The aim of this toolkit is to support early career researchers in finding a journal that publishes their paper and optimally promotes the visibility of their research. How can they find a journal with a good journal ranking score that is perceived in the respective research community? How can they find a journal that perfectly matches their topic? Should they consider publishing open access? What are predatory journals and how can they detect them?
This faculty and librarian toolkit is designed to support teaching at the intersections of scholarly communication and information literacy. The heart of the toolkit is a choose-your-own scenario activity which can be used in a flipped classroom setting or in a traditional classroom. The choose-your-own scenario activity is inspired by and adapts questions from: Hare, S. & Evanson, C. (2018). Information privilege outreach for undergraduate students. College and Research Libraries. http://crl.acrl.org/index.php/crl/article/view/16767. Please note the survey questions are provided below, however, the survey skip logic is not included in the PDF, we recommend the link for the full experience. We also include talking points for librarians and instructors and include ways to modify the activity for students publishing information within their disciplines or for lower-division general education courses.
The high cost of textbooks is of concern not only to college students but also to society as a whole. Open textbooks promise the same educational benefits as traditional textbooks; however, their efficacy remains largely untested. We report on one community college’s adoption of a collection of open resources across five different mathematics classes. During the 2012 fall semester, 2,043 students in five different courses used these open access resources. We present a comparison between the previous two years in terms of the number of students who withdrew from the courses and the number that completed the courses with a C grade or better. Our analysis suggests that while there was likely no change in these educational outcomes, students who have access to open access materials collectively saved a significant amount of money. Students and faculty were surveyed as to their perceptions of these materials and the results were generally favorable.
- Career and Technical Education
- Material Type:
- Athabasca University
- Provider Set:
- The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning
- Donna Gaudet
- Jared Robinson
- John Levi Hilton III
- Phil Clark
- Date Added:
Anteprima del volume "I BACINI CULTURALI E LA PROGETTAZIONE SOCIALE ORIENTATA ALL’HERITAGE-MAKING, TRA POLITICHE GIOVANILI, INNOVAZIONE SOCIALE, DIVERSITÀ CULTURALE. Il framework del Progetto ABACUS – Attivazione dei Bacini Culturali Siciliani, alla luce della Convenzione Quadro del Consiglio d'Europa sul valore del Patrimonio culturale per la società"
- Architecture and Design
- Computer Science
- Environmental Science
- Information Science
- Arts and Humanities
- Art History
- Performing Arts
- World Cultures
- Public Relations
- Physical Geography
- Social Science
- Political Science
- Social Work
- Material Type:
- Case Study
- Primary Source
- Teaching/Learning Strategy
- ABACUS Project Activation of Cultural Basins
- Date Added:
Author Carpentry is a researcher-to-researcher training and outreach program in open authoring and publishing. It was initiated at the Caltech Library to enhance scientific authorship and publishing in the digital age. The aim of Author Carpentry is to promote and support good information handling tools, practices, and skills that help researchers prepare, submit, and publish contributions that add value to the scholarly record and invite others to adapt and build upon. Ideally, that means contributions that fulfill not only the original Big Four of the scholarly record – Registration, Validation, Dissemination, and Preservation - but also enable an essential fifth component of knowledge management in the digital age: Replication, Reuse, and Remixing.
Bulletin of Environment, Pharmacology and Life Sciences [BEPLS] is a monthly peer reviewed open access international journal focused towards the rapid publication of fundamental research papers on all areas of Environment, Pharmacology and Life Sciences. BEPLS is official publication of Academy for Environment and Life Sciences [Regd. Under Societies Registration Act XXI, 1860]
The focus and the scope of journal include:
Economic Zoology and Botany
Calculus: Early Transcendentals, originally by D. Guichard, has been redesigned by the Lyryx editorial team. Substantial portions of the content, examples, and diagrams have been redeveloped, with additional contributions provided by experienced and practicing instructors. This approachable text provides a comprehensive understanding of the necessary techniques and concepts of the typical Calculus course sequence, and is suitable for the standard Calculus I, II and III courses.
To practice and develop an understanding of topics, this text offers a range of problems, from routine to challenging, with selected solutions. As this is an open text, instructors and students are encouraged to interact with the textbook through annotating, revising, and reusing to your advantage. Suggestions for contributions to this growing textbook are welcome.
Lyryx develops and supports open texts, with editorial services to adapt the text for each particular course. In addition, Lyryx provides content-specific formative online assessment, a wide variety of supplements, and in-house support available 7 days/week for both students and instructors.
Aproximació general a la definició de ciència oberta i als seus pilars bàsics i presentacio de les principals institucions i/o plataformes digitals relacionades amb la ciència oberta i l’arqueologia a nivell internacional, europeu i català.
This is an interview with Dr. Joy Morris, Professor at the Department for Mathematics and Computer Sciences at the University of Lethbridge on her Open Educational Practices, including the publications of her own textbooks under CC-BY-NC-SA and her open work in the community.
Some research funders have a mandate for data resulting from their funded research to be shared. This presentation provides a general definition of data sharing and how scholars can identify and follow data sharing mandates.
In this deep dive session, we discuss the current model of scholarly publishing, and highlight the challenges and limitations of this model of research dissemination. We then focus on the value of open access and elaborate on different open access levels (Gold, Bronze, and Green), before discussing how preprints/postprints may be leveraged to promote open access.
Differentiating open access and open educational resource can be a challenge in some contexts. Excellent resources such as "How Open Is It?: A Guide for Evaluating the Openness of Journals" (CC BY) https://sparcopen.org/our-work/howopenisit created by SPARC, PLOS, and OASPA greatly aid us in understanding the relative openness of journals. However, visual resources to conceptually differentiate open educational resources (OER) from resources disseminated using an open access approach do not currently exist. Until now.
This one page introductory guide differentiates OER and OA materials on the basis of purpose (teaching vs. research), method of access (analog and digital), and in terms of the relative freedoms offered by different levels of Creative Commons licenses, the most common open license. Many other open licenses, including open software licenses also exist.
A Digital Project Preservation Plan is designed to help with organizing preservation efforts for digital projects. Initially drafted as a companion guide meant to fill the gap on best methods for preserving digital scholarship or digital humanities projects, it can also be applied to digital projects outside the humanities. This preservation plan is most beneficial to those digital humanities (DH) project creators who need guidance on how to start a digital project with preservation in mind. Although the DH community has shared resources and case studies, the examples available tend to focus on DH development, and less on DH preservation. These resources are also located in disparate locations. The Digital Project Preservation Plan is a singular guide, focusing on DH preservation, as a starting point with references to more resources and related DH practices. This is a working document, available to practitioners in whole or part; ideally, it will be used in the early stages of project planning and consulted and revised regularly. The preservation infrastructure should be designed and built as a collaborative effort from the beginning of the project. As priorities, methods and technologies change, the preservation plan will need to be updated and modified accordingly.
This book has been used in humanities (history) and media courses but is applicable to any course that has digital/web project components.
The Table of Contents for this publication includes:
Summary, Project Charter, Digital File Inventory, Additional Considerations, Preservation Plan-A Summary and Checklist, References/Plan Resources, Appendix A: Project Charter, Appendix B: Digital File Inventory, Appendix C: Project Profile, Appendix D: Collaborators Web Publishing Agreement, Appendix E: Universal Design Checklist, Appendix F: Preservation Guidance Checklist, and the Glossary.
Digitize Me, Visualize Me, Search Me takes as its starting point the so-called ‘computational turn’ to data-intensive scholarship in the humanities. What Digitize Me, Visualize Me, Search Me endeavours to show is that such data-focused transformations in research can be seen as part of a major alteration in the status and nature of knowledge. It is an alteration that, according to the philosopher Jean François Lyotard, has been taking place since at least the 1950s, and involves nothing less than a shift away from a concern with questions of what is right and just, and toward a concern with legitimating power by optimizing the social system’s performance in instrumental, functional terms. This shift has significant consequences for our idea of knowledge.
Background Many journals now require authors share their data with other investigators, either by depositing the data in a public repository or making it freely available upon request. These policies are explicit, but remain largely untested. We sought to determine how well authors comply with such policies by requesting data from authors who had published in one of two journals with clear data sharing policies. Methods and Findings We requested data from ten investigators who had published in either PLoS Medicine or PLoS Clinical Trials. All responses were carefully documented. In the event that we were refused data, we reminded authors of the journal's data sharing guidelines. If we did not receive a response to our initial request, a second request was made. Following the ten requests for raw data, three investigators did not respond, four authors responded and refused to share their data, two email addresses were no longer valid, and one author requested further details. A reminder of PLoS's explicit requirement that authors share data did not change the reply from the four authors who initially refused. Only one author sent an original data set. Conclusions We received only one of ten raw data sets requested. This suggests that journal policies requiring data sharing do not lead to authors making their data sets available to independent investigators.
Amidst increased pressure for transparency in science, researchers and community members are calling for open access to study stimuli and measures, data, and results. These arguments coincidentally align with calls within community psychology to find innovative ways to support communities and increase the prominence of our field. This paper aims to (1) define the current context for community psychologists in open access publishing, (2) illustrate the alignment between open access publishing and community psychology principles, and (3) demonstrate how to engage in open access publishing using community psychology values. Currently, there are several facilitators (e.g. an increasing number of open access journals, the proliferation of blogs, and social media) and barriers (e.g. Article Processing Charges (APCs), predatory journals) to publishing in open access venues. Openly sharing our research findings aligns with our values of (1) citizen participation, (2) social justice, and (3) collaboration and community strengths. Community psychologists desiring to engage in open access publishing can ask journals to waive APCs, publish pre-prints, use blogs and social media to share results, and push for systemic change in a publishing system that disenfranchises researchers, students, and community members.
This is a guide to good practices for college and university open-access (OA) policies. It's based on the type of rights-retention OA policy first adopted at Harvard, Stanford, MIT, and the University of Kansas. Policies of this kind have since been adopted at a wide variety of institutions in North America, Europe, Africa, and Asia, for example, at public and private institutions, large and small institutions, affluent and indigent institutions, research universities and liberal arts colleges, and at whole universities, schools within universities, and departments within schools.