Data Means Better Science. PLoS Biol 9(12): e1001195. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001195 Published: December 6, 2011 Copyright: © 2011 Jennifer C. Molloy. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Open data leads to better science, but a community effort is needed in order to overcoming the barriers to widespread publication and availability of open scientific data.

In this article, Barker believes that technology has somehow become harmful to communicate in person among teenagers. Teens prefer to write to each other such as pick up their phones to ping each other, communicating by texting though instant messaging and social networking sites like Facebook, Twtter rather than talking to each other in person. Thus this has given out a general that is technology has become a problem in communication since cell phone has become widely used in society. Therefore, within the development in cell phone technology, smartphone was invented, which a mobile phone is built on a mobile computing platform that not only a communication tool to make phone call or text message but also allows people to go on internet or play game for their pastime. Hence this with the development for technology, people spends more time on their smartphones rather than having interaction between people which has become an issue in our life. By reading this article, it leads my thought to online education. Being honest, I enjoy the in person discussion rather than online written discussion however digital platform has provided a convenient way for people to share their ideas. However this article did raised a good question, technology makes everything easier for people but does it somehow hurt the communication among people?

By: Matthew LeBar Massively Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are often described as the future of education - or at least a significant part of it. But there may be a significant problem with them: a very small proportion of students who start them actually finish. This poses a serious threat to their legitimacy.

This brings up the question of what it means to complete something? And why is it so important to us? And why 'productivity', a thing somebody defined ages ago, is so important to our humanity? .. or is it anymore?

Because I am taking a MOOC course but also on campus at University, I receive credits and grades where this is definitely one of the motivations for me to contribute. Although I agree that completion of the course is not essential to attain knowledge, what about our motivations to learn? And what about our incentives? Not saying MOOCs are not interesting nor helpful, I like MOOCs, but I think people like recognition too. I think to just receive the "statement of accomplishment" is not enough to prove efforts made within the course. However MOOCs are not as well developed at this stage, there definitely will be adjustments in the near future.

Get involved. Please go to the website for more details: "TASK We are launching a print magazine to educate teachers, school administrators and students. The magazine will provide information and training tips for these sets of people to improve their capacity in teaching and managing schools. And improve life skills for students. We are in need of experienced writers and educationalists to contribute original contents to the magazine. Each article should not be more than 250 words and every information needed about the organization will be provided. "

Hi Maria, I like your tag "get involved". I hope others will use it as they post opportunities for our group.

The ECOPSI team published information regarding the project through various print and online mediums in 2012 and 2013. The reference list below itemizes each of the documents into the following categories: Journal Article Books Magazine Articles Conferences and Presentations Online Dissemination Journal Article Tench, R., Vercic , D., Tkalac, A., Juma, H.

"People now buy songs, not albums. They read articles, not newspapers. So why not mix and match learning "modules" rather than lock into 12-week university courses?"

@Kevin - thanks for sharing. I really share many of the sentiments of this article - but the modularisation of the curriculum also raise some interesting and possibly disturbing points. For example, our current diploma/degree structures are based on the premise that the final outcomes of a diploma or a degree is the result, inter alia, of the unique combination of a number of different courses/modules which, together, allow students to provide evidence of competency in all of the outcomes. While I sincerely think there is a place for just-in-time learning and short courses, and secondly, that the notion of a four-year degree may be outdated - I am wondering about the notion of the curriculum as journey.

Thank you sharing this! I think this is new and innovative idea. I wouldn't mind trying this kind of system at my school.

This article is interesting in that it introduces (although repurposes an existing term) the concept of participatory surveillance in the digital age as something a little less sinister than what Manzerolle argues against in his paper for the OK MOOC's 3rd module. Instead of seeing the user as a victim of the commodification of social media as Manzerolle suggests, Albrechtslund instead focuses on the fact that people are offering this information freely. Although this was written in 2008, a couple years before Manzerolle, I think these articles really balance each other. Albrechtslund focuses on the complexities of having a digital identity in a physical world and light-heartedly refers to surveillance as something users are aware of as they participate. Are users also aware of the commodification of their participation? I think many are, and for now users are ok with it. I appreciated Manzerolle's mention of options like Diaspora, which I think as a concept could play an important part of negotiating the tension between data ownership and digital social participation.

I think these types of discussion of the implications of privacy and surveillance need a full module--in each module i keep thinking its something we need to consider. here is a more light hearted take from the humorous news website the Onion: http://www.theonion.com/video/cias-facebook-program-dramatically-cut-agencys-cos,19753/

This reminds me of a point made in Yevgeny Morozov's illustration video -- that dictatorial governments don't necessarily have to torture people to get information; they can simply follow Tweets and Facebook status updates. In the case of Rwanda, American religious social media is painting a picture of the Paul Kagame government that is at odds with what many dissidents in that country report. I agree with koobredaer -- a module on privacy and surveillance would be valuable.

"This paper interrogates and situates theoretically from a Marxist perspective various aspects and tensions that inhere in the contemporary academic publishing environment. The focus of the article is on journal publishing. The paper examines both the expanding capitalist control of the academic publishing industry and some of the efforts being made by those seeking to resist and subvert the capitalist model of academic publishing. The paper employs the concepts of primitive accumulation and alienation as a theoretical register for apprehending contemporary erosions of the knowledge commons through the enclosure effects that follow in the wake of capitalist control of academic publishing. Part of my purpose with this discussion will be to advance the case that despite a relatively privileged position vis-à-vis other workers, academic cognitive labourers are caught up within and subject to the constraining and exploitative practices of capitalist production processes."