Weirdly, on the ICC’s website (even with a $$$ subscription), I can’t find any mention of who made this proposal and how it got into the code. I don’t see it in any of the 2021 cycle monographs, and it’s not annotated in Premium Complete like it normally is
Some thoughts from the @copim.bsky.social#OA#REFcopim.pubpub.org/pub/copim-th...
Some thoughts from the Copim Open Book Futures team on Research England's decision not to include an OA mandate for monographs submitted to the next REF
Some thoughts from the @copim.bsky.social#OA#REF ... ⬇️
Hot off the press ❤️🔥 Our response to Research England's decision not to include an #OA mandate for #monographs submitted to the next #REF copim.pubpub.org/pub/copim-th...
Some thoughts from the Copim Open Book Futures team on Research England's decision not to include an OA mandate for monographs submitted to the next REF
Hot off the press ❤️🔥 Our response to Research England's decision not to include an #OA#monographs#REFcopim.pubpub.org/pub/copim-th...
Some thoughts from the Copim Open Book Futures team on Research England's decision not to include an OA mandate for monographs submitted to the next REF
We've worked really hard on this scoping report to research and then analyse the HUGE number of resources, guidelines, and toolkits for #OpenAccess monographs out there ... 🔎 Read our findings and share any feedback 👀
Copim Connects: Developing an Information Hub for the #OpenAccess book community 📚 Read our scoping report, which is the first step in the process of planning and implementing our new ‘knowledge base’🧠 copim.pubpub.org/pub/developi...
‘Not another knowledge base / toolkit / resource bank’ we hear the community say ….
…I don’t so much mind the extra $ non-profit uni presses take in, assuming they use it to serve the academic community (eg subsidize obscure monographs). But it is also incentivizes even uni presses to put editorial pressure: each article published = more $
It’s a valid concern.The overemphasis on monographs feels disconnected from what people actually read or need.With fewer libraries purchasing them and less readership,it begs the question of whether academic priorities needto evolve. Maybeit's time to rethink whatcounts as valuable scholarly output.
Partly, I suspect, because it's a model made for a pre-globalised academic world where the volume of articles was an order of magnitude lower. Certainly it's less of an issue with monographs, though it's not like that doesn't have other issues (partner is a copy editor for academic publishers.)
OK but I read some really *really* awful monographs before I worked it out.