Peer-reviewed physics for Wikipedia: PLOS ONE Topic Pages | EveryONE: The PLOS ONE blog

“Despite Wikipedia’s importance as a resource for both practicing physicists and the wider community, it is rare for professional physicists to contribute, in part because there are few, if any, professional incentives to do so. We’re all in agreement that researchers should receive proper attribution for our work (which is why PLOS ONE supports ORCID); and as credit is not given for submitting or editing Wikipedia pages, only a small fraction of the physicists that I asked about this have edited even a single Wikipedia page.

With this in mind, we’re excited to introduce PLOS ONE Topic Pages, which are peer-reviewed review articles written with Wikipedia in mind. These provide opportunities for author attribution and will result in both journal articles and Wikipedia pages of high quality and utility….”

Overlay Journals — the ultimate publication model? (#94) · Issues · Publishing Reform / discussion · GitLab

Quick description (see links for more details)

Articles are archived in open repositories.

Authors are free to decide which version to post as preprints.

When article is accepted, the final version is posted and permanently linked from the journal.

The author is free to post new versions or updates, whereas the journal continues to link to the accepted version.

The final version includes copy-editing if there is any.

The overlay model seems to best address the needs of all participants:

Cheaper archiving done via repositories and mirrors, fast and secure content availability.

Single final version posted to open repository, no confusion between free and published versions, easy accurate referencing to parts of the paper.

Easy and cheap way to post an update, typos or error fixes. The journal continues to link to the official refereed version.

None of these seem to be met by traditional journals:

Archiving is fragmented and expensive, work and staff costs are duplicated for individual journals.

Official published version diverges from the one posted to repositories, updating to the last version is hard and discouraged by publishers only providing final PDFs, where the exact changes are not clear. Different pages, structure, section/formula numbering etc. Different look of citations.

Updates require major work and cost, only by means of sending an Erratum. Authors are discouraged from sending too many Errata, since those appear in their publication lists and may cause repetitional damage. Consequently, many errors are not fixed, readers are confused and suffer….”

Rebus Projects – Marking OER Courses: Best Practices and Case Studies

“The “Texas Toolkit for OER Course Markings (a living guide)” is a living document that can help colleges and universities develop and implement processes to share information with students about courses that use open education resources (OER). This project expands the toolkit to include case studies representing a variety of approaches to OER course markings, brief stories from the perspectives of various stakeholders, and a more robust analysis of stakeholders, options, and barriers. Items slated for further exploration include platform specs, talking points for stakeholder groups, graphic illustrations and flow charts, communication opportunities and roadblocks, branding considerations, and impact….”

Open Science Network

“The Open Science Network is a shared open protocol on the blockchain where researchers, universities, companies with R&D budgets and government institutions can interact effectively with lower barriers to entry and reduced friction in each step of the process….

Everything will be publishable without a pre-approval process beyond basic validation to prevent network spam. All research that scientists consider ready for the world will exist in a continuum state instead of the binary unpublished/published state of the current ecosystem. Research verification will help determine valuable findings, but everything will be open and available by default….”

BITSS Preprints | Why We Need Open Policy Analysis

Abstract:  The evidence-based policy movement promotes the use of empirical evidence to inform policy decision-making. While this movement has gained traction over the last two decades, several concerns about the credibility of empirical research have been identified in scientific disciplines that use research methods and practices that are commonplace in policy analysis. As a solution, we argue that policy analysis should adopt the transparent, open, and reproducible research practices espoused in related disciplines. We first discuss the importance of evidence-based policy in an era of increasing disagreement about facts, analysis, and expertise. We then review recent credibility crises of empirical research (difficulties reproducing results), their causes (questionable research practices such as publication biases and p-hacking), and their relevance to the credibility of evidence-based policy (trust in policy analysis). The remainder of the paper makes the case for “open” policy analysis and how to achieve it. We include examples of recent policy analyses that have incorporated open research practices such as transparent reporting, open data, and code sharing. We conclude with recommendations on how key stakeholders in evidence-based policy can make open policy analysis the norm and thus safeguard trust in using empirical evidence to inform important policy decisions.

Wevolver | Develop Better Hardware Together

“Wevolver is a file sharing and revision management solution, empowering both private teams and open communities….

  • Wevolver offers a secure, central location for your project files and documentation.
  • Past revisions are stored out of sight in a version control system.
  • No more ‘final-final-final’ in your file names.
  • Everyone knows the concurrent revision. Never work on the wrong version of a file….”

New publishing platform makes experienced authors’ works freely available > News > USC Dornsife

“…Readers who visit the Free Read Press website can download and distribute books by experienced authors, many of whom are connected with USC, at no cost and with no usage restrictions. In addition to work by Dane and Rowe, who is professor of English, American studies and ethnicity, and comparative literature, contributors include Distinguished Professor of English Percival Everett, Aerol Arnold Professor Emeritus of English Jim Kincaid, and Richard Fliegel, associate dean for undergraduate programs. Unlike traditional printing houses, there is little editing, and authors can make changes to their work at any time. For readers who prefer the texture of a crisp page over the digital swipe, Free Read Press has partnered with printers to sell physical copies of each book at cost….”