1. Curation Nation: Thoughts on the Future of Textbooks
Is there a role for a curated, remixing approach to developing next generation textbooks. In his post in the Scholarly Kitchen Blog, Robert Harington investigates the role of curated open textbooks in teaching today's students, looking at some of the available tools, the way in which instructors utilise such tools, and issues around fair use of content.
The blog post says (quote): What are the takeaways? Publishers looking to produce textbooks, at a range of levels, need to incorporate more flexibility for both the instructor and the student, bearing in mind such factors as interactive features such as video, audio, computer simulations and so on, as well as strong annotation and navigation components, with elements of curation available through customisation techniques. But in all the excitement in the potential of ebooks do not ignore the print - there is value in both forms.……………(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
2. Research collaboration between universities and industry: Five practical principles to make it work.
Increasingly, academics and practitioners in the UK are urged to work together in collaborative research. In their post in The Impact Blog, Ana Isabel Canhoto and Sarah Quinton discuss how social features, material characteristics, and the attributes of the individuals engaged in research collaboration can support the success of a collaborative research project.
The blog post says (quote): Research collaboration is deemed to accelerate the transfer of knowledge between experts and the translation of world-class research into practical applications, which has important commercial, economic and social benefits. Collaboration between academics and practitioners can also produce new knowledge, by bringing together researchers with complementary perspectives, interests, skills and knowledge bases. For instance, in the digital arena - which encompasses multiple streams of inquiry, from computer science and sociology to marketing and information systems – research collaboration has supported industry innovation, as well as the development of new techniques and protocols to collect, manage, analyse, and distribute digital data.……………(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
3. Get credit where credit is due as a peer reviewer
Peer Reviewers help safeguard the quality of work being published in a journal. When you take the time to review, you are helping to uphold a journal's academic credibility. But reviewing generally happens anonymously, making it hard for experts to prove how much they do, or which journals rely on their reviewing expertise, notes Penny Freedman, in her post in the BioMed Central Blog.
The blog post says (quote): Over 70,000 experts already use Publons to effortlessly track their hard work reviewing over 400,000 manuscripts. When you create a profile you will be able to verify your review history across all journals without revealing the details of the reviewed manuscript. Publons also partners with ORCID so you can easily export your peer review record to your ORCID account, if you decide to do so. As of September, those who review for one of our participating journals (BioData Mining, Genome Biology and GigaScience) will get the option to have a verified record of their review automatically added to their Publons profile.……………(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
4. Science editor-in-chief sounds alarm over falling public trust
Jeremy Berg is taking on one of the most influential jobs in science just as the scientific endeavour is facing a challenge of historic proportions. As the new editor-in-chief of Science, a highly selective journal that still has the controversial power to make scientific careers, the biochemist and former University of Pittsburgh senior manager is worried about an apparent rejection of science by some parts of the public - and thinks that academics should look closely at how their own behaviour may have contributed, notes David Matthews, in his post in the Times Higher Education Blog.
The blog post says (quote): A paper published in 2011 made waves after it found that there was a correlation between journal impact factors (JIFs) - which measure average paper citation rates over the past two years and are highest for prestigious journals such as Science, Nature and Cell – and the rate of retractions. Science had the second highest rate of retractions among the journals studied, below only the New England Journal of Medicine. This could be because these journals are more highly scrutinised, the authors said. But it could also be because of demands from such journals for "clear and definitive" results, they suggested, which incentivise researchers to cut corners to come up with a neat scientific story.……………(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
Leave a Reply