Re-designing (hacking) scholarly communications

704 views

Published on

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

Re-designing (hacking) scholarly communications

  1. 1. RE-DESIGNING(HACKING?) SCHOLARLYCOMMUNICATION Openness and its Discontent KMD 1001F — KNOWLEDGE MEDIA DESIGN: FUNDEMENTAL CONCEPTS
  2. 2. Key Messages• Open Access as a philosophical principle and a set of practical tools• “Journal” no longer serves the needs of networked scholarship• From “Wealth of Nations” to “Wealth of Networks”• Need to rethink measurements of “impact” and values, especially for research for the public goods• Innovations are happening in the “peripheries” but there are gatekeepers and social barriers• Aligning funding and reward policies with new scholarly practices and inclusive metrics
  3. 3. BOAI
  4. 4. “Now as then, the hacker is characterised by an active approach to technology, undaunted by hierarchies and established knowledge, and finally a commitment to sharing information freely.”http://cspp.oekonux.org/special-issues/expanding-the-frontiers-of-
  5. 5. Cohen, Dan, and Tom Scheinfeldt, eds. Hacking the Academy: A BookCrowdsourced in One Week. Center for History and New Media,George Mason University. 21-28 May 2010. http://hackingtheacademy.org/
  6. 6. http://wiki.diffandrep.org/performing-scholarly-communication
  7. 7. Problems• Current Scholarly Communication system is broken• Emerging tools are not being used effectively to serve scholarship• Re-designing Scholarly Communications
  8. 8. The Dysfunctional Economy of ScholarlyCommunications • Commodification of public knowledge Bundling • Oligopoly • Artificial scarcity • Homogeneity of forms and functions • Reputation management
  9. 9. Hacking the bundle Explore ways by which new practices can becoded (codified) so that the key functions ofscholarly communication – authoring,certification, quality control, archiving, andrewarding - can be decoupled and better servedby emerging tools for collaborative authoring,sharing, and reputation management.
  10. 10. This is not just a technology issue, but asocio-political problem.
  11. 11. InstitutionalDesign Sustainability as a set of institutional structures and processes that build and protect the knowledge commons (after Sumner 2005, Mook and Sumner 2010)
  12. 12. Broadening the definition of “success”, “impact”,“value” and “capital”Business value monetary return, financial capital, efficiency, competivenessScholarly value Reputation and citation; trust; symbolic capitalInstitutional value Public mission, community outreach, intellectual capitalSocial value Equity, participation, diversity, social capitalPolitical value Evidence based policy, transparency, accountability, civic capital
  13. 13. http://ip-science.thomsonreuters.com/citation
  14. 14. http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.4328
  15. 15. The JIF is appallingly open to manipulation; mature alt-metrics systems could be more robust, leveraging thediversity of of alt-metrics and statistical power of big data toalgorithmically detect and correct for fraudulent activity.This approach already works for online advertisers, socialnews sites, Wikipedia, and search engines. http://altmetrics.org/manifesto/
  16. 16. http://impactstory.org/
  17. 17. Scholarly Primitives Discovering Annotating Comparing Referring Sampling Illustrating “…basic functions Representing common to scholarly activity across disciplines, over time,John Unsworth. "Scholarly Primitives: What Methods Do HumanitiesResearchers Have in Common and How Might Our Tools Reflect and independent ofThis?" "Humanities Computing, Formal Methods, ExperimentalPractice" Symposium, Kings College, London, May 13, 2000. theoretical orientation.”http://jefferson.village.virginia.edu/~jmu2m/Kings.5-00/primitives.html
  18. 18. Opportunities for Digital Scholarship Public outreach and engagement New forms of Service “impact”Student training Data sharing New scholarlyCuration practices Personalization Experimentations Interdisciplinary Professional and Collaborative development research
  19. 19. Scholarly Primitives and Reputation? Discovering Annotating Comparing Referring Sampling Illustrating RepresentingJohn Unsworth. "Scholarly Primitives: What Methods Do HumanitiesResearchers Have in Common and How Might Our Tools ReflectThis?" "Humanities Computing, Formal Methods, ExperimentalPractice" Symposium, Kings College, London, May 13, 2000.http://jefferson.village.virginia.edu/~jmu2m/Kings.5-00/primitives.html
  20. 20. http://mediacommons.futureofthebook.org/mcpress/plannedobsolescence/
  21. 21. http://commons.gc.cuny.edu/
  22. 22. Conclusions• Open Access is just the substrate, but an essential one• Metrics drive behaviour, but we have been using the wrong metrics• Need to rethink what we value as a public institution• Reward open scholarship
  23. 23. http://www.openoasis.org http://www.bioline.org.br http://www.openaccessmap.or gThank You!chan@utsc.utoronto.ca

×