[GOAL] Australian Research Council rejects grant applications for mentioning preprints

[Danny Kingsley]

Hi all, (sorry if you get this by more than one means, I’m pretty cross)

The Australian Research Council - one of only two in Australia - has just 
rejected a whole heap of grant applications because they mentioned preprints. 
Not necessarily cited them, just *mentioned* them.

There was an outcry yesterday, to which the ARC has responded that it was in 
the eligibility criteria, so it’s only fair they reject the applications that 
dared to mention preprints https://t.co/kI6xG7NL2Z?amp=1 
<https://t.co/kI6xG7NL2Z?amp=1> 

I’d argue the problem is not that it was in the criteria - it’s that the 
criteria were appropriate if but were 2016. 

I’ve had a rant on Twitter linking to multiple instances dating from 2017 of 
funders in the real world allowing citation of preprints 
https://twitter.com/dannykay68/status/1428490302998810628 
<https://twitter.com/dannykay68/status/1428490302998810628>

But my main point is that no-one here noticed this was a problem until now…

Greetings from the land of tumbleweeds….

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Scholarly Communication Consultant
Visiting Fellow, Australian National Centre for the Public Awareness of 
Science, ANU
Member, Board of Directors, FORCE11
---
e: da...@dannykingsley.com
m: +61 (0)480 115 937
t:@dannykay68
o: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Register now for OAI12 – The Geneva Workshop on Innovations in Scholarly Communication

[Danny Kingsley]

CAUTION: This e-mail originated outside the University of Southampton.


OAI12 – The Geneva Workshop on Innovations in Scholarly Communication
[image002.jpg]

The renowned OAI series of Workshops returns on 6-10 September 2021 as a series 
of digital webinars looking at Innovation in Scholarly Communication.

The OAI12 events page can be found at 
https://oai.events/oai12<https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Foai.events%2Foai12=04%7C01%7C%7C6d7e068200534c49434008d910a77fe7%7C1faf88fea9984c5b93c9210a11d9a5c2%7C0%7C0%7C637559133857824497%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000=RnEjds9%2BFeUwcMQvCU%2FoYE1MMjkgV3JoWS0LGjvGZ%2FY%3D=0>
 and registration at 
https://oai.events/registration/<https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Foai.events%2Fregistration%2F=04%7C01%7C%7C6d7e068200534c49434008d910a77fe7%7C1faf88fea9984c5b93c9210a11d9a5c2%7C0%7C0%7C637559133857834465%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000=t5Kkuk3D2ZM3susj0Oc%2BeKW86QJqf81oL7awIvFfNsU%3D=0>.
 Registration is free for all attenders.

The OAI series of Workshops is 20 years old this year, having started in 2001. 
The aim of the Workshops is to bring cutting-edge speakers from around the 
world to a global audience to examine and discuss topics of mutual interest. 
The 2021 gathering is divided into 5 themes:
•   Scholarly Publishing
•   Digital research data in the era of EOSC and FAIR
•   Research Integrity: How are changes in research practice re-shaping our 
thinking about what research integrity should be?
•   Diversity, Inclusion and Collaboration
•   The Future of Open Science

OAI events are one of the leading scholarly communication events from Europe, 
aimed at a global audience, in the year in which they are held. Pre-recorded 
and live talks will be accompanied by live Panel sessions for discussion with 
the speakers. All sessions will be freely available online afterwards.

Please register early for this online event to avoid disappointment. We look 
forward to a fantastic week of talks, discussion and interactions.

(Disclosure - I am on the Steering Committee for this conference)

Dr Danny Kingsley
Scholarly Communication Consultant
Visiting Fellow, Australian National Centre for the Public Awareness of 
Science, ANU
Member, Board of Directors, FORCE11
---
e: da...@dannykingsley.com<mailto:da...@dannykingsley.com>
m: +61 (0)480 115 937
t:@dannykay68
o: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] List of links to news and commentary about Plan S

[Danny Kingsley]

Hi all,

Because it is useful to me, and presumably therefore to everyone else too, I 
have pulled together as best I can the various news articles, commentaries and 
responses to Plan S into a blog 
https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=2433
Please send any others via the comments, and I’ll upload them.

No comments about not having a life please.

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Deputy Director - Scholarly Communication & Research Services
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Libraries
West Road, CB3 9DR
e: da...@cam.ac.uk<mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>
p: 01223 747 437
m: 07711 500 564
t: @dannykay68
w: www.osc.cam.ac.uk<http://www.osc.cam.ac.uk/>
b: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk
o: orcid.org/-0002-3636-5939

[IMG_BannerNorthernLightsREFlogo_V10_20180417]

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] So what did you get up to in 2018?

[Danny Kingsley]

OK, so you are back at work and back in the rhythm. Maybe it is time to take a 
moment to reflect.

We have just published "2018 That Was the Year that Was" 
https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=2201 describing the 
achievements and the challenges of the past year at the Office of Scholarly 
Communication at Cambridge

Cartoons! Videos! New programmes! And we even sorted out our staffing for our 
Research Data Management Facility. It has been such a big year it ended up 
leaking into the first couple of weeks of 2019 (hence the late publication 
date).

Remember: “It’s not *all* about the REF”.

Enjoy,

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Deputy Director - Scholarly Communication & Research Services
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Libraries
West Road, CB3 9DR
e: da...@cam.ac.uk<mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>
p: 01223 747 437
m: 07711 500 564
t: @dannykay68
w: www.osc.cam.ac.uk<http://www.osc.cam.ac.uk/>
b: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk
o: orcid.org/-0002-3636-5939

[IMG_BannerNorthernLightsREFlogo_V10_20180417]

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] GOAL Digest, Vol 82, Issue 14

[Danny Kingsley]

Hi Lisa,

No, as Smits said 'it is not a menu'. Author retention of rights is fundamental 
to Plan S. The green option is simply something that allows compliance without 
payment of an APC. 

This is of course speculation - until we have actual policies and the 
implementation plan, we are all kind of guessing here.

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Deputy Director - Scholarly Communication & Research Services
Cambridge University Library
e: da...@cam.ac.uk
p: 01223 747 437
m: 07711 500 564

On 25/09/2018, 06:18, "goal-boun...@eprints.org on behalf of 
goal-requ...@eprints.org"  wrote:

Send GOAL mailing list submissions to
goal@eprints.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
goal-requ...@eprints.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
goal-ow...@eprints.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of GOAL digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Musings from the COASP 2018 conference (and another blog
  about Plan S) (Lisa Hinchliffe)


--

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 03:04:01 +0300
From: Lisa Hinchliffe 
Subject: Re: [GOAL] Musings from the COASP 2018 conference (and
another blog about Plan S)
To: "Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)" 
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Danny,
Thanks for these write ups. Most informative.

I hope you don't mind a quick question re Plan S. I see you wrote "yes,
publishing an AAM with zero embargo and CC-BY would comply." Do you take
this to mean that copyright transfer of the final article would then be
acceptable?

Lisa

On Mon, Sep 24, 2018, 4:11 PM Danny Kingsley  wrote:

> 
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> Last week, the 10th Conference of the Open Access Publishing Association
> <https://oaspa.org/conference/coasp-2018-program/> was held in Vienna.
> Much was covered over the two and a half days. A decade in, this 
conference
> considered the state of the open access (OA) movement, discussed different
> approaches to OA, considered inequity and the infrastructure required to
> meet this need and argued about language.
>
>
>
> I have written two blogs ? one that summarises my takeaways from the
> conference:
>
>- Ten years on and where are we at?  COASP 2018
><https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=2168> -
>https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=2168
>
>
>
> Separately I have posted the discussion that occurred with Robert-Jan
> Smits at the conference on Plan S:
>
>
>
>- The Plan S conversation continues
><https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=2163> -
>https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=2163
>
>
>
> Enjoy.
>
>
>
> Danny
>
>
>
> *Dr Danny Kingsley*
>
> Deputy Director - Scholarly Communication & Research Services
>
> Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
>
> Cambridge University Library
>
> West Road, CB3 9DR
>
> e: da...@cam.ac.uk
>
> p: 01223 747 437
>
> m: 07711 500 564
>
> t: @dannykay68
>
> w: www.osc.cam.ac.uk
>
> b: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk
>
> o: orcid.org/-0002-3636-5939
>
>
>
> [image: IMG_BannerNorthernLightsREFlogo_V10_20180417]
>
>
> ___
> GOAL mailing list
> GOAL@eprints.org
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20180925/fe35b43b/attachment.html
 
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 95698 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : 
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20180925/fe35b43b/attachment.png
 

--

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal


End of GOAL Digest, Vol 82, Issue 14




___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Plan S. Because not enough has been written about it yet.

[Danny Kingsley]

Dear all,

To add to the collection of commentary on Plan S I have just published two 
sister blogs on Unlocking Research:

  *   "Relax everyone, Plan S is just the beginning of the discussion" 
https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=2148  and
  *   "Most Plan S principles are not contentious" 
https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=2145

The general points are that this is a statement of principle rather than a set 
of policies, it does not necessarily represent a ligature on academic’s choice 
of publication (note that hybrid is not necessarily off the table and green OA 
is compliant with zero embargo and a CC-BY license), and that the real 
conversation we should be having is about the academic reward system rather 
than Plan S itself.

Enjoy!

Danny


Dr Danny Kingsley
Deputy Director - Scholarly Communication & Research Services
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, CB3 9DR
e: da...@cam.ac.uk<mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>
p: 01223 747 437
m: 07711 500 564
t: @dannykay68
w: www.osc.cam.ac.uk<http://www.osc.cam.ac.uk/>
b: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk
o: orcid.org/-0002-3636-5939

[IMG_BannerNorthernLightsREFlogo_V10_20180417]

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] GOAL Digest, Vol 82, Issue 4

[Danny Kingsley]

That's great news Christina, and the kind of information that really helps us 
when we have discussions with our research community about the value of OA 
monographs.

What would help would be some more nuanced numbers. Some of those chapters will 
be in edited books and some from monographs. And they will also be in different 
disciplines. If we could have some numbers about comparative average sales of 
hardcopy books in similar disciplines (of both monographs and edited books) 
then it starts to become a more meaningful statistic that we can use in our 
discussions.

Regards,

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Deputy Director - Scholarly Communication & Research Services
Cambridge University Library
e: da...@cam.ac.uk
p: 01223 747 437
m: 07711 500 564

On 06/09/2018, 12:00, "goal-boun...@eprints.org on behalf of 
goal-requ...@eprints.org"  wrote:

Send GOAL mailing list submissions to
goal@eprints.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
goal-requ...@eprints.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
goal-ow...@eprints.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of GOAL digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Springer Nature: 30 million downloads of open access book
  chapters (Christina Emery)


--

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2018 14:35:09 +
From: Christina Emery 
Subject: [GOAL] Springer Nature: 30 million downloads of open access
bookchapters
To: "Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)" 
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

* Apologies for cross-posting *

Dear list subscribers,

We?re proud to announce that there have now been more than 30 million 
chapter downloads across our open access (OA) books portfolio. 

This includes data for 512 OA books, which works out to an average of 
58,704 chapter downloads per book. 

>From our SpringerLink data, we can see that 44% of the downloads 
originated from 151 countries (other downloads were registered as anonymous 
users).

Further information can be found on our new usage statistics webpage: 
https://goo.gl/VyQ1jb 

Best regards,
Christina Emery

Open Access Books Marketing Manager
Open Research, Springer Nature

DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone 
who is not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in 
error please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other 
storage mechanism. Springer Nature Limited does not accept liability for any 
statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not expressly made on 
behalf of Springer Nature Ltd or one of their agents.
Please note that Springer Nature Limited and their agents and affiliates do 
not accept any responsibility for viruses or malware that may be contained in 
this e-mail or its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail 
and attachments (if any).



--

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal


End of GOAL Digest, Vol 82, Issue 4
***



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Blog: "New to OA? Top tips from the experts"

[Danny Kingsley]

Dear all,

Recently a UK scholarly communication email list contributed to a discussion 
around the questions:

  *   What do you wish you were told before you started your job in repository 
management/scholarly communication?
  *   What are your top three tips for someone just starting?
The advice that flowed was too good not to share, hence the blog: “New to OA? 
Top tips from the experts” https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=2134

Enjoy!

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Deputy Director - Scholarly Communication & Research Services
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, CB3 9DR
e: da...@cam.ac.uk<mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>
p: 01223 747 437
m: 07711 500 564
t: @dannykay68
w: www.osc.cam.ac.uk<http://www.osc.cam.ac.uk/>
b: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk
o: orcid.org/-0002-3636-5939

[IMG_BannerNorthernLightsREFlogo_V10_20180417]

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] BLOG: 'No free labor' – we agree.

[Danny Kingsley]

Dear all,
A new blog on Unlocking Research might be of interest: “No free labor” – we 
agree. https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=2087

A taster:



Last week the University of California released their Declaration of Rights and 
Principles to Transform Scholarly 
Communication.<https://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/_files/committees/ucolasc/scholcommprinciples-20180425.pdf>
  It states as one of the 18 principles:

"No free labor. Publishers shall provide our Institution with data on peer 
review and editorial contributions by our authors in support of journals, and 
such contributions shall be taken into account when determining the cost of our 
subscriptions or OA fees for our authors."

Well, this is interesting. At Cambridge we have been trying to look at this 
specific issue since late last year.

The project

Our goal was to have a better understanding of the interaction between 
publisher and researcher. The (not very imaginatively named) Data Gathering 
Project<https://osc.cam.ac.uk/open-access/open-access-policies/paying-open-access/data-gathering-project>
 is a project to support the decision making of the Journal Coordination Scheme 
in relation to subscription to, and use of, academic journal literature across 
Cambridge.

What we have initially found is that the data is remarkably difficult to put 
together.

***

Enjoy!

Danny



Dr Danny Kingsley
Deputy Director - Scholarly Communication & Research Services
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, CB3 9DR
e: da...@cam.ac.uk<mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>
p: 01223 747 437
m: 07711 500 564
t: @dannykay68
w: www.osc.cam.ac.uk<http://www.osc.cam.ac.uk/>
b: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk
o: orcid.org/-0002-3636-5939

[IMG_BannerNorthernLightsREFlogo_V10_20180417]

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] BLOG: Compliance is not the whole story

[Danny Kingsley]

Dear all,

I have just published a blog commenting on the Research England report 
Monitoring sector progress towards compliance with funder open access 
policies<http://re.ukri.org/documents/2018/research-england-open-access-report-pdf/>.

Read “Compliance is not the whole story” here: 
https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=2074

A taster:

*

Today, Research England released Monitoring sector progress towards compliance 
with funder open access 
policies<http://re.ukri.org/documents/2018/research-england-open-access-report-pdf/>
 the results of a survey they ran in August last year in conjunction with RCUK, 
Wellcome Trust and Jisc.  <…>
The rather celebratory commentary from UKRI has focused on the compliance 
aspect – see the Research England’s press release: Over 80% of research outputs 
meet requirements of REF 2021 open access policy 
<http://re.ukri.org/news-events-publications/news/oa-report-130618/> and the 
post by the Executive Chair of Research England David Sweeney, Open access – 
are we almost there for 
REF?<https://wonkhe.com/blogs/open-access-are-we-almost-there-for-ref/>
At risk of putting a dampener on the party I’d like to point a few things out. 
For a start,  compliance with a policy is not the end goal of a policy in 
itself. While clearly the UK policies over the past five years have increased 
the amount of UK research that is available open access, we do need to ask 
ourselves ‘so what?’.
****

Enjoy!
Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Deputy Director - Scholarly Communication & Research Services
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, CB3 9DR
e: da...@cam.ac.uk<mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>
p: 01223 747 437
m: 07711 500 564
t: @dannykay68
w: www.osc.cam.ac.uk<http://www.osc.cam.ac.uk/>
b: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk
o: orcid.org/-0002-3636-5939

[IMG_BannerNorthernLightsREFlogo_V10_20180417]

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Blog - What's new in OA?

[Danny Kingsley]

Hi all,

A new blog published today on Unlocking Research summarises some recent events 
in the always changing open access landscape. 
https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=2011

Including:

  *   Sweden draws the line
  *   Europe no-deals
  *   Springer sinks
  *   ResearchGate shenanigans
  *   All together now – UKRI
  *   Wellcome Trust consultation
  *   Responsible metrics?
  *   Data monetisation
  *   Ecosystem takeover

Get up to date!

Danny


Dr Danny Kingsley
Deputy Director - Scholarly Communication & Research Services
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, CB3 9DR
e: da...@cam.ac.uk<mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>
p: 01223 747 437
m: 07711 500 564
t: @dannykay68
w: www.osc.cam.ac.uk<http://www.osc.cam.ac.uk/>
b: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk
o: orcid.org/-0002-3636-5939

[IMG_BannerNorthernLightsREFlogo_V10_20180417]

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] [SCHOLCOMM] On Academic Freedom

[Danny Kingsley]

Hi all,

I would very much welcome a concrete example (or two..) of the scenario 
described below where a work has been taken and distorted to the extent an 
author would actually wish to have their name removed as an originator of the 
work. It is a scenario often used by people concerned about the Non Derivative 
aspect of Creative Commons licenses. It is my understanding that Creative 
Commons themselves have not had any examples of this type provided to them in 
discussions about the ND aspect of their license. In the UK we are similarly 
asking for examples and have not managed to unearth any to date. It would help 
hugely before we make national decisions on policies whether concerns being 
raised are actual problems or not.

On the thesis issue, this is indeed something I am actively managing working 
through a new policy at my institution and I am working from the premise that 
we must give our students the best possible opportunity to succeed. That means 
different things for different disciplines and it is important to ensure that 
we do not throw the baby out with the bathwater in both directions. It is not 
helpful to have a moratorium of 10 years on all theses to ensure the small 
percentage who require an embargo of a period of time to secure publication are 
protected. Equally we do not want to put those students at risk by insisting on 
blanket immediate OA. It requires nuance.

But I would like to point out that in the consultations I have now had working 
with two institutions, I know of several cases where theses have been published 
as books under another person's name. These were all theses that were 
'protected' by All Rights Reserved. They were not born digital theses, they had 
had to be requested and then digitised and a single copy sent to a 
person/library. In at least one case where a thesis was heavily plagiarised and 
submitted as someone else's thesis the work was never digitised. It is still 
unclear how it happened. 

So we do, to a large degree actually rely on 'scholarly culture', not copyright 
law to protect us. Lizzie Gadd explains it much better than I do 
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2017/10/31/guest-post-academics-copyright-ownership-ignorant-confused-misled/
 

This is again, however detracting from the point I was trying to make. We have 
bigger fish to fry. There will be no 'academic' - free or not - if we are not 
vigilant in our current political climate. 

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Deputy Director - Scholarly Communication & Research Services
Cambridge University Library
e: da...@cam.ac.uk
p: 01223 747 437
m: 07711 500 564
On 24/03/2018, 19:27, "SANFORD G THATCHER" <s...@psu.edu> wrote:

So, Danny, let me ask if you are ok with funders requiring authors to 
publish
under a CC BY license and waive all rights they otherwise would have to have
input into how and where their writings get translated and how and where 
their
works are republished (e.g., in edited form that distorts the author's 
meaning
and associates the author with a cause, ideology, etc. that the author finds
abhorrent)?

Is these rights do not pertain to academic freedom, please explain why.

The same might be asked of those universities that require immediate OA 
posting
of dissertations, allowing no time for an author to revise it and find a
publisher for it. Various associations (in history, medieval studies, etc.)
have adopted recommended embargo periods to deal with this problem. You are
saying that those associations are wrong to be concerned about this problem?
That this has nothing to do with academic freedom either?

Sandy thatcher



On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 04:07 AM Danny Kingsley <da...@cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>Hi all,
>
>Can we have a quick chat about Academic Freedom? I am frankly fed up with 
this
being trotted out in multiple discussions in relation to open access. It is
akin to the PhD student who recently tearfully told me that the University’s
requirement for her to provide a digital version of her thesis in addition 
to
the hardbound one was a ‘breach of her human rights’. I feel the academic
freedom argument is moving into similar levels of hysteria.
>I wrote a blog recently that addresses this issue: Scare campaigns, we have
seen a few<https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p?05>
https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p?05 (relevant bits below)
>Usually I hear ‘Academic Freedom’ thrown in in relation to being able to
choose where to publish. On the SCHOLCOMM and GOAL lists in the discussion
about Willinsky’s copyright proposal, academic freedom has been thrown into
the mix again. Given, there is potentially some validity in the statement 
that:
“Policies that impact academics that are not developed and supported by
academics are not consistent with academic

[GOAL] Invitation to contribute to a Review of the Office of Scholarly Communication at Cambridge University

[Danny Kingsley]

Dear all,

The Office of Scholarly Communication (OSC) at Cambridge University is 
currently under Review 
http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/reporter/2016-17/weekly/6466/section1.shtml#heading2-6
 
<http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/reporter/2016-17/weekly/6466/section1.shtml#heading2-6>
  The objective of the Review is to ensure that the OSC can best position the 
University to meet changing requirements for the creation and dissemination of 
research and scholarly outputs.

Responses to the Review that include a contextualisation of the wider research 
landscape, the changing nature of research dissemination and how the OSC has 
contributed to the development of policies, workflows or the discourse beyond 
Cambridge would be particularly useful.

If you do feel that you have something to contribute, please send your 
submission to the Secretary (osc-consultat...@admin.cam.ac.uk 
<mailto:osc-consultat...@admin.cam.ac.uk>) by close of business on Friday, 16 
June 2017.

Regards,

Danny


Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk <mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/ 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/>
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley 
<http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley>
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939




___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Cambridge RCUK Block Grant spend for 2016-2017

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all, 

We have just published a blog post: "Cambridge RCUK Block Grant spend for 
2016-2017” https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=1463 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=1463>
Headline numbers

In total Cambridge spent £1.68 million of RCUK funds on APCs (this is up from 
£1.28 last year)
1920 articles identified as being RCUK funded were submitted to the Open Access 
Service, of which 1248 required payment for RCUK*
The average article processing charge was £1850 – this is significantly less 
than the £2008 average last year,  reflecting the value of the memberships we 
have (see below)
*Note these numbers will differ slightly from the report due to the difference 
in dates between the calendar and financial years (see below).

The blog explains the University’s expenditure on non-APC costs, and also 
analyses the value for money of a few of the offset deals and memberships in 
which we are participating.

Our full dataset is available in the repository here - 
https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/264341 
<https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/264341>

Regards,

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk <mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/ 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/>
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley 
<http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley>
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939




___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] GOAL Digest, Vol 66, Issue 13

[Danny Kingsley]

Hi Eric,

This is not what you want because it is not in any way complete, but we provide 
a guide for our researchers at Cambridge - 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/open-access/open-access-policies/paying-open-access/how-much-do-publishers-charge-open-access
 
<http://osc.cam.ac.uk/open-access/open-access-policies/paying-open-access/how-much-do-publishers-charge-open-access>

Regards,

Danny

> On 18 May 2017, at 22:01, goal-requ...@eprints.org wrote:
> 
> Send GOAL mailing list submissions to
>   goal@eprints.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>   http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>   goal-requ...@eprints.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>   goal-ow...@eprints.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of GOAL digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. List of APCs per publisher (?ric Archambault)
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 17:02:56 +
> From: ?ric Archambault <eric.archamba...@science-metrix.com>
> Subject: [GOAL] List of APCs per publisher
> To: "Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)" <goal@eprints.org>
> Message-ID:
>   
> <by2pr02mb1957cf697b2705a8d4d964eeba...@by2pr02mb1957.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
>   
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> Are you aware of a list of average APCs per publisher (or per journal) which 
> is current, and even better, which is up to date and regularly maintained? 
> I'm looking for APCs for both hybrids and bon-gold journals.
> 
> Thanks in advance
> 
> ?ric
> 
> Eric Archambault, Ph.D.
> CEO | Chef de la direction
> Science-Metrix & 1science
> [Description: Description: 
> http://1science.com/images/LinkedIn_sign.png]<https://www.linkedin.com/in/ericarchambault>
> T. 1.514.495.6505 x.111
> C. 1.514.518.0823
> F. 1.514.495.6523
> 
> [Description: Description: 
> http://1science.com/images/Logo_SM_horizontal_small.png]<http://www.science-metrix.com/>
>[Description: Description: http://1science.com/images/1science.png] 
> <http://www.1science.com/>
> 
> 
> 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20170518/d65f687e/attachment.html
>  
> -- next part --
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: image001.png
> Type: image/png
> Size: 3394 bytes
> Desc: image001.png
> Url : 
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20170518/d65f687e/attachment.png
>  
> -- next part --
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: image002.png
> Type: image/png
> Size: 29449 bytes
> Desc: image002.png
> Url : 
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20170518/d65f687e/attachment-0001.png
>  
> -- next part --
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: image003.jpg
> Type: image/jpeg
> Size: 2529 bytes
> Desc: image003.jpg
> Url : 
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20170518/d65f687e/attachment.jpg
>  
> 
> --
> 
> ___
> GOAL mailing list
> GOAL@eprints.org
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
> 
> 
> End of GOAL Digest, Vol 66, Issue 13
> 


Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk <mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/ 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/>
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley 
<http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley>
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939




___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Find out about current developments in Schol Comm - Geneva, June

[Danny Kingsley]

OAI10 Reminder
The OAI10 CERN-UNIGE Workshop on Current Developments in Scholarly 
Communication, 21-23 June 2017, is fast approaching. For a detailed view of the 
Tutorials and Programme for the event, see 
https://indico.cern.ch/event/405949/timetable/#20170621.detailed 
<https://indico.cern.ch/event/405949/timetable/#20170621.detailed>.

Registration for the Workshop closes on 31 May. The OAI Workshops are well 
known for providing a setting where developments in the world of scholarly 
communication are displayed and discussed. 

Do join us if you would like to be part of this conversation by registering to 
attend the Workshop at https://indico.cern.ch/event/405949/registrations/2142/ 
<https://indico.cern.ch/event/405949/registrations/2142/>.

Regards,

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk <mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/ 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/>
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley 
<http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley>
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939




___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Registration open - Researcher to Reader Conference

[Danny Kingsley]

*Registrations*are now open for the popular /*Researcher to Reader 
Conference*//**/at the BMA in /*London */on /*20 & 21 February 2017. */


*Presentations*and *Panels* will include *Rick Anderson* on Copyright, 
*Michael Jubb* on Academic Book Supply, *Stephen Curry* on Metrics, 
*Kent Anderson* on The Ingredients for Successful Publishing and *Alicia 
Wise* on Stakeholder Collaboration.  Back by popular demand are the 
highly interactive *Workshops*, with this year’s topics including: 
*Outsourcing, Metrics, Funding, Collaboration, Intermediation 
*and*Standards**.

*

*Delegates*attending the 2016 conference said: /'very interesting and 
informative', 'lovely venue', 'very clever workshops',  'a really 
well-run conference', 'one of the best I have been to'//.///


There are *discounted tickets* available for Returning Delegates, 
Librarians, Academics and Sponsors, and attractive ‘early-bird’ 
discounts are available until the end of 2016. To register, go to: 
https://r2rconf.com/registration/



--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Opportunity to work at the OSC in Cambridge as Open Access Research Assistant - Finance

[Danny Kingsley]

Dear all,

Why not start the new year with a bang? The Office of Scholarly 
Communication at Cambridge is expanding and a new role has been created 
- Open Access Research Assistant - Finance. This is a Grade 5 role and 
we are encouraging anyone interested in joining our dynamic and 
productive team to apply for the role. Applications close 23 December 
and we will be interviewing in January.


Details are here: http://www.jobs.cam.ac.uk/job/12236/

The Office of Scholarly Communication is expanding the services offered 
to the Cambridge research community and is inviting candidates to apply 
for the newly created OA Research Assistant - Finance position. As a 
member of the Open Access team, they will provide support and advice on 
Open Access matters to the research community and will be responsible 
for managing the financial aspects of the Open Access projects. This 
will require the processing of invoices, verification of the agreed 
transaction and checking that compliance is met. The role holder will be 
responsible for preparing reports to funders and Jisc on expenditure 
from the funds. This will require close liaison with the Library Finance 
Office.


The Open Access Service in the Office of Scholarly Communication is 
processing several hundred articles per month into Apollo, the 
University repositorywww.repository.cam.ac.uk 
<http://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/>. The repository holds over 200,000 
items, and stores, disseminates and preserves in the long-term the 
broader intellectual output of the university in digital formats, 
including databases, multi-media files, e-science outputs, theses, 
learning objects and electronic. To ensure efficient engagement with the 
"open" agenda, the Office of Scholarly Communication delivers numerous 
advocacy and training events across the University of Cambridge.


In addition to people with an eye for detail, financial accuracy and 
experience working across multiple systems, the OSC is looking for 
candidates familiar with the concepts of, and arguments, behind Open 
Research. As part of a dynamic team, the successful candidate will be 
resourceful, enthusiastic and show initiative in their work.


Shortlisted candidates will be asked to complete an exercise to 
demonstrate their ability to manipulate data to create a report, and to 
understand and interpret funder and publisher policies.


Fixed-term: The funds for this post are available for 3 years in the 
first instance.


For further details and to apply for the post, please click on the 
Cambridge University Job Opportunitieslink. 
<http://www.jobs.cam.ac.uk/job/12236/>This will direct you to the 
University’s web-based recruitment system, where you will be able to 
create an online application form.


Queries about the role can be directed to Dr Arthur Smith, Manager, Open 
Access Service -as2...@cam.ac.uk <mailto:as2...@cam.ac.uk>


Please quote reference VE10832 on your application and in any 
correspondence about this vacancy.


The University values diversity and is committed to equality of opportunity.

The University has a responsibility to ensure that all employees are 
eligible to live and work in the UK.



Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Open Access Week at the Office of Scholarly Communication, Cambridge - Friday

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

We have made it to the end of Open Access Week and this is our final 
contribution. It has been a big and successful week again. Thanks for 
participating.


*Blog
*We have had over 1100 reads of our OA Week blogs so far*!
*

Today's blog "How open is Cambridge?" 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=1080 - is an analysis by 
Dr Arthur Smith of how much Cambridge research is openly available.


The full list of blogs from this week are on our OA Week webpage 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/open-access/open-access-week-2016

*
*
*Announcement*
The Office of Scholarly Communication is pleased to announce that 44 
Cambridge researchers and staff have successfully applied to become Data 
Champions; advocates for data management and sharing within their 
departments. The Champions are in a range of departments from Applied 
Mathematics through to Zoology, and include PIs, post-doctoral 
researchers, PhD students and support professionals. As well as 
advocating to their peers these Champions will be delivering 
discipline-specific training on research data management and sharing.


The Data Champions will help meet the demand for more data management 
training across Cambridge, something we are currently struggling to meet 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=877>, and will also 
create a Community of Practice of researchers who can share their 
expertise. In the coming weeks we will be adding information about the 
Data Champions to http://www.data.cam.ac.uk so researchers can find the 
right expert to help them. If you have any questions about this 
programme please email i...@data.cam.ac.uk <mailto:i...@data.cam.ac.uk>.


We have also made available two infographics about the repository and 
Open Access services at Cambridge 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/open-access/open-access-policies/oa-cambridge-oct-2016


The full list of announcements from this week are on our OA Week webpage 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/open-access/open-access-week-2016


*Events*

Last night we launched Apollo, our upgraded University repository 
https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/ - we couldn't go past the space theme 
of an 'Apollo launch' - with astronaut ice-cream giveaways, a NASA 
countdown, and even an intergalactic visit from Dr Peter Hedges, our 
Head of the Research Office.


There is a short story about the event: 'Mission Open Access: the Apollo 
Repository launches' https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=1156


The recordings from our events this week are now available on 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/open-access/open-access-week-2016 if you missed the 
live streams:


 * /"Preprints: biomedical science publication in the era of Twitter
   and Facebook"/
 * /"Open Access: grassroots movement or top-down imposition?"/


--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Open Access Week at the Office of Scholarly Communication, Cambridge - Thursday

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

Thursday already and Open Access Week is powering along.

*Blog*

Today's blog "*Are academic librarians getting the training they need?*" 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=995 discusses the issue 
of changing skill requirements for librarians in an academic context and 
the apparent lack of recognition of this in traditional library training.


*Announcement*
The Office of Scholarly Communication's survey on the educational 
background of those working in scholarly communication has struck a 
chord with the community, receiving 439 responses since it opened. 
Responses show that many of those working in this area come from outside 
librarianship, mainly from research and IT roles. Even those who do come 
from within the sector learn many of the necessary skills on the job 
rather than through formal education. This is opening up some 
interesting areas for future discussion and investigation.


 We have decided to keep the survey open for one more week so you still 
have an opportunity to participate - 
https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/ScholCommsEd Please complete the survey 
by *5pm BST on Monday 31 October*


*Events*

The recordings from our events in the last two days are now available if 
you missed the live streams:


 * /"Preprints: biomedical science publication in the era of Twitter
   and Facebook"/  is available from our OA Week page
   http://osc.cam.ac.uk/open-access/open-access-week-2016 You can also
   check out the hashtag #pptsca
 * /"Open Access: grassroots movement or top-down imposition?"/  was
   held yesterday. The panel came to some interesting conclusions - not
   least that if something that starts as a grassroots movement is
   taken up by government and funders, then this is a sign of success.
   Also that even if the agenda for open access is 'co-opted' in the
   process, if the end result is the same this doesn't necessarily
   matter. You may have your own opinon - you can watch the recording
   here http://osc.cam.ac.uk/open-access/open-access-week-2016 The
   hashtag  for the event is #OAWeekCam

This evening we will be launching our upgraded university repository, 
Apollo.


--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Open Access Week at the Office of Scholarly Communication, Cambridge - Wednesday

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

Wednesday already and we are halfway through Open Access week, but there 
is no slowing down.


*Blog*
Today's blog 'Theses - releasing an untapped resource' 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=993 is written by Dr 
Matthias Ammon and discusses the sharing of born digital theses and the 
issues and projects around digitising and sharing older print-only 
versions of PhDs.


*Announcement*

The Office of Scholarly Communication is pleased to able to announce 
that from late November we will be running a pilot for the electronic 
submission of PhD theses for the academic year 2016/17. In cooperation 
with several departments from across the University we will be 
requesting that PhD students in these departments who are submitting 
their thesis this year also upload a copy to Apollo. Our external 
developers are currently putting the final touches to the upload form 
which will make the whole process smooth and straightforward. Authors 
will be encouraged to make their theses available Open Access though 
this is not mandatory. More information can be found at 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/theses/digital-thesis-pilot


In order to release more of our older theses the Office of Scholarly 
Communication has entered into an agreement with the British Library to 
make a selection of 1,4000 theses the BL has on microfilm available in 
digital form. We have selected the titles and the digitisation is 
occurring now. We hope to have these uploaded into the repository 
towards the end of the year.


*Events*

Today we will be holding a debate - */"Open Access: grassroots movement 
or top-down imposition?"/* 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/open-access-grassroots-movement-or-top-down-imposition-panel-discussion-open-access-week-2016 where 
panellists will discuss this question and any related questions from the 
audience and general public. *You can send your questions via Twitter to 
**#OAWeekCam *The event will be live streamed from 1pm today and can be 
viewed at http://osc.cam.ac.uk/open-access/open-access-week-2016.


The panel are:

 * Mark Patterson - Executive Director, eLife and former Director of
   Publishing at PLoS
 * Kirstie Whitaker - Cambridge neuroscience researcher, advocate of
   open science and organiser of OpenCon Cam 2015 and 2016
 * Matt Hodgkinson - Head of Research Integrity at Hindawi, formerly
   editor at PLoS ONE and BioMed Central
 * Stuart Lawson - researcher at Birkbeck, University of London
   undertaking a PhD in the politics of open access.


If you missed yesterday's talk */"Preprints: biomedical science 
publication in the era of Twitter and Facebook"/* 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/preprints-biomedical-science-publication-era-twitter-and-facebook 
It can now be viewed at 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/open-access/open-access-week-2016 and the Twitter 
hashtag was*#pptsCamOA*


--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Open Access Week at the Office of Scholarly Communication, Cambridge - Tuesday

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

Today's happenings for Open Access week at the Office of Scholarly 
Communication.


*Blog*

Today's blog is written by Dr Lauren Cadwallader about her experience 
working on a research project where she attempted to work entirely 
openly. /*Walking the talk - reflections on working 'openly'*/ - 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=975 discusses the 
challenge and what researchers need to consider.


*Announcements*
The Office of Scholarly Communication is excited to be announcing that 
we will be working together with the Wellcome Trust on *a project to 
experiment with opening up research*. Details will be released shortly 
but from January 2017 we will be hoping to work with a small number of 
Cambridge research groups on the project. Sign up for our monthly 
newsletter not to miss the announcement 
http://www.data.cam.ac.uk/newsletter/signup


Today we launch our much awaited Copyright help pages 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/copyright which have been developed in response to 
the many queries members of our library staff have received from our 
researchers and students over the past few years. We hope they are useful.


*Events*
Today you can watch the livestream of our event */"Preprints: biomedical 
science publication in the era of Twitter and Facebook"/* 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/preprints-biomedical-science-publication-era-twitter-and-facebook 
from the embedded link on this page 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/open-access/open-access-week-2016between 2pm - 
5.30pm. *Join in the discussion on the **hashtag#pptsCamOA*


This event will bring together publishers and funders to talk about 
about how preprints might help researchers:


 * John Inglis (BioRxiv, CSH)
 * Mark Patterson (eLife)
 * Katherine Brown (The Company of Biologists)
 * Hannah Hope (The Wellcome Trust)
 * Sophia Abbasi (BBSRC)
 * Steven Royle (University of Warwick),
 * Raymond Goldstein, Alfonso Martinez Arias, Sudhakaran Prabakaran and
   Aylwynn Scally (University of Cambridge)

Don't forget to send your questions through for tomorrow's panel - 
*/"Open Access: grassroots movement or top-down imposition?" /***via 
Twitter to***#OAWeekCam**//*(This event will be livestreamed)


--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Open Access Week at the Office of Scholarly Communication, Cambridge - Monday

[Danny Kingsley]

Welcome to Open Access Week 2016! The Office of Scholarly Communication 
at Cambridge is celebrating with a series of blog posts written by 
members of the Office of Scholarly Communication team, events and 
announcements. We will send out a daily notice, and information will be 
added to our OA Week webpage - 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/open-access/open-access-week-2016 throughout the week.


*Blogs*

Today we have published two blogs looking at the issue of hybrid open 
access:


*Hybrid open access- an analysis* 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=969 looks at the origin 
of hybrid, the changing funder requirements and the uptake of hybrid in 
the UK versus the rest of the world
*Who is paying for hybrid?* 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=1002 analyses whether 
funds allow payment for hybrid open access


*Announcement*

In response to issues with compliance we have written an *open letter to 
/Blood/  journal* to request they amend their advice to authors funded 
by RCUK and COAF and offer a compliant option. You can see the letter 
here https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=1018 and if you 
wish to add your name to the signatures, please email i...@osc.cam.ac.uk 
<mailto:i...@osc.cam.ac.uk>


*Events*

*Today* we are holding an*/Introduction to Open Research for STEM PhD 
students/* 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/introduction-open-research-stem-phd-students This 
is part of the work we are doing around the issue of Open Research at 
Cambridge, given our researcher's expressed interest in the topic - 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=817 we have started 
building some resources around Open Research on the OSC website 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/open-research in addition to our blog post series 
on the topic 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?page_id=2#OpenResearch


On *Tuesday *we are presenting an event */"Preprints: biomedical science 
publication in the era of Twitter and Facebook"/* 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/preprints-biomedical-science-publication-era-twitter-and-facebook We 
will be live streaming the event *you can join in the discussion on the 
**hashtag#pptsCamOA*


This event will bring together publishers and funders to talk about 
about how preprints might help researchers:


 * John Inglis (BioRxiv, CSH)
 * Mark Patterson (eLife)
 * Katherine Brown (The Company of Biologists)
 * Hannah Hope (The Wellcome Trust)
 * Sophia Abbasi (BBSRC)
 * Steven Royle (University of Warwick),
 * Raymond Goldstein, Alfonso Martinez Arias, Sudhakaran Prabakaran and
   Aylwynn Scally (University of Cambridge)


On *Wednesday* we will be holding a debate - */"Open Access: grassroots 
movement or top-down imposition?"/* 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/open-access-grassroots-movement-or-top-down-imposition-panel-discussion-open-access-week-2016 where 
panellists will discuss this question and any related questions from the 
audience and general public. *You can send your questions via Twitter to 
**#OAWeekCam *


The panel are:

 * Mark Patterson - Executive Director, eLife and former Director of
   Publishing at PLoS
 * Kirstie Whitaker - Cambridge neuroscience researcher, advocate of
   open science and organiser of OpenCon Cam 2015 and 2016
 * Matt Hodgkinson - Head of Research Integrity at Hindawi, formerly
   editor at PLoS ONE and BioMed Central
 * Stuart Lawson - researcher at Birkbeck, University of London
   undertaking a PhD in the politics of open access.

In addition to the live audience, we will stream the session through the 
Cambridge University Library YouTube channel and invite engagement via 
Twitter throughout the discussion*on the hastag #OAWeekCam*


--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Calling people who work in scholarly communication

[Danny Kingsley]

**Apologies for cross-posting**

Do you work in scholarly communication? The Office of Scholarly 
Communication at Cambridge University invites you to participate in a 
brief survey exploring the education background of people working in 
scholarly communication.


The survey can be found here: https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/ScholCommsEd

This survey is aimed at people who are working in scholarly 
communication and associated support services. This covers areas which 
include, but are not limited to, open access and open data, copyright, 
institutional repositories and research data management.


We estimate that the survey will take approximately 15 minutes to 
complete and will close on Monday 24 October 2016. We will be sharing 
the (aggregated) results with the community after analysis.


If you have any questions or would like further information please 
contact i...@osc.cam.ac.uk <mailto:i...@osc.cam.ac.uk>


Thanks in advance.

Danny Kingsley, Head & Claire Sewell, Research Skills Coordinator
Office of Scholarly Communication

--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Question about changing 'esteem' value of journals

[Danny Kingsley]

Hi all,

This is a question that comes up every now and then with researchers. 

You spend all your career publishing in the 'Journal of X’ because it is the 
fancy-pants journal of your discipline. The citations to your work in Journal 
of X are also part of your reputation. Then something happens - the journal 
loses reputation, or is closed down, or another journal becomes more 
influential (the Glossa example comes to mind) and suddenly the 'Journal of X' 
is not considered the top journal any more because 'Journal of Y’ is. What 
happens to your reputation?

I get the argument that ‘it shouldn’t matter because the emphasis should be on 
the quality of the paper’ - but many (many, many) researchers have impact 
factor deeply embedded in their psyche.

I don’t know if there are any case studies or writings on this issue that 
anyone can point me to?

Thanks in advance for help.

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk <mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/ 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/>
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley 
<http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley>
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939




___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] BLOG: Taking a Principled stance - the Scholarly Commons

[Danny Kingsley]

Hi Heather,

I agree and this was one of things that was discussed at length - about 
the risk of putting up a fence and saying 'you're on the other side'. 
The point is trying to establish what it is we are saying when we mean 
that a researcher is working openly. And to find things that we can 
recognise and praise people for doing that works towards this utopia - 
because this is a utopia and one that in all likelihood won't be ever 
completely realised.


This is a community discussion, no-one 'owns' the Scholalry Commons 
(putting aside the fact that they are a concept so couldn't be owned 
anyway). The idea is that we - the community interested in this kind of 
thing - work together to try and come to some agreement.


We had a very wide range of people at the workshop. Some people are from 
countries where the whole idea of open access is still very new. For 
them, having something that they can point to as a list or set of 
Principles that the community generally agree with is very helpful as a 
starting point. Even in a (very) well established university, I am 
having some difficulty discussing the idea of 'Open Research' with the 
research community because it is a nebulous concept.


We welcome discussion - anyone who is interested can join FORCE11 - the 
'join us' button is on the top of the webpage https://www.force11.org/


Regards,

Danny

On 22/09/2016 15:23, Heather Morrison wrote:

hi Danny,

The idea of  "an attempt to define what the community considers the 
attributes and behaviours of a person who is fully participating in 
research" can be interpreted as signalling a movement towards negative 
branding or deprecation of anyone the community considers less than 
pure according to community standards, as does this discussion point" 
"An agreement as to inclusion implies a concomitant agreement to exclude".


Is it one of the purposes of the group to attack or deprecate a 
"person" whose "attributes and behaviours" are not what this group 
considers to be "fully participating in research"? Perhaps I am 
misunderstanding - please advise.


best,

--
Dr. Heather Morrison
Assistant Professor
École des sciences de l'information / School of Information Studies
University of Ottawa
Desmarais 111-02
613-562-5800 ext. 7634
Sustaining the Knowledge Commons: Open Access Scholarship
http://sustainingknowledgecommons.org/
http://www.sis.uottawa.ca/faculty/hmorrison.html
heather.morri...@uottawa.ca <mailto:heather.morri...@uottawa.ca>




On 2016-09-22, at 9:19 AM, Danny Kingsley <da...@cam.ac.uk 
<mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>>

 wrote:




I have just returned from a two day workshop looking at the 
'Scholarly Commons'. Never heard of it? You might want to read on...


"Taking a Principled stance - the Scholarly Commons" 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=919 is a blog about 
the FORCE11 event, now published in /Unlocking Research/.


Taster:

It only rains about 10 days a year in San Diego. And Tuesday was one 
of them. In a rooftop room on campus in San Diego at UCSD, a group 
had gathered for theFORCE11 Scholarly Commons workshop 
<https://www.force11.org/group/scholarly-commons-working-group/san-diego-workshop-sept-2016>. The 
workshop brought together members of the Scholarly Commons working 
group 
<https://www.force11.org/group/scholarly-commons-working-group>, who 
hail from around the world and come from the broad scholarly commons. 
The Scholarly Commons is an idea to help define the future of 
research communication.*The goal is to promote the best research and 
scholarship possible through rapid **and wide dissemination to all 
who need or want it.*


We were meeting to discuss the draft of 18Principles of the Commons 
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p7RoG_ja-8Gx-7YODw8iHWFsKn5YAVeHv0UYRyzWmL4/edit> – 
an attempt to define what the community considers the attributes and 
behaviours of a person who is fully participating in research.*The 
Principles are broadly separated into four major themes of being 
Open, Equitable, Sustainable and Research & Culture Driven*.


**
Read it and join in if you are interested...

Danny
--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E:da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
B:https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
S:http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939
___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org <mailto:GOAL@eprints.org>
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal





___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] BLOG: Taking a Principled stance - the Scholarly Commons

[Danny Kingsley]

I have just returned from a two day workshop looking at the 'Scholarly 
Commons'. Never heard of it? You might want to read on...


"Taking a Principled stance - the Scholarly Commons" 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=919 is a blog about the 
FORCE11 event, now published in /Unlocking Research/.


Taster:

It only rains about 10 days a year in San Diego. And Tuesday was one of 
them. In a rooftop room on campus in San Diego at UCSD, a group had 
gathered for theFORCE11 Scholarly Commons workshop 
<https://www.force11.org/group/scholarly-commons-working-group/san-diego-workshop-sept-2016>. The 
workshop brought together members of the Scholarly Commons working group 
<https://www.force11.org/group/scholarly-commons-working-group>, who 
hail from around the world and come from the broad scholarly commons. 
The Scholarly Commons is an idea to help define the future of research 
communication.*The goal is to promote the best research and scholarship 
possible through rapid **and wide dissemination to all who need or want it.*


We were meeting to discuss the draft of 18Principles of the Commons 
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p7RoG_ja-8Gx-7YODw8iHWFsKn5YAVeHv0UYRyzWmL4/edit> -- 
an attempt to define what the community considers the attributes and 
behaviours of a person who is fully participating in research.*The 
Principles are broadly separated into four major themes of being Open, 
Equitable, Sustainable and Research & Culture Driven*.


**
Read it and join in if you are interested...

Danny

--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Cambridge APC spend - RCUK report 2015-2016 and all reports dating back to 2009 are now publicly available

[Danny Kingsley]

Dear all,

The Office of Scholarly Communication has today made available all 
information Cambridge University holds about APC expenditure since 
records began in 2009. We have created a Collection in Apollo, the 
University repository https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/260180


For those who do not wish to trawl through Excel sheets a short 
explanation of the 2015-2016 RCUK report that we submitted today is 
contained in this blog post 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=899


The headline figures for the 2015-2016 RCUK fund are:

 * In total Cambridge spent £1,288,090 of RCUK funds on APCs
 * 1786 articles identified as being RCUK funded were submitted to the
   Open Access Service, of which 890 required payment for RCUK
 * 785 articles have been invoiced and paid
 * The average article cost was ~*£2008*


Regards,

Danny


--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Exciting role - Repository Manager at Cambridge University

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

Have you come back from holidays full of ideas about a change of job? 
The Office of Scholarly Communication at Cambridge University is 
advertising for a Manager of Institutional Repository. The role has 
become vacant due to the encumbent pursing a study opportunity which is 
great for her, but leaves us with a big hole to fill.


The job advertisement is here: http://www.lib.cam.ac.uk/Vacancies/#212

Applications close 5 October and we intend to interview in the week of 
10 October.*** *Please pass on to anyone you feel might be interested.


Come and work with us!

Regards

Danny

*Manager of Institutional Repository*
*Grade:*6
*Salary Range:*£27,328-£32,600

The University of Cambridge is seeking an enthusiastic, experienced 
individual to work within the Office of Scholarly Communication as the 
Manager of Institutional Repository. The funding landscape in the UK now 
requires that the outputs of funded research, such as research articles, 
conference proceedings and supporting research data are made publicly 
available. The University's DSpace repository houses the wide range of 
research outputs of the University, ranging from published articles and 
conference papers, through to datasets, theses, videos and molecules.


The post holder will work within the growing and friendly Office of 
Scholarly Communication at the University Library. He/she will manage 
the digital content of the institutional repository and provide 
assistance to end users, including advice relating to third party 
copyright issues. He/she will be also responsible for reviewing and 
where necessary, modifying, the structure of digital collections in the 
repository, as well as the organisation of various types of research 
outputs stored in the repository. The role holder will participate in 
the ongoing upgrades and integration of the repository within existing 
and future Library and University systems. This will involve 
consideration of workflows that increase efficiency and provide a 
positive experience for the users. The Manager of Institutional 
Repository will stay abreast of developments in discipline-specific and 
generic metadata standards, and technological advancements in digital 
curation and preservation.


Applicants should have an understanding of the academic environment, 
familiarity with a range of data formats, desktop software, and 
operating systems, and be willing to learn. Applicants should have 
expert IT skills, knowledge of Linux, command line, xml protocols, and 
the ability to communicate technical information with clarity and 
effectiveness.


Fixed-term: The funds for this post are available for 3 years in the 
first instance.


To apply for the post, please click the Cambridge University Job 
Opportunitieslink. <http://www.jobs.cam.ac.uk/job/10908/>This will 
direct you to the University's web-based recruitment system, where you 
will be able to create and log in to create an online application form.


The closing date for applications is Wednesday 5 October 2016

For informal enquiries please contact Dr Danny Kingsley,da...@cam.ac.uk 
<mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>


Please quote reference VE09626 on your application and in any 
correspondence about this vacancy.


The University values diversity and is committed to equality of opportunity.

The University has a responsibility to ensure that all employees are 
eligible to live and work in the UK.


*Closing Date: Wednesday 5 October 2016*


--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] GOAL Digest, Vol 58, Issue 2

[Danny Kingsley]

Thanks Emily,

There has been a posting on Scholarly Kitchen about it with Kent 
Anderson's calculations - you may agree or wish to answer the call.


Danny


 Annual Reports --- What Do They Actually Tell Us?

POSTED BYKENT ANDERSON 
?AUG 29, 2016
 - 
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2016/08/29/annual-reports-what-do-they-actually-tell-us/


Kent states:

Unfortunately,/eLife's/report is itself rather opaque.

Like some of its ilk, the report provides some insights into the 
organization's finances, but obscures many things, using questionable 
math to achieve certain ratios and make certain claims. It also leaves 
out many costs in order to generate a misleading cost-per-article 
calculation.


Costs that are left out of the equation includethe approximately 2,400 
square feet of office space 
, 
which seems to rent for about US$40 (furnished) per square foot, giving 
us an approximate cost of US$96,000 annually, or roughly another $100 
per article. Legal fees, human resources, benefits, and other corporate 
overheads may or may not be captured, but experience suggests they have 
been left out, which would be another approximately 20-30% premium on 
all the fixed costs, which calculates out to another US$780,000 on the 
high side, or US$780 per article.


There is a lot of text expended rationalizing the amount of 
money/eLife/spends paying its editors. But little transparency is given, 
with only a single number for editorial salaries as a whole provided. 
Unlike in the IRS 990, no specific salaries are given. We can find 
recent ones elsewhere, fortunately.


The math on publishing costs in the/eLife/annual report is questionable, 
with some capital expenditures held out as non-publishing expenses 
despite their clear relevance to a long-term technology publishing plan. 
In fact, this bit of financial contortion removes 22% of their 
expenditures, which suppresses their per-article charge calculations by 
a similar amount. For example, the calculations without the capital 
expenditure for 2015 come out to about US$4,700 per article. But, with 
the capital expenditure factored back into the overall expenses, the 
per-article publishing cost rises to US$5,500.


Factoring in the work space, overheads, and capital expenditures, and 
the/eLife/cost-per-article goes from US$4,700 to roughly US$6,380. And 
we're still not sure that we've seen all their expenses. This is 
approximately 27% more than Patterson states.




On 06/09/2016 12:00, goal-requ...@eprints.org wrote:

Send GOAL mailing list submissions to
goal@eprints.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
goal-requ...@eprints.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
goal-ow...@eprints.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of GOAL digest..."


Today's Topics:

1. Inside eLife: What it costs to publish (Emily Packer)


--

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 15:43:13 +0100
From: Emily Packer 
Subject: [GOAL] Inside eLife: What it costs to publish
To: goal@eprints.org
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

[Apologies for cross-posting]

Hi all,

Of interest, eLife has published its 2015 annual report, detailing
our costs of publishing versus those of our technology innovation and
development.



Every year since 2012, eLife has published an annual report on activities
along with our US Form 990 (required for our type of non-profit
organisation) and our audited financial accounts. This year, we present a
deeper view of our 2015 financials, covering publishing and non-publishing
expenses.



As part of our ambition to change how science publishing works, especially
among highly selective journals, we hope that being transparent about
our costs will help set a future course for research communication that is
efficient and sustainable.



eLife's Executive Director, Mark Patterson, and Head of External Relations,
Jennifer McLennan, have written a blog post that provides further
information about our costs (https://elifesciences.org/eli
fe-news/inside-elife-what-it-costs-publish) and the Times Higher Education
featured a news piece: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/elife-
reveals-publication-costs-spark-debate-journal-prices.


Our 2015 annual report is also available to view here:
https://2015.elifesciences.org.


Please let me know if you would like any further information.



Kind regards,


Emily




___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org

[GOAL] Call for Proposals - Researcher to Reader Conference, London, 20 & 21 February 2017

[Danny Kingsley]

*Call for Proposals*
The Researcher to Reader Conference is the forum for discussion of the 
creation and dissemination of international scholarly content. The 
Conference Advisory Board is inviting proposals for participation in the 
next Conference, on 20 & 21 February 2017.


A proposal could include a topic, presentation, panel or workshop for 
the event, or a nomination for a speaker, panellist or facilitator. Each 
speaker, panellist and facilitator is offered a complimentary place at 
the conference.


Please respond by 31 August 2016; although later submissions may be 
considered.


*Proposals *
Each proposal should include the following information:

 * Title and format of the proposal (presentation / workshop / etc)
 * Name, contact details and credentials for the proposer / speaker /
   panellist / facilitator
 * A description or abstract of about 100-300 words

We are particularly seeking participation by librarians, researchers, 
editors and funders, and by people based outside the UK.


Please send suggestions, proposals or any other communications to the 
Conference Chairman, Mark Carden, at i...@r2rconf.com. For additional 
information about the 2017 Conference and Programme, please visit the 
website at *www.R2RConf.com*


*Themes & Topics *
We welcome suggestions for themes and topics that would be relevant, and 
of interest to our delegates, ideally accompanied by suggestions for 
appropriate speakers. Although we are open to a wide range of topics, 
some of the subject we are particularly keen to include in the 2017 
programme include:


 * International Funding and International Research Collaboration
 * Metrics in Funding, Discovery and Usage
 * Marketing and Selling Scholarly Content (Paid or Free)
 * The Financial Future of Learned Societies
 * Access, Authentication & Entitlement

*Presentations*
Speaker sessions can be in the form of either presentations (lasting 
approximately 20-40 minutes) or 'lightning talks' (where the speaker 
will have a very brief opportunity to just introduce a topic).


*Workshops *
Delegates attend one out of about six workshop topics, and each has a 
duration of 2½ hours, split across three sessions during the two days of 
the Conference. Workshops work best when discussing and resolving a 
clearly-defined question or problem.


*Panels *
Panel discussions are a chance for both experts and general delegates to 
discuss a key topic of interest to the community. Panels work best where 
an issue needs discussion amongst knowledgeable pundits, and where the 
chair is well-prepared and an excellent facilitator.


--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] BLOGS: The case for Open Research: does peer review work? and Lifting the lid on peer review PLUS a discussion paper

[Danny Kingsley]

Good afternoon,

A cornucopia of peer-review related items for your perusal today. The 
fourth post in the Case for Open Research series is now available, this 
time turning its attention to peer review. This blog follows on from the 
last and asks -*if peer review is working why are we facing issues like 
increased retractions and the inability to reproduce considerable 
proportion of the literature?*(Spoiler alert - peer review only works 
sometimes.)


"The case for Open Research: does peer review work?" is available at: 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=188


Published alongside this post is the write-up from a series of 
discussions about peer review held last year by Cambridge University 
Press with Cambridge researchers who act as editors of journals.


"Lifting the lid on peer review" is available at: 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=759


In addition a Discussion Paper based on my PhD research into peer review 
is also available in Apollo, Cambridge University's repository (abstract 
below)
"The Peer Review Paradox: An Australian case study" is available at 
https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/256773


The first three blogs in 'The case for Open Research' series are:

 * The case for Open Research: the mis-measurement problem
   https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=713
 * The case for Open Research: the authorship problem
   https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=720
 * The case for Open Research: reproducibility, retractions &
   retrospective hypotheses
   https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=727


Regards,

Danny


 Citation


Kingsley, D. A.(2016).The Peer Review Paradox: An Australian case study 
http://dx.doi.org/10.17863/CAM.708



 Abstract

This paper discusses the results of a series of 42 interviews with 
Chemists, Computer Scientists and Sociologists conducted in 2006-2007 at 
two Australian universities. All academics perform peer review with 
later career researcher usually taking a greater load. The amount and 
type of review undertaken differs between disciplines. In general, 
review of journal articles and conference papers is unpaid work although 
reviewing books (a much larger task) often results in at least an offer 
of a free book from the publishers. Reviewing of grant proposals and 
theses does attract an honorarium, but these are insignificant amounts. 
Most interviewees indicated that reviewing is part of what is expected 
in academia, and that it offers the benefit of early access to new 
research results. The competing requirements of an academic's peer group 
and the institution at which they work has meant a sharp increase in the 
number of papers published over the past decade. This in turn has made 
finding referees difficult, and the fact the work goes unrecognised by 
the performance measurement process adds to the problem. The claim of 
certain conferences that their papers are refereed is met with some 
cynicism, even in Computer Science, which normally uses conferences as 
its main channel of peer reviewed communication. Overall these findings 
open the question of whether the amount of effort expended in peer 
review is justified.


--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] JOIN US: Manager of Institutional Repository job is available

[Danny Kingsley]

Due to a staff member pursuing further study a new vacancy has arisen at 
the Office of Scholarly Communication at Cambridge University - Manager 
of the Institutional Repository. Details are at: 
http://www.jobs.cam.ac.uk/job/10908/


The University of Cambridge is seeking an enthusiastic, experienced 
individual to work within the Office of Scholarly Communication as the 
Manager of Institutional Repository. The funding landscape in the UK now 
requires that the outputs of funded research, such as research articles, 
conference proceedings and supporting research data are made publicly 
available. The University's DSpace repository houses the wide range of 
research outputs of the University, ranging from published articles and 
conference papers, through to datasets, theses, videos and molecules.


The post holder will work within the growing and friendly Office of 
Scholarly Communication at the University Library. He/she will manage 
the digital content of the institutional repository and provide 
assistance to end users, including advice relating to third party 
copyright issues. He/she will be also responsible for reviewing and 
where necessary, modifying, the structure of digital collections in the 
repository, as well as the organisation of various types of research 
outputs stored in the repository. The role holder will participate in 
the ongoing upgrades and integration of the repository within existing 
and future Library and University systems. This will involve 
consideration of workflows that increase efficiency and provide a 
positive experience for the users. The Manager of Institutional 
Repository will stay abreast of developments in discipline-specific and 
generic metadata standards, and technological advancements in digital 
curation and preservation.


Applicants should have an understanding of the academic environment, 
familiarity with a range of data formats, desktop software, and 
operating systems, and be willing to learn. Applicants should have 
expert IT skills, knowledge of Linux, command line, xml protocols, and 
the ability to communicate technical information with clarity and 
effectiveness.


Fixed-term: The funds for this post are available for 3 years in the 
first instance.


To apply online for this vacancy, please click on the 'Apply' button 
below. This will route you to the University's Web Recruitment System, 
where you will need to register an account (if you have not already) and 
log in before completing the online application form.


The closing date for applications is Friday 29 July 2016.

Interviews for this post are anticipated to take place in early August.

If you have any questions about this vacancy or the application process, 
please contact Dr Danny Kingsley, Office of Scholarly Communication, 
Cambridge University Library, Tel: 01223-(7)47 437; 
Email:da...@cam.ac.uk <mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>



--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] BLOG: The case for Open Research: reproducibility, retractions & retrospective hypotheses

[Danny Kingsley]

Good morning all,

The third in the series arguing for Open Research has been published. "The case 
for Open Research: reproducibility, retractions & retrospective hypotheses is 
available at https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=727

A taster:


This blog will explore the accuracy of the research record, including the 
ability (or otherwise) to reproduce research that has been published, what 
happens if research is retracted, and a concerning trend towards altering 
hypotheses in light of the data that is produced.

Science is thought to progress  through the building of knowledge through 
questioning, testing and checking work. The idea of ‘standing on the shoulders 
of giants’ summarises this – we discover truth by building on previous 
discoveries. But scientists are very rarely rewarded for being right, they are 
rewarded for publishing in certain journals and for getting grants. This can 
result in distortion of the science.



The first two blogs are:

The case for Open Research: the mis-measurement problem 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=713 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=713> 
The case for Open Research: the authorship problem 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=720 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=720>

Regards,

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk <mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/ 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/>
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley 
<http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley>
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939




___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] BLOG: The case for Open Research: the authorship problem

[Danny Kingsley]

Dear all,

The second instalment in the Case for Open Research series has just been 
published. "The case for Open Research: the authorship problem” is available at 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=720 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=720> This post looks at issues 
of hyperauthorship, academic credit and problems with academic responsibility.

It follows on from the first post: "The case for Open Research: the 
mis-measurement problem https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=713 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=713>

Regards,

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk <mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/ 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/>
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley 
<http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley>
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939




___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] BLOG: The case for Open Research: the mismeasurement problem

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

The first in a series of blogs about 'The case for Open Research' went 
live today.


The case for Open Research: the mismeasurement problem - 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=713


A taster:
*

Let's face it. The biggest blockage we have to widespread Open Access is 
not researcher apathy, a lack of interoperable systems, or an 
unwillingness of publishers to engage (although these do each play some 
part) -- it is the problem that*the only thing that counts in academia 
is publication in a high impact journal*.


This situation is causing multiple problems, from huge numbers of 
authors on papers, researchers cherry picking results and 
retrospectively applying hypotheses, to the reproducibility crisis and a 
surge in retractions.


This blog was intended to be an exploration of some solutions prefaced 
by a short overview of the issues. Rather depressingly, there was so 
much material the blog hashad to be split up, with several parts 
describing the problem(s) before getting to the solutions.


Prepare yourself, this will be a bumpy ride. <...snip...>
***

I'm not sure that 'enjoy' is the right sign off.

Danny

--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] Event - 23 June at Cambridge - 'Working Towards an Open, Research Future' (Richard Poynder)

[Danny Kingsley]

Hi Richard,

The event has been organised by Hindawi which might explain the 
publisher focus. Cambridge Union is a student union and it is expected 
that the target audience will be PhD students primarily and possibly 
some undergraduates (although the timing of it means many will have left 
for the year after exams and graduation).

I will be able to report back once it has happened but my understanding 
is that the panel discussion will be interactive with the audience.

Danny

On 05/06/2016 13:37, goal-requ...@eprints.org wrote:
> Send GOAL mailing list submissions to
>   goal@eprints.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>   http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>   goal-requ...@eprints.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>   goal-ow...@eprints.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of GOAL digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Event - 23 June at Cambridge - 'Working Towards an Open
>Research Future' (Richard Poynder)
>
>
> --
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2016 13:32:13 +0100
> From: "Richard Poynder" <richard.poyn...@cantab.net>
> Subject: Re: [GOAL] Event - 23 June at Cambridge - 'Working Towards an
>   OpenResearch Future'
> To: "'Global Open Access List \(Successor of AmSci\)'"
>   <goal@eprints.org>
> Message-ID: <001501d1bf26$49bd9a00$dd38ce00$@cantab.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Fuller details of this event are available here: 
> https://www.eventbrite.com/e/working-towards-an-open-research-future-tickets-25313623730
>
>   
>
> I realise this is presented as a workshop, but what strikes me is that it is 
> top heavy with publishers. I am also not sure how the voice of the researcher 
> (for whom open access is surely most pertinent) will be represented here. Are 
> researchers to be viewed as passive recipients of open access, or active 
> agents?
>
>   
>
> I also think it is misleading to refer to the recent EU statement on open 
> access as a ?mandate? (If this is a reference to this: 
> http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-8791-2016-INIT/en/pdf).
>
>   
>
> List members might want to refer to this article for further information on 
> the EU?s recent statement:
>
> http://arstechnica.co.uk/science/2016/05/eu-open-access-research-competitiveness-council/
>
>   
>
> Richard Poynder
>
>   
>
>   
>
> From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of 
> Danny Kingsley
> Sent: 05 June 2016 08:46
> To: goal@eprints.org; ukcorr-discuss...@jiscmail.ac.uk
> Cc: lib-st...@lists.cam.ac.uk; lib-l...@lists.cam.ac.uk
> Subject: [GOAL] Event - 23 June at Cambridge - 'Working Towards an Open 
> Research Future'
>
>   
>
> Hi all,
>
>   
>
> You may be interested in this event being held at Cambridge in a couple of 
> weeks.
>
>   
> <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.eventbrite.com%2Fe%2Fworking-towards-an-open-research-future-tickets-25313623730=D=2=AFQjCNHhbeL-91sLEz75afaRahmSSDYJTg>
>  
> https://www.eventbrite.com/e/working-towards-an-open-research-future-tickets-25313623730
>
> Working Towards an Open Research Future
> Date: Thursday 23rd June 2016, 2pm - 5.30pm
> Cambridge Union Society (Library Room) 9A Bridge St, Cambridge CB2 1UB
>
> 14:00-14:15 Keynote #1 Publisher Perspective (Paul Peters, President, OASPA; 
> CEO, Hindawi)
> Brief overview of Open Access from a publisher?s perspective. What were the 
> drivers for the conversion to open access, how have they changed, and what 
> are the major open access discussions shaping the future for publishers. What 
> are the broader infrastructural challenges faced by the industry as a whole 
> and how are these being addressed?
>
> 14:20-15:10 Panel Discussion #1 Open Access Models
> Moderator: (Paul Peters)
> Open Access is evolving into many forms, this panel will look at some of the 
> different models that have developed in this space. It will consider the 
> merits and potential challenges that they present for publishers, 
> institutions and funding bodies.
>
> ? Sara Grime, Publishing & Product Director - Heliyon
> ? Matt Day, Head of Open and Data - Cambridge University Press
> ? Lara Speicher, Publishing Manager - UCL Press
>
> 15:10-15:25 Keynote #2 Institutional Perspective ? (Dr Danny Kingsley)
> The challenges of Open Access. What are the obstacles, annoyances and hazards 

[GOAL] Event - 23 June at Cambridge - 'Working Towards an Open Research Future'

[Danny Kingsley]

Hi all,

You may be interested in this event being held at Cambridge in a couple of 
weeks.
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/working-towards-an-open-research-future-tickets-25313623730
 
<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.eventbrite.com%2Fe%2Fworking-towards-an-open-research-future-tickets-25313623730=D=2=AFQjCNHhbeL-91sLEz75afaRahmSSDYJTg>
Working Towards an Open Research Future
Date: Thursday 23rd June 2016, 2pm - 5.30pm
Cambridge Union Society (Library Room) 9A Bridge St, Cambridge CB2 1UB
 
14:00-14:15 Keynote #1 Publisher Perspective (Paul Peters, President, OASPA; 
CEO, Hindawi)
Brief overview of Open Access from a publisher’s perspective. What were the 
drivers for the conversion to open access, how have they changed, and what are 
the major open access discussions shaping the future for publishers. What are 
the broader infrastructural challenges faced by the industry as a whole and how 
are these being addressed?
 
14:20-15:10 Panel Discussion #1 Open Access Models
Moderator: (Paul Peters)
Open Access is evolving into many forms, this panel will look at some of the 
different models that have developed in this space.  It will consider the 
merits and potential challenges that they present for publishers, institutions 
and funding bodies.  

·   Sara Grime, Publishing & Product Director - Heliyon
·   Matt Day, Head of Open and Data - Cambridge University Press
·   Lara Speicher, Publishing Manager - UCL Press

15:10-15:25 Keynote #2 Institutional Perspective – (Dr Danny Kingsley)
The challenges of Open Access. What are the obstacles, annoyances and hazards 
for institutions in making their research output openly accessible? How has the 
landscape changed over the years, from a “nice to have” option put forward by 
more activist members of the research community, to an imperative supported by 
major funder. What steps need to be taken to ensure that, going forward, 
individual researchers are able to meet accessibility criteria and don’t fall 
foul of these new guidelines?
 
15:30 – 15:50 Coffee Break
 
15:50-16:30 Panel Discussion #2 Publishing Solutions
Moderator: (Dr. Danny Kingsley, University of Cambridge)
How are various stakeholders tackling the challenges outlined above by Dr 
Kingsley? With a vast number of new funder and institutional requirements 
increasing the burden on institutions and researchers what can be done to help? 
 

·   Matt Green, Head of Institutional Membership -  Hindawi
·   Catriona MacCallum - Acting Director of Advocacy at Public Library of 
Science PLOS
·   Carolyn Alderson - Deputy Director Jisc Collections
 
16:30-17:10 Panel Discussion #3 Technology Innovation
Moderator: (Liz Allen, F1000)
How can technology help researchers collaborate effectively online; provide a 
view on usage and sharing far beyond traditional measures and create an 
interlinked infrastructure? This panel will look at ways in which technology 
can support the creation, distribution and discussion around scholarly content. 
 
 
·   Ali Smith, Web Developer - Overleaf  
·   Euan Adie, Founder - Altmetric
·   Geoffrey Bilder - Director Of Strategic Initiatives – CrossRef
·
17:10-17:20 Closing Remarks  
 
17:30-  Refreshments at the Union Bar


Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk <mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/ 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/>
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley 
<http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley>
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939




___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Two jobs in Office of Scholarly Communication at Cambridge

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

We have two exciting job opportunities to join our dynamic Office of Scholarly 
Communication team at Cambridge:
- Research Data Adviser: http://www.jobs.cam.ac.uk/job/10449/ 
<http://www.jobs.cam.ac.uk/job/10449/> (applications close on 7 June)
- Outreach and Engagement Coordinator: 
http://www.jobs.cam.ac.uk/job/10502/ <http://www.jobs.cam.ac.uk/job/10502/> 
(applications close on 15 June)

Regards,

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk <mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/ 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/>
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley 
<http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley>
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939




___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Re: [GOAL] BLOG: Press embargoes ? a threat from the shadows, (William Gunn)

[Danny Kingsley]

gt;> its benefits. (2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and
>> material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic
>> production of which he is the author. ?
>> and try to imagine what it means:
>>
>>  - that our world has decided there is a collective right to science in
>> which scientists have a big role to play in it (by freely sharing their
>> work)
>>
>>  - that researchers have a right to be protected against publishers
>> that terrify them.
>>
>>
>> Florence Piron (Universit? Laval), totally fed-up
>>
>>
>>
>> Le 2016-05-20 ? 06:54, Danny Kingsley a ?crit :
>>
>> 
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> Our latest blog on Unlocking Research is looking at the issue of press
>> embargoes.
>>
>> Below is a teaser from "Press embargoes ? a threat from the shadows" -
>> https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=653
>>
>> 
>> Something has been rumbling under the surface in the repository world
>> recently, at least in the UK. Over the past six months or so, the Office of
>> Scholarly Communication has had some fraught conversations with researchers
>> who are terrified that their papers will be 'pulled' from publication by
>> the journal. The reason is because some information about the upcoming
>> paper is publicly available.
>>
>> 
>>
>> Our researchers are concerned that having the metadata about an article
>> available means that publishers will consider this a breach of embargo and
>> will pull the publication. Note that the Author?s Accepted Manuscript of
>> the article itself (or the data files, in case of datasets) is locked down
>> and the information about the volume, issue and pages are missing as the
>> work is not yet published.
>>
>> The researchers are worried because there is a need for publication in
>> high profile journals such as *Nature* for their careers and if a work
>> was to be pulled from publication this would have huge implications for
>> them. This has caused a challenge for us ? clearly we do not wish to
>> threaten our researchers? publication prospects, but we are also bound by
>> the requirements of the HEFCE policy.
>> 
>> *
>>
>> Comments welcomed.
>>
>> Danny
>>
>> --
>> Dr Danny Kingsley
>> Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
>> Cambridge University Library
>> West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
>> P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
>> M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
>> E: da...@cam.ac.uk
>> T: @dannykay68
>> B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
>> S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
>> ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> GOAL mailing 
>> listGOAL@eprints.orghttp://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> GOAL mailing list
>> GOAL@eprints.org
>> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>>
>>

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] BLOG: Press embargoes – a threat from the shadows

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

Our latest blog on Unlocking Research is looking at the issue of press 
embargoes.


Below is a teaser from "Press embargoes – a threat from the shadows" - 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=653



Something has been rumbling under the surface in the repository world 
recently, at least in the UK. Over the past six months or so, the Office 
of Scholarly Communication has had some fraught conversations with 
researchers who are terrified that their papers will be 'pulled' from 
publication by the journal. The reason is because some information about 
the upcoming paper is publicly available.




Our researchers are concerned that having the metadata about an article 
available means that publishers will consider this a breach of embargo 
and will pull the publication. Note that the Author’s Accepted 
Manuscript of the article itself (or the data files, in case of 
datasets) is locked down and the information about the volume, issue and 
pages are missing as the work is not yet published.


The researchers are worried because there is a need for publication in 
high profile journals such as/Nature/for their careers and if a work was 
to be pulled from publication this would have huge implications for 
them. This has caused a challenge for us – clearly we do not wish to 
threaten our researchers’ publication prospects, but we are also bound 
by the requirements of the HEFCE policy.



*

Comments welcomed.

Danny

--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
B: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/
S: http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] BLOG: Show me the money – the path to a sustainable Research Data Facility

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello everyone,

You might find the latest Unlocking Research blog of interest because it 
explains how we are going to fund our research data management services.

Regards

Danny

Show me the money – the path to a sustainable Research Data Facility
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=631 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=631>

Like many institutions in the UK, Cambridge University has responded to 
research funders' requirements for data management and  sharing with a 
concerted effort to support our research community in good data management and 
sharing practice through our Research Data Facility. […]

The word sustainability (particularly in the scholarly communication world) is 
code for 'money'. And money has become quite a sticking point in the area of 
data management. […]

Clearly there was a need to work out the longer term support for staffing the 
Facility - a service for which there are no signs of demand slowing. Early last 
year we started scouting around for options. […]


Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939




___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] BLOG: Notes from the first Open Scholarship Initiative workshop

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

I have written up my notes from the first Open Scholarship Initiative workshop: 
'Watch this space - first OSI workshop' 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=614 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=614>

A taster:

It was always an ambitious project – trying to gather 250 high level delegates 
from all aspects of the scholarly communication process with the goal of better 
communication and idea sharing between sectors of the ecosystem. The first 
meeting of the Open Scholarship Initiative 
<http://nationalscience.org/portfolio/open-scholarship-initiative/> (OSI) 
happened in Fairfax, Virginia last week. Kudos to the National Science 
Communication Institute <http://nationalscience.org/> for managing the 
astonishing logistics of an exercise like this – and basically pulling it off.

This was billed as a ‘meeting between global, high-level stakeholders in 
research’ with a goal to ‘lay the groundwork for creating a global 
collaborative framework to manage the future of scholarly publishing and 
everything these practices impact’. The OSI is being supported by UNESCO who 
have committed to the full 10 year life of the project. As things currently 
stand, the plan is to repeat the meeting annually for a decade. 

I am fairly sure I have solved the spam issue on the blog so comments to the 
blog *should* appear.

Enjoy!

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939




___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] BLOG: Consider yourself disrupted - notes from RLUK2016

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

You may be interested in the latest blog from Unlocking Research: "Consider 
yourself disrupted - notes from RLUK2016" - 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=601 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=601>

A teaser:

The 2016 Research Libraries UK <http://rlukconference.com/> conference was held 
at the British Library from 9-11 March on the theme of disruptive innovation. 
This blog pulls out some of the highlights personally gained from the 
conference:

If librarians are to be considered important – we as a community need to be 
strong in our grasp of understanding scholarly communication issues
We need to know the facts about our subscriptions to, usage of and 
contributions to scholarly publishing
We need high level support in institutions to back libraries in advocacy and 
negotiation with publishers
Scientists are rarely rewarded for being right, so the scientific record is 
being distorted by the scientific ecosystem
Society needs more open research to ensure reproducibility and robust research
The library of the future will have to be exponentially more customisable than 
the current offering
The information seeking behaviour of researchers is iterative and messy and 
does not match library search services
Libraries need to ‘create change to triumph’ - to be inventors rather than 
imitators
Management of open access issues need to be shared across institutions with 
positive outcomes when research offices and libraries collaborate.
I have blogged separately about my own contribution ‘The value of embracing 
unknown unknowns’ <https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=594> - 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=594 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=594>
Regards,

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] BLOG: The value of embracing unknown unknowns

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all, 

You may be interested in a blog I have just posted to accompany a talk I gave 
this week to the Research Libraries UK Conference held at the British Library. 
‘The value of embracing unknown unknowns’ 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=594 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=594>

The slides are available 
http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley/the-value-of-embracing-unknown-unknowns 
<http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley/the-value-of-embracing-unknown-unknowns>
 and the Twitter hashtag from the event was #rluk16.

The talk centred around what happened when I wrote a debate piece with my long 
standing collaborator, Dr Mary Anne Kennan, published in August 2015: Open 
Access: The Whipping Boy for Problems in Scholarly Publishing 
<http://aisel.aisnet.org/cais/vol37/iss1/14> 
http://aisel.aisnet.org/cais/vol37/iss1/14/ 
<http://aisel.aisnet.org/cais/vol37/iss1/14/>. This original 10,000 word 
article was the starting point for a debate where five people provided 
rebuttals to our position and we were then given the opportunity to write a 
rejoinder to these. All the articles were published together.

The take-home messages from the talk were:

Scholarly Communication is not recognised as a research discipline
If we rely on the academic community to come to their own epiphanies about OA 
we will never get there
Librarians in the academic space also need to know about Scholarly 
Communication issues
It is very challenging to find any formal training or education for the library 
community on these topics
Librarians must shift from managing the academic literature to participating in 
the generation of it. 





Comments to the list please - the spam problem on the blog is ongoing.

Regards

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] BLOG: Is CC-BY really a problem or are we boxing shadows?

[Danny Kingsley]

Dear all,

You might be interested in the outcomes of a roundtable discussion held 
at Cambridge University earlier this week on the topic of Creative 
Commons Attribution licences.


Is CC-BY really a problem or are we boxing shadows? 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=555


A taster:
***

Comments from researchers and colleagues have indicated some disquiet 
about the Creative Commons (CC-BY) licence in some areas of the academic 
community. However, in conversation with some legal people and 
contemporaries at other institutions one of the observations was that 
generally academics are not necessarily cognizant with what the licences 
offer and indeed what protections are available under regular copyright.


To try and determine whether this was aneducation and advocacy problemor 
if there arereal issueswe had a roundtable discussion on 29 February at 
Cambridge University attended by about 35 people who were a mixture of 
academics, administrators, publishers and legal practitioners.


In summary, the discussion indicated that CC-BY licences*do 
not*encourage plagiarism, or issues with commercialism within academia 
(although there is a broader ethical issue). However in some cases CC-BY 
licences*could*pose problems for the moral integrity of the work and 
cause issues with translations. CC-BY licenses*do create challenges*for 
works containing sensitive information and for works containing third 
party copyright.


**
Please feel free to comment on the list. Due to a serious spam problem 
with the blog, comments sent to the blog are being buried (we are 
working on this).


Thanks

Danny

--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] ‘It is all a bit of a mess’ – observations from Researcher to Reader conference

[Danny Kingsley]

Dear all

My observations from this week’s Researcher to Reader conference are now 
available as a blog https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=539 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=539> A taster:

“It is all a bit of a mess. It used to be simple. Now it is complicated.” This 
was the conclusion of Mark Carden, the coordinator of the Researcher to Reader 
<http://r2rconf.com/> conference after two days of discussion, debate and 
workshops about scholarly publication. The conference bills itself as: ‘The 
premier forum for discussion of the international scholarly content supply 
chain – bringing knowledge from the Researcher to the Reader.’  <…>

Suggestions, ideas and salient points that came up

Journals are dead – the publishing future is the platform
Journals are not dead – but we don’t need issues any more as they are entirely 
redundant in an online environment
Publishing in a journal benefits the author not the reader
Dissemination is no longer the value added offered by publishers. Anyone can 
have a blog. The value-add is branding
All research is generated from what was published the year before – and we can 
prove it
Why don’t we disaggregate the APC model and charge for sections of the service 
separately?
You need to provide good service to the free users if you want to build a 
premium product
The most valuable commodity as an editor is your reviewer time
Peer review is inconsistent and systematically biased. 
The greater the novelty of the work the greater likelihood it is to have a 
negative review
Poor academic writing is rewarded
Enjoy!

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Blogs about Wellcome Trust and CRUK's open data policies

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

Recently, Cambridge University hosted an information session for staff with 
representatives from Wellcome Trust and CRUK to discuss their data sharing 
policies. We have now uploaded two blogs covering these discussions:
"In conversation with Wellcome Trust and CRUK" 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=528 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=528>
"Charities’ perspective on research data management and sharing" 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=525 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=525>
These have been checked and approved by Wellcome Trust and CRUK, and the 
questions and answers have been incorporated into our Frequently Asked 
Questions pages - http://www.data.cam.ac.uk/data-faq 
<http://www.data.cam.ac.uk/data-faq>

This is the third in our ‘In conversation with…” series, where we are trying to 
provide as much clarity for our researchers as possible relating to funders’ 
data sharing policies. The earlier blogs are:
In conversation with Michael Ball from the BBSRC 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=337> - 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=337 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=337>
In conversation with Ben Ryan from EPSRC 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=151> - 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=151 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=151>
Regards,

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] What does an academic do all day?

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

The latest Unlocking Research blog discusses the results of a study done at 
Cambridge University towards the end of 2013 that looked at how the University 
could meet the compliance requirements of the RCUK open access policy. Recently 
the person who led the project, involving in depth interviews and ‘shadowing’ 
of academics during their work day, came to speak to members of the libraries 
at Cambridge and this blog summarises that talk. 

As well as links to several useful ‘day in the life’ graphics (included in the 
blog), the information included interesting facts like:

Academics wear many hats - often juggling many jobs at once
They have about 20 minutes at any given time to devote to a particular project
Running a research group is like running a small company while remaining 
research active
There are no natural touch points with the University during the publication 
process
For more insights please read:  
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=515 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=515>

Regards

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Blog: Could the HEFCE policy be a Trojan Horse for gold OA?

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

A new Unlocking Research blog published today “ Could the HEFCE policy be a 
Trojan Horse for gold OA?” - 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=488 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=488> is arguing that changes 
to the HEFCE policy are moving it from a green policy towards a gold one.


A teaser:
**
The HEFCE Policy for open access in the post-2014 Research Excellence Framework 
<http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/year/2014/201407/> kicks in 9 weeks from now. The 
policy states that, to be eligible for submission to the post-2014 REF, 
authors’ final peer-reviewed manuscripts of journal articles and conference 
proceedings with an ISSN must have been deposited in an institutional or 
subject repository on acceptance for publication. Deposited material should be 
discoverable, and free to read and download, for anyone with an internet 
connection.
The goal of the policy is to ensure that publicly funded (by HEFCE) research is 
publicly available. The means HEFCE have chosen to favour is the green route – 
by putting the AAM into a repository. This does not involve any payment to the 
publishers. The timing of the policy – at acceptance – is to give us the best 
chance of obtaining the author’s accepted manuscript (AAM) before it is 
deleted, forgotten or lost by the author. 

***

Enjoy!

Danny


Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Blog reviewing the inaugural year of the Office of Scholarly Communication at Cambridge University

[Danny Kingsley]

Happy New Year everyone,

To start us all off I have just posted a blog reviewing the inaugural 
year of the Office of Scholarly Communication at Cambridge University. 
"2015 - that was the year that was" is now available at 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=451


"This time last year, the Office of Scholarly Communication at Cambridge 
University had been in existence for one week. As the inaugural Head of 
the Office, I had landed in the UK from Australia on 1 January, and was 
still battling jet lag. What a difference a year makes. This blog is a 
short run down of what has happened in 2015 and a brief peek intoour 
plans for 2016 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/wp-admin/post.php?post=451=edit=6#2016>.


The OSC has three primary foci -managing compliance 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/wp-admin/post.php?post=451=edit=6#compliance>with 
funders,external engagement 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/wp-admin/post.php?post=451=edit=6#External>and 
working with the Cambridge community to ensureawareness of broader 
scholarly communication 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/wp-admin/post.php?post=451=edit=6#training>issues. 
In our spare time we have also taken ona few projects 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/wp-admin/post.php?post=451=edit=6#Projects>. 
..."


Happy reading.

Danny

--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Big Pharma companies are developing a standard format for data

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

On 20 October I attended an event at the Royal Society of Chemistry. One of the 
other presenters was Gerhard Noelken who talked about a project that Pfizer and 
other big pharmaceuticals are developing through something called the Allotrope 
Foundation which is ‘building an open framework for laboratory data’.

The Allotrope Data Format (ADF) is an attempt to provide a standardised format 
for data. It sounded when he presented like this will be quite a big thing for 
data sharing - at least in chemistry. And seriously these guys have the cash to 
build something that works. From memory the companies involved will be 
implementing it in 2016 and it will be publicly released in November 2016.

His abstract for the talk:

Allotrope Foundation, how a data standard and taxonomy for analytical data will 
support data integration and knowledge generation. 
Dr Gerhard Noelken, Technology and Innovation Group, Pfizer Pharmaceutical 
Sciences. 

This presentation will provide an update on the progress of the Allotrope 
Foundation towards delivering a Framework solution for managing analytical 
chemistry data throughout its lifecycle. It will include details on the 
deliverables, timelines, and results not only on the Allotrope Framework 
delivery but also on the Integration projects happening across many of the 
Allotrope member companies. The intelligent analytical laboratory is moving 
closer to reality; an automated laboratory where data, methods and processes 
are seamlessly shared between software applications and analytical instruments. 
The Framework leverages emerging standards including: the Allotrope Data Format 
to store the analytical chemistry results, a set of taxonomies to provide 
accurate metadata for laboratory systems; and class libraries to provide access 
to data, metadata, and business objects. 

The reason for my delay in letting people know about this is the slides have 
only just been released - they are available here 
http://www.rsc.org/events/detail/18885/measurement-information-and-innovation-digital-disruption-in-the-chemical-sciences
 
<http://www.rsc.org/events/detail/18885/measurement-information-and-innovation-digital-disruption-in-the-chemical-sciences>
 Gerhard’s slides can be downloaded from that page.

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] {Disarmed} Call for submissions: Force2016

[Danny Kingsley]

***Apologies for cross posting***
*
*
*Force2016 Conference *
Dates: Preconference: April 17, 201; Main conference: April 18-19, 2016
Venue: Portland, Oregon
Hashtag: #Force2016
Site: www.force2016.org 
Chair: Melissa Haendel
Program Chairs: Susanna Sansone and Nicole Vasilevsky

The FORCE2016 Research Communication and e-Scholarship Conference brings 
together a diverse group of people interested in changing the way 
scholarly and scientific information is communicated and shared. Join us 
in Portland if you are passionate about transforming research processes 
and scholarly communication in support of maximizing accessibility and 
efficiency. Keynote speakers include John Brownstein (Harvard Medical 
School) <http://www.childrenshospital.org/researchers/john-brownstein>, 
Cassidy Sugimoto (Indiana University) 
<http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/%7Esugimoto/index.php>, Phil Bourne (NIH) 
<http://www.sdsc.edu/%7Ebourne/> and the Alan Alda Institute for 
Communicating Science <http://www.centerforcommunicatingscience.org/>.
*Who is it for? *Scholars, researchers, librarians, data managers, grant 
administrators, funders, publishers, editors, societies and anyone else 
interested in scholarly communications

*
*
*What is Force11? *FORCE11 is a grass-roots organization that aims to 
improve knowledge creation and sharing by encouraging better use of new 
technologies by working across disciplines, roles and sectors. Everyone 
is welcome to join Force11 <https://www.force11.org/> and participate in 
a variety of working groups, task teams and pilot projects.


*SUBMIT ABSTRACTS:* *Posters, Demos, Sessions* at this *__*form here 
<http://force11.us7.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=5e2d2ee75f2d3afd1d39a666d=64af21b943=45b944a225>.


Sessions descriptions:

 * No see, no touch traps: still struggling to escape or free at last?
   
<https://www.force11.org/meetings/force2016/concurrent-session-no-see-no-touch-traps-still-struggling-escape-or-free-last>
 - Open
   Access let the world first see (access), and then use (license)
   research content. But access doesn't stop at the point of reading.
 * Starting off on the right foot with data management
   
<https://www.force11.org/meetings/force2016/concurrent-session-starting-right-foot-data-management>
 -
   Calling for participants to argue positions on data sharing
 * Data by the people, for the people
   <https://www.force11.org/meetings/force2016/session-data-people-people> --
   Ethical considerations for human subjects research and patient data
   sharing
 * Pitch it: innovation challenge
   
<https://www.force11.org/meetings/force2016/session-pitch-it-innovation-challenge>
 --
   Give us your great ideas on how to change scholarship!

*Travel Fellowship Funding - Apply Today* 
<https://www.force11.org/meetings/force2016/forms/travel-fellowship-application> Travel 
Fellowships are available for up to $1,200 for travelers within the US 
and Canada, and up to $2,000 *__*for international travelers. While 
applications will be accepted from anyone who wishes to attend the 
conference and demonstrates a need for support, we especially encourage 
applications from student/young scholars and those from beyond North 
America and Europe.

*
*
*SUBMIT TO HOST: Pre-conference Workshops and Meetings* Sunday, 17 April 
2016, is available for groups who want to meet in conjunction with the 
FORCE2016 conference, whether for workshops, informal or formal 
collaborations, or business meetings. Meetings should *__*be related to 
the goals and mission of FORCE11 <https://www.force11.org/about>. If you 
are interested in hosting a meeting at the FORCE2016 venue, *__*please 
submit this form 
<https://www.force11.org/meetings/force2016/forms/pre-conference-meeting-proposals>. 




--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Re: GOAL Digest, Vol 48, Issue 27

[Danny Kingsley]

> On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 8:20 AM, Clement-Stoneham Geraldine <
> geraldine.clement-stone...@headoffice.mrc.ac.uk> wrote:
> 
>> Danny,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Some journals like to control the way information is being published about
>> new papers, and therefore impose a strict press embargo period (another
>> embargo, nothing to do with green OA embargo period). This sometime
>> referred to as the ?Ingelfinger rule? (
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingelfinger_rule).
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> All of this is well orchestrated, with a press pack made available so that
>> coverage is reflecting accurately the research, and is advertised to
>> authors as the added value offered by the publishers if they chose to
>> submit their paper to them. This explains why you often see papers
>> published in Nature, or Science, all making the headlines of daily press on
>> the same day. The downside of course is that they do act as ?gagging
>> orders?, which can make it tricky for researchers to talk about their
>> research once the paper has been accepted, but not yet published (which can
>> go for weeks/months).
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> One of the issues with the HEFCE requirement to add article metadata to a
>> repository at the acceptance stage, was that this could inadvertently
>> breach such publishers? embargo by release some (even if not much)
>> information about the paper ahead of time. I believe this is what your
>> researcher is concerned about. I am not sure that at this stage there is a
>> way around it, but it would deserve a wider conversation. Less traditional
>> journals such as eLife have deliberately done away with such embargo, and
>> indeed encourage authors to discuss their research as soon as they wish,
>> which seems to be better aligned with ?open science? principles.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> You?ll find more details for the journal you named here
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> http://www.nature.com/authors/policies/embargo.html
>> 
>> http://www.nejm.org/page/author-center/embargo
>> 
>> http://www.cell.com/cell/authors#prepub
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> and eLife?s policy
>> 
>> http://elifesciences.org/elife-news/authors-the-media-and-elife
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Best wishes
>> 
>> Geraldine
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> *Geraldine Clement-Stoneham*
>> 
>> Knowledge and Information Manager
>> 
>> Medical Research Council
>> 
>> Tel: +44 (0) 207 395 2272
>> 
>> Mobile: +44 79 00 136 319
>> 
>> geraldine.clement-stone...@headoffice.mrc.ac.uk
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> This email may have a protective marking, for an explanation please see
>> http://www.mrc.ac.uk/About/Informationandstandards/Documentmarking/index.htm
>> 
>> We use an electronic filing system. Please send electronic versions of
>> documents, unless paper is specifically requested.
>> _
>> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
>> For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
>> __
>> 
>> ___
>> GOAL mailing list
>> GOAL@eprints.org
>> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>> 
>> 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20151126/9756d0c5/attachment.html
>  
> 
> --
> 
> ___
> GOAL mailing list
> GOAL@eprints.org
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
> 
> 
> End of GOAL Digest, Vol 48, Issue 27
> 

Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Instistence by researchers that we do not make metadata available prior to publication for Nature, NEJM and Cell journals

[Danny Kingsley]

Hi,

I have just had a fraught conversation with a researcher who supports 
open access and what the OA policies in the UK are trying to acheive. 
But he is saying that we cannot under any circumstances make the 
metadata available for Nature, NEJM and Cell journals available prior to 
publication. He said he personally knows that people's papers have been 
pulled from Nature and NEJM for this reason. He said he became aware of 
the issue because the details of a recent paper of his that is not yet 
published turned up in Google Scholar when he was looking for something 
else (evidence that our are indexing is very good BTW, but that's a 
separate issue).

So this raises a few issues:

1. I think I need to get written confirmation from these journals about 
what their policy is relating to metadata being available prior to 
publication - does anyone have anything along these lines they can share?

2. There is a risk that if we start putting articles in these specific 
journals into a restricted collection and then only making the metadata 
available that other publishers/journals will change their policies to 
insist that they too should not have the metadata available earlier.

3. This raises our workflow complexity yet again - we have a standing 
number of articles that have been deposited but not yet published that 
sits at over 1200. We now simply check those articles that have been in 
the pile for more than three months*. So for those articles in the 
restricted collection there will be no exposure of them until we check 
that they have been published and move them into the open collecion 
(while the article is still under embargo).

4. Clearly there is a fair bit of bullying going on by the publishers 
towards the researchers - we need to get evidence and expose this.

5. Do not get me started on the 'one rule for this situation, and a 
different one for another' palaver that the publishers are putting us 
through. It gets worse by the minute.

Danny

*If anyone cracks an automated way of finding whether an accepted 
article has been published (given that hybrid joural articles are poorly 
indexed and that article titles can change etc) we would love to hear 
about it.

-- 
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Call for Papers – Data Science Journal

[Danny Kingsley]

Call for Papers – Data Science Journal
The Data Science Journal is a peer-reviewed, open access, electronic journal 
dedicated to the advancement of data science and its application in policies, 
practices and management of Open Data.
 
We are currently soliciting submissions for papers on a wide range of data 
science topics, across the whole range of computational, natural and social 
science, and the humanities. The scope of the journal includes descriptions of 
data systems, their implementations and their publication, applications, 
infrastructures, software, legal, reproducibility and transparency issues, the 
availability and usability of complex datasets, and with a particular focus on 
the principles, policies and practices for data.
 
All data is in scope, whether born digital or converted from other sources, and 
all research disciplines are covered. Data is a cross-domain, cross-discipline 
topic, with common issues, regardless of the domain it serves. The Data Science 
Journal publishes a variety of article types (research papers, practice papers, 
review articles and essays). The Data Science Journal also publishes data 
articles, describing datasets or data compilations, if the potential for reuse 
of the data is significant or if considerable efforts were required in 
compilation. Similarly, the Data Science Journal also publishes descriptions of 
online simulation, database, and other experiments, partnering with digital 
repositories on ‘meta articles’ or ‘overlay articles’, which link to and allow 
visualisation of the data, thereby adding an entirely new dimension to the 
communication and exchange of data research results and educational materials.
 
For further information, and to submit a manuscript, please visit 
http://datascience.codata.org/ <http://datascience.codata.org/>
 
 
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Open Access at Cambridge - Friday

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

Here we are at the end of Open Access Week 2015, but it is not over yet!

*Announcement - Research Support Ambassadors*

Scholarly communication is an increasingly dynamic area, and the support 
researchers require is becoming more complex. The changing policy 
landscape means there are more requirements for researchers to manage 
their research outputs in different ways. Information managers (such as 
librarians) are the perfect people to help, and the library community at 
Cambridge is working on a solution.


The Research Support Ambassador Program has gathered dynamic, proactive 
library staff to work on developing a series of 'modular' resources to 
assist the research community with four areas:


 * Scholarly publishing lifecycle
 * Making theses open access
 * Managing your online presence
 * Research support at the University


Ambassadors are benefitting from participating with increased 
understanding and knowledge about the changing landscape, and 
opportunities for new roles in a changing workplace (both within and 
outside Cambridge). The University will also benefit through having a 
more aware and switched in research community, better ability to meet 
funder expectations, and increased dissemination and impact of research 
outputs. The libraries of Cambridge will also benefit due to an engaged 
and informed workforce, an increased profile amongst the research 
community and importantly, relevance in an increasingly online world.


The Ambassadors will be presenting the newly developed resources to the 
wider library community on the 19th November and we will be launching 
the program to the research community shortly after that.


*Blog - Open Access around the world
*The last in the series of blogs written by the team at the Office of 
Scholarly Communciation is from Dr Lauren Cadwallader with some 
observations on the bigger open access picture.


https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=362

*Twitter activity - #OAchat2015 *

Today at 3pm @UKCoRR is hosting a synchronous Twitter chat to coincide 
with the end of Open Access Week 2015 using the hashtag #OAchat2015; you 
may also wish to tag your tweets #OAWeek2015 (space allowing!) The theme 
of OA Week 2015 is "Open for Collaboration" and the chat will be 
structured around 10 questions which will be tweeted in order by 
@UKCoRR. Follow the conversation or join in


*The Conversation - Your questions answered on open access*

Dr Danny Kingsley participated in a panel publication in The 
Conversation which answered readers questions about open access, 
published today. 
https://theconversation.com/your-questions-answered-on-open-access-49284**


*Debate tonight - Can society afford open access?*

For those of you who are Cambridge based please join in the fun tonight 
at 6pm in the Main Lecture Room, Old Divinity School, St John's College, 
All Saints Passage CB2 1TP
Open access disseminates research to the community, circumventing 
expensive publisher subscriptions. But there is a high cost associated 
with open access and it is not without risk. Tonight scholars, 
publishers, administrators and others will discuss the question 'Can 
society afford open access?'


Bookings: 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/panel-discussion-can-society-afford-open-access 
(NOTE: If you can't make it don't panic, we will be filming commentary 
from each of the panellists and making this available after the event.)


Regards,

Danny

--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] {Disarmed} Open Access at Cambridge - Thursday

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

Today's missive from the Open Access Week celebrations at Cambridge.

*Unlocking Theses project*
The Office of Scholarly Communications is making a concerted effort to 
build on the 860+ open access theses we already hold in the Apollo 
repository. The Library holds over 1200 scanned theses that have been 
redigitised from the printed copy in the Library as a result of a 
research request for a copy. Earlier this year we embarked on a project 
to 'unlock' these theses. We have run OCR across all of the scans and 
uploaded the theses into a restricted thesis collection. We also spent 
some time negotiating the intricate issues related to obtaining contact 
information for our alumni. Last month we began contacting the authors 
to ask permission to make the theses openly available. Our initial 
pilots are indicating we will have a very positive response to this 
project, with over 50% of the first group contacted giving us permission 
within a fortnight. The project should run through the Christmas break 
and we hope to be able to provide final numbers about this initiative 
early in 2016.


*Blog**- Where to from here? Open Access in Five Years*
Today's blog is a peice by Dr Arthu Smith looking to the future.


Academic publishing is not what it used to be. Open access has exploded 
on the scene and challenged the established publishing model that has 
remained largely unchanged for 350 years. However, for those of us 
working in scholarly communications, the pace of change feels at times 
frustratingly slow, with constant roadblocks along the way. Navigating 
the policy landscape provided by universities, funders and publishers 
can be maddening, yet we need to remain mindful of how far we have come 
in a relatively short time. There is no sign that open access is losing 
momentum, so it's perhaps instructive to consider the direction we want 
open access to take over the next five years, based upon the experiences 
of the past. 


https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=366

*Campaign*
The League of European Universities (LERU) has launched the 
#Christmasisover campaign 
<http://www.leru.org/index.php/public/news/christmas-is-over-research-funding-should-go-to-research-not-to-publishers/> 
(http://www.leru.org/index.php/public/news/christmas-is-over-research-funding-should-go-to-research-not-to-publishers/) 
with an online petition to sign the *LERU Statement on OA 
(http://www.leru.org/index.php/public/extra/signtheLERUstatement/) 
<http://www.leru.org/index.php/public/extra/signtheLERUstatement/>. 
*Individuals and organisations are encouraged to sign the statement. 
Make this your action for Open Access Week!*

*
Enjoy!

Danny

--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Re: GOAL Digest, Vol 47, Issue 34

[Danny Kingsley]

Alicia,

Repeatedly saying something does not make it true. Davis's half life 
study is interesting but it does not tell us anything about cancellation 
behaviours. There is no causal arrow between half lives of articles and 
journal cancellation.  The evidence we are asking for is not conjecture 
based on some old study, or an assumption there must be some sort of 
relationship between two separate sets of information.


Please provide an actual example with actual data of a situation where a 
journal has lost subscriptions because it has permitted researchers to 
upload a pdf of a non formatted version of the article into an 
institutional repository.


I am not even beginning to get into the question of what value add 
publishers provide if they are so clearly threatened by *potential 
*availability of a*small proportion* of articles in a given issue of a 
journal that are uploaded in the form of *static unformatted pdf*s into 
*unconnected repositories *across the globe.


Danny

On 22/10/2015 11:02, goal-requ...@eprints.org wrote:

Send GOAL mailing list submissions to
goal@eprints.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
goal-requ...@eprints.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
goal-ow...@eprints.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of GOAL digest..."


Today's Topics:

1. Re: BLOG: Unlocking Research 'Half-life is half the story'
   (Wise, Alicia (ELS-OXF))
2.  Open Access Week at Cambridge - Wednesday (Danny Kingsley)
3. Re: ?spam? Re: BLOG: Unlocking Research 'Half-life is half
   the story' (David Prosser)


--

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 15:05:40 +
From: "Wise, Alicia (ELS-OXF)" <a.w...@elsevier.com>
Subject: [GOAL] Re: BLOG: Unlocking Research 'Half-life is half the
story'
To: "Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)" <goal@eprints.org>
Message-ID:

<by2pr08mb255852dcedac9e0013e8bd4e5...@by2pr08mb255.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Hi there -

Great to see engagement on this topic which is of shared strategic interest for 
librarians and publishers!  My original posting was to push back on the idea 
that there is 'no evidence', and I'm pleased to see acknowledgment that there 
is evidence and some discussion about whether or not it is sufficient or if 
more is needed.

Publishers, including Elsevier, have c. 20 years of usage data and c. 10 years of 
experience of setting embargos and looking at the impact of various sharing 
behaviors.  We're not guessing or crying wolf or 'ignoring reality' when we set 
embargo periods.  Some impacts of short embargos can take time to be felt. An 
interesting perspective on why that might be the cases is implicit in a study the 
AAP commissioned from Phil Davis.  You can see the full study for yourself at 
http://publishers.org/sites/default/files/uploads/PSP/journalusagehalflife.pdf but 
let me quote the first two sentences of the abstract for everyone here:  "An 
analysis of article downloads from 2,812 academic and professional journals 
published by 13 presses in the sciences, social sciences, and the humanities reveals 
extensive usage of articles years after publication. Measuring usage half-life - the 
median age of articles downloaded from a publisher's website - just 3% of journals 
had a half-lives shorter!
   than 12-months".

It is also a fact that libraries look at usage figures, and this is one factor in 
their purchasing decisions.  Why else would services such as COUNTER exist?  See 
http://www.projectcounter.org/  Again, to quote from the COUNTER website: 
"Launched in March 2002, COUNTER (Counting Online Usage of Networked Electronic 
Resources) is an international initiative serving librarians, publishers and 
intermediaries by setting standards that facilitate the recording and reporting of 
online usage statistics in a consistent, credible and compatible way.  Later on that 
page the benefits of COUNTER to librarians and publishers are explained in this way:

"Librarians are able to compare usage statistics from different vendors; derive 
useful metrics such as cost-per-use; make better-informed purchasing decisions; plan 
infrastructure more effectively.

Publishers and intermediaries are able to: provide data to customers in a format 
they want; compare the relative usage of different delivery channels; aggregate data 
for customers using multiple delivery channels; learn more about genuine usage 
patterns."

Might these data on usage be leveraged in some way to shed light?  I don't know 
if someone from COUNTER is on this listserv, but if so would 

[GOAL] Re: Open Access Week at Cambridge - Wednesday

[Danny Kingsley]

Good point Serge,

I should have put these links in yesterday (I am blaming a headcold for 
fuzzy thinking). You might find the information on the Office of 
Scholarly Communication webpages useful.


 * Modern Monographs overview - http://osc.cam.ac.uk/modern-monographs
 * Open access and monographs -
   http://osc.cam.ac.uk/modern-monographs/open-access-and-monographs
 * OA monograph costs -
   
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/modern-monographs/open-access-and-monographs/oa-monograph-costs
 * OA monograph publishing options -
   
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/modern-monographs/open-access-and-monographs/open-access-monograph-publishing-options
 * Book chapters in repositories -
   
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/modern-monographs/open-access-and-monographs/making-book-chapters-available-repositories
 * New monograph business models -
   http://osc.cam.ac.uk/modern-monographs/open-monograph-business-models
 * Research and reports on OA in HASS -
   http://osc.cam.ac.uk/modern-monographs/research-reports-oa-hass
 * Resources and support -
   http://osc.cam.ac.uk/modern-monographs/resources-and-support

Regards,

Danny

On 21/10/2015 21:12, BAUIN Serge wrote:

Very nice, indeed Danny,
But is there something anywhere on the web we could use as a reference?
Cheers
Serge Bauin
(see red boldface below)

De : Danny Kingsley <da...@cam.ac.uk <mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>>
Répondre à : Global List <goal@eprints.org <mailto:goal@eprints.org>>
Date : Wed, 21 Oct 2015 20:49:29 +0200
À : Global List <goal@eprints.org <mailto:goal@eprints.org>>
Objet : [GOAL] Open Access Week at Cambridge - Wednesday

*Discussion: 'How open access can help you'*
Today Dr Danny Kingsley accepted an invitation from Dr Rupert Gatti, 
one of the Directors of the Open Book Publishers 
http://www.openbookpublishers.com/section/14/1/about to attend a 
discussion hosted by Professor Steve Connor, the Head of English about 
open access and the future of academic publishing. Some very powerful 
statements were addressed including 'The world of academic publishing 
is over’ and '*The monograph as an entity is very powerful thing – for 
the author not for the reader*’.  Issues around the readership of the 
legacy publishing model compared to those of open publishing models 
*were explored in the context of the current reward system*. These are 
profound questions for the Arts and Humanities in a time of drastic 
funding cuts. New ‘publishing’ models were discussed in light of the 
types of online and digital research now being conducted in the 
Humanities, and the challenges associated with maintaining the 
integrity of the links into the long term. This is likely to be the 
first of a series of discussions about this important topic.


___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Open Access Week at Cambridge - Wednesday

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

Half way through Open Access Week and we are powering along...

Discussion: 'How open access can help you'
Today Dr Danny Kingsley accepted an invitation from Dr Rupert Gatti, one of the 
Directors of the Open Book Publishers 
http://www.openbookpublishers.com/section/14/1/about 
<http://www.openbookpublishers.com/section/14/1/about> to attend a discussion 
hosted by Professor Steve Connor, the Head of English about open access and the 
future of academic publishing. Some very powerful statements were addressed 
including 'The world of academic publishing is over’ and 'The monograph as an 
entity is very powerful thing – for the author not for the reader’.  Issues 
around the readership of the legacy publishing model compared to those of open 
publishing models were explored in the context of the current reward system. 
These are profound questions for the Arts and Humanities in a time of drastic 
funding cuts. New ‘publishing’ models were discussed in light of the types of 
online and digital research now being conducted in the Humanities, and the 
challenges associated with maintaining the integrity of the links into the long 
term. This is likely to be the first of a series of discussions about this 
important topic.

Blog: Software Licensing and Open Access
The third in our Open Access Week series is written by Dr Marta Teperek and 
addresses some of the uncertainties surrounding making software open access. 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=345 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=345>  If the questions 
that the Research Data Service Team have been asked during data sharing 
information sessions with over 1000 researchers at the University of Cambridge 
are any indicator, then there is a great deal of confusion about sharing source 
code <http://www.data.cam.ac.uk/faq-0/source-code>. … We decided to call in 
expert help. Shoaib Sufi <http://www.software.ac.uk/about/people/shoaib-sufi> 
and Neil Chue Hong <http://www.software.ac.uk/about/people/neil-chue-hong>* 
from the Software Sustainability Institute <http://www.software.ac.uk/> agreed 
to lead a workshop on Software Licensing in September, at the Computer Lab in 
Cambridge.  

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Open Access Week at Cambridge - Tuesday

[Danny Kingsley]

Dear all,

New repository name revealed
In 2005, Cambridge University implemented a new open source repository platform 
DSpace, as one of the worldwide 'test-bed institutions'. Now, a decade later, 
we are undergoing a substantial upgrade of the repository to increase its 
capabilities. Part of this process has been for us to choose a new repository 
name. We have been running a competition to ask our community for ideas - and 
the winner is [… drumroll ...] Apollo.

Apollo is a god of learning, healing and creativity - the god of truth and 
light and leader of the Muses. This makes him the perfect symbol for a 
cross-disciplinary repository containing research from every branch of the 
University - Arts, Humanities, Science, Technology, Engineering and Medicine.

We will be upgrading the look of the repository over the next few months, so 
watch out for the new logo to appear!

Presentation at the Royal Society of Chemistry
Today, Dr Danny Kingsley spoke about ‘The purpose, practicalities, pitfalls and 
policies and managing and sharing data in the UK’ at the Royal Society of 
Chemistry Chemical Information and Computer Applications Group conference. The 
slides for the talk are available on Slideshare - 
http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley/the-purpose-practicalities-pitfalls-and-policies-of-managing-and-sharing-data-in-the-uk
 
<http://www.slideshare.net/DannyKingsley/the-purpose-practicalities-pitfalls-and-policies-of-managing-and-sharing-data-in-the-uk>
 and the blog went live today as part of the Office of Scholarly Communications 
Open Access Week series. A run down:
The data policy landscape
Places to share data
What are we actually trying to achieve?
Researcher responses
We are trying to start at the end instead of the beginning
Basics of Research Data Management
Who owns the data?
Required skillsets for managing and curating data
Training available
Issues and consequences of not sharing data
Read more: unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=350  
<https://t.co/PWYyPhZK7i>

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Open Access activities at Cambridge - Monday

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

We are celebrating Open Access Week at Cambridge University with a series of 
activities, announcements and blog posts.

Today we have published the second in our series of ‘In conversation with…’ 
posts reflecting our meetings with funding bodies to answer researchers' 
questions about data sharing. ‘In conversation with Michael Ball from the 
BBSRC’ - answers many of the big questions about biological data sharing 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=337 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=337>

We have also published the first blog of a series written by members of the 
Office of Scholarly Communication. Today’s blog is ‘A day in the life of an 
Open Access Research Adviser’ by Dr Philip Boyes. If you ever wondered what is 
involved in the work we do, read on - 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=340 
<https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=340>

Our big event will be 6pm - 7.30pm Friday evening with a co-branded Open Access 
Week and Cambridge Festival of Ideas event. 
http://osc.cam.ac.uk/panel-discussion-can-society-afford-open-access 
<http://osc.cam.ac.uk/panel-discussion-can-society-afford-open-access>
You are welcome to join us for an entertaining evening where scholars, 
publishers, administrators and others discuss the question 'Can society afford 
open access?’ in the Main Lecture Room, Old Divinity School, St John's College, 
All Saints Passage CB2 1TP
Open access disseminates research to the community, circumventing expensive 
publisher subscriptions. But there is a high cost associated with open access 
and it is not without risk.

The panel consists of:

Professor Stephen Curry, Structural Biology at Imperial College 
(Chair/Moderator)
Dr Daniel Allington, Digital Cultures, University of the West of England
Professor Peter Mandler, President of the Royal Historical Society
Dr Theodora Bloom, Executive Editor, BMJ
Dr Danny Kingsley, Head of Scholarly Communications, Cambridge University
Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Re: GOAL Digest, Vol 47, Issue 23

[Danny Kingsley]

Alicia,

I do not wish to end up in a tit for tat over this but the three things 
you cite as 'evidence factored into decision-making' are precisely the 
three things that are discussed in the blog with substantial support for 
their lack of credibility.

1. The usage evidence on its own does not prove causation.

2. The causation evidence is based on a 2012 study that has no validity 
and the methodology of which has been soundly rebuked. If the dire 
predictions of the 2006 study had come to fruition in the ensuing nine 
year period then this would itself be the evidence rather than the 
original study.

3. This has nothing to do with green open access and everything to do 
with the gold open access model versus a subscription model - an 
important but different debate.

Danny

-- 
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939



On 16/10/2015 17:23, goal-requ...@eprints.org wrote:
> From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of 
> Wise, Alicia (ELS-OXF)
> Sent: 16 October 2015 16:31
> To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
> Cc: Wise, Alicia (ELS-OXF)
> Subject: [GOAL] Re: BLOG: Unlocking Research 'Half-life is half the story'
>
> Hi Danny -
>
> Publishers support sustainable approaches to Green OA as well as Gold OA - 
> indeed that was the focus of the panel discussion at the STM conference.
>
> For articles that are published under the subscription business model, when 
> and how they are made available for free (on a wide array of platforms - 
> institutional repositories are one important example of these platforms) does 
> make a difference.  In my experience publishers are both evidence-based and 
> thoughtful about how they set embargo periods and so forth.
>
> The evidence that is factored into decision-making currently includes:
>
>
> 1. Usage Evidence
>
>
>
> In 2014 Phil Davis published a study commissioned by the Association of 
> American Publishers which demonstrates that journal article usage varies 
> widely within and across disciplines, and that only 3% of of journals have 
> half-lives of 12 months or less. Health sciences articles have the shortest 
> median half-life of the journals analyzed, but still more than 50% of health 
> science journals have usage half-lives longer than 24 months. In fields with 
> the longest usage half-lives, including mathematics and the humanities, more 
> than 50% of the journals have usage half-lives longer than 48 months. See 
> http://publishers.org/sites/default/files/uploads/PSP/journalusagehalflife.pdf
>
>
>
> 2. Evidence for the link between embargos, usage and cancellations
>
>
>
> A 2012 study by ALPSP was a simple one-question survey: "If the (majority of) 
> content of research journals was freely available within 6 months of 
> publication, would you continue to subscribe?" The results "indicate that 
> only 56% of those subscribing to journals in the STM field would definitely 
> continue to subscribe. In AHSS, this drops to just 35%. See 
> http://www.alpsp.org/ebusiness/AboutALPSP/ALPSPStatements/Statementdetails.aspx?ID=407
>   This 2012 study builds on earlier, more nuanced, studies undertaken for 
> ALPSP in 2009 and 2006. The 2009 ALPSP study (see the next to last bullet) 
> found that "overall usage" is the prime factor that librarians use in making 
> cancellation decisions. The 2006 ALPSP study (see points 7 and 8) found that 
> "the length of any embargo" would be the most important factor in making 
> cancellation decisions.
>
>
>
> A 2006 PRC study (see pages 1-3) shows that a significant number of 
> librarians are likely to substitute green OA materials for subscribed 
> resources, given certain levels of reliability, peer review and currency of 
> the information available. With a 24 month embargo, 50% of librarians would 
> use the green OA material over paying for subscriptions, and 70% would use 
> the green OA material if it is available after 6 months. See 
> http://publishingresearchconsortium.com/index.php/115-prc-projects/research-reports/self-archiving-and-journal-subscriptions-research-report/145-self-archiving-and-journal-subscriptions-co-existence-or-competition-an-international-survey-of-librarians-preferences
>
>
>
> 3. Experiences of other journals
>
>
>
> For example, the Journal of Clinical Investigation which went open access 
> with a 0 month embargo in 1996 and lost c. 40% of institutional subscriptions 
> over time. The journal was forced to return to the subscription model in 
> 2009, see http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/02/2

[GOAL] BLOG: Unlocking Research 'Half-life is half the story'

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

You may be interested in the latest Unlocking Research blog: 'Half-life 
is half the story' https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=331




This week theSTM Frankfurt Conference 
<http://www.stm-assoc.org/events/frankfurt-conference-2015/>was told 
that a shift away from gold Open Access towards green would mean some 
publishers would not be 'viable' according to a story in/The Bookseller/ 
<http://www.thebookseller.com/news/green-oa-will-hit-publishers-314667>. 
The argument was that support for green OA in the US and China would 
mean some publishers will collapse and the community will 'regret it'.


It is not surprising that the publishing industry is worried about a 
move away from gold OA policies. They have proved extraordinarily 
lucrative in the UK withWiley and Elsevier each pocketing an extra £2 
million 
<https://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/publishers-share-10m-in-apc-payments/2019685.article>thanks 
to the RCUK block grant funds to support theRCUK policy on Open Access 
<http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/openaccess/>.


But let's get something straight. There is*no evidence that permitting 
researchers to make a copy of their work available in a repository 
results in journal subscriptions being cancelled*. None.




--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] BLOG: Openness, integrity and supporting researchers

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

You might find the most recent Unlocking Research blog interesting - it 
summarises a talk given by Prof Tom Cochrane to Univeristy of Cambridge 
staff on 'Openness, integrity and supporting researchers'.


To summarise the summary:

 * The nature of research itself is changing profoundly. This includes
   extraordinary dependence on data, and complexity requiring
   intermediate steps of data visualisation.  These eResearch
   techniques have been growing rapidly, and in a way that may not be
   understood or well led by senior administrators.
 * Early or mid career researchers are asking: What are the data
   services that I can get from the University? What is the University
   doing by way of scaffolding the support services that will make that
   more effective for me? What sort of help and training will you
   provide in new ways of disseminating findings and new publishing
   approaches?
 * While universities may have in place some kind of code of conduct to
   advise people about research misconduct, there are questions about
   how well understood or implemented this advice or knowledge about
   those kinds of perspectives actually are.
 * We need concerted action by people at certain levels -- Vice
   Chancellors, heads of funding councils, senior government bureaucrats.


Slides are downloadable from the blog: 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=307


Thanks

Danny

--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] BLOG: What is 'research impact' in an interconnected world?

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

You may be interested in the latest Unlocking Research blog - 'What is 
research impact in an interconnected world?' - 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=252 This is the basis 
for a talk I am giving to the Cambridge University Alumni Festival on 
Saturday 26th September 
https://www.alumni.cam.ac.uk/events/alumni-festival-2015/what-is-research-impact-in-an-interconnected-world


The main gist:

 * Publishing a paper is the beginning not the end.
 * Making work open access does not mean it is accessible.
 * Writing in plain language is translating, not dumbing it down.
 * Sharing work involves peer networks and publishing platforms
 * If you don't take control of your online presence someone/something
   else will

Other recent blogs include:

 * It's time for open access to leave the fringe
   <https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=238> -- 27 August 2015
 * Data sharing -- Build it and they will come
   <https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=221> -- 24 August 2015

Enjoy!

Danny

--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Job Opportunity - Research Skills Coordinator at Cambridge University

[Danny Kingsley]

Dear all,

An opportunity has come up in the Office of Scholarly Communciations at 
Cambridge University. Details available here 
http://www.jobs.cam.ac.uk/job/8079/


The University of Cambridge is seeking an enthusiastic, experienced 
individual to work within the Office of Scholarly Communications as the 
Research Skills Coordinator. The role will play a pivotal part in 
research skills training and coordination offered to the wider academic 
community in the area of scholarly communications. This is a rapidly 
expanding area with the implementation of Open Access and Data 
Management requirements. The role holder will be involved in taking 
library services to readers as part of an outreach programme.


The Research Skills Coordinator will also be responsible for delivering 
regular first-rate reader-focused training sessions to all staff of the 
University Library through developing the information and academic 
support skills of the UL's staff, in close cooperation with the School 
Librarians, the Reader Services Division and the Office of Scholarly 
Communications. The role holder will be involved in developing excellent 
presentation skills amongst the library community.


The role holder is expected to stay on top of, inform and consult 
colleagues about service developments, particularly in the rapidly 
evolving areas of electronic resources and scholarly communications. In 
addition the role performs a crucial part in ensuring staff members 
across the University Library are aware of, and responsive to changing 
reader expectations, and to support the continuing professional 
awareness of electronic resources and scholarly communications.


The post holder will work within the growing and friendly Office of 
Scholarly Communications at the University Library, and will have strong 
direct links to both Reader Services within the University Library and 
School Librarians.


Interviews for this post are anticipated to take place in week 
commencing 12 or 19 October.


To apply online for this vacancy, please click on the 'Apply' button 
below. This will route you to the University's Web Recruitment System, 
where you will need to register an account (if you have not already) and 
log in before completing the online application form.


The closing date for applications is Friday 09 October 2015.

If you have any questions about this vacancy or the application process, 
please contact Dr Danny Kingsley, Office of Scholarly Communication, 
Cambridge University Library, tel: 01223-(7)47 437, 
e-mail:da...@cam.ac.uk <mailto:da...@cam.ac.uk>.


Please quote reference VE07059 on your application and in any 
correspondence about this vacancy.


The University values diversity and is committed to equality of opportunity.

The University has a responsibility to ensure that all employees are 
eligible to live and work in the UK.



--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Cambridge University is looking for a repository manager - DSpace

[Danny Kingsley]

Dear All (with apologies for cross posting)

Come and join us! The University of Cambridge is seeking an 
enthusiastic, experienced individual to work within the Office of 
Scholarly Communications as the Manager of Institutional Repository. The 
funding landscape in the UK now requires that the outputs of funded 
research, such as research articles, conference proceedings and 
supporting research data are made publicly available. The University's 
DSpace repository houses the wide range of research outputs of the 
University, ranging from published articles and conference papers, 
through to datasets, theses, videos and molecules.


The role holder will participate in the ongoing upgrades and integration 
of the repository within existing and future Library and University 
systems. This will involve consideration of workflows that increase 
efficiency and provide a positive experience for the users. The Manager 
of Institutional Repository will stay abreast of developments in 
discipline-specific and generic metadata standards, and technological 
advancements in digital curation and preservation.


If you have any questions about this vacancy or the application process, 
please contact Dr Danny Kingsley, Office of Scholarly Communication, 
Cambridge University Library, tel 01223-(7)47 437, e-mail: da...@cam.ac.uk


The closing date for applications is Sunday 27 September 2015.

For more information please see http://www.jobs.cam.ac.uk/job/7992 
http://www.jobs.cam.ac.uk/job/7992/


--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Re: libre vs open - general language issues

[Danny Kingsley]

Thanks Helene,

Yes you are not the first to be confused which was which because I put 
the terms in a different order.

Gold open access is 'born' open access - because it is published open in 
an open access journal (with or without a cost), or in a hybrid journal 
where the remainder of the journal remains under subscription (always 
incurs a cost). There are many, many times that the terms 'gold open 
access' has been taken to mean 'pay for open access'. Publishers of 
course have done little to dissuade this impression.

Green open access is 'secondary' open access because it is published in 
a traditional manner (usually a susbcription journal) and a copy of the 
work is placed in a repository - institutional or subject.

I hope that is a bit clearer. I agree it would not be easy to change. But we 
all used to call things preprints and postprints. That really made no sense 
because post-prints were not yet printed. We do not use those terms any more, 
not in the UK anyway. We use the terms Submitted Manuscript, Author's Accepted 
Manuscript (AAM) and Version of Record (VoR).

Regards,

Danny

 -- next part --
 An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
 URL: 
 http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20150814/8a94cdff/attachment-0001.html

 --

 Message: 2
 Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 16:28:01 +0200
 From: H?l?ne.Bosc hbosc-tcher...@orange.fr
 Subject: [GOAL] Re: libre vs open - general language issues
 To: Global Open Access List \(Successor of AmSci\)
   goal@eprints.org
 Message-ID: 8A81FFDC57274D9287431EE2740BA515@PCdeHelene
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1

 Yes there is an appetite for trying to rebuilt the past in changing OA names!
 But even if the words Green and Gold can hurt some people it has been adopted 
 for years now by all institutions, for example in European reports, since 
 2006. See the last one in June 2015 : 
 http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/open-access-scientific-information

 Of course, everybody can rename Green and Gold as well as Open Access. But 
 the difficulty will be to get the change worldwide.

 Nicolas Pettiaux, for example proposed in a previous mail, Libre instead of 
 Open Access!

 Therefore mixing his idea with your option, Born Open Access and Secondary 
 Open Access could become Born Libre and Trying to get Libre... ;-)

 BTW, I am not sure that I have well understood what means Green and what 
 means Gold in your proposition!

 We could play on this list to find best definition and vote for it! But the 
 aim of Open Access is not to find the best OA word for 2015, then for 2016 
 and for 2020! The aim is to stay clear for all stake holders, at the time of 
 important political decisions are taken. Policy makers seem to have 
 understood what is Green and what is Gold. They need only to have more 
 details on the true Gold and Green roads which really conduct to OA.

 To be efficient today, we just need to repeat what is precisely Green or 
 Gold, and how to get it, in each publication, conference, blog  and forum, as 
 Stevan Harnad and Jean-Claude Gu?don do it for years now.

 H?l?ne Bosc
- Original Message -
From: Danny Kingsley
To: goal@eprints.org
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 6:56 PM
Subject: [GOAL] Re: libre vs open - general language issues


Hi all,

There is some appetite it seems for looking at definitions at the moment. 
 In the last couple of weeks I have tweeted about the following:

  a.. COAR has a 'Resource Type Vocabulary Draft' - standard naming of 
 items in repositories available for comment - 
 https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/repository-interoperability/ig-controlled-vocabularies-for-repository-assets/deliverables/
  b.. Open Research Glossary' so we can all be more informed about vastly 
 complex topic 'Open Scholarship' - 
 http://blogs.egu.eu/network/palaeoblog/2015/07/14/the-open-research-glossary-round-2/
  c.. 'We hope to build a common dictionary of terms about open access to 
 facilitate sharing of information' http:// 
 http://dictionary.casrai.org/Open_Access_APC_Report
My issue is with the terms 'green' and 'gold' which are entirely 
 arbitrary. The main problem I have is that 'gold' implies 'the best' and it 
 implies 'expensive' and it is not necessarily either.

If we have an option I think we should refer to these two routes to OA as 
 'Born Open Access' and 'Secondary Open Access'. Considerably more 
 understandable to the external audience.

Danny



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Re: libre vs open - general language issues

[Danny Kingsley]

Hi all,

There is some appetite it seems for looking at definitions at the 
moment. In the last couple of weeks I have tweeted about the following:


 * COAR has a 'Resource Type Vocabulary Draft' - standard naming of
   items in repositories available for comment -
   
https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/repository-interoperability/ig-controlled-vocabularies-for-repository-assets/deliverables/
 * Open Research Glossary' so we can all be more informed about vastly
   complex topic 'Open Scholarship' -
   
http://blogs.egu.eu/network/palaeoblog/2015/07/14/the-open-research-glossary-round-2/
 * 'We hope to build a common dictionary of terms about open access to
   facilitate sharing of information' http:// http://t.co/Y5tnTbcAGl
   http://dictionary.casrai.org/Open_Access_APC_Report

My issue is with the terms 'green' and 'gold' which are entirely 
arbitrary. The main problem I have is that 'gold' implies 'the best' and 
it implies 'expensive' and it is not necessarily either.


If we have an option I think we should refer to these two routes to OA 
as 'Born Open Access' and 'Secondary Open Access'. Considerably more 
understandable to the external audience.


Danny

--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939



On 13/08/2015 16:58, goal-requ...@eprints.org wrote:

Send GOAL mailing list submissions to
goal@eprints.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
goal-requ...@eprints.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
goal-ow...@eprints.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than Re: Contents of GOAL digest...


Today's Topics:

1. Re: libre vs open (Darnton, Robert)
2. Re: libre vs open (Nicolas Pettiaux)
3. Re: libre vs open (Jean-Claude Gu?don)


--

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 15:24:45 +
From: Darnton, Robert robert_darn...@harvard.edu
Subject: [GOAL] Re: libre vs open
To: H?l?ne.Bosc hbosc-tcher...@orange.fr, Global  Open Access List
(Successor of AmSci) goal@eprints.org
Cc: Lessig, Lawrence les...@law.harvard.edu
Message-ID: d1f22da9.77b3%robert_darn...@harvard.edu
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1

Dear Fellow Travelers,

For what it's worth, I would like to express my agreement with H?l?ne Bosc's argument.  In my own 
experience, acc?s libre works well in France and Qu?bec, open access in 
English-speaking countries.  Those phrases have caught on, and it is too late to change them now.

Best wishes,
Bob Darnton

From: H?l?ne.Bosc hbosc-tcher...@orange.frmailto:hbosc-tcher...@orange.fr
Reply-To: H?l?ne.Bosc 
hbosc-tcher...@orange.frmailto:hbosc-tcher...@orange.fr
Date: Thursday, August 13, 2015 at 10:07 AM
To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) 
goal@eprints.orgmailto:goal@eprints.org
Cc: Lessig, Lawrence les...@law.harvard.edumailto:les...@law.harvard.edu, Robert 
Darnton robert_darn...@harvard.edumailto:robert_darn...@harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [GOAL] libre vs open

-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20150813/26f8db98/attachment-0001.html

--

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 17:27:34 +0200
From: Nicolas Pettiaux nico...@pettiaux.be
Subject: [GOAL] Re: libre vs open
To: goal@eprints.org
Message-ID: 55ccb766.3010...@pettiaux.be
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252


Much thanks H?l?ne for the detailed explanation.

I know (and have known) personnally Bernard Lang and Jean-Claude Gu?don
for years, and I admit that I am late writing again about such a topic.

I appreciate that at least in French in 2002 it was clear that the word
libre acc?ss was used (hence I supposed was better suited)

I appreciate your reference to the post of Peter Suber and his long
explanation about gratis and libre OA.

I appreciate that you blog itself is Libre acc?s ? la connaissance.

I have more insight about the topics, I understand more about the
context (even though I had read a lot)

I will not fight nor spend much energy on this topic (libre vs open),
but I also consider that the word open today does not reflect the
philosophy that many academic want to put when they speak about the kind
of access they want just for science to exist.

Science without full reproducibility is not science.

Science with any barrier (eg. price) in a world where it is possible to
remove them is not science for everyone, because the people who
experience barriers cannot reproduce.

About removing the barrier, as much as possible, in today's world, I
consider that computer and internet access

[GOAL] Journals Consortium Archive - dodgy or legit?

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

One of our PhD students has received an offer to upload their thesis to 
something called the 'Journals Consortium Archive' 
http://journalsconsortium.org/


I have never heard of them, the 'About us' tab is a file not found and 
there is no information yet about Australia or the UK. This raises some 
suspicions (to say the least).


But before I respond with a loud warning to the student I would like to 
check that this is not some new start up that is legitimate. Please let 
me know if you have had a positive experience with these people.


Regards

Danny

INTRODUCING ARCHIVE OF POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATIONS

Dear Dr. ,

We are glad to introduce to you the Journals Consortium Archive of
Postgraduate Dissertations [1].

Postgraduate thesis/dissertations are resources of immense research
value across academic disciplines. Unfortunately, most
thesis/dissertations tend to be restricted to university libraries and
archives.

Journals Consortium Postgraduate Archive
http://pgd.journalsconsortium.org/ [1] provides a new and exciting way
of digitally archiving postgraduate thesis/dissertations. This enables
postgraduate students to archive their thesis/dissertations by uploading
them to the Journals Consortium Postgraduate Archive platform. This not
only extend these thesis/dissertations work from university libraries to
the global academic community, but also gives them a global audience and
better chances for these thesis/dissertations to be cited by other
researchers.

Using the Open Access model, these thesis /dissertations will be freely
available to all researchers by simply visiting the Journals Consortium
Postgraduate Archive website [1].

Please inform your colleagues and students of this archive and encourage
them to submit their postgraduate theses/dissertations.

Yours sincerely,

Postgraduate Dissertations Department

Journals Consortium

dissertati...@journalsconsortium.org 
mailto:dissertati...@journalsconsortium.org


http://journalsconsortium.org/ [2]

Links:
--
[1]
http://msl.journalsconsortium.org/index.php?subid=391656option=com_acymailingctrl=urlurlid=31mailid=22
[2]
http://msl.journalsconsortium.org/index.php?subid=391656option=com_acymailingctrl=urlurlid=13mailid=22
[3]
http://msl.journalsconsortium.org/index.php?subid=391656option=com_acymailingctrl=urlurlid=14mailid=22
[4]
http://msl.journalsconsortium.org/index.php?subid=391656option=com_acymailingctrl=urlurlid=15mailid=22
[5]
http://msl.journalsconsortium.org/index.php?subid=391656option=com_acymailingctrl=urlurlid=16mailid=22
[6]
http://msl.journalsconsortium.org/index.php?subid=391656option=com_acymailingctrl=usertask=outmailid=22key=KIJRuBvw8UYM9L 







--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Dutch begin their Elsevier boycott

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

You may be interested in the latest Unlocking Research blog: 'Dutch 
boycott of Elsevier - a game changer?' 
https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=192


Dutch universities have begun their boycott of Elsevier due to a 
complete breakdown of negotiations over Open Access. As a first step in 
boycotting the publisher, the Association of Universities in the 
Netherlands (VSNU) has asked all scientists that are editor in chief of 
a journal published by Elsevier to give up their post. If this way of 
putting pressure on the publishers does not work, the next step would be 
to ask reviewers to stop working for Elsevier. After that, scientists 
could be asked to stop publishing in Elsevier journals.


The blog explains the background of the Dutch situation with some facts 
and figures about what we are spending in the UK. We need to stand by 
and support our Dutch colleagues.


Danny

--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] In conversation with Ben Ryan from the EPSRC

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

Last week Cambridge University hosted a meeting with respresentatives 
from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) 
which as a policy that data underpinning published research is made 
available. It kicked in on 1 May 2015. Apart from the policy itself 
there is very little information about what the policy does and does not 
allow (and certainly little about the implications of people not complying).

This blog summarises the discussed and has been checked by Ben Ryan. It 
is a good explanation of some of the background to the policy and what 
they expect.

https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=151

Regards

Danny

-- 
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Blog post about the challenges of convincing researchers that sharing their data is a good thing

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

I have just written a post about the challenges of convincing 
researchers that sharing their data is a good thing:



 Good news stories about data sharing?

https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p=114

We have been speaking to researchers around the University recently to 
discuss theexpectations of their funders 
http://www.data.cam.ac.uk/research-data-policies/funders-policiesin 
relation to data management. This has raised the issue of how best to 
convince people this is a process that benefits society rather than a 
waste of time or just yet another thing they are being 'forced to do' -- 
which is the perspective of some that we have spoken with. snip


Regards

Danny

--
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: da...@cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: -0002-3636-5939

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Profile of Danny Kingsley in USKG journal Insights

[Danny Kingsley]

Hi all,

A profile of me, Dr Danny Kingsley, Executive Officer of Australian Open Access 
Support Group, and soon to be Head of Scholarly Communications at Cambridge 
University, has appeared in UKSG journal Insights Nov 2014 issue (Volume 27, No 
3).

The interview happened earlier this year, before I accepted the position at 
Cambridge University - something they mention right at the end.

Anyway, for those interested in my position on all things open access, the DOI 
is here http://dx.doi.org/10.1629/2048-7754.185

It is available open access of course.

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Visiting Fellow
Australian National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science (CPAS)
p: +61 413 101 197
w: http://cpas.anu.edu.au/about-us/people/danny-kingsley
t: @openaccess_oz

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Any examples of journals charging non refundable fee for peer review?

[Danny Kingsley]

Hi all,

I am passing on a question from a library in Australia:

I have recently become aware that some publishers and journals are charging 
authors a non-refundable fee to have their articles peer reviewed that is 
separate from the article processing charge.  I hadn't heard about this until 
one of our librarians mentioned it in passing.

I was wondering if anyone else had come across this (or whether I've just had 
my head in the sand and not noticed!), and if so, whether it is common.  Any 
examples would be great :)

Dr Danny Kingsley
Visting Fellow
Australian National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science (CPAS)
p: +61 413 101 197
w: http://cpas.anu.edu.au/about-us/people/danny-kingsley
t: @openaccess_oz

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Re: Library Vetting of Repository Deposits

[Danny Kingsley]

Putting aside the tit for tat nature of some of this discussion, one of
the big problems for making available works that have been deposited to
repositories is the complexity of the copyright compliance.

There are the rules imposed by publishers, and then the possibility that
the institution or funder has a special Œarrangement¹ with publishers that
then override the standard copyright position obtainable from their
websites. And sometimes publishers change their rules - like the length of
embargo. To add to this there is the confusion over whether the author is
under a mandate - which affects the Elsevier situation. Yes, Stevan - I
know you argue that Elsevier¹s position is semantics, but nonetheless it
adds to the muddiness of the waters here.

I wrote about this on 23 May last year: ³Walking in quicksand, keeping up
with copyright agreements
http://aoasg.org.au/2013/05/23/walking-in-quicksand-keeping-up-with-copyrig
ht-agreements/


My conclusion then was:

These changing copyright arrangements mean that the process of making
research openly accessible through a repository is becoming less and less
able to be undertaken by individuals. By necessity, repository deposit is
becoming solely the responsibility of the institution.²

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group
e: e...@aoasg.org.au
p: +612 6125 6839
w: www.aoasg.org.au
t: @openaccess_oz






On 25/09/2014 1:46 am, Joachim SCHOPFEL
joachim.schop...@univ-lille3.fr wrote:

Here in France, librarians often are more or less unsatisfied with
scientists because of lacking awareness, motivation and enthusiasm for
open access. In the UK, some scientists seem unsatisfied with librarians
because they do their job too carefully. Why not swap them? (I am joking,
yet...why not?)

:)
 
 
 
 
Le Mercredi 24 Septembre 2014 16:29 CEST, Heather Morrison
heather.morri...@uottawa.ca a écrit:
 
 Thanks for defending the profession, Jean-Claude and I think you've
made some important points.
 
 However, there is nothing with service. Providing good service does not
make one a servant. 20% of the work of an academic is commonly formally
described as service. One could also describe teaching and research as
service activities. A good leader of the country serves the country. If
librarians are and should not be servants (I agree with this),
nevertheless the library itself is a service, and it will be easier for
libraries to make the case to sustain and grow their support if the
library is perceived as a useful and valued service, IMHO. Many
libraries fully understand this, and I am familiar with examples of
libraries that excel in both service to their universities or colleges
and academic service to their profession.
 
 The obligation to consider service true of academic departments and
universities, too - if we want to survive and thrive we need to recruit
, retain and graduate students and demonstrate the value of their
education.
 
 My perspective is that it would be helpful to the transition in
scholarly communication for librarians and faculty to understand each
other better. Following is an overgeneralization that I'd critique in
one of my students papers :) Some researchers do not fully appreciate
the value of the library profession. Some librarians do not fully
appreciate the working conditions of scholars. There are some librarians
who assume that the generous funding, tenure and secure salaries enjoyed
by some faculty is the norm. The reality in many universities is that
many faculty in arts, humanities and social sciences may have no
research funding at all and no guarantees of funding for travel to
conferences, and that in the US and Canada, the largest group of
university professors are very part-time with no job security, benefits,
or support for research activities whatsoever.
 
 Your point about the Charleston Conference (librarians and publishers
together) is well taken. If librarians want to become more actively
involved in scholarship (which I advocate), it might be best to spend
less time talking with publishers (and even with other librarians) and
more time talking with and understanding faculty members. One idea that
I know some librarians are already doing is having librarians attend the
conferences associated with the discipline(s) that they serve. Other
ideas?
 
 best,
 
 Heather
 
 
 On 2014-09-24, at 9:10 AM, Jean-Claude Guédon
jean.claude.gue...@umontreal.camailto:jean.claude.gue...@umontreal.ca
  wrote:
 
 Beware of categories such as librarians or publishers or even
researchers. Let us remember also that librarians were behind the
creation of repositories back around 2003-4. Without them, their work
and, often, their money and resources, we simply would not have these
repositories. That some librarians should try to enforce very strict
rules, etc. is not all that surprising: the profession is built on care,
precision and rigorous management of an unwieldy set of objects.
However, we should not paint

[GOAL] Open access update June 2014 is now live

[Danny Kingsley]

Apologies for cross posting

The AOASG 'Open access update June 2014' is now live and available at 
http://aoasg.org.au/2014/07/01/open-access-update-june-2014/

It contains:

Cost of scholarly publishing under 
scrutinyhttp://aoasg.org.au/2014/07/01/open-access-update-june-2014/#Cost
Shining a light on the big deal - 20 June 2014
FoI requests by New Zealand libraries - 5 June 2014
Where is the money for open access going?

Publisher 
newshttp://aoasg.org.au/2014/07/01/open-access-update-june-2014/#Publisher
Interesting development - STM licenses
Publisher imposes censorship on article about open access - 5 June 2014
Publisher apologises about the censorship issue - 19 June 2014

Monograph 
developmentshttp://aoasg.org.au/2014/07/01/open-access-update-june-2014/#Monograph
Monograph solution 1 - Proposal to make HASS monographs sustainable
Monograph solution 2 - seed money? - 27 June 2014
Monograph solution 3 - Home institution pays for first book

Altmetrics 
articleshttp://aoasg.org.au/2014/07/01/open-access-update-june-2014/#Altmetrics
Special issue on alternative metrics - June 2014
Altmetrics for institutions have been released - 12 June 2014

Other published 
researchhttp://aoasg.org.au/2014/07/01/open-access-update-june-2014/#Other
Learned Societies and open access report - 27 May 2014
Researchers change their publication to fit the assessment - 8 June 2014
Availability of Journal articles to internet - 15 June 2014
Google Scholar trumps Web of Science - 9 May 2014

Newshttp://aoasg.org.au/2014/07/01/open-access-update-june-2014/#News
Collecting UK research in one spot - 13 June 2014
The only way is up for OA journals - June 2014
User beware - Publication Integrity and Ethics
Academic identity theft  - 6 June 2014
More licenses for publishers to open research
Plan to link data - 30 April 2014

Events - pasthttp://aoasg.org.au/2014/07/01/open-access-update-june-2014/#past
Ockham's Razor on Radio National - 15 June 2014
Open Access Publishing in Asia - 2-3 June 2014
Global Research Funders discussing Open Access - 26-28 May
How to get published -15 May 2014

Events - 
upcominghttp://aoasg.org.au/2014/07/01/open-access-update-june-2014/#upcoming
Webinar - PLOS: open data. ORCIDs and Article Level Metrics - 3 July 2014
A festival of events in October/November - block out your diaries!

Resourceshttp://aoasg.org.au/2014/07/01/open-access-update-june-2014/#Resources
Open Access Journal Options Flowchart - 24 June 2014
Location of Academic Knowledge - June 2014
Tweeterati advice


Dr Danny Kingsley
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group
e: e...@aoasg.org.aumailto:e...@aoasg.org.au
p: +612 6125 6839
w: www.aoasg.org.au
t: @openaccess_oz


___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] NEW RESOURCE: Open access journal options flowchart

[Danny Kingsley]

Apologies for cross posting

The AOASG has uploaded an Open access journal options flowchart to their 
Downloadable Graphics pages - http://aoasg.org.au/downloadable-graphics/

The flowchart is designed to assist researchers with decisions about where to 
publish in order to ensure their work is available to the widest possible 
audience. It is available under a CC-BY license - 
http://aoasg.org.au/open-access-journal-options-flowchart/

Regards

Danny


Dr Danny Kingsley
--
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group (AOASG)
Menzies Library, Building 2
The Australian National University
Canberra ACT 0200 Australia

E: danny.kings...@anu.edu.aumailto:danny.kings...@anu.edu.au
P: +612 6125 6839
W: http://aoasg.org.au
T: @openaccess_oz

Cricos Provider - 00120C

NOTE: I work three days a week: Mondays (on campus), Tuesdays and Thursdays. I 
think about open access 24/7.



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Open access update May 2014 is now live

[Danny Kingsley]

Apologies for cross posting

The AOASG Open access update May 2014 is now live and available at 
http://aoasg.org.au/2014/05/29/open-access-update-may-2014/

It contains:

Open Access 
Newshttp://aoasg.org.au/2014/05/29/open-access-update-may-2014/#News

§  AOASG a signatory on COAR Statement about embargoes - 29 May 2014

§  Open Access Week 2014 theme is Generation Open

§  Predator-watch 1 - 'Hijacked' journals list - 18 May 2014

§  American Society Of Civil Engineers Issues take down notices - 16 May 2014

§  Librarians should be across OA  APC payment options - May 2014

§  Elsevier expenditure - 24 April 2014

§  Predator-watch 2 - another 'sting' - 21 April 2014

§  Declaration on open access for LIS authors - March 2014

§  Complying with mandates - March 2014

§  Predator-watch 3 - Beware VDM publishing - 23 March 2014

New open access policies - 
internationalhttp://aoasg.org.au/2014/05/29/open-access-update-may-2014/#Policies

§  Chinese Academy of Sciences Open Access Policy - 16 May 2014

§  Mexico national legislation on open access and repositories - 8 April 2014

Reports  
Researchhttp://aoasg.org.au/2014/05/29/open-access-update-may-2014/#Reports

§  Open-Access Repositories Worldwide, 2005-2012 - 2 May 2014

§  British Academy study on OA journals in HASS - April 2014

§  UKSG special issue on OA monographs - April 2014

§  Aligning repositories - March 2014

§  Analysis of deposit rules of 100 largest journals

Alternative ways to value 
journalshttp://aoasg.org.au/2014/05/29/open-access-update-may-2014/#Alternative

§  Journal Openness Index

§  JournalGuide

§  Quality Open Access Market

§  Open Review

Eventshttp://aoasg.org.au/2014/05/29/open-access-update-may-2014/#Events

§  Stop blaming open access: what's wrong with scholarly communication and why 
it's not the fault of open 
accesshttp://www.canberraskeptics.org.au/event/stop-blaming-open-access-whats-wrong-with-scholarly-communication/

§  Recent Developments in Open Access and Scholarly Communication: The case of 
History in Britain.http://anulib.anu.edu.au/events/


Dr Danny Kingsley
--
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group (AOASG)
Menzies Library, Building 2
The Australian National University
Canberra ACT 0200 Australia

E: danny.kings...@anu.edu.aumailto:danny.kings...@anu.edu.au
P: +612 6125 6839
W: http://aoasg.org.au
T: @openaccess_oz

Cricos Provider - 00120C

NOTE: I work three days a week: Mondays (on campus), Tuesdays and Thursdays. I 
think about open access 24/7.



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] What are we spending on OA publication?

[Danny Kingsley]

Apologies for cross posting

Hello all,

The last of the AOASG's Paying for Publication series has been uploaded today:

'What are we spending on OA publication? - 
http://aoasg.org.au/what-are-we-spending-on-oa-publication/

The page takes the position: It is naive to think that we can have an 
effective strategic conversation about the future of scholarly publishing 
without understanding what we are spending in the sector. The page notes that 
it is extremely difficult to determine expenditure in this area and lists 
different attempts to approach the question in the Australian context (with 
little success).

This page is timely in light of the revelations of Timothy Gower's FoI requests 
about UK university expenditure on subscriptions.

This page is the last of the Payment for Publication: 
http://aoasg.org.au/paying-for-publication/ series which also includes:


'Managing Article Processing Charges' - 
http://aoasg.org.au/managing-article-processing-charges/

'Cost of Hybrid' - http://aoasg.org.au/cost-of-hybrid/

'Addressing the double dipping charge' - 
http://aoasg.org.au/addressing-the-double-dipping-charge/

'Do OA funds support hybrid?' - http://aoasg.org.au/funding-hybrid/

'Not all hybrid is equal' - http://aoasg.org.au/not-all-hybrid-is-equal/

'The membership model' - http://aoasg.org.au/the-membership-model-2/


We hope you have found the series useful and informative.

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group
e: e...@aoasg.org.aumailto:e...@aoasg.org.au
p: +612 6125 6839
w: www.aoasg.org.au
t: @openaccess_oz


___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] New AOASG resource - Managing Article Processing Charges

[Danny Kingsley]

Apologies for cross posting



The latest in the series on Payment for Publication from the Australian Open 
Access Support Group (AOASG) has gone live today.


Managing Article Processing Charges - 
http://aoasg.org.au/managing-article-processing-charges/ considers how complex, 
and deeply embedded in institutional administration, the management of article 
processing charges has (and needs to) become. The page looks at funding body 
and institutional financial support for article processing charges before 
exploring the logistics of managing these payments. The page concludes with an 
analysis of the advantages or otherwise of centralising APC management from 
both an institutional and an author perspective.



This page is part of the Payment for Publication: 
http://aoasg.org.au/paying-for-publication/ series which also includes:



* 'Cost of Hybrid' - http://aoasg.org.au/cost-of-hybrid/

* 'Addressing the double dipping charge' - 
http://aoasg.org.au/addressing-the-double-dipping-charge/

* 'Do OA funds support hybrid?' - http://aoasg.org.au/funding-hybrid/

* 'Not all hybrid is equal' - 
http://aoasg.org.au/not-all-hybrid-is-equal/

* The membership model - http://aoasg.org.au/the-membership-model-2/



Regards



Danny


Dr Danny Kingsley
--
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group (AOASG)
Menzies Library, Building 2
The Australian National University
Canberra ACT 0200 Australia

E: danny.kings...@anu.edu.aumailto:danny.kings...@anu.edu.au
P: +612 6125 6839
W: http://aoasg.org.au
T: @openaccess_oz

Cricos Provider - 00120C

NOTE: I work three days a week: Mondays (on campus), Tuesdays and Thursdays. I 
think about open access 24/7.



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Re: Question why journals in DOAJ are being listed as 'Australian'

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

Thank you for the responses sent through to my specific question about a 
particular publisher being identified as 'Australian'. It has sparked a 
secondary discussion about the value or otherwise of locating a publisher in a 
particular country - and the value judgements that might be subsequently 
assigned.

While this in itself is a worthwhile discussion, I would like to note the 
reason why I was trying to establish the number of Australian OA journals in 
the first place.

In OA advocacy (which is primarily my job) much of what needs to be done is 
convince people (either individual researchers , institutions or governments) 
that open access is worthwhile, worth investing in and also that any investment 
has been well spent. To do this we need numbers and benchmarks. I can't speak 
for other places around the world but in Australia we are having difficulty 
obtaining even basic information about where we stand internationally in open 
access stakes.

While we were early adopters of institutional repository software and have full 
coverage across out institutions of operational repositories, over one quarter 
of our universities have open access policies and our two primary government 
funding bodies have open access policies we do not know whether this has 
translated into a high level of open access research here. A paper about the 
Australian situation is here 
http://src-online.ca/index.php/src/article/viewFile/39/121

We do not currently have any automated way of knowing how much material is 
available within repositories as full text open access nor do we know what 
percentage of the previous year's research is now available open access (which 
could be benchmarked). On the other road, we could potentially create a system 
to pull information from our publication reporting to find out what we are 
publishing in fully open access journals (but we don't have it now), and we do 
not know what or where we are spending on APCs (so we have very little idea 
about how much we are publishing as hybrid OA).

One number that relatively simply could be collected is the number of open 
access journals Australia is publishing. Hence the original question.

Danny

From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of 
Jean-Claude Guédon
Sent: Thursday, 27 March 2014 2:00 AM
To: goal@eprints.org
Subject: [GOAL] Re: Question why journals in DOAJ are being listed as 
'Australian'

Beall's remark about the importance of the country where a publication is 
located, if he is right, fully demonstrates how stupid the evaluation process 
has become. The next step, I suppose, is to create a ranking of countries and 
thus establish their status with regard to scientific publishing. It also leads 
to really weird forms of reasoning such as: a press in Brazil, or India, or 
China, or Russia, is obviously not as good as a press in the US, in Britain, in 
Holland, etc... What about Italy? Greece? Portugal? What about Mexico? What 
about South Africa? What about the rest of Africa? Is Australia OK?

How many implicit forms of racism or cultural arrogance are hidden in such a 
perspective?

Jean-Claude Guédon




Le mardi 25 mars 2014 à 17:42 -0600, Beall, Jeffrey a écrit :
Danny,



I have been monitoring this publisher closely recently. I regularly receive 
inquiries about it -- researchers asking me whether it is predatory or not.



I currently do not have it included on the list of predatory publishers. 
Contrary to an opinion expressed earlier, for many, the country of publication 
is very important. Researchers in many countries get more academic credit 
towards tenure, promotion, and the annual evaluation when they publish in a 
journal based in a western country. (This is why many predatory publishers 
often pretend to be from western countries).



I recently posted an inquiry on this list seeking comments about this company's 
peer-review portability policy (it allows authors themselves to transfer peer 
reviews from the rejecting publisher to Ivyspring.)



Ivyspring until recently said it was based in Wyoming, NSW. Now they've changed 
their official address to this:



Ivyspring International Publisher Pty Ltd
Level 32, 1 Market Street
Sydney, NSW 2000
Australia



That address matches the address of Alliance Business 
Centershttp://www.abcn.com/offices-sydney--level-32-1-market-street-3264, a 
virtual office company. Also, according to an Australian business directory, 
the publisher's owner is Jinxin Jason Lin.



I think it's safe to say this company lacks needed transparency. Who owns it? 
Where are they based? What experience do the owners have with scholarly 
publishing? Why are they using a virtual office as their headquarters address? 
What is the extent of this company's connection to Australia? To other 
countries?



--Jeffrey Beall


From: goal-boun...@eprints.orgmailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org 
[mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Danny Kingsley
Sent

[GOAL] Question why journals in DOAJ are being listed as 'Australian'

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

I recently looked at the DOAJ list of Australian journals to determine how many 
Australian OA journals charge an APC. Of the list of 115 journals on the DOAJ, 
12 charge an APC.

However on investigation seven of these 12 do not appear to be Australian 
journals at all.

There is no definitive list of Australian OA journals - the AOASG page 
http://aoasg.org.au/open-access-in-action/australian-oa-journals/ lists 150  
(compared to the smaller DOAJ list) and before I investigated this it did not 
include the five genuinely OA Australian journals that charge an APC.

My questions are:

* Does anyone know why these journals would be appearing on DOAJ as 
'Australian'?

* Five of them are published by Ivyspring International Publishers - 
does anyone know anything about this publisher?

Thanks

Danny


Journal

Publisher

APC

Notes

Journal of Genomicshttp://www.jgenomics.com/

Ivyspring International Publisher

No publication charge during the current promotional period of this journal

Not published in Australia and only one Australian listed in the Editorial 
Board.

Theranosticshttp://www.thno.org/

Ivyspring International Publisher

$100AUD

Not published in Australia and there are no Australians listed in the Editorial 
Board

International Journal of Electronics, Engineering and Computer 
Systemshttp://www.irphouse.com/elect/ijece.htm

International Research Publication House

$150USD

Not published in Australia and there are no Australians listed in the Editorial 
Board

Asian Journal of Crop Sciencehttp://scialert.net/current.php?issn=1994-7879

Asian Network for Scientific Information

$370AUD

There is no direct website for the journal and it is difficult to determine the 
countries the Editorial Board come from

Journal of Cancerhttp://www.jcancer.org/

Ivyspring International Publisher

$1100AUD

Not published in Australia and only one Australian listed in the Editorial 
Board.

International Journal of Biological Scienceshttp://www.ijbs.com/

Ivyspring International Publisher

$1450AUD

Not published in Australia and only two Australians listed in the Editorial 
Board.

International Journal of Medical Scienceshttp://www.medsci.org/

Ivyspring International Publisher

$1450AUD

Not published in Australia and only two Australians listed in the Editorial 
Board.




Dr Danny Kingsley
--
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group (AOASG)
Menzies Library, Building 2
The Australian National University
Canberra ACT 0200 Australia

E: danny.kings...@anu.edu.aumailto:danny.kings...@anu.edu.au
P: +612 6125 6839
W: http://aoasg.org.au
T: @openaccess_oz

Cricos Provider - 00120C

NOTE: I work three days a week: Mondays (on campus), Tuesdays and Thursdays. I 
think about open access 24/7.



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Open access update March 2014

[Danny Kingsley]

Apologies for cross posting

The AOASG has published a new blog Open access update March 2014 - 
http://aoasg.org.au/2014/03/19/open-access-update-march-2014/, which includes 
updates on OA developments from December to mid-March, both in Australia and 
overseas and includes new policies, events and feedback.

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group
e: e...@aoasg.org.aumailto:e...@aoasg.org.au
p: +612 6125 6839
w: www.aoasg.org.au
t: @openaccess_oz


___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] New AOASG resource - the membership model

[Danny Kingsley]

Apologies for cross posting

The latest in the series on Payment for Publication from the Australian Open 
Access Support Group (AOASG) has gone live today.

The membership model  http://aoasg.org.au/the-membership-model-2/ explores the 
different options publishers are offering in the form of discounts on article 
processing charges. These range from the well established model of membership 
to an open access publisher, through to some membership options now offered for 
hybrid publishing. Membership to open access repositories, and the ways learned 
societies are offering discounts are explored. The page looks at potential 
issues with these membership options and discusses some ways publishers are 
addressing double dipping by tying discounts to article processing charges to 
subscriptions.

This page is part of the Payment for Publication 
http://aoasg.org.au/paying-for-publication/ series which also includes:
'Cost of Hybrid' - http://aoasg.org.au/cost-of-hybrid/
'Addressing the double dipping charge' - 
http://aoasg.org.au/addressing-the-double-dipping-charge/
'Do OA funds support hybrid?' - http://aoasg.org.au/funding-hybrid/
'Not all hybrid is equal' - http://aoasg.org.au/not-all-hybrid-is-equal/

Regards

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group
e: e...@aoasg.org.aumailto:e...@aoasg.org.au
p: +612 6125 6839
w: www.aoasg.org.au
t: @openaccess_oz


___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] New AOASG resource - not all hybrid is equal

[Danny Kingsley]

Apologies for cross posting

The latest in the series on Payment for Publication from the Australian Open 
Access Support Group (AOASG) has gone live today.

'Not all hybrid is equal' - http://aoasg.org.au/not-all-hybrid-is-equal/ looks 
at some of the issues about identification of hybrid articles as open access, 
which has generated some discussion on the lists recently. It also looks at the 
discoverability (or not) of hybrid open access articles. A couple of examples 
where publishers are offering different 'levels' of open access for different 
price points are also explored.

This page is part of the Payment for Publication 
http://aoasg.org.au/paying-for-publication/ series which also includes:
'Cost of Hybrid' - http://aoasg.org.au/cost-of-hybrid/
'Addressing the double dipping charge' - 
http://aoasg.org.au/addressing-the-double-dipping-charge/
'Do OA funds support hybrid?' - http://aoasg.org.au/funding-hybrid/

Regards

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group
e: e...@aoasg.org.aumailto:e...@aoasg.org.au
p: +612 6125 6839
w: www.aoasg.org.au
t: @openaccess_oz


___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] New AOASG resource - Do OA funds support hybrid?

[Danny Kingsley]

Apologies for cross posting

The latest in the series on Payment for Publication from the Australian Open 
Access Support Group (AOASG) has gone live today.

'Do OA funds support hybrid?' - http://aoasg.org.au/funding-hybrid/ looks at 
some high profile funds and their statements on paying for hybrid publication. 
It also includes an analysis of the position taken by the 81 listed open access 
publication funds on the Open Access Directory. The short answer to the 
question is more funds don't support hybrid than do.

This page is part of the Payment for Publication 
http://aoasg.org.au/paying-for-publication/ series which also includes:
'Cost of Hybrid' - http://aoasg.org.au/cost-of-hybrid/
'Addressing the double dipping charge' - 
http://aoasg.org.au/addressing-the-double-dipping-charge/

Regards

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group
e: e...@aoasg.org.aumailto:e...@aoasg.org.au
p: +612 6125 6839
w: www.aoasg.org.au
t: @openaccess_oz


___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] New AOASG resource - Addressing the 'double dipping' issue

[Danny Kingsley]

Apologies for cross posting

The latest in the series on Payment for Publication from the Australian Open 
Access Support Group (AOASG) has gone live today.
'Addressing the double dipping charge' - 
http://aoasg.org.au/addressing-the-double-dipping-charge/ explores the 
perception that publishers offering hybrid open access are 'double dipping' - 
receiving payment to make an article open access and receiving a second payment 
for the same article in the form of a subscription to the remainder of the 
journal. The page looks at a range of specific responses from publishers and 
the position on this issue of members of the open access community.
This page is part of the Payment for Publication 
http://aoasg.org.au/paying-for-publication/ series which also includes the 
'Cost of Hybrid' page - http://aoasg.org.au/cost-of-hybrid/
Regards

Danny


Dr Danny Kingsley
--
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group (AOASG)
Menzies Library, Building 2
The Australian National University
Canberra ACT 0200 Australia

E: danny.kings...@anu.edu.aumailto:danny.kings...@anu.edu.au
P: +612 6125 6839
W: http://aoasg.org.au
T: @openaccess_oz

Cricos Provider - 00120C

NOTE: I work three days a week: Mondays (on campus), Tuesdays and Thursdays. I 
think about open access 24/7.



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] New AOASG webpages on Paying for publication

[Danny Kingsley]

Apologies for cross posting

The AOASG has published the first two pages in a series about paying for 
publication. The main page - Paying for Publication 
http://aoasg.org.au/paying-for-publication/  introduces the hybrid model of 
publication with links to some different programs offered by publishers, it 
also discusses other types of payment associated with scholarly publishing.

The second page Cost of hybrid - http://aoasg.org.au/cost-of-hybrid/ compares 
the cost of hybrid open access publishing with publishing in a fully open 
access journal.

Watch this space for further information on this rich and complex topic.

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group
e: e...@aoasg.org.aumailto:e...@aoasg.org.au
p: +612 6125 6839
w: www.aoasg.org.au
t: @openaccess_oz


___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] AOASG 2013: That was the year that was

[Danny Kingsley]

apologies for cross posting

Seasons Greetings!

As we wind up towards the end of 2013, it is a good time to reflect on 
achievements during the inaugural year of the Australian Open Access Support 
Group.

This blog AOASG in 2013: that was the year that was 
http://aoasg.org.au/2013/12/20/aoasg-in-2013-that-was-the-year-that-was/ 
discusses some of the highlights, achievements and surprises of our first year 
of operation. It has been a great year for open access and we are delighted to 
have been able to contribute to the debate and discussion.

Happy reading and enjoy the break.

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group
e: e...@aoasg.org.aumailto:e...@aoasg.org.au
p: +612 6125 6839
w: .aoasg.org.au
t: @openaccess_oz


___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] BLOG: Reflections on the Open Access Research Conference 2013

[Danny Kingsley]

Apologies for cross posting

Hello all,

The Open Access and Research Conference 2013, held at QUT between 31 October – 
1 November 2013, focused on the theme of Discovery, Impact and Innovation. This 
was only the second open access conference held in Australia and featured 
speakers discussing open access activities from around the world.

The AOASG has published a blog summarising some of the key messages that 
emerged from the discussions: Reflections on the Open Access  Research 
Conference 2013 - 
http://aoasg.org.au/2013/12/09/reflections-on-the-open-access-and-research-conference-2013/

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group
e: e...@aoasg.org.aumailto:e...@aoasg.org.au
p: +612 6125 6839
w: .aoasg.org.au
t: @openaccess_oz


___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Re: Seeking some information on OA in Peru

[Danny Kingsley]

Thank you to all of the people who have responded to my query about the Peru 
open access policy. It sounds like there is great momentum in the region which 
is excellent - and a coordinated process for harvesting materials from 
repositories.

I am intending to add the following to the Australian Open Access Support Group 
(AOASG) webpage 'Statements about OA in Australia and the World' - 
http://aoasg.org.au/statements-on-oa-in-australia-the-world/

If I have mis-represented the situation please let me know.

Thanks

Danny

Peru Congress passes OA legislation - March 2013

Peru Congress has passed legislation 
(http://www2.congreso.gob.pe/sicr/comisiones/2012/com2012ciencia.nsf/0/cb7c863ded37261e05257b3b007c029c/$FILE/1188_Sustitutoria_27MAR2013.pdf)
  to establish the legal and regulatory framework for an Open Access National 
Digital Repository for output from publicly funded science, technology and 
innovation activities. The legislation states deposit is mandatory for any 
research output (articles, technical reports, doctoral thesis, books, book 
chapters, software, data and others) from projects funded by the Government. 
The legislation requires deposit of metadata and a copy of the work into the 
National Digital Repository. The work is to be made available after observation 
of any embargo period (without specifying periods). The details of the law are 
available (in Spanish): 
http://www.slideshare.net/ernestoq1973/proyecto-de-ley-repositorio-digital-de-acceso-abierto-de-ciencia-tecnologa-e-innovacin


Dr Danny Kingsley
--
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group (AOASG)
Menzies Library, Building 2
The Australian National University
Canberra ACT 0200 Australia

E: danny.kings...@anu.edu.aumailto:danny.kings...@anu.edu.au
P: +612 6125 6839
W: http://aoasg.org.au
T: @openaccess_oz

Cricos Provider - 00120C

NOTE: I work three days a week: Mondays (on campus), Tuesdays and Thursdays. I 
think about open access 24/7.



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Feature article on open access written for Australian Innovation System Report 2013

[Danny Kingsley]

Apologies for cross posting
Hi all,
Earlier this year, the then Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, 
Research and Tertiary Education invited the Australian Open Access Support 
Group (AOASG) to contribute a feature article to the Australian Innovation 
System Report 2013 http://aoasg.org.au/blog/www.industry.gov.au/AISreport 
which was published in early November. Entitled 'Open Access Publishing', the 
feature article by Dr Danny Kingsley appears in Chapter 4: Public Research 
Capacity and Innovation: University research quality 
assessmenthttp://www.industry.gov.au/innovation/policy/AustralianInnovationSystemReport/AISR2013/chapter-4-public-research-capacity-and-innovation/university-research-quality-assessment/index.html.
The feature provides a background to open access and the Australian situation, 
so is not proposing new concepts, but the inclusion of a feature article on the 
issue of open access in such a report is a very positive sign for the place 
open access has within the broader research support systems in Australia.
The text of the article is reproduced on the AOASG website with the kind 
permission of the Department of Industry - 
http://aoasg.org.au/2013/11/21/open-access-publishing-feature-article/
Regards
Danny
Dr Danny Kingsley
--
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group (AOASG)
Menzies Library, Building 2
The Australian National University
Canberra ACT 0200 Australia

E: danny.kings...@anu.edu.aumailto:danny.kings...@anu.edu.au
P: +612 6125 6839
W: http://aoasg.org.au
T: @openaccess_oz

Cricos Provider - 00120C

NOTE: I work three days a week: Mondays (on campus), Tuesdays and Thursdays. I 
think about open access 24/7.



___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Seeking some information on OA in Peru

[Danny Kingsley]

Hello all,

A notification last week about Argentina's new open access policy being passed 
by the Congress mentioned that Peru also have an open access mandate - 
http://www2.congreso.gob.pe/sicr/comisiones/2012/com2012ciencia.nsf/0/cb7c863ded37261e05257b3b007c029c/$FILE/1188_Sustitutoria_27MAR2013.pdf

I am not able to translate the document (text copied below) - but it appears to 
have been dated 27 March 2013 and refers to a National Digital Repository 
service of some kind.

I haven't been able to find any information about the mandate, and ROARMAP only 
refers to a thesis mandate for Peru.

Does anyone know what the details are for this mandate - what is it asking for, 
embargo periods etc?

Thanks

Danny


Dr Danny Kingsley
--
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group (AOASG)
Menzies Library, Building 2
The Australian National University
Canberra ACT 0200 Australia

E: danny.kings...@anu.edu.aumailto:danny.kings...@anu.edu.au
P: +612 6125 6839
W: http://aoasg.org.au
T: @openaccess_oz

Cricos Provider - 00120C

NOTE: I work three days a week: Mondays (on campus), Tuesdays and Thursdays. I 
think about open access 24/7.





Comisión de Ciencia, Innovación y Tecnología



1



DICTAMEN RECAÍDO EN EL PROYECTO DE LEY 1188/2011-CR, LEY DEL REPOSITORIO 
NACIONAL DIGITAL DE CIENCIA, TECNOLOGÍA E INNOVACIÓN DE ACCESO ABIERTO. .



FÓRMULA LEGAL

LEY QUE REGULA EL REPOSITORIO NACIONAL DIGITAL DE CIENCIA, TECNOLOGÍA E 
INNOVACIÓN DE ACCESO ABIERTO

Artículo 1. Objeto de la Ley.

Establecer el marco normativo del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, 
Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto.

Artículo 2. Definición de Repositorio Nacional Digital de Acceso Abierto

2.1. Para los fines de la presente ley, se denomina Repositorio Nacional 
Digital de Acceso Abierto al sitio centralizado donde que mantiene información 
digital resultado de la producción en ciencia, tecnología e innovación (libros, 
publicaciones, artículos de revistas especializadas, trabajos 
técnico-científicos, programas informáticos, datos procesados y estadísticas de 
monitoreo, tesis académicas y similares).

2.2. Dicha información es de acceso libre y abierto, sin fines de lucro y sin 
requerimientos de registro, suscripción o pago alguno y está disponible para 
leer, descargar, reproducir, distribuir, imprimir, buscar o enlazar textos 
completos; considerando los derechos de autor, establecidos en el Decreto 
Legislativo 822 Ley sobre el Derecho de Autor.

Artículo 3. Ámbito de Aplicación

La presente Ley es de aplicación a las siguientes entidades y personas:

a) Las entidades del sector público.



b) Las entidades del sector privado o personas naturales que deseen 
voluntariamente compartir su información, con las restricciones técnicas y 
académicas que establezca el reglamento

Comisión de Ciencia, Innovación y Tecnología

2

DICTAMEN RECAÍDO EN EL PROYECTO DE LEY 1188/2011-CR, LEY DEL REPOSITORIO 
NACIONAL DIGITAL DE CIENCIA, TECNOLOGÍA E INNOVACIÓN DE ACCESO ABIERTO. .





c) Entidades privadas o personas naturales cuyos resultados de investigaciones 
hayan sido financiadas con recursos del Estado.



d) Entidades y personas naturales que realizan actividades en el ámbito de la 
ciencia, tecnología e innovación que componen el Sistema Nacional de Ciencia, 
Tecnología e Innovación Tecnológica (Sinacyt), que cumplan con los requisitos 
establecidos en el reglamento.



Artículo 4. Del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e 
Innovación de Acceso abierto

4.1. Establézcase el Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e 
Innovación de Acceso Abierto, el cual es administrado por el Consejo Nacional 
de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación Tecnológica (Concytec), constituyéndose en 
la máxima instancia para recolectar, integrar, estandarizar, almacenar, 
preservar y difundir la producción nacional de ciencia, tecnología e innovación 
de los repositorios.

4.2. El Consejo Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación Tecnológica 
(Concytec), responsable del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología 
e Innovación de Acceso Abierto, asume las siguientes funciones:

a) Implementa, integra, estandariza, almacena, preserva y gestiona el adecuado 
funcionamiento del repositorio nacional, establece las políticas que regulen la 
seguridad y sostenibilidad del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, 
Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto, en el marco de la presente ley.



b) Brindar asistencia técnica integral a los participantes del Sistema Nacional 
de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación Tecnológica (Sinacyt) para la generación y 
gestión de sus respectivos datos e información, así como establecer los 
mecanismos y estándares de interoperabilidad del Estado con el Repositorio 
Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto, para lo 
cual cuenta con el asesoramiento técnico de la Oficina Nacional de Gobierno 
Electrónico.



c

[GOAL] Recognising Open Access Champions - inaugural AOASG Awards

[Danny Kingsley]

To celebrate Open Access Week 2013, the Australian Open Access Support Group is 
recognising two ‘Open Access Champions’ – an individual and an organisation.

The Open Access Champion 2013 – Individual Category – has been awarded to 
Associate Professor Alex O. Holcombe, who is a psychologist studying human 
visual perception and visual attention. He is based in the School of Psychology 
at the University of Sydney. Alex spoke to Danny Kingsley about his interest in 
open access and how he is spreading the open access message 
-http://aoasg.org.au/2013/10/22/open-access-champion-2013-alex-holcombe/

The Open Access Champion 2013 - Organisation Category - has been awarded to the 
not-for-profit international development organization Engineers Without Borders 
Institute’s Open Journal Projecthttp://www.openjournalproject.org/. Julian 
O’Shea, the Director of the EWB Institute, who is heading up the project, spoke 
to Danny Kingsley about what has happened in the three months since the AOASG 
featured a 
storyhttp://aoasg.org.au/2013/07/02/accessibility-is-more-than-making-the-paper-oa
 about the project in July - 
http://aoasg.org.au/2013/10/22/open-access-champion-2013-open-journal-project/http://aoasg.org.au/2013/10/22/open-access-champion-2013-open-journal-project

Congratulations to Alex and Engineers Without Borders on being the AOASG's 
inaugural Open Access Champions.

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group
e: e...@aoasg.org.aumailto:e...@aoasg.org.au
p: +612 6125 6839
w: .aoasg.org.au
t: @openaccess_oz


___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] ARC NHMRC OAWk panel discussion

[Danny Kingsley]

Apologies for cross posting

In celebration of Open Access Week, the Australian Open Access Support Group 
(AOASG) and the Australian National University (ANU) invited the Chief 
Executive Officers of the two government funding agencies to a panel discussion 
about their open access policies.

Professor Aidan Byrne, CEO of the Australian Research Council (ARC), and 
Professor Warwick Anderson, CEO of the National Health  Medical Research 
Council (NHMRC) spoke about their open access policies, and then participated 
in a QA session that was moderated by ANU Vice Chancellor, Professor Ian Young.

The session was recorded and is available on the ANU You Tube Channel - 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Kcj8j3LyBQ

A blog on the AOASG site 
http://aoasg.org.au/2013/10/20/arc-nhmrc-oawk-panel-discussion/ has a summary 
of the discussion and includes time stamps of different parts of the recording 
for ease of use.

Happy Open Access Week 2013.

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group
e: e...@aoasg.org.aumailto:e...@aoasg.org.au
p: +612 6125 6839
w: .aoasg.org.au
t: @openaccess_oz


___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Open Access Week events in Australia

[Danny Kingsley]

For those who are interested in what is happening down under, the Australian 
Open Access Support Group has compiled this page - 
http://aoasg.org.au/oawk-events-2013/ listing OAWk events.

There will be events in every state and territory across the country and more 
than half the universities around the nation are celebrating the week in some 
manner (with more events to be added shortly).

Events range from competitions to win iPads or money to cover APCs, through to 
demonstrations, conferences, seminars and workshops.

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group
e: e...@aoasg.org.aumailto:e...@aoasg.org.au
p: +612 6125 6839
w: .aoasg.org.au
t: @openaccess_oz


___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Case study: Implementing DSpace at Ballarat Health Services

[Danny Kingsley]

Apologies for cross posting

Hello all,

The latest blog from the Australian Open Access Support Group is by Gemma 
Siemensma, Library Manager at Ballarat Health Services. She describes the 
thinking and processes behind the introduction of their DSpace repository, the 
Ballarat Health Services Digital 
Repositoryhttp://bhsdigitalrepository.bhs.org.au/bhsjspui/.

She covers issues like developing policies, working through technical issues on 
a limited budget (and limited skill sets), implementation and uptake.

http://aoasg.org.au/2013/10/17/case-study-implementing-dspace-at-ballarat-heath-services/

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Executive Officer
Australian Open Access Support Group
e: e...@aoasg.org.aumailto:e...@aoasg.org.au
p: +612 6125 6839
w: .aoasg.org.au
t: @openaccess_oz


___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal