To prepare for class discussion this Thursday, May 26, please read in advance (details and links can be found on the syllabus http://www.slais.ubc.ca/courses/syllabi/10-11-st1/l559l.htm
Required: the Dove and PLoS Medicine Peer Review Guidelines (1-2 pages each)
and choose one of: Casadevall, Harley & Acord, or Maskalyk. Or, pick another article on this topic.
Powerpoint for the May 24 class is here
Audio of presentation-of-a-presentation coming soon. Update May 25: this doesn’t work out (accidentally stopped the recording early on), and so what I have done instead is to create a PDF version with notes that sort of roughly cover what I spoke to:
Lab days will include as many of the following dates as are necessary to complete the journals. This is probably more time than we’ll need, which is a good thing as later in the class schedule it would be good to have more time for emerging areas in scholarly communication. If you are not able to attend, perhaps you could do some research or preparation to make things easier for the rest of your group.
May 24, 11:00 – 11:50
June 2, 9:00 – 10:00 OR 11:00 – 11:50
June 9, 9:00 – 10:00
June 16, 9:00 – 11:50
Marking
Since this assignment is worth a fair bit of your grade, and how I’ll be marking will not be obvious, I will be talking about this more in class, but here is just a brief outline of how this will work:
The mark is for the work of creating the journal and publishing an issue, if only temporarily (likely the case for the Scholar’s Biographies). There are NO marks for content. If you choose to publish your presentations or papers, marking is for the presentations or papers. I will NOT be looking at the quality of peer reviews, only whether your group has gone through the process (and there is no right way, just got it done).
If your group gets a practice journal set up (addressing most of what is covered in the instructions, which are available here, and published one issue (scholar’s biography), then your group has met the expectations for this assignment (in SLAIS standards, that’s a B). Most groups are already pretty close to this as of May 18.
Achieving a higher grade for all for this assignment is definitely doable, even if all the work is done within class time. A journal that looks like everyone in the group would be proud of it and likely to want to point to it when looking for jobs (if this is relevant to the job, of course), seems a likely B plus. A journal that shows some skill in OJS and insight / innovation into scholarly communication is likely an A. Highly skilled, creative and insightful, probably A plus. Because I think this exercise works best collaboratively, I would encourage all of the groups to aim for a high mark and help each other out, not compete. A class-wide A is definitely achievable for this particular assignment.
Optional Summary of Contributions
Students are INVITED (not required) to submit a one-page (maximum) summary of contributions to the OJS exercise, and participation in class. Were you there and actively participating in all or most of the lab work? Did you do something a little extra – whether technical for OJS, or research, for your group that I wouldn’t know about – especially important to note if you were not able to attend in person every time. Similarly with class participation – were you attending as often as you could, having done the readings and actively participating in class? Did you listen carefully to other students’ presentations and ask questions or provide feedback? A quick note about something you contributed in class (or outside to share with the class) could help to jog my memory. In addition to helping me to mark as appropriately as possible, this simple summary can be a good way to approach preparing for job interviews.
OJS in an hour – can be downloaded from here: http://pkp.sfu.ca/node/1321PPkp
PKP support forums: http://pkp.sfu.ca/support/forum/
PKP Scholarly Publishing Conference 2011: http://pkp.sfu.ca/ocs/pkp/index.php/pkp2011/pkp2011
Liquid Publishing Project – PKP Conference Hackfest (preconference) http://pkp.sfu.ca/wiki/index.php/Liquid_Publishing
Some things we noticed in the Scholar’s Biography exercise:
Issues of standardization
Good model: LATTES (Brazil) – top down approach facilitates standards
Centralization helpful otherwise fractured, hard to search
Intellectual property
One group had all niche scholars with small communities, did not seem interested in OA.
Another group had lots of scholars whose work would be of interest to the public, had been on t.v., but rarely found links to full-text audience. Brings up question: do scholars see public as audience?
Access depends on our networks – could access work of UBC scholar, not Lakehead or Africa
One group had a hard time finding authors with websites – e.g. history if they did have one, it was better organized, with a wider variety of materials than available in the IR (if there was one); most had full-text, but not using IR. Are IRs necessary, a good idea at all?
Another group – all had web presence, some university profile, others scholar managed. It seemed the more control the scholar had, the better the site was organized. Lots of PDFs on author websites. But is this stable? Will there be takedown notices?
One scholar publishes in OA journals, but nothing in the IR.
Annoying! broken links / spelling mistakes, even author’s names
entire book in google books – but not linked
What if everyone was on the same page?
Here are the instructions for May 19 lab exercise to create a group journal.
from the post announcing the class OJS Journals Space:
Thanks to Bronwen Sprout of UBC Library for creating 7 new journals for the course OJS Journals Space, available at http://tsc.library.ubc.ca/
Also at this space are the practice journals created by a previous class.
The Canadian Association of Learned Journals (CALJ) has published their 2010-11 Report, downloadable from the CALJ website
Recommended reading for the May 19 class. Thanks to Peter Suber via the Open Access Tracking Project.
This post from Scholarly Communications at Duke suggests to me that the Georgia State University case is much more similar to the Access Copyright tariff nightmare than I had thought. Just started an Access Copyright: NOT a member facebook page for anyone who, like me, wishes to make it very clear that Access Copyright is NOT representing my interests.
Heather Morrison’s powerpoint May 12, 2011 http://blogs.ubc.ca/scholcomm2011/files/2011/05/May-12-LIBR-559L1.pdf
Hilde Colenbrander’s presentation https://blogs.ubc.ca/scholcomm2011/files/2011/05/LIBR559L_2011_cIRcle_Presentation.pptx
Student activism links
A question came up in class about student activism. Some resources to help with this:
Right to Research Coalition http://www.righttoresearch.org/
Make Textbooks Affordable – Student PIRGS http://www.studentpirgs.org/textbooks/
Thanks to Bronwen Sprout of UBC Library for creating 7 new journals for the course OJS Journals Space, available at http://tsc.library.ubc.ca/
Also at this space are the practice journals created by a previous class.
