10 Years of OERcamp: Community Get-together on Digital and Open Educational Resources

An interview with Kristin Hirschmann

Around ten years ago, the first Barcamp to focus especially on the topic of Open Educational Resources (OER) was held in Germany. For the anniversary event in October 2022 there were 446 registrations, 19 workshops, 56 Barcamp sessions, 235 minutes of video, keynotes and live podcasts ranging from Austria to New Zealand.

In this interview Kristin Hirschmann, project manager of the OERcamps organised by the J&K – Jöran und Konsorten training agency, reports on the development of the Barcamps and further OERcamp formats.

The anniversary OERcamp took place in autumn 2022 in Hamburg. Which topic did the community explore in particular?

At the OERcamp in October 2022, the main focus was on the OER strategy of the federal government, introduced in the summer by Jens Brandenburg, parliamentary state secretary at the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). The third day of the OERcamp was therefore completely dedicated to the strategy: Stakeholders of the OER community discussed and reviewed the different areas of activity of the strategy. We also made it possible for members of the OER community who were not able to be present at the OERcamp to comment on the results realised at the event. This commentary phase took place during the two weeks following the event via a collaborative document; 100 contributions were also added.

By agency J&K – Jöran und Konsorten for the OERcamp 2022 under CC BY 4.0

What’s more, after almost 3 years without face-to-face events, people felt it was important to bring the community together in one place. I received this feedback from many participants: the personal networking and exchange was even more important.


What were the milestones during ten years of OERcamp?

The first OERcamp took place at Bremen University in 2012. Since then, the OERcamp format has developed further according to current requirements: An OERcamp took place in Berlin every year until 2016. In 2017 there were then two innovations: the OERcamp was extended to four events for the first time: in the north, east, west and south. The OER Award was also established to select the best open educational materials in German-speaking countries. In 2018, the principle of one OERcamp in each of the four points of the compass in Germany was established. In 2019–2020, the OERcamp formats were refined so that the 5 aims of the OERcamp (qualification of OER, OER mainstreaming, networking and exchange, creation of specific materials and enabling a culture of sharing) could be implemented even more successfully. This means that alongside the participatory format of the Barcamp, there are now OERcamp workshops that focus on the creation and publication of OER as well as small, compact OERcamps that are affiliated to other events.

By agency J&K – Jöran und Konsorten for the OERcamp 2022 under CC BY 4.0

In 2020, the OERcamps were held in a virtual format owing to the coronavirus pandemic. With online formats such as the OERcamp webtalks or the OERcamp SummOERschool, we were able to respond to the urgent need of teachers to find, use and create digital teaching and learning materials quickly.

Further milestones that we were pleased about were the „Open Innovation Award 2020“(German) of the OE Awards Committee of “Open Education Global” at the 2020 OERcamp, the recognition of the work of the OERcamps with the 2020 EDUCAUSE Horizon Report the first international OERcamp in December 2021, OERcamp.global. This was, moreover, the first 48-hour festival on OER, and received 1063 registrations from 87 countries.

What makes the OERcamp so unique in your opinion?

At the OERcamps, I am struck time and again by the participants, who are exceptionally enthusiastic. Of course, this comes on the one hand from the participatory format of the Barcamp. On the other hand, the formats of the OERcamp, such as the OERcamp workshop, are very needs-based and offer many more programmes than the participants can use: the participants therefore need the courage and openness to decide what they need for their personal OER journey from the abundance of programmes.

By agency J&K – Jöran und Konsorten for the OERcamp 2022 under CC BY 4.0

I also enjoy the great mix of people: those who are attending the OERcamp for the first time, and OER connoisseurs and pros. Experience has shown that around half the participants at the events are OERcamp newbies. The exchange that takes place there is very fruitful and also serves the aim of making OER accessible to a wider group of people.

In the OERcamp workshop, great focus is placed on the creation as well as the publication of OER. This is owing to the concept, because OER newbies receive a low-barrier start to working with OER thanks to the concrete utilisation of OER. This very specific learning-by-doing thereby enables them to experience the culture of sharing. I find this experience in particular a very important basis for continuing to engage with OER, and therefore also using the potentials of the OER community. The fact that we promote this active engagement with OER through the OERcamp format is something special, in my opinion.

The members of the OER community are not merely participants at an OERcamp who consume one-sidedly, but also central components who give input, ensure exchange and networking, thereby also ensuring the further development of OER and its dissemination.

Are there comparable events at international level?

From an international point of view, OER has even greater relevance than in German-speaking countries. The CC summit of Creative Commons, the Open Education Global Conference with the Open Education Week, the Open Education Policy Forum, the OER22 Conference, the Open Science Conference and the OpenEd are just a few events that focus on OER. At the events, it also becomes clear that OER plays a role on all continents. There is even more value placed on OER as a correct step towards more educational fairness and, above all, equity and social inclusion.

What are your tips for employees in libraries who want to get started with OER?

There is already a wide range of materials available for getting started in OER. This includes the #OERklärt video series (German), which explains the OER basics. This is published via OERinfo (German), the information centre for Open Educational Resources. The platform iRights.info (German) focuses on OER from a legal perspective. And the OERcamps themselves have published diverse materials that can also be further used. The campus of the OERcamps (German), for example, offers 12 online courses with know-how on OER. These include “100 great sources for OER”, “videos and audios as OER” or “online courses with and as OER”.

For librarians in particular, I recommend Fachstelle Öffentliche Bibliotheken NRW (German) – which emerged from the “oebib” blog, which has already been very active since 2015.

This text has been translated from German.

This might also interest you:

We were talking to:

Kristin Hirschmann is a cultural and educational scientist. She works as project manager for the J&K – Jöran und Konsorten (German) training agency – a “think and do tank” for contemporary training. In this context, she designs and organises educational events for all educational fields and works in a content-related capacity on the topic of Open Education/Open Training.
Portrait: Kristin Hirschmann©

The post 10 Years of OERcamp: Community Get-together on Digital and Open Educational Resources first appeared on ZBW MediaTalk.

Just released — new insights into OE in European Libraries of Higher Education 2022

We are pleased to announce the publication of our report, Open Education in European Libraries of Higher Education: Implementing the UNESCO Recommendation on OER.  The report presents the findings of the […]

The post Just released — new insights into OE in European Libraries of Higher Education 2022 appeared first on SPARC Europe.

Open Educational Resources: Getting Started in OER in the User Services – Best Practice from the ZBW

by Nicole Clasen and Carola Ziebart

Status quo of Open Educational Resources in Germany

Open Educational Resources (OER) are an important element in the transition of science towards Open Science. The UNESCO defines them as “teaching, learning and research materials in any medium – digital or otherwise – that reside in the public domain or have been released under an open license that permits no-cost access, use, adaptation and redistribution by others with no or limited restrictions”. In its Sustainable Development Goals for 2030, the United Nations Organisation describes under point 4, „Quality Education”, the tasks of sustainable and fair education and training. Open teaching and learning materials make these calls for free-of-charge, freely available information programmes possible, and offer good opportunities for implementing the Agenda 2030, even outside the primary education sector.

“Open Educational Resources (OER) are teaching, learning and research materials in any medium – digital or otherwise – that reside in the public domain or have been released under an open license that permits no-cost access, use, adaptation and redistribution by others with no or limited restrictions”

UNESCO publishes new definition of OER

The dissemination of Open Educational Resources in Germany is low, however, as was already shown in 2015 in the study “Open Educational Resources in Germany: development status and perspectives (German) and was again made evident in the second UNESCO World Congress on OER (PDF). The essential features of Open Educational Resources – sharing, reuse and further development (German, PDF) – are not yet established as standard in German higher education institutions.

Five challenges hinder the mainstreaming of OER into education
Second UNESCO World Congress on OER

Knowledge about how to produce OER and its challenges is however also essential so that library users can be advised competently. The challenges include reusable licensing, copyright and finding the right tools for the planned OER project. By checking the individual service programmes for OER compatibility, and creating space and programmes for OER in both their analogue and their digital teaching and learning location, libraries can additionally support the dissemination and better use of OER.

First OER project at the ZBW: just do it

For these reasons, Open Educational Resources should be a fixed element of the user services at the ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics . We therefore decided that the best way to get started in this new topic for us was to implement an OER project in practice. How otherwise could we competently advise students and researchers if we had never been involved ourselves with free licenses or searching for Open Educational Resources and their platforms?

We received regular enquiries as to why this or that was not possible in the context of international inter-library loan and document delivery. Up to now these questions have been asked and answered by email. The topic thus required a lot of explaining. We wanted to change this and communicate the topic proactively in the future, so that it could also be explained and shared among international libraries. Colleagues in the ZBW document delivery department saw H5P as offering a good opportunity to explain the complexity of German copyright law and its consequences for international inter-library loan to international colleagues in a light-hearted yet concise way.

H5P is a free software programme for creating interactive content and exercises. Thanks to the diverse, interactive possibilities it offers, it provides an excellent and light-hearted way to get started in Open Educational Resources. The basic version of H5P is accessible free-of-charge, and content created with it can be re-used.

Communicating knowledge in a light-hearted way: the quiz

The colleagues began by selecting a suitable H5P component for the knowledge transfer intended. The desired blend of explanatory slides and infotainment seemed to be provided by the component “Course Presentation“. Part 1 of the Open Educational Resource created explains the different aspects of German copyright law and its significance for inter-library loan. These include details such as the permissible percentage of 10 per cent of a work that may be copied from the work at most, the definition of ‘public domain’, and the information that the sending of PDFs is not permitted. Following this, in part 2 the knowledge communicated was tested in a quiz.

Part 2 – a Quiz

The approach selected, which made it easier for the team to get started in Open Educational Resources through a familiar territory such as inter-library loan, was successful. All colleagues have expertise and many years of experience in the field. This means that they were able to concentrate fully on developing the H5P slides, selecting license-compliant photos and creating suitable metadata. And that was exciting enough for the start. But the greatest hurdle was the following decision: When is the draft good enough to go online? The perfectionism of librarians and Open Educational Resources would seem to be mutually contradictory rather than complementary.

The H5P quiz on German copyright law in international inter-library loan aroused the enthusiasm of our colleagues who then directly developed a sequel: an explanation of the electronic reading room.

Everyone has to do it: in-house further training on OER

Following these initial experiences, we plan to integrate the insights gained regarding Open Educational Resources permanently into user services and make them available for all colleagues. To this end, our department has initiated the in-house training series “OER for information specialists”. Practical and modular in conception, it provides all employees of the user services with insights into the OER entry topics of licensing, searching for public domain material, and data and media literacy. Additionally, open-source software is presented and tested. All lecturers are departmental colleagues who have familiarised themselves with individual tools in advance.

The first steps towards Open Educational Resources have been taken. The training programme in particular offers potential for further use-based projects and facilitates access to shared knowledge.

Our tips for OER newcomers

To get started successfully with OER, we would recommend taking part in the appropriate workshops and online training courses. There are many offers for this. Then you can see which of the OER platforms fit your library or topic.

This might also interest you:

This text has been translated from German.

About the authors

Nicole Clasen is Head of User Services at ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics. Her work focuses on information transfer, digital user services and the usability experience.
Portrait: ZBW©, photographer Sven Wied

Carola Ziebart has been working as a media and information services clerk in the user services department of the ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics since April 2004. She works in the areas of document delivery, service desk, dunning and loss management and also in the area of data quality and coordination.
Portrait: ZBW©, photographer Sven Wied

The post Open Educational Resources: Getting Started in OER in the User Services – Best Practice from the ZBW first appeared on ZBW MediaTalk.

Open Science: Grassroots Initiative from Students for Students at the University of Amsterdam

The Student Initiative for Open Science (SIOS) at the University of Amsterdam was initiated and is still run by students. The grassroots movement wants to introduce students as early as possible, voluntarily and sometimes playfully, to the sometimes quite abstract subject area of open practices and thus make university life easier for students. Good academic practice should be learned and internalised as early as possible, is the motto.

Marla Dressel and Franziska Nippold from SIOS presented the project at the Open Science Conference this year. Now we have spoken with them and asked them about their motivation, because there are no credit points for the commitment. In the interview, they also tell us how their university environment reacted to the grassroots initiative and how academic libraries can support them. At the end, there are starting points and links for anyone who would like to establish a similar movement at her/his university.

An Interview with Marla Dressel and Franziska Nippold

Your grassroots initiative is very interesting as it targets Open Science education for students at the University of Amsterdam. What was your motivation?

A course called “Good research practices” at our Psychology master’s programme was an important motivating factor. The course teaches students how to conduct reliable science and discusses current research practices. Fellow students of ours found it quite disappointing that they learned Open Science only during their master’s degree and many programmes do not offer such courses at all. Besides, most Open Science initiatives mainly target PhDs, post-docs, and professors while not adapting resources and materials to students’ needs.

They felt that students were being overlooked in the Open Science movement.

We think that this could be fatal because students are the researchers of tomorrow.
This is why SIOS ( Student Initiative for Open Science) was born. We wanted to involve students in the movement and to provide them with open education on Open Science. 

We are Data Sharing. We are Open Access.
We are Reproducibility.
We are Open Science, from students for students.

What are your activities?

Our event team organises a broad range of activities. We host lectures on Open Science topics (e.g., the difference between exploratory vs confirmatory research, Bayesian statistics, pre-registered reports), workshops to provide students with practical tools (e.g., how to pre-register your thesis, version control with GitHub, power analysis, JASP), and more fun activities to get students together, such as Open Science movie nights, pub quizzes, or discussion panels. We also have a communication team at SIOS that is pretty active on social media, especially on Twitter, but also on Instagram and on Facebook. Here, we spread our events and resources with other students, scholars, universities and everyone else, who is interested. At the same time, we attend conferences and write grant applications. We also provide materials and resources to students on our website and our Slack Channel. Here, students can also ask questions and debate current issues. Besides the purely educational part, we are currently running a study on research practices among students.

How did your environment (e.g. profs, lecturers …) react to it?

We have received immense support from our study coordinators, profs and lecturers. Many of them have offered to give lectures themselves and help us share our endeavours. For us, it is extremely rewarding to see the resonance in the community but at the same time we also know that we are lucky that our university is very method-conscious and that it may be different at universities outside the Netherlands. More importantly, students find our events helpful, and we receive a lot of positive feedback from them. 

Are any of your activities part of the university curriculum, so that students get credits for them? Would that even be a goal for you?

Besides the course we talked about before (Good research practices), students can get credit points for visiting our lectures. That is at least a start and so our goals are more focused on spreading our message and helping to set up other SIOS’s at different universities. However, we just heard from a newly founded SIOS that they will definitely focus on integrating Open Science in their curriculum because they do not even have a course on good research practices there. We hope that someday every research student can have access to Open Science materials if he:she wish to. 

How do you ensure that your efforts and projects are sustainable and long-lasting?

An easy answer would be that we currently digitise all our projects (thanks, COVID!). That means, we record all our lectures and we provide our whole range of resources for free on our website and social media. We also created a step-by-step guide to create an own initiative for Open Science and we pitch this guide at other universities. At the same time, we really think about what students need. That is why, most of our lectures are very introductory.

We think that this is a general problem in the Open Science movement – that everyone who does not know so much about it yet will have problems organising all the information and debates that are currently going on.

That is why often PhD students and other-level researchers are visiting our lectures – we offer comprehensive bunches of information. 

We also believe that it is best to start as early as possible to teach students Open Science practices. Take pre-registrations, for example: If you already do this for your very first research project, the bachelor thesis in most cases, it will become normal for students to follow these practices. In this way, you are teaching students and building awareness as early as possible to integrate Open Science practices in the long run. 

How can academic libraries support initiatives like yours?

We think that there is a lot that can be done. The most important step is to help us share our endeavours. That can be on social media and on your website. Libraries could also always ask us for collaboration and especially now it is easier to just organise workshops together online. Libraries can also ask their students to create their own SIOS. And more generally, they can provide all kinds of resources themselves and participate in our Slack Channel.

Do you have any tips for other students who want to start such an initiative? (How) Can they get any support from you?

We have actually created a step-by-step guide to create your own SIOS. These are just guidelines of course, not necessarily a rulebook. We think that creating a SIOS is not super easy but that you can get a lot of support if you ask for it. That can be asking us at SIOS Amsterdam (we will always find time for you to have a meeting with us and give you some recommendations) but also lecturers and other people from university. Also, creating such an initiative has many incentives. From learning a lot about Open Science and current debates, over networking, to doing something worthwhile next to your study – creating such an initiative is inherently very rewarding.

We were talking to Franziska Nippold and Marla Dressel

SIOS link list

Links to the course “Good Research Practices”

Further readings

The post Open Science: Grassroots Initiative from Students for Students at the University of Amsterdam first appeared on ZBW MediaTalk.

Horizon Report 2021: Focus on Hybrid Learning, Microcredentialing and Quality Online Learning

by Claudia Sittner

The 2021 EDUCAUSE Horizon Report Teaching and Learning Edition was published at the end of April 2021 and looks at what trends, technologies and practices are currently driving teaching and learning and how they will significantly shape its future.

The report runs through four different scenarios of what the future of higher education might look like: growth, constraint, collapse or transformation. Only time will tell which scenario prevails. With this in mind, we looked at the Horizon Report 2021 to see what trends it suggests for academic libraries and information infrastructure institutions.

Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence (AI) has progressed so rapidly since the last Horizon Report 2020 that people cannot catch up fast enough to test the technical advances of machines in natural language proceedings. Deep learning has evolved into self-supervised learning, where AI learns from raw or unlabelled data.

Artificial intelligence has a potential role to play in all areas of higher education where learning, teaching and success are concerned: support for accessible apps, student information and learning management systems, examination systems and library services, to name but a few. AI can also help analyse learning experiences and identify when students seem to be floundering academically. The much greater analytics opportunities that have emerged as the vast majority of learning events take place online, leaving a wide trail of analysable data, can help to better understand students and adapt learning experiences to their needs more quickly.

But AI also remains controversial: for all its benefits, questions about privacy, data protection and ethical aspects often remain unsatisfactorily answered. For example, there are AI-supported programmes that paraphrase texts so that other AI-supported programmes do not detect plagiarism.

Open Educational Resources

For Open Educational Resources (OER), the pandemic has not changed much, many of the OER offerings are “born digital” anyway. However, advantages of OER such as cost savings (students have to buy less literature), social equality (free and from everywhere) and the fact that materials are updated faster are gaining importance. Despite these obvious advantages and the constraints that corona brought with it, however, only a few teachers have switched to OER so far as the report „Digital Texts in Times of COVID” (PDF) shows. 87% of teachers still recommend the same paid textbooks.

OER continue to offer many possibilities, such as teachers embedding self-assessment questions directly into pages alongside text, audio and video content, and students receiving instant feedback. In some projects, libraries and students are also involved in the development of materials as OER specialists, alongside other groups from the academic ecosystem, helping to break down barriers within the discipline and redesign materials from their particular perspective.

In Europe, for example, the ENCORE+ – European Network for Catalyzing Open Resources in Education is working to build an extensive OER ecosystem. Also interesting: the „Code of Best Practices in Fair Use für Open Educational Resources”. It can be a tool for librarians when they want to create OER and use other data, including copyrighted data.

Learning Analytics

Online courses generate lots of data: How many learners have participated? When did they arrive? When did they leave? How did they interact? What works and what doesn’t? In higher education, learning data analysis should help make better, evidence-based decisions to best support the increasingly diverse group of learners. Academic libraries also often use such data to better understand and interpret learner needs, respond promptly and readjust.

The Syracuse University Libraries (USA), for example, have transmitted its user data via an interface to the university’s own learning analysis programme (CLLASS). A library profile was developed for this purpose, which was consistent with the library’s values, ethics, standards, policies and practices. This enabled responsible and controlled transmission of relevant data, and a learner profile could be created from different campus sources.

Just as with the use of artificial intelligence, there are many objections in this area regarding moral aspects and data protection. In any case, the handling of such learning data requires sensitisation and special training so that teachers, advisors and students can use data sensibly and draw the right conclusions. In the end, students could also receive tailored virtual support throughout the entire process from enrolment to graduation. Infrastructures for data collection, analysis and implementation are essential for this.


Microcredentials are new forms of certification or proof of specific skills. They are also better suited to the increasingly diverse population of learners than traditional degrees and certificates. Unlike these, they are more flexible, designed for a shorter period of time and often more thematically focused. The spectrum of microcredentials spans six areas from short courses and badges, to bootcamps and the classic degree or accredited programmes.

Microcredentials are becoming increasingly popular and can also be combined with classic certifications. The Horizon Report 2021 sees particular potential for workers who can use them to retrain and further their education. It is therefore hardly surprising that companies like Google are also appearing on the scene with Google Career Certificates. For many scientific institutes, this means that they will have to further develop and rethink the architecture, infrastructure and work processes of their traditional certification systems.

Blended and Hybrid Course Models

Due to the corona pandemic, diverse blended and hybrid course models mushroomed, especially in the summer of 2020. “It is clear that higher education has diversified quickly and that these models are here to stay”, the report says. Hybrid courses allow more flexibility in course design; institutions can ramp up capacity as needed and cater even more to the diverse needs of students. However, most students still prefer face-to-face teaching.

Newly learned technical skills and technical support have played a predominant role. In some places, new course models have been developed together with the learners. On the other hand, classic practices (such as frequent assessments, breakout groups during live course meetings, and check-in messages to individual students) remain high on the agenda. However, corona has brought mental and social health of all participants into sharper focus; it should also receive even more attention according to the Horizon Report.

Quality Online Learning

The coronavirus came along and everything suddenly had to take place online. So it is little wonder that the need to design, meaningfully evaluate and adapt high-quality online learning opportunities has increased enormously. Some were surprised to find that teaching online involved more effort than simply offering the on-site event via Zoom. In order to achieve learning success, online quality assurance became an issue of utmost relevance.

Early in the pandemic, therefore, institutes began to develop online portals or hubs that included materials and teaching strategies adapted to the situation: for content delivery, to encourage student participation and to rethink assessment mechanisms.

A positive example is the twelve-module course “Quickstarter Online-Lehre” (Quickstarter Online Teaching, German) by the Hochschulforum Digitalisierung – German Forum for Higher Education in a digital age and the Gesellschaft für Medien in der Wissenschaft (Society for media in science) from Germany. This course aims to support teachers with no or little online experience.

This text has been translated from German.

This might also interest you:

The post Horizon Report 2021: Focus on Hybrid Learning, Microcredentialing and Quality Online Learning first appeared on ZBW MediaTalk.

Research Data Management Project bw2FDM: Best Practice for Consultations and Training Seminars

We were talking to Elisabeth Böker and Peter Brettschneider

Research data management (RDM, known as FDM in German) is an essential topic regarding Open Science. Baden-Württemberg’s support and development project for research data management (German, bw2FDM) is dedicated to this issue. One of the aims of the bw2FDM project is to create a multifaceted educational programme to drive forward sustainability and networking within the entire research data management community. bw2FDM also operates the information platform forschungsdaten.info (Forschungsdaten means research data), which offers a wide-ranging collection of articles on RDM topics. None of these programmes is limited to a specific institution; rather they are aimed at the entire German-speaking community. Elisabeth Böker and Peter Brettschneider, who are involved in the project, explain how it works in detail, which topics are particularly popular within the RDM community, and what role libraries and information infrastructure institutions can play.

Please introduce the project in three sentences: What is the mission / aim / vision of bw2FDM?

Elisabeth Böker: bw2FDM is an initiative for research data management, funded by the Baden-Württemberg Ministry for Science, Research and Art. We follow four primary aims:

  • The coordination of the interdisciplinary issues of the four Science Data centres (German) in Baden-Württemberg.
  • We want to develop the information platform forschungsdaten.info further to become the central RDM platform for the German-speaking countries.
  • We offer consultations and training seminars on the topic of research data management, primarily for researchers from Baden-Württemberg.
  • bw2FDM is responsible for the planning and implementation of the E-Science-Tage conference .

Fig. 1: Diagram showing overview of bw2FDM project areas / Axtmann and
Reifschneider / CC BY 4.0

We are particularly interested in the bw2FDM consultations and training seminars on research data management, which you also presented at the Open Science Conference 2021. What was your approach? What is your target group? What you do offer, specifically? And who can participate in the training seminars and consultations?

Elisabeth Böker: That differs slightly, depending on the format: We focus our training seminars primarily on researchers from Baden-Württemberg. The students of the University of Konstanz are the target audience for our Open Science course. We want to introduce them to the topic of Open Science during their studies and are delighted at the considerable interest it has already drawn. The course “Open Science: From Data to Publications ” is subject to a CC BY licence – reuse is most welcome! Following the principle of openness, we have also published the videos as Open Educational Resources (OER) on Zenodo (German) and the central OER repository of the Institutions of Higher Education in Baden-Württemberg (ZOERR, German) as well as the material collection of the sub-working group training seminars / continuing education of the DINI/nestor AG research data (German) and also on the website of the Konstanz Open Science team.
By way of contrast, forschungsdaten.info live (German) focuses on all interested persons – both researchers as well as RDM officers – throughout the entire German-speaking countries.

Peter Brettschneider: : We try to consider research data management in a holistic sense. This also means that we focus on different target groups, and it also ensures that our training activities never become boring.

To what extent do you specifically address Open Science topics, for example in the field of Open Data?

Elisabeth Böker: Research data management is our central focus point. The guiding principle of the EU data strategy “as open as possible, as closed as necessary” is extremely important to us, which is why we emphasise it continually.

Libraries fit wonderfully into a data-based academic world.
– Peter Brettschneider

(How) Are academic libraries and other digital infrastructure institutions integrated into the field of training seminars and consultations?

Peter Brettschneider: Libraries fit wonderfully into a data-based academic world. Their core business is collecting information and making it available to the users. Research data have been part of the digital inventory of libraries for a considerable time. For example, that is the reason why universities will usually task their library or IT department with the implementation and operation of a research data repository. However, this kind of services should be accompanied by consultation and training programmes. Once again, our aim is to approach research data management holistically: It is not sufficient to provide just the hardware. There is also a need for people who explain and promote these services and are ready to assist researchers that may require help.

The project runs from 2019 to 2023. This means that you are just about half way through. Could you draw some interim conclusions? What are the most important lessons that you have learned over the past two years?

Elisabeth Böker: RDM is a team sport” – this is what we wrote in a publication (German) about our project. In this spirit, I would say it is crucial to approach issues collaboratively, use synergies and then progress towards the target. That works wonderfully. It is particularly gratifying to see this happening with the forschungsdaten.info platform. Even before “half-time”, we have been able to bring colleagues from Austria and Switzerland into the team – and we intend to continue building on this even more intensively in the second phase.There is an enormous demand for legal topics, and we are very lucky to have with Peter Brettschneider a legal specialist in the team.

FDM is a Teamsport.
– Elisabeth Böker

Peter Brettschneider: Indeed, there is a lot of uncertainty regarding legal issues. In our training seminars, we like to combine legal topics with fundamental RDM know-how. This is important to us, because we can’t emphasise enough the central messages on research data and its management – such as FAIR data. But on the other hand, research data management is not an end in itself. It’s not our task to proselytise. Rather, it is our intention to support researchers and to make their research visible and reusable.

What has the feedback to your RDM consultation and training seminar programmes been like so far?

Elisabeth Böker: We are extremely satisfied. With forschungsdaten.info live in particular, we were able to average over a hundred participants. The demand is definitively there!

Which of your programme’s RDM topics or formats are particularly popular?

Elisabeth Böker: The forschungsdaten.info live format has been very popular – in part due to its focus on the entire German-speaking RDM community. Moreover, events that explore legal topics are always sure-fire successes.

The bw2FDM project can definitely be called a success so far in the area of training and consulting. Are there plans to expand your project throughout Germany?

Elisabeth Böker: : We are already active throughout the German-speaking countries with forschungsdaten.info live. However, we intend to advertise our other training seminars primarily for researchers in Baden-Württemberg – at both, universities as well as other higher education institutions. The reason for this is that our funding comes from the Baden-Württemberg Ministry for Science, Research and Art. Moreover, other federal states have their own RDM initiatives that offer great training opportunities.

Are there already similar projects in other federal states? To what extent do you collaborate with them?

Elisabeth Böker: Yes, many other federal states have comparable RDM projects or dedicated initiatives. They introduce themselves on the platform forschungsdaten.info (German). We have close and very fruitful collaboration with our colleagues, both, within a joint discussion forum as well as via the editorial network of forschungsdaten.info.

From a legal point of view, we ensure sustainability by systematically releasing the project results under free licences in order to promote reuse.
– Peter Brettschneider

Sustainability plays an important role in your project. How do you ensure it?

Peter Brettschneider: Sustainability has several dimensions: Structurally, we try to safeguard our programmes in the long-term through partnerships with other institutions. For example, our project team does not run forschungsdaten.info on its own, but rather relies on an editorial network of approximately 20 institutions.
From a legal point of view, we ensure sustainability by systematically releasing the project results under free licences in order to promote reuse. This means that all training materials are licenced under Creative Commons BY 4.0. The contents of the forschungsdaten.info page can be reused completely without any restrictions, as we waive our rights by using CC 0 1.0.. Perhaps the most difficult thing is securing sustainability in terms of personnel. Currently, research data infrastructures are primarily sustained by project employees – the National Research Data Infrastructure (NFDI) provides a good example. That is a real issue since RDM is a long-term task.

This text has been translated from German.

Weblinks to the bw2FDM project and to forschungsdaten.info:

This might also interest you:

The post Research Data Management Project bw2FDM: Best Practice for Consultations and Training Seminars first appeared on ZBW MediaTalk.

Announcing the Single Source Publishing Community Launch!

The Single Source Publishing Community (SSPC) is focused on scholarly publishing and is a meeting place for researchers, educators, publishers, and software developers. The community looks to help Single Source Publishing (SSP) technology to work better for Open Access, Open Science, in learning, and for Bibliodiversity. Drop in on our discussion board, join the monthly ‘SSPC Show & Tell’ sessions…


Librarians in Action for Open Education: Strategy just out

The European Network of Open Education Librarians ((ENOEL) is helping implement the UNESCO Open Educational Resources (OER) Recommendation as ambassadors and facilitators of Open Education. How it plans to support it […]

The post Librarians in Action for Open Education: Strategy just out appeared first on SPARC Europe.

Looking ahead: EIFL’s plans for open access

“Open scholarship is growing in importance as a way of ensuring that there is global participation in research, improved quality and efficiency of education and science, and faster economic and social progress.

Over the next two years, the EIFL Open Access Programme will support open scholarship by focusing on four key areas: open access policies, open science training for early career researchers, sustainable open access journals and repositories, and Open Educational Resources….”

Open Research Glossary

This glossary is designed to be a resource to inform people about the culture of ‘open scholarship’.

This resource was written by the community, and depends on the community to stay current. To update this resource please make changes here, and periodically this resource and associated PDF/XML will be updated.

  • Get this as a PDF

  • Get this in XML 

Share this page with: bit.ly/OpenResearchGlossary


Core Definitions

Types of Open Access

Depreciated terms

Declarations And Principles


Journal Types

Peer Review

Assessment And Metrics

Tools And Technology

Data Repositories

Funders And Policy-Related

Open Research Infrastructure


About this resource

Core Definitions

  • Open Access (OA) – making peer reviewed scholarly manuscripts freely available via the Internet, permitting any user to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full text of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any lawful purpose, without financial, legal or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain, should be to give authors control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited. May also refer to theses, books, book chapters, monographs and other content. (BOAI)

  • Open Data – making data freely available on the public internet permitting any user to download, copy, analyse, re-process, pass them to software or use them for any other purpose without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. (Panton Principles)

  • Open Educational Resources (OER) – high quality, openly licensed, online educational materials for sharing, use, and reuse. They act as a mechanism for instructional innovation as networks of teachers and learners share best practices. (Source)

  • Open Source Software (OSS) – availability of source code for a piece of software, along with an open source license permitting reuse, adaptation, and further distribution. (Wikipedia)

  • Article Processing Charge (APC) – a fee charged to the author, creator, or institution to cover the cost of an article, rather than charging the potential reader of the article. APCs may apply to both commercial and Open Access publications. APCs are sometimes charged to authors in order to cover the cost of publishing and disseminating an article in an Open Access scholarly journal. (Source)

  • Repository (article) – an archive to deposit manuscripts. These can be personal, institutional, on websites such as ResearchGate or Academia.edu, or subject-based such as arXiv.

  • Repository (software) – a collection of files managed with version control software (e.g., bzr, hg, git, csv, svn, etc.). Can be hosted by third-party (e.g., github, bitbucket, sourceforge), by an institution, or self-hosted locally.

  • Institutional Repository – An online database designed to collect the intellectual output of a particular institution or university, including digital collections such as electronic theses and dissertations (ETDs), pre-prints, or faculty scholarship, and presents associated metadata regarding the these items. (Source)

  • Embargo period – a length of time imposed on a research output for users who have not paid for access, or do not have institutional access, before it is made freely available.

  • Reproducibility – the similarity between results of a study or experiment and independent results obtained with the same methods but under different conditions (i.e., pertains to results).

  • Repeatability – the similarity between results of a study or experiment and independent results obtained with the same methods and under identical conditions (i.e., pertains to methods and analysis).

  • Publishing – to make a research output available to the public. Commonly refers to the release of works by publishers, irrespective of whether public access is granted or not.

  • Sharing – the joint use of a resource or space. A fundamental aspect of collaborative research. As most research is digitally-authored & digitally-published, the resulting digital content is non-rivalrous and can be shared without any loss to the original creator.

  • Paywall – restriction via a financial barrier to research, often implemented by legacy publishers. Can be removed by personal or institutional subscription. See Loginwall for a barrier that prevents access, without asking for money to unlock access.

  • Funder – an institute, corporation or government body that provides financial assistance for research.

  • Publisher – a company whose purpose is to make the outputs of research publicly available.

  • Creative work – An original, identifiable piece of content, such as an academic paper, a diagram, a photograph, or a video clip. Owners of creative works have rights, such as copyright, that they might reserve to keep control of the content, or relinquish to allow others to share and reuse that content.

  • Intellectual property (IP) – a legal term that refers to creations of the mind. Examples of intellectual property include music, literature, and other artistic works; discoveries and inventions; and phrases, symbols, and designs.

  • Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) – the rights given to the owners of intellectual property. IPR is protected either automatically (eg copyright, design rights) or by registering or applying for it (eg trademarks, patents). Protecting your intellectual property makes it easier to take legal action against anyone who steals or copies it. IPR can be legally sold, assigned or licenced by the creator to other parties, or joint-owned.

  • Copyright – The aspect of Intellectual property that gives creators the right to permit (or not permit) what happens to their creations, as opposed to trademark rights or moral rights.

  • Copyleft – a form of licensing that makes a creative work freely available to be modified, and requiring all modified and extended versions of the creative work to be free as well. Open Access does not require works to be copyleft, nor does it necessarily exclude copyleft works from being open access. The recommended licence (CC-BY) for academic publishing is not copyleft.

  • Subscription – a form of business model whereby a fee is paid in order to gain access to a product or service – in this case, the outputs of scholarly research.

  • Toll access – whereby a fee is required to pass a paywall to access research.

  • Legacy publisher – a publisher that historically has operated on a paywall-based business model.

  • Open access publisher – a publisher that publishes all research articles as open access articles. Most legacy publishers have options to make journals at least partially open access.

  • Open access journal – a journal that exclusively comprises open access articles.

  • Impact – the scale of use of research outputs both inside and outside of academia.

  • Self-archiving – making a copy of a manuscript available through a personal website, institutional repository, or other repository.

  • Scholarly Communication - The creation, transformation, dissemination, and preservation of knowledge related to teaching, research, and scholarly endeavors; the process of academics, scholars and researchers sharing and publishing their research findings so that they are available to the wider academic community. The creation, transformation, dissemination, and preservation of knowledge related to teaching, research, and scholarly endeavors; the process of academics, scholars and researchers sharing and publishing their research findings so that they are available to the wider academic community. (Sources: Wikipedia, University of Pittsburgh)


Types of Open Access

  • Pre-print – a manuscript draft that has not yet been subject to formal peer review, distributed to receive early feedback on research from peers.

  • Post-print – a manuscript draft after it has been peer reviewed.

  • Version of Record (VOR) – the final version of a manuscript, after peer review and processing by a publishers.

  • Hybrid – a type of journal in which certain articles are made open access for typically a significantly higher price (relative to full OA journals), while others remain toll access.

  • Accepted author manuscript – the version of a manuscript that has been accepted by a publisher for publication.

  • Eprint – a digital version of a research document available online for a repository.


Depreciated terms

the use of which is not encouraged as they are typically poorly-understood:

  • Green OA – making a version of the manuscript freely available in a repository.

  • Gold OA – making the final version of manuscript freely available immediately upon publication by the publisher.

  • Gratis OA – the paper is available to read free-of-charge, though its reuse is still restricted, for example by ‘All Rights Reserved’ copyright. (source)

  • Libre OA – the paper is made available under an open licence, allowing it to be shared and reused, depending on which licence is used. (source) (Libre and Gratis refer to copyright and licensing restrictions)

  • Diamond OA – a form of gold open access in which there is no author fee (APC).


Declarations And Principles

Taken from:(source)



  • Creative Commons – A suite of licences that set out the rights of authors and users, providing alternatives to the standard copyright. CC licences are widely used, simple to state, machine readable and have been created by legal experts. There are a variety of CC licences, each of which use one or more clauses, examples of which are given below. Some licences are compatible with Open Access in the Budapest sense, and some are not. (Source) (Choosing a license)

  • CC Attribution (BY) – a licence clause that allows the reuse, sharing, and remixing of materials providing the original author is appropriately attributed. Aside from attribution the CC-BY licence has no other restrictions on copying. Compatible with free cultural works.

  • CC NonCommercial (NC) – a licence clause allowing the reuse, sharing, and remixing of materials providing that it is for non-commercial purposes. Not compatible with free cultural works.

  • CC NoDerivatives (ND) – a licence clause requiring that derivatives are not made of the original works. Not compatible with free cultural works.

  • CC ShareAlike (SA) – a licence clause requiring that derivative works have the same licence as the original. Compatible with free cultural works.

  • CC 0 – waiver of copyright; no rights reserved. Places content as openly as possible in the public domain. (Source)

  • BSD (Berkeley Software Distribution) – A family of UNIX-like operating systems. (Wikipedia)

  • GNU GPL (General Public License) – A free copyleft license for software and other kinds of works (Source)

  • Apache License – A free software license by the Apache Software Foundation. (Source)

  • MIT License – An open and permissive software license. (Source)

  • Author Addendum – An author addendum is a supplemental or added agreement to a publishing contract that defines or changes the terms of the contract, often focusing on the transfer of copyright ownership. For authors of scholarly works, an author addendum to a publisher’s standard publication contract may be necessary to help ensure that authors protect important rights, such as the right to post their articles online to a personal website or in a digital repository; the right to use their works within a classroom setting; or the right to use their works as the foundation for future research. (Source)


Journal Types

  • Megajournal – a journal with editorial criteria based on scientific soundness instead of a priori estimated newsworthiness or ‘impact’.

  • Journal – an aggregation of published research articles. Historically divided into volumes and issues.

  • Overlay journals – An open access, electronic journal that does not produce its own content, but selects and curates groups of articles that are already freely available online. An example of this is an ‘Epijournal’. (Wikipedia)

  • Epub – A free and open e-book standard by the International Digital publishing Forum.

  • Hybrid journal – Some traditional journals offer an option for authors to make their individual articles freely accessible to anyone worldwide, for an additional fee. Other articles in the journal remain accessible only through subscription. Such journals are known as “hybrid journals.” (Source: MIT)

  • Library-based publishing – Many academic libraries are now beginning to act as publishers for scholarly works produced in their institutions and elsewhere.  In some cases, the library works with the university scholarly press to publish works. In other cases, the library publishes works independently or separately from the academic press. Library-based publishers are often strongly in favor of Open Access. (Library Publishing Coalition)


Peer Review

  • Peer review – a process by which a research article is vetted by experts in community before publication. (Sense About Science)

  • Post publication peer review – standard peer review, but after a research article has been formally published.

  • Transferable peer review – reviews that travel with a paper if it is rejected from a journal. (Wiley pilot)

  • Open review – when reviews are made openly available, typically alongside the article.

  • Signed peer review – when the individual reviews are publicly signed by those who conducted them.

  • Portable peer review – independent peer review that travels with a manuscript that is submitted to subsequent different journals, designed to combat redundancy in the peer review process. (Rubriq)

  • Double blind peer review – when the reviewers don’t know who the authors are, and vice versa.

  • Registered Reports – A type of publication in which peer review of the suggested method is completed prior to data collection and analysis. Accepted papers then are guaranteed publication in the journal if the authors follow through with the registered methodology (Source)


Assessment And Metrics

  • Altmetrics – Altmetrics are alternative ways of recording and measuring the use and impact of scholarship. Rather than solely counting the number of times a work is cited in scholarly literature, alternative metrics also measure and analyze social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, blogs, wikis, etc.), document downloads, links to publishing and unpublished research, and other uses of research literature, in order to provide a more comprehensive measurement of scholarships reach and impact. (Source)

  • Article-level metrics – all types of article-level metrics including download and usage statistics, citations, and article-level altmetrics (Source).

  • Bibliometrics – Bibliometrics is the branch of library and information science concerned with the application of mathematical and statistical analysis to bibliography. Bibliometrics involves the statistical analysis of books, articles, or other publications.

  • Impact factor – a numerical measure that indicates the average number of citations to articles published over the previous two years in a journal, and frequently used as a proxy for a journal’s relative importance.

  • H-index – a personal metric that relates the number of citations to the number of published papers for an academic. (Wikipedia)

  • Journal level metrics – metrics that apply to all papers published within a journal. A common example is Thomson Reuters’ journal impact factor.


Tools And Technology

  • Extensible Markup Language (XML) – A language that defines a set of rules for encoding documents in a format that is readable by both machines and humans. (Wikipedia)

  • Machine readable – data or metadata in a format that can be understood by a computer.

  • Machine Readable Cataloguing (MARC) – a set of digital formats for the description of items catalogued by libraries. (Wikipedia)

  • Data mining – an analytic process designed to explore data in search of consistent patterns and/or systematic relationships between variables, and then to transform this information into content for future use. (Wikipedia)

  • Content mining – large-scale extraction of information from content (e.g., photographs, videos, audio, metadata), usually involving thousands of items. (The ContentMine)

  • Comma-Separated Values, or Character-Separated Values (CSV) – a plain-text (non-binary) format for tabular data.

  • Hypertext Markup Language (HTML) – the set of markup symbols or codes inserted in a file intended for display on a browser page. (Wikipedia)

  • LaTeX – a markup language for typesetting documents, particularly common in mathematics and the sciences. Many academic journals accept submissions in LaTeX. (Source)

  • Digital Object Identifier (DOI) – a unique text string that is used to identify digital objects such as journal articles or open source software releases. (Source)

  • Journal Article Tag Suite (JATS) – a common XML format in which publishers and archives can exchange journal content. (Source)

  • Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) – a string of characters used to identify a name of a resource to enable its digital and networked representation and interaction. (Wikipedia)

  • GitHub – a web-based service that provides a source code repository that works exclusively with the Git command-line tool. (Source)

  • Git – an open-source, distributed revision control system. (Source)

  • Bitbucket – Free source code hosting site. (Source)

  • IPython notebook – a web-based interactive computational environment where you can combine code execution, text, mathematics, plots and rich media into a single document. (Source)

  • AnnotatorJS / Hypothes.is – A framework and application for annotating resources online according to an emerging W3C standard for web annotations. Focus is on scholarly applications. (Source Annotator / Source Hypothes.is)

  • DSpace – a software for digital open repositories launched by The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in 2002. (Source)

  • Flexible Extensible Digital Object and Repository Architecture (FEDORA) – a software for digital repositories launched by The Cornell and Virginia Universities in 2003. (Source)

  • Eprints – a software for open digital repositories to self-archiving launched by Southampton University in 2000. (Source)

  • OAI Media Importer Bot – A computer program, run by Daniel Mietchen, that takes figures and video clips from Open Access articles in PubMed, and copies them to Wikimedia Commons with full attribution of the original paper. This facilitates the reuse of those files in educational materials or Wikipedia articles.

  • Scraping – a computing technique to extract information from websites. (Wikipedia)

  • Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) – a format for images that is open rather than tied to particular software, resolution-independent (unlike GIF, PNG and JPG), and structured so that with appropriate software it is relatively easy, for example, to translate labels into different languages.

  • Open Journal Systems (OJS) – a journal management and publishing system. (Source)

  • Open Monograph Press – an open source software platform for managing the editorial workflow required to see monographs, edited volumes, and scholarly editions through internal and external review, editing, cataloguing, production and publication. (Source)

  • Open Conference Systems (OCS) – a free Web publishing tool that will create a complete Web presence for scholarly conferences. (Source)

  • Open Harvester Systems – a free metadata indexing system. (Source)

  • ResearcherID – assigns a unique identifier for researchers to manager publication ists, track citations, and avoid author mis-identification. (Source)

  • ORCID – a persistent digital identifier that distinguishes individual researchers. Also supports integration in research workflows. (Source)

  • ProtocolsIO – Up-to-date crowdsourced protocol repository (Source)

  • Publish or Perish – software for retrieving and analysing academic citations. (Source)

  • Open lab notebooks – a concept of blogging about research on a regular basis, such that research notes and data are accumulated and published online as soon as they are obtained. (Wikipedia)

  • Stack Overflow – A Question and Answer site for programming issues. (Source)

  • Markdown – a syntax for adding formatting to documents allowing correctly formatted articles to be written in plain text. (Wikipedia)

  • Etherpad – An online, open source collaborative writing/editing tool operating in real time. (Source)

  • The Open Access Button – Tracks global encounters with paywalls, and helps provide access to papers through a ‘wishlist’. (Source)

  • Open Archives Initiative – Supplies a common framework to web communities that allows them to gain access to content in a standard manner by means of metadata harvesting. (Source)


Data Repositories

  • Dryad – a curated resource that makes the data underlying scientific publications discoverable, freely reusable, and citable. (Source)

  • Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) – contains data about all types of life on Earth, published according to common data standards. (Source)

  • Knowledge Network for Biocomplexity (KNB) – a network for the discoverability, access, and interpretation of complex ecological data. (Source)

  • DataONE – a framework and infrastructure for Earth observational data. Source.

  • figshare – a repository where users can make all of their research outputs available in a citable, shareable, and discoverable manner. (Source)

  • Morphbank – an image database documenting a range of specimen-based research, including comparative anatomy and taxonomy. Funded by the National Science Foundation. (Source)

  • Morphobank – a web application for collaborative evolutionary research, specifically phylogenetic systematics or cladistics, involving morphology. (Source)

  • Genbank – the NIH sequence database comprising an annotated collection of all publicly available DNA sequences. Part of the International Nucleotide Sequence Database Collaboration. (Source)

  • UniProt – Central repository of protein sequence and annotation data. (Source)

  • Worldwide Protein Data Bank (wwPDB) – Publicly available repository of macromolecular structural data. (Source)

  • A list of data repositories approved by F1000Research.

  • Map of Open Educational Resource Repositories – Map containing locations for items in the directory of Open Educational Resource Repositories. (Source)

  • Zenodo – An all-purpose free to use repository for all research outputs. DOIs and flexible licensing. (Source)

  • Open Science Framework – A tool created by the Center for Open Science for scientists. It is both a research and workflow management tool and open repository. Their goal is to link up the entire research ecosystem, from conception through publication. They give the user full control over the openness of their work and allow for the creation of registrations, which can be used when submitting registered reports. (Source)

  • re3data.org – a global registry of research data repositories from different academic disciplines. (Source)

  • Databib – a searchable registry of research data repositories (Source) [Note that the Databib and re3data.org registries will merch by the end of 2015]


Funders And Policy-Related

  • Publicly funded research – refers to research which is, at least in part, funded by Governments, often through Research Councils.

  • Research Councils UK (RCUK) – The primary government research funding body in the UK. (Open Access policy)

  • Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) – A UK educational charity, formerly the of HEFCE but now independent. Provides expertise to universities, colleges and cultural institutions on the use of technology to support research, including publication models, repositories, licensing, and infrastructure. (Source)

  • National Institute of Health (NIH) – The national medical research agency in the USA. (Public Access policy)

  • National Science Foundation (NSF) – an independent federal agency in the USA for the funding of research. (Public Access policy)

  • Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) – a funding body for higher education, universities and colleges in England. (Open Access policy)

  • Wellcome Trust – A life sciences funding body in the UK (Open Access policy)

  • The Research Excellence Framework (REF) – An initiative to assess researchers in the UK. Coordinated by HEFCE.

  • Gates Foundation – A funding body co-ordinated by Melinda and Bill Gates. (Open Access policy)

  • Max Planck Society – a German research organisation with 82 Institutes worldwide. (Open Access policy)

  • CrossRef – an association of scholarly publishers that develops shared infrastructure to support more effective scholarly communication. (Source)

  • Public Knowledge Project (PKP) – a multi-university initiative developing free, open source software and conducting research to improve the quality and reach of scholarly publishing. (Source)

  • Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) – an international alliance of academic and research libraries working to create a more open system of scholarly communication. (Source)

  • Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA) – represents the interests of open access journal and book publishers in all scientific, technical, and scholarly disciplines. (Source)

  • Mandate – an authority to carry out a policy. In this context, largely to conform to open access policies.

  • OpenAIRE – a pan-European infrastructure that supports the EC’s Open Access Mandate in Horizon2020. All publications funded by the EC should be made available in Open Access and OpenAIRE harvests from a range of data sources namely repositories, OA publishers. (Source)

  • Department of Energy (DOE) – A federal agency addressing US energy, environment, and nuclear challenges. (Public Access Policy)


Open Research Infrastructure

  • Google Scholar – a freely accessible search engine for indexing the scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines. (Source)

  • Directory of Open Access Repositories (OpenDOAR) – a directory of academic open access repositories. Also has a search function for repositories and repository contents. (Source)

  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) – a directory indexing open access peer-reviewed journals (Source)

  • Registry of Open Access Repositories (ROAR) – a registry for open access repositories, hosted by the University of Southampton, UK. (Source)

  • Registry of Research Data Repositories – An open science tool that serves as a global registry of research data repositories. (Source)

  • PubMed – a repository comprising more than 24 million citations for the biomedical literature. (Source)

  • PubMed Central (PMC) – a free full-text archive of biomedical and life sciences journal literature at the US National Institutes of Health’s Library of Medicine. (Source)

  • Europe PubMed Central (EuroPMC) – Based on PubMed Central, and part of a network of repositories supported by funders of life sciences and biomedical research. (Source)

  • Repository 66 – a mashup of data from ROAR and OpenDOAR overlayed onto Google maps.(Source)

  • Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) – a programme started in Brazil in 1998 which has now expanded to 15 other countries, developed by FAPESP (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo) and BIREME (Centro Latino-americano e do Caribe em Informação em Ciências da Saúde). The objectives are to develop a common methodology for the preparation, storage and dissemination of scientific literature, including standardised evaluation and quality control processes. This comprises a model for cooperative electronic publication of scientific periodicals on the internet using organised bibliographic databases with full text access. (Source (Portuguese Language) (English))

  • Securing a Hybrid Environment for Research Preservation and Access – Rights of MEtadata for Open archiving (SHERPA-RoMEO) – a tool to check what the self-archiving policies for individual journals are. (Source)

  • Connecting Repositories (CORE) – a collection of open access repositories. (Source)

  • Paperity – a multidisciplinary aggregator of open access journals and papers, Gold and Hybrid. Aims to include ultimately 100% of open access literature. (Source)


  • Open Access Movement (OAM) – a global movement started in the late 1990s and early 2000s fuelled by the widespread public access to the World Wide Web. Its prime objective is the free and unrestricted access and reuse of the world’s knowledge.

  • Open Archives Initiative (OAI) – develops and promotes interoperability standards that aim to facilitate the efficient dissemination of content. (Source)

  • Openwashing – having an appearance of open-source and open-licensing for marketing purposes, while continuing proprietary practices. Coined by Audrey Watters.

  • Curation – the selection, preservation, maintenance, collection and archiving of [digital] assets. Curation establishes, maintains, and adds value to repositories of digital data for present and future use. (Wikipedia)

  • Typesetting – the composition of text by arranging physical pieces of type or by using software to prepare a version of the text suitable for printing. Stored letters and other symbols are retrieved and ordered according to a language’s orthography (conventional spelling system of a language) for visual display.

  • Copy editing – a type of editing designed to improve the formatting, style, and accuracy of text. It usually does not involve changing the content of the original text.

  • Annotation – a comment with specific location and context, either inline or in the margin of a text document, or within a region of an image or video, or located within a specific row or cell of data in a data set.  

  • Citation – a reference to a published or unpublished source embedded in content, for the purposes of acknowledging the work and relevance of others to the topic of discussion where the citation appears.

  • References – defines a relationship between one object, a designator, and a second object, a source. Usually takes the form of a bibliography of academic papers at the end of a research manuscript.

  • Submission fee – a fee levied by some publishers for submitting a manuscript to their journals.

  • Accessibility – refers to the degree of access. Defined by an end-user basis, depending on their ability to understand or reuse content.

  • Mixed citation – a textual, bibliographic description of a work that is cited within text.

  • Data archiving – the process of moving data to a storage device for long-term preservation. (Wikipedia)

  • Computational reproducibility – when publishing computational findings, include details and access to the underlying code, data, and implementation.

  • Empirical reproducibility – the reproduction of results to obtain ‘verifiable facts’, through improving existing communication standards and reporting.

  • Statistical reproducibility – validating the statistical results, errors, and confidence measures in research. Also the statistical assessment of repeated results for validation purposes. (post from Victoria Stodden)

  • Loginwall – the requirement to log in to a system in order to access content.

  • Shibboleth – a single sign-in system for computer networks and services on the open Internet. (Wikipedia)

  • Athens – A sign-in system that provides access to library resources. (Source)

  • Symplectic – A world-leading products and services company specialised in research information management. Their flagship system Elements, is used by a number of the world’s research institutions. (Source)

  • Journal to Wiki publication (J2W) – Copying text from a published paper to a wiki (such as Wikipedia or Wikibooks), with attribution: legally possible if the licence of the paper is less restrictive than the licence of the wiki.

  • Wiki to Journal publication (W2J) – Creating a paper on a wiki, using its features for collaboration and informal review, for submission to a journal for formal peer review. Might involve a public wiki such as Wikipedia or Wikiversity, or a specially-created wiki.

  • Fee waiver – If an institution, research funder or author cannot pay for an Article Processing Charge, many publishers or journals will offer partial or total waiving for fees.

  • Derivative work – A work based upon one or more pre-existing works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. (Source)

  • Double-dipping – In the context of Open Access, double-dipping occurs when a journal has an article processing charge (APC) for publishing an author’s work, as well as requiring payment (usually through a subscription fee) by the potential user of the work. This model makes the institution or author pay twice to access the work. (Source)

About this resource

This resource is lightly edited from an original created by created by Jon Tennant and Ross Mounce. This material is licensed under a CC-0 license. We strongly encourage the distribution and re-use of this material.

Version 2.0: Released [12 July 2015]

Additional contributors:

Richard Iannone, Chealsye Bowley, Martin Poulter, Matt Hall, Priscilla Ulguim, Lou Woodley, Sibele Fausto, Nazeefa Fatima, Karen Cranston, Lauren B. Collister, Alasdair Taylor, Matt Menzenski, Patricia Herterich.

Please note: The Right to Research Coalition does not endorse the accuracy or completeness of this material.

To the extent possible under law, Jon Tennant has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to Open Research Glossary . This work is published from: United Kingdom.











Open Access,

Open Data,

Open Education