“One of the highlights of the day was the presentation of the first SHARE Open Science Award. With this initiative, SHARE wants to stimulate the shift to more openness and transparency in science. Its first two winners were PhD students Stefania Barzeva and Yoram Kunkels, from the Interdisciplinary Center Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation (ICPE). They received the award for integrating Open Science principles in their work, such as pre-registration, sharing of data sets and publishing in Open Access journals. Both early career researchers are also advocates of Open Science in their networks and active members of the recently founded Open Science Community Groningen (OSCG)….”
“With the approaching deadline of 1 January 2020 in sight, the VSNU, NFU, NWO and data company Elsevier have today come to a joint statement. The parties agree to continue to negotiate full open access, in combination with extensive cooperation in the field of open science….
In the past two years , extensive negotiations have taken place between the VSNU, NFU and NWO with the publishing company and data giant Elsevier about a follow-up to the first transformative deal from 2015. Where it was initially possible to work with an extension of the previous contract, the parties negotiated it last year with the prospect that on 1 January 2020 Elsevier would go black for Dutch knowledge institutions.
At the end of 2019, the parties have now signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that guarantees access to the more than 2500 scientific journals of Elsevier at least until the beginning of May 2020. In addition, Dutch researchers who submit (submit) an article during this period do not have to pay an open access fee. “This remains unchanged from the current OA deal with Elsevier,” says a spokesperson. “The number of titles in which this is possible has increased considerably.” In the meantime, the parties agree to work together on a wide range of pilots that should make open science and research information possible….”
Abstract: Scientific journal publishers have over the past twenty-five years rapidly converted to predominantly electronic dissemination, but the reader-pays business model continues to dominate the market. Open Access (OA) publishing, where the articles are freely readable on the net, has slowly increased its market share to near 20%, but has failed to fulfill the visions of rapid proliferation predicted by many early proponents. The growth of OA has also been very uneven across fields of science. We report market shares of open access in eighteen Scopus-indexed disciplines ranging from 27% (agriculture) to 7% (business). The differences become far more pronounced for journals published in the four countries, which dominate commercial scholarly publishing (US, UK, Germany and the Netherlands). We present contrasting developments within six academic disciplines. Availability of funding to pay publication charges, pressure from research funding agencies, and the diversity of discipline-specific research communication cultures arise as potential explanations for the observed differences.
“In recent weeks it has emerged that Elsevier is negotiating a new deal with VSNU, a consortia of Dutch Universities. According to press reports on leaked details of the deal, Elsevier is discussing a contract to provide Dutch universities with access to its journals at no extra cost (a major concession after decades of significant annual increases for most of their customers). However, the deal comes with significant new strings: Elsevier will essentially accept a “zero revenue growth” position for its journal in exchange for the universities purchasing a large set of their data analytics products. While the exact details of the deal are unconfirmed (and Elsevier has indicated that there are several inaccuracies in the leak), we have no reason to believe that the main storyline is incorrect.
There are many reasons why signing a deal like this would represent a very insidious precedent for the academic community. …”
“Academics can excel in many areas, but thus far they have primarily been assessed based on research achievements. From now on, the public knowledge institutions and research funders want to consider academics’ knowledge and expertise more broadly in determining career policy and grant requirements. In doing so, our aim is to ensure that the recognition and rewards system is better suited to the core tasks of the knowledge institutions in the areas of education, research, impact and patient care, and that the appreciation academics receive is better aligned with society’s needs.
A change is urgently needed in the way universities recognise and reward their academic staff. Research achievements have long determined academics’ career paths, and this dominance is becoming increasingly at odds with reality. Education and impact are also crucial to the success of a modern knowledge institution, as is patient care for our university medical centres. New developments relating to Open Access and Open Science are placing different demands on modern-day academics as well. Tackling complex scientific and social issues requires greater collaboration. At the moment, there are still insufficient career prospects for staff who (in addition to doing good research) mainly excel in education….”
Abstract: Open Science is creating new forms of scientific interaction that were impossible or undreamed of in an earlier age. This has a strong impact on core academic processes like research, education and innovation. It is, for instance, easier to replicate an experiment if the relevant data sets are digitally available to any scientist who wishes to corroborate her colleague’s findings.TU Delft has a long history of engagement with Open Science. Yet, with its Open Science Programme 2020-2024, Research and Education in the Open Era, TU Delft wishes to take Open Science to the next level: a situation in which Open Science has become the default way of practising research and education, and the “information era” has become the “open era”. It is TU Delft’s ambition to be frontrunner in this revolutionary process. This is reflected in the TU Delft Strategic Framework 2018-2024, with “openness” as one of its major principles.The TU Delft Open Science Programme 2020-2024 tackles all areas of scholarly engagement where restrictions limit the flow of academic knowledge. It proposes new approaches to the process of research, education and innovation, with a strong focus on transparency, integrity and efficiency.The programme consists of five interrelated projects: Open Education, Open Access, Open Publishing Platform, FAIR Data, and FAIR Software. The projects are aimed at creating and disseminating various types of resources for the benefit of TU Delft researchers, teachers and students, as well as the general public. They will range from educational materials and software to a publishing platform. All outputs of the programme will be as ‘FAIR’ as possible: findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable.
“On Tuesday 26 November, the Executive Board of TU Delft endorsed the Open Science Programme 2020 – 2024, ‘Research and Education in the Open Era’. Over the next four years, the university will further its efforts to make open research and education a standard part of scientific practice. Prof. dr. Rob Mudde, vice-rector magnificus of TU Delft: “It is our ambition to be the frontrunner in this area. Our aim is that Open Science becomes the default setting for research and education at TU Delft.” …”
“Last summer, dozens of academic institutions in Sweden let their Elsevier subscriptions lapse, forgoing permission to read new content in the scholarly publisher’s journals. Like other groups in Europe and the US, they were pushing for increased open access and contained costs—and had reached a deadlock in negotiations with the publisher. On Friday (November 22), the two sides announced that they had finally come to an agreement, establishing a so-called transformative deal that includes access to paywalled articles and open-accessing publishing into one fee….”
[Quoting] Wilhelm Widmark, the library director at Stockholm University and a member of the steering committee for the Bibsam consortium, which negotiates on behalf of more than 80 Swedish institutions. “I think Elsevier has become more flexible during the last couple of months.”
Just a day before the Swedish deal was made public, Elsevier and Carnegie Mellon University in Pennsylvania announced a similar deal. These are the latest of several agreements Elsevier has forged to pilot open-access elements since the beginning of 2019. Earlier this year, for example, Hungary and Norway—both countries that had cancelled their subscriptions with the publisher after stagnant negotiations—also announced new contracts with the publisher….
As Elsevier is successfully forging deals on both sides of the Atlantic, there are still two major academic groups missing from these announcements: the University of California (UC) system, which includes 10 campuses, and Project DEAL, which represents around 700 academic institutions in Germany….”
Dutch public knowledge institutions and funders call for a modernization of the academic system of recognition and rewards, in particular in five key areas: education, research, impact, leadership and (for university medical centres) patient care. Sicco de Knecht writes, for ScienceGuide, that a culture change and national and international cooperation is required to achieve such modernization.
“Many academics feel there is a one-sided emphasis on research performance, frequently leading to the undervaluation of the other key areas such as education, impact, leadership and (for university medical centres) patient care. This puts strain on the ambitions that exist in these areas. The assessment system must be adapted and improved in each of the areas and in the connections between them.”
“The road to Open Science is not a short one. As the chairman of the Executive Board of the European Open Science Cloud, Karel Luyben, is keen to point out, it will take at least 10 or 15 years of travel until we reach a point where Open Science is simply absorbed into ordinary, everyday science.
Within the Netherlands, and for research data in particular, we have made many strides towards that final point. We have knowledge networks such as LCRDM, a suite of archives covered by the Research Data Netherlands umbrella, and the groundbreaking work done by the Dutch Techcentre for Life Sciences.
But there is still much travel to be done; many new landscapes to be traversed. Data sharing is still far from being the norm (see here for a visualisation of these results).
The authors of this blog post have put together six areas that, in their opinion, deserve attention on our Open Science journey….”