Breaking down fences

Seth Godin's blog is always good value, but his post today is quite profound. He writes about his avid reading of the entire collection of one library's science fiction stock during his high school days and concludes that "Expertise is a posture as much as it is a volume of knowledge". Expertise does not come easily. It takes hard work and a lot of tenacity to become expert at anything, whether it is sport, music, art or and other realm of knowledge or skill. Godin urges us to 'go deep' and to read everything we can on our chosen subject, and on the surface, this seems a no brainer. We read for a degree. Reading is what it takes to master a topic.

I tell all potential PhD candidates I meet the same thing. If they wish to complete a research degree, they must become an expert in a very narrow domain, and through their research they should contribute something unique to that field. In order to do that, they need to explore their field thoroughly. It means reading a lot. It means reflecting on your own practice, and thinking critically about your field. It means finding where the edge of that field is, and sometimes - if you're bold enough - even breaking a few fences down to venture beyond into uncharted territory.

It doesn't just apply to PhD candidates. Anyone who is a professional should try to be the best they can be. What about your own professional practice? How do you find the edge of your field of knowledge and expertise? What do you read and where do you find the edgy stuff?

Although journal articles and books are a great source of knowledge, many articles go quickly out of date, and were probably in most cases already out of date by the time they were published, due to ponderous editorial and review processes, and a general back-log of articles that wait in a queue to be published. It's the same for just about every closed pay-per-view journal. Open access journals are better - they are generally more up to date, and are of course free to read. Many can be found online and usually, as soon as an article is accepted, it is quickly published. Better still, if you wish to approach the very very edge of your field, search for blogs written by the leaders in the field. You can gain access to the latest thoughts and ideas posted onto the web direct from the mind of the author. You can't get much more immediate than that. You may receive more understanding and wisdom from a just-written-blog by a reputable researcher or leading thinker than you will ploughing through several dozen paper based journal articles. You need to find your own pathway. Any way you do it, go deep, search for the edge of your field and then break down a few fences.

Image by Lionel Grove


Breaking down fences by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

What if they threw a party and none of us came?

Academic publishing is changing. Has to, because the old model of academic publishing is sadly outmoded. As Brian Lamb said recently at the Open Educational Resources Symposium, it seems perverse to hoard knowledge in any form, particularly in the light of the current economic crisis. Why should knowledge be a commodity? Why should publishers charge so much money for access to important ideas, new findings and vital knowledge that can make the difference in people's lives? Before anyone points out the fact that paper based journals cost money to produce, edit, review, print and distribute, I want to make the following points: Most academic journals are run by academics on a voluntary basis - those who review for my journal don't get paid a penny. They receive a free subscription to the journal, (and of course the kudos of working on a journal run by me - priceless!) but that's their lot. The real costs come in the production of the paper version. What if the publishers all went over to solely online publishing? How much could costs be reduced then?

Some publishers, particularly those running open access journals, are reversing the business model - and offering all contents free to any reader online, whilst the authors pay to have their work published. This model has come in for some criticism of course, because there is then great pressure on the editors to publish as many submissions as they can, so the journal can optimise its revenue stream. This criticism has been countered by said journals imposing more rigorous peer reviews. One of my recent open access journal articles (which I did not pay to have published btw) was peer reviewed by no less that 5 experts for the excellent journal Future Internet. Other business models involve advertising and/or sponsorship. Some, such as the highly successful International Review of Research in Open and Distance Education (IRRODL) and the Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education (TOJDE) are supported by parent institutions or organisations (as is the case with EURODL - the European Online Open Distance Learning Journal run by EDEN).

Whichever way we go to ensure academic publishing is economically sustainable, there is a growing movement to ditch traditional publishing because it is prohibitive, discriminatory and increasingly outmoded. Many of my academic colleagues are now refusing to publish in standard publications, preferring to throw their lot in with the open access journals.

Some are turning their back completely on the hard nosed, monetizing operation that is global publishing, and are instead using free tools such as blogs and other social media services to publish their work. They argue that they can reach a larger audience more quickly, and in a more interest driven and user-centric manner. There is no waiting for peer review, no publishing contracts to sign, and no production fees to pay. They argue that peer review comes later - and in a continual stream. Rather than as a barrier to overcome, peer review through comments and feedback directly to the author, becomes more open, honest and accessible for all to read and learn from. I can see their point, as increasingly, I am publishing my ideas and research up here on this blog, so everyone can see it and access it freely, rather than waiting for it to be published in a reputable peer reviewed journal a year or so down the road, when it is out of date. I agree with Brian Lamb that we should not hoard knowledge, nor should we restrict it, by charging others for the priviledge of reading it. Further, academics should not be constrained by the old economic models of publishing that still prevail. We should make our knowledge freely available to anyone who wants to read it using free and open services. That is the 'prime directive' of the open access, open educational resources movement. The powers that be don't like it, and neither I assume, will the publishers if everyone starts doing it. What if they threw a party and none of us came?

Image source

What if they threw a party by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at steve-wheeler.blogspot.com.

Access all areas

Back in 2006 I moaned about how difficult it is to get quick turn around for review and publication of articles in paper based peer reviewed journals. In one of my blog posts - publish and be jammed - I named and shamed one journal for its abysmal feet dragging which saw one of my papers delayed by almost 3 years before it was published. Now I'm a journal editor myself, I try my level best with my review and editorial team, to turn round reviews quickly so that academics and researchers can see their work in print before its sell by date. It's hard, but not impossible to turn a paper round in 3-6 months from submission to publication.

I also wrote about how some of my papers were published rapidly in open access online journals, and how the experience was infinitely more satisfying. Two of my papers (co-written with Maged Boulos) are ranked as highly accessed and as a result have been cited numerous times. I have just had another article (on mashups) accepted for publication in a new open access journal called Future Internet (it looks interesting and well worth bookmarking). I submitted it last week, it was reviewed within a few days by two experts, I received back the feedback on Friday, revised and resubmitted it the same day, and on Saturday I was advised that it will be published in a few days. Turn around time? Approximately one week from submission to publication.

Articles published through open access journals often enjoy a higher profile than say, articles published in conventional paper based journals, because they are made freely accessible on the internet. Their high visibility is mainly due to full texts being visible on, and searchable from, all major search engines. Open access articles are also easily and quickly added into many literature databases and generally become more frequently cited over a shorter period of time.

The old model for conventional journals is that readers pay for subscription to read the articles they are interested in. Generally the open access model differs - instead it is the authors pay for their articles to be reviewed and published. The same rigorous review process is in place to ensure quality, but readers don't have to pay to read the article, and the readership is exponentially higher. (I have not paid a single penny though, because these articles have usually been invited). There is a third model, where organisations, institutions and third parties pay for the article to be published, and the author and reader participate for free.

My honest opinion is that the days of the conventional journal are numbered. The business model no longer makes a lot of sense in the context of social media, and other more relevant models will soon become dominant. What do you think about the new business models? What are your experiences with open access journals?

Directory of Open Access Journals (via @josswinn)

Image source