When the dam breaks...

Publication of research is one of the most important facets of academic life. I can't stress enough how important it is for good research to be as widely and swiftly disseminated as possible. Without it, our practice is less likely to be informed, and more prone to repeated errors. As a researcher myself, I take this challenge very seriously. Along with other educational researchers, I attempt to identify key issues for investigation and then spend considerable time and energy examining as much of the terrain that surrounds my research question as I can. Once I have analysed the data, I am usually able to arrive at some conclusions and write some form of report, which is likely to include a set of recommendations that I hope will benefit my community of practice. Such findings should be published widely to inform the entire community. This is the way it should be. And yet often, sadly, it just doesn't happen.

Recently, several writers have bemoaned the fact that a) there is often a significant time delay between the submission of papers to academic journals, and the papers actually reaching the reader, and b) many of the top, elite journals we are expected to publish in are in fact read by a very small percentage of the community the research is intended to reach. Open access journals (and there are several alternative funding models that support these) are the best way to address these problems. They open content up to be read by a much larger audience, and in my personal experience, they turn around reviews and publish sugnifcantly quicker than the standard traditional closed journals. Much of this argument is elaborated on in Sarah Thornycroft's excellent post Redefining Academic Publishing in Digital Spaces, in which she calls for a reform of the current archaic system.  


Way back in 2008, in one of the most erudite arguments ever made for open access publishing, danah boyd called for a boycott on writing for closed academic journals. Several notable scholars joined this boycott - refusing to publish again in pay-to-subscribe academic journals - but at present this movement is a trickle rather than a deluge. The truth is, not many academics can afford to turn their backs on closed journal publishing. Those that do take a public stand against closed publishing do so for a very good reason. As it stands, the current publication system has academics over a barrel. Many cannot secure tenure or gain promotion without publishing their work in the top notch journals, almost all of which are currently locked down. Moreover, many governments apportion research money to institutions who have the best track record of publications in the said journals. This strangle hold rewards the publishers with huge profits at the expense of the hard working academics, who are forced to provide their labour for free. I believe the prices many publishing houses charge for access to their journals is obscene and unjustifiable, and the costs prevent many students and scholars from reading important research they would otherwise benefit from.

Last month I took a similar personal stance to danah boyd, vowing that I would never again publish my research in closed journals. Because I feel very strongly about this, I have decided I must take this even further. From now on, I am no longer reviewing for closed journals. I have also resigned from my post as co-editor of the journal Interactive Learning Environments, after 3 years at the helm. I have nothing against the good people who run the journal, many of whom are friends of mine. I resigned because the role of editor of a closed journal is incompatible with my personal stance on open access. It would have been hypocritical of me if I had stayed. I'm now putting my full support behind the open access movement, because it is the right thing to do. Education should be accessible for all, and we can no longer sit back and do nothing as the edubusinesses charge people more than they can afford for learning they need.

I don't have the hubris to believe that this will change the world. It won't. Nor am I deluded enough to consider that what I am doing will challenge the might of the dozen or so big publishers who hold the monopoly. It will not. It may not make any difference whatsoever. But if by taking this stance I can raise awareness of the problems locked down journals cause, and signal that there are alternatives, then it will be worth it. If others feel the same, we can begin to make a difference. The cracks are already showing and the dam wall is beginning to leak. Some publishers are already seriously considering how they will survive when the open access movement gains enough traction to pose a significant threat. I'm hoping that one day soon the trickle will become a deluge, and that when the dam breaks, the publishers will have to sit up and take notice.      


Cost of Knowledge Petition to boycott Elsevier Journals


Image source


When the dam breaks... by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Pigs are flying

In several previous posts on this blog I have extolled the virtues of open content, and have called for traditional journals to go open access. Recently we heard the excellent news that the flagship journal of the Association for Learning Technologies (ALT-J) which recently changed its name to Research in Learning Technology, will go fully open access in January 2012. It took a change of publisher to achieve it. In future, I predict that the 3 issue a year publication will reach a significantly larger and more diverse audience than it has ever previously achieved. That's what happens when content is made free and open for all. For me and an increasing number of other academics in all disciplines, open access is the way forward, and I am becoming disenchanted with the idea of writing for closed and pay-wall ridden publications.

I therefore sat up and took notice this week when the American publishing house Nova Science sent me an e-mail asking me if I wanted my recently published chapters to be open and freely available to readers. What an opportunity! I thought. It's a no brainer! So I checked the fine print. Here's the deal: Any Nova published author can participate in the open access scheme - it's easy. All we have to do is complete an order form and send it off to Nova with our credit card information. For only $400 I can enjoy option 1. "This feature allows your chapter to be visible free of charge to anyone in the world with internet access. In addition, the Publisher will send e-announcements to up to 100 recipients upon request and provision of the email list." For a paltrey $700 my readers and I can enjoy option 2: "The Express version of Open Access provides Open Access immediately after page proofs resulting in full Open Access 8-12 weeks before publication." Not satisfied with such an unbelievably generous offer, Nova are really pushing the boat out, creatively offering additional options for only a small extra payment, including colour print versions ($300 for the first 10 pages and just a little more for additional pages), video enhancement (a snip at $400 for 10 minutes) and even 'personalised offprints' at $14.50 per item.

It thrills me to think that Nova Science (and hopefully other publishers too) have finally decided to put their authors and readers first, while worrying less about their shareholders, as they fully adopt the ethos of open content and open access for all the content they publish. After all, the content is only there as a result of the hard work of academics and authors, so it's only fair. It warms my heart to think that they are now putting aside their profiteering instincts to ensure that knowledge is democratised and freely available for all. I'm going to sign up to this most excellent arrangement ... just as soon as the pigs that are flying around outside my window stop for a swill break.

Image source by Stephanie Pouyllau

Pigs are flying by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Open educational practices

I made a video recording for Core Ed while I was at the Ulearn conference in New Zealand last month. They sat me in front of two cameras, and asked me to talk off the cuff, no script, about something that I was passionate about. It didn't take me long to think up what I wanted to say and I'm pleased that I did it in one take (Core Ed were pleased too, because minimal studio time and editing were needed!). I spoke about Open Educational Practices, (including Open Educational Resources and Open Scholarship) a subject which I am learning more about all the time as the movement grows and gains traction. You see, the idea behind open practices is that anyone can gain access for free, at any time and in any place - courses, software, ideas, knowledge, people... OEP requires everything to be open - for access, scrutiny and repurposing. So whether it's licensing agreements such as Copyleft or Creative Commons, or open access journals, or even massively online open courses, the open educational practices are gaining ground and influence in the academic world.



It's not going to be easy to change a model where knowledge has become a commodity though. Too many powerful people and organisations stand to lose a lot if everything becomes 'free' and open. But things are changing slowly. The publishing houses who once had a strangle hold on academic journals are beginning to lose their grip. Some are having to change their business models. Google Reader and Google Books for example, are giving us all more than a glimpse of the pages of just about every book that has ever been published. And open access journals are opening up knowledge for all without payment. So when a student comes up against a paywall - what will they do? They will go elsewhere of course - to the free versions that are out there on the web. I know many colleagues who now refuse to publish their research in traditional journals - only open access will do for them. Traditional journals can be slow to publish, there is often a backlog of journals articles and too few issues to put them in, and citation frequency from open access journals can be more rewarding. These refusnik colleagues are growing in numbers too, and so are the open access journals to accommodate them. Is this the start of the end for traditional academic publishing? Watch the video and then tell me whether you think I'm on the right track about OEP, or whether I'm barking up the wrong tree. After all, that's exactly what open scholarship is all about....


Open educational practices by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.