> On Nov 11, 2015, at 3:58 PM, Lucie Burgess <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Dear Stevan, all > > I would be very interested to hear more about good (particularly open-source > if available) > in-house university CRIS systems, from anyone who is willing to share this > information. > We are working on a review of our systems for open access, research data > management > and REF reporting/ funder compliance at the moment and this would be valuable > input.
Preliminary reply from Keith Jeffery: > From: Keith Jeffery <[email protected]> > Date: November 12, 2015 at 12:36:23 PM GMT-5 > To: Stevan Harnad <[email protected]> > Cc: "Lucie Burgess ([email protected])" > <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: Liege-type policy at Kings College London > > Stevan, Lucie – > > There are many functionally equivalent CRIS but they are ‘homebrew’ or > developed for a > particular organisation by a particular software company. Typical examples > are systems > in Czech Republic and Slovakia. What they share is they all use CERIF and so > can interoperate. > > euroCRIS is currently building a reference model CRIS which I believe will be > made available > to euroCRIS members (euroCRIS as a community is currently meeting in > Barcelona and > I understand the board will take decisions while there). It will be based on > the CRIS developed > by EKT in Greece (where they are rolling it out to all the universities and > research labs with an > aggregator CRIS at EKT for the ministry). > > Let me check with euroCRIS colleagues the exact state of play on this and get > back to you > Best > Keith Another excerpt from Keith Jeffery: > PURE is a product from Atira (DK) spun out from Aalborg University and they > were then taken > over by Elsevier. > > (Thomson Reuters took over the CONVERIS system from AVEDAS for the same > reason). > > … both use CERIF which... has referential and functional integrity and the > concept of relationships > between base entities(objects)) > > One great advantage is that in CERIF date/time information is recorded not on > the base > object records (digital object y has an attribute date/time and an attribute > value person x) > but on the relationships between them – person x deposited digital object y > between > date/time 1 and date/time 2 (these may be the same of course). > Note that person x may not be the author (and a separate CERIF relationship > would link > digital object and person in role author – or even primary author or 30% > author or…) > > This... has a very large effect when analysing research performance and when > utilising > catalogs (built on CERIF) in e-Research infrastructures and VREs. > > > Kind regards > Lucie > > Lucie Burgess > Associate Director for Digital Libraries > Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford > Clarendon Building, Broad Street, Oxford > Senior Research Fellow, Hertford College > Tel: +44 (0)1865 277104 > +44 (0)7725 842619 > Twitter @LucieCBurgess > LinkedIn LucieCBurgess > http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6601-7196 > Get ready for the REF – Act on Acceptance > <http://openaccess.ox.ac.uk/home-2/act-on-acceptance/> > > > > > From: Stevan Harnad <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Reply-To: "Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > Date: Wednesday, 11 November 2015 19:36 > To: "Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > Subject: [GOAL] Re: PURE nonsense > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Lucie Burgess > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > wrote: > >> I think it’s worth noting that HEFCE has in fact changed its policy to ‘the >> published version’ rather than the author accepted manuscript for open >> access articles published under the ‘gold’ route, hence delaying open access >> to the article until it is published. See: >> http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/Year/2015/CL,202015 >> <http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/Year/2015/CL,202015>/ and scroll to the heading >> ‘gold open access outputs’. > > More's the pity. But the lost OA time is the author's, since the Gold OA > articles have no OA embargo. Nothing changes for articles published in > subscription journals. > > (But it's still a waste of money to pay for pre-Green Fool's Gold -- and now > a waste of time too.) > >> And PURE is not the only CRIS system being adopted by UK universities to >> help them manage the administrative burden of the REF or reporting and >> statistics required by many funders to support compliance. > > The problem is not the CRIS (which is just a record-keeping system, > completely compatible with immediate institutional full-text deposit in the > institutional repository); the problem is outsourcing the CRIS function to > publishers. > > In-house CRIS's are an excellent complement to institutional repositories. > > Stevan Harnad > University of Southampton > >> Lucie Burgess >> Associate Director for Digital Libraries >> Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford >> Clarendon Building, Broad Street, Oxford >> Senior Research Fellow, Hertford College >> Tel: +44 (0)1865 277104 <tel:%2B44%20%280%291865%20277104> >> +44 (0)7725 842619 <tel:%2B44%20%280%297725%20842619> >> Twitter @LucieCBurgess >> LinkedIn LucieCBurgess >> http://orcid.org/ <http://orcid.org/>0000-0001-6601-7196 >> Get ready for the REF – Act on Acceptance >> <http://openaccess.ox.ac.uk/home-2/act-on-acceptance/> >> >> >> >> >> From: Stevan Harnad <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Reply-To: "Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)" <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Date: Wednesday, 11 November 2015 16:09 >> To: "Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)" <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Subject: [GOAL] PURE nonsense >> >> >> PURE is a Trojan Horse from Elsevier >> <https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/pure> that (some) UK institutions have >> allowed to enter their portals. It is a trick, by Elsevier, to insinuate >> themselves into and retain control of everything they can: access, timing of >> access, fulfillment of mandates, research assessment, everything. The ploy >> was to sneak in via CRIS’s, which are systems for institutions wishing to >> manage and monitor their metadata on all their functions. >> >> Notice that the following passage from KCL's OA Policy >> <http://www.kcl.ac.uk/governancezone/Assets/InformationPolicies/Open%20Access%20Policy.pdf> >> makes no mention of timing: >> >>>> In internal evaluation procedures it will be expected that all >>>> publications considered as part of appraisal or promotional assessments, >>>> will have a metadata record in the Research Information System, Pure, with >>>> either the full text article attached and downloadable from the Research >>>> Portal, or a link to the Open Access article on the journal’s web site. >> >> What Pure is in reality designed to do is to make sure that the full text is >> not openly accessible until after the publisher embargo on Open Access. >> >> In point of fact, the battle for OA has long shifted to the arena of timing: >> The 1-year (or longer) embargo is the one to beat. Access after the embargo >> elapses is a foregone conclusion (publishers have already implicitly >> conceded on it, without overtly saying so). But access embargoed for 12 >> months is not OA. Publishers want to make sure (1) there is no OA before the >> embargo elapses, (2) the embargo is as long as possible, and even after the >> embargo, (3) access should be via the publisher website, or at least >> controlled in some way by the publisher. >> >> That’s exactly what PURE + CRIS does. >> >> And (some) UK institutions (under pressure from Finch’s fatal foolishness — >> likewise originating from the publisher lobby) have been persuaded that PURE >> will not only provide all the OA they want, but will take a lot of other >> asset-management tasks off their shoulders. >> >> It’s a huge scam, masquerading as OA, and its only real function is to >> strengthen the perverse status quo — of ceding the control of university >> research access to publishers — even more than they had before. >> >> It won’t succeed, of course, because HEFCE/REF2020 has nailed down the >> timing of full-text deposit as having to be made within 3 months of >> acceptance (not publication) for eligibility for REF2020, which a metadata >> promissory note from Elsevier will not fullfill. My hope is that >> universities will be as anxious as they have been for 30 years now not to >> risk REF ineligibility by failing to comply with this very specific >> requirement. >> >> (And the institution’s copy-request Button >> <http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/1110-Importance-of-Request-Copy-Button-in-Implementing-HEFCEREF-Immediate-Deposit-Policy.html> >> will take care of the rest, as long as all full-texts are deposited within >> Acceptance + 3.) >> >> (I think it was a mistake on HEFCE/REF’s part to state formally that there >> is no need to archive the dated acceptance letter that defines the >> acceptance date, but again I trust in the anxiety of universities to comply >> with REF2020 eligibility requirements to draw the rational conclusion that >> is indeed within 3 months of acceptance that deposit must be done for >> eligibility, and not 12 months after publication.) >> >> As you will see from the ROARMAP data below, KCL’s OA policy >> <http://roarmap.eprints.org/690/> alone is not compliant with the >> requirement for REF2020 eligibility, and the above extract does not change >> that one bit! >> >> Best wishes, >> >> Stevan >> >> >> King's College London >> General >> Country: Europe > Northern Europe > United Kingdom of Great Britain and >> Northern Ireland <http://roarmap.eprints.org/view/country/826.html> >> Policymaker type: Research organisation (e.g. university or research >> institution) >> Policymaker name: King's College London >> Policymaker URL: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/index.aspx >> <http://www.kcl.ac.uk/index.aspx> >> Policy URL: >> http://www.kcl.ac.uk/governancezone/InformationPolicies/Open-Access-Policy.aspx >> >> <http://www.kcl.ac.uk/governancezone/InformationPolicies/Open-Access-Policy.aspx> >> Repository URL: https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/en/ >> <https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/en/> >> Policy adoption date: 16 July 2012 >> Source of policy: Administrative/management decision >> Policy Terms >> Deposit of item: Required >> Locus of deposit: Institutional Repository >> Date of deposit: When publisher permits >> Content types specified under the mandate: Peer-reviewed manuscripts >> Journal article version to be deposited: Not Specified >> Can deposit be waived?: Not specified >> Making deposited item Open Access: Required >> Can making the deposited item Open Access be waived?: Not Specified >> Date deposit to be made Open Access: When publisher permits >> Other Details >> Is deposit a precondition for research evaluation (the 'Liège/HEFCE >> Model')?: Yes >> Rights holding: Not Mentioned >> Can rights retention be waived?: Not specified >> Can author waive giving permission to make the article Open Access?: Not >> specified >> Policy's permitted embargo length for science, technology and medicine: >> 6 months >> Policy's permitted embargo length for humanities and social sciences: >> 12 months >> Can maximal allowable embargo length be waived?: Yes >> Open licensing conditions: Other >> Gold OA publishing option: Permitted alternative to Green self-archiving >> Funding for APCs where charged by journals: Funder provides specific >> additional funding for APCs >> APC fund URL (where available): >> http://www.kcl.ac.uk/library/researchsupport/openaccess/funding.aspx >> <http://www.kcl.ac.uk/library/researchsupport/openaccess/funding.aspx> >>> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GOAL mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal >> <http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal> >> > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
