Two New OA Books (+1)

This has been a busy week for books on Open Access. On Wednesday I blogged about the book Understanding Open Access in the Academic Environment: A Guide for Authors by Kylie Pappalardo. Today Open Access News wrote about two more new Open Access books:

E. Canessa and M. Zennaro at the Science Dissemination Unit of the Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP) in Trieste have put together an edited book Science Dissemination using Open Access.

From today’s announcement:

The book is a compendium of selected literature on Open Access, both on the technical and organizational levels, and was written in an effort to guide the scientific community on the requirements of Open Access, and the plethora of low-cost solutions available. The book also aims to encourage decision makers in academia and research centers to adopt institutional and regional Open Access Journals and Archives to make their own scientific results public and fully searchable on the Internet. Discussions on open publishing via Academic Webcasting are also included.

The other book is a 144 pp. collection of articles on OA by 38 authors, edited by Barbara Malina entitled Open Access Opportunities and Challenges: A Handbook, the German UNESCO Commission, July 2008. This is an English translation of Open Access: Chancen und Herausforderungen – ein Handbuch (2007).

PhD in Edinburgh – short deadline

SCRIPT – a law and technology research centre at the University of Edinburgh, School of Law – is seeking to recruit a suitably-qualified candidate to undertake a fully-funded PhD studentship. This is a full-time, full maintenance, three-year position sponsored by the Arts and Humanities Research Council, which also supports the Centre. The area of research will fall within the “Open Science Business Model” strand of the Centre’s activities and the successful candidate will be supervised by Professor Graeme Laurie and Andres Guadamuz, Co-Directors of the Centre.

This studentship will benefit from collaboration with Roslin Cells Ltd, a not-for-profit company associated with the Roslin Institute which produces high-quality embryonic stem cell lines for research and clinical application. Roslin Cells, which is interested in issues of Open Science and wishes to develop a suitable open licensing strategy, will serve as a case study and this is expected to form a central part of the thesis.

This studentship is being fully funded by the Arts & Humanities Research Council and candidates must be eligible to receive such support. Further details of the eligibility criteria are available from http://www.law.ed.ac.uk/ahrc/aboutus/studentshipguidelines.aspx

Queries relating to this studentship can be addressed to Professor Graeme Laurie, Director of SCRIPT at graeme.laurie@ed.ac.uk or on 0131 650 2020.

An application form is available from the SCRIPT Administrator via john.anzani@ed.ac.uk

The closing deadline for application is 09:00 Friday 13th June 2008. Interviews will be held on the afternoon of Friday 20th June 2008.

Women in Science

The numbers differ between the disciplines but there is a basic sad truth in academia and that is that the higher up you climb the less women are left. Anna Kushnir writes in Wired:

Take my graduate school for example: My class was made up of eight people — seven women and one man, or 7 to 1. He was Snow White and we were the seven dwarves — each with a remarkably appropriate nickname. I was Grumpy, should you be curious to know.

Snow White and at least four of the dwarves have continued on to postdoctoral research jobs. That is a 4 to 3 ratio of women who went on to do a post-doc to those that chose alternate career paths.

Everything is adding up so far, right? Lots of women are around. Lots of science is being done. All is well.

The next set of numbers is slightly puzzling, however. That is the ratio of female to male professors in our department, at a well-respected academic institution, is 48 to 7 men to women.

Interesting reversal, isn’t it? We go from 7 to 1 in grad school to roughly 1 to 7 in professorships.

There are plenty of reasons and explanations but none that adequately explain the whole process. One of the reasons is that, unfortunately, academia for a long time been a boys club where girls are not welcome. This is a really silly reason but who said that professors were not silly?

Calvin & Hobbes G.R.O.S.S. club (get rid of slimy girls)
by Bill Watterson

The dumbest generation

A new book that may be a good read is Mark Bauerlein’s The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future (Or, Don’t Trust Anyone Under 30) – another recommendation by Kevin at Question Technology (his recommendations are always worth looking into).

dumbestgeneration.jpg

From the book’s website:

According to recent reports from government agencies, foundations, survey firms, and scholarly institutions, most young people in the United States neither read literature (or fully know how), work reliably (just ask employers), visit cultural institutions (of any sort), nor vote (most can’t even understand a simple ballot). They cannot explain basic scientific methods, recount foundations of American history, or name any of their local political representatives. What do they happen to excel at is – each other. They spend unbelievable amounts of time electronically passing stories, pictures, tunes, and texts back and forth, savoring the thrill of peer attention and dwelling in a world of puerile banter and coarse images.

The book argues that this is not the typical elder generation complaining about, or not getting, the younger generation but it is a serious problem.

To those of us outside the US its no point in laughing at the Yanks – the evidence shows the same trends even in Europe and based upon my (non-scientific, anecdotal evidence) students – I cannot say that I am impressed.

On the other hand, for as long as I can remember, I have been hearing how the great thinkers have all gone. As a young PhD I was taught that the pace of life and the realities of academia no longer allow for the great works – we have to force research to create publications. Reading is almost frowned upon and when was the last time you could sit in your office and just think?

Still I see plenty of evidence of thought, and great thought at that. No, it is not in the same pattern as the old thought. It is more communicative – it must be to catch the reader who is not allowed to read and think. To enable this depth may, sometimes, be sacrificed.

If we look to the past it seems populated with genius – but this may be because we tend to forget the idiots, unless they were spectacularly idiotic. But if we look around us we seen the idiots but cannot see the geniuses, this may be that they are working instead of appearing on talent shows for the untalented.

ps trust me, I am 41 today 🙂

Trademark Violation

On my way to work I saw an interesting advert on the tram. Göteborg University is attempting to attract new students by using the Pirate Bay trademark. The advert has changed the logo slightly by replacing the skull and crossbones with a globe but this still makes it a trademark violation… I guess that piracy sells even academia.

gu_pirate.jpg

Treat them like crap

Explaining the inner workings of the university to outsiders is complicated enough my family and friends don’t get what the university is, or how it works and often enough the comments that I have “stayed” in university are flung at me as if this is a simple, cosy sinecure. Ignore the fact that we have an incredible series of qualifications (both formal and informal), ignore the fact that we have internal politics, real budgets, tough evaluations and working conditions which do not match our salaries – no other group works for free as much as we do – ignore all that. Just remember that universities can, and do, treat many of their valued workers like shit.

Purse Lips and Square Jaw blogged an excerpt from Marc Bousquet’s new book How The University Works (the introduction in pdf)

Degree in hand, loans coming due…the degree holder asks a question to which the system has no answer: If I have been a splendid teacher and scholar while nondegreed for the past ten years, why am I suddenly unsuitable? Nearly all of the administrative responses to the degree holder can already be understood as responses to waste: flush it, ship it to the provinces, recycle it through another industry, keep it away from the fresh meat.

Several of my friends have written their PhDs and are still struggling to get fixed jobs in academia despite several years of teaching and research experience. Martin over at Aardvarcheology has written his experiences at getting hired within academia.

Read more over at Bousquet’s How The University Works Blog and Tiziana Terranova and Marc Bousquet, Recomposing the University, Mute Magazine, 2004

Coping with the Crap and thinking the thoughts

After spending the best part of a morning doing admin, in particular going through my inbox only to discover what I have missed, I realize (not for the first time) that I need to be more systematic about my work. In particular I need to divide my day in a more efficient manner.

For me the three main productivity and time thieves are:

Interruptions and short meetings – this is because I try to work before and after but interruptions and short meetings make me lose my chain of thought and send me off on a different tangent. A well placed interruption can create a chain of events that cause a whole day to be lost.

Travel time – Since I spend several hours a week on trains (mainly) I need to reconsider the way in which travel can be seen. This time must be used more efficiently. Computer work is possible but not desirable. Reading may be the optimal use of train travel.

Administration – By this I mean the whole process of ensuring that my research and teaching works. It is everything from maintaining email correspondence to filling out the reports. The actual time spent with administration concerns and annoyances is almost as high as the time spent actually carrying out the administrative tasks.

The plan: A proposal of a new work order for myself.

First of all I need to create a meetings and administration day. On this day the main point of going to work will be not to write or to research. It will be to efficiently resolve my administration tasks. This will also free up my mind from thinking about administration.

Second of all I need to create the opposite of an administration day and this is my Creativity day. The whole point of this day will be to think. Not to write but to think. A whole day to work out solutions to problems, lay plans and develop ideas. This day should not be spent writing. Of course I will make notes but maybe I will do this longhand with a paper and pen. This day should be as unplugged as possible. Little or no computer use.

Third I will create two research and writing days. This will include writing out the ideas from the creativity day, carrying out research, writing articles, chapters and books. Writing research proposals belongs to the administration day and should not be done here. These days should be relatively unplugged – keeping Internet use to a minimum.

Fourth and last will be the teaching day. During this day I will lecture and guide, have student meetings and seminars. Since I have a low teaching burden at present this should be more than enough and the time not spent in teaching should be used in preparing for teaching and teaching administration.

Naturally an idea like this cannot work without making sure that there are exceptions. Every now and then I am sure that the plan will implode but the idea is to strive for improvement.

When will you blog? The exception to the rule

However while the focus of these days is as mentioned I do believe that there is a need to apply oneself to work on a regular basis. Therefore in each day I will include one hour of academic writing (except on the two research and writing days since this is already included). One hour of other writing (mostly emails & this blog).

This is the basic plan and I am sure that it will require some fine tuning but I hope to be quite strict about its application. It’s not a new idea that the freedom embedded in academia requires a great deal of self discipline but what is new for me is the attempt to implement a strict organized regime instead of trying to solve things on a priority basis.

Arrogant, Daring & Right

Found a new voice of wisdom (to call it vox populi would probably be wrong) today. Alf Rehn writes an excellent rant about the research article in the context of the UK RAE (Research Assessment Exercise) system:

Now, what I find absolutely horrendous and directly unethical is that all this denigrates the scholarly book, the research monograph. The way I was raised into academia, this was what you meant by research, and now a bunch of foreign bureaucrats with language problems are saying that this does not count? Well, fuck you and the horse you rode in on. Writing a journal article, to me, is mainly an exercise in typing. There are rote formulas to get a journal article done (well known such, looking at the shite that gets published), and it frankly bores me a lot of the time. A book, however, is another matter. A book takes time to craft, and the sheer length thereof forces one to work in an altogether different manner. I was taught by my Doktorvater the following: If you haven’t written a serious monograph, you shouldn’t be made a PhD. If you haven’t written two, you’re not a serious scholar. “—And never let one who hasn’t written three serious books become a professor! It cheapens the title.” And damn good advice it was too.

It’s provocative, it’s daring, maybe it could be a bit reactionary, it’s definitely bold, ballsy and forward. It also happens to be correct. Go Alf!

(via Imaginary Magnitude)

Harvard Thesis Repository

With so many discussions on Free Culture, Open Access and the problems connected with making academic publishing available outside academia it is surprising how few good places there are to find thesis’ online.

This is why I was happy when Peter Murray-Rust pointed me towards the Harvard College Thesis Repository (a project of Harvard College Free Culture).

Here Harvard students make their senior theses accessible to the world, for the advancement of scholarship and the widening of open access to academic research.

Too many academics still permit publishers to restrict access to their work, needlessly limitingâ??cutting in half, or worseâ??readership, research impact, and research productivity. For more background, check out our op-ed article in The Harvard Crimson.

If you’ve written a thesis in Harvard College, you’re invited to take a step toward open access right here, by uploading your thesis for the world to read. (If you’re heading for an academic career, this can even be a purely selfish moveâ??a first taste of the greater readership and greater impact that comes with open access.)
If you’re interested in what the students at (ahem) the finest university in the world have to say at the culmination of their undergraduate careers, look around.

The FAQ explains much of the process. It is also good to see that they are applying Creative Commons Attribution License

Q. What permissions do I have to grant to free my thesis?

A. To make sure your thesis is always available for scholars to build on, we ask that you give everyone permission to do the things you’d want to be able to do with a scholarly work you liked: download the work, read it, keep copies, share it with other people, and adapt it into fresh works. The specific legal permission we ask for is the Creative Commons Attribution License, the same one required by the world’s leading biology journal PLoS Biology and the other journals of the Public Library of Science.

My only (small) complaint is that I wish the repository was clearer in showing the license terms for their content. I only found it in the faq. Normally I would not bother reading the faq. To increase the usability of the site the terms should be on the download page and preferably on the essay file.
Despite this I think this is an excellent initiative and I would hope that the fact that Harvard has taken a step such as this would work as an incentive for other universities to follow suite.

Andrew "Da-Man" Murray

Can you believe that I almost forgot to tell everyone about it? My friend Andrew has just published his first solo work! Too cool. Andrew’s book is called “The Regulation of Cyberspace: Control in the online environment” and is an excellent mix of academia, anecdote, politics, law, raw power and technology.

He cites examples as varied as the online coffee pot at Cambridge to the Live8 ebay scandals of 2005, draws from academic fields of information technology, law, philosophy and physics. His point? Basically the world of Internet regulation is much more complex than we care to accept. Regulation is neither hierarchical nor a question of social practice therefore we must bravely accept this and come to terms with the uncertainty of the situation…

Andrew D. Murray – The Regulation of Cyberspace is going to be influential and long lived. Get it from Amazon here!