JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives


NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives


NEW-MEDIA-CURATING@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Home

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Home

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING  May 2008

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING May 2008

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: New Models of Academic Publishing

From:

Ken Friedman <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Ken Friedman <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 12 May 2008 23:42:49 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (75 lines)

Hi, Simon,

While I recognize your concern, there are two different issues here.

Metrics is based on several factors. These include impact, publishing, and
citation counts. ISI cites only to and from journals within the ISI
database. To sell the database, they must cover the journals that have
impact in a field. As a result, the growing impact of open access journals
is changing the content of the ISI database.

Engagement in wire services and news services means that ThomsonReuters has
a longer history in electronic and online publishing than nearly any other
publisher. They make money selling information. The information counts for
more than the package -- digits and pixels make as much money for them as
paper. They want to make money. If collaborating with online journals helps
them to make money, they will embrace online journals for the ISI indexes.
In fact, they aready do so.

You can learn more at:

http://www.isiwebofknowledge.com/

As essay describing evaluation and inclusion criteria appears at:

http://scientific.thomsonreuters.com/free/essays/selectionofmaterial/journalselection/

So first, ISI does incude electronic journals and will increasingly include
more open source journals. Second, other issues at stake mean that metrics
cannot exclusively favor ISI. The reason for this is that most specialized
fields include highly rated journals with great specific impact that do not
appear in ISI lists. Second, ISI does not cover monographs -- where in many
fields, monographs from strong publishers have the greatest impact of all.

It is vital to be watchful and to lobby effectively toward government for
appropriate metrics. Norway's metrics are highly effective because they
allow for articles in high ranked journals and good journals, as well as for
books and book chapters.

The system allocates 1 point for an article in any good journal (level 1), 3
points for an article in a select group of high ranked journals (level 2), 5
points for a book from a good publisher (level 1), and 8 points for a book
from a top publisher (level 2). Book chapters from level 1 and 2 publishers
count for a fraction of a point or a full point.

You can see the system here to judge its breadth and usability across
fields. It is also a useful data base on journals and publishers:

http://dbh.nsd.uib.no/kanaler/

Publishers have a great deal of influence, but I would not agree that they
are in control. I suggest that we can exert great influence as academics,
and those who also hold administrative posts with budget authority over
staff resources and research or library facilities can exert significant
power if we also make a case for our position.

Warm wishes,

Ken


On Sat, 10 May 2008 22:00:14 +0100, Simon Biggs <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>To take this back to where we began; open access to academic journals and
>how this relates to vested interests in academe and publishing. Whilst I
>noted that a stated policy aspiration in the UK is that all publicly funded
>research will be published online and made freely accessable there is
>another side to this �logic�. The UK is currently reviewing its methods for
>evaluating academic research and thus how it is funded. It is looking very
>seriously at adopting certain aspects of the US system. Specifically, it
>would seem we will move, to a great or lesser degree, to a citation metric
>to determine quality (how many citations a paper receives will determine its
>value). Currently the proposal is that the system will be based upon
>(perhaps partly run by) Thompson/Reuters Web of Science database. This just
>about assures that vested interests (the publishers) will keep the whip
>hand.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001


WWW.JISCMAIL.AC.UK

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager