MIT OA Task Force Releases Recommendations, Publisher Framework | Library Journal

“As part of its ongoing work to support open access (OA) both on campus and in the wider world of academia, in October the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) released two documents that will amplify open sharing of MIT resources and clarify communications with scholarly publishers.

On October 17, the Ad Hoc Task Force on Open Access to MIT’s Research, chaired by Class of 1922 Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Hal Abelson and Director of Libraries Chris Bourg, released its OA Task Force Final Report, a set of recommendations that will support and increase open sharing of MIT publications, data, software, and educational materials.

In addition, MIT Libraries staff partnered with the task force and the Committee on the Library System to develop a framework, based on those core principles, to help guide negotiations with scholarly publishers, support the needs of scholars, and advance science. The MIT Framework for Publisher Contracts was released on October 23….”

ARL Supports MIT Framework for Publisher Contracts – Association of Research Libraries

“The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) supports the MIT Framework for Publisher Contracts as an important pathway to making scholarly content more openly available. The framework sets forth six core principles for library contracts with publishers, such as author retention of copyrights, automatic deposit of manuscripts into institutional repositories, and blanket text- and data-mining (machine-reading) rights with no additional license required.

The MIT Framework also calls for sustainable and fair, cost-based pricing for publisher services. This will depend, at a minimum, on institutions refusing to sign non-disclosure agreements and, even better, providing their licensing expenditures and terms in an easily comparable format. ARL is committed to advancing such transparency as a key principle to achieving open, equitable, and enduring access to information….”

MIT Press and Harvard Data Science Initiative launch the Harvard Data Science Review | MIT News

“The MIT Press and the Harvard Data Science Initiative (HDSI) have announced the launch of the Harvard Data Science Review (HDSR). The open-access journal, published by MIT Press and hosted online via the multimedia platform PubPub, an initiative of the MIT Knowledge Futures group, will feature leading global thinkers in the burgeoning field of data science, making research, educational resources, and commentary accessible to academics, professionals, and the interested public. With demand for data scientists booming, HDSR will provide a centralized, authoritative, and peer-reviewed publishing community to service the growing profession….”

Harvard and MIT team up to launch peer-reviewed data science journal | News | Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health

“The Harvard Data Science Initiative and MIT Press have launched the Harvard Data Science Review (HDSR), an open-access peer-reviewed journal that serves as a centralized and authoritative outlet for the burgeoning field of data science.

The journal will feature expert overviews of complex ideas and topics from leading thinkers with direct applications for teaching, research, business, government, and more, according to a July 15, 2019 MIT Press article….”

MIT framework for negotiating with scholarly publishers gains wide support

“Who should own and control the dissemination of research? Not academic publishers, according to a new framework developed by library leaders at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

The framework, published this week, asserts that control of scholarship and the way in which it is distributed should reside with scholars and their institutions. The document contains six core principles that will be used by MIT as a starting point for future contract negotiations with academic publishers.

The principles aim to ensure that research is available openly and appropriately archived. They also call for fair and transparent pricing of publisher services and say that no author should be forced to give up a copyright in order to publish their work. Instead, authors should be provided with “generous reuse rights,” the framework says….”

Strong Ideas from MIT Libraries and the MIT Press – MIT Press Podcast

“In this episode, Gita Manaktala, Editorial Director at the MIT Press, and Ellen Finnie, Co-Interim Associate Director for Collections at MIT Libraries, discuss the Ideas series: a hybrid print and open access book series for general readers, that provides fresh, strongly argued, and provocative views of the effects of digital technology on culture, business, government, education, and our lives….”

Strong Ideas from MIT Libraries and the MIT Press – MIT Press Podcast

“In this episode, Gita Manaktala, Editorial Director at the MIT Press, and Ellen Finnie, Co-Interim Associate Director for Collections at MIT Libraries, discuss the Ideas series: a hybrid print and open access book series for general readers, that provides fresh, strongly argued, and provocative views of the effects of digital technology on culture, business, government, education, and our lives….”

Harvard Library’s Commitment to Open Access | Harvard Library

“In my own view, to achieve this equity and diversity, we need to go beyond article processing charges (APCs) and the aims of transformative agreements. A reliance on APCs excludes authors who cannot find the money to pay them, and that burden falls disproportionately on authors from the global south and from less affluent institutions in the global north. We need to develop truly transformative models that leverage the opportunities of the digital age and fully remove cost barriers: no fees for authors or readers. We need to envision distributed, trusted networks, rather than letting control rest within just a few entities. We need academic control of academic work. We need to invest in reasonable and transparent costs, ideally within an open-source framework, for infrastructure and services that enable the use of that scholarly work.

Plan S gives a nod in the direction of new platforms: “Plan S is NOT just about a publication fee model of Open Access publishing. cOAlition S supports a diversity of sustainability models for Open Access journals and platforms…” Last fall, I appreciated seeing the Plan S feedback provided jointly by Harvard and MIT, including this statement: “We’d like to see Plan S reinforce and expand — rather than neglect or unintentionally hinder — the power of open-access repositories to democratize access to science and scholarship.” Earlier this October, the Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR) and cOAlition S issued a joint statement noting that “Repositories offer a low-cost, high-value option for providing Open Access and are also a mechanism for introducing innovation in scholarly communication, acting as vehicles for developing new dissemination models and providing access to a wide range of scholarly content.” …”

MIT Reaffirms Commitment to Open Access

“The Massachusetts Institute of Technology has published its final recommendations on how to increase the open sharing of MIT publications, data, software and educational materials.

An open-access task force was convened in 2017 to update and revise MIT’s open-access policies. The task force published its final recommendations last week. A draft set of recommendations was released in March 2019 for public comment.

The task force recommend that MIT ratify a set of open-access principles, create an open-access fund for monographs and work with department heads to encourage open practices across all disciplines. The existing MIT Faculty Open Access Policy will be expanded to include students, staff, postdoctoral fellows and research staff….”

Recommendations of the Ad Hoc Task Force on Open Access to MIT’s Research

“In 2016, the Open Access Task Force was charged with taking up the question of whether MIT should strengthen its activities in support of providing open access to the research and educational contributions of the MIT community. We were also asked to coordinate an Institute-wide discussion on this topic. To this end, after 18 months of work, we developed recommendations for changes and enhancements to policy, infrastructure, and advocacy. We offer these recommendations after wide consultation across the Institute and beyond, and with the intent of sparking an even wider conversation across the MIT community and other stakeholder communities. We believe these recommendations will strengthen MIT’s commitment to open science and scholarship and allow people around the globe to build on MIT-created work as we all aim to tackle the world’s challenges, big and small.”