Armstrong & Miller on the challenges of getting academics to communicate work in simple terms. Or perhaps the challenges of people expecting you to be able to communicate something complicated in simple terms.
We Step Aside: This week The Scholarly Kitchen is spotlighting research and researchers writing about systemic racism. Today’s post comes from the resource of Particles for Justice.
The story behind the survey for and from the academic library community as it responds to COVID-19 by @lisalibrarian + @cwolffeisenberg.
Robert Harington explores rumors circulating in recent weeks of an impending US Executive Order focusing on public access to federally funded research and open data.
Social license, in the context of research, is a form of public ‘approval’ that ensures research is funded, that its results are respected, and that participation is willingly engaged in, where needed. For many reasons, it seems as if researchers’ current social license is in danger of being revoked. Charlie Rapple explores what might be required to ensure it is renewed.
Could scholarly publishers’ skills and capacity be re-positioned to serve researchers at earlier stages in the research process, “upstream” of publication? Charlie Rapple shares findings from a survey of the communications needs of almost 10,000 researchers.
Robert Harington talks to Amy Brand, Director of MIT Press, to discover more about the recent launch of the Knowledge Futures Group.
Ever felt frustrated with your governing board? Although the board may not be of your design, there’s still much you can do to shape an effective board that truly adds value to execution of your business strategy and mission. Read on to find out how!
LEGO is increasingly being used in teaching and research. Here are some fun examples of how and why it can be useful.
In this interview Robert Harington asks Melinda Baldwin to talk about her recent article in Isis, entitled “Scientific Autonomy, Public Accountability, and the Rise of “Peer Review” in the Cold War United States”, and to provide some more personal views on peer review topics of the moment.
The buzz around blockchain is mounting. But does it fit with scholarly publishing’s incentives and practices?
A flawed article claiming that manuscripts don’t change much between being preprints and published articles somehow makes it through peer review unchanged.
Researchers from Africa, Asia and Latin America answer the question, “How do we increase diversity in scholarly communications?”
A study of how enriching keyword metadata improved sales of 4 publishers points to changes in how we should view marketing of books online.
A look at inequality in research and knowledge systems, and in particular, how gender issues in higher education are exacerbated in the Global South.