Although the open scholarship movement has successfully captured the attention and interest of higher education stakeholders, researchers currently lack an understanding of the degree to which open scholarship is enacted in institutions that lack institutional support for openness. I help fill this gap in the literature by presenting a descriptive case study that illustrates the variety of open and sharing practices enacted by faculty members at a North American university. Open and sharing practices enacted at this institution revolve around publishing manuscripts in open ways, participating on social media, creating and using open educational resources, and engaging with open teaching.
This examination finds that certain open practices are favored over others. Results also show that even though faculty members often share scholarly materials online for free, they frequently do so without associated open licenses (i.e. without engaging in open practices). These findings suggest that individual motivators may significantly affect the practice of openness, but that environmental factors (e.g., institutional contexts) and technological elements (e.g., YouTube’s default settings) may also shape open practices in unanticipated ways.
URL : A Case Study of Scholars’ Open and Sharing Practices
Related URL : http://openpraxis.org/index.php/OpenPraxis/article/view/206
1 août 2015
· 15 h 12 min
To determine trends in research data output, reuse, and sharing of the college of veterinary medicine faculty members at a large academic research institution.
This bibliographic study was conducted by examining original research articles for indication of the types of data produced, as well as evidence that the authors reused data or made provision for sharing their own data. Findings were recorded in the categories of research type, data type, data reuse, data sharing, author collaboration, and grants/funding and were analyzed to determine trends.
A variety of different data types were encountered in this study, even within a single article, resulting primarily from clinical and laboratory animal studies. All of the articles resulted from author collaboration, both within the University of Illinois at Urbana – Champaign, as well as with researchers outside the institution. There was little indication that data was reused, except some instances where the authors acknowledged that data was obtained directly from a colleague. There was even less indication that the research data was shared, either as a supplementary file on the publisher’s website or by submission to a repository, except in the case of genetic data.
Veterinary researchers are prolific producers and users of a wide variety of data. Despite the large amount of collaborative research occurring in veterinary medicine, this study provided little evidence that veterinary researchers are reusing or sharing their data, except in an informal manner. Wider adoption of data management plans may serve to improve researchers’ data management practices.
1 août 2015
· 14 h 54 min
« This report presents the findings and recommendations of the Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment and Management. The review was chaired by Professor James Wilsdon, supported by an independent and multidisciplinary group of experts in scientometrics, research funding, research policy, publishing, university management and administration.
This review has gone beyond earlier studies to take a deeper look at potential uses and limitations of research metrics and indicators. It has explored the use of metrics across different disciplines, and assessed their potential contribution to the development of research excellence and impact. It has analysed their role in processes of research assessment, including the next cycle of the Research Excellence Framework (REF). It has considered the changing ways in which universities are using quantitative indicators in their management systems, and the growing power of league tables and rankings. And it has considered the negative or unintended effects of metrics on various aspects of research culture. »
URL : http://microblogging.infodocs.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/2015_metric_tide.pdf
Related URL : http://www.hefce.ac.uk/media/HEFCE,2014/Content/Pubs/Independentresearch/2015/The,Metric,Tide/2015_metric_tide.pdf
Through funding agency and publisher policies, an increasing proportion of the health sciences literature is being made open access. Such an increase in access raises questions about the awareness and potential utilization of this literature by those working in health fields.
A sample of physicians (N=336) and public health non-governmental organization (NGO) staff (N=92) were provided with relatively complete access to the research literature indexed in PubMed, as well as access to the point-of-care service UpToDate, for up to one year, with their usage monitored through the tracking of web-log data. The physicians also participated in a one-month trial of relatively complete or limited access.
The study found that participants’ research interests were not satisfied by article abstracts alone nor, in the case of the physicians, by a clinical summary service such as UpToDate. On average, a third of the physicians viewed research a little more frequently than once a week, while two-thirds of the public health NGO staff viewed more than three articles a week. Those articles were published since the 2008 adoption of the NIH Public Access Policy, as well as prior to 2008 and during the maximum 12-month embargo period. A portion of the articles in each period was already open access, but complete access encouraged a viewing of more research articles.
Those working in health fields will utilize more research in the course of their work as a result of (a) increasing open access to research, (b) improving awareness of and preparation for this access, and (c) adjusting public and open access policies to maximize the extent of potential access, through reduction in embargo periods and access to pre-policy literature. »
URL : In an Age of Open Access to Research Policies: Physician and Public Health NGO Staff Research Use and Policy Awareness
DOI : 10.1371/journal.pone.0129708