Christo Dichev, Darina Dicheva, Gennady Agre and Galia Angelova
The world is embracing an open education model. The success of this process implies an adequate awareness, an assumption that is inconsistent with recent reports and statistical facts. Despite the major advances in recent years, Open Educational Resources (OER) are still not in the mainstream of Computer Science course development. Motivated by the need to fill this gap, this paper analyzes the evolution of the OER development and the emerging trends relevant to Computer Science education. The aim is to raise the awareness and promote a practical transition process towards an adequate model that aligns the interests of all stakeholders.
Open access to research data is one of the key themes of current science development concepts and relevant R & D strategies at least in Europe. A systemic change in the modus operandi of science and research should lead to so-called Open Science. The presented paper questions the extent to which the Open Science concept is reflected in the strategies of Czech universities. The paper first describes basic idea of Open Access to Research Data including principles of „FAIR data” as one of the key assumption of it. After a brief characterization of the Czech university sector, the results of the empirical analysis of the inclusion of the Open Access to Research Data concept in the current strategic plans of the Czech universities are presented. The conclusion of the paper is then an evaluation of the results, which reveal an underestimation of the Open Science concept in the current strategic plans of the Czech universities.
Peiling Wang, Sukjin You, Rath Manasa and Dietmar Wolfram
To understand how authors and reviewers are accepting and embracing Open Peer Review (OPR), one of the newest innovations in the Open Science movement.
This research collected and analyzed data from the Open Access journal PeerJ over its first three years (2013–2016). Web data were scraped, cleaned, and structured using several Web tools and programs. The structured data were imported into a relational database. Data analyses were conducted using analytical tools as well as programs developed by the researchers.
PeerJ, which supports optional OPR, has a broad international representation of authors and referees. Approximately 73.89% of articles provide full review histories. Of the articles with published review histories, 17.61% had identities of all reviewers and 52.57% had at least one signed reviewer. In total, 43.23% of all reviews were signed. The observed proportions of signed reviews have been relatively stable over the period since the Journal’s inception.
This research is constrained by the availability of the peer review history data. Some peer reviews were not available when the authors opted out of publishing their review histories. The anonymity of reviewers made it impossible to give an accurate count of reviewers who contributed to the review process.
These findings shed light on the current characteristics of OPR. Given the policy that authors are encouraged to make their articles’ review history public and referees are encouraged to sign their review reports, the three years of PeerJ review data demonstrate that there is still some reluctance by authors to make their reviews public and by reviewers to identify themselves.
This is the first study to closely examine PeerJ as an example of an OPR model journal. As Open Science moves further towards open research, OPR is a final and critical component. Research in this area must identify the best policies and paths towards a transparent and open peer review process for scientific communication.
Beth A. Plale, Eleanor Dickson, Inna Kouper, Samitha Harshani Liyanage, Yu Ma, Robert H. McDonald, John A. Walsh and Sachith Withana
Open science is prompting wide efforts to make data from research available for broader use. However, sharing data is complicated by important protections on the data (e.g., protections of privacy and intellectual property). The spectrum of options existing between data needing to be fully open access and data that simply cannot be shared at all is quite limited. This paper puts forth a generalized remote secure enclave as a socio-technical framework consisting of policies, human processes, and technologies that work hand in hand to enable controlled access and use of restricted data. Based on experience in implementing the enclave for computational, analytical access to a massive collection of in-copyright texts, we discuss the synergies and trade-offs that exist between software components and policy and process components in striking the right balance between safety for the data, ease of use, and efficiency.
The paper takes as a starting point a recent EU Commission report on scientific publishing in Europe (Dewatripont et al 2006). In Norway, where a new system of documentation of scientific publishing was introduced in 2005, several of the recommendations in this report have already been anticipated. The Norwegian documentation system which has already proven controversial in parts of the research community and lacks parallells in other Nordic countries like Denmark and Sweden, is expected to have considerable consequences on Norwegian publishing patterns, such as increased use of electronic journals and of open standards such as Open Access and Open Source (Vaagan 2005). As e-publishing grows as part of the process of globalization, there is increasing awareness in many countries of ethical concerns in science and in scientific publishing, including the need for public access to publicly-funded research results. In this perspective, the paper links open standards in scientific communication and publishing to the principle of universality of science and to information ethics priorities identified by Capurro (2004). Qualitative methodology is used with critical & typical case sampling (Patton 2002) of key policy documents as well as international articles on e-publishing 2000-2005, especially from DLib magazine. In conclusion, it is suggested that open standards such as Open Access and Open Source are likely to increase in scientific publishing in the future, both in Norway and in the EU.
Many investigators have carried out text mining of the biomedical literature for a variety of purposes, ranging from the assignment of indexing terms to the disambiguation of author names. A common approach is to define positive and negative training examples, extract features from article metadata, and use machine learning algorithms. At present, each research group tackles each problem from scratch, in isolation of other projects, which causes redundancy and a great waste of effort. Here, we propose and describe the design of a generic platform for biomedical text mining, which can serve as a shared resource for machine learning projects and as a public repository for their outputs. We initially focus on a specific goal, namely, classifying articles according to publication type and emphasize how feature sets can be made more powerful and robust through the use of multiple, heterogeneous similarity measures as input to machine learning models. We then discuss how the generic platform can be extended to include a wide variety of other machine learning-based goals and projects and can be used as a public platform for disseminating the results of natural language processing (NLP) tools to end-users as well.
Carmen de Pablos Heredero and Jose Manuel Bermejo Ruiz
Background: The sharing of practices that enable the flow and the distribution of tacit knowledge and other ways of proprietary knowledge are essential requisites for promoting an innovation system. Objectives: In this paper a diagnosis of the Spanish Science and Technology System is offered by using the normalized protocol for responsible partnering proposed by EIRMA. Methods/Approach: The triple helix model has been used to identify the agents that take part in the system. The grounded theory has also been applied to analyse interactions and interviews with seven key agents in the system. Results: The lack of common objectives among the main partners in the system is the most important weakness; the New Acts developed in the last three years is a strength that allows the different agents of the system to share objectives. The economic crisis is a threat for the performance of research within the university context and becomes at the same time an opportunity to establish closer relationships. Conclusions: Universities, firms and governments must synchronise their work to accomplish a common objective: produce high levels of innovation that aim to enhance the competitiveness of the system.