Tools for Transparency and Open Access June 26, 2020 | 15:00–16:30 CEST SESSION Session Ground Rules ● This session is recorded. We’ll share the recording and slides afterwards. ● Questions for the speakers ? Type them in the Attendee Chat on the left side of the screen. The chair will address these at the end of the session. ● Technical issues. Check your settings as well as your internet connection. No luck? Try to rejoin by closing your tab and reusing the link provided. Thank you for your attention and enjoy the session! Tools for Transparency and Open Access SESSION The session will be chaired by Simone Kortekaas, Wageningen University and Research – Library, The Netherlands ● Transparency, provenance and collections as data: the National Library of Scotland’s Data Foundry Sarah Ames, National Library of Scotland, United Kingdom ● Library Toolkit for Open Access: Impacts and implications Maurits van der Graaf, Pleiade Management & Consultancy, The Netherlands ● SPEED TALK – An OER for Early Career Researchers to improve Skills on Sharing and Publishing Nicole Krüger; Dr. Tamara Pianos, ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, Germany Transparency, provenance and collections as data: the National Library of Scotland’s Data Foundry Dr Sarah Ames Digital Scholarship Librarian National Library of Scotland @semames1 | #NLSdata This talk Digital Scholarship at the National Library of Scotland Practical work involved in turning collections into data How we are promoting and embedding transparency in our practice The Digital Scholarship Service The use of computational methods with National Library of Scotland collections to enable new forms of research Digital scholarship NLS Digital Scholarship Computational methods Research activity Collections Digital Scholarship Service ENCOURAGE, ENABLE & SUPPORT USE OF COMPUTATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS WITH THE COLLECTIONS ENSURE THAT THE COLLECTIONS ARE USED TO THEIR FULL POTENTIAL ESTABLISH A LIBRARY CULTURE WHICH UNDERSTANDS DIGITAL SCHOLARSHIP PRACTISE AND PROMOTE TRANSPARENCY IN OUR DATA CREATION PROCESSES ANTICIPATE THE FUTURE OF RESEARCH Digital Scholarship Service ENCOURAGE, ENABLE & SUPPORT USE OF COMPUTATIONAL RESEARCH METHODS WITH THE COLLECTIONS ENSURE THAT THE COLLECTIONS ARE USED TO THEIR FULL POTENTIAL ESTABLISH A LIBRARY CULTURE WHICH UNDERSTANDS DIGITAL SCHOLARSHIP PRACTISE AND PROMOTE TRANSPARENCY IN OUR DATA CREATION PROCESSES ANTICIPATE THE FUTURE OF RESEARCH Service levels Level 1: self-service (data, tools) Level 2: self-service plus consultation time Level 3: funded service – partnership/collaboration Why ‘service’? ‘Digital humanities in the library isn’t a service’ (Muñoz 2012) http://trevormunoz.com/notebook/2012/08/19/doing-dh-in-the-library.html • However: • Pragmatics: ‘Service’ vs ‘Project’, ‘Programme’ • Collaboration often builds on some level of underlying service provision • Some users want DIY http://trevormunoz.com/notebook/2012/08/19/doing-dh-in-the-library.html 1. Making data available TEXT IMAGE METADATA AUDIOVISUAL MAPS WEB ARCHIVE CORPORATE 2. External engagement Collaboration Projects PhDs, residencies, fellowships Beyond research community 3. Internal engagement Awareness Training Champions Culture Collections as data Pro Intermediate Beginner All the tech skills! Will find a way to get the data no matter how presented But – has expectations of existing standards (where they exist) & consistency Limited tech skills Understands value of different formats and approaches for research questions: theoretical rather than practical understanding Wants to get hold of the data easily to check what’s there Will employ an RA to do the work No tech skills Wants to use online tools to explore datasets Just wants the text Identifying user needs Plus broader audience includes other libraries (standards, presentation of data etc) Pro Intermediate Beginner All the tech skills! Will find a way to get the data no matter how presented But – has expectations of existing standards (where they exist) & consistency Limited tech skills Understands value of different formats and approaches for research questions: theoretical rather than practical understanding Wants to get hold of the data easily to check what’s there Likely to employ an RA to do the work No tech skills Wants to use online tools to explore datasets Just wants the text Plus broader audience includes other libraries (standards, presentation of data etc) Identifying user needs Changing processes: digitisation to data Selection Rights and conservation assessments Digitisation Generate derivative images (thumbnails, crops, etc) Files into repository – ALTO XML, txt, JPEGs, PDFs, thumbnails, copyright info [retro-create ALTO] Compile METS Extract ALTO XML, txt, JPEGs, PDFs, thumbnails and METS Compile dataset: structure/naming conventions Zip and move to cloud/local storage Create DOI Publish online Making decisions • Standards: • METS/ALTO and Plain text • MARC/Dublin Core • Tiered downloads • Image sizes/quality to include • Storage (local/cloud) • Selecting the first five datasets • What metadata to include and what is available • How to be transparent: gathering and presenting dataset context A whole-Library effort Developers Curators Digitisation Metadata Rights Access External Relations Embedding transparency in our practice The value of transparency • Open practices: conveying processes, transformations, decision making • ‘Reproducible research’ • Acknowledging and reducing bias • Providing counter-narratives Our principles 1. Communicating transparency Shining light on invisible labour 2. Value of clarity in online presentation of data Open Data Plan • Level of open data (3*) • Formats • Where we publish data • Frequency of publication • Open Data Register https://data.nls.uk/about/ https://data.nls.uk/about/ 3. Data provenance Standards • https://data.nls.uk/about/standards/ • METS implementation • Technical provenance information…but what about reasoning and decision making process? https://data.nls.uk/about/standards/ Library collections Digitised material Data Problematic, historic collection practices Selection processes; copyright; conservation; funding Resource; OCR; copyright Collections in context? Contextualising our data collections • What do we digitise? • Where? • Why? • Who is involved in the selection process? • What funds it? What are the responsibilities of libraries as we increasingly become producers of our own collections? Thank you! sarah.ames@nls.uk @semames1 | #NLSdata LIBRARY TOOLKIT FOR OPEN ACCESS: IMPACTS & IMPLICATIONS % OA articles per publication year Data from the European Open Science Monitor (2018) 41 36 15 18 29 15 7 6 8 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 OA total Gold OA Green OA Hybrid OA Bronze OA % OA articles per publication year Data from the European Open Science Monitor (2018) 41 36 15 18 29 15 7 6 8 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 OA total Gold OA Green OA Hybrid OA Bronze OA % OA articles per publication year Data from the European Open Science Monitor (2018) 41 36 15 18 29 15 7 6 8 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 OA total Gold OA Green OA Hybrid OA Bronze OA WHAT DOES THIS SHOW US?  Green OA important contribution to OA albeit with a delay  % Gold and Hybrid OA articles increasing to about 24% of the articles in 2018  Gold and Hybrid OA articles are for the larger part APC-paid  % Closed Access articles:  64% of the 2018 articles  59% of the 2016 articles (from the viewpoint of 2018) LIBRARY TOOLKIT FOR OA FOCUS ON GREEN OA TRANSFORMATIVE TOOLS IN THE LIBRARY TOOLBOX Closed access articles in subscription-only journals Green OA: institutional repository Closed acces articles in hybrid journals APC OA articles in OA or hybrid journals APC-funds Transformative agreements APC-free journals Support by libraries 5367 REPOSITORIES [ O P E N D O A R ; 6 - 6 - 2 0 2 0 ] GROWTH 2005 - NOW IMPACT OF GREEN OA Tools:  5367 repositories, mostly institutional Impact:  Publishers’ response: 82% of publishers allow self- archiving [Sherpa-Romeo]  29% of 2016 journal articles available via Green OA [Open Science Monitor] LIBRARY TOOLKIT FOR OA FOCUS ON APC-GOLD OA TRANSFORMATIVE TOOLS IN THE LIBRARY TOOLBOX Closed access articles in subscription-only journals Green OA: institutional repositrory Closed acces articles in hybrid journals APC OA articles in OA or hybrid journals APC-funds Transformative agreements APC-free journals Support by libraries APC FUNDING SOURCES  Library funds and library-managed funds:  Transformative agreements  Institutional OA-funds and so-called ‘block grants’ (UK)  Researchers’ discretionary budgets:  Researchers’ discretionary (institutional) budgets  Author’s personal funds  Co-author(s) funds  Research funders:  OA allocations from a research grant  Funds from a research grant not dedicated to OA Institutional funds Research funder APCS AND AUTHORS 54% of the authors used 1 provider of funding 46% of the authors used > 1 provider of funding • 20% institution funding • 19% research funder • 15% other funding sources • 9% institution + research funder • 10% institution + other sources • 9% research funder + other funding • 18% institution + research funder + other sources Survey among 1014 authors; Monaghan 2020 Funding sources APC payments • 50%: institution paid • 28%: author paid • 9%: research funder paid • 10%: co-author arranged payment • 6%: other/don’t know FOUR MODELS FOR LIBRARIES REGARDING APC’S A: SEPARATE FINANCE STREAMS  Research registration system and repositories (Green OA)  No transformative agreements (“the library cannot do it alone”)  Sometimes OA monitoring B: OA FUND TO FILL THE GAP  Research registration system and repositories (Green OA)  OA fund for authors without research grants – often limited to Pure Gold journals Sometimes OA monitoring D: LIBRARY IN THE LEAD: TRANSFORMATION OF THE LIBRARY BUDGET  Transformative agreements  Library OA fund  OA monitoring  Institution-wide APC tracking  Research registration systems/repositories C: RESEARCH FUNDER IN THE LEAD: COMPLIANCE IS KEY [UK]  Transformative agreements  Block grants from research funders; sometimes also an additional library OA fund  OA monitoring  Institution-wide APC tracking  Research registration systems/repositories CLOSER LOOK AT MODEL C/D: THE TALE OF THE FRONTRUNNERS IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS (1)  A few frontrunners expect that with agreements with the top-20 publishers about 70% of the articles produced by their university will be covered  Additional mechanisms are needed in case the library wants to cover the other 30%: articles published by the long tail of smaller publishers  The same frontrunners report the need for 2 to 4 FTE extra staff for handling the related workflows IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS (2) New workflows and services:  Controlling publishers’ deals: eligibility checks & monitoring uptake  Institution-wide tracking of APCs  Management of OA fund and/or block grant  OA monitoring using bibliographic databases  Also: tools to inform authors of transformative agreements IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS (3) Fundamental changes:  Submission and acceptance process is between publishers and authors: libraries need to be informed in time  Journal acquisition budget becomes an article publishing budget  The Stockholm University library has stated this explicitly: ‘the aim is a gradual and cost-efficient reallocation of the acquisition budget to pay for publishing rather than subscriptions’ IMPROVING THE LIBRARY TOOLKIT: CONCLUSIONS AND OUTLOOK THE WHY: BUSINESS CASE FOR OA SUPPORT BY LIBRARIES  60% more views for OA articles in comparison to Closed Access articles  18% more citations for OA articles in comparison to Closed Access articles  Thus: 1. OA publishing gives a university a clear competitive edge by the enhanced visibility of its research and its researchers during the OA transition. 2. The OA toolkit of the research library will align the library with the objectives of the university Piwowar 2019 Piwowar 2018  Model C/D: reality at relatively few research libraries  APC market is so far partially (directly or indirectly) funded by research funders  Read & Publish (hybrid journals) or Publish-licenses (APC-OA journals) will shift the financial burden of these APCs to the library  Therefore, sharing the financial burden with research funders often necessary  Feasibility depends on national landscape of research funders: the European landscape makes this feasible CONCLUSION (1): EUROPEAN LANDSCAPE FAVOURS R&D/P DEALS CONCLUSIONS (2): NEXT STEPS  Green and Gold both add value to OA transition  LIBER vision of predominant OA in 2022 can be reached (but maybe a few years later)  For this next steps are needed:  more R&P agreements and P agreements  mechanisms for R&P/P for long tail publishers  library support for APC-free OA journals [SSH disciplines]: ‘subscribe to OA’, library publishing,… OUTLOOK  Financial participation of research funders in transformative agreements often necessary  Call for publishers to inform libraries in time of articles submitted/accepted  APC-market moves from author-market to institutional market (less ‘APCs in the wild’)  Transformative agreements will also transform the libraries regarding:  Journal collections  Journal acquisition procedures Monaghan et al; 2020 The ZBW is a member of the Leibniz Association. An OER for Early Career Researchers to improve Skills on Sharing and Publishing Tamara Pianos & Nicole Krüger ZBW – Leibniz-Information Centre for Economics Session #9 – Tools for Transparency and Open Access LIBER 2020 Online - Building Trust With Research Libraries June 26, 2020 page 2 ZBW – Leibniz-Information Centre for Economics 2 sites > in Hamburg and Kiel / Germany National research infrastructure Economics and business studies information. www.zbw.eu http://www.zbw.eu/ Research in the fields of: > Open Science > Web Science page 3 ZBW – Leibniz-Information Centre for Economics 100th anniversary in 2019 www.zbw.eu http://www.zbw.eu/ https://100years.zbw.eu/openup/ page 4 Search Portal EconBiz www.econbiz.de Learning materials http://www.econbiz.de/ page 5 EconBiz Guided Walk for Students https://www.econbiz.de/eb/en/gw https://www.econbiz.de/eb/en/gw/ https://www.econbiz.de/eb/en/gw A few weeks later ... page 6 Let‘s make it OER! page 7 Barriers Technical realization • Typo3 • Bootstrap • html, css Contents • Screenshots • Covers of Publications No download option / sharability Materials not sharable under CC- BY license Essential to consider OER from the very beginning – before designing the learning materials. Lessons learned! page 8 page 9 - Open Source - Interactive content - Mobile friendly - Download and Re-use Technical Platform? page 10 - Open Source and mobile friendly - Interactive content elements (Quiz, Drag and Drop, Dialog Cards, Interactive Video, …) - Download und adapt in WordPress, Drupal, Moodle, Blackboard, or Typo3 extension (Reuse) - Or: Embed into websites / learning management environments (Embed) https://h5p.org https://h5p.org/ https://h5p.org/ page 11 What about fonts, images of persons, screenshots, logos? CC0 under CC-BY?  CC0 materials could be wrongly re-used under CC-BY license. Publish under CC-BY-NC? Copyright / Licenses? ZBW legal department page 12 - Only CC licensed images, videos, and fonts or own materials - No persons displayed in images - No screenshots - Disclaimer for logos. - CC-BY license: CC-BY-NC cannot be shared in portals with ads, … Legal advice required ... page 13 EconBiz Academic Career Kit for Early Career Researchers page 14 Drag and Drop / Quiz page 15 Decision based progress page 16 Personal support and a bit of comic relief page 18 Drag and Drop / Quiz page 19 Comic relief page 20 Rewards page 21 page 22 Further Reading page 23 Last updated: A few weeks later ... page 24 How can users or teachers find our materials? - Not in: YouTube, CC-Search, Wikimedia Commons, Pixabay, Slideshare - + OER commons - Not findable as OER in Google - Contents / Texts of H5P files not indexed by search engines - Limited number of search portals for OER that cover materials across universities or countries. Finding and Sharing interactive OER (H5P) page 25 page 26 „Allow content created on your site to be shared on a global H5P Hub with a single click” “Allow users to browse and reuse content from the H5P Hub without having to download and import activities as H5P files“ Forthcoming: H5P search hub https://h5p.org/roadmap (June 19th, 2020) https://h5p.org/roadmap EduArc Project "The project targets the development of a design concept for disseminated learning infrastructures that provide federated access to digital educational resources." Funded by Partners: page 27 ZBW – Leibniz-Information Centre for Economics https://www.zbw.eu/en/research/science-2-0/eduarc/ Seite 28 Other Formats for OER PDF and Print Booklet Videos Academic Career Kit as PowerPoint / PDF Findable / commonly used formats e.g. „Publish your Paper“ as PPT or PDF https://www.econbiz.de/eb/en/research-skills/how-to-guides/ https://www.econbiz.de/eb/en/research-skills/information-literacy-videos/ https://www.econbiz.de/eb/en/research-skills/academic-career-kit/ https://www.econbiz.de/eb/en/research-skills/how-to-guides/ https://www.econbiz.de/eb/fileadmin/user_upload/ppt/EconBiz_Academic_Career_Kit_Publish.pptx https://www.econbiz.de/eb/fileadmin/user_upload/pdfs/EconBiz_Academic_Career_Kit_Publish.pdf page 29 ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics Contacts Nicole Krüger @elocin_ka Dr. Tamara Pianos T: +49 431 8814-365 E: t.pianos@zbw.eu @taps69 https://www.zbw.eu/en/search/econbiz-mobile/tamara-pianos/ https://twitter.com/elocin_ka http://www.zbw.eu/de/recherchieren/econbiz-mobile/tamara-pianos/ mailto:t.pianos@zbw.eu https://twitter.com/taps69 https://www.zbw.eu/en/search/econbiz-mobile/tamara-pianos/ Q&A Thank You for Participating! Recordings will be made available in the near future! Session #9 - Tools for Transparency and Open Access LIBER 2020 SA slides OA toolkit for libraries presentation LIBER 2020 Maurits van der Graaf 2020_LIBER_online_slides_pianos_krueger_zbw