To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osi2016-25/83601C0F-5606-4A73-BA2D-711C0E80A559%40gmail.com.
“For We Brought Nothing into this World, and it is certain we can carry Nothing Out!
And having FOOD and CLOTHING let us be with these Things CONTENT.
But They that will be Rich fall into Temptation and a Snare, and into many Foolish and Hurtful Lusts, which Plunge Men into Destruction…
But You, o man of God, FLEE these THINGS; and follow after RIGHTEOUSNESS…”
---- Holy Bible
Williams, Johanna, Idowu---good to hear from you. I do hope that each of you, along with our other OSI colleagues, can find time to read our latest policy paper which was released last Monday: Considering evidence-based approaches to open policy | OSI Global. In this paper---based on our survey of researchers, other surveys of researchers, the mountains of ideas put forward in OSI, and the totality of evidence for what’s happening in the OA world---a path forward is suggested where we simply follow the evidence: What do researchers want from open? What does open even mean in the context of research (hint: it isn’t CC-BY)? What solutions are working now, and what can we learn from these? What does communication reform look like in the broader context of what researchers want and need?
The overall recommendation in this paper is to unshackle ourselves from the ideological construct that “open” means something very specific (like CC-BY, no embargo, etc.), and instead recognize that there are many different, attainable, and sustainable open outcomes for different audiences. We also need to step back from the whole PR-driven notion that open is some brand new force in science without which science will not succeed. The history of science is a history of open.
The challenge of tomorrow is to ensure that we can make science more EQUITABLE through open on the one hand, and with the other hand attempt to improve the effectiveness of science by making it more accessible, discoverable, and interoperable. Taking an EVIDENCE-BASED approach to OA policy reforms is the only sensible path forward for achieving these objectives. We can’t get there by forcing ideologically-driven one-size-fits-all policies on the world that only serve the interests of the privileged few, and that create a caste system in science that the world of science has never experienced before in its long history.
With best regards as always,
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osi2016-25/2CE14F84-96AC-4212-8D58-5E70D6A7CD79%40gmail.com.
This programme, which was broadcast today by BBC Radio 4, might be of interest to some.
The Truth Police
For years, science has had a dirty secret; research has been dogged by claims and instances of fraud, malpractice and outright incompetence. Suspicious-looking data sets, breakthrough results that can’t be replicated, eyebrow-raising statistical sleights of hand - science has been undergoing something of an existential crisis.
And at the forefront of keeping science honest has been a bunch of outsiders, some of them with no formal academic positions, no salaried posts, double-checking the published claims of researchers and academics. Their work is not without controversy, especially when they go public; nevertheless, they’ve achieved impressive results.
Presenter Michael Blastland meets some of these ‘Truth Police’, discovering their methodology and their motives, as well as asking how scientific institutions are reacting to the deep issues they have brought out into the light.