Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Unless otherwise specified these slides are made available by OASPA under a CC BY 4.0 License
2nd April 2020
What is Scholarly Communication and Publishing in the 21st Century?
OASPA Open Scholarship Webinar Series
Unless otherwise specified these slides are made available by OASPA under a CC BY 4.0 License
What is Scholarly Communication and Publishing in the 21t Century?
With thanks to Copyright Clearance Center for hosting today’s webinar
Unless otherwise specified these slides are made available by OASPA under a CC BY 4.0 License
• Heather Joseph (@hjoseph) - Executive Director of the
Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC)
• Kathleen Fitzpatrick (@kfitz)– Director of Digital
Humanities and Professor of English at Michigan State University
• John Wilbanks (@wilbanks) – Chief Commons Officer at
Sage Bionetworks
What is Scholarly Communication and Publishing in the 21t Century?
What is Scholarly Communication and Publishing in the 21st Century?
Heather Joseph
Executive Director, SPARC
OASPA Webcast
April 2, 2020
Our goal is a global research and education ecosystem that is truly
open and equitable for all.
This means building a scholarly communication system that
ensures equity in contributing to knowledge, as well as equity in
accessing it.
We can do this by focusing on empowering ongoing scholarly
communication – not just scholarly publishing.
Enter: Massive Unexpected Global Change
• Scientists/scholars are demonstrating better ways to communicate.
• Policymakers/research funders are under enormous public pressure to support faster/open communication for more than COVID.
• Academic/research institutions are being forced to fundamentally change operations.
• The funding sources that support our current system of scholarly communications are being fundamentally altered.
Scientists/scholars are demonstrating better ways to communicate.
Policy makers and research funders are under enormous public pressure to support faster open communication
for more than just COVID.
Academic/research institutions that support science and
scholarship are being forced to fundamentally change.
The sources of funding that have supported our current system of
scholarly communications are being fundamentally altered.
Oy. So now what?
Our community is a global ecosystem.
Watch. Listen. Document. Understand. Support.
Decisions that we make now will shape the future; and should be firmly rooted in shared values.
The opportunity is to (re)build a scholarly communications system
that truly serves humanity.
Thank You - looking forward to our discussion.
Heather JosephExecutive Director, [email protected]: @hjosephwww.sparcopen.org
Future scholars looking back…
How did scholarly communications evolve in the 21st
century?
“Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.”
massive exogenous
change
Accelerates processes already
in play
Demonstrates the key problems
were political and economic
the new normal
• It’s the arxiv’s world, we just live in it now
• Preprints
• Post-preprint peer review
• Rapid versions and “fog of war”
• No cadence tied to the calendar to publish
• Popular enough to grift and abuse beyond actual scientific mistakes
• Um, misinterpretation?
the new normal
• Hey, TDM!
• Biorxiv./medrxiv corpus + 32,000 other full text papers
• Copyright problems magically solved?!?
• Looks like publishing scientific facts in prose might be a bad idea
• Challenge incentives because everyone else is too slow to create them in crisis
the new normal
• Do you even share in the cloud?
• Suddenly everyone wants to reuse data because the labs are closed
• Power (and funding) is flowing to what already works – exogenous event rewards those who did the grinding work before the event
• This is scholarly communication. Just not in the document metaphor.
accessibility
degrees of freedom
closed + restricted
model to data
sandbox
collaboration
closed
open
After the meteor
• Vast increase in ”born digital” science shared (i.e. “published”) over open channels
• New forms of collective review that were slowly gaining already (overlays, “playlists”)
• A lot of non-junk but non-important science may just live as preprint
• What happens to societies who lose a full year of conference revenue, and a lot of submissions to preprints?
After the meteor
• New forms of collective review (communities, benchmarks) that are faster and don’t involve any publication in the traditional sense
crc subtyping consortium
A
B
C
D
E
F
1
2
3
4
5
6
expert team data subtype
crc subtyping consortium
A
B
C
D
E
F
1
2
3
4
5
6
...
expert team data subtype
crc subtyping consortium
doi:10.1038/nm.3967
crc subtyping consortium
accessibility
degrees of freedom
closed + restricted
model to data
sandbox
collaboration
closed
openconsensus model
public / private partnership between NIH, 10 biopharmaceutical companies
and several non-profit organizations
accelerating medicines partnership
coordinate sharing of early-phasetarget identification insights
accelerating medicines partnership
accelerating medicines partnership
benchmark as peer review
We have to do better
We must be better than the “just use zoom” advice so many institutions just adopted for teachers
• training
• infrastructure
• cultural support, time, and space to adjust
Unless otherwise specified these slides are made available by OASPA under a CC BY 4.0 License
Questions?
Unless otherwise specified these slides are made available by OASPA under a CC BY 4.0 License
Thank you!
Thank you for joining us today
Contact us at [email protected] view our website at www.oaspa.org
