Thursday, December 20, 2012
Definitely worth a read.
Source: Science; 11/23/2012, Vol. 338 Issue 6110, p1018-1018, 1p
If you are at the University of Guelph full text is available via the ejournals list link on the Library home page.
Monday, December 10, 2012
The policy states that :
As of January 1, 2013, researchers awarded funding from CIHR are required to adhere with the following responsibilities:
- ensure that all research papers generated from CIHR funded projects are freely accessible through the Publisher's website or an online repository within 12 months of publication;
- deposit bioinformatics, atomic, and molecular coordinate data into the appropriate public database (e.g. gene sequences deposited in GenBank) immediately upon publication of research results;
- retain original data sets for a minimum of five years (or longer if other policies apply);
- and acknowledge CIHR support by quoting the funding reference number in journal publications.
If you have recieved funding from CIHR and want to discuss what this policy means for you, please contact someone from the Research Enterprise and Scholarly Communication Team: firstname.lastname@example.org
Friday, December 7, 2012
Peter Suber and Darius Cuplinskas. Titled, "Why Open Access Saves Lives" the article tells the story of 15 year old Jack Andraka, a high-school student in Maryland who has invented a diagnostic test for pancreatic cancer.
"Without open access, Jack Andraka would not have been able to retrieve and read scientific publications on the Web, even if he had been able to locate them. "
His is a great example of why the traditional publishing model is broken and why academics need to take this issue on.
Read the article: http://chronicle.com/article/Open-Access-to-Research-Can/136065/
Thursday, November 22, 2012
Citation: Phys. Today 65(11), 22 (2012); doi: 10.1063/PT.3.1781
View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.1781
View Table of Contents: http://www.physicstoday.org/resource/1/PHTOAD/v65/i11
Published by the American Institute of Physics.
Additional resources for Physics Today:
Daily Edition: http://www.physicstoday.org/daily_edition
- If you would like to discuss the value of Open Access in your discipline please contact Jane Burpee, Research Enterprise and Scholarly Communication Team, Library (email@example.com).
Thursday, November 15, 2012
|Image from the Wikimedia Commons.|
One new model emerging that attempts to find new ways of showcasing impact is that of Alternative Metrics. Alternative Metrics take many forms but often focus on efforts to move beyond proprietary bibliometrics and traditional forms of peer referencing in assessing the quality and scholarly impact of published work.
A recent post in the Scholarly Kitchen blog is worth a read. Altmetrics — Replacing the Impact Factor Is Not the Only Point
Posted by Todd A Carpenter, Director at NISO on Nov 14, 2012 discusses the pros and cons of the word "alt" in the world of journal and article metrics.
“There are other important value metrics beyond the strength of a journal. This might come as a shock to some STEM publishers, who have flourished or floundered based on the performance of impact factor rankings published each June …” (Read on)
- If you would like to discuss the value of Altmetrics in your discipline please contact Jane Burpee, Research Enterprise and Scholarly Communication Team, Library (firstname.lastname@example.org).
Thursday, November 8, 2012
At the end of October 2012, Open Access Week finally came to the French capital, with two evenings of talks and discussions organized by MyScienceWork, in partnership with the University of Pierre and Marie Curie and UNESCO. Open access leaders like Bernard Rentier, Pierre Mounier and Curt Rice exchanged with professionals and students on the promise and pitfalls of OA.
In this video, get a taste for these events firsthand: the subjects tackled, questions raised and connections forged among a variety of players, all concerned about the future of scientific publishing.
Check out the video on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLb2GXb-bsE
Friday, October 26, 2012
Animation by Jorge Cham
Narration by Nick Shockey and Jonathan Eisen
Transcription by Noel Dilworth
Produced in partnership with the Right to Research Coalition, the Scholarly Publishing and Resources Coalition and the National Association of Graduate-Professional Students
>>> Duration = ~ 8:30 Minutes <<<
Friday, October 19, 2012
They have just published a new DOAJ tutorial video!
If you are interested please look at the video here: http://screencast.com/t/pfyZlOZdj
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
In anticipation of worldwide Open Access Week, the Harvard Open Access Project is pleased to release version 1.0 of a guide to good practices for university open-access policies.
Gathering together recommendations on drafting, adopting, and implementing OA policies, the guide is based on policies adopted at Harvard, Stanford, MIT, and a couple of dozen other institutions around the world. But it's not limited to policies of this type and includes recommendations that should be useful to institutions taking other approaches.
The guide is designed to evolve. As co-authors, we plan to revise and enlarge it over time, building on our own experience and the experience of colleagues elsewhere. We welcome suggestions.
The guide deliberately refers to "good practices" rather than "best practices". On many points, there are multiple, divergent good practices. Good practices are easier to identify than best practices. And there can be wider agreement on which practices are good than on which practices are best.
The current version of the guide has the benefit of the advice of expert colleagues, and the endorsement of projects and organizations devoted to the spread of effective university OA policies. It has been written in consultation with Ellen Finnie Duranceau, Ada Emmett, Heather Joseph, Iryna Kuchma, and Alma Swan, and has already been endorsed by the Coalition of Open Access Policy Institutions (COAPI), Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR), Electronic Information for Libraries (EIFL), Enabling Open Scholarship (EOS), Harvard Open Access Project (HOAP), Open Access Scholarly Information Sourcebook (OASIS), Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC), and SPARC Europe.
Over time we hope to name more consulting experts and endorsing organizations. Please contact us if you or your organization may be interested. We do not assume that consulting experts or endorsing organizations support every recommendation in the guide.
The guide should be useful to institutions considering an OA policy, and to faculty and librarians who would like their institution to start considering one. We hope that institutions with working policies will share their experience and recommendations, and that organizers of Open Access Week events will link to the guide and bring it to the attention of their participants.
Good practices for university open-access policies
Professor of Computer Science and Director of the Office for Scholarly Communication, Harvard University
Director of the Harvard Open Access Project, Special Advisor to the Harvard Office for Scholarly Communication, and Fellow at the Berkman
Center for Internet & Society
Harvard Open Access Project
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
delighted to announce the release of 2 new open access books,
published in partnership with MPublishing, at the University of
New Materialism: Interviews & Cartographies by Rick Dolphijn and Iris
van der Tuin, includes interviews with Rosi Braidotti, Manuel DeLanda,
Karen Barad, and Quentin Meillassoux
Terror, Theory and the Humanities, ed. Jeffrey De Lio and Uppinder
Mehan, contains essays by Christian Moraru, Terry Caesar, David B.
Downing, Horace L. Fairlamb, Emory Elliott, Elaine Martin, Robin Truth
Goodman, Sophia A. McClennen, William V. Spanos, Zahi Zalloua.
Like all the OHP books, these are freely available for reading online
and downloading as PDF (as well as for purchase through Amazon).
Happy OA Week!
Monday, October 15, 2012
"While the Australian Research Council considers its policy on open-access publication and others within the scientific community call for the increased sharing of scientific data, the British are already … "
eLife, the new open-access journal for outstanding scientific advancements, has published its first four research articles.
First announced in summer 2011, eLife is a researcher-led initiative for the best in science and science communication. Backed by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, the Max Planck Society, and the Wellcome Trust, the initiative’s first aim is to launch an open-access journal for outstanding advances in life science and biomedicine, which is also a platform for experimentation and showcasing innovation in research communication.
The eLife journal Web site is set for launch by the end of 2012, but the first collection of articles was released today – listed at the eLife Web site with the full content available at the online archive of the U.S. National Library of Medicine, PubMed Central (PMC), and its mirror sites including UKPMC.
According to Randy Schekman, the journal’s Editor-in-chief, “We see no reason to delay the availability of these discoveries. Our editors have identified them as important, inspiring contributions of the high caliber expected for eLife. So, while the launch of our own journal Web site isn’t expected until December, we will best serve our authors, and science, by just getting them out there.”
To read the full announcement, visit http://www.elifesciences.org/12-1015/
Thursday, October 4, 2012
PeerJ is an Open Access publisher of scholarly articles. The folks at PeerJ have two publications serving the Biological and Medical sciences: "PeerJ" (a peer-reviewed academic journal) and "PeerJ PrePrints" (an innovative ‘preprint server’). Authors pay for a lifetime membership, which gives them the ability to publish their articles with us for free. Lifetime plans start at just $99.
Go check out this new experiment. PeerJ.com
Thursday, September 13, 2012
Worth a read at: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/342585/
posted by Jane
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
In its meeting of 2 July the Academic Council of UCK adopted a policy of mandatory deposit in its DIAL repository of all bibliographic metadata as well as full-texts as of 1 January 2013. As of that date, the Academic Council will only consider duly deposited publications in its internal research performance evaluations and that deposit will also be one of the criteria in the allocation of institutional research funds.
See DIAL: http://dial.academielouvain.be/vital/access/manager/Index?site_name=BOREAL
Would this ever work at the University of Guelph?
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
For Immediate Release
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., today announced revised licensing arrangements for proprietary journals published under the Wiley Open Access program. The journals will adopt the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) licence which allows commercial use of published articles.
The Wiley Open Access portfolio also includes journals published with society partners, many of which will similarly transfer to the Creative Commons Attribution licence.
Wiley is responding to recent developments in funder and government policies and supports the sustainable evolution of scientific publishing. The change will be implemented immediately.
Rachel Burley, Vice President and Director, Open Access, commented, “Wiley is committed to meeting the evolving needs of the authors who wish to provide open access to the published articles that convey the results of their research.”
Burley continued, “Our announcement today concerns Wiley’s fully open access journals. We are also reviewing the licensing arrangements for our hybrid program OnlineOpen, our open access option for individual articles published in subscription journals. In consultation with our publishing partners, we aim to continue to develop and deliver sustainable open access products providing author choice and high levels of service.”
In the first instance, the journals moving to the CC-BY licence are Brain and Behavior, Ecology and Evolution, MicrobiologyOpen, Cancer Medicine, Food Science & Nutrition, Evolutionary Applications, Geoscience Data Journal and EMBO Molecular Medicine. The CC-BY licence allows (with the correct attribution of the original creator) for the copying, distribution and transmission of the work. Adaption and commercial use is also permitted.
More information about Wiley’s open access initiatives is available online.
Sounds good right? The reponse that came from Peter Suber over the sparc-oaforum is worth a critical read:
Wiley publishes nearly 1500 journals: http://olabout.wiley.com/WileyCDA/
1064 of them are Wiley-Blackwell journals according to SHERPA-Romeo: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/pub/580/
And 246 of the John Wiley and Sons journals according to SHERPA-Romeo: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/pub/45/
Wiley Open Access publishes 12 pure-Gold OA journals (cost c. $2000 - $3000): ttp://www.wileyopenaccess.com/details/content/12f25d2979e/Authors.html
In addition the Wiley OnlineOpen Hybrid Gold OA option (cost c. $3000) is available for some 1240 Wiley journals (80%), eight of them now offering CC-BY. http://olabout.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-40
The SHERPA-Romeo information (as well as the Wiley information) on Wiley's policy on un-embargoed Gratis Green OA self-archiving is now quite complicated and difficult to understand, so let me put a very simple, straight-forward question to John Wiley & Sons (Wiley-1) and to Wiley-Blackwell (Wiley-2) publishers:
Does Wiley-1/Wiley-2, like Springer, formally recognize its authors' right to make their final, refereed drafts OA immediately upon publication (no embargo) by self-archiving them in their institutional OA repository (Green OA)?
If the answer is yes, then the 1240 Wiley paid Gold OA options and the eight of them with CC-BY are a very welcome and positive step.
If, unlike Springer (which also offers paid Gold, both full and hybrid), Wiley-1/Wiley-2 embargoes Green OA, then Wiley's Gold OA options (including CC-BY) are a Trojan Horse, and a highly expensive one, blocking Green OA in order to force authors who want to provide immediate OA to pay for it, even though institutional subscriptions are paying publication costs in full.
In the latter case, CC-BY is an (easy) sop, providing something that only a few sub-fields need (CC-BY) at the cost of denying all fields what they urgently need (OA) unless they are able and willing to pay Wiley even more money for it.
A clear, unequivocal answer from Wiley-1/Wiley-2 could settle this at once.
And then we'll know whether Wiley's recent PR is indeed progress for OA, or another attempt to block it (until it comes on the publisher's financial terms).
- Stevan Harnad
Monday, August 13, 2012
If an academic author wants to put their research articles in an institutional repository (IR) such as the UG Atrium, they are faced with a time consuming and sometimes complex task of publisher policy verification. Some publishers prohibit authors from using their own articles in an insitutional repository. Others allow it, but only under certain conditions, while others are quite happy for authors to show their work in this way.
A significant development for authors and for repositories was the development of the SHERPA-RoMEO database . This database saves a lot of time and headache by providing the details of publisher copyright policies and policies on self archiving. Prior to the existence of the database, authors had to spend time searching publisher web sites looking for information and copyright transfer agreements. Often, there was no information to be found on the web site and publishers had to be individually contacted. The time and effort required was off putting and discouraging.
The development of the Romeo database as a searchable database of publisher's policies regarding the self- archiving of journal articles on the web and in Open Access repositories was therefore a huge step forward.
According to Steven Harnad "the purpose of OA self-archiving is enhanced access, usage and impact, *not* the digital preservation of the publisher’s PDF". He suggests that the author’s postprint is the draft with the fewest publisher constraints and that the default option should be the author’s final, peer-reviewed, revised, accepted draft (the postprint), not necessarily or even preferentially the publisher’s PDF. But, in terms of retrospective archiving, the PDF is often the simplest quickest option for faculty who are just getting started archiving their work in an IR. and it is still great to know that Romeo generates a separate list of Publishers allowing the deposition of their published version/PDF in Institutional Repositories.
Check out everything Romeo can do...http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo
K. Jane Burpee, Associate Librarian,
Research Enterprise & Scholarly Communication
Coordinator of ETDs, Campus Author Recognition & Open Access Advocacy
Research Enterprise Services for FRAN, CBS, CPES, & OVC
Monday, July 30, 2012
The study was published in BMC Medicine on July 17, 2012 by authors Bo-Christer Björk from the Hanken School of Economics in Helsinki, Finland, and David Solomon from the College of Human Medicine at Michigan State University. A total of 610 OA journals were compared with 7,609 subscription journals using Web of Science citation data and an overlapping set of 1,327 OA journals were compared with 11,124 subscription journals using Scopus data.
If you've ever questioned whether or not open access (OA) publishing would damage the peer review system and put the quality of scientific journal publishing at risk, this article will be worth a read.
The electronic version of the complete article and can be found online at: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/10/73
Monday, July 23, 2012
On July 18, Engineering Village released a new user interface and features. The product has been updated and refreshed to improve usability and save users time. All core functionality remains along with other functionality enhancements that include:
- Search results page is easier to scan, making it faster to find an article
- “Add search field” feature has been added to Quick Search
- More facets are visible on search results page without having to scroll down a page
- Access to Search History is quicker
- Results display options include 25, 50 and 100
- Search terms in an article are highlighted for easier viewing
Access EV by going to the Library home page: lib.uoguelph.ca > Journal Articles
Feel free to contact me for a research consultation.
Jane Burpee, Offering Research Enterprise Support to FRAN, CBS, CPES, & OVC email@example.com
Monday, July 9, 2012
Opting out of Access Copyright in no way diminishes the Library’s obligation to obtain copyright clearance for a work when it is required by law. The Library has always respected copyright legislation and will continue to do so. This often involves paying the copyright holder for the use of her work.
It is important to remember, however, that academic work makes up the bulk of material purchased by university libraries. Most researchers are employed by universities and other institutions and publish as part of their job. Furthermore, much of this research was funded, at least in part, by public sources. In any case, many academic authors (unless they are publishing in Open Access journals) are still asked to sign over their copyright to the journal publisher. Most continue to do so, particularly junior faculty who need to be published. This is changing due to the emergence of alternative options such as Open Access, but this is a recent development and publishers still hold the copyright to much of the academic literature (and therefore receive whatever compensation there may be).
With respect to academic publishing, then, Access Copyright's University Model License benefits the publishers more than the authors. It is a (poorly) disguised attempt to privatize and commodify information, including information that has been produced using public funds. More and more academic authors and universities are themselves ensuring that the research they produce is widely and freely disseminated, hence the spectacular growth of Open Access. Access Copyright is (unsuccessfully) trying to counter this positive trend.
Pascal Lupien, Research Enterprise and Scholarly Communications Team (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Friday, July 6, 2012
According to their Policy on Access to Research Outputs, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR): States that all grants awarded January 1, 2008 and onward require grant recipients to make every effort to ensure that their peer-reviewed publications are freely accessible through the Publisher's website (Option 1) or an online repository as soon as possible and in any event within six months of publication (Option 2).
On their website, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) indicate that they support open access in principle. Additionally, under the Connection program, particular importance will be given to proposals that include plans for open access and open source approaches to knowledge mobilization. Costs associated with open access publishing are considered by SSHRC to be eligible grant expenses.
It is taking some time to take shape but in 2008, the National Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) announced in that an Open Access policy is in development.
- Canadian Institute of Health Research (CIHR) Policy on Access to Research Outputs: http://www.cihr.ca/e/32005.html
- Canadian Tri Council Comprehensive Brief on Open Access to Publications and Research Data: http://www.science.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=en&n=2360F10C-1
- SSHRC’s approach to open access: http://www.sshrc-crsh.gc.ca/about-au_sujet/policies-politiques/open_access-libre_acces/index-eng.aspx
Thursday, July 5, 2012
The UK Joint Information Systems Committee and the British Library have just released a major (17,00 student) study of the behaviors and beliefs of “Generation Y” (eg born 1983-1992) doctoral students involving social media, information access, and related matters.
This is a fascinating report analyzes the research habits of GenY students.
Those interested in the future habits of academics might find both the inclusion of a comprehensive literature review and a longitudinal student tracking study that engages with a cohort of approximately 50 doctoral candidates and Chapter 5:Collaborating, sharing and disseminating research to be worht a close read.
The full report can be downloaded at http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/reports/2012/researchers-of-tomorrow
Wednesday, July 4, 2012
- Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569-16572.
- Howard, J. (January 29, 2012). Scholars seek better ways to track impact online. The Chronicle of Higher Education http://tinyurl.com/7ds7ghk
- Wouters, Paul and Costas, Rodrigo. Users, narcissism and control – tracking the impact of scholarly publications in the 21st century. SURF foundation, 2012. http://www.surf.nl/en/publicaties
- John Hopkins University Library Scholarly Metrics Guide : http://tinyurl.com/7tqrywk
- Altmetrics: http://altmetrics.org
- Article Level metrics at PLoS: http://tinyurl.com/plosALM
- SCOPUS SJR, SNIP : http://www.journalmetrics.com
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
We will soon have the capacity to expand our services into the area of monograph publishing. The Public Knowledge Project is finishing its last round of external testing of this open source platform and is poised to release the software to early adopters. While many academic institutions have established scholarly presses for print publication OMP would enable UG to undertake a very professional approach to e-book publishing with virtually no cost.
To read more about OMP visit this URL: http://pkp.sfu.ca/omp
If you think you might be interested in publishing open access monographs please contact the Wayne Johnston of the Research Enterprise & Scholarly Communication team at email@example.com.