Connotea: Bookmarks matching tag oa.new (50 items) |
- Searchable List of 250+ Open Access Archaeology Publications- Journals, Reports, etc.
- 'Badges' Earned Online Pose Challenge to Traditional College Diplomas - College 2.0 - The Chronicle of Higher Education
- Nuit Blanche: Toward Robust Science: Why Open Access of Government Funded Peer Review Work is Important
- The Research Works Act Aims to Kill Open-Access Journals
- US Research Open Access In Peril - Slashdot
- Open Access and the Origin of the Research University
- A Fistful Of Dollars: Why Corporate Publishers Have No Place In Scholarly Communication
- How much does it cost to get a scientific paper?
- Scientists, Share Secrets or Lose Funding: Stodden and Arbesman - Bloomberg
- NeuroDojo: ESA still not supporting open access
- nsf.gov - National Science Foundation (NSF) News - National Science Board Seeks Public Comment on Data Policies Report - US National Science Foundation (NSF)
- Anti-Open Access Rises Again
- Could an iTunes-like model work with scientific publishing?
- Stop U.S. legislation that would block public access to publicly funded research - Creative Commons
- Thread to keep track of publicly-available... - Heather Piwowar - FriendFeed
- Open science: why is it so hard?
- ACM’s role in public policy
- Elsevier editorial boards: Serials Review
- Shoes and other feet
| Searchable List of 250+ Open Access Archaeology Publications- Journals, Reports, etc. Posted: 11 Jan 2012 06:56 PM PST |
| Posted: 11 Jan 2012 03:03 PM PST chronicle.com "Hundreds of educational institutions, traditional and nontraditional, have flocked to a $2-million grant program run in coordination with the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, seeking financial support to experiment with the educational-badge platform. Employers might prefer a world of badges to the current system. After all, traditional college diplomas look elegant when hung on the wall, but they contain very little detail about what the recipient learned. Students using Mozilla's proposed badge system might display dozens or even hundreds of merit badges on their online résumés detailing what they studied. And students could start showing off the badges as they earn them, rather than waiting four years to earn a diploma. "We have to question the tyranny of the degree," says David Wiley, an associate professor of instructional psychology and technology at Brigham Young University. Mr. Wiley is an outspoken advocate of so-called open education, and he imagines a future where screenfuls of badges from free or low-cost institutions, perhaps mixed with a course or two from a traditional college, replace the need for setting foot on a campus. "As soon as big employers everywhere start accepting these new credentials, either singly or in bundles, the gig is up completely." ..." |
| Posted: 11 Jan 2012 10:00 AM PST nuit-blanche.blogspot.com "Here are some of my thoughts with regards to comments to the OSTP RFI on Open Access to Government Funded Peer Review work. If you do respond to the RFI directly do not hesitate to use any of the words below...." |
| The Research Works Act Aims to Kill Open-Access Journals Posted: 11 Jan 2012 09:57 AM PST |
| US Research Open Access In Peril - Slashdot Posted: 11 Jan 2012 09:50 AM PST science.slashdot.org A Slashdot discussion thread on the RWA. |
| Open Access and the Origin of the Research University Posted: 11 Jan 2012 09:49 AM PST Academic Librarian, (11 Jan 2012) " I have been thinking of the RWA in historical context. The modern research university was originally created to allow professors to research any topic they wanted, pursue the results of the research wherever they might lead, and to publish the research for the world to share. (You can read all about this development and how it led to the foundation of modern academic libraries in my forthcoming book, Libraries and the Enlightenment.) There’s a lot of support for open access in the ideas of those who founded research universities. One of the most influential, Daniel Coit Gilman, was the first president of the Johns Hopkins University. He believed that research universities should be “devoted to the discovery and promulgation of the truth,” and that “It is one of the noblest duties of a university to advance knowledge, and to diffuse it not merely among those who can attend the daily lectures–but far and wide.” ...The creation of open access directives by the faculty at universities like Harvard and Princeton show that most professors still value the original motivation to share the results of their research widely...." |
| A Fistful Of Dollars: Why Corporate Publishers Have No Place In Scholarly Communication Posted: 11 Jan 2012 09:38 AM PST bjoern.brembs.net "With roughly four billion US$ in profit every year, the corporate scholarly publishing industry is a lucrative business. One of the largest of these publishers is Anglo-Dutch Elsevier, part of Reed Elsevier. According to their website, their mission is to "publish trusted, leading-edge Scientific, Technical and Medical (STM) information – pushing the frontiers and fueling a continuous cycle of exploration, discovery and application." However, Elsevier recently admitted to publishing a set of six fake journals, aimed to promote medical products and drugs by the company Merck, but with the appearance of peer-reviewed, scholarly literature. Clearly, trust is not Elsevier's top priority. What is Elsevier's top priority, though, is making money.... With hardly any labor costs to speak of and great value provided from outside for free by tax-funded researchers, it is not surprising hat corporate publishers sport great profit margins: Elsevier...36%; Springer’s Science + Business Media...33.9%; John Wiley & Sons...42%; Informa.plc...32.4%....[W]ith low costs and an ever increasing stream of tax funds burning holes in your pocket, you wonder how all the money could be invested to protect your shareholder value for the future. Therefore, commercial publishers: [1] Buy access to elected representatives, [2] Use this access to lobby for protective legislation, [3] Pay full-time employees for government lobbying, [4] Support SOPA, [5] Discredit Open Access by hiring professional 'pit-bull' campaigners, [5] Lobby against Open Access at the US White House...." |
| How much does it cost to get a scientific paper? Posted: 11 Jan 2012 09:32 AM PST Discovering Biology in a Digital World, (09 Jan 2012) "Out the 14 journals, 9 of them charge $30 per article or more. I looked at multiple Nature journals since the prices for each journal subscription varied so widely. Many times when we have students research a topic, we want them to look at multiple articles from multiple journals. Students might need to look at ten papers to complete an assignment. We also tend to have students investigate different topics. This means that we can't just give every student the same set of articles. Each student needs to get multiple articles from multiple sources, and each article could cost $30-35 at today's prices. Today, we can make do by having students stick to open access articles. RWA will kill that option. If papers were priced more reasonably, like songs in iTunes, we instructors would find RWA less alarming. But as it stands, if publishers charge the all articles with the prices they're using now, it will kill our ability to use the literature in the classroom." |
| Scientists, Share Secrets or Lose Funding: Stodden and Arbesman - Bloomberg Posted: 11 Jan 2012 09:30 AM PST www.bloomberg.com "Many people assume that scientists the world over freely exchange not only the results of their experiments but also the detailed data, statistical tools and computer instructions they employed to arrive at those results. This is the kind of information that other scientists need in order to replicate the studies. The truth is, open exchange of such information is not common, making verification of published findings all but impossible and creating a credibility crisis in computational science. Federal agencies that fund scientific research are in a position to help fix this problem. They should require that all scientists whose studies they finance share the files that generated their published findings, the raw data and the computer instructions that carried out their analysis...." |
| NeuroDojo: ESA still not supporting open access Posted: 11 Jan 2012 09:27 AM PST |
| Posted: 11 Jan 2012 09:25 AM PST www.nsf.gov "The National Science Board (NSB) seeks comments from the public on the report from the Committee on Strategy and Budget Task Force on Data Policies, Digital Research Data Sharing and Management. Please send your comments by email to Blane Dahl at the National Science Board Office at bdahl@nsf.gov. Comments are due by close of business Wednesday, January 18, 2012...." [PS: Note that this is a new deadline.] |
| Posted: 11 Jan 2012 09:21 AM PST |
| Could an iTunes-like model work with scientific publishing? Posted: 11 Jan 2012 09:20 AM PST Discovering Biology in a Digital World, (10 Jan 2012) |
| Stop U.S. legislation that would block public access to publicly funded research - Creative Commons Posted: 11 Jan 2012 09:04 AM PST creativecommons.org "The legislation would be toxic for progressive initiatives such as the NIH’s Public Access Policy, which requires scientists to submit final peer-reviewed journal manuscripts that arise from NIH funds to the PubMed Central digital archive. PubMed Central provides free public access to research the public pays for. SPARC’s Alliance for Taxpayer Access website has outlined specific ways that supporters of public access can speak out against this proposed legislation. Especially helpful is contacting the Congressional offices listed below. Please voice your support for public access to publicly funded research...." |
| Thread to keep track of publicly-available... - Heather Piwowar - FriendFeed Posted: 11 Jan 2012 09:00 AM PST |
| Open science: why is it so hard? Posted: 11 Jan 2012 08:59 AM PST lemire.me "I could never get excited about open access. I find it annoying that I cannot download papers freely, but astrophysicists have already solved this problem without any government intervention or lawsuit. Indeed, nearly all recent astrophysics papers are on arXiv. What matters is the culture: physicists care about being read, they love the web. In this sense, open access is a short-sighted fight. Thus, a much more significant vision is Nielsen’s open science. Michael Nielsen is arguing for a culture shift in science: from a science obsessed with individual performance (and publications) to a science culture resembling more that of open source software or wikipedia. I fear however that despite all the (well deserved) press that Michael Nielsen’s latest book has been getting, too few people understand the importance of this shift. It is not about becoming hippies. It is not a socialist utopia. On the contrary, the system we have right now is akin to an highly regulated industry. All power is in the hands of the government and a few large organizations (universities, publishers) working in tandem. The barrier to entry is maintained artificially high. Open science is really about creating “open markets” with freer exchanges....If you are one of the thousands of members of the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) or the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), then you are indirectly supporting this new legislation [SOPA and RWA]. Indeed, the ACM and IEEE are members of the Association of American Publishers (AAP). The AAP is a lobbyist for both proposals...." |
| Posted: 11 Jan 2012 08:56 AM PST ACM President's Blog, (10 Jan 2012) Alain Chesnais, President of the ACM, explains why the ACM is taking no position on the Research Works Act, not even to disavow the position taken by the AAP in the name of its members, which include the ACM. Also see the reader comments. |
| Elsevier editorial boards: Serials Review Posted: 11 Jan 2012 08:19 AM PST gavialib.com "The Loon suggests that the individuals on Elsevier’s boards have several ethical options, in increasing order of desirability: [1] Express opposition to SOPA and RWA in an editorial inside the journal, calling upon Elsevier to change its stance and lobbying practices. [2] Make a public statement opposing Elsevier’s stance on SOPA and RWA, calling attention to it within Elsevier as well. [3] Leave the editorial board, individually or in a collective declaration of independence, and explain both publicly and privately why...." |
| Posted: 11 Jan 2012 08:17 AM PST gavialib.com "Historically, the burden of creating praxis change has rested with open-access advocates. “Self-archive,” we said. “Try these new journals,” we said. “There’s more to life than journal impact factor,” we said. And because faculty thought all these things threatened faculty autonomy—”I’ll publish where I damn please, thank you, and I won’t pay a damn penny for it, either!”—the blowback was severe. With the Research Works Act, the shoe is on the other foot. “Don’t self-archive,” says the AAP. “Don’t enact mandates,” says the AAP, “and if you’re subject to one, don’t follow it.” “Don’t share your data,” says the AAP....Faculty don’t like to hear “don’t.” Not from librarians, and not even from publishers...." |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Connotea: Bookmarks matching tag oa.new To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
No comments:
Post a Comment