Data We Trust—But What Data?

Author: Jennifer Golbeck

Abstract: The Obama administration’s time saw massive amounts of government data shifting online. It can be hard to remember the landscape back in 2008, when very few people had smartphones, and Facebook had fewer than 150 million users—less than 10 percent of its current size.1 We were just starting to grapple with all the data that was becoming available. The administration embraced the trend. They launched data.gov, a project designed to serve as a repository of important data sets from the federal government. Agencies followed suit, uploading their data or creating their own repositories. Databases, websites, and all sorts of content became accessible online. It appeared we were entering a golden age of open data, where citizens would have access to the raw data that their tax dollars funded, that fueled policy decisions, and that affected their lives. The movement of government data to the web improved transparency and fueled research to complement official sources.

Citation: Golbeck, Jennifer. “Data We Trust—But What Data?” Reference & User Services Quarterly 57, no. 3 (March 16, 2018): 196–99. https://doi.org/10.5860/rusq.57.3.6605.

View

Source: Data We Trust—But What Data?

Funding community controlled open infrastructure for scholarly communication: The 2.5% commitment initiative

Authors: David W. Lewis, Lori Goetsch, Diane Graves, Mike Roy

Abstract: In August 2017, a short paper, “The 2.5% Commitment,” was distributed on several email lists.1 The paper proposed that every academic library should commit to invest 2.5% of its total budget to support the common infrastructure needed to create the open scholarly commons. Somewhat to our surprise, the paper and the ideas it contained have generated widespread discussions and interest.

Citation: Lewis, D., Goetsch, L., Graves, D., & Roy, M. (2018). Funding community controlled open infrastructure for scholarly communication: The 2.5% commitment initiative. College & Research Libraries News, 79(3), 133. https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.79.3.133

View

Teaching with Data: Visualization and Information as a Critical Process

Authors: Andrew Battista, Jill Conte

Abstract: This chapter is published in the Critical Library Pedagogy Handbook, Volume Two: Lesson Plans. It focuses on teaching with data, posing visualization and information as a critical process.

Citation: Battista, Andrew,and Jill A Conte 2017. “Teaching with Data: Visualization and Information as a Critical Process”. LIS Scholarship Archive. July 20. doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/AMS2F

View

Source: LIS Scholarship Archive

Predatory publishing from a global south perspective

Author: Reggie Raju

Abstract: The unilateral determination of a definition of predatory publishing, by Jeffrey Beall, has sent the research publishing world into a tizz. Even though Beall has withdrawn his list, unfortunately in the current technological age this list is not cleared from the web archive nor is there a prevention of the rehashing of the list by someone else. Nor, has there been subsequently an adequate reconceptualization of predatory publishing to ensure that it is not discriminatory to open access or the global south.

Writing as a Fellow of the LPC from the global south, I feel a sense of obligation to follow the call that African academics and intellectuals (not that I am either), on the continent and in the diaspora, play a role in countering the prejudice and misinformation about Africa. Be that as it may, I think there are significant lessons for both the global south and north by interrogating the concept of predatory publishing. The recently published article by Olivarez and others (2018) highlight the need for interventions to remedy the insensitive generalization of predatory publishing.

Citation: Raju, Reggie (2018). ““Predatory publishing from a global south perspective.” Fellows Journal, LPC Blog. https://librarypublishing.org/predatory-publishing-global-south-perspective/

View

Source: librarypublishing.org

Format Aside: Applying Beall’s Criteria to Assess the Predatory Nature of both OA and Non-OA Library and Information Science Journals

Authors: Joseph D. Olivarez, Stephen Bales, Laura Sare, Wyoma vanDuinkerken

 

Abstract: Jeffrey Beall’s blog listing of potential predatory journals and publishers, as well as his Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access (OA) Publishers are often looked at as tools to help researchers avoid publishing in predatory journals. While these Criteria has brought a greater awareness of OA predatory journals, these tools alone should not be used as the only source in determining the quality of a scholarly journal. Employing a three-person independent judgment making panel, this study demonstrates the subjective nature of Beall’s Criteria by applying his Criteria to both OA and non-OA Library and Information Science journals (LIS), to demonstrate that traditional peer-reviewed journals could be considered predatory. Many of these LIS journals are considered as top-tier publications in the field and used when evaluating researcher’s publication history for promotion and tenure.

 
Citation: Olivarez, Joseph D., Stephen Bales, Laura Sare, and Wyoma vanDuinkerken. “Format Aside: Applying Beall’s Criteria to Assess the Predatory Nature of both OA and Non-OA Library and Information Science Journals.” College and Research Libraries 79, no. 1 (2018): 52-67. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.52.
 

View

 

Source: Format Aside: Applying Beall’s Criteria to Assess the Predatory Nature of both OA and Non-OA Library and Information Science Journals

From “life support” to collaborative partnership: A local/global view of academic libraries in South Africa

Abstract: In response to the need to eliminate poverty and reduce inequality, the South African government developed the National Development Plan. A significant reconstruction tool is a sound educational system in which universities become centers of excellence at the cutting edge of technology. The ambitious goals of the Plan presupposes an efficient academic libraries system. Unfortunately, academic libraries in South Africa, and it could be assumed that this may be the case in many parts of the global south, are at a crossroads. On the one hand, there are academic libraries that are hanging by the finest of threads (or as Jeffrey Gayton2 says, “on life support”). On the other hand, there are those libraries that are reinventing themselves and are moving away from providing a support service to playing a collaborative partnership role. This partnership role paradigm shift has facilitated the redefinition of roles and responsibilities of the academic library, and it is hoped that this would contribute to the ambitions of the National Development Plan.
 
Citation: Raju, Reggie. “From ‘Life Support’ to Collaborative Partnership: A Local/Global View of Academic Libraries in South Africa.” College and Research Libraries News 79, no. 1 (2018): 30-33. https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.79.1.30.
 

View

 

Source: From “life support” to collaborative partnership: A local/global view of academic libraries in South Africa

Understanding how Twitter is used to spread scientific messages

Authors: Letierce, Julie and Passant, Alexandre and Breslin, John and Decker, Stefan

Abstract: According to a survey we recently conducted, Twitter was ranked in the top three services used by Semantic Web researchers to spread information. In order to understand how Twitter is practically used for spreading scientific messages, we captured tweets containing the official hashtags of three conferences and studied (1) the type of content that researchers are more likely to tweet, (2) how they do it, and finally (3) if their tweets can reach other communities — in addition to their own. In addition, we also conducted some interviews to complete our understanding of researchers’ motivation to use Twitter during conferences.

Citation: Letierce, Julie and Passant, Alexandre and Breslin, John and Decker, Stefan (2010) Understanding how Twitter is used to spread scientific messages. In: Proceedings of the WebSci10: Extending the Frontiers of Society On-Line, April 26-27th, 2010, Raleigh, NC: US. http://journal.webscience.org/314/

View

Red Light, Green Light: Aligning the Library to Support Licensing

Author: Roger C. Schonfeld

Abstract: In this piece, I propose that the academic library engage more robustly to take back control of its collections budget. I do not evaluate, and certainly do not critique, existing negotiating models. Fundamentally, I propose that libraries find ways to act with single purpose to strengthen their negotiating position. This proposal has not been “road-tested” at any institution of which I am aware. As written, it is organized around what a library might do, but readers may also find opportunities for groups of libraries to engage with some of these approaches through consortia and systems. It is my hope to contribute to ongoing conversations about how best to strengthen the library’s negotiating hand.

Citation: Schonfeld, Roger C. “Red Light, Green Light: Aligning the Library to Support Licensing.” Ithaka S+R. Aug. 17, 2017. https://doi.org/10.18665/sr.304419.

View

Changing the Culture in Scholarly Communications

Author: Alice Meadows

Abstract: I was delighted to see that the theme for this year’s FORCE2017 meeting is Changing the Culture – a great opportunity to engage with colleagues from across the scholarly communications community on key questions such as: What needs to change in our culture and why? Who are our stakeholders and how are we going to involve them? What are the most effective ways to change the culture; which approach works best – carrot, stick, or both? How will we measure success?

Citation: Meadows, Alice. “Changing the Culture in Scholarly Communications.” The Scholarly Kitchen. Blog post. August 7, 2017.

View