EN

Open Data Protection : Study on legal barriers to open data sharing – Data Protection and PSI

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Andreas Wiebe, Nils Dietrich

This study analyses legal barriers to data sharing in the context of the Open Research Data Pilot, which the European Commission is running within its research framework programme Horizon2020.

In the first part of the study, data protection issues are analysed. After a brief overview of the international basis for data protection, the European legal framework is described in detail.

The main focus is thus on the Data Protection Directive (95/46/EC), which has been in force since 1995. Not only is the Data Protection Directive itself described, but also its implementation in selected EU Member States.

Additionally, the upcoming General Data Protection Regulation (2016/679/EU) and relevant changes are described. Special focus is placed on leading data protection principles. Next, the study describes the use of research data in the Open Research Data Pilot and how data protection principles influence such use.

The experiences of the European Commission in running the Open Research Data Pilot so far, as well as basic examples of repository use forms, are considered. The second part of the study analyses the extent to which legislation on public sector information (PSI) influences access to and re-use of research data.

The Public Sector Information Directive (2003/98/EC) and the impact of its revision in 2013 (2013/37/EU) are described. There is a special focus on the application of PSI legislation to public libraries, including university and research libraries, and its practical implications.

In the final part of the study the results are critically evaluated and core recommendations are made to improve the legal situation in relation to research data.

URL : Open Data Protection : Study on legal barriers to open data sharing – Data Protection and PSI

EN

Connector, Catalyst and Common Good: Defining the Academic Library of the 21st Century

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Janice Jaguszewski, Lisa A. McGuire

Clearly articulating how an academic library inspires and transforms teaching, learning and research is critical for library leadership. Conveying the library’s deep expertise throughout the knowledge lifecycle (discovery, use, creation, and sharing) and demonstrating its ability to provide solutions to information problems are core to what an academic library brings to campus collaborations.

At the University of Minnesota, the Health Sciences Libraries have developed a “Space as a Service” model of collaboration that positions them as a vital component of a larger Interprofessional Learning and Education Center within the University’s Academic Health Center.

We describe and discuss six fundamental principles that guide our vision of an academic library as a Connector, Catalyst, Common Good and Service-Rich Environment, and offer a template for applying this model to a range of disciplines.

URL : https://journals.tdl.org/llm/index.php/llm/article/view/7227

EN

Opening Academic Publishing – Development and application of systematic evaluation criteria

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Anna Björk, Juho-Matti Paavola, Teemu Ropponen, Mikael Laakso, Leo Lahti

This report summarizes the development of a standardized scorecard for evaluating the openness of academic publishers. The assessment was completed in January 2018 as part of the Open Science and Research Initiative of the Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture.

The project complements the previous reports published by the Open Science and Research Initiative and the Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture, which have covered (i) the openness of universities and polytechnics, (ii) the overall situation of OA publishing costs in Finland, and (iii) research organization and research funding organizations, including selected European research funders.

The project mapped and evaluated the openness of selected major academic publishers: Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), American Chemical Society (ACS), Elsevier, Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineering (IEEE), Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins (LWW), Sage, Springer Nature, Taylor & Francis, and Wiley-Blackwell. The dimensions of publisher openness were summarized in a scorecard of seven key factors, providing a new tool for systematic and standardized evaluation.

We used data from the publisher websites to compare the key factors of openness, and the publishers were given a chance to provide comments on the collected information. As complementary sources, we utilized data from commonly acknowledged, open databases: Directory of OA Journals (DOAJ), Gold OA Journals 2011-2016 (GOAJ2), Scopus (title list + Scimago), and Sherpa / Romeo.

The main results include the scorecard and the evaluation of openness of the selected major academic publishers. These are based on seven key factors: (i) Fraction of open access (OA) journals and their articles of the total publication output, (ii) costs of OA publishing (article processing charges, APC), (iii) use of Creative Commons (CC) licensing, (iv) self-archiving policies, (v) access to text and data mining (TDM), (vi) openness of citation data, and (vii) accessibility of information relating to OA practices.

To take a look beyond the publisher level into journal level practices we also sampled individual journals. We use the samples to discuss the distribution of journals according to APCs, their licensing and three impact metrics (CiteScore 2016, Scimago Journal & Country Ranks (SJR) 2016, and Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016).

The evaluation of the selected publishers with the scorecard indicates, for example, that the fraction of OA journals and their articles of the total publication output runs low within this group. In our sample of journals, the most expensive OA journals also seem to bear the highest impact metrics.

A definite view on the matter, however, would require more extensive data and further research. We
conclude by discussing key aspects and complexities in quantitative evaluation and in the design of a standardized assessment of publisher openness, and note also further factors that could be included in future versions of the scorecard.

URL : Opening Academic Publishing – Development and application of systematic evaluation criteria

Alternative location : https://avointiede.fi/documents/10864/12232/OPENING+ACADEMIC+PUBLISHING+.pdf/a4358f81-88cf-4915-92db-88335092c992

EN

Revisiting the Reusability and Openness of Resources in the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Open Courseware

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Author: Bernard Nkuyubwatsi

The marketing of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Open Courseware gives the impression that it has the potential to contribute to quality open learning and opening up higher education globally. It is from this perspective that the potential contribution of Open Educational Resources (OER) units in the MIT Open Courseware to opening up higher education in Rwanda was investigated. Ten OER units were sampled as objects of the study.

I took the role of an archive analyst, giving full attention to any item that constituted each unit. Results indicate that only one unit had enough openly licensed resources to enable its potential adaptation for use in opening up higher education.

In other units, only metadata (course information, the syllabus, course calendar, and the list of required and suggested readings), assignments and/or quizzes/exams were openly licensed. Most (if not all) of the required and suggested readings, which are the core learning materials learners need to engage with for quality learning, had to be purchased, mostly from the Amazon website.

On the basis of these findings, I argue that the MIT Open Courseware served the marketing agenda (probably for the purpose of acquiring funding), rather than the open access agenda.

The study may benefit funding organisations, educators and institutions that are interested in supporting or engaging in the production, adaptation and use of OER with an agenda to contribute to opening up higher education.

URL : Revisiting the Reusability and Openness of Resources in the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Open Courseware

DOI : http://doi.org/10.5334/jime.447

EN

Secondary Students’ Perceptions of Open Science Textbooks

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors: Rebecca Morales, Alesha Baker

In an attempt to align instructional resources with new state standards and to increase teacher awareness of these standards, one large suburban public school district piloted the development and adoption of open secondary science textbooks.

Open textbooks created by teachers in grades six through nine replaced conventional science textbooks provided by mainstream publishing companies. Therefore, grade nine students were not included in this study.

At the end of the first quarter, middle school students (grades six through eight) who used the open textbooks were surveyed. Survey responses required respondents to consider their learning before and during the use of the open textbook. The survey included quality and presentation of content questions, as well as an opportunity for students to explain their responses.

There were qualitative and quantitative indications that students’ perceptions of an open textbook in place of a standard textbook are improving students’ attitudes and behaviors toward learning.

URL : Secondary Students’ Perceptions of Open Science Textbooks

DOI : http://doi.org/10.5334/jime.455

 

 

EN

Utilisation of open access institutional repositories in Zimbabwe’s public universities

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Author : Mass Masona Tapfuma

Despite the establishment of institutional repositories (IRS) in Zimbabwe’s public universities, content for these repositories remains untangible. The purpose of this study was to explore the utilisation of IRs in the universities.

The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Usage of Technology (UTAUT) model was used to understand individuals behaviours’ towards acceptance of technologies. The pragmatist paradigm guided the study employing the mixed methods research (MMR) approach combining quantitative and qualitative approaches.

Triangulation was used to obtain a deeper understanding of the research problem. Eight public universities were surveyed including all levels of academics, research directors, library directors and IR/faculty librarians. A census, stratified and systematic sampling techniques were adopted to constitute the sample of the study.

A survey was carried out aided by questionnaires and interviews. Document analysis (policies and so forth) and bibliometric analysis were also employed including attending a Zimbabwe University Libraries Consortium (ZULC) workshop.

The findings of the study revealed a high awareness of OA/IRs by the academic community but content deposits were very low despite the existence of research and OA/IR policies (in some of the universities) which mandated deposit of research funded by the universities. A national repository was also established by the Research Council of Zimbabwe to link all repositories in the country while ZULC was lobbying for the development of a national OA policy. T

he study concluded that Zimbabwe’s university libraries faced numerous challenges in marketing and promoting of repositories, therefore, the concept of IRs remains in the infancy stage. It was recommended that: the libraries should intensify OA/IR education efforts; incentivise scholars/academics and library staff; resolve IPR issues and strengthen deposit mandates.

The study would contribute to practice in the establishment, running, management and promotion of repositories and policy makers will be informed and guided in the development and implementation of OA policies and regulatory frameworks leading to the establishment of the requisite infrastructure for OA/IR establishment in all academic institutions in the country, the national repository and the national content harvesting systems. Further research to probe the causes of low deposit rates and why scholars prefer depositing elsewhere is recommended.

URL : http://hdl.handle.net/10413/14893

EN

Higher Education as a Gift and as a Commons

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Author : Andreas Wittel

This paper takes as a starting point Lewis Hyde’s (2007, xvi) assertion that art is a gift and not a commodity: “Works of art exist simultaneously in two ‘economies’, a market economy and a gift economy.

Only one of these is essential, however: a work of art can survive without a market, but where there is no gift there is no art.” I want to argue that the same claim should be made for those aspects of academic labour that refer to teaching and education. Education can survive without a market, but where there is no gift there is no education.

However the gift that is part of all educational processes gets rather obscured in regimes where higher education is either a public good or a private good. In regimes of higher education as public good the gift gets obscured by the provision of a service by the state. In regimes of higher education as a private good (e.g. higher education in the UK) the gift gets even more obscured, obviously so.

It is only in a third educational regime, where education is a common good (e.g. the recent rise of the free universities), that the gift character of education can properly shine. Whilst this should be celebrated, the notion of a higher education commons poses some severe challenges.

The paper ends with an examination of possibilities of academic activists to rescue or even strengthen the gift-like character of education.

URL : Higher Education as a Gift and as a Commons

Alternative location : http://www.triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/article/view/892