Open Access: Blazing Trails through the Scholarly Communication Landscape


Published on

Slides from a presentation given before faculty at Furman University in Greenville, SC, as part of the Libraries' "Scholarly Conversations" series, and in celebration of Open Access Week 2012.

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Here’s a brief overview of what we’re going to cover today
  • Technology is keyMultiple models, and not completely moving away from traditional models…just shifting a bit
  • One model we’re trying to move away from is the “closed access” model
  • Stephen Joyce, a nephew of the author and representative of the estate, is notorious for pursuing lawsuits against scholars who so much as quote from Joyce’s works, even in situations that are clearly fair use. Some of James Joyce’s works came into the public domain in the US as of January 1, 2012, but not all.
  • Cory Doctorow releases all of his books under a Creative Commons license, allowing for adaptation and remixing. People release translations of his work, fan videos, and alternate covers. All without asking.
  • So when we talk about making research publications more open, what do we mean?
  • Open access, the focus of today, is just part of a broader open movement impacting many areas of higher education and scholarly research
  • This is the seminal definition of Open Access
  • Regardless of ‘road’ to OA, can be either gratis or libre…libre hard to do with archiving
  • OA publishing got its start with journals, and is still dominated by journals, but includes books tooOne key feature is that in the majority of cases, the author(s) retain copyright
  • PLoS Biology – earlyBMC Genetics – early & first profitable publisherEcosphere – society exampleSAGE Open – multidisciplinary social sciences & humanities; answer to PLoS ONE
  • Impact factors aren’t everything…Jason Priem will be with you all next month to talk about AltMetrics, which are different ways to measure and assess impact, which has largely grown from the shift to greater openness in researchNot all OA journals use the Article Processing Charge (APC) model, although that’s a strong misconception
  • arXivSSRNPMCInstitutionalInstitutional (IDEALS)Institutional (WakeSpace)
  • Growth with faculty collections is slow at best at many institutions, essentially stagnant at more than we likely care to admitFuture growth will likely come in “non-traditional” IR areasPre-print vs. post-print: explain the differences
  • Just a cross-section; most publishers now offer
  • Discuss COPE funds, difference in Wake’s OA fundDiscuss memberships in BMC, PLoS, etc.
  • NIH Mandate – All research funded by National Institutes for Health must be made freely available in PubMedCentral 12 months after publication; Legislative efforts to restrict NIH mandate (HR 801: Fair Copyright in Research Works Act) – 2009/2010Legislative efforts to expand it (Federal Research Public Access Act S.1373 and Federal Research Public Access Act HR5037) 2009/2010White House Office of Science and Technology Policy: act
  • Update, talk about the process, lessons learned; also note use of word policy and not mandate.Slow going, both in working toward adoption and in implementingCOAPI (Coalition of Open Access Policy Institutions) for support
  • As of February 2012, there were 21 North American institutions with fundsFunding models vary widelyWhy WFU isn’t COPE (Compact for Open-access Publishing Equity)
  • University of Tennessee’s Newfound Press: free online, print option; associated with library – also mention UMich’sMpublishing & digitalculturebooksOpen Humanities Press: books and journals; free online, print option for booksAnvil Academic Press: publisher for non-traditional scholarship; keep an eye on this one!Flat World Knowledge: OA textbooks; electronic free, print option
  • Open Access: Blazing Trails through the Scholarly Communication Landscape

    1. 1. Open Access Blazing Trails through the Scholarly Communication LandscapeMolly KeenerScholarly Communication LibrarianWake Forest UniversityFurman UniversityOctober 23, 2012
    2. 2. Why Open Access?What is it?ExplorationsTensionsWhat you can do
    3. 3. Why do faculty and researchers publish? impact grant funding expectations money engagement reputation advancement others…
    4. 4. Why develop new models?• A reaction to the restricted flow of information• A reaction to traditional models of control• Technology enables us to do things we couldn’t before• Research doesn’t fit into traditional models
    5. 5. Commonalities• Generally enabled by technology• Works both inside and outside of traditional models• Supported by a variety of business models
    6. 6. Moving from this…
    7. 7. Open & free to access
    8. 8. Movingfromthis…
    10. 10. What do we mean by open? Open to contribution & participation Open & free to accessOpen to use & reuse with few or no restrictions Open to indexing & machine readable
    11. 11. Open movements• Open access –Public access• Open data• Open science• Open/digital humanities• Open education• Open books• Open peer review…
    12. 12. Open access literature is digital, online, free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions. - Peter Suber
    13. 13. Two (and a half) Roads to Open Access 1) Open Access Publishing 2) Author archiving 2.5) Hybrid
    14. 14. Gratis vs. Libre• Gratis: You can read it for free. Anything else, you better ask permission.• Libre: With credit given, OK to text-mine, re- catalog, mirror for preservation, quote, remix, whatever.• Most OA is gratis. You get to “libre” via Creative Commons licensing, usually.(text from Dorothea Salo)
    15. 15. Open Access Publishing• Publication that is free & open for anyone to access on internet• Journals or books!– 8299 OA journals according to Directory of Open Access Journals (as of Oct. 22, 2012) • Journals across all disciplines • Share common features with toll access journals• Supported by variety of models • Institution / funder supported OR author-supported• Generally allow authors to retain copyright and/or license under Creative Commons
    16. 16. Issues & Questions• Has taken time for impact factors & reputation to build• Business models still emerging• Author pays model has better traction in the STM community
    17. 17. Open Archiving/Repositories• Literature published through traditional channels that is made openly available through deposit in a repository or placing on web site• Institutional, departmental, or discipline based repository• Supported by a range of business models• Range of publisher policies on deposit
    18. 18. Issues & Questions• Sustainability sometimes an issue• Participation of faculty (particularly for institutional) – Discipline based repositories often rooted in cultures used to sharing• Often include a range of material including student work, grey literature, theses and dissertations, etc.• For published literature, what can be deposited confusing (post print, pre print, published version?)• Copyright issues murky and (often) frustrating
    19. 19. Hybrid modelsPublisher Price NotesElsevier Sponsored Article $3,000 Some journalsOxford Open $3,000 Some journals; lower price if author from a developing countrySpringer Open Choice $3,000 All journalsWiley OnlineOpen $3,000 Some journals; fees varyAmerican Chemical $1,000 – 3,000 Lowest price if institution subscribesSociety AuthorChoice & have personal membershipPlant Physiology $1,500 / $500 / OA free for members of ASPB; Free Discount if non-member but institution subscribes
    20. 20. Issues & Questions• Mixed business model – subscriptions and author pays on an article by article basis – uncomfortable for many• Relatively low adoption (generally around 1-2%)• What impact on subscription prices?• Many libraries with funds for faculty to publish in OA journals will not fund these articles
    21. 21. Public Access Mandates Public should have ready and easy access to taxpayer funded researchMany legislative efforts in US to halt and expand this.
    22. 22. Institutional Open Access Policies Harvard (Faculty of Arts and Sciences, College of Law) MIT Kansas Trinity Oberlin Duke And others!
    23. 23. Institutional Open Access Funds
    24. 24. Tensions• Modern Language Association• The Cost of Knowledge• Harvard faculty statement on journal sustainability• UK’s Finch Report• American Historical Association• Licensing debate• Ongoing FUD
    25. 25. But we aren’t a research university…• Access for students…some of whom are our future faculty• Publish OA when possible• Retain rights to share your work• Use Creative Commons licenses• Talk to society members and leaders• Talk to editors and editorial boards
    26. 26. Resources• Open Access Directory• DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals• OASPA: Open Access Scholarly Publisher Association• OANow• Sherpa/RoMEO
    27. 27. AttributionSlide 3: “BookCase” 11: “Hope” 13: “Two roads were there – 2” 14: Text used from Dorothea Salo’s “Open Sesame” Presentation at 23: Public 24: “Harvard Widener Library” 31: “Curiosity” This work is partially based on works created by Sarah L. Shreeves and Molly Kleinman for the ACRL Scholarly Communication 101 Road Show, and was last updated on October 23, 2012 by Molly Keener. It is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. To view a copy of this license, visit nc-sa/3.0/us/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.
    28. 28. Be curious!Molly