Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

The "manifesto" for the open access movement, written by Aaron Swartz from 2008. Only 6 years old, but already, it carries a historical value. "Will you join us?" Creative Commons license: Attribution 3.0 United States

Great resource and very relevant to this weeks' module! Thank you for sharing. The idea of "Guerilla Open Access" is something I had really hoped to cover more in depth in the lecture materials. Yes, there's a tension -- or a "balance", as many of the lecturers said -- between protecting creators vs. protecting consumers, but there has not been nearly enough discussion on the power dynamics and implicit within our current system. I am taking this class partly in person through UBC, and I will be sharing this resource with my seminar group this week.

Banned Books Week is an annual event celebrating the freedom to read. Typically held during the last week of September, it highlights the value of free and open access to information.

Interesting! I always thought that Banned Books Week was very "public library" driven. I like how ALA encompass open access by saying that this event is to advocate against any restriction on access to books (or I would say information/documents)

In Spanish.

La realidad que se vive en México es muy distinta a países como EUA, Cánada,Alemania, etc., existe una gran desigualdad y no hay unión. Tal vez estas leyes no den resultados inmediatos, pero son importantes por que quienes las promovieron creyeron en ellas y las apoyaron, y en un país como México es de reconocerse que tuvieron iniciativa. Una ley no va cambiar la realidad de un país, eso depende de las personas y otros factores como la educación y los valores. ------------ The reality of life in Mexico is very different to countries like USA, Canada, Germany, etc., there is great inequality and no union. Perhaps these laws do not give immediate results, but are important because they promoted those who believed in them and supported them, and in a country like Mexico is recognized that took initiative. A law will not change the reality of a country that depends on people and other factors such as education and values.

Me encontré con esta interesante reseña acerca de las políticas de acceso abierto en México.

This report shows the importance of college education. With the rise in cost of higher education, it is all the more important to have alternatives to the traditional route for college. For those who question the value of college in this era of soaring student debt and high unemployment, the attitudes and experiences of today's young adults-members of the so-called Millennial generation-provide a compelling answer. On virtually every measure of economic well-being and career attainment-from personal earnings to job satisfaction to the share employed full time-young college graduates are outperforming their peers with less education.

There are also costs to society - countries with fewer educated citizens cannot be as competitive in the global environment. It behooves countries to try to figure out how to keep education economical for its citizens.

Well said. Thanks for bringing up this topic and adding it to the conversation. I don't doubt that those who keep learning and gain skills will be more valuable economically and probably then more economically rewarded. But I have serious doubts that the current program of institutionalized degrees is the best route for citizens.

"Is Luciana Fasani too cool for school or better prepared than most teens for a rapidly changing workplace? A qualified make-up artist and hair consultant and now studying the performing arts, the 14-year-old Cape Town teen tells Nelia Vivier about stepping up to today's job market and life in future.. "The educational system today only values one type of intelligence - if you do not fit into that mold, you are made to feel unhappy and stupid" "Schools and schooling ar becoming increasingly irrelevant to the great enterprises of the planet. No-one believes anymore that scientists are trained in science classes, or politicians in civic classes, or poets in English classes - John Gatto"."Our school crisis is a reflection of the greater social crisis (in South Africa) - children and old people are penned up and locked away to a dgree without precendent... a community that has no future, no past, only a continuous present". "We live in networks, not communities and everyone I know is lonely...school is a major actor in this tragedy....We appear to be creating a caste system, complete with untouchables who wander..."

This list is not to be taken at face value (many of the publishers on it do have legitimate journals), but it serves as a reminder that there are many predatory journals that ask scholars to pay a lot of money to share their work, and many that also skirt traditional peer review processes in order to get money from unwary authors.

Will show to some colleagues who sometimes are interesteed in publishing issues.

Lists by By Jeffrey Beall of predatory journals Released January 2, 2014

Publicado el 7/5/2012 This is a brief overview of several Open Peer Review Models, including ETAI, Nature, ACP, PLoS One and EJCBS. It is recorded based on a Prezi Presentation first developed for Open Access Week 2011 at UBC.

I found this presentation, in particular the visual representations, to be very useful in understanding just how diverse open peer review models can be. Several things stuck out to me throughout the presentation. First, I was surprised that many of the open peer review models either maintained anonymity of the reviewers or self-identification was optional. For example, PLOSone and the Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics journals did not require self-identification. This raises a tension for me in that it does enable more people to participate in the publishing/review process, but it still inherently indicates context does not matter, which is something I disagree with. That is, if, for example, a paper is on student-faculty partnerships or feminism, it seems to me that crucial insights pertain to the particularities of the people reviewing an article. The other aspect that stuck out to me was how crucial it is for a journal to be intentional about implementing, integrating, and valuing an open peer review process. The Nature experiment is a good example of this. While I am sure they spent a great deal of time figuring out how to construct and enable an open peer review process, it was not necessarily emphasized as important by the journal nor well integrated into people's current practice. In contrast, the ETAI did this by permanently archiving the peer comments rather than deleting them unannounced, and editors also sent notifications to people that articles were ready rather than assuming people would seek out articles themselves.

Online discussions and post-publication analyses are catching mistakes that sneak past editorial review. This article describes the pitfalls with editorial review and pre-publication peer review, and advocates for post-publication crowd-sourced reviewing through social media platforms.

I think having a comments section is a great way to provide feedback on the information provided. Often when I read articles the comments section allows me to understand different perspectives and interpretations of the information.

This article, while not necessarily explicitly, managed to hint at what I find to be a source of problematic practices/outcomes in the academy, publishing, etc. That is, it is not necessarily that traditional peer review processes are ineffective at finding errors or misconduct, but rather it is when our processes and practices become so systematized that we can mindlessly or effortlessly engage in and reproduce them without our full, critical attention that they can produce problems. While I think there are good reasons to critique the notion of peer and "expert" culture within traditional peer review processes, an additional and separate critique is the problems that arise with systematization. The article implicitly addressed this when the author commented that current post-publication environments "provide a public space that is not under the control of journal editors and conference organizers." Yet, as White indicates, there exists skepticism of the value of post-publication reviews along with a simultaneous effort to build post-publication systems that have standards that put those questioning it at ease. The National Institutes of Health establishing requirements that potential post-publication reviewers must meet demonstrated this. That is, they are trying to figure out how to systematize post-publication. For me, what this article indicates is that we ought to figure out how to keep our academic and publishing processes "fresh," so to speak. This way we don't become so comfortable with our methods and practices that they allow us to simply go through the motions without fostering innovative and critical inquiry.

I really cannot recommend this resource highly enough. The brainchild and master's thesis of a lawyer-turned-information professional, SIPX is an incredible blend of copyright control centre, digital distribution hub, and online marketplace. With the impending downfall of Access Copyright and its rejection by most Canadian universities, schools have had to quickly learn about copyright and establish good practices and guidelines, but this product provides the safest legal protection while considerably upgrading the dissemination of course readings; it also makes strides that push against the dominance of the traditional textbook market. It has already been adopted by several major American universities, including Stanford (where it was developed; it seems all the greatest open knowledge stuff is coming out of there!) and Notre Dame. Did I mention that it even supports MOOCs? I just found out about this resource while doing a practicum placement for library school, and I can't believe that I'd never heard of it before. It's exactly the kind of integrated library and informational system that needs to happen in academic institutions, and while it's not explicitly modelled on open access, it relies on many of the same values that we've talked about throughout this course. Check it out!

Text from 2011, still extremely timely, about privacy. The author, professor of Law, deconstructs the "nothing to hide" argument that says that we should not be scared to disclose private activities or information when we do nothing wrong.

"With regard to individual rights,.... there exists a private domain in man which should not be regulated or violated. This realm constitutes what is deepest, highest, and most valuable in the individual human being." http://rebirthofreason.com/Articles/Younkins/Social_Cooperation,_Flourishing,_and_Happiness.shtml

Privacy off course matters.It is right that if I have not done anything wrong then why should I hide it. On other hand we can not share our family relationship information with anyone.

A brief article outlining the ongoing value of print.

I always think printing can't be replaced ,but because rising of costing and resources shrink, and inflation of population. I think in future, schools, printing text books will still exist, but only people who have power in society, no matter politics, money or wisdom, can afford .

I believe that it has something to do with preference. There are books I like to have them in print and others in electronic forms. The fact that a number of old books that I read at school are now free encourages some of us to keep them in an electronic format and read them again without the pressures or fear of being scolded by our beloved teachers (Tom Brown's School Days- my standard 5 or Grade 7 book comes to mind). I cannot wait to read a collection of new printed books that my local bookshop has tagged as good reads for the silly season. Magazines "tastes" better in their printed format.

This handbook discusses the legal, social and technical aspects of open data. Open data, especially open government data, is a tremendous resource that is yet to be tapped properly. It is targeted for civil servants, journalists, politicians, data professionals or anyone interested in open data. It can be used by anyone but is especially designed for those seeking to open up data. It discusses the why, what and how of open data - why to go open, what open is, and the how to 'open' data. This book explains the basic concepts of 'open data', especially in relation to government. It covers how open data creates value and can have a positive impact in many different areas. In addition to exploring the background, the handbook also provides concrete information on how to produce open data.

A really complete must read on Digital ID

Merete Sanderhoff edited this collection of 18 articles on the topic of Openness in the cultural sector (predominantly museums). An excellent resource as museums struggle to retain image rights while at the same time fulfilling their both their educational and preservational missions.

This is really interesting! Thanks for sharing - I'll be reading this on my commute this week. The juxtaposition raised between safeguarding collections and allowing access (and possible re-use) is enlightening.

Caring for collection being shared is also a part of knowledge openness to access because all collections are precious for its timeless value , memoirs, and cultural heritage.

Who owns the Data or the question should be, who is manipulating the Data? The article by Alistair Croll on who owns the Data asks big questions but fails short to highlight the fact that there is someone out there manipulating the well intended, innocent data into their own profit motive agendas. Many times, I have received emails, phone calls and SMS from sales people trying to sell me something. How they got my contact details is definitely my guess that someone is busy manipulating the data, I gave away for profit motives. At the end of the article the writer makes an opinion that, we are using the internet for free? Which I disagree, because our data makes and runs the internet. Without our data, the internet will not be the internet. Without our data on Facebook, facebooks or twitter will be blank, no value and worthless. If companies are paying people to participate in surveys and opinions, then it means our free data we upload on the internet, facebook and twitter is a payment for us to use the internet. After all we have to pay to the internet service providers for us to access to use the internet, and face book. Or someone is even suppose to pay for our data, in fact we have made things easy for the marketing people who now just sit behind their laptops and manipulate our free given data for their own consumptions. Or maybe I should console myself that, since the article is old, maybe someone has answered my question?

A mi me pareció que el artículo señala dos puntos centrales, aunque resolver el tema es una empresa peliaguda. El asunto de lo gratuito en un sistema basado en la ganancia y la capacidad de aprovechar los resquicios que abren las situaciones nuevas y una buena dosis de desorientación generalizada: 1. As we use the Internet for "free," we have to remember that if we're not paying for something, we're not the customer. We are in fact the product being sold - or, more specifically, our data is. 2. The important question isn't who owns the data. Ultimately, we all do. A better question is, who owns the means of analysis? Because that's how, as Brand suggests, you get the right information in the right place. The digital divide isn't about who owns data - it's about who can put that data to work. Tal vez, como menciona natashasana, el problema sea más complejo, y reducir la manipulación al negocio deje temas relavantes fuera. Y la información que usan/manipulan es la que todos aportamos. Cierto, pero no todos la usamos o aprovechamos de la misma forma.

PhD Theses are normally locked away digitally. They cost 20 billion dollars to create and we waste much of this value. By making them open we can use software …

Thank you very much for sharing this presentation. I completely agree that today science is done in C20th way and communicated in C19th way. The risk is lose the power and possibilities opened in the C21th, mainly because of the power of science publishing moguls & others.

As we move toward an era of openness, where information is instant and infinite, it is not enough to simply have the tools and skills to access information. We must make meaning, not only through analysis and critical thinking, but also by engaging directly with knowledge, by taking it apart, putting it together, by sharing it, and by creating it.

It is an amazing presentation. Changing people attitude toward the value of knowledge and make them more involved in creating it is coming.

Great article that talks about the very nature of openness! In this article the author argues that openness in education has been successful in establishing itself as an approach. However, this initial victory should be viewed as part of a larger battle around the nature of openness. Drawing lessons from history and the green movement, a number of challenges for the open education movement are identified as it enters this new stage. The value of openness to education is stressed in that it relates to opportunities for development and the role of the higher education in society.

Thanks for sharing this, Marieke. It provides a wonderful overview of the central issues of "openness". This is one that should definitely be bumped up into the course reading list.

Hola Marieke. Coincido con Kevin en que el artículo es muy ilustrativo, con datos y una interesante reflexión sobre el acceso abierto. Pero me parece que la comparación con el movimiento verde requiere matizarse, principalmente el de los verdes porque era un movimiento político de transformación civilisatoria (eso se proponía, al menos) y terminó bastante desinflado (http://newleftreview.org/II/81/joachim-jachnow-what-s-become-of-the-german-greens). Igual, el texto vale la pena. Danke

Roopika Risam puts forth an argument that digital publication is not merely a new platform in which to carry out traditional academic actives. Rather, Risam proposes three ways in which digital scholarship is distinct from print, fundamentally shifting the values potentially underlying the academy: (1) it tends towards more collaboration (2) it is an iterative process, rarely considered "finished", and (3) it is frequently more public. Risam notes that these new principles do not guarantee dramatic shifts in the academy, and there are efforts to systematize these features in order to make digital scholarship more closely reflect the principles in print scholarship. Yet, it is emphasized we are at a point in time where we have the opportunity to be clear enough about the ways digital scholarship differs from print scholarship in order to decent and uplift these qualities rather than try to transform them to better resemble print scholarship.

Looks at the "Linux model" as a successful way of doing business."I think there is a general movement and a general recognition in the technology community that we need to reform the patent process. There's far too much effort and energy put into creating patents that do not end up fostering innovation," said Musk. "I think no reasonable person would say that the current patent system is ideally suited to foster innovation."

A true pioneer, Mr Musk is. I think he has an extra sense for the future. Patents seem to be an institution which increasingly focuses on short term profit instead of the common benefit on the long run.

Patents are the biggest responsible for the technological delays. The laws should change radically.