News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
Dec. 20, 2005
Paying for information? In print? That’s a model that’s just so early 20th century, according to The Access Principle: The Case for Open Access to Research and Scholarship, published last week by MIT Press.
The book reviews the various models to bring the dissemination of knowledge online and to make it free, and along the way, the book criticizes plenty of publishing practices, copyright interpretations and scholarly traditions. John Willinsky, professor of language and literacy education at the University of British Columbia, has devoted much of his scholarship to the ideas behind the book. Among other things, he directs the Public Knowledge Project, which is financed by the Canadian government to promote the free exchange of information. Willinsky responded to questions about the themes of his book.
Q: Can you define “the access principle"?
A: The access principle holds that with a form of knowledge that is constituted as a public good, which is the case with research and scholarship, the knowledge should be circulated as widely and publicly as possible, especially as that wider circulation increases the value and quality of that knowledge. The Internet, as a new publishing medium, is proving itself capable of a considerable increase in access and circulation over print, and we are thus compelled to explore how this medium can contribute all that it can to this principle.
Q: Many publishers argue that journals and materials for which one must pay are somehow by definition of higher quality than various open models. How do you respond?
A: The empirical evidence argues otherwise: For example, the Public Library of Science (PLoS) Biology, a relatively new open access journal that operates on author fees, has the highest “impact factor” (number of times articles are cited) by a considerable margin among biology journals indexed by the ISI Web of Science. But that is only part of the quality story. The majority of journals now allow their authors to “self archive” their published articles in open access institutional repositories (usually located in the author’s university library). But note that in all cases, someone pays, though it is not necessarily the reader, and these alternatives are greatly increasing access to this knowledge.
Q: What economic models could allow those who publish journals to embrace the access principle? How can costs be covered?
A: First, there are now open access approaches that call for no change to the current financial models that most journals follow: There are journals, as I noted, whose policies permit authors to self-archive the final version in their library or on their Web site, while other journals grant open access six months or more after the initial publication of their otherwise subscription-controlled content. Then, too, there are new economic models for open access publishing based on the reduced costs afforded by online systems, which is where my Public Knowledge Project comes in, with its open source software (Open Journal Systems) for managing and publishing journals that significantly reduces costs. As societies and publishers move to online editions, and away from print — in the face of libraries canceling print editions when they have a choice — the reduced publishing costs can enable forms of open access, through author fees, society subsidies and institutional support. I would add that there can be no sense of fixed costs that need to be met in scholarly publishing as long as journal subscription prices range, as they currently do, from hundreds of dollars to, in at least one case, over $20,000.
Q: To what extent do open models of information relate not only to price, but to speed of information distribution? How does this relate to your goals?
A: Online publishing is certainly speeding up the process, as well as increasing how widely materials circulate. The increasing availability of working papers, as well as “preprints,” in a number of fields, along with greater openness among researchers to sharing data, are fostering a renewed sense of the long-standing tradition of “open science” only at much accelerated access speeds.
Q: An open access principle also means that members of the public who might never pay for a journal can read an article when they want. Would this change the nature of scholarship?
A: I would hope so. The increased public presence can add to scholarship in a number of ways. Among the examples, there are amateur astronomers who are able, now that they have access to the literature and data sets, to make positive contributions to the discipline through their field work. Or take the other side of this question, and how the increasing public presence of health research has led to what the Pew Internet & American Life Project has called an “online health care revolution,” as patients engage in what some doctors refer to “shared decision making.” I don’t see this public presence leading to a dilution of research goals or quality. Rather, it could well foster greater public support and a sense of this work’s value as a public good.
Q: In academe, the quest for tenure is a huge motivating factor for young faculty members. Do you think the biases of the tenure system (in favor of more established journals, for example) hinder the spread of the access principle?
A: Because even major commercial publishers, such as Elsevier and Springer, as well as the leading societies, permit authors to self-archive — and as Oxford, PLoS, and others offer open access journals — faculty members can chase the prestige titles and still contribute to the access principle. In fact, studies now show that who do self-archive achieve a 25-250 percent increase in the number of citations to their work, depending on the field. The higher citation rate following on open access is certainly a boon for anyone making the case for tenure and promotion.
Q: How do you think scholarly publishing will be different five years from now?
A: The scholarly publishing of journals will move increasingly online, with print editions eventually disappearing, and, and thanks to the efforts of open access advocates, this move will lead to a far greater proportion of the literature available through some form of open access, in what can only be called a mixed knowledge economy. The resulting increase in global and public access may well prove to be the best thing that has happened to research and scholarship in some time.
Q: In light of the themes of your book, are you taking steps to make it available online and free?
A: An obvious and fair question, and I did take steps before the book was published. The majority of the chapters in the book initially appeared in open access journals or, if the journals were not open access, then they have been self-archived, with all of these articles continuing to be made available at the Public Knowledge Project, along with a good deal of other pieces on this work by myself and others associated with this project. While my focus in The Access Principle: The Case for Open Access to Research and Scholarship is on increasing access to journal articles — given how well journals have taken to Internet — the access principle undoubtedly speaks to the book as well, and the fact that this book is not yet available for download as while does leave a comforting point for critics to pull me over and cite me for a violation.
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
My first book was simultaneously published on the internet and in printed form. Interest generated from the online version of the book, which provides links to purchase the print version of the book, drove sales in an incredible way. I understand that the publisher sold out of two printings. If you are thoughtful about open access it can be a win-win situation for you and everyone.
Also, it is true that not everyone will be willing to participate in open access initiatives. Some will heap contempt and scorn on them, as the previous commentator has. No one will require them to participate. But as the open access journals receive the highest impact ratings in their various fields, individuals will find that the impact of their work is increasingly proportional to their participation in open access initiatives. And then they will have to chose the degree of impact they wish their research to have in their various fields of pursuit.
David Wiley, PhD, at 9:13 am EST on December 20, 2005
It is no longer a question of WHETHER or not scholarly works and, indeed, fundamental academic knowlege, will be freely available for public consumption. It isn’t even of question of WHEN—it is already happening.
It only remains to be seen how those of us who have made a living from the “early 20th century” publishing model will adapt and succeed within the new paradigm.
DaveH, Owner at SweetHaven Publishing Services, at 9:36 am EST on December 20, 2005
Willinsky’s book does make brief mention of MIT’s Open CourseWare initiative, but he doesn’t discuss the content that attracts most student eyeballs: textbooks.
According to a recent GAO report [1], the cost of commercial textbooks is now approaching $900US/year in the United States.
So, the idea that Willinsky might consider is whether it would be feasible for schools to use Open Educational Resources (OER) [2] as a substitute for commercial textbooks.
A growing number of schools already use open source learning management system software such as Sakai [3]. And, faculty can obtain creative commons course materials from groups such as MIT’s OpenCourseWare (OCW) initiative [4]. And, soon, they will also be able to freely access content from the UK Open University’s Open Content Initiative’s site [5].
I’ve argued in a number of articles [6, 7, 8, 9] that schools in developed countries should form a consortium to develop and acquire textbook content from one or more strategic partners (e.g. the UK Open University) and distribute that content as electronic textbooks, which could substitute for commercial textbooks.
My calculations indicate that a coalition of 1,000 colleges and universities could “buy out” the UKOU (i.e. cover their annual development costs) for around $75,000/year per institution. At Berkeley, if we recovered the annual $75K membership dues by charging a student fee, it would come to around $3.25 per year per student ($75,000 divided by 23,000 undergraduates) — far less than the current annual cost of textbooks.
Also, although Hewlett foundation has funded the UKOU’s Open Content Initiative, they have not provided sufficient funds to cover the UKOU’s development cost on an on-going basis. Nevertheless, it’s a start, and the UKOU has be very cooperative. In my opinion, however, schools in the United States should contribute to this effort.
As I show above, if the cost is divided evenly across a reasonable number of schools in the US (i.e. around 1000 schools), it comes out to very little: $75,000/year per school. At Berkeley, in some cases our library will pay $75K per year for a subscription to a single journal!
Finally, in my recent publications and presentations [8, 9], I present three local models to encourage faculty to switch from commercial textbooks to Open Educational Resources. In brief, they are:
1. the Jawbone — a simple library resource model that assumes that if we build it, and if we tell them about it (jawbone them), then they will come.
2. the Stick — an administrative fiat model, where faculty are told they have to use open content as a substitute for commercial textbooks. This model may be used in developing countries where students simply cannot afford commercial textbooks
3. the Carrot — a financial incentives model that would involve student fees, faculty stipends, and patronage refunds to students.
Regards,Fred M Beshears
Senior Strategist Educational Technology ServicesUC Berkeley
co-chairIMS/Global Technical Board (http://imsglobal.org)
————————————————————-References
[1] College Textbooks: Enhanced Offering Appear to Drive Recent Price Increases(http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05806.pdf )
[2] Open Educational Resources (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_educational_resources)
[3] Sakai (http://sakaiproject.org/)
[4] MIT Open CourseWare Initiative (http://ocw.mit.edu/).
[5] UKOU’s Open Content Initiative (http://oci.open.ac.uk/)
[6] The Case for Creative Commons Textbooks Cetis (April, 2005)(http://www.cetis.ac.uk/content2/20050407015813)
[7] The Case for Creative Commons Textbooks Berkeley Computing & Communications (September 2005)(http://istpub.berkeley.edu:4201/bcc/Fall2005/opentextbook.html )
[8] Viewpoint: The Economic Case for Creative Commons Textbooks Campus Technology (September 2005 )(http://www.campus-technology.com/print.asp?ID=11891)
[9] A Sustainable Business Model for Creative Commons Textbooks Economics of Open Content Conference Webcast (January 2006) Massachusetts Institute of Technology(http://webcast.berkeley.edu/events/details.php?webcastid=15693)
Fred Beshears, Senior Strategist at UC Berkeley, at 1:55 pm EDT on April 25, 2006
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
Posting Description: The dance program in the Department of Theatre and Dance seeks an established artist / ... see job
East Carolina University, a constituent institution of the University of North Carolina, is a doctoral institution with an ... see job
The E. Philip Saunders College of Business invites applications for two tenure-track faculty positions at the Assistant or ... see job
The Savannah College of Art and Design seeks candidates for a full-time faculty position in fibers. Qualified candidates ... see job
Assistant Director – Food Technology Center (Pilot Plant Research Manager) Food Technology Center Open for Recruitment: ... see job
Eastern Kentucky University, located in Richmond, Madison County, Kentucky near the Heart of the Bluegrass, is a ... see job
Posting Description: The Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at the University of Colorado, Boulder ... see job
Sinclair is a comprehensive community college with an enrollment of over 24,000 students that offers career and transfer ... see job
The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job
The nation’s first university, Penn is a world-renowned leader in education, research, and innovation. Situated on a ... see job
Open access
The professor obviously has never had to depend on his writing to make a living. Many scholarly authors do, either because they are too controversial to obtain academic positions, or because they prefer to devote themselves to research and publication. Now he argues that individuals do not have a right to make a living from their intellectual pursuits appearing in print. This is nonsense as well as theft of intellectual property. I have nothing but scorn and contempt for such an idea. It is time that the professor come out of his ivory tower and enter the real world where academic jobs are not plentiful, where many depend on their writings to earn their bread, and where his arguments are so chilling that many will just stop publishing — to the loss of all.
I had one of my books put on the internet without my permission—and sales of the book dropped. Instead of generating a royalty of $3000 a year for that book, I received nothing for ten years—until I discovered it in “open access". After successful litigation, I had the book taken off the internet and those who stole it prosecuted for theft.
Arthur Ide, PhD, at 7:53 am EST on December 20, 2005