A proposed new presidential policy on open access theses and dissertations is open for systemwide review until February 28, 2018. All members of the UC community are invited to comment on the draft policy. Visit the UC Academic Affairs website to read the draft policy, a cover letter with instructions on where to send comments, and a set of Frequently Asked Questions.
The draft policy was written by a task force including graduate students as well as representatives of the Graduate Deans, the Coordinating Committee on Graduate Affairs, the UC Libraries, and others. If passed, the policy will expand the University of California’s commitment to disseminating UC research as widely as possible by building on the Academic Senate and Presidential open access policies already in place. Like its predecessors, this policy on open access theses and dissertations would enable California and the rest of the world to freely access the research of UC scholars and, likewise, would improve the ability of UC’s graduates to reach a global audience.
Many UC dissertations are already freely available to read online; the draft policy would align practices across the UC system by requiring all new UC dissertations and theses to be made open access. The policy does not affect copyright ownership, which remains with graduate student authors absent unusual circumstances. Students who do not want their work to be available immediately can specify an embargo period. (more…)
This year, international Open Access Week is October 23-29.. The theme, “Open in Order to…,” was chosen, according to Heather Joseph, Executive Director of SPARC, to highlight the many benefits of open access for different people, including “increasing citation counts, enabling anyone to learn from the latest scholarship, or accelerating the translation of research into economic gains.”
The University of California Libraries have planned a variety of events this year in order to explore and celebrate issues related to open access. Find one near you! (more…)
Back in 2014, the University of California got its first set of DMCA takedown notices for eScholarship, UC’s open access repository and publishing platform. I wrote about it here on the OSC blog, which you can check out if you want to see our tips for authors who want to avoid receiving a takedown notice (short version: post the right version of your article).
I also said in that post that we’d report on any other notices that UC received for eScholarship, because we believe it’s important to be transparent about which publishers are using this procedure to target article sharing by their own authors. We’ve received two more sets of notices this year, and I haven’t posted about it until now. Mea culpa! (more…)
October 24-30, 2016 is international Open Access Week. This year’s theme is “Open in Action,” which was chosen to “focus on the small steps everyone can take to make openness in research a reality,” said Heather Joseph, Executive Director of SPARC. “This year’s theme will help showcase these actions, the individuals who are leading by example, and the ways this openness advances science and scholarship.”
The University of California Libraries have a planned a greater number and wider variety of events this year than ever before in order to explore and celebrate issues related to open access. (more…)
Last week I wrote about data ownership, and how focusing on “ownership” might drive you nuts without actually answering important questions about what can be done with data. In that context, I mentioned a couple of times that you (or your funder) might want data to be shared under CC0, but I didn’t clarify what CC0 actually means. This week, I’m back to dig into the topic of Creative Commons (CC) licenses and public domain tools — and how they work with data. (more…)
Which of these is true?
“The PI owns the data.”
“The university owns the data.”
“Nobody can own it; data isn’t copyrightable.”
You’ve probably heard somebody say at least one of these things — confidently. Maybe you’ve heard all of them. Maybe about the same dataset (but in that case, hopefully not from the same person). So who really owns research data? Well, the short answer is “it depends.”
A longer answer is that determining ownership (and whether there’s even anything to own) can be frustratingly complicated — and, even when obvious, ownership only determines some of what can be done with data. Other things like policies, contracts, and laws may dictate certain terms in circumstances where ownership isn’t relevant — or even augment or overrule an owner where it is. To avoid an unpleasant surprise about what you can or can’t do with your data, you’ll want to plan ahead and think beyond the simple question of ownership. (more…)
In February 2013, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) issued a memo requiring many federal agencies to develop policies ensuring that the research that they fund would be freely publicly available.
It took time for the agencies to develop their plans, get them approved by OSTP, and release them to the public, but most of them have done it now. They’re not all easy to find, and once you find them it’s not always easy to to tell whether you’re looking at the most current version, or to understand the basic requirements. To help UC scholars who might be wondering about the requirements from the funder they work with, we’ve put together a page listing the federal agency plans we’ve been able to find, and summarizing some of the highlights of each. (more…)
Running an independent journal is a lot of work, even if you’re just focused on managing the process of moving articles through submission, review, and publication. But publishing an article isn’t the end of the story. Even a great article won’t make an impact unless people read it. And without visibility, even a journal with a terrific editorial board won’t get the kind of submissions it’s looking for.
WestJEM – the Western Journal of Emergency Medicine: Integrating Emergency Care with Population Health – gets ten times the submissions that it got a decade ago. In 2008 it averaged about 2,000 combined article views and downloads per month; by 2015 that number had climbed to 130,000. Without the support of a large publisher, and charging a modest $400 article processing fee, the journal’s resources are limited. So what’s the secret to its success? Well, it doesn’t hurt to fill a need in an active and growing field – or to have a hard-working board of editors thinking about savvy strategies to build connections with professional organizations and academic departments. But one crucial piece that cannot be overlooked, according to Mark Langdorf, Editor-in-Chief and UC Irvine Professor of Clinical Emergency Medicine, is getting indexed – and finding the right resources to help make that happen. (more…)
This week UC Libraries join other organizations around the world in celebrating Fair Use Week, which honors the important doctrines of fair use in the United States and fair dealing in Canada and other jurisdictions. It’s a great time to learn about all the ways in which this important exception to the rights of copyright holders enhances our lives both inside and outside the university. (more…)
In November 2015, the editorial board of Lingua, a linguistics journal published by Elsevier, resigned en masse to begin a new open access journal, Glossa. The decision followed a series of disagreements with the publisher which are discussed in this post on Language Log. Several UC linguistics faculty have now issued a statement declaring their support for the new journal and urging their colleagues and the UC libraries to no longer support Lingua. In response, the UC libraries have informed Elsevier that they wish to cancel their subscription to Lingua.
“The UC Linguistics faculty statement of support for Glossa reflects our conviction that the value of a journal lies in the efforts of the authors, reviewers, and editors responsible for creating and vetting the content that the journal publishes,” says Eric Bakovic, UC San Diego linguistics professor and chair of the Academic Senate’s University Committee on Library and Scholarly Communication (UCOLASC). “In the move from Lingua to Glossa, all of these critical elements remain the same — therefore, Glossa is what Lingua was, except now better because it is now a fair open access journal. Elsevier insists on keeping the Lingua name for what is effectively a brand-new journal, with none of the same critical elements, which means that they believe that the value of a journal lies in its name and its publisher. Our aim is to prove them wrong.” (more…)