Digital Content

Open Educational Practice Day 3: Research as OER

By Adrian Stagg and Emma Power, USQ

As this is the mid-way point of the Coffee Course, we’ll shift the focus slightly and examine the role of research as OER.

Open Access Research: greater impact?

Coffee Splash, by luismendozamx, used under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence from: https://flic.kr/p/7Jv7A9

Research, like learning and teaching, is one of the core activities at a university, for academic staff and an increasing number of professional staff.  As national agendas and Federal educational policy emphasise the economic value of research, industry partnerships, competitive grant funding, and ‘national innovation’; the proposition for open research may seem challenging.

In Driving Innovation, Fairness and Excellence in Australian Higher Education (Australian Government, 2016) – you’ll notice the free and open licence on the report – there are key recommendations that could be aligned with OER.  For advocates and researchers of open education – and open research – the most feasible approach for national traction is this type of alignment.

In particular, Driving Innovation notes in the introduction:

For these reasons it is essential that higher education policy settings drive innovation and areas of specialisation across our universities; embed fairness and equitable access to university for all Australians; ensure global excellence amongst our universities; and are financially sustainable and affordable into the long term (p. 2) And, While the Government is committed to a system that provides genuine choice and appropriate support for students, removes barriers for under-represented groups and allows institutions to excel and innovate to deliver world class education, at the same time, it recognises that this system must be affordable and provide a return on investment for both the student and the nation (p. 2).

Emphasis has been added on the sections that can be directly supported by open education.  Earlier posts have discussed ‘fairness and equitable access’, as well as ‘remov[ing] barriers for under-represented groups’, but the ‘return on investment’ aspect of openness has not been articulated in this course yet.

Readership, collaboration, efficiency, and open research

Coffee time, by Anthony Easton, used under a Creative Commons Attribution Licence from: https://flic.kr/p/5fxYRq

Open-access research publishing is not a new idea.  Most Australian universities have a research publication repository that may also include pre-publication versions of articles and report.  Academic networking sites also provide an avenue for researchers to share their output with prospective readers and collaborators – although such activities may not always be legal.

Publishers have been swift to respond to open access. Some journals (such as the International Review of Research in Online and Distributed Learning – IRRODL) are not only free and openly licenced, but also ranked highly in their discipline (IRRODL is a Q1 journal).  Others, like Springer Open Publishing, charge an ‘author processing fee’ (APC) for articles to be published with an open licence (the current fee is USD3,000 per article), with encouragement to authors to begin discussions at their institution about how the APC will be funded.  Other journals provide opportunities for open access after embargo periods, or allow pre-publication versions of the article to appear in institutional repositories.

The core message is that there is no uniform approach to open access.  This has also allowed ‘predatory publishers’ (this article from Nature explains the concept) to fraudulently charge researchers, sparking responses such as Associate Professor Jeffrey Beall’s list that has been used (and added to) by researchers since 2012.  Earlier this year, Beall’s List was removed from his blog, which has led to conjecture, and very little fact.

Openness doesn’t just encompass education or research, as noted in the OER Consortium image used on Day One.  There are a range of activities, that include working openly.

Nature acknowledged the value of ‘crowd-sourcing’ in 2015 after experimentation with open data sets (that is, raw data collected as part of research that is then made openly and freely available when ethically appropriate).  As many researchers accessed the same set of data, more robust and appropriate tests were suggested (and implemented), additional viewpoints and multi-disciplinary interpretations occurred, and provided a space to ‘explore doubts and get a second, third or fourth opinion’ (Silberzahn & Uhlman, 2015).

Broadly, open access to research can also provide benefits such as:

Teaching and learning opportunities

Most university courses include ‘Selected Readings’ or a similar list of resources.  Consider that when set as a reading, a research article becomes a teaching resource.  Open access articles (those that are freely and openly accessible) thus fulfil the definition of OER.

University staff are often familiar with the ‘copyright conversation’ when including articles from a journal or database in readings, especially if those readings need to be provided in print (a format that is currently less often used, but there are student cohorts that need print).  It often involves a lengthy process involving Copyright Officers (or librarians, or both), and sometimes results in either a required fee for use, inability to locate the copyright holder, or even a complete lack of response from said holder.

Open access publishing has benefits for learning and teaching, not only for access to information, but the potential for open access articles and data to be used to support authentic assessment.

Activity 4

Consider your own research.  Do you see any benefit to open publishing models; or do you already publish this way?  Do you think there is a tension between open and ‘closed’ publishing in terms of institutional expectations for research activities?

Activity 5

When selecting a journal, researchers across the sector will often consult SJR for impact, rankings, and other metrics.  If you haven’t done so already, use SJR to locate an open journal.  You’ll find a ‘tick-box’ underneath the top menu to limit your search (http://www.scimagojr.com/journalrank.php).  Were you surprised at the results?  Or were they as expected?

As always, Emma and I will be in the discussion; and we’ll see you for another coffee tomorrow.

Join us for a coffee in person!

Emma will be joining your coffee course facilitators Katie and Janene at ANU campus for a face-to-face coffee catchup. We welcome you to join us at 10am, Friday 31 March 2017 at Biginelli’s Cafe in the School of Music, Building 100 (note this is NOT our usual coffee location). Emma would love to hear how you have found the course, and is hoping to capture your thoughts and feedback. Please email Janene if you can attend.

Share your thoughts on social media

We are using the hashtag #OERCoffee on Twitter to keep the conversation going and open it up to a wider audience. Please join us there!

Licence

The text of this work is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence.  All images and videos retain their respective licences.

 

Links to Resources

23 thoughts on “Open Educational Practice Day 3: Research as OER

  1. Overview of Day Two: Giving Knowledge for Free

    The activity question seemed to spark a lot of thinking about the role of universities and teaching in an information-abundant environment; although this is still a challenging space. Most of the folk responding agreed that the teachers’ role was about providing the link between theory and practice (Dan), taking the opportunity to build reputational capital to enhance collaboration (Melissa), acting as a guide who separates the ‘wheat from the chaff’ (Michael, Imogen, Tom), but also recognised challenges like disciplinary norms for teaching (Melissa, Jill), and the need to keep informed teaching practice at the centre of OER (Noemi).

    Alison raised some points regarding ‘gaps’ in resources that can be ‘filled’ by teaching and learning staff (in collaboration with students), and the possibilities for cultural works to arise from a community, but students as co-creators was also of interest to others in the Comments (Imogen).

    Even though we’re just two days in, I’m learning a lot from these interactions, and the diversity of views and disciplines has been especially rewarding in the conversation. Today we’ll focus on research in the open space, and the role that research plays in open learning and teaching. I did notice a few people apologising for ‘arriving late’ – please think nothing of it. One of the advantages of an open and flexible space is that you can engage when you’re ready, in your own time. I’m very glad to see more people arriving, and look forward to your thoughts.

  2. Hi Adrian,
    Thanks for you daily ’round-ups’. Your synopses help as a refresher of the emerging themes and you’re modelling a good strategy for engaging with learners and creating an inclusive environment. Great!

    Activity 4
    Well, no publications yet, but I will happily publish open access (perhaps that’s because I’m in the library world and we’re a sharing, caring bunch :-)). I highly value those researchers who’ve gone this route and made their knowledge, data and research open for our communities to draw from. I like this quote:

    Galileo: To what end are you working? Presumably for the principle that science’s sole aim must be to lighten the burden of human existence. If the scientists, brought to heel by self-interested rulers, limit themselves to piling up knowledge for knowledge’s sake, then science can be crippled and our new machines will lead to nothing but new impositions.

    Berthold Brecht (1898–1956)
    Gallileo, Scene 14
    (https://timreview.ca/article/810)

    I am interested to see what others say about the tension between open and ‘closed’ publishing in terms of institutional expectations for research activities as I don’t know enough to comment.

    Activity 5
    I was pleasantly surprised that there are 8 Classics OA journals listed! Given that Classics is a bastion of knowledge and publications are deeply embedded within the traditional scholarly publishing ecosystem, it excites me to see this!

  3. Due to rural clinical workload I didn’t get a “coffee- break” yesterday and today isn’t looking grand. Can I catch up on yesterday and today tonight? Sorry for the inconvience but patients have got in the way!! (in the nicest way)

    1. Hi Louise,
      You can catch up whenever you have time. That’s the beauty of this model of training , you can do it whenever you like now and in the future! 🙂

  4. I have published in open access journals in the past. This has mainly been in ones that charge a fee. The main issue with this is trying to work out where the money is coming from to pay the fee? Many grants do not allow you to use funds for this. I am not aware of any tensions in regards institutional expectations as long as they do not have to pay the fees.
    My main concern with journals that charge fees is the conflict they may have between making money and scientific merit of submissions.

    1. Hi Michael; the Author Processing Charge is a response from publishers to find a business model for open publishing. Some of the fees are truly amazing, and I have to ask ‘who pays these?’ (as in ‘who really think sit’s okay to pay a publisher outlandish fees for openness?’).
      Springer had a very interesting campaign a couple of years ago where they introduced the APC in terms that made it sound like normal practice. They even asked academic staff to ‘take leadership’ of the discussion around who was to pay the APC at their institution – the insinuation being that they could be responsible for a Very Important Conversation. Normalising a model where openness is paid for is in their best interests – they are after all a commercial entity.
      If the APC is normalised, then there are some impacts on budget. If staff are asking their Faculty for potentially USD3,000 for each article they want to publish openly, those in charge of the budget start to take a very dim view on open publishing models, and OA publishing suffers by association. You raise some good points here, and the conflict of interest might be worth exploring.

  5. My research topic is open educational practices, so it would be fitting if I only published in open journals. However, the issue of publishing in highly ranked closed journals is one that I can’t ignore. That’s because of the way my and my co-authors’ publication list would be viewed for professional considerations. Besides, some closed journals have a broad and established readership, so it can be an advantage to publish there. Still, I believe that research that is supported by public funds should be made available to the public freely.

    As for determining the ranking of a journal, I started with a search in doaj.org to find education-related journals. I copied many titles into the SJR search bar; many journals were not in the system. Is that an indication that they rank too low to be recognised by SJR?

    Anyway, I got a hit with Australian Council for Computers in Education, and the results are here:
    http://www.scimagojr.com/journalsearch.php?q=145256&tip=sid&clean=0 In 2015, this journal achieved a Q2 status for the first time since 2003. I suppose I’m not surprised since it can take a while for a journal to build its reputation and get known by the research community. In contrast, IRRODL shot up to Q2 status after 2 years. So I wonder what the reasons were for the difference.

    Just a side note: SJR is using IRRODL’s original name – not its current one, where D = Distributed, so I used the ISSN to find info on it. So I guess there is a bit of a question of SJR needing to update its databases.

    1. Dan wrote:
      ‘My research topic is open educational practices, so it would be fitting if I only published in open journals. However, the issue of publishing in highly ranked closed journals is one that I can’t ignore. That’s because of the way my and my co-authors’ publication list would be viewed for professional considerations. Besides, some closed journals have a broad and established readership, so it can be an advantage to publish there. Still, I believe that research that is supported by public funds should be made available to the public freely.’

      It’s a shame that we do have to make this decision, especially in light of the public funds. As a researcher in OEP too, I feel the conflict sometimes of wanting to be true ideologically to something I believe in, but also keeping an eye on what will be beneficial professionally next performance review. SJR has been very useful for this (and yes, IRRODL was difficult to find).

      Do you think that there is a balance for researchers in our discipline when publishing?

  6. Hi All,
    I must admit, I’ve followed the chain you set on Jeffrey Beall and the disappearing list of predatory journals. As someone in that field, I’m just sitting here in disbelief, and don’t think I can write anything abut anything just now.
    The question that was set for today – Activity 4 – I answered pretty fully yesterday (I’m not good at confined linear paths – I like to explore and double-back on some things and skip over others) so will just leave it at that for now. If anyone wants to go back and look, they can; and if not, then not.

      1. Alison – I felt the same way when Emma alerted me earlier int he year of what was happening. I’d been referring people to the List for years, especially because I saw a sharp rise in the number of Faculty requests asking about evaluating publishing opportunities. Predatory publishing was (and is) very real. For someone to then be pressured in this manner, is inexcusable behaviour, and sits at the extreme. I’ll be checking back from time to time to see how this evolves, and I certainly hope that he is well, and that the University of Colorado is looking after him.

  7. Hi all,
    I have put yesterday’s comment on yesterday’s site today. Sorry.
    I don’t do research being a hands on teacher so I don’t have anything to publish. I would like to go back to my comment on Monday about the reliability of material. It’s not easy to judge the correctness of articles and as a reader I tend to rely on the reputation of the journal.

    1. Agreed, Sally, and it’s fine about the Comment placement because this is meshing into an overall discussion. Most researchers have a sense of the journals in their field and reputation plays a major role in this.

  8. The part of of “Driving Innovation” I found most useful was the idea of promoting sub-bachelor programs (Australian Government, 2016, p. 9). However, the report was disappointing in that it only mentioned on-line education once: http://blog.highereducationwhisperer.com/2016/05/sub-bachelor-programs-more-cost.html
    But I am a little confused as to what this week’s topic is. Are we discussing open access (OA) publishing of research, OA educational resources to support research, or “open research” (whatever that might be)?
    I try to use OA publishing, but there are powerful disincentives. OA publications are perceived as low quality in the computing discipline. As an Adjunct, I have to pay any OA costs myself. One major publisher in the discipline, the IEEE-CS, charge “only” US$1,750 to have a paper made open access. When attending a conference to present a paper I have to pay the conference fees, accommodation and air-fares myself. If I have to also pay for OA publishing that pushes up the cost significantly.
    In 2006 I presented to the Australian Council of Professors and Heads of Information Systems (ACPHIS), on how the Australian Computer Society (ACS) was building a Digital Library of free open access materials. This was set up using the Open Journal Systems software from Canada: http://blog.tomw.net.au/2006/11/acs-digital-library.html
    But this did not get much traction. Business orientated computer professionals saw it as too “academic”, especially as it did not make any money. The academics saw it as not academic enough, curiously enough for the same reason: it was not a for-profit activity.

    Reference
    Australian Government. (May, 2016). Driving Innovation, Fairness and Excellence in Australian Higher Education. Retrieved from https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/he_reform_paper_driving_innovation_fairness_and_excellence_3_may_2016_-_.pdf#page=11

  9. Ranking of OA Journals:
    For Computer Science I found 5183 journals, of which only 194 were open access (4%). This is much as I had expected: http://www.scimagojr.com/journalrank.php?area=1700&openaccess=true
    For Australia, I found 22 Computer Science journals, with two open access: 10%, which is twice the world average. I helped establish one of these two publications: the Journal of Research and Practice in Information Technology (JRPIT). It ceased publication some years ago, but is still being cited.
    Also surprising is the Australasian Journal of Information Systems (AJIS) is not listed as an open access publication, although it is in the same OA library as JRPIT: http://journal.acs.org.au/index.php/ajis/issue/view/45
    ps: I see mention of the International Review of Research in Online and Distributed Learning (IRRODL) in the notes. This is my favorite education journal, because it is provided in HTML, which makes it much easier to cite in papers and use in courses than PDF. Also there is an audio option, so I can listen to papers while driving.
    IRRODL is one of many references to Canadian publications in the notes. Is this because Canada is doing good work in OA, or am I just noticing these because I am a Canadian HE groupie? 😉

  10. Activity 4
    Open publishing models permit to share information and conduct research in a collaborative way. The benefit is both for the author and for the readers because the material becomes a resource for interaction, learning and the basis for new research. I only have some published works, one of them has open access (the previous ones are not worth it), and I have no problem in continuing to publish in this type of models.

    When speaking of “institutional expectations”, I think we need to break some bureaucratic practices and go beyond the idea that free means poor quality.

    Activity 5
    I looked for journals focused on “Arts and Humanities” by place of origin because I think there are important differences regarding scientific production among regions. The results were not surprising but worrisome:
    • 2052 from Western Europe
    • 903 from the United States
    • 102 from Latin America
    • 76 of Asiatic Region
    • 16 from Africa

    I consider that despite the movement towards open access to scientific and pedagogical resources, there are economic and cultural differences that become a barrier to scientific collaboration. Would it be worth discussing the implications of the dominance of English in scientific writing?

  11. I think that open journals and open research are hugely beneficial, particularly to those who might not have clear ways of accessing the research, but who may benefit from it (e.g. researchers in locations with less access to funding to subscribe to journals). However, I do think that there is a tension between the open and the paid journals, and that there can be a common (mis)conception that “open” is not always synonymous with “quality”.
    I was surprised at how many open journals were available, and in my area of research, too. While I already knew some of the journals, I didn’t realise that they were open because I usually access them while on my university’s internet and do not always see the log in required, etc., to access the paid journals. It is a positive thing to see so many open journals and it gives me hope that this will become the norm in the future.

  12. Activity 4: I think that there are a lot of benefits to open publishing models, particularly in enabling people who are not linked to academic institutions to access papers. However, as an early-career researcher without much in the way of research funding, the publication costs for open-access journals usually mean that this option isn’t usually viable for me. I think it is really great that open access is becoming more and more common, but there needs to be support from universities to facilitate publishing in these journals. In my field (ecology/evolution) I don’t feel that there is much tension between open and closed publishing. There are many well-respected open-access journals and many high profile researchers prefer to publish in open-access journals.

    Activity 5: The results from the SJR search were roughtly what I expected, as many of the journals are ones that I access regularly. It seemed to me that a higher proportion of the UK-based journals were open access than the US-based journals, and I wonder if this is (a) true and (b) the same across other disciplines.

  13. Activity 4: I think that there are a lot of benefits to open publishing models, particularly in enabling people who are not linked to academic institutions to access papers. However, as an early-career researcher without much in the way of research funding, the publication costs for open-access journals usually mean that this option isn’t usually viable for me. I think it is really great that open access is becoming more and more common, but there needs to be support from universities to facilitate publishing in these journals. In my field (ecology/evolution) I don’t feel that there is much tension between open and closed publishing. There are many well-respected open-access journals and many high profile researchers prefer to publish in open-access journals.
    Activity 5: The results from the SJR search were roughtly what I expected, as many of the journals are ones that I access regularly. It seemed to me that a higher proportion of the UK-based journals were open access than the US-based journals, and I wonder if this is (a) true and (b) the same across other disciplines.

  14. As much as the idea of open journals appeals to me philosophically, it is not currently a viable option for me in practice. The issue of who picks up the bill has already been brought up: neither universities nor grant agencies want to allocate money for that. The expectation to publish in top-tier journals is also there, making journal rankings the deciding factor (though I do see several open access journals climbing up the ranks in my discipline).

    1. Ksenia, this is such a salient point about how OERs are encouraged by institutions and funding bodies. While an individual might philosophically or personally like OERs, without some encouragement, approval, or recognition they may just remain on the fringes of publishing and such.

  15. I don’t really have a problem with publishing my research openly, mostly because as a researcher, we don’t get any monetary benefit from publishing anyways. However, I recognise that this is an area I have neither much experience or knowledge in, and there are likely to be many considerations I have not taken into account. The biggest problem I see is the fee for open publishing. That listed APC is astonishingly high — if publishers are making that much money out of an article, then why isn’t any of it coming back to the authors?! But that’s somewhat off topic. However, like Ksenia, that fee is really prohibitive of me publishing in open access at this stage.

    In terms of journal rankings in my field, I was surprised at how many of the Q1 journals were open access — or more accurately, how many of the open access journals were Q1. It makes me feel a lot better about publishing in my field. I do think that being published in a Q1 journal still takes priority over open access — as does being published at all.

  16. I have very little to share about this topic as I’m not doing any major research and planning on publishing anytime soon. But I’m learning a lot from reading the comments and share the same concern about the cost of publishing to open access journals. As Michael said – who should pay the fee?

    In relation to Rachel’s point on OER “enabling people who are not linked to academic institutions to access papers” I’d like to share my experience doing research for my Masters thesis a few years back in a university that had no funding for database or journal access. I would find articles relevant to my topic that I could not access fully because I needed to pay to subscribe to the database or journal. The university could not afford it and I could not afford it. I suspect there are others out there who experience the same barrier and it was so frustrating. And it’s the same problem if you are not affiliated with any university and you are doing research. This is one problem that OER can address.

Leave a Reply to Dr Louise Baker Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*