Highlights from the FORCE11 SC Institute | Midday at the Oasis (Aug. 29, 2018)
It's. On. Great. Thanks. Welcome. To midday at the Oasis, the. August 29th. 2018. Version. I am, kdeeny, the, education. And outreach librarian, and, host, of midday at the Oasis you're. All muted and, you. Can make use of the chat box to send us messages, during. The presentation. Your best bet is to send, it either to all participants. Or to. I. Guess. Kind of the hosts, and. Presenters. So, that Marco. And I can see it as well as some of our speakers. So. You can also go fullscreen we. Usually set, it so that you can see the attendees, and the chat box but you can go full screen so that you can see more of the details of the slides. As they're, presented, and we, have an exciting presentation. Today with, quite a number of speakers. Which. Makes it cool we. Have the highlights from the force 11. Scholarly. Communication. Institute. And we, have several. People which, will. Be introduced, shortly from. All sorts, of different institutions. Live. Captioning, is available and, Marco has put the URL in the chat box, and. We'll. Probably have a midday again in October and, we'll be sending out messages on, the listserv for that but. The next nn/lm, resource. Picks is. September. 26. 2018. At 12, noon pacific time, or 3, p.m. eastern time and that will be focusing, on clinical, trials.gov. So. Now, on to our program. So. Marco do you want to bring up the slides and then. You can pass. The ball over to Andre oh thanks. Great. Andreea you, can go now. Name's Andrea Lynch I'm the probably communication, librarian at the City. Of Hope lead Graff medical and scientific library and we. Have a great panel for you today, and, so we're going to be talking about our experiences and. The. Content, that we kind of that we learned at the scholarly communications, is the to put on by 411, that, took place at UC, San Diego this year, and. I'm, here, with allegra, swift scholarly, communications, librarian, at UC San Diego library. Annalisa, Taylor the head of scholarly communication at. UCSF, library. Bethany. Meyers research, information is UCLA, Louise, M darling biomedical, library, Martin. Brennan copyright. Librarian at, UCLA, young research library, and Mary, Lynn Bergstrom, subject. Specialists, for biology, bioinformatics. System. And systems, biology at, UC San Diego and so. What we're going to do today is talk. Really. Briefly about the group that, put on this institute and then, talk very generally, about the Institute kind of before and then at the end but. The bulk of what we're going to be covering today are, all the great courses that were offered and our experiences. And what we learned from them so. Without. Ado let's. Move, on, to. The next slide so I, don't know if you've heard about 411. But. I was introduced, to force. 11 through the national, network of libraries of, Medicine research. Data management course, that took place earlier this year, there, they. Are community, of scholars librarians. Archivists. Publishers. And funding, agency, representatives. All, focused, on creating. The new future of scholarly communications, and a scholarship, they. Started back in 2011. And, the. Kid this group came out of the future. Of research communication. Workshop that was held that year in Germany. Currently. They have about 2,500. Active members. And. They organize. Themselves in, these workgroups and there are currently two 34. Of them that are. And that includes active and completed, ones some. Of the work group step there or, there, that are active are scholarly, to meet scholarly. Commons and, data. Citation. Implementation. So. If you're interested based. On what you're hearing today you might want to become. A member and or, attend, their annual meeting that's coming up in Montreal.
In October, so. This. Group along. With collaborating. With UCSD, put, on the 4th eleven scholarly, communications. Institute. So. It's one of the activities. Organized, by this group and it's basically, in a week-long. Fun-filled. Activity. Intensive. Session. Made up of mostly, courses. Seminar. Like sessions. A like, neat lightning, talk session adieu Ahsan and loads. Of various, activities to, foster, networking and, team-building. Among the participants. And this. Year I believe the estimate, was, around. A hundred people who participated, in the, one that took place just. Recently and. Allegra. Do you have anything to add and Allegra was that. Sits on the program, committee and is, a faculty member of a number of those courses, that were offered. No. I think, you covered it and. I think there was about 125, hundred, and fifty this, is perfect, thank. You, all. Right. So. Moving on and so we're going to get started in the courses, so, I took three. Courses during the time there. One. Was on collaboration, communities. And collectivities, and. That, was led by a doctoral Donald, dr.. Perrin off and dr. antonova and this. Was I was really excited about this course because it was really focused on collaboration. Communication. And, fostering, scholarly, communications, it, was broken up into two sections, the. First one was led by dr. Perrin, off and dr. antonova and focused. Mostly on collaboration. And, communication. And, dr.. Perrin off was putting, forward his, kind of draft, working. Theory on how, to, think about small groups. Research. Collaboration. And. He. Was putting forward. The. Idea. That really the the, Nexus of where the activity, happens is really at the small group level. That, that. They work together and kind. Of create, that new, knowledge. That new discovery, and he. Was proposing that, this happens, because they. Share. A common mental, model so, they're on the same wavelength they're working together on, the goal that they have, either. May, it be a research project or whatever question, they're, trying to answer, and. So. The group and the participants. In the course, was. Able to were able to give dr. Perrin often dr. antonova, feedback, on that working theory, and, it. Made me think and was a nice segue. To the fact the second section of this course which was on throttling Commons and that's, where dr. O Donnell and who was joined by dr., Marianne Marton from, UCSD talked. About their, work to. Rethink, Farley, Commons and when. When you think of that it's not a thing it's an it's a, it's an understanding. That that, this, exists, to, help kind, of to. Create new science. New knowledge, and. And. Works and, kind of coming to a better understanding and, what, they have been doing is bringing. Together and, as a sinkers and researchers. To. Think about how to, revamp or, think, about what the skull is what the future of scholarly communications, will be and what. They are proposing is, a set, of principles and rules to, foster, a scholarly, Commons, and that, it should be open by, default open to everyone, librarians. Researchers. Students, citizen, scientists, and they. Are hoping to really change the culture, so. That we can get to discoveries, more quickly and they're. Hoping to bring that expert. Group. Together. To, focus, on how to change, the culture so, that we can get. To kind, of what they envision as the future, more. Quickly. As. For me the takeaway, was, really listening, to the researchers, students, in the room to, see how kind. Of these things that we were talking about really, resonated, for them because. As a librarian, I think of libraries. As, being kind of the, part. Of the environment, when, we talk about the Frawley Commons, and I think about librarians, as contributing. To that and helping our researchers, and students in that way Marty. Do you have anything to add to that. Just. That I really enjoyed the discussion and, just the exploration. Of the. Overall theme was if, you wrap it up in a nutshell what, if we took. Away the, scholarly. Publication. Infrastructure. And, industry. That we know of what if that were to just vanish and we were to replace it with something that. Serves. Our purposes, in the 21st century and. It. Was a fascinating discussion of how. You structure, such a thing and all. The implications that it has. On. The. Work that we do in. Various, ways, it. Would not only mean a. Interesting. New way, to interact with other researchers, but. It would be, an. Opportunity, for information. Professionals, like. Us to. Contribute to the Solley communication. Workflow, in, do. In interesting ways so. It was a great discussion very. High-minded. Open-ended, and, one. Of the highlights of. The. Institute, for me. Thank. You very much. Now. Let's talk about another course, I. Took. This course, and I and, a liger will be tiny chiming in as one of the instructors, so. Is walking the walk promoting, and maintaining, best practices, in fair and open evaluation. This. Session. Was code taught by dr. Tanaka, from UCSD, dr.. O'donald and our own Allegra, Swift on the panel, and there was a member of the.
Faculty, From Oxford, and I can't track down his name but I will, find that longer. Oh Oh, awesome. Thank, you very much just. And this. Was an afternoon session over. Two days and the. Focus there were kind of two parts we talked about three. Use cases around. Tenure. Promotion, as, well as, research, evaluation. We. Focus on UCS d's policy. As well, as the research. Excellence frameworks, in the UK and dr., O'Donnell talked about his perspective, as, a Canadian, researcher. The. Crux of this session, for me was really talking. About or, thinking, about the, new ways people and our researchers. And scholars want. To think about how, research, should be, assessed, and evaluated so. You see the youth. The. Declaration, on research assessment, listed. Here, transparency. And openness, promotion. Guidelines, and the light in manifesto. These. If you haven't read them I do, recommend it, the Douro came out, in, 2012. And the other two came out in 2015. And and. Basically from for me my interpretation. Of of this, is that scholars. And. And. People want to rethink. And. Make more transparent. Or. Promote the transparency. Of methodology. Analysis. Of the. Research data and data, itself, and that, they. Would, like people to come to. Think about reading the actual publication, and and. And. Maybe, when. They think about reading. And assessing, value to, maybe. Add. The, metrics, as kind of the menu of things that they look at and assessing value so, that the. Article metrics and other. Quantitative. Measures as a way to relate, to that research and that. These. Efforts are kind of recommending, to both institutions and funding, agencies that, they that they and. Also. Make, their evaluations. More open and transparent so, that researchers, know how they're being evaluated to. Get those grants, or for promotion, and tenure. I like. Write anything to add to this. Sure. So I'm going to share, with you all, I'll. Email them later that we had shared notes from the day so. People. Contributed, to a, Google. Doc and, there. Was a listing. Of, and. Links. To some Concordat, that David, Rohrer was talking about from. The University of Oxford and I. Have links to those in that document, but yeah. My my, job during that. Was. Kind. Of on the fly and. To. Facilitate. Some, questions. And. And. There were a lot of questions around, implications. For grad, students, and junior faculty it was all very kind of high level and theoretical, and and radical. And. And how, can you, know what, color women. Grad. Students. People. Who have less power kind, of engender. This change. Safely. So those, are some of the questions that came up from the participants. Thank. You so much and. What. That, my takeaway also is, was. The importance of telling the, story whatever, the story is so. For the research excellence framework, they. Have impact, stories where an institution, highlights. Certain research. That was impactful, in various communities, and talking about the global impact of that and, then I was reminded, of when. Dr. O'Donnell was talking, about. How. He approaches. His tenure and promotion. Packages. Is you, know how howdy, how, do you put your first year best, face. Forward how, do you based. On your research your, field how, do you want to demonstrate. The impact that your Rakeem so, it gave me things, to think about. All. Right. Okay. I'm going to pass this on to Marty. Don't. You snuck up on me there sorry. Great. So I. Took a course called detection of detection, of questionable, publishing. Practices. I'm. Going to screw up his name but the course instructors, were the. Editor-in-chief. Of. The. Directory, of open access journals, Tom Ola Hoek and, Ivonne. Lejano. They. Really presented, a. Two-part. Presentation. First of all reframing. The. Idea, of credits, 40 journals. As really, more question, of questionable. Journal. Pointing. Out that there. Are good and bad actors in. Open. Access and in commercial, journal. Distribution. So. All too often we hear, about predatory. Publishing. And it's applied specifically. To the bad actors, that can be found within open access but, there are bad actors in the, commercial, realm as well and, if. You consider, the amount of money, that. Giants. Like Elsevier, make off. Of the. Work of academics. You. Could easily consider them predatory, as well, so. It pushes. A, sense. Of. Nefarious. Activity. On open access that's really unfair, but.
We Do still need to understand. What makes a good journal from a bad so. This is like a just. A an, extension. Of information. Literacy. That. In part two they hooked too. They. Have a set, of questions that they ask about journals, before. They include it in the directory, of open access journals, so. They take their criteria and, use. It as a framework for evaluating journals, that we and use, to teach. Faculty. And, publishing researchers. How. To tell, a. Questionable. Journal for. A reliable one. Asking. Questions. About. How the editorial. Process is handled. Looking. At the, publishing, history, of the journal. How, many articles have they published in a recent amount of time they have. Minimums. For that so if the journal is only published a handful of articles, per year they're. Not really up to the, robust. Quality that fits into the OHA, and, it. Is a sign that perhaps the journal is not, as. Robust. Or, genuine. As it. Often, pretends, to be on their websites so. It's. A great set of questions, that we're going to use at, UCLA, in the near future to. Teach people connecting. Information literacy to, the problem of, questionable. Journal practices. So. There. Is also lots of discussion on, how current scholarly publishing is biased, towards the global north global. South researchers, find, it difficult to publish in these paths in local. Journals and about. Research on their geographic issues, or, in their native native, languages, so. That was an, interesting aspect of the discussion you I. Just. Wanted a really practical. Demonstration. Of how you can use this tool that the laj uses, in their day-to-day work of, deciding. What to include in, the database. As. A way, to teach people how to be more crafting, before. They submit something to a journal that they're not really sure about I believe, analyse you took this, class as well do you have any comments. Yes. I also took this class and I, think. Like as Marnie described, it was it was really useful, to, get this sort of behind the scenes look, at the editorial. Process at, the. Directory of open access journals and. How. They what, the criteria, our that they use to. Ensure. That a journal. Can be listed in the directory and, then likewise, things that are not listed there since. It's a resource, that we. Rely on quite, a bit and in. The, library field and. There. Were a couple of exercises, that we did in the class the. Afternoon. Class this. Being a two day class, one. Of them was, to. Fill. Out an application form. As if we were a journal, that was aligned to be indexed, in the directory of open access journals so that that. Made. Us and go through that journals website, and try. To find the information that. Is required in, order to submit. An application for. Indexing, and then. The second, exercise that we did was to do, an evaluation of, a. Journal. Web page as if we were an editor. For. That, for, do AJ so we were looking for things that were you, know either good. Or bad. And. And it just so happened that the journals that we were reviewing were questionable. Publishers, so where we, were noting the things that. Stood. Out to us as questionable. Practices, such as the, naming of a journal and having a sort of a misleading title that made it look like it was either. A Western journal or, international. Journal or something that mimicked titles, that, an established, title in the field. Questionable. Rankings. And so forth so, that was a very practices, are both very practical, exercises, to. Illustrate. The the process that do AJ goes, through to determine. Whether they're going to include a journal, in their index. Party. There's been very I just want to talk about. Were. There any links, to content. That you can share from. The publishing practices, course. That's. From Allegra. Thomas. And. Yeah were there any links, to content, that you can share from the publishing, practices. Got let me let me try to do that right now I have, the journal application. Link. That and I'm able wanted to take a look at it that, might be interest. Interesting. It's, the application for. Do AJ. And. You'll. See if for. Those of you who are visiting. That, page as we're talking, we're. Talking about 58. Different, criteria. That. Kind of range the gamut of. Things. So. Copyright. And permissions, content, licensing.
Qualitative. And, transparency. Of the editorial. Process and that's just a few. And. Also, the slides that they presented are under a CC, by Creative, Commons license, so I believe we, can we. Ensure those as well. Great. Right. Hi. So this is Allegra swift at UC. San Diego and. This. Course was information-rich. An Open University. This. Was a week-long course for three hours every morning with, David. Miner who's the director. For research data curation program. Here at UCSD and myself as facilitators. So, the. Slides that I'm using were. Part. Of the set, up that we had for the course to explain what. It was we were talking, about and what we were going to go through so. I'm. Just going to read a little bit from the abstracts. For, the course just to give you an idea of what it was about this. Course is based on the observation, that systems, of scholarly communication are, reproducing, rapidly, and are being marketed to our campuses, to address specific, stakeholder. Needs or. As an interoperable. System and supported, the entire scholarly. Communication, ecosystems. During. This course we discussed advances. In the field through, the evaluation, of models and different, systems we. Looked at the stake hole loaders in the drivers. Behind. Use of these systems and. We. Had discussions, and the latter, part of the morning, that were intended to build awareness, and in. The end deliver a set of tools to not, only bring awareness back to our home campuses, but also support. More informed, decision making when purchasing, or implementing, these scholarly. Communication, infrastructure, such as. Institutional. Repositories. Research. Information, management systems, or rims or Chris's. Are known, across the pond. Systems, of research and intelligence, and. Impact. Measurement tools, academic. Profile, of data repositories. Etc. So. We focused, on where, we could exercise our influence, on. The infrastructure, providers. As well as, the stakeholders, who purchased. Subscriptions. To these systems in order to shape a what. We were calling a healthy sustainable fair, and equitable research, information, and scholarly communication, in ecosystems. Ok next oh great thanks. So. This, course initially came about because, the program committee was interested in repeating, successful. Courses from. The first 50 in 2017. And. Danny. At Kingsley, and Sarah Shrieves could not return so I offered to pick it up and I conscripted David David we, had a few conversations with, Rebecca Bryant from OCLC research, because of her work on rim. Systems, and. She. Was there that first day to, set. Up. What. It was we were doing kind of talk about the entire, ecosystem. And we also, asked. Charlotte row it at usf. To expand, on her work with exclusion. And equity and publishing fair tube and. Apply. It to the entire scholarly, communication, systems ecosystems, and not just that that publishing, end. So. This. Course, came about kind, of out. Of that that. Problem when it was announced that Elsevier, purchased, the. Institutional, repository system, be press. So, and we're all kind of a familiar, I imagine, with that effort where that happened. And. That, was kind of a wake-up call to looking, at okay what what are publishers doing. You know why did Elsevier, buy up this. Platform. And what else are they doing. So. For. The course we actually, for, the three middle days Tuesday Wednesday and Thursday we invited publishers and vendors and I had a difficult, time locating, an open source Academy, owned or scholar led, infrastructure. Provider there's plenty. Of providers, that are, doing. One piece of the infrastructure, but nothing really integrated, like. That. The big publishers doing and, I, had some vendors you know backing out at last minute but what I ended up was was, Elsevier. Digital, science and Taylor & Francis. So. Like, I said the course was intended to shed light on this entire ecosystem that. Is being brought up and developed, and then being sold back to our institutions. So, we're, not just buying back the articles of products of research were now buying back the processes. And. That. Kind. Of losing control of the content. And the metadata around that content so. In, addition they're marketing directly to faculty departments. Offices of research or academic affairs, and you'll, find on your campuses, you might have multiple systems, none of which talk to each other at. Great, expense. So. What, we looked looked. At doing what this course was when, we're faced with this question of which systems, are which infrastructure, provider to go with what, criteria should, we go with and.
How Can we be change makers what can we do the. Next slide so. Through. The course we, intended to develop two products, or at least have them in process, by the end one. Product was a set of questions or. An evaluation that. People. Could use at their campuses, or give to people who make the decisions and sign the checks and, these questions were designed to. Kind. Of in two parts, one. Was, the, first part was to you, know what do you ask about your institution, needs-assessment. What. You know what are your needs and how do, they align to any sort of information of value statements. And the, second part was, what. Sort of questions do we need. Given. Those needs that, we need to ask providers. In. Order to evaluate these systems and, the. Second product was a, visualization. And. This. Was to convey you, know what the issue is. Around. This problem and it's visualization. Of how the stakeholders, their needs and uses for these systems the infrastructure, systems, and how all these pieces, interact, within. The scala communication. Ecosystems. And the. Attention here is to raise, awareness of, the complexity, and need for more intentional. Implementation. If we are to remain an open and information, rich institutions. So. We started out with initial, set of questions, and. The. Idea was as the participants. Would kind of test out these questions on the vendors as they came each day and expand, and modified and you, know have discussions, in the afternoons so. While. There is some great work done we actually did not complete the the outcomes, but. A nice sized group was really invested in completion. And we're continuing, to work through. This completion, phase and a. Lot of people are really excited and, a couple. Of people have actually, tested. Them at their home institution. And. I and I did this recently we had sage come to UC, San, Diego, and. I tested some of the questions there. So. If. I was to do it over again I probably would, have structured, the working sessions much, more not less, things. So open-ended, I was experimenting, with learner, centered, pedagogy, after, working a lot with instruction. Librarians, but. The work here needed much more scaffolding, and, direction, so. It. Took a lot of time to bring people kind of up to speed and understand, what it was we're trying to do and, to contribute. All, right Annalise did you have any ELISA did you have me in. Put. Her. And. I'm I also took this, course and I. Would, say I thought, it was really valuable to. Hear. From the, both OCLC. And just them describes. The work that they've done just kind of helping paint a landscape of research. Information management systems, and also kind of understand, how these how.
These Tools, are, implemented. In, other, countries, outside of the United States because, there's, a little bit seems. Like there's a little bit of a different approach in in Europe, in particular and how, they're used compared to the United States and. To. See, how the publishers. Are, the vendors who, gave. Their presentations. How, they approach, this. These. Types of resources and just - it, felt. Like it gave me a much better understanding of, how diversified. They've made their businesses. Elsevier. And, Taylor and Francis as, the, publishers, of the of the vendors that we had demos from are no longer just publishers, they are you, know they also, market, or they sell research. Analytics tools and, research. Research. Tools that integrate, with the actual research process, and they're really. Large they, really have a large portfolio with, these types of tools and it. I think it it. Was both informative, to learn more about their. Entire, portfolios. But also just to kind of get, a better understanding, of just how challenging that. Phenomena. Phenomenon, that Allegra. Described of you. Know we have open, source tools but they're sort of a patchwork of, a tool here in the tool they're words these vendors have developed, this suite, of tools. That that, are interoperable and. That. Make it very easy to transfer. Data from one purpose. To another and so it's. It. You, you can really understand, the appeal of using. The, these. Vendors. Systems. To do, the work of the institution, but then it sort of raises questions about who. Owns the data and, what's being done with the data. What. Happens if we decide. Not to continue with this tool after, certain, amount of time - what do we get to retain what use do we get out of the information. That we put. Into the system those, kinds of questions there, was a really really valuable, exercise. Of course. Hi. Everybody I'm, Bethany, Meyers from UCLA, and Mary. Lynn and I took this class data in the scholarly communications. Lifecycle, this was a week-long class, our. Instructor, was Natasha, Simons who works for the Australian, research data Commons so we had kind of an Australian, wildlife theme, throughout this class which. Was really educational. And. This course was really an overview, of a, lot of the major issues around. Research, data management, so, we've listed a few ism on this slide so, one thing that we talked about repeatedly throughout. The class was this idea of fair principles, for data so, fair stands for findable, accessible. Interoperable. And reusable, and those are the things that you need for data to be truly open so. That was a recurring theme. We. Had one, of the highlights was we had an open, data debate, so our class split in half and we. Were debating about data. Sharing mandates. So half of us were Pro a data sharing mandate, and half of us were an anti, data, sharing mandate. So. That, was a fun time debating. That. We. Had a lot of guest speakers in this class so, Stephanie. Sims from the California, digital library came, and talked to us about data, management plans, or. DMPs. And they. Have, a tool called the DMP tool which generates, data management plans, and she talked a bit about their. Work towards, the future of bnps where. The MPs will become machine readable and, machine actionable, which is going to make a big difference in, integrating. Data, management plans into the whole lifecycle of research. Reed. Otogi from UCSD, came, and talked about Open Science framework which, we saw in the previous classes. So the Open Science framework is, an. Online, platform to organize, research. Transparently. And, he also talked about the, carpentry. The. Carbon trees is, an organization. That, supports, teaching. Code and digital, technologies. To researchers, to, help them be more to, have more open workflows. And, to, facilitate them being able to share their data at the end of their work. Rachel, Sandberg and bring a gold from Berkeley came and talked about licensing. Research data for reuse and data, rights which. I learned, was a really complex, legal topic, so that was really, interesting. And lightning for me and, we. Had Gustavo. Durant from Harvard, dataverse, come and talk about dataverse, dataverse. Is an open source repository, platform. The institution's, can install. Their own. Installation. Of and host, data on it they can use that for repositories, so. Overall this class had a lot of introductions. To different tools around research data management a lot, of the basic principles, for. That so, my takeaways, were definitely a lot learning, about a lot of tools Mary, Lynn do you have anything to add to that I.
Would. Say that that it really did address, the basics and it was interesting, to hear from a variety of speakers the, class was very engaging. On, the. DMP tool. Which, if, you're. Not familiar with it has. Customized. Access. If your institution, is a member but it also is available as, an, open source guest, login, it, prompts. You through, the. Requirements. For a data management plan from, a variety of funding, agencies. And, depending. On which agency. You're, intending, to submit. Your grant proposal to. It, will, prompt, you accordingly, so. If you if you haven't taken a look at it I'd. Encourage, you to do that. It. And. Other. Than, I think you covered. It very well it was it was a very interesting course. Yeah. Anyway, the. Carbon trees are alive. And well if you have a chance to take one of their life, software. Carpentry Zoar library carbon trees or to learn more about that as a way of, building. Up your your, programming, and. Skills. Please. Explore, them. So. Bethany. Again I also took this class opening, the research Enterprise partnering, to support openness and grant funded faculty, research this. Was taught by 9x nur from Virginia, Commonwealth University. And. It was a really discussion. Based class like most, of the class was working in teams and talking about our own experiences. At our own institutions. So. What. We worked on together we made our own research, life cycle we. Tried to incorporate the librarian perspective. Of research, and what happens to it along with the researcher perspective of, like being in the weeds with that, then. We use that lifecycle to identify. Different. Points, where open research, issues. Or opportunities. Might, arise at, at, each stage and then try. To pair. That with the people, who, in our campus research offices, might. Be good partners at each of those points, so I'll show you guys that on the next slide but, then on the second day this was a two day class on the second day we really focused, in and honed in on just one idea for outreach, for. Openness and, research so, my team ended up focusing on this. Workshop, that a library could give to guide researchers, through writing, a dissemination, plan because we felt like there was a lot of opportunities, to work in. Issues. About open access and, impact. Into that, can. I get the next slide, yeah. So here's what we actually made so it looks very complicated but. Basically, on the circle that blue circle is the research lifecycle so, doing. A you know background research planning, grant writing collecting, analyzing, data and then finally, sharing. And publishing, the research we, have these gold boxes, with are the. Opportunities, that we identified, in each of those stages and then the grey boxes, are the challenges, that we thought would come up and then. Those little icons, there. In the legend over in the right those are different research. Administrators, compliance, and ethics people and development, people and we, tagged each of those boxes with who we thought would. Be interested, in each of those stages so it was just helping us think through on our campus, on our different campuses, who. We could reach out to about these different issues so. My takeaway was really just every. Every. Institution, is, different, and I. Definitely. Have some people that I need to meet at mind but, it was a really interesting class I liked the discussion. Hi. This is Auto Lisa Taylor, I am at. UCSF. Head of scholarly communications, and the. Other afternoon class that I took was, how, much does open access cost a hands-on approach to tracking, and analyzing, article, processing charges, an. Article. Processing charges a PCs are open. Access. Journal. Charges. If you're not familiar with those it, one of the things that we did in this course was talk about well what are APCs, because sometimes, it's very cut and dry and then there's other things that, it's like a membership, charge and does that constitute an APC or not so the. Class was taught by Katie, shamash, who, is the scholarly communications, analysts, at JISC in the UK and just, gives a joint, information systems, committee. Which. Is a membership. Organization in. The UK and, they provide digital solutions, for education and research and, so. This the items. That you see listed here are, the topics that we covered throughout the class and, we, started off with talking. About things like you, can, go ahead and go to the next slide that's fine. We.
Talked About things, like this is an example of one of the slides that Katie, presented, which is how. Much JISC, membership, organizations, have been paying for APCs, and in some between, 2013, and 2017, and. Just be important this, this slide, in particular demonstrates. The importance of tracking this kind of data because it shows. How. Over, time a PC payments, are changing, and in, particular, in the UK where they have research funders that pay for APCs they. Want to be able to track how much they're paying and. Having. That as a comparison, for example, against how much they're paying to these same publishers, and subscriptions. As well. So. We have lots of data like that and then. What. We spent actually the bulk of the class doing is. Using. Open refine, to. To. Practice, cleaning, data and if. You've not used open refiner if you're not familiar with it it, is a, open. Source software program, it was created, by Google and then they made it open source and so. It's free to install. And to use, and, I. Had. Actually taken a class at my library and opened refined before and kind of was, thinking oh I don't know if how well I'm going to be able to grasp this but it was very very easy to, feel. Like I had a at, least a good enough basic understanding, of it with just an hour-long class, but. Of course I hadn't done anything with that since I did the class so it was really useful to have a review, of this and this. Is just a screen that shows opening. A file that, I, already. Had loaded, so you open like an excel file it's great for working with large data sets where you have 3,000, rows of data or 10 or 30 thousand, or even fewer, than that anytime when you need to just clean a bunch of data and make everything standardized. And. Go. To the next screen next, slide and, so this, is an example, this is a screenshot of the. Files that we were working with in the class and we, did a number of different data. Cleaning, activities. This. One is showing you how you go. To the, publisher field, and. This would have been a file of gathered. Of. Thousands. Of articles. That were published by. JISC members, institutions. And we. Wanted to clean, or, to standardize, the publisher, name so you have things where you have a publisher, like Wiley and sometimes it says why Blackwell or you have elsevier. And sometimes this is also very. With. Us you know one of their imprints. Or just variations of that and so. You can go to the text facet and clean, that data so that every there's, there all have the same name and, using. The numeric facet would be something like, cleaning. Up payment, data so that there is a standardized, format, for payments, and currency. And so forth and, we. Did a number of we, had lots of hands-on time in the class in this class so we used a number of the other types. Of data cleaning, tools in here and then. On the, second day we, got. Some time to play around with the cross REST API, and. If, a cross F has a public API that, you can access and, so we learn some of the standards, and some of the sort of etiquette, like providing, your email address so. That, process. If there's any question, or problem if the system is slow they know how to contact you, and, we, used the benefit of using being.
Able To pull cross rough data into. Openrefine. For, example, is that, it, publishers. Use, CrossRef, to, register their do is for individual, articles, and so you can. We. Were what. We were doing in the exercises, was matching a DOI, finding. That DOI in in cross, resin and we pull in the data about that particular, article and that publisher, so, using. It to pull in metadata, such as, standardized. Publisher, name the, number of references and citations you. Could use it to pull in an ISSN, binder. Information, and license type so that kind of data. So. Really great. Opportunity. To have some hands-on, experience, working. With these tools and definitely. Something. That i will I hope to get a lot more practice in and, the. Last thing that we did in this class was we had a class exercise where we had a data set and people could use their own data set or one of the ones that we were provided, in class and just. Create, a visualization, from. That data set and so what you're seeing here is one of my classmates which. I thought was a nice fun. A nice, clean, example, of what. You can do with very quickly, visualizing. Some data and what. They did was just shows a comparison, of payments, from. The JISC data between. Subscription. Payments, and APC payments, by publisher, so this gives you a really nice snapshot. Of, how. Much money is going to, a publisher, and then how that breaks down between, subscription. Payments and open access APC payments. Thank. You. Hi. This is Mary Lin at UC San Diego I was. Delighted. To take a course, this, was a two-day course the afternoon, courses, were two-day, the. Course was on structural, biology, a prototypical. Case for, publishing big data it and, it. Had two instructors, one, Pete Meyer. From. The SP grids at structural, biology, grid databank, Harvard, med school and his. Colleague. Gustavo. Durand from, dataverse, and I. Think you heard Gustavo's, name mentioned before as a guest speaker, in one of the other classes that that, was offered and. He. He. Was the second. Speaker. Pete took the lead in describing. An overview. Of structural, biology, which I've got to tell you was just.
Fascinating. He, talked about. The. Weather. Stroll what structural, biology, really is the biological. Macromolecules. DNA, RNA and proteins, and how, structural biology, is the, science. Of determining. The 3d, coordinates, of these, biological. Macromolecules. He. Talked about the three main experimental. Techniques, for. Exploring. And determining, these structures. X-ray. Crystallography. Accounts. For 90% of, these instructors. And what, the data output from, x-ray. Crystallography. Is 3d. Diffraction. Patterns, of x-ray, photons. The. Second, most common is nuclear, magnetic. Resonance, in spectroscopy, and. That accounts, for 9% of. The existing, structures, and the. Research. Output, the data output from that is multi-dimensional, resonance. Spectra. And then, last but far from least is the cryo-electron, microscopy. That. Accounts for 1.2. Percent of existing structures but is likely to increase due. To improved hardware, and algorithms. The primary, data from that method, is to. The electron. Micro, grid, so. Having, given us this really fascinating overview. On peat and talked. About how SB, grid the structural, biology, grid that he is working, on on. Sort. Of managing, the collaboration. How. It complements, the Protein Data Bank and, uniprot, and. Then. How, the various. Repositories who. Store. This and how this kind of data. Has to interact and complement, one another in. Order to be effective in supporting science. So. We. Then. Learned what data verse had to do in order to accommodate, this, this. Structural, biology, data and data verse I'm. Not sure if many. Of you have interacted, with it or use any of the contents. Of it but it's an open source platform, for where. You can publish site. And archive, research data, built. To support, multiple types, of data and users and workflows. But. The requirements. Were. Kind, of shifted. Gears in. Order, to account accommodate. The structural biology, data, and and. Gustavo. Talked about that and then they. They. Tried to have a hands-on, component and, that was very challenging it, turned out that their expectations, for who would have taken this course was. Developers, software developers, and. There. Are they're, amusing, pictures, of of people such as myself not, a software, developer. Trying. To actually, do. As we were instructed and where this, load this stuff up on our our laptops. Anyway it was fascinating, was very, intellectually. Stimulating, and challenging and. I, really enjoyed the opportunity and. I, think Bethany you were in that class as well, yeah. I was. I. Think I think you covered it yeah I mean I I learned, so much about, virtual. Biology as a distance learning it was just really interesting to hear the perspective of, you. Know dataverse. And this like kind of subject. Diagnostic, platform working with like. Really really technically. Detailed, needs of a subject so it was good. Alright. I'm I'm also up for this one I guess um. Open. Data visualization. Tools and techniques to better report, data was, another. Two-day, course in. The, section I took with the. First, of the, two, times it was taught and I. Think he was kind of working out his techniques, with us as a. Smaller group of students it was taught by Gaurav, Godwin, is an, Indian. Gentleman from in director, and co-founder of, the Civic data lab and. He. Gave. A background. Of data visualization as. You can see from this quote he. Described. What. Visualization. Can do with data why it's necessary. When. You're lost in information. And information map is kind of useful so. He gave, that good background and, if you can show the next slide then.
He He, talked about, the. Development, over time of, visualization. Technologies. And software and, how the, different players in, the process, kind of drive it and how it's come from. 1975. To present, he, had a lot of interesting, slides but this was just one that showed all the different players people, who put the data in people. Who developed, the visualization. Software in the middle and then the end user who's. Trying. To make sense of it all and the. Last slide for this one um. Just. Describes, the. Garage. Um. Sort. Of philosophy. Big data will not change the world unless it is collected, and synthesized, into tools that have a public, benefit, and that's the underlying. Premise for the Civic data lab it's, an open source on. Effort. And. He. He conducted, a demo, based on the Apache superset, and I. Think you can I think that link is still active, and live and you can get in I know he opened up extra, capacity for the class when we took it but I believe you can still get in there and he. Walked us through the, key elements, of interactive. Data visualizations. Talked. About various challenges. And. Techniques, for visualizing, and reporting, data and, then, some, of the open source data visualization. Tools, that are available on. This particular. Demo site, so. A lot to learn was an interesting, two days and a real hands-on, I liked. That approach. And. I'm not sure if anyone else on the panel, was. Able to take that one. Bethany. Did you take that one no. I didn't, okay. My apologies oh wait. I had. That. Me too um, so. That was the bulk of the content presented. During. The Institute, what. We're going to end on really quickly are just kind of the overall highlights, some of the other activities, so. Again descend RIA from City of Hope they, also didn't, do us on I don't, know if anyone has participated in, one of those ever it was my first time I found it's a great thing, basically. People pitch. An idea for, a small project and then, so, you get these presentations. For a variety, of ideas where people are trying to sell their project, to you and then, you. Take are, they devoted about an hour, and a half to two hours where, the people who are interested, in help with that project can actually work and accomplish. The goal or work. Towards the goal and. I know that one of the projects, had to do with creating a wiki page for force, 11 and I. Helped, the. Do AJ group and, tracking, down a new, list that was coming out of India of. Journals. That they were going to be using for research, evaluation so. We were trying to track down that. For. Tom the. Other things that I thought was the coolest thing and. I had never experienced, that either I really need to get out more I think is. Power. PowerPoint. Karaoke. So. Basically, that is is, someone. Facilitates, goes out into, the web and. And. Find, small, PowerPoint. Slides and they're about 10 slides each and they, progress at, 30-second. Intervals I, think and then the poor volunteer, sign up to, take their, to. Just basically wing it for five minutes and pretend that's their presentation. I think I laughed. So hard that, was awesome so for any of you who are part. Of program committees, for, other. Conferences. Or events I. Have. To thumbs up for these things and then, what, I found during my classes. And. And, the various, activities is I just, thought it was a great opportunity or, I tried, to take every opportunity to, advocate as, to, what librarians, do what. I do in my role as a scholarly communication, librarian and, how, I help contribute to. To. Our institutions. Mission and. So I just wanted a plug for that were. There any other highlights. That anyone wanted to add it in in a couple minutes. I'll just say that UCSD. Is a really, fabulous campus. And being in in San. Diego, is a really, great place to have a, week-long. Workshop. Institute, like this it's, a really. Really great opportunities. To network with, people and, interact, with a lot of people who are focused on scholarly communication, for a week I. Agree. It's. Also a fairly, international. Group. It's not. Certainly. Not California, only and and. Really. Has quite a reach there, were there. Were students, and instructors. From all, over the, world and and. That gave it a nice. Kind. Of authenticity when, people talk about being open or or, accessible. It's nice to have people who can speak. To that from, Africa, or other. Parts. Of the world that, we don't always hear from that, was nice I think, you've heard from a lot of different. Courses but. I'm, not, sure we even covered. 75%. Of them I think there were a lot that didn't even get covered by the number of people that have, spoken today so though it was a very rich, offering. I'd. Encourage you to check out next year's programs. Yes. The math is happening, around the same time in 2019.
At UC, San Diego and. I, just want to echo what annalisa, said about San. Diego and La Jolla that I felt. Like everything. The, content. And the environment, were just perfect, I, think. That's all we have today. I know. We're leaving two minutes one minute for questions. And. I, did plug in the there. Is a link for the final, closing session slides. From. The Institute, that, link is in the chat if, you wanted to take a look at kind, of the overall, feedback and people how the the. Of. The students what. Their takeaways, not just our perspectives, of things. You wanted to take, a look at that that would be great. Any. Questions for us. So. While, you're putting your questions, in the chat box we. Put up the slide for the n.l.a.p, evaluation. That. You can take. To get one hour, of MLA, seee credit, and we'll, also be sending that out to the people who RSVP'd and, who showed up to. This session as well and. Just, another. Plug for in. September. There will be an NLM, resource picks on the clinical trials, gov, database. And that's going to be September 26. At, noon. Pacific, time, or, 3:00 p.m. Eastern Time and. I'd, like to thank all our speakers, this. Is a really interesting session. And I think we have a lot of interesting ideas and things and so, I'm. Sure you'll, all be looking out for next. August. To, go to San Diego for, this, scholarly. Communication. Institute. Great. Thank you yeah I plan on being there, good. Anything. Else. Thank. You everyone. But. We're just getting thank yous in there. All. Right buh-bye. Okay. Bye bye. Bye. Hey. We did it bang hey. That's. Great oh I forgot to send this. Okay. Well if anyone's still on the line you can always send us emails and we'll get back to you. Have any questions thank, you yeah great. Thanks. Kay thanks, Marco. Thanks, Andre for. Well. Yeah that recognizing, all this thanks. Everyone. You're. Very welcome it was a pleasure and I was so happy to work with you guys on it so thank you my. Clearing line, everybody. Good. Thanks bye. Bye hi.