Quality Criteria in Scholarship and Science: Proposing a Visualization of Their Interactions
Proposing a model for thinking about the interactions of rigor, cogency, accessibility, significance, openness, and impact in scholarly quality.
Proposing a model for thinking about the interactions of rigor, cogency, accessibility, significance, openness, and impact in scholarly quality.
Accessible publishing is better for publishers, better for the bottom line, better for readers of all stripes. If we agree that egalitarian dissemination of academic content is the thing to do, including those with physical, learning, or cognitive challenges, then why does end-to-end accessible publishing continue to elude us?
Ideally, we want science and scholarship to be not only available to the general public, but also comprehensible to them. But the challenges to doing so are real, and may vary both by discipline and by study type.
Darrell Gunter discusses the great opportunities available in making all forms of content accessible to everyone.
Charlie Rapple reports back from ISMTE, which does not stand for the International Society of Making Toys Educational
When thinking about open access to content, is it appropriate to equate disabling downloads with lack of support for the visually impaired?
A compelling essay points out some interesting wrinkles to the access debate.