“The European Commission will finance the project TRIPLE (Targeting Researchers through Innovative Practices and multiLingual Exploration) under the Horizon 2020 framework with approx. 5,6 million Euros for a duration of 42 months. TRIPLE will be a dedicated service of the OPERAS research infrastructure and will become a strong service in the EOSC marketplace. TRIPLE will help social sciences and humanities (SSH) research in Europe to gain visibility, to be more efficient and effective, to improve its reuse within the SSH and beyond, and to dramatically increase its societal impact. Work is expected to start this fall….”
“Elsevier welcomes cOAlition S’s updated implementation guidance: “Accelerating the transition to full and immediate Open Access to scientific publications.” Elsevier fully supports and promotes open access. Authors can achieve full and immediate open access — and so be Plan S compliant — either by publishing their articles in our gold open access journals or publishing their articles gold open access in our hybrid journals….”
“It has been over a year in April 2018 since I had the opportunity to present at two panels in conferences alongside experts such as Lisa Hinchliffe, Johan Tilstra (Founder Lean Library), Jason Priem (Cofounder Unpaywall), Ben Kaube (Cofounder Kopernio) on the topic of browser extensions that help users gain quick access to the full text of articles while browsing the web.
They would typically be installed as a browser extension in the user’s web browser, and would activate when they detected the user was on a page with article details and would typically popup a message with a link to where the article full text was available or offer to download the PDF directly for the user.
We eventually started to see the rise of browser extensions (many of which were commerical) such as Kopernio and Lean Library, that extended the idea to finding copies available via institutional subscriptions.
Such extensions aimed to help users conveniently get one-click access to the best verson of the article available to them. This could be very helpful if you didn’t start off your search from a library discovery service or page and was off campus. …”
“Open access advocates are calling for a globally coordinated approach to “scholarly infrastructure”, saying knowledge is trapped behind paywalls and Europe’s Plan S initiative solves only part of the problem.
Lobby groups around the world have teamed up to run a stocktake of existing infrastructure and to direct spending on future needs, under the guise of a new alliance called Invest in Open Infrastructure (IOI).
Co-founder Ginny Barbour said IOI was a “separate but necessary” initiative to Plan S, which is focused on making journal articles openly accessible. “Journals are largely owned by a relatively small number of for-profit publishers, and the same is happening for infrastructure,” said Dr Barbour, director of the Australasian Open Access Strategy Group….”
Abstract: Albertsons Library [at Boise State University] embarked on a practical effort this past year to document post-cancellation perpetual access for those electronic journal titles that had been or were part of large package purchases. Documenting entitled content was challenging and hampered by limits to accounting records maintained at the library and university; a change in the library’s integrated library system (ILS); limited or incomplete access to third-party subscription agent order and payment records; and changes or the demise of consortia. Decisions were made to work with the known more recent electronic journal content purchased, and to work backwards from there. Procedures for creating standardized perpetual access documentation by title was devised for use in the ILS cataloging module as well as the library’s electronic resource management system. By creating a method for documenting perpetual access, institutions are able to support claims for access purchased by the library, even as content shifts from one publisher to another.
“KAUST University Library is happy to announce new open access publishing agreements with 3 STEM publishers, in collaboration with KAUST Office of Sponsored Research (OSR). These agreements will allow KAUST corresponding authors to publish their accepted articles open access mode (in the journals of publishers listed below) and made openly available under creative common license, at no cost to the author.
- Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) : Read and Publish Model coverage 2019-2021
- Cambridge University Press (CUP) : Read and Publish Model coverage 2019-2021
- Institute of Physics (IOP) : Off-set Publishing Model coverage 2019
The first of its kind in the region, these publishing models aim over time to reduce the proportion of pay-walled scholarly articles, as library subscription funding shift to open access publishing. University Library, with the support of OSR, is taking a proactive role of negotiating with other publishers on similar agreements in the coming years, and expecting to be aligned with global open access and open science movements. This new initiative will support KAUST open access policy and supplement KAUST research repository, aimed to increase the impact of KAUST research publications through its availability to the world without locking them behind publisher’s paywalls.
In view of the forthcoming publication of the Plan S’ revised Implementation Guidance, The Guild has published a position paper presenting its proposals for a successful transition towards Open Access. With these recommendations, The Guild builds on its submission to the Plan S consultation, contributing to a wider debate about how Plan S can help realise the ambitions of Open Science.
Full position paper at https://www.the-guild.eu/news/2019/12_open-science.pdf
Crowd-sourced spreadsheet of Open Science Grassroots Community Networks, apparently launched by Brian Nosek, May 2019.
“As of March 2019, more than 1 million Euros had been pledged by over 135 institutions globally for both services collectively. See the SCOSS website for the complete list. The SCOSS Board is pleased with these results. This shows considerable uptake in channeling investment to an expert-selected number of global-reach services. For this reason, the Board has decided to continue after the pilot. As a result, 38 services submitted Expressions of Interest following SCOSS’s latest call for Expressions of Interest, from most continents (18 from Europe, 9 from North America, 8 from Africa, 2 from Oceania and 1 from South America). Of these, six have been short-listed to apply for SCOSS endorsement in 2019.
Over the course of two months, ending in January 2019, members of the SCOSS Board and representatives of DOAJ and Sherpa/RoMEO individually completed a written evaluation of the Pilot Project assessing progress made until December 2018. The SCOSS Board then came together for two meetings. During this convening, responses were jointly discussed and consensus reached on a collection of key themes which are shared below as actionable learnings which we’d like to share with the community. The purpose of this Progress Report is to provide a summary of the Board’s findings: both positive and negative. …”
From Google’s English: “The criteria, 44 in number , are divided according to different themes.
For the operation of the platforms and the infrastructures, it is about:
- the governance,
- viability / sustainability
- replicability / portability.
And for the editorial contents of:
- governance / integrity / editorial policy,
- the legal framework,
- the business model / generalities,
- the economic model / special cases of journals and collections with payment per unit of publication costs,
- accessibility / interoperability / sustainability of content.
They are classified according to three levels : indispensable, highly recommended and desired. …”
“Academics in the arts, humanities and social sciences (AHSS) voiced concerns that Open Access mandates will damage academic freedom at a conference held at Goldsmiths, University of London, on Friday (24th May). The conference heard that widening the funder Open Access mandates developed for STEM subjects to cover the humanities fields would actively prevent some researchers from publishing, because they would not have access to funds.
A push has been initiated in the UK to require all monographs to be published Open Access to be eligible for the 2027 Research Excellence Framework (REF). Meanwhile under international initiative Plan S, all government-funded research will have to be published Open Access from 2020.
Sarah Kember, professor of new technologies of communication at Goldsmiths and director of Goldsmiths Press, suggested that funder-mandated OA publishing – as opposed to scholar-led OA initiatives such as Goldsmiths Press – could narrow the range of work appearing and damage diversity. …”
“While faculty are increasingly interested in an open access publication model, traditional scholarly incentives continue to motivate their decision-making. Approximately two-thirds of respondents in this survey cycle indicated they would be happy to see the traditional subscription-based publication model replaced entirely by an open access system, which represents a greater share of respondents compared to the previous survey cycle. However, only four in ten faculty indicate open access characteristics of journals as highly influential in publication decisions.
There is substantial interest in use of open educational resources for instructional practices, particularly from younger faculty members. About six in ten respondents are very interested in using open educational resources (OER), and roughly half strongly agreed that they would like to adopt new instructional approaches with OER….”
“In the summer of 2018 the FIT4RRI Work Package 2 ‘Sectorial Diagnosis’ came to completion. The question was how RRI and Open Science related dynamics vary, in particular across sectors and national background. In general, contexts matter, so how would this play out in the case of RRI and Open Science? A better understanding of this variability is very important for the co-creation experiments of FIT4RRI….”
“Established in 2006, Twitter is currently one of the most powerful social networking platforms for scientists across the world. In a 2014 survey by Nature, about 13% of scientists reported that they regularly use Twitter mainly to follow discussion on research-related issues . I recently asked my Twitter followers to tell me the things they enjoy about ‘Science Twitter’ and/or the scientists they followed. After over a hundred responses primarily from scientists, the top two responses (> 35%) related to how scientists showcase their human side – their passion and struggles – and the sense of community established as a result. A recent study found that most followers of scientists on Twitter are scientists themselves , which is reflected in the responses I obtained. While this is great for certain aspects of science communication, it limits the power of outreaching to a wider community. However, the same study showed that the types of followers became more diverse as the number of followers increased beyond a certain threshold. While not every scientist has the interest or resources to achieve thousands of followers, there are certain ways in which scientists can improve their presence and experience in social media. Here are my top five tips on how to do this: …”