Workshop “How to make your work Open Access” A workshop about Open Access for researchers The workshop is conducted of three modules. It is up to the organizer to decide on which module to focus. You are entirely free to modify the Workshop since the work has been licensed under a CC‐BY license. This means you can share, distribute as you like, and modify as long as you refer to the original creators. This framework aims to support you in your own organization, which works best for you and your research community. We recommend you to print out the hand outs that are guiding the slides and to show the power point presentations in the workshop. 1 Colophon This Workshop has been developed by: • • • • • Michiel Cock (Leiden University Libraries) Victoria Tsoukala (The National Documentation Centre, Athens) Annette Balle Sorensen (State and University Library Denmark) Mina Sotiriou (Leeds Metropolitan University, UK) Astrid van Wesenbeeck (SPARC Europe) This presentation is licensed under a CC‐BY license. Contact: [email protected] http://www.sparceurope.org 2 Table of contents Module 1 Introduction to Open Access (presentation) Module 2 (presentations) Disciplinary publishing cultures and Open Access • Humanities • Social Sciences • Natural & Health Sciences Module 3 (practical) Exploring the Open Access landscape: how to make use of OA Module 1 focuses on Open Access; The module aims to give a brief overview and make people familiar with the concept. Module 2 focuses on some characteristics in Humanities, Social Sciences and Natural and Health Sciences. Some cultural features and status of Open Access are presented. Module 3 gets practical and offers different routes to explore Open Access possibilities for researchers. Open Access to (your) research Open Access (OA) literature is digital, online, original, free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions. Open Access removes price barriers (subscriptions, licensing fees, pay per view fees) and permission barriers for scholarly use (most copyright and licensing restrictions) and thus stands for free availability and unrestricted use of scholarly content. Open Access refers to DATA as well. Peter Suber, A very brief introduction to Open Access http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/brief.htm Two main routes to Open Access Open Access Repositories • Freely available • Institutional Repositories / Subject Repositories • Worldwide network • Preservation and management information • Funders policies • Extra services • Copyright? In Sherpa Romeo authors find if publishers allow self‐archiving Content: • Articles (pre‐print / post‐print/official published version) • Conference proceedings • Reports • Books • Book chapters • Research data • Etc. Freely available for all; the reader does not pay to get access Open Access Publishing (journals, books) Peer Reviewed Then who pays? Copyright stays with the author Article Processing Charges (APC) ‐ Funding agencies provide money to the author or establish agreements with publisher ‐ Via Open Access funds ‐ Via institutional membership ‐ APC waved by publisher Is copyright such an easy issue? Things to know about Copyright • As the creator of a work you are automatically the Copyright owner (unless otherwise agreed with your employer) • In the ideal Open Access Situation you don't give away your Copyright, but rather license your publisher to publish and distribute your work • Whereas copyright was originally a tool to encourage creativity and learning, it is now the basis for business (Statute of Anne, 1709) o In other words, in our times toll publishers obtain copyright from authors and then profit by asking users to pay for access to publications Reality check: o o many authors sign away their copyright to the publisher many authors are not aware about copyright issues and how this affects the dissemination of research Best practice for Open Access: Creative Commons license CC-BY Means others can share your work (copy, distribute and transmit) and remix (adapt) as long as they credit you for the original creation Other Creative Commons Licenses CC‐BY‐SA CC‐BY‐ND CC‐BY‐NC CC‐BY‐NC‐SA CC‐BY‐NC‐ND (most restrictive) http://creativecommons.org/ How Open Access benefits your work and career Distribution and usage • Immediate access to your research output for everyone upon official publication; • More visibility and usage, also from non‐specialist audiences; • Immediate impact of your work; • Intensification of research through fast dissemination and use of research; • Possibly a citation advantage as well. Plus: • Monitoring of your research output; • Preservation of your research output by your library; • Keep your rights instead of signing them away. Open Access also benefits Universities (and their libraries) / funders ‐ Increased visibility & increase of Return on Investment ‐ Promotion possibilities of the work carried out by staff ‐ Long term preservation of scholarly content ‐ Increase efficiency in monitoring and managing research ‐ Decrease costs in journal subscriptions ‐ Basis to develop added‐value services essential for Open Scholarship Society at large (i.e. citizens and small and medium enterprises) ‐ Immediate and toll‐free access to research paid for by public funds ‐ Increase of Return on Investment ‐ Enhance interest and participation in research (citizen science) ‐ Contribution to the development of conditions that foster social and financial prosperity and development Publishers • Optimal distribution service; widest audience • Opportunity to work with new publishing models and participate in Open Scholarship / Open Science • Less overhead in managing access Enterprises • Immediate access to research content promote enterprise‐based research • Development of innovative products and services • Enhance contact with the research community Summary: Adapted from: John Houghton, Colin Steele and Peter Sheehan, Report to the Department of Education, Science and Training “Research Communication Costs in Australia: Emerging Opportunities and Benefits” [Online] Available at: http://www. dest . gov .au/NR/ rdonlyres /0ACB271F‐EA7D‐4FAF‐B3F7‐0381F441B175/13935/DEST_Research_Communications_Cost_Report_Sept2006. pdf Open Access is a strong global movement. (European) policy developments illustrate: ‐ Lisbon Treaty, Article 179 ‘a European Research Area in which researchers, scientific knowledge and technology circulate freely...' as an objective of the Union ‐ European Research Counsil: Open Access Guidelines (2008) ‐ European Commission: FP7 Open Access Pilot ‐ European Commission: Will FP8 have an Open Access Mandate? National Funding agencies and other (private) research funders are embedding Open Access Policies Myths and truths about OA Myth 1: Open Access journals do not practice strict peer‐review process; they are of low(er) quality. Truth 1: Peer‐review practices are not related to access models of a journal but to editorial policies. Myth 2: There are no Open Access journals in my field of expertise Truth 2: ‐ Most journals offer OA possibilities, even if they are not purely OA. As author you have a lot to say and you can pay an additional fee for OA. ‐ Check out the DOAJ for available high quality Open Access Journals Myth 3 Self‐archiving (depositing in the Institutional Repository) takes too much of my time Truth 3 Self‐ archiving takes some time but is still a simple process. Check if you can use the Research Information System for filling out the data. Most libraries offer excellent assistance and help to make it as easy as possible for you. Myth 4 Open Access aims at punishing commercial publishers (my publishers) Truth 4: Open Access is respectful to all; it facilitates the access to and dissemination of research and complements, but does not replace publishing activities. Myth 5 There is no funding for publishing in Open Access Journals Truth 5 Check out the policies of your funding organization; many funders have included OA clauses and cover OA related costs; Ask your librarian for funding options! Why is Open Access Beneficial per subject field: Zooming in your academic discipline MODULE 2: Humanities Disciplinary Traits in Scholarly Communication • Long publication lifecycle • Monograph culture and increasing significance of journals • Print over Digital, but also increasing reliance on digitized materials • High number of citations per publication • Use of large number of primary sources • Single authorship prevalent • Library as a physical space; the library’s gateway is starting point for • research • Publication cost a substantial part of the research cost • Statistics and citation scores not commonly used in evaluation What Humanists produce & the significance of the monograph RIN and JISC Report, (2009), Communicating Knowledge: How and why UK researchers publish and disseminate their finding,[Online] Available at: http://www.rin.ac.uk/system/files/attachments/Communicating-knowledge-report.pdf Open Access in the Humanities: status quo 1. Already long history and increasingly growing awareness: 70% of respondents in OAPEN survey familiar with OA publishing 2. But… slower uptake than in STM field 3. Overall, perception that OA is beneficial for research (eg. OAPEN and SOAP surveys), a change from past attitudes Obstacles • Less skilled in technology • Fear that the print book will become extinct • Worries about long‐term availability of electronic publications/data • Long lifecycle of publications • Speed of publication generally not a priority • Electronic publishing, and OA publishing, not part of the professional advancement evaluation process • Copyright issues • Proprietary attitude towards data, unwillingness to share OA and publishing values Digital Monographs in the Humanities and Social Sciences: Report on User Needs, Janneke Adema, Paul Rutten, OAPEN Project, http://project.oapen.org/images/D315%20User%20Needs%20Report.pdf Open Access Monographs • The Monograph Crisis: In fact an opportunity • A new model: Open Access Monographs • New pilot models for monograph publishing • Characteristics: Disciplinary and Technological • Funding models and sustainability Open Data in the Humanities • Benefits o Data preservation o Enables data‐intensive research in new ways and check on past research o Enables linking (Linked data) o Scholars in the humanities hesitant • Slow uptake! • Motive: Digging into the data challenge: Canada, US, UK, Holland. Funding for data‐intensive research Some resources for Open Access Research in the Humanities Repositories • www.opendoar.org Open Access Journals • Directory of Open Access Journals: www.doaj.org • JURN: www.jurn.org Open Access Books • OAPEN www.oapen.org • Re‐press www.re‐press.org/ • Open Humanities Press www.openhumanitiespress.org Open Access Data • Open Context http://opencontext.org • Archaeology Data Service: http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/ Open up, get practical! Remember it takes only 10 minutes per paper to self-archive! Image from: Palepu –Giustini – BCLA Conference 2008 Module 2: Social Sciences Disciplinairy traits • Networking, collaborating • Young researchers: publications are a means for career advancement • Older researchers: publishing are a means for communicating and contributing to developments in society • Over the years more journals, less monographs • Like to cite! • Lengthy publications • Use of grey literature • Institutional guidelines What social scientists produce Research Information Network Report, (2009), Communicating Knowledge: How and why UK researchers publish and disseminate their finding,[Online] Available at: http://www.rin.ac.uk/system/files/attachments/Communicating-knowledge-report.pdf Social Sciences Citation Index Output Source: Thomson Reuters Social Science Citation Index online version in Jonkers, K., (2010), International Social Science Council (ISSC) & UNESCO, (2010), World Social Science Report 2010 , p. 194 [Online] Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001883/188333e.pdf Perceptions about OA in the Social Sciences • Overall, perception that OA is beneficial for research • 70% of respondents of an HSS survey familiar with OA publishing • Accessibility and efficiency the most important values of OA • Tremendous awareness differences per country, younger scholars more familiar with Open Access. Sources: SOAP Study and OAPEN survey OA and publishing values Digital Monographs in the Humanities and Social Sciences: Report on User Needs, Janneke Adema, Paul Rutten, OAPEN Project, http://project.oapen.org/images/D315%20User%20Needs%20Report.pdf (Accessed, 28/2/2011) Resources for finding Open Access research in the Social Sciences Repositories • The Directory of Open Access Repositories – OpenDOAR www.opendoar.org • Social Sciences Repository: http://www.ssoar.info/en.html Open Access Journals • DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals: www.doaj.org – JSTOR: http://about.jstor.org/ Open Access Books – OAPEN (Open Access Publishing in European Networks www.oapen.org – Open Monograph Press: www.openmonographpress.org Open Access Data – CESSDA Council of European Social Science Data Archives: http://www.cessda.org/ – World Bank Open Data: http://data.worldbank.org/ – IMF Archive Material : http://www.imf.org/external/np/arc/eng/archive.htm – International Council on Archives : http://www.ica.org/ – International Social Science Council ISSC: http://www.worldsocialscience.org/ Some other examples of Open Access repositories and research platforms • EconStor: an Open Access repository for economics publications • Social Science Research Network (SSRN): devoted to the rapid worldwide dissemination of social science research and is composed of a number of specialized research networks in each of the social sciences • ISI ‐ Social Indicators Information Service: the largest infrastructure facility in Germany, GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, offers a variety of services related to the social sciences • European Cultural Heritage Online (ECHO) an Open Access Infrastructure to bring Essential Cultural Heritage Online Open up, get practical! Remember it takes only 10 minutes per paper to self-archive! Image from: Palepu –Giustini – BCLA Conference 2008 Module 2: Health and Natural Sciences Some disciplinary traits Snapshot of Publication outputs by discipline Snapshot of Research characteristics Sciences and Engineering: Multi‐authorship Cancer & Nursing Studies : Communication and engagement with practitioners and policy‐makers The Research Publication Landscape: An Overview The most important types of scholarly publication include: Research Information Network Report (2009), Communicating Knowledge: How and why UK researchers publish and disseminate their finding, http://www.rin.ac.uk/system/files/attachments/Communicating‐knowledge‐report.pdf OA availability (by discipline) An example of analyses of 2008 figures Source: Open Access to the Scientific Journal Literature: Situation 2009. Björk B-C, Welling P, Laakso M, Majlender P, Hedlund T, et al. PLoS ONE 5(6): e11273. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0011273 (2010) Resources for finding Open Access Research in Natural and Health Sciences • Open Access Repositories – Arxiv www.arxiv.org – PMC http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc • Open Access Journals – DOAJ www.doaj.org – BioMed Central www.biomedcentral.com – PLoS www.plos.org • Open Access Data Open Access Disciplinary Repositories: Data Sets Example I: INSDC www.insdc.org INSDC has been developed and maintained collaboratively for over 18 years between GenBank National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) The European Nucleotide Archive (ENA) EMBL‐European Bioinformatics Institute DNA Data Bank of Japan (DDBJ) Center for Information Biology and DNA Data Bank of Japan of National Institute of Genetics Open Access Disciplinary Repositories: Data Sets Example II: Pangaea • Pangaea www.pangaea.de The information system PANGAEA is operated as an Open Access library aimed at archiving, publishing and distributing georeferenced data from earth system research. The system guarantees long‐term availability of its content through a commitment of the operating institutions Areas: Water, Sediment, Ice & Atmosphere Open up, get practical! Remember it takes only 10 minutes per paper to self-archive! Image from: Palepu –Giustini – BCLA Conference 2008 MODULE 3 - Exploring the Open Access landscape: how to make use of OA 1. Preliminaries This blueprint is based on the assumption that the participants at the workshop have no prior knowledge of the relevant OA landscape but they do know what Open Access means (Module 1 and 2). Depending on the knowledge of your audience and the time you have, you can choose which parts of this module to focus on. As the organizer, you can either use this blueprint to let the attendants explore the landscape during the workshop (making it more an interactive session), or follow the steps yourself as preparation for the workshop and then present the relevant information to the researchers (which may be a good option when time for the workshop is short). Please note for your preparation: ‐ Collect the needed details and include them in the module, such as institutional URL’s, policies and other specific information. ‐ For an interactive session ‐ which we recommend you to do ‐ you will need computer facilities for all participants. ‐ We suggest that you write the results of the exersize in the PPT during the session. This will give you tools to proceed with. ‐ If you do the latter, SPARC Europe would be grateful if you could share the results. 2. Overview part 1: commonly used search engines Aim: to demonstrate how (open access) articles appear in most commonly used search engines, such as Google Scholar, how easily they are to access, and how they can be recognized as Open Access. ● look up articles or books via commonly used search engines (Google) and demonstrate which publications are OA and which not; focus on how licenses work (they may let you think the article is freely accessible) part 2: repositories Aim: to have an overview of relevant subject repositories for a specific subject field, so that researchers realize they (as readers) can benefit from OA. ● find relevant subject repositories Aim: to have the necessary knowledge of policies for author self‐archiving. ● give an overview of the local, national and international policies for self‐archiving Aim: to get to know the local repository, so that authors recognize the added value of self‐archiving and know the procedure for self‐archiving. ● look at the institutional repository of your own institution and run through steps to take and support to get. Aim: to have an overview of relevant institutional repositories and realize that OA is not an isolated phenomenon. ● look at other institutional repositories (in your country or at other relevant institutions). part 3: OA‐journals & books Aim: to have an overview of OA‐journals in a specific field, so that researchers realize they (as readers) can benefit from and “join” OA. ● check out most populair journals; are they OA or do they offer OA possibilities? ● find relevant OA‐journals through DOAJ Aim: to realize that OA and high quality are very well compatible. ● assess the quality of OA‐journals Aim: to have an overview of options for publishing in hybrid journals. ● find hybrid journals Aim: to realize that OA is also possible for books. ● find OA‐books part 4: Know your copyright Aim: To share support and tools that can be of help in managing your copyright ‐ explore your publisher’s policies with regard to Open Access in Sherpa Romeo ‐ explore the SURF copyright toolbox to find out what you can do 3. The workshop part 1: OA‐publications through commonly used search engines 1.1 inventory of channels @workshop SLIDE 2 1. Ask the participants to list the channels they use when they search for research articles and data. 2. Add these channels to slide 2. Your audience might come up with subject repositories here, such as PubMed or the Arxiv. 1.2. demonstration of OA through commonly used – so no subject specific yet ‐ search engines background/preparation The inventory may include: General resources: Google Scholar / ISI Web of Knowledge / Web of Science / Scopus Natural and Health Sciences: PubMed Social Sciences: PsycINFO / Sociological Abstracts Humanities: MLA International Bibliography To do this exercise plenary, ask one of the attendants for input / article details. Please note: ● in PubMed: you can set a limit to show only OA‐articles (“Links to free full text”). ● in Google Scholar, ISI Web of Knowledge / Web of Science, MLA, OvidSP: no option to limit a search to OA only; a library access link may be added by your library if you have a campus license; you may be able to access not open access litterature; you should make clear when access has been established through a license. Ask the participants to start a query in different channels (in any case, use Google, WoS and Scopus) and analyse the results: which articles are accessible, is there a – most of the time invisible – license you need for viewing? part 2: repositories 2.1 Subject repositories background/preparation for slide 5 (finding an important publication in a repository), you may want to prepare an example yourself @workshop SLIDE 3 Ask the participants to find relevant subject repositories in OpenDOAR (http://www.opendoar.org). Start with the parameters Repository Type: Disciplinary or Repository Type: Aggregating and your Subject Area. SLIDE 4 Ask the participants to choose one repository: ● do they know this subject repository and do they use it? ● were they aware it is about Open Access? Ask the participants to choose one repository to visit and see if they can find information on the following questions: ● what materials are included? ● is there a further subdivision of areas? ● is there any added functionality (statistics, comments, notifications of new material etc.)? ● select an important publication (one of their own publications, the best thing they have read in the past few months, etc.). Can they find it in this repository? 2.2 Local, national and international policies for self‐archiving background/preparation make an overview of (local, national, international) policies relevant for your audience and its consequences, support and other related matters >> include overview in SLIDE 6. @workshop SLIDE 5 Give an overview of the policies for self‐archiving: ● local (your institution’s policies, e.g. master students are obliged to deposit the final draft of their thesis in the repository, or the university recommends you to deposit a final version of your article in the IR) ● national (e.g. the policies of national funding agencies) ● international (e.g. OpenAire http://www.openaire.eu/) 2.3 Your institutional repository background/preparation ● if you can facilitate this, ask your researchers on forehand to bring their papers with them so you can upload for them. ● prepare an overview of the operational details ● prepare an overview of extra services ● add information in a SLIDES 7, 8, 9 (see below) If your institution does not have a repository yet, you can focus on 2.4 @workshop Ask the participants to go to the repository of your institution and take a look at the special features of your local repository: ● can they easily go to the repository from the institution’s or library’s website? ● is information from the repository integrated with other pages on the website (e.g. is there a list of publications on their personal page?) ● is there a further subdivision of areas? ● is there any added functionality (statistics about downloads and uploads, comments, notifications of new material etc.)? SLIDE 6 List the features of your Institutional Repository as a wrapping up of this exersice. Underpin extra features you have developed to make the IR more attractive. SLIDE 7 Give an overview of the operational details: ● who’s contact person? ● how can you upload a paper? How can you receive support? ● how to handle copyrights? ● is the repository integrated with the research registration system? ● what types of publications can you upload? ● what is the policy of your institution: is uploading mandated or encouraged? SLIDE 8 With the ‘did‐you‐know?’ slide you can briefly focus on extra details about what you really want your audience to know, such as mandate, consequences etc. 2.4 Other institutional repositories Background / preparation This exercise can especially be relevant when your institution does not host an IR; you may collect repositories that can be used by researchers at your university. For example: the EC Orphan repository, but also the ArXiv can be useful. @workshop (no SLIDE) Ask the participants to find: ● other relevant institutional repositories in OpenDOAR (http://www.opendoar.org) (by selecting Institutional as Search for Repository Type and your Country). ● other institutional repositories that may interest them: find the repository of the important institutions in their field. No Institutional Repository at your institution? Show the participants which repository they can use as an alternative ● The Arxiv (www.Arxiv.org) ● EC Orphan Repository (http://openaire.cern.ch/) ● Open Depot (www.opendepot.org) ● OpenAIRE Orphan Repository part 3: OA articles, journals, books, data Find journals @workshop SLIDE 9 Ask the participants to list some of their top journals / favorite journals and check them out: are they Open Access Journals? Or are there Open Access possibilities? What kind of licenses do they have or what do they say about copyright? SLIDE 10 Ask the participants to look for relevant OA journals, through the Directory of Open Access Journals (http://www.doaj.org/). They can either browse the list of subjects or search for specific words. Journals in DOAJ have specific keywords that narrow down the (rather broad) division in subjects. Specific for Arts & Humanities: ask the participants to find OA articles through JURN (http://www.jurn.org), a Google Customized Search Engine that indexes free e‐journals in the Arts & Humanities. SLIDE 11 Assess the quality of OA journals Ask the participants to go to a specific journal and assess the (editorial) policies. ● what are the specific subjects covered? ● what is the prestige or ranking of this journal and publisher? ● does the journal have an impact factor? ● are submissions peer reviewed? ● ● ● what is the acceptance rate? what is the speed of publication (and how important is that for you?)? how does this journal handle copyrights: does the author retain copyright? Does the journal ask you to use a CC‐BY license? Find hybrid journals: Sherpa Romeo PaidOA @Workshop (No slide) Ask the participants to find relevant hybrid journals through Sherpa Romeo PaidOA (http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/PaidOA.html). This list is ordered by publisher and provides information about the fees and a link to the information on the publisher’s website. Funding options background/preparation make an overview of (local, national, international) funding options that are relevant for your audience. Sources for information are: ● Overview of local journal funds: http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/OA_journal_funds ● EU Seventh Framework Programme (FP7): http://ec.europa.eu/research/science‐ society/index.cfm?fuseaction=public.topic&id=1300&lang=1 ● the websites of other research funding agencies (e.g. http://nwo.nl/nwohome.nsf/pages/NWOP_86AFST_Eng) SLIDE 12 @Workshop List relevant funding options in SLIDE 13 SLIDE 13 Find OA books (not (yet) for the sciences) Ask the participants to look for relevant books through: ● OAIster (http://oaister.worldcat.org). ● OAPEN (http://oapen.org), a collaborative initiative to develop and implement a sustainable Open Access publication model for academic books in the Humanities and Social Sciences. CHECK out: Do the funding options listed in SLIDE 13 include book publishing? Part 4 Copyright background / preparation Publishing with an Open Access Publishers in most occasions means the author can license his/her work with a Creative Commons license. This part of the workshop zooms in at services offered by your library or university, Copyright Toolbox and Sherpa Romeo. We recommend you include this topic by giving a short presentation about resources and support. The SPARC Europe interview with Paul Ayris can be of help: http://www.sparceurope.org/resources/sparc‐eu‐materials/sparc‐europe‐interviews @Workshop SLIDE 14 Copyright support at your institution Explanation Copyright toolbox: what can you do? What is the license to publish? http://copyrighttoolbox.surf.nl/copyrighttoolbox/authors/licence/ Sherpa Romeo: how does it work / online tour; focus on publishers the researchers know SLIDE 15 Final comments To learn about the impact of the workshop, you can ask your audience for final comments about their opinion about OA. For example: ‐ Did you learn new things today? (And what?) ‐ Do you care? (Why / Why not?) ‐ What would be your first / next OA‐step? ‐ ..?
© Copyright 2020