The University Library’s Scholarly Communication Program is looking for a Graduate Student Researcher, 18 hours/week in AY2015-16
The Scholarly Communications Graduate Student Researcher will work closely with the University Librarian and other library staff to conduct research and support a range of activities related to changing Scholarly Communications as supported by the Library. These include:
a) Helping organize the Library’s support for the new Academic Senate faculty Open Access policy, including: outreach to faculty (together with subject librarians and the Academic Senate leadership); coordinating creation of ‘marketing’ and training materials; tracking work to supply data, reports, etc., to project partners; and researching intellectual property questions;
b) Assisting with current Library research projects in Scholarly Communications, including Innovating Communication In Scholarship (ICIS) and Software Attribution for Geoscience Applications (SAGA);
c) Collaborating with the Library’s data management team and the Data Sciences Initiative on Open Data issues as they relate to the Open Access policy and other federal data sharing mandates;
d) working with the University Librarian on grant proposals for new funding opportunities in the area of Scholarly Communication and Open Access.
The Scholarly Communications GSR must work both independently and in collaboration with other members of the Library staff. Essential job functions include developing and conducting outreach and communication to faculty affected by the Open Access policy and researchers collaborating with the Library on other Scholarly Communications projects. The candidate must have experience managing projects and communicating with diverse audiences on complex topics, both in writing and in person. Excellent and tactful communication skills are mandatory. Interest in and some knowledge of the changing nature of academic publishing and scholarly communication is also expected. Basic computer competency, including spreadsheet development and maintenance, powerpoint presentation creation, online project tracking, and website maintenance, also necessary.
Start date: September 1, 2015 (negotiable)
Apply via Aggie Job Link at https://icc.ucdavis.edu/students/ajl.htm (PostedAugust 6, 2015, #798605)
This re-post from the Committee on the Anthropology of Science, Technology, and Computing (CASTAC) blog describes a workshop on archival practices that took place on May 21, 2015, at the University of California, Davis. The essay is co-authored by Alessandro Delfanti, Allison Fish, and Alexandra Lippman. Delfanti, Fish, and Lippman are postdocs with UC Davis’ Innovating Communication in Scholarship (ICIS) project.
On May 21, 2015, the Innovating Communication in Scholarship project at the University of California, Davis held a one-day workshop on Art of the Archive. Papers given by the fifteen invited speakers explored the changing nature of the archive given the emergence of new information and communication technologies. These presentations largely focused on how these new digital archives are not merely technical creations, but are also constructed through social processes, have social impacts, and are not seamlessly implemented in everyday life. Instead, these digital storehouses are vibrant spaces for curating, organizing and publishing cultural heritage and expressive culture in new ways. In taking up this discussion three primary topics emerged and are described below: questions about access, circulation, and research design.
Peer review – can’t live with it, can’t live without it. That’s the basic conclusion to be drawn from the myriad of discussions currently surrounding the topic, with a new peer review crisis apparently popping up every other day. Peer review’s ubiquitous place in scientific funding and publishing might lead the casual observer to assume it had been commonplace for centuries. In fact, while the Royal Society established a form of peer review as early as 1753, the practice did not become widespread until after World War II and, as of yet, nobody really knows why. But peer review’s surprising youth is a treat to the historian of twentieth century science. To try and picture a publishing landscape without omnipotent peer review, one does not have to go back too far.
The archive is in flux. The proliferation of born-digital objects and digitized materials opens up new modes of curation, circulation, and scholarly communication. This presents opportunities and challenges for scholars, artists, and publics for assembling, making accessible, decolonizing, and appropriating.
Digital platforms for curating and publishing cultural heritage and expressive culture—art, music, video, performance, sound—promise new collaborative forms, creating new relationships between producers and publics. Furthermore, archives and databases raise questions of ownership and control over knowledge–including decolonizing ethnographic collections and developing traditional knowledge licensing.
Our workshop will examine the digital archive and database in terms of the aesthetics and politics of curation. We will bring together perspectives from the humanities, arts, and social sciences to address the challenges and possibilities for an emerging art of the archive.
I’m currently at the Advancing Research Communication & Scholarship conference. Hackathon, presentations on open data, open access, and alt metrics. You can follow what’s happening via Twitter at #arcs2015. I’ll add some notes from the conference soon and am excited to present on “Beyond Open: Global Perspective on Research Communication and Knowledge Production.” The panel’s chaired by Brian Rosenblum (University of Kansas Libraries) and I am joining Jane Anderson (NYU) Mónica I. Feliú-Mójer, (Ciencia Puerto Rico and iBiology) and John Willinsky (Stanford). Below is the description:
Current scholarly communication initiatives are focused on expanding access, use, and reuse. This session will explore the relationship between these issues and the needs and goals of the developing world and marginalized communities. We will consider how new models and expectations affect and address knowledge distribution structures in the developing world, and the control local research communities have over their own legacies and outputs.
ICIS associates have issued an open call for papers for a panel at the next 4S Annual Meeting (Society for Social Studies of Science), to be held in Denver, CO, November 11-14, 2015
Transforming Scholarship: Open Access, Data Sharing, and Emerging Forms of Publication
Powerful changes are impacting traditional systems of research publication, academic credit, research quality assessment, and the meaning of “publication.” At the same time, traditional publishing models continue to shape how scholars produce and exchange knowledge. Understanding the scholarly communication system and its balance between transformation and continuity is a key goal for science and technology studies, as publishing practices affect scholars and scientists across all fields and levels. These changes also frame the policies of administrators evaluating and funding them, and of libraries confronting new technologies. The increasing scale and interdisciplinary nature of collaborations, as well as the growing reliance on cyberinfrastructures for producing and disseminating research, are central transformations that require a critical, theoretically oriented approach that encompasses the significance of these trends beyond communication.
The panel turns to different perspectives, such as STS, law, history, ethnography or media studies, to shed light on how scholarly communication systems evolve and interact with broader socio-political transformations. Indeed, we believe that the transformation we point out is posing epistemological and sociological questions about the place of scientific knowledge in contemporary societies. We are particularly interested in papers including, but not limited to, the following sub-topics: the interplay between old and new models of scholarly communication; the impact of Open Access models; the transformation of data from research results to research output itself; new metrics of impact; new forms of misconduct including metrics-based misconduct; the impact of English as the lingua franca of global science; doubts about peer review as quality guarantor; the impact of intellectual property on the content and timing of publications; disciplinary and geographical differences; scholarly norms and incentives that shape scientific institutions and their communication practices. Through this panel we aim to discuss and strengthen a critical research agenda that could inform university policy change for scholarly communication.
Provoke! published its first online collection of digital sound studies, making scholarly communication just a little bit noisier. As the editors write:
“Provoke! creates a home for creative-critical projects by makers, documentary artists, and sound scholars whose work presses at the boundaries of scholarship. Envisioned as ‘provocations’ to existing forms of publication, these projects relate to one another through their deep engagement with sonic materials and innovative formal presentation….
The editors, known collectively as Soundbox, wish to see audio material featured more abundantly and creatively in scholarly settings. At the heart of our collaboration is a bold aspiration to hear sound used as a primary means of knowledge production.”
Their website privileges listening. Hovering one’s cursor over different projects triggers related sound. The range of scholarship and approaches are impressive. Perhaps the challenges of working between media and fields of expertise fostered frequent collaboration. Dancers, composers, ethnomusicologists, curators, sound artists and others worked together to produce different projects. The pieces include “a city symphony of sounds” collected before the 2010 earthquake in Port-Au Prince; recordings from a music studio set up in the Richmond, VA jail; and an audio effects processor, Paperphone, for giving scholars tools to critically ‘sonify’ their presentations.
For Paperphone’s debut at the UCLA, I had agreed to become one of experimenters. Using the MaxLive software plug-in, I performed “Mixtape Rio,” weaving together soundscapes I recorded with my vocal narration. Everyone’s varying uses of the software revealed and opened up new possibilities for scholarly communication and artistic creation.
But, what of credit and evaluation for this kind of scholarship? How does the work register as scholarship and what challenges does it present for the standardized peer-review model of publishing? Support and guidance from well-respected individuals and institutions helps; Duke’s Franklin Humanities Institute and PhD Lab in Digital Knowledge sponsored the initiative. Also, the online iteration of Provoke! Digital Sound Studies will be followed by an edited volume to be published by Duke in Fall 2015. Perhaps, these multiple modes of publishing can work together to strengthen and push the possibilities for scholarship– sonic or otherwise.
The essence of open science is to make the whole research process transparent and accessible. The idea of open science can be traced back to the days of the emergence of the scientific journal system when scientists started to publish their insights in the form of scientific papers instead of anagrams. In its current form, open science has gained a new dimension thanks to the internet which provides scientists with the technological means to share their insights on a potentially global scale.