Quels sont les types de données de recherche collectées, traitées et produites dans une université de lettres et sciences humaines et sociales ? Quelles sont les pratiques des chercheurs en SHS en matière de stockage, d’archivage, de diffusion, de partage de leurs données de recherche ?
Quelles sont leurs représentations et leurs définitions des données de recherche, leur position par rapport au libre accès ? Quels sont leurs besoins prioritaires en matière de gestion ou de partage des données de recherche ?
Comment perçoivent-ils le bon niveau d’une politique des données ? C’est pour répondre à toutes ces questions qu’une double enquête, statistique et qualitative, a été menée à l’Université Rennes 2 au printemps 2017, enquête portée par l’URFIST (Unité Régionale de Formation à l’Information Scientifique et Technique) de Rennes, la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme en Bretagne et le Service Commun de Documentation Rennes 2, avec le soutien des instances de l’université.
Le rapport et ses annexes en présentent ici tous les résultats, avec un certain nombre de propositions pour une politique des données de recherche.
Authors : Laura McDonald, Anna Schultze, Alex Simpson, Sophie Graham, Radek Wasiak, Sreeram V. Ramagopalan
In order to understand the current state of data sharing in observational research studies, we reviewed data sharing statements of observational studies published in a general medical journal, the British Medical Journal.
We found that the majority (63%) of observational studies published between 2015 and 2017 included a statement that implied that data used in the study could not be shared. If the findings of our exploratory study are confirmed, room for improvement in the sharing of real-world or observational research data exists.
The emergence of networked digital methods of scholarly dissemination has transformed the role of the academic library in the context of the research life cycle. It now plays an important role in the dissemination of research outputs (e.g. through repository management and gold open access publication processing) as well as more traditional acquisition and collection management.
The University of Manchester Library and Manchester University Press have developed a strategic relationship to consider how they can work in partnership to support new approaches to scholarly publishing. They have delivered two projects to understand researcher and student needs and to develop tools and services to meet these needs.
This work has found that the creation of new journal titles is costly and provides significant resourcing challenges and that support for student journals in particular is mixed amongst senior academic administrators.
Research has suggested that there is more value to the University in the provision of training in scholarly publishing than in the creation of new in-house journal titles. Where such titles are created, careful consideration of sustainable business models is vital.
This research work investigates the usage of Open Educational Resources (OER) and Print Educational Materials by the students of Federal College of Education Katsina, Nigeria. Using descriptive survey, 358 students were sampled as respondents.
The research find out that while print section still remain relevant, an alarming negative attitudes by the students toward print educational materials have been found. Factors including students’ learning needs and interest, infrastructural decay, outdated books stocks, under equipped nature of the print sections and the unfriendly attitudes of the librarians toward clients are responsible this attitudes. However,
OER enjoy an overwhelming patronage of students. The unrestricted nature of open educational resources coupled with its ease of access, freeness, proximity, relevance and IT infrastructural advancements are what make it an educational hotcake of the time.
Better funding of education, inculcation of reading culture in younger generation, massive development of print materials into open educational resources and in-service training of library staff has been recommended.
Authors : Jeff R. Broadbent, Andrea Payant, Kevin Peterson, Betty Rozum, Liz Woolcott
Data from federally funded research must now be made publicly accessible and discoverable. Researchers must adhere to guidelines established by federal agencies, and universities must be prepared to demonstrate compliance with the federal mandate.
At Utah State University, the Office of Research and Graduate Studies and the Merrill-Cazier Library partnered to facilitate data sharing and create an audit trail demonstrating compliance with the terms of each researcher’s award.
This systematic approach uses existing resources such as the grant management system, the institutional repository (IR), and the Library online catalog. This paper describes our process and the first eight months of implementation.
Whereas traditional book and journal publishing remain the gold standard for many post-secondary institutions, nontraditional publishing is just as prolific at the flagship university in Maine. The university has strong land and sea grant missions that drive a broad research agenda, with an emphasis on community outreach and engagement.
However, the impact of researchers’ contributions outside of academe is unlikely to be accurately reflected in promotion, tenure or review processes. Thus, the authors designed a series of altmetrics workshops aimed at seeding conversations around novel ways to track the impact of researchers’ diverse scholarly and creative outputs.
This paper presents a case study of the instructional approach taken at the University of Maine library to facilitate discussions of alternative impact assessments that reach beyond traditional publications.
Evaluations revealed an increased awareness of, and interest in, impact tracking tools that capture both traditional scholarship, like journal articles, and nontraditional scholarly and creative outputs, such as videos, podcasts and newsletters.
The authors learned that altmetrics provides an entry point into a broader conversation about scholarly impact, and was best received by those whose scholarly output is not always captured by traditional metrics.
Scholars are equipped with novel methods for describing the value of their work and discovering a broader audience for their research. Future initiatives will target the needs identified through initial conversations around altmetrics.
Altmetrics workshops provide spaces to explore the potential for new tools that capture a range of previously unconsidered measures of impact, and to discuss the implications of those measures.
Authors : Melody Dale, Nickoal Eichmann-Kalwara, Sheeji Kathuria, Mary Ann Jones
This study analyses the extent of gold open access (OA) publishing options in 377 anthropology journals by applying a six-level coding scheme (0=non-transparent publishing, 5=fully OA, i.e., free to read and publish without embargo).
This analysis is meant to simplify the process of identifying OA journal publishing options in the discipline of anthropology, in addition to sharing findings on some of the prominent issues in OA publishing as they relate to anthropology journals, including non-transparency among publishers and the prevalence and price of article processing charges (APCs).
We conclude that publishers should be more transparent about their OA publishing options and policies by providing conspicuous and straightforward information to potential authors. Further, we find that in the anthropology scholarly communication ecosystem,
APCs for hybrid journals are more expensive than those for fully gold OA journals, thus contradicting the assumption that gold OA is more costly to researchers.