The Scholarly Publishing
Roundtable:
Recommendations for Access to
Federally Funded Research
T. Scott Plutchak
University ...
Scholarly Publishing Roundtable
Convened by the Committee on Science and
Technology of the United States House of
Represen...
Charge
“to explore and develop an appropriate
consensus regarding access to and preservation
of federally funded research ...
Participants
Academia Libraries Publishers
John Vaughn (AAU, Chair) Ann Okerson (Yale) Y.S. Chi (Elsevier)
Richard McCarty...
The debate
Zaporozhian Cossacks of Ukraine Writing a Letter to the Turkish
Sultan. Oil painting by Elias Repin, 1878-91. 6...
Shared principles
 Peer review must continue its critical role in maintaining high
quality and editorial integrity.
 Ada...
Shared principles, cont’d
 Sustained archiving and preservation are essential
complements to reliable publishing methods....
Core recommendation
 Each federal research funding agency should
expeditiously but carefully develop and
implement an exp...
• Agencies should work in full and open consultation
with all stakeholders, as well as with OSTP, to
develop their public ...
• Policies should foster innovation in the research
and educational use of scholarly publications.
• Government public acc...
• 12 of 14 members fully endorsed report’s
recommendations
• YS Chi (Elsevier) – recommendations call
for too much governm...
• COMPETES Act -- Interagency Public Access
Committee
– The America COMPETES Act (H.R. 5116): The
America Creating Opportu...
• Provisions:
– coordinate the development of standards for research data and
reports to achieve interoperability across F...
Federal Research Public Access
Act (FRPAA)
• Consistent with recommendations…
• But…
– Rigid
– Less emphasis on interopera...
Thanks to:
• Fred Dylla & John Vaughn, from whom I
borrowed many of these slides
• All the roundtable members, from whom I...
The Scholarly Publishing Roundtable: Recommendations for access to federally funded research
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

The Scholarly Publishing Roundtable: Recommendations for access to federally funded research

615
-1

Published on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
615
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Concentrated on pubs; not data or grantee reports
  • What do scholars want? Access; Now; Unihibited; Search
    Gov has responsibility to devlop and implement a public access policies ($45b)
    Gov should exercise this responsibility in full collaboration with stakeholders
  • The Scholarly Publishing Roundtable: Recommendations for access to federally funded research

    1. 1. The Scholarly Publishing Roundtable: Recommendations for Access to Federally Funded Research T. Scott Plutchak University of Alabama at Birmingham James J. O’Donnell Georgetown University November 6, 2010 The Charleston Conference [No competing interests]
    2. 2. Scholarly Publishing Roundtable Convened by the Committee on Science and Technology of the United States House of Representatives, in coordination with the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) Issued report on January 12, 2010 http://science.house.gov/press/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=2710
    3. 3. Charge “to explore and develop an appropriate consensus regarding access to and preservation of federally funded research information that addresses the needs of all interested parties.”
    4. 4. Participants Academia Libraries Publishers John Vaughn (AAU, Chair) Ann Okerson (Yale) Y.S. Chi (Elsevier) Richard McCarty (Vanderbilt) T. Scott Plutchak (UAB) Mark Patterson (PLoS) David Campbell (Boston ) Paul Courant (Michigan) Fred Dylla (AIP) Jim O’Donnell (Georgetown) Crispin Taylor (ASPB) Researchers: Phil Davis (Cornell), Carol Tenopir (Tennessee) and Don King (UNC)
    5. 5. The debate Zaporozhian Cossacks of Ukraine Writing a Letter to the Turkish Sultan. Oil painting by Elias Repin, 1878-91. 6'8" x 11'9". Copyright © 1999 Andrew Gregorovich, Reprinted from FORUM Ukrainian Review No. 100, Summer 1999, Published by the Ukrainian Fraternal Association
    6. 6. Shared principles  Peer review must continue its critical role in maintaining high quality and editorial integrity.  Adaptable business models will be necessary to sustain the enterprise in an evolving landscape.  Scholarly and scientific publications can and should be more broadly accessible with improved functionality to a wider public and the research community.
    7. 7. Shared principles, cont’d  Sustained archiving and preservation are essential complements to reliable publishing methods.  The results of research need to be published and maintained in ways that maximize the possibilities for creative reuse and interoperation among sites that host them.
    8. 8. Core recommendation  Each federal research funding agency should expeditiously but carefully develop and implement an explicit public access policy that brings about free public access to the results of the research that it funds as soon as possible after those results have been published in a peer-reviewed journal.
    9. 9. • Agencies should work in full and open consultation with all stakeholders, as well as with OSTP, to develop their public access policies. • Agencies should establish specific embargo periods between publication and public access. • Policies should be guided by the need to foster interoperability. • Every effort should be made to have the version of record as the version to which free access is provided. Additional Recommendations of Report
    10. 10. • Policies should foster innovation in the research and educational use of scholarly publications. • Government public access policies should address the need to resolve the challenges of long-term digital preservation. • OSTP should establish a public access advisory committee.
    11. 11. • 12 of 14 members fully endorsed report’s recommendations • YS Chi (Elsevier) – recommendations call for too much government intervention • Mark Patterson (PLoS) – recommendatioins don’t call for enough government intervention
    12. 12. • COMPETES Act -- Interagency Public Access Committee – The America COMPETES Act (H.R. 5116): The America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science Act! – principal provisions authorize increased funding for the NSF, DOE Office of Science, and NIST – National Institute of Standards and Technology – HSTC added a section of the bill directing OSTP to establish a Public Access working group under the National Science and Technology Council
    13. 13. • Provisions: – coordinate the development of standards for research data and reports to achieve interoperability across Federal science agencies and science and engineering disciplines – coordinate Federal agency programs that support research and education to ensure preservation and stewardship of all forms of digital research data, including scholarly publications – work with international counterparts to maximize interoperability between US and international research databases and repositories – solicit input from, and collaborate with, non-Federal stakeholders • Similar Interagency Committee provision in the Senate bill, reasonable chance of bill passing with this public access provision this year
    14. 14. Federal Research Public Access Act (FRPAA) • Consistent with recommendations… • But… – Rigid – Less emphasis on interoperability – Less emphasis on VoR – Lacks interagency oversight and committee of stakeholders
    15. 15. Thanks to: • Fred Dylla & John Vaughn, from whom I borrowed many of these slides • All the roundtable members, from whom I learned so much!

    ×