Open+: Versioning Open Social Scholarship

Authors

  • Alyssa Arbuckle University of Victoria

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5334/kula.39

Keywords:

open scholarship, open access, community engagement, public humanities, digital scholarship

Abstract

Advocates of the Open Access (OA) movement have been fighting for free and unfettered access to research output since the early 1990s. Open access is a crucial element of a fair, efficient scholarly communication system where all are able to find, interpret, and use the results of publicly-funded research. Universal open access is more possible now than ever before, thanks to networked technologies and the development of open scholarship policies. But what happens after access to research is provided? In this paper I argue that versioning scholarship across varying modes and formats would move scholarly communication from a straightforward open access system to a more engaging environment for multiple communities.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Alyssa Arbuckle, University of Victoria

Alyssa Arbuckle is the Associate Director of the Electronic Textual Cultures Lab (ETCL) at the University of Victoria, where she works with the Implementing New Knowledge Environments (INKE) research group and the Digital Humanities Summer Institute (DHSI). Arbuckle is also an interdisciplinary PhD student at the University of Victoria, studying open social scholarship and its implementation (planned completion 2019). She holds a BA Honours in English from the University of British Columbia and an MA in English from the University of Victoria, and her previous studies have centred around digital humanities, new media, and contemporary American literature. Her work has appeared in Digital Studies, Digital Humanities Quarterly, and Scholarly and Research Communication, among other venues.

References

Ahmed, Allam. 2007. “Open Access Towards Bridging the Digital Divide – Policies and Strategies for Developing Countries.” Information Technology for Development, 13(4): 337–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/itdj.20067

Arbuckle, Alyssa, and Bonnie Stewart. 2017. “How Can We Make Scholarship More Relevant?” Inside Higher Ed (blog), November 13. Accessed May 11, 2018. https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/university-venus/how-can-we-make-scholarship-more-relevant. Archived at: https://perma.cc/NR89-7UT9.

Arbuckle, Alyssa, and John Maxwell. Forthcoming. “Modelling Networked Open Social Scholarship within the INKE Community.” KULA: Knowledge Creation, Dissemination, and Preservation Studies, 2(2): n.p.

Brennan, Sheila A. 2016. “Public, First.” In: Debates in the Digital Humanities 2016, Gold, Matthew K., and Klein, Lauren F. (Eds.), 384–89. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Eve, Martin Paul. 2014. Open Access and the Humanities: Contexts, Controversies, and the Future. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316161012

Fitzpatrick, Kathleen. 2011. Planned Obsolescence: Publishing, Technology, and the Future of the Academy. New York: New York University Press.

Gargouri, Yassine, Chawki Hajjem, Vincente Larivière, Yves Gringas, Les Carr, Tim Brody, and Stevan Harnad. 2010. “Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for Higher Quality Research.” PLoS ONE, 5(10): n.p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0013636

Government of Canada. 2015. Tri-Agency Open Access Policy on Publications. Ottawa: n.p. http://www.science.gc.ca/eic/site/063.nsf/eng/h_F6765465.html?OpenDocument. Archived at: https://perma.cc/67QT-3SRN.

Harnad, Stevan. 2011. “Open Access is a Research Community Matter, Not a Publishing Community Matter.” Lifelong Learning in Europe, 16(2): 117–18.

Hsu, Wendy F. 2016. “Lessons on Public Humanities from the Civic Sphere.” In: Debates in the Digital Humanities 2016, Gold, Matthew K., and Klein, Lauren F. (Eds.), 280–86. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

International Telecommunication Union. 2017. “ITU Releases 2015 ICT Figures.” http://www.itu.int/net/pressoffice/press_releases/2015/17.aspx#.W7_bh2d1E7y.

Jhangiani, Rajiv S. 2017. “Open as Default: The Future of Education and Scholarship.” In: Open: The Philosophy and Practices that are Revolutionizing Education and Science, Jhangiani, Rajiv S., and Robert Biswas-Diener (eds.), 267–79. London: Ubiquity Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/bbc.v

Lovett, Julia A., Andrée J. Rathemacher, Diana Boukari, and Corey Lang. 2017. “Institutional Repositories and Academic Social Networks: Competition or Complement? A Study of Open Access Policy Compliance vs. ResearchGate Participation.” Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 5(1): n.p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2183

Mandell, Laura. 2015. Breaking the Book: Print Humanities in the Digital Age. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118274538

Maxwell, John. 2015. “Beyond Open Access to Open Publication and Open Scholarship.” Scholarly and Research Communication, 6(3): 1–10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22230/src.2015v6n3a202

McGregor, Heidi, and Kevin Guthrie. 2015. “Delivering Impact of Scholarly Information: Is Access Enough?” Journal of Electronic Publishing, 18(3): n.p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0018.302

Rodriguez, Allyson. 2017. “Collaboration in Scholarly Communication: Opportunities to Normalize Open Access.” College & Research Libraries News, 78(5): 270. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.78.5.270

Suber, Peter. 2010. “Thoughts on Prestige, Quality, and Open Access.” Logos, 21(1): 115–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/095796510X546959

Suber, Peter. 2012. Open Access. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Willinsky, John. 2006. The Access Principle: The Case for Open Access to Research and Scholarship. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Downloads

Published

2019-02-27

How to Cite

Arbuckle, Alyssa. 2019. “Open+: Versioning Open Social Scholarship”. KULA: Knowledge Creation, Dissemination, and Preservation Studies 3 (1):18. https://doi.org/10.5334/kula.39.

Issue

Section

Research Articles

Most read articles by the same author(s)