共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
Lack of critical thinking skills leading to research crisis in developing countries: A case of Pakistan 
下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 Sarwat Nauman 《Learned Publishing》2017,30(3):233-236
Key points
- Increasing funding for research may not improve the quality of research.
- Pakistan is investing heavily in research with commensurate increases in publications.
- Pakistan's increase in article output is not being matched with increased quality – is this due to a fundamental problem with critical thinking skills?
- All developing countries need to focus on critical thinking skills to realize the best use of their research funding.
2.
Making materials accessible to students in higher education institutes: Institutional obligations,methods of compliance,and recommendations for future action 下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 Jamie Axelrod 《Learned Publishing》2018,31(1):39-44
Key points
- Current publishing restrictions cause duplicated – and wasted – effort to delivery of accessible information to students.
- Universities have a legal obligation to provide access, but this is not required from publishers.
- Initiatives to support access are helpful, but do not completely resolve the accessibility problems.
3.
4.
David Nicholas Anthony Watkinson Abdullah Abrizah Cherifa Boukacem‐Zeghmouri Jie Xu Blanca Rodríguez‐Bravo Marzena Świgoń Eti Herman 《Learned Publishing》2018,31(3):249-253
Key points
- Early career researchers (ECRs) consider journals the central form of communication – but are concerned about pressure to publish.
- ECRs want to share but currently accept the closed publishing system because of the need to build a traditional reputation.
- ECRs know – and appear to care – little about publishers but trust them as publishing and reviewing facilitators.
- Editors are criticized for not managing peer review with better selection of reviewers.
- Megajournals are not seen as the future journal form and criticized for lack of selectivity.
- ECRs want open access/science in principle but are circumspect about their contribution to it.
- ResearchGate is a key force for change as ECRs consider it a mainstay communication and reputation platform.
5.
Frederick Bowes III 《Learned Publishing》2018,31(1):35-38
Key points
- Educational accessibility needs to accommodate not only text but also supplemental, multimedia, and interactive elements.
- Accessibility considerations need to address user needs for timeliness, quality, cost, and security.
- Schools often default to remediation instead of embracing EPUB 3 for practical reasons and to respond to student preferences.
- PDF is often preferred over EPUB for creating alternate formats because of familiarity and expediency.
- Schools require accessibility to deal with increased legal pressure from both government agencies and disability advocates.
6.
Rebecca Kennison 《Learned Publishing》2016,29(1):69-71
Key points
- Scholarly communication – with the exception of traditional (e.g. blind and double‐blind) peer review – prizes the open exchange of ideas.
- The aim of peer review should be engagement, not judgement.
- Reviews that improve the quality of a work and thus advance the field are not merely service to the community, but contributions to existing scholarship, and need to be rewarded accordingly; an open and transparent review process is the first step in enabling such reviews to be properly recognized.
7.
Key points
- A clear set of rules regarding authorship responsibilities in academic publications is much needed.
- The leading research integrity guidelines on scientific authorship, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors Recommendations, are unclear about authorship responsibilities in case of misconduct.
- The source of the problem is the fourth authorship criterion – it should be revised.
8.
Key points
- Instructions to authors about submitting papers for publication vary hugely – from none at all to whole handbooks.
- Online submission systems have not reduced the complexity of submission and may have increased the work of authors.
- Electronic submission processes do not appear to have been adequately ‘road tested’ with authors.
- Some publishers are introducing more flexible submission rules that may help authors.
9.
Edith Holmes 《Learned Publishing》2016,29(4):293-299
Key points
- Delivering focused and relevant content that researchers find valuable creates and sustains a dedicated and loyal audience.
- Partnerships expand the Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy (JOSPT)’s audience and reach and enable growth.
- Introducing innovations at the right time is key – neither too soon nor too late.
- Investing in specific initiatives developed through strategic planning moves JOSPT forward.
10.
Kenneth J. Varnum 《Learned Publishing》2017,30(1):45-48
Key points
- The Open Discovery Initiative (ODI) was created in 2011 to improve participation among content providers in the then‐novel web‐scale discovery services.
- The issues addressed by the ODI included metadata standards, content indexing, and availability of licensed content in discovery services.
- After adoption of the recommended practice in June 2014, a new Standing Committee has been formed to address unfinished business and implementation.
- A challenge for the ODI is finding the right balance between the needs of commercial partners and library customers.
11.
Sneha Kulkarni 《Learned Publishing》2016,29(3):211-213
Key points
- Peer review, the cornerstone of academic publishing, has come under a lot of criticism for its flaws and has been manipulated by both authors and editors.
- Lack of review transparency is a contributing factor to peer review problems.
- Pressure to publish – among authors and journals – is adding to peer review problems.
- Technology can help maintain review integrity, although editorial vigilance remains key.
12.
Key points
- The UK policy landscape supports access for the users whilst allowing publishers to maintain business models.
- Advancements such as EPUB 3, aligning publishing with web technologies, and the Inclusive Publishing hub help publishers reach accessibility compliance.
- Print impairment is not an on/off switch, and each reader has his or her own unique set of requirements – a fact that is supported by EPUB 3.
- The time is ripe for publishers to make firm commitments to accessibility initiatives.
13.
John G. Dove 《Learned Publishing》2017,30(1):81-86
Key points
- Our collective authorship and publishing practices do not always end up ensuring that scholarly content is discoverable by readers.
- Readers of all kinds rely on a variety of ‘discovery pathways’, such as search engines, library systems, and various electronic links, some of which are blind to the content they desire.
- Efforts over the years to improve content discoverability have made great progress, but an increasing amount of freely available content brings up new issues.
- The National Information Standards Organization (NISO)’s Discovery to Delivery (D2D) Topic Committee has developed a grid comparing various ways in which content is shared with various ways in which users discover such content.
- This article brings to light a few of the current obstacles and opportunities for innovation by publishers, aggregators, search engines, and library systems, and invites Learned Publishing readers to step up and identify others.
14.
Rick Anderson 《Learned Publishing》2016,29(3):215-218
Key points
- U.S. university OA policies are far less mandatory than those in the U.K.
- The waiver clauses in U.S. university policies make it easy for authors to decline making their articles OA.
- The relative autonomy – and competitiveness – of U.S. universities may be the reason for weaker OA policies.
- OA in the U.S. is likely to be driven by government funding agency policies rather than by academia.
15.
Fiona Murphy 《Learned Publishing》2016,29(1):51-53
Key points
- Technological advances in the amounts of data that researchers generate and use are causing problems for the scholarly communication system.
- How, when and by whom should quality checks and assurance be integrated into this – already overloaded – ecosystem?
- This paper outlines the challenges, illustrates some current initiatives and posits possible directions for the future.
16.
17.
Quan‐Hoang Vuong 《Learned Publishing》2020,33(1):64-68
Key points
- Societies face increasing pressure to contain costs and retain revenues, which are threatened by open access mandates.
- Funders and other science publishing campaigns need to recognize the value of learned societies and work with them to sustain the production of quality knowledge.
- Self‐publishing via preprint servers may threaten the quality of academic research.
- Societies can reinforce their value proposition through a model of academic entrepreneurship, including research activities, media engagement, and consultancy.
18.
Alison Baverstock 《Learned Publishing》2016,29(1):65-68
Key points
- Although ‘peer review’ has quasi‐sacred status, times are changing, and peer review is not necessarily a single and uniformly reliable gold standard.
- For publishers, peer review is a process not an outcome.
- Academics understand peer review, but are often ignorant about the quality checking mechanisms within wider publishing.
- Self‐publishing has led to the much wider availability of publishing services – these now being used by all stakeholders in publishing.
- How should universities evaluate comment and ideas that were first disseminated within a non‐academic market?
- Rather than an upper house, is peer review today more of a galley kitchen?
19.
Key points
- The term ‘predatory journal’ hides a wide range of scholarly publishing misconduct.
- The term ‘predatory journal’ unhelpfully bundles misconduct with poor quality.
- The term ‘predatory journal’ blinds us to important possibilities, needs, and questions arising in the developing scholarly landscape.
- The current scholarly publishing environment cannot rely on such a simplified classification of journals into predatory or not.