Open Boek: online leesclub voor informatieprofessionals

From Google’s English:  “Keeping up with our professional knowledge is not only done by reading trade journals, blogs and/or books. Conversations about this with each other are also important. And it is precisely at this point that the time or opportunity is often lacking. That is why as a professional organization we want to start an online reading club under the name: OPEN BOOK, because we believe in the open sharing of knowledge. The works discussed are also available open access. During each meeting we discuss one publication on a theme within our beautiful field.

The topic of open access publishing is central to the new meeting OPEN BOEK , the online reading club for information professionals . We discuss the following article:

Jeroen Bosman, Hans de Jonge, Bianca Kramer and Jeroen Sondervan, ‘ Advancing Open Access in the Netherlands after 2020: From Quantity to Quality ‘ Working Paper, January 21, 2021. …”

Open Science Agreement with Elsevier

From Google’s English:  “On this webpage you will find relevant and up-to-date information about the services provided in the context of the multi-year agreement, from May 2020 to December 2024, between VSNU, NFU, NWO, VH, KNAW and Elsevier. It provides information about the progress of services related to reading and publishing rights and about the joint development of new open science services for Research Intelligence and Scholarly Communication.”

Open Science Agreement with Elsevier

From Google’s English:  “On this webpage you will find relevant and up-to-date information about the services provided in the context of the multi-year agreement, from May 2020 to December 2024, between VSNU, NFU, NWO, VH, KNAW and Elsevier. It provides information about the progress of services related to reading and publishing rights and about the joint development of new open science services for Research Intelligence and Scholarly Communication.”

Bedreigingen voor fundamenteel wetenschappelijk onderzoek in Nederland brengen onze toekomstige welvaart in gevaar – ScienceGuide

From Google’s English:  “The approach by which Dutch science has risen to the top 5 in the world since the 1980s is under threat, write Raymond Poot and more than a hundred other scientists. Not through Open Access or Recognition and Valuation, but through the link between this and the signing of DORA and the roll-out of Open Science. In this contribution, Poot shares the conclusions and recommendations from a study into the consequences of Open Science and DORA. “A scenario of an internationally competitive Dutch science, where different talents can come into their own, is entirely possible. However, the current policy has to be drastically adjusted for that.” …

Dutch scientists are no longer assessed on the basis of international, scientific and measurable criteria, as was done very successfully at NWO for thirty years. These criteria have been partly removed by Open Science and DORA and replaced by criteria that are politically motivated and difficult to measure. As we described in our previous contribution in ScienceGuide, the negative effects of Open Science and DORA at NWO are amplified because measurable criteria are replaced by narratives. Sometimes the CV is even omitted entirely.  …

To show that ‘policy’ based on Open Science and DORA contains major risks that we should not get used to, I wrote a report with Bas de Bruin and Frank Grosveld that goes deeper into the matter. The report is supported by 105 scientists (further support for the report can be emailed to Raymond Poot). In the report we discuss the effects of DORA on evaluations, and we examine the underlying reasoning behind DORA. We also discuss the focus of Open Science on the (direct) benefit of research for society, the focus on public involvement in research and the focus on team science and leadership.’. We discuss the current Open Access policy of Open Science, Plan S, to enforce Open Access for all Dutch scientific publications. 

The conclusions of our report are alarming.  

1) The combination of different Open Science  policies  with DORA puts the fundamental sciences at a disadvantage compared to the more applied sciences. Through the ERC and Marie Curie competitions, Europe spends twenty-five percent of its innovation budget on scientist-initiated fundamental research, which is selected for excellence. The Netherlands spends only five percent of its budget on such research. Europe has a reason to spend so much on scientist-initiated research, according to conclusion two of our report. 

2) Scientist-initiated fundamental research that is selected on the basis of scientific quality provides considerably more social benefit per euro spent in the medium term than research that is selected on the basis of direct social or industrial relevance. This apparent paradox is related to the observation that the usefulness of scientific discoveries is very difficult to predict, while it is clear that without real discoveries there is little progress. While this message is difficult to sell to politicians, it is a very important one. 

3) Various Open Science measures reduce the quality of Dutch science by not selecting for scientific quality and at the same time creating a lot of bureaucracy. …”

Open Science in Education van start – Nieuws – Universiteit Utrecht

From Google’s English:  “Utrecht University works with an open mind, open attitude and open science on solutions that have a positive impact on society. What does that mean for university education? This important question, which partly arises from the Strategic Plan, is being investigated in the new track Open Science in Education, which will be launched shortly. In the run-up to this, the Open Science Program is organizing a broad work session – open to everyone – to exchange ideas.

In the work session, participants jointly look for ways in which Open Science and Education are connected. Because what knowledge and open science skills do we want to impart to students? What does an open attitude mean for reflection on and debate about your own discipline? How do you value education and guidance and what does that mean for the new Recognition and Valuation? What is already going well at UU, what can be improved and where are there still opportunities? These – but not only these – questions lie ahead. The input of the participants is used in further shaping the Open Science in Education track….”

We moeten af van telzucht in de wetenschap – ScienceGuide

From Google’s English:  “On July 19, ScienceGuide published an open letter from 171 academics who are concerned about the new Recognition and Valuation of scientists. In fact, the signatories warn that the new ‘Recognize and Appreciate’ leads to more arbitrariness and loss of quality. This will jeopardize the international top position of Dutch science, argue the writers, which will adversely affect young academics in particular.  …

It is noticeable that these young scientists, whom the letter speaks of, do not seem to be involved in drafting the message. It is also striking that signatories to the open letter themselves are mainly at the top of the academic career ladder; 142 of the 171 signatories are even professors. As Young Science in Transition, PhD candidates Network Netherlands, PostDocNL, a large number of members of De Jonge Akademies and many other young researchers, we do not agree with the message they are proclaiming. In fact, we worry about these kinds of noises when it comes to our current and future careers. Young academics are eagerly waiting for a new system of Recognition and Appreciation. …”

Nieuwe Erkennen en waarderen schaadt Nederlandse wetenschap – ScienceGuide

From Google’s English:  “A group of 171 scientists, including 142 professors, warns in this open letter that the new Recognition and Valuation will harm Dutch science. The medical, exact and life sciences in particular are in danger of losing their international top position as a result of the new Recognition and Appreciation, because it is no longer clear how scientists are judged.

An article was recently published in Nature about the new policy of Utrecht University whereby the impact factors of scientific journals are no longer included in the evaluation of scientists. Measurable performance figures have been abandoned in favor of an ‘open science’ system and elevating the team above the individual.  

Here 171 academics warn that this new ‘Recognition and appreciation’ will lead to more arbitrariness and less quality and that this policy will have major consequences for the international recognition and appreciation of Dutch scientists. This will have negative consequences in particular for young researchers, who will no longer be able to compete internationally.  …”

Wetenschappelijk tijdschrift Rijksmuseum nu voor iedereen online beschikbaar – Persberichten – Pers – Rijksmuseum

From Google’s English:  “In addition to a printed version, The Rijksmuseum Bulletin now also appears as a free digital magazine in Open Access. The peer-reviewed scientific journal of the Rijksmuseum, in which historical and art-historical research about the collection is presented, will thus be freely available online to everyone. All editions of the magazine from 2012 are currently online. Later this year, the archive will be expanded to include the first issue in 1953….”

Onderzoekinformatiesystemen/Open Knowledge Base

“Subsequently, a study was conducted into the need and feasibility of a so-called Open Knowledge Base (OKB) in which all data from research information systems is openly available. The draft report of the feasibility study into an OKB was published in December 2020. The responses to this have been incorporated into the final final report. With regard to the interpretation, the report examines in detail the context of an OKB, what an OKB can look like in relation to existing systems and the various development scenarios. Based on Dialogic ‘s final report. It can be concluded that it is desirable and technically feasible for the Dutch scientific field to set up an open infrastructure for the metadata and analyzes of scientific research. In the coming months, the Taskforce will enter into discussions with the scientific field about setting up an OKB. …”

Open science contract met Elsevier stap dichterbij – ScienceGuide

“With the approaching deadline of 1 January 2020 in sight, the VSNU, NFU, NWO and data company Elsevier have today come to a joint statement. The parties agree to continue to negotiate full open access, in combination with extensive cooperation in the field of open science….

In the past two years , extensive negotiations have taken place between the VSNU, NFU and NWO with the publishing company and data giant Elsevier about a follow-up to the first transformative deal from 2015. Where it was initially possible to work with an extension of the previous contract, the parties negotiated it last year with the prospect that on 1 January 2020 Elsevier would go black for Dutch knowledge institutions.

 

At the end of 2019, the parties have now signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that guarantees access to the more than 2500 scientific journals of Elsevier at least until the beginning of May 2020. In addition, Dutch researchers who submit (submit) an article during this period do not have to pay an open access fee. “This remains unchanged from the current OA deal with Elsevier,” says a spokesperson. “The number of titles in which this is possible has increased considerably.” In the meantime, the parties agree to work together on a wide range of pilots that should make open science and research information possible….”

Het Harvard Open Access-licentiemodel in het Nederlands recht

From Google’s English: “Many US universities can publish scientific articles directly open access. They makeuse the Harvard open access licensing model for this. This article examines whether the Harvardlicensing model under Dutch law is permitted. That appears to be the case. That makes it for authors and institutions in the Netherlands very easy to meet the open access requirements of grant providers,as recently formulated in Plan S.”

NJB: Het Harvard Open Access-licentiemodel in het Nederlands recht – NJB – Nederlands Juristenblad

From Google’s English: “Many US universities can publish scientific articles directly open access. For this they use the Harvard open access licensing model. This article examines whether the Harvard licensing model is permitted under Dutch law. That appears to be the case. This makes it very easy for authors and institutions in the Netherlands to comply with the open access requirements of grant providers, as they have recently been formulated in Plan S.”

De stap naar open science moet door een zo groot mogelijke hoepel – ScienceGuide

” It is clear that the assessment criteria for researchers must change. There are other good reasons for that. Publishing in Science gets a lot of weight in the assessment of a scientist, but it is not in itself proof that a person’s research is important: there are also articles in this journal that are never or little quoted. And some fields are underrepresented.

This is one of the reasons why NWO recently issued the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA).  signed. This calls for a broader assessment of a person’s contribution to science: not just on the basis of a few simple core indicators such as the h-index  . It does not only have to be researched: a method can also be groundbreaking. And research data can in itself already have great value for other scientists and even for society as a whole.

NWO will adapt the instructions to its reviewers in order to give this change in the assessment criteria hands and feet….”

Robert-Jan Smits wordt voorzitter van de TU Eindhoven – ScienceGuide

In Google’s English: “Currently he is still special Envoy Open Access and introduced Plan-S earlier this month with 14 European scientific organizations. He received a lot of praise for this internationally. After clearing this initial impulse to prepare the EU for more Open Access, he leaves for [Eindhoven University of Technology] on 1 March….

In March 2019, the born Brabander Robert-Jan Smits will succeed lecture chairman Jan Mengelers, who will retire in mid-2019. Nicole Ummelen will succeed Jo van Ham as vice-chairman of the Executive Board on 1 January 2019. Jo van Ham will also retire in mid-2019. Until then, he will focus on broadening the international coalition for Plan S and the implementation of the open access policy….

The plan seems to have a lot of impact. Since the announcement of this plan on 4 September, a day after Smits took care of the Academic Year Opening at Eindhoven University of Technology, the share of the largest scientific publisher Elsevier has already fallen by 7% in market value, stock market analysts attribute this to the introduction of Plan S. International he has also received much praise for this plan….

In the coming months, Smits will focus primarily on expanding the coalition at an international level. Last weekend gave the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation already commit themselves to the coalition, and there is interest from the US, China and Japan. In early October Smits travels to the US to speak with American partners for a global rollout of Schedule S. “This week I have a meeting with the TNCs from Europe to explain the plan.”

In a week’s time, a task force headed by ScienceEurope will start the concrete implementation of the European organization of NWO-like institutions….”

11 EU-landen besluiten: vanaf 2020 moet alle wetenschappelijke literatuur gratis beschikbaar zijn | De Volkskrant

From Google’s English: “It is nothing less than a revolution. From 2020 onwards, scientists will no longer be allowed to publish paid research in scientific journals that charge subscription fees. Researchers, but also general practitioners, patients, hospitals and companies that can not afford to pay expensive subscriptions to professional literature, should then be able to view publicly paid research free of charge….”