Monthly Archives: February 2020

The R2R debate, part 1: opening statement in support | Sauropod Vertebra Picture of the Week

Posted on by

“This Monday and Tuesday, I was at the R2R (Researcher to Reader) conference at BMA House in London. It’s the first time I’ve been to this, and I was there at the invitation of my old sparring partner Rick Anderson, who was organizing this year’s debate, on the proposition “The venue of its publication tells us nothing useful about the quality of a paper”.

I was one half of the team arguing in favour of the proposition, along with Toby Green, currently managing director at Coherent Digital and prevously head of publishing at the OECD for twenty years. Our opponents were Pippa Smart, publishing consultant and editor of Learned Publishing; and Niall Boyce, editor of The Lancet Psychiatry.

I’m going to blog three of the four statements that were made. (The fourth, that of Niall Boyce, is not available, as he spoke from handwritten notes.) I’ll finish this series with a fourth post summarising how the debate went, and discussing what I now think about the proposition….”

The R2R debate, part 1: opening statement in support | Sauropod Vertebra Picture of the Week

Posted on by

“This Monday and Tuesday, I was at the R2R (Researcher to Reader) conference at BMA House in London. It’s the first time I’ve been to this, and I was there at the invitation of my old sparring partner Rick Anderson, who was organizing this year’s debate, on the proposition “The venue of its publication tells us nothing useful about the quality of a paper”.

I was one half of the team arguing in favour of the proposition, along with Toby Green, currently managing director at Coherent Digital and prevously head of publishing at the OECD for twenty years. Our opponents were Pippa Smart, publishing consultant and editor of Learned Publishing; and Niall Boyce, editor of The Lancet Psychiatry.

I’m going to blog three of the four statements that were made. (The fourth, that of Niall Boyce, is not available, as he spoke from handwritten notes.) I’ll finish this series with a fourth post summarising how the debate went, and discussing what I now think about the proposition….”

Cited papers outdated way to evaluate researchers – Opinion – Chinadaily.com.cn

Posted on by

“The Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Science and Technology have called for a more comprehensive evaluation system for science researchers, and specifically require universities and colleges to cancel direct bonuses for those who publish essays in Scientific Citation Index (SCI) journals.

That’s a good move. In those top domestic universities, including the University of Science and Technology of China where I serve, the number of papers published in SCI journals has long lost importance. The top universities are more concerned with innovation and making breakthroughs.

The phenomenon of “SCI worship” exists more in the other universities, and the new guidance document is a good opportunity for them to improve. With the performance evaluation system changed, researchers serving in these universities will be encouraged to concentrate more on long-term studies instead of short-term papers….”

Cited papers outdated way to evaluate researchers – Opinion – Chinadaily.com.cn

Posted on by

“The Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Science and Technology have called for a more comprehensive evaluation system for science researchers, and specifically require universities and colleges to cancel direct bonuses for those who publish essays in Scientific Citation Index (SCI) journals.

That’s a good move. In those top domestic universities, including the University of Science and Technology of China where I serve, the number of papers published in SCI journals has long lost importance. The top universities are more concerned with innovation and making breakthroughs.

The phenomenon of “SCI worship” exists more in the other universities, and the new guidance document is a good opportunity for them to improve. With the performance evaluation system changed, researchers serving in these universities will be encouraged to concentrate more on long-term studies instead of short-term papers….”

R2R Debate Teams Announced | The Researcher to Reader Conference – BMA House, London – 24-25 February 2020

Posted on by

“This time, the debate is on the subject of Journal Brands and Impact Measures. Teams of debaters will be arguing for and against the controversial proposition:

“The venue of its publication tells us nothing useful about the quality of a paper”.

Speaking for the proposition will be:

Dr Mike Taylor, who is a Research Associate at the University of Bristol and a Software Guy at Index Data
Toby Green, who is Managing Director at Coherent Digital and Former Head of Publishing at the OECD

Speaking against will be:

Pippa Smart, who is a Publishing Consultant, Editor-in-Chief of Learned Publishing and President of the European Association Of Science Editors
Dr Niall Boyce, who is Editor of The Lancet Psychiatry and a PhD researcher at Birkbeck…”

R2R Debate Teams Announced | The Researcher to Reader Conference – BMA House, London – 24-25 February 2020

Posted on by

“This time, the debate is on the subject of Journal Brands and Impact Measures. Teams of debaters will be arguing for and against the controversial proposition:

“The venue of its publication tells us nothing useful about the quality of a paper”.

Speaking for the proposition will be:

Dr Mike Taylor, who is a Research Associate at the University of Bristol and a Software Guy at Index Data
Toby Green, who is Managing Director at Coherent Digital and Former Head of Publishing at the OECD

Speaking against will be:

Pippa Smart, who is a Publishing Consultant, Editor-in-Chief of Learned Publishing and President of the European Association Of Science Editors
Dr Niall Boyce, who is Editor of The Lancet Psychiatry and a PhD researcher at Birkbeck…”

I’ve been an idiot for three years; or, goodbye Brexit, hello Open Access! | Sauropod Vertebra Picture of the Week

Posted on by

“I’m not going to rehearse all the reasons why Brexit is awful — not now, not ever again. (If you have a taste for that kind of thing, I recommend Chris Grey’s Brexit Blog, which is dispassionate, informed and forensic.) I’m not going to follow Brexit commentators on Twitter, and read all the desperately depressing analysis they highlight. I’m certainly not going to blog about it myself any more. More importantly, I’m not going to let the ongoing disintegration of my country dominate my mind or my emotions. I’m walking away: because obviously absolutely nothing I say or do about it can make the slightest bit of difference.

But there is an area of policy where I can hope to make some small difference, and that is of course open science — including but not limited to open access, open data, open reviewing and how research is evaluated. That’s where my political energy should have been going for the last three years, and it’s where that energy will be going from now on….”

I’ve been an idiot for three years; or, goodbye Brexit, hello Open Access! | Sauropod Vertebra Picture of the Week

Posted on by

“I’m not going to rehearse all the reasons why Brexit is awful — not now, not ever again. (If you have a taste for that kind of thing, I recommend Chris Grey’s Brexit Blog, which is dispassionate, informed and forensic.) I’m not going to follow Brexit commentators on Twitter, and read all the desperately depressing analysis they highlight. I’m certainly not going to blog about it myself any more. More importantly, I’m not going to let the ongoing disintegration of my country dominate my mind or my emotions. I’m walking away: because obviously absolutely nothing I say or do about it can make the slightest bit of difference.

But there is an area of policy where I can hope to make some small difference, and that is of course open science — including but not limited to open access, open data, open reviewing and how research is evaluated. That’s where my political energy should have been going for the last three years, and it’s where that energy will be going from now on….”

The Open Science Training Handbook

Posted on by

“A group of fourteen authors came together in February 2018 at the TIB (German National Library of Science and Technology) in Hannover to create an open, living handbook on Open Science training. High-quality trainings are fundamental when aiming at a cultural change towards the implementation of Open Science principles. Teaching resources provide great support for Open Science instructors and trainers. The Open Science training handbook will be a key resource and a first step towards developing Open Access and Open Science curricula and andragogies. Supporting and connecting an emerging Open Science community that wishes to pass on their knowledge as multipliers, the handbook will enrich training activities and unlock the community’s full potential.

Sharing their experience and skills of imparting Open Science principles, the authors (see below) produced an open knowledge and educational resource oriented to practical teaching. The focus of the new handbook is not spreading the ideas of Open Science, but showing how to spread these ideas most effectively. The form of a book sprint as a collaborative writing process maximized creativity and innovation, and ensured the production of a valuable resource in just a few days.

Bringing together methods, techniques, and practices, the handbook aims at supporting educators of Open Science. The result is intended as a helpful guide on how to forward knowledge on Open Science principles to our networks, institutions, colleagues, and students. It will instruct and inspire trainers how to create high quality and engaging trainings. Addressing challenges and giving solutions, it will strengthen the community of Open Science trainers who are educating, informing, and inspiring themselves….”

The Open Science Training Handbook

Posted on by

“A group of fourteen authors came together in February 2018 at the TIB (German National Library of Science and Technology) in Hannover to create an open, living handbook on Open Science training. High-quality trainings are fundamental when aiming at a cultural change towards the implementation of Open Science principles. Teaching resources provide great support for Open Science instructors and trainers. The Open Science training handbook will be a key resource and a first step towards developing Open Access and Open Science curricula and andragogies. Supporting and connecting an emerging Open Science community that wishes to pass on their knowledge as multipliers, the handbook will enrich training activities and unlock the community’s full potential.

Sharing their experience and skills of imparting Open Science principles, the authors (see below) produced an open knowledge and educational resource oriented to practical teaching. The focus of the new handbook is not spreading the ideas of Open Science, but showing how to spread these ideas most effectively. The form of a book sprint as a collaborative writing process maximized creativity and innovation, and ensured the production of a valuable resource in just a few days.

Bringing together methods, techniques, and practices, the handbook aims at supporting educators of Open Science. The result is intended as a helpful guide on how to forward knowledge on Open Science principles to our networks, institutions, colleagues, and students. It will instruct and inspire trainers how to create high quality and engaging trainings. Addressing challenges and giving solutions, it will strengthen the community of Open Science trainers who are educating, informing, and inspiring themselves….”

CODECHECK is a process for independent reproduction of computations and awarding of time-stamped certificates for successful reproductions of scholarly articles.

Posted on by

“CODECHECK tackles one of the main challenges of computational research by supporting codecheckers with a workflow, guidelines and tools to evaluate computer programs underlying scientific papers. The independent time-stamped runs conducted by codecheckers will award a “certificate of reproducible computation” and increase availability, discovery and reproducibility of crucial artefacts for computational sciences. See the project page for a full description of problems, solutions, and goals and take a lookg at the GitHub organisation for examples of CODECHECKs and tools….”

CODECHECK is a process for independent reproduction of computations and awarding of time-stamped certificates for successful reproductions of scholarly articles.

Posted on by

“CODECHECK tackles one of the main challenges of computational research by supporting codecheckers with a workflow, guidelines and tools to evaluate computer programs underlying scientific papers. The independent time-stamped runs conducted by codecheckers will award a “certificate of reproducible computation” and increase availability, discovery and reproducibility of crucial artefacts for computational sciences. See the project page for a full description of problems, solutions, and goals and take a lookg at the GitHub organisation for examples of CODECHECKs and tools….”

Open Science for the implementation of the UN 2030 Agenda

Posted on by

“The background: The first United Nations Open Science Conference was organized by the UN Dag Hammarskjöld Library in collaboration with the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) in November 19, 2019 in the UN Headquarters in New York. The theme of the conference, “Towards Global Open Science: Core Enabler of the UN 2030 Agenda”,  aimed into elevating the discussion about open science and open research to the global level and to examine the role of open science in advancing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. 

The conference brought together representatives of open science initiatives from around the world (OpenAIRE, Hindawi, LA Referencia, Scielo, AfricanLII and others), early career researchers, library directors and policymakers….”

Open Science for the implementation of the UN 2030 Agenda

Posted on by

“The background: The first United Nations Open Science Conference was organized by the UN Dag Hammarskjöld Library in collaboration with the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC) in November 19, 2019 in the UN Headquarters in New York. The theme of the conference, “Towards Global Open Science: Core Enabler of the UN 2030 Agenda”,  aimed into elevating the discussion about open science and open research to the global level and to examine the role of open science in advancing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. 

The conference brought together representatives of open science initiatives from around the world (OpenAIRE, Hindawi, LA Referencia, Scielo, AfricanLII and others), early career researchers, library directors and policymakers….”