What is Open Science, and How Can Radical Collaboration Facilitate It?

Author: Meghan Potterbusch

Abstract: Open science is a multi-faceted movement serving as a goal and a motivation for many stakeholders, from researchers to information professionals and from funders to the general public. Aspects of open science include: open sharing of research materials such as data and code, collaborative research platforms, crowdsourcing platforms, blogs, open peer review, open educational resources, altmetrics, and more. These diverse aspects can be classified into schools of thought and are emphasized by members of various open-focused communities to different degrees (from intense belief to neutral to opposition in some cases). Regardless of the differences in views between diverse communities and differences in aspects or approaches, each of these forms of open science allows for additional levels of understanding, participation, or both by people external to the group producing the science.

Citation: Megan Potterbusch. “What is Open Science, and How Can Radical Collaboration Facilitate It?” Research Library Issues, no. 296 (2018): 44–48. https://doi.org/10.29242/rli.296.6

 

Source: Research Library Issues

The Radical Collaboration of RDA and What It Means for Developing Institutional Data Management Services

Author: Amy Nurnberger

Abstract: The Research Data Alliance (RDA) is an organization dedicated to
reducing barriers to data sharing and exchange. While there are many
technical barriers that must still be surmounted, it is a core principle of
RDA that technical impediments are not the only ones. Often the more
challenging barriers are the less visible social roadblocks and those
blockades constructed at the intersections of the technical and the
social. In my experience in developing and working in institutional data
management services, these services are also dedicated to easing the
way to data sharing and are likewise subject to a similar set of barriers.
The connections between how RDA works, how data management
services develop in institutions, and how radical collaboration happens
may map out a route to more successful service development practices.

Citation: Amy Nurnberger. “The Radical Collaboration of RDA and What It Means for Developing Institutional Data Management Services.” Research Library Issues, no. 296 (2018): 23–32. https://doi.org/10.29242/rli.296.3.

VIEW

 

Source: Research Library Issues

From transaction to collaboration: scholarly communications design at UConn Library


Authors: Holly Jeffcoat, Gregory Colati

Abstract: The University of Connecticut (UConn) Library, in collaboration with the School of Fine Arts and the UConn Humanities Institute and with support from the Andrew W Mellon Foundation, is developing Greenhouse Studios (GS). GS is a scholarly communications research laboratory dedicated to using collaborative models and design principles in the creation of scholarly works. Scholarship laboratories that function as a combination of a scientific research lab and an art studio are a useful means of advancing the methods and outcomes of scholarly communications.

We intend to examine whether flattening hierarchies through the GS model is a significant challenge for librarians who work within transactional models of interaction and are closely tied to faculty-driven service models of research support. Other participants typically thought of as supporting faculty are embedded as equal participants in the design process. We will apply qualitative methods to examine whether the GS design process facilitates development of new models of interaction among faculty, librarians, design technologists and other experts. Preliminary experience finds most participants embrace the collaborative model and are energized by the experience. Our assessment will focus on GS techniques as drivers for role and scholarly output changes, how these experiences might translate into changes in library culture or services, and on practical findings related to space, technology usage and administrative hurdles.

This paper is the result of a presentation delivered at CNI (the Coalition for Networked Information) in early 2017 and encapsulates our thinking then and now (in early 2018) as we refine our assessment tools.

Citation: Jeffcoat, H., & Colati, G. (2018). From transaction to collaboration: scholarly communications design at UConn Library. Insights, 31, 17. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.405

Source: Insights

Analyzing Citation and Research Collaboration Characteristics of Faculty in Aerospace, Civil and Environmental, Electrical and Computer, and Mechanical Engineering


Author: Li Zhang

Abstract: This article investigates citation and research collaboration habits of faculty in four engineering departments. The analysis focuses on similarities and differences among the engineering disciplines. Main differences exist in the use of conference papers and technical reports. The age of cited materials varies by discipline and by format. Regarding faculty connection with other subjects, the study finds that aerospace and mechanical engineering faculty collaborate more often with researchers outside their fields, while civil and environmental faculty, as well as electrical and computer engineering faculty, are more likely to cooperate with peers in their fields. Lists of highly cited journals are generated. The paper also provides suggestions for collection management, research assistance, and outreach efforts.

Citation: Zhang, Li. (2018). Analyzing Citation and Research Collaboration Characteristics of Faculty in Aerospace, Civil and Environmental, Electrical and Computer, and Mechanical Engineering. College & Research Libraries News, 79(2), 158. doi: 10.5860/crl.79.2.158

View

Source: College & Research Libraries News

Collectivity and collaboration: imagining new forms of communality to create resilience in scholar-led publishing


Author: Janneke Adema and Samuel A. Moore

Abstract: The Radical Open Access Collective (ROAC) is a community of scholar-led, not-for-profit presses, journals and other open access (OA) projects. The collective promotes a progressive vision for open access based on mutual alliances between the 45+ member presses and projects seeking to offer an alternative to commercial and legacy models of publishing. This article presents a case study of the collective, highlighting how it harnesses the strengths and organizational structures of not-for-profit, independent and scholar-led publishing communities by 1) further facilitating collective efforts through horizontal alliances, and by 2) enabling vertical forms of collaboration with other agencies and organizations within scholarly publishing. It provides a background to the origins of the ROAC, its members, its publishing models on display and its future plans, and highlights the importance of experimenting with and promoting new forms of communality in not-for-profit OA publishing.

Citation: Adema, J., & Moore, S. A. (2018). Collectivity and collaboration: imagining new forms of communality to create resilience in scholar-led publishing. Insights, 31, 3. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.399

View

Source: Insights

An exploration of collaborative scientific production at MIT through spatial organization and institutional affiliation


Authors: Claudel M, Massaro E, Santi P, Murray F, Ratti C

Abstract: Academic research is increasingly cross-disciplinary and collaborative, between and within institutions. In this context, what is the role and relevance of an individual’s spatial position on a campus? We examine the collaboration patterns of faculty at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, through their academic output (papers and patents), and their organizational structures (institutional affiliation and spatial configuration) over a 10-year time span. An initial comparison of output types reveals: 1. diverging trends in the composition of collaborative teams over time (size, faculty versus non-faculty, etc.); and 2. substantively different patterns of cross-building and cross-disciplinary collaboration. We then construct a multi-layered network of authors, and find two significant features of collaboration on campus: 1. a network topology and community structure that reveals spatial versus institutional collaboration bias; and 2. a persistent relationship between proximity and collaboration, well fit with an exponential decay model. This relationship is consistent for both papers and patents, and present also in exclusively cross-disciplinary work. These insights contribute an architectural dimension to the field of scientometrics, and take a first step toward empirical space-planning policy that supports collaboration within institutions.

Citation: Claudel M, Massaro E, Santi P, Murray F, Ratti C (2017) An exploration of collaborative scientific production at MIT through spatial organization and institutional affiliation. PLoS ONE 12(6): e0179334. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179334

View

Student Learning Outcomes using Wikipedia-based Assignments: Fall 2016 Research Report


Author: Zach McDowell

Abstract:“To better understand the types of skills students obtain from contributing to Wikipedia as a course assignment, the Wiki Education Foundation sponsored Dr. Zach McDowell, of the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, to conduct a study of our program participants during the Fall 2016 term. After careful analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data, the study found that Wikipedia-based assignments enhance students’ digital literacy and critical research skills, foster their ability to write for a public audience, promote collaboration, and motivate them more than traditional assignments. Students also gain a valuable understanding and appreciation for a source of information they use every day: Wikipedia.”  (Description from the Wikiedu blog)

Citation: McDowell, Z. (2017). Student learning outcomes using Wikipedia-based assignments: Fall 2016 research report. Wikimedia Commons.

View

Collaborating and communicating: Humanities scholars working and talking together


Author: Maria Bonn

Abstract:  Among the academic truths that we generally hold to be self evident, are 1) the inherent value of collaboration and 2) humanists tend to be lone scholars, tucked away at their desks or in their carrels, surrounded by their books and papers, jealously guarding their intellectual expression until such a time as it can spring from their heads, fully formed, into the world. Like all truisms, these are open to dispute. Anyone who has tried managing projects undertaken by those with a diversity of personalities and perspectives, intellectual and otherwise, can quickly summon examples of the sometimes chaotic inefficiency of collaboration undermining the benefits afforded by that diversity. More positively, one can assert that those lone scholars in their studies are always working in collaboration, often across time and space, through the mediation of texts, rather than in team meetings and group conversations.

Citation: Bonn, M. (2017). Collaborating and communicating: Humanities scholars working and talking together. College & Research Libraries News, 78(4), 206-209. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/crln.78.4.9650

View

Organization and Delivery of Scholarly Communications Services by Academic and Research Libraries in the United Kingdom: Observations from Across the Pond


Author: Christine Fruin

Abstract: The U.K. library community has implemented collaborative strategies in key scholarly communication areas such as open access mandate compliance, and U.S. librarians could benefit from learning in greater detail about the practices and experiences of U.K. libraries with respect to how they have organized scholarly communication services. METHODS In order to better understand the scholarly communication activities in U.K. academic and research libraries, and how U.S. libraries could apply that experience in the context of their own priorities, an environmental scan via a survey of U.K. research libraries and in-person interviews were conducted. RESULTS U.K. libraries concentrate their scholarly communication services on supporting compliance with open access mandates and in the development of new services that reflect libraries’ shifting role from information consumer to information producer. DISCUSSION Due to the difference in the requirements of open access mandates in the U.K. as compared to the U.S., scholarly communication services in the U.K. are more focused on supporting compliance efforts. U.S. libraries engage more actively in providing copyright education and consultation than U.K. libraries. Both U.K. and U.S. libraries have developed new services in the areas of research data management and library publishing. CONCLUSION There are three primary takeaways from the experience of U.K. scholarly communication practitioners for U.S. librarians: increase collaboration with offices of research, reconsider current organization and delegation of scholarly communication services, and increase involvement in legislative and policy-making activity in the U.S. with respect to access to research.

View

La producción científica colombiana en SciELO: un análisis bibliométrico


Abstract: A bibliometric analysis of the Colombian scientific production indexed in SciELO Citation Index is presented. Some of the settled objectives are to determine the total production and the degree collaboration, to identify the most prolific Colombian universities as well as the main academic collaboration networks. The sample was integrated by 15302 documents published in twelve years.

A remarkable increase of the scientific production was found, with a global degree collaboration index of 0.75. It was found that the state universities are the most prolific ones, being the Universidad Nacional and the Universidad de Antioquia the first two producers. A growth of the international collaboration was detected, especially among Latin-American countries. Spain is the main academic collaborator of Colombia. It is shown a bias in pro of domestic journal publications. Health Sciences journals constitute the principal core of the Colombian scientific production.

Se presenta un análisis bibliométrico de la producción científica realizada en Colombia indexada en la base de datos SciELO Citation Index.
Algunos de los objetivos fueron determinar el volumen de la producción
y determinar el grado de colaboración, identificar las universidades colombianas más productivas y determinar cuáles son los pares
académicos en la investigación científica y tecnológica en Colombia. Se
analizaron 15 302 documentos publicados en doce años.

Se halló un notable incremento en la producción, con un grado de colaboración
global de 0,75. Las universidades públicas son las que más
publican, destacando la Universidad Nacional y la Universidad de Antioquia.
También se constató un aumento de la colaboración internacional,
especialmente con los países de la región latinoamericana. España
es el principal socio académico de Colombia.
Hay un sesgo en favor de las publicaciones realizadas en revistas nacionales.
Las Ciencias de la Salud se confirman como el mayor núcleo de la
producción científica en Colombia.

Maz-Machado, Alexander and Jiménez-Fanjul, Noelia Noemí and Villarraga-Rico, Miguel Ernesto. (2016). La producción científica colombiana en SciELO: un análisis bibliométrico. Revista Interamericana de Bibliotecología, vol. 39, n. 2, pp. 111-119.

View