Small and Medium Publishers Consultation on Barriers to Open Access

“The Plan S guidelines require all scholarly publications or the results of research funded by public or private grants from national, regional and international research councils and funding bodies to be open access immediately on publication. This can be by openly publishing the work in compliant journals or on Open Access (OA) Platforms, or by making the author accepted manuscript (AAM) or version of record (VoR)immediately available in a repositories without embargo.

We are now asking you, as a Small or Medium Publisher (SMP), for feedback about the impact that these principles will have on you. We are interested to hear about:

How your scholarly publishing models will be affected.
The challenges you anticipate encountering as you work to become compliant with the principles.
The work you have done so far to support the scholarly community move towards open access….”

Eurodoc Survey on Publishing in Open Science for Early Career Researchers

“Later this year, the European Commission will launch ‘Open Research Europe’ (ORE), an open access Publishing Platform for Horizon 2020 beneficiaries. ORE will offer rapid publication of a wide range of article types without editorial bias. All articles will benefit from transparent peer review and will be published under an open license. ORE is a significant step towards Open Science in Europe. Eurodoc, as an expert partner in the project, will ensure that the voice of early-career researchers is heard.

This survey aims to provide the ORE project team with insights related to awareness, perception and experience with open practices and tools, from the perspective of doctoral candidates and junior researchers. Let’s make an impact together!”

View of Editing for equity: Understanding instructor motivations for integrating cross-disciplinary Wikipedia assignments | First Monday

Abstract:  Advances in both research and advocacy have demonstrated how Wikipedia-based education, as a movement, has grown exponentially in the last 10 years. As a result, academics know a lot more about specific learning outcomes that Wikipedia assignments might enable and are more familiar with issues of social equity (e.g., systemic biases related to gender) in the encyclopedia. Despite these advances, little scholarship has focused on instructor motivations for utilizing Wikipedia assignments. This paper reports on a survey of over 100 instructors engaged in Wikipedia-based education practices in order to contribute a cross-disciplinary picture of instructor motivations. Our findings suggest that instructors take up Wikipedia-based assignments for a number of reasons beyond learning objectives: including social influence (being inspired by others), providing students an opportunity to contribute to public knowledge, and motivations related to addressing social equity, among others. Participants who are directly motivated to address issues of social equity rationalize their pedagogy as opportunities for activism or advocacy, professional identity, and critical pedagogy. Finally, this paper provides recommendations to Wikipedia Education stakeholders in regards to the finding that instructors’ professional identities play a significant role in their motivation to address issues of social equity.

 

View of Editing for equity: Understanding instructor motivations for integrating cross-disciplinary Wikipedia assignments | First Monday

Abstract:  Advances in both research and advocacy have demonstrated how Wikipedia-based education, as a movement, has grown exponentially in the last 10 years. As a result, academics know a lot more about specific learning outcomes that Wikipedia assignments might enable and are more familiar with issues of social equity (e.g., systemic biases related to gender) in the encyclopedia. Despite these advances, little scholarship has focused on instructor motivations for utilizing Wikipedia assignments. This paper reports on a survey of over 100 instructors engaged in Wikipedia-based education practices in order to contribute a cross-disciplinary picture of instructor motivations. Our findings suggest that instructors take up Wikipedia-based assignments for a number of reasons beyond learning objectives: including social influence (being inspired by others), providing students an opportunity to contribute to public knowledge, and motivations related to addressing social equity, among others. Participants who are directly motivated to address issues of social equity rationalize their pedagogy as opportunities for activism or advocacy, professional identity, and critical pedagogy. Finally, this paper provides recommendations to Wikipedia Education stakeholders in regards to the finding that instructors’ professional identities play a significant role in their motivation to address issues of social equity.

 

Survey Extended: The State of Journal Production and Access

“f you haven’t had a chance to take “The State of Journal Production and Access” survey, there’s still time — we’ve extended the deadline to the 5th of June 2020. You can take the survey here. Read on for the full details.

Since the 12th of March 2020, Scholastica has been running a survey on “The State of Journal Production and Access” among scholarly societies, university presses, and university libraries that publish one or more journals independently (i.e., not outsourced to a separate publisher). The survey spans core aspects of journal production, including article formatting, layout, and metadata tagging processes and priorities, as well as different open access publishing and funding models. Scholastica is running this survey to develop an openly available report for the independent society and university journal publishing community on current production and access practices and future priorities.

If you work with a scholarly society or university publishing program, we invite you to take the survey, open now through the 5th of June, to help develop collective insights. The survey takes only around 5-10 minutes to complete. The information you submit for this survey will be published in an aggregated and anonymized form, and no personally identifying fields are required….”

Survey Extended: The State of Journal Production and Access

“f you haven’t had a chance to take “The State of Journal Production and Access” survey, there’s still time — we’ve extended the deadline to the 5th of June 2020. You can take the survey here. Read on for the full details.

Since the 12th of March 2020, Scholastica has been running a survey on “The State of Journal Production and Access” among scholarly societies, university presses, and university libraries that publish one or more journals independently (i.e., not outsourced to a separate publisher). The survey spans core aspects of journal production, including article formatting, layout, and metadata tagging processes and priorities, as well as different open access publishing and funding models. Scholastica is running this survey to develop an openly available report for the independent society and university journal publishing community on current production and access practices and future priorities.

If you work with a scholarly society or university publishing program, we invite you to take the survey, open now through the 5th of June, to help develop collective insights. The survey takes only around 5-10 minutes to complete. The information you submit for this survey will be published in an aggregated and anonymized form, and no personally identifying fields are required….”

Brits demand openness from government in tackling coronavirus – Open Knowledge Foundation blog

“A new opinion poll has revealed that people across the UK want openness from the government as it tackles the coronavirus pandemic.

The Survation poll for the Open Knowledge Foundation found that in response to COVID-19, people want data to be openly available for checking, they are more likely to listen to expert advice from scientists and researchers, and they oppose restricting the public’s right to information.

The poll found:

97% believe it is important that COVID-19 data is openly available for people to check
67% believe all COVID-19 related research and data should be made open for anyone to use freely
64% are now more likely to listen expert advice from qualified scientists and researchers
Only 29% believe restricting the public’s right to information is a necessary emergency measure
63% believe a government data strategy would have helped in the fight against COVID-19….”

What are your priorities for data sharing? – The Official PLOS Blog

“We’ve been working to identify important problems faced by researchers in the practice of open research. And, to deepen understanding of researchers’ priorities with regards to sharing research data, we’ve launched a new study. If you are a researcher residing in the US or Europe who has shared or reused research data please take a few minutes to take part in the survey.

The results of the survey will also help determine if and how well researchers’ needs are met by existing tools and services for sharing research data, and inform future PLOS initiatives and partnerships – beyond the publication of open access journals….”