OSCP MunchLunch amp Learn 16 October 2014 John Barnett Scholarly Communications Librarian CC BY 30 Whats New in OA 2014 On the local national and international scenes Internationally speaking ID: 565690
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Open Access Week 2014: What You Need to ..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Open Access Week 2014: What You Need to Know
OSCP Munch/Lunch & Learn #16, October 2014
John Barnett, Scholarly Communications
Librarian
CC BY 3.0Slide2
What’s New in OA 2014?
On the local, national, and international scenesSlide3
Internationally speaking
World Health Organization (WHO) commits to Open Access by joining Europe PubMed Central
(
Wellcome
Trust, 1 May 2014)
WHO announces Open Access Policy (1 July 2014)
Articles authored or co-authored by WHO staff will have to be published in
OA journals or hybrid OA journals under Creative Commons 3.0 intergovernmental organization (IGO) license
Subscription journals allowing deposit of accepted author manuscript in Europe PubMed Central w/i 12 months
Articles produced by recipients of WHO funding will have to be published in
OA journals or hybrid OA journals under standard CC license terms
Subscription journals allowing deposit of articles in Europe PMC w/i 12
mosSlide4
Internationally speaking: The UK
Ongoing
debates re:
Research Councils UK (RCUK)
OA policy
Favors gold open access but leaves final choice to
authors (“confusing”)
Gold OA is considered cheaper in the long run but may be expensive during transition away from established subscription
models
Independent review of implementation announced
Higher Education Funding Council for England (
HEFCE
) announcement
Only papers placed in IRs will be considered eligible for the next Research Excellence Framework (REF) (periodic assessment of the outputs of UK university depts.)
Proposes mandated deposit on acceptance, rather than deposit on publicationSlide5
Internationally speaking: Canada
Draft Tri-Agency OA policy
for publicly funded research
Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)
CIHR was the 1
st
North American public research funder to have an OA
mandate
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC)
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC)
Efforts under way to extend this to all federally funded research
Option 1: Submit manuscripts to journals offering immediate OA, or within 12 months
Option 2: Archive final peer-reviewed full-text manuscripts in a digital archive where it will be freely accessible within 12 monthsSlide6
Internationally speaking: Latin America
Argentina: OA law passed Argentina’s Senate in November 2013
Brazil: National draft policy in place (2011-)
Mexico: National draft policy in place (2013-)
Peru: Law passed in 2013Slide7
At the national level: Energy
U.S. Dept. of Energy unveils plan to increase public access to research it finances
(CHE,
4 August 2014)
Prompted by
White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) memorandum
Energy 1
st
agency to release its public access plan
Web-based portal: Public Access Gateway for Energy and Science (PAGES)
Initial rollout: 6,500 papers and abstracts only for some
(Science Insider,
4 August 2014)Slide8
SPARC response
Good but . . . “Falls short in some key areas” (Heather Joseph, SPARC)
Reuse
rights not addressed clearly
Publishers retain copyright to their
versions
of the research
Metadata is in public
domain
No centralized system for searching
No searchable index of the full text of articles
Instead, distributed full-text access
Dark archive of manuscripts to be used if links become broken or full-text access is interrupted
No plans to provide ways for researchers to analyze the entirety of research
Harder to do computational analysis, text or data mining—”the kind of innovative uses the White House directive was designed to encourage”Slide9
Publisher response
“Generally supportive of the DOE plan”
(CHE,
4 August 2014
)
However, the Association of American Publishers doesn’t like the 12-month embargo the plan provides
“The ‘half-life’ of published research varies across disciplines, which is an argument against blanket embargo periods”
“Many publishers dislike PubMed Central—they say it infringes on journal copyright and diverts readers from their websites, cutting into advertising revenues”
(Science Insider,
4 August 2014)
White House order tried to address this concernSlide10
At the national level: Education
U.S. Dept. of Education releases “
Secretary’s Proposed Supplemental Priorities and Definitions for Discretionary Grant Programs
” (24 June 2014)
New definition for Open Educational Resource (OER)
Understanding that OER can be used to improve and enhance department wide priorities
Proposed Priority #11: Leveraging Technology to Support Instructional Practice and Professional DevelopmentSlide11
SPARC response
Applauded proposal; cited additional proposed priorities that OER could help address
Proposed Priority #3: Enabling the Creation of Personalized Learning Environments
Proposed Priority #4: Targeting and Differentiating Material Specifically for High-Need Students
Proposed Priority #5: Increasing Postsecondary Access, Affordability, and Completion
Proposed Priority #7: Promoting Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics
EducationSlide12
At the National Level: Congress
HR 4186, Frontiers in Innovation, Research, Science, and Technology (FIRST) Act
Language amended to match that of HR 3157, Public Access to Public Science Act (May 2014)
Embargo period of 12 months, not 24
Allows for embargo to be modified by a maximum of 6 months if the stakeholders can prove “substantial and unique harm”
Requires agencies to submit a report to Congress w/i 90 days detailing their public access policy; implementation w/i 1 yearSlide13
At the state level: California
California Taxpayer Access to Publicly Funded Research Legislation (AB 609) signed into law on 29 September 2014
Requires researchers receiving state-funded grant from the CA Dept. of Public Health
to
Submit an electronic copy of articles resulting from that grant and accepted for publication to a publicly accessible online database
Or, if needing to be submitted to another OA repository, researchers can supply the link to the state agency and the CA State Library
Within 12 months of publicationSlide14
At the state level: Illinois
Illinois Open Access to Articles Act (SB 1900)
Passed both chambers of the IL legislature
Awaiting governor’s signature
Requires that
Illinois state universities and colleges develop an “open access to research articles policy” within 1 year of the bill’s passage
Direct faculty to make freely available to the public an electronic version of the author’s final manuscript of original research (deposit on acceptance)
Author grants to public an irrevocable, worldwide copyright license to use these manuscriptsSlide15
At the state level: New York
New York Taxpayer Access to Publicly Funded Research Legislation (A180-2013 and S4050-2013)
Introduced into NY State Assembly in 2013
Bill currently under consideration; “no further action expected until the start of the 2014 legislative session
So what’s the current status of this legislation?Slide16
Crickets . . .Slide17
OA and the OSCP
An update on Open Access activities by the
ULS Office of Scholarly Communication and Publishing Slide18
At Pitt: Journal publishing
New journals
Anthropology & Aging
(website live:
anthro-age.pitt.edu
)
Hungarian Cultural Studies
(back issues loaded:
ahea.net
/
ahea.pitt.edu
)
New issues
45 issues published from October 2013 to October 2014
Some journal editors even won awards . . .Slide19
At Pitt: OA author fee fund
Activity for July
2012-June 2014
Articles approved and reimbursed to date: 121
Number of unique submitting authors: 113
Number of unique departments: 61
Number of unique journals: 75
Expenditures: $51,350 (FY 2013); $35,724 (FY 2014)
Includes
Hindawi
institutional membership and
BioMed
Central deposit accountSlide20
At Pitt: D-Scholarship
New staff
John Fudrow, Repository Manager
Spencer Goodwin, consultant on linked data, OAI harvesting
Nearly 15,000 records to date; 2,196 in the last year, including 699 ETDs
Books:
http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/21148
/
Data:
http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/20650
/
Improved metrics from
PlumX
:
http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/22403
/
In development
New version of EPrints software
Site redesignSlide21
At Pitt: Outreach and education
OA
LibGuide
completed -
pitt.libguides.com/
openaccess
Updated copyright/IP pages on the OSCP website –
www.library.pitt.edu/oscp/intellectual-property
Outreach
Approximately 30 information sessions (ULS, Pitt, regional, state, national, international)
New
OSCP services brochure
In development
LibGuides
on OER and Copyright/IP
Revamped
altmetrics
webpages
OA journals and quality webpagesSlide22
OA Week 2014 events—for ULS staff
October 14: Today’s Munch & Learn (our 16
th
)
October 22, 11 am to 12 noon:
How
to Talk with Faculty about Open
Access
Featuring Erin McKiernan, neuroscientist and advocate for Open Access, Open Science, and Open Data
Amy Knapp Room and via Lync
You’re welcome to invite colleagues from other institutions
Refreshments servedSlide23
OA Week 2014—Historic Pittsburgh Fair
Meet the partners and learn about future plans for this Open Educational Resource
Guest speakers
Steve Mellon, writer,
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Angelique Bamberg, adj. professor of history of art and architecture, Pitt
Discussions and demonstrations on local history research
October
21, 1 to 5 pm: Historic Pittsburgh Fair
University Club, Ballroom
BSlide24
OA Week 2014—Culture Change in Academia
. . . Making sharing the new norm
Public presentation by Erin McKiernan
Featuring short presentations and discussions by Pitt faculty panelists
Brian Beaton, Information Sciences
Gordon Mitchell, Communications
Lara Putnam, History
Jackie Smith, Sociology
Date
: October 22, 3 to 4:30 pm
Location: University Club, Ballroom A
(Note! Room change!)Slide25
OA Week 2014—The Challenge of Openness
. . . And Transparency in Scholarly Communication
Panel presentation by representatives from both traditional and OA publishing interests
Maryann
Martone
, Force11
Peter
Binfield
,
PeerJ
Rachel Burley, John Wiley
Jennifer Lin,
PLoS
Joint program with Carnegie Mellon University Libraries
Date: October 29, 4:30 to 6 pm
Location: 6115 Gates Hillman, CMUSlide26
How you can help
Send individual invitations to faculty, students, and staff you know
At Pitt or outside of Pitt, all are welcome
Interactive: Information, practical advice, discussion, conversation, ideas
Refreshments and new OSCP swag available!
You’re not only supporting the OSCP, you’re supporting the ULS
You gain
cachet
for being
au courant
(and other positive French phrases)Slide27
How can we help you?
Questions and answers about Open Access
and scholarly communication and publishingSlide28
Question: D-Scholarship versus . . .
Why should I deposit my works
in D-Scholarship as opposed to Academia.edu or
ReseachGate
?
Preservation
Who’s doing what with your information?
Pitt-centered scholarship
Copyright guidance
Publishers allow deposits into an IR, not so much into other, commercial repositories
The deposit process is about to get much easier with
Symplectic ElementsSlide29
Question: Altmetrics
What’s the status of
PlumX
? Can faculty still participate?
Yes, faculty can still have profiles created in
PlumX
—just ask OSCP to help
Waiting for
PlumX
to adopt single-sign-on technology
Will allow researchers to create/manage their own profiles
Metrics available in D-Scholarship, e-journals
Now includes EBSCO statistics
Better visualizationsSlide30
Question: OA journals
How can you tell that an OA journal is of high quality?
A better question: How can you tell that
any
scholarly journal is of high quality?
Editorial board and editorial staff
Quality, relevance, and identification
Ethical standards
Peer review (and a clearly stated peer review process)
Quality of content, copyediting, layout
Quality of website and clear contact information
Long-term preservation policySlide31
Question: Research data
What’s Pitt doing about research data? How is the ULS helping researchers with data needs?
Digital Scholarship group working on a web presence for RDM
Strategic options under discussion for FY 16
D-Scholarship can handle small, “fixed” datasets
Larger sets, big data, data
that are
active, may need other solutionsSlide32
Question: ORCID
Hey, what’s up with ORCID?
Pitt is now an institutional member of ORCID
Encourage registration now
Faculty members can register
now but should use
their Pitt e-mail
address for accurate linking
Work groups forming
Communication about ORCID ID and workflow
Registration workflow (individual, institutional)Slide33
Question: Bibliometrics
What’s the current status of those
bibliometrics
/citation tools we trialed in the summer?Slide34
Your questions & answers
What questions do you receive about Open Access? About researcher metrics? About scholarly communication and publishing?Slide35
OA Week is fast approaching! (But, honestly, it’s not that scary)Slide36
Thank you!
John Barnett
Scholarly Communications Librarian
University Library System
University of Pittsburgh
oscp@mail.pitt.edu
CC BY 3.0Slide37
Sources
DeSantis
, N. (2014, August 4). Energy Dept. unveils plan to increase public access to research it finances.
Chronicle of Higher Education.
Retrieved from
http://
chronicle.com/blogs/ticker/energy-dept-unveils-plan-to-increase-public-access-to-research-it-finances/83205
Eve, M. P., Curry, S., & Swan, A. (2014, July 28). Occam’s Corner: Open access: Are effective measures to put UK research online under attack?
The Guardian.
Retrieved from
http://
www.theguardian.com/science/occams-corner/2014/jul/28/open-access-effective-measures-threat
Kaiser, J. (2014, August 4). U.S. Energy Department to make researchers’ papers free.
Science Insider.
Retrieved from
http://
news.sciencemag.org/policy/2014/08/u-s-energy-department-make-researchers-papers-free
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. (2013). Policies and guidelines: Open access: Draft tri-agency open access policy.
Retrieved from
http://
www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/NSERC-CRSNG/policies-politiques/Tri-OA-Policy-Politique-LA-Trois_eng.asp
Research Councils UK. (2014). Open access.
Retrieved from
http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/openaccess
/
SPARC
. (2014). National policies. Retrieved from
http://www.sparc.arl.org/advocacy/national
SPARC. (2014). News & media.
Retrieved from
http://
www.sparc.arl.org/news
SPARC. (2014). State policies.
Retrieved from
http://
www.sparc.arl.org/advocacy/state
U.S. Dept. of Education. (2014). Secretary’s Proposed Supplemental Priorities and Definitions for Discretionary Grant Programs.
Retrieved from
http://www.regulations.gov/#!
documentDetail;D=ED-2013-OII-0146-0001
Wellcome
Trust. (2014, May 1). WHO commits to open access by joining Europe PubMed Central.
Retrieved from
http://
www.wellcome.ac.uk/News/Media-office/Press-releases/2014/WTP056351.htm
World Health Organization (2014, July). WHO policy on open access.
Retrieved from
http://www.who.int/about/policy/en
/