2021-01-23T14:23:20Z https://zenodo.org/oai2d
oai:zenodo.org:3549091 2020-01-20T16:48:49Z openaire user-coki
Wilson, Katie Neylon, Cameron Brookes-Kenworthy, Chloe Hosking, Richard Huang, Chun-Kai (Karl) Montgomery, Lucy Ozaygen, Alkim 2019-10-31 In the context of a growing international focus on open access publishing options and mandates, this paper explores the extent to which the ideals of ‘openness’ are also being applied to physical knowledge resources and research spaces. This study, which forms part of the larger Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative project, investigates the relationship between academic library access policies and institutional positions on open access or open science publishing. Analysis of library access policies and related documents from twenty academic institutions in Asia, Australia, Europe, North America, Africa and the United Kingdom shows that physical access to libraries for members of the public who are not affiliated with a university is often the most restricted category of access. Many libraries impose financial and sometimes security barriers on entry to buildings, limiting access to collections in print and other non-digital formats. The limits placed on physical access to libraries contrast strongly with the central role that these institutions play in facilitating open access in digital form for research outputs through institutional repositories and open access publishing policies. We compared library access policies and practices with open access publishing and research sharing policies for the same institutions and found limited correlation between both sets of policies. Comparing the two assessments using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient confirmed open access policies have a direct association with the narrow aspects of public access provided through online availability of formal publications, but are not necessarily associated (in the universities in this study) with delivering on a broader commitment to public access to knowledge. The results suggest that while institutional mission statements and academic library policies may refer to sharing of knowledge and research and community collaboration, multiple layers of library user categories, levels of privilege and fees charged can inhibit the realisation of these goals. As open access publishing options and mandates expand, physical entry to academic libraries and access to print and electronic resources has contracted. This varies within and across countries, but it conflicts with global library and information commitments to open access to knowledge. https://zenodo.org/record/3549091 10.18352/lq.10298 oai:zenodo.org:3549091 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode open knowledge; library access; open access; academic libraries 'Is the library open?': Correlating unaffiliated access to academic libraries with open access support info:eu-repo/semantics/article publication-article
oai:zenodo.org:3549160 2019-11-21T07:59:01Z user-coki
Lucy Montgomery Cameron Neylon 2019-11-21 Digital ubiquity has disrupted the traditional university model. The internet has shifted the balance of a tension between control and disorder in knowledge production, with many of the opportunities the web brings leading directly to many of the challenges we now need to address. Lucy Montgomery and Cameron Neylon advocate for the idea of universities as Open Knowledge Institutions, which would support and provide spaces for the world’s creative diversity to contribute to a common stock of global knowledge. This means reinventing some of our ideas about what university is, or should be, while also recognising that this change has to be an evolution, not a revolution. https://zenodo.org/record/3549160 10.5281/zenodo.3549160 oai:zenodo.org:3549160 url:https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2018/09/17/in-a-globalised-and-networked-world-what-is-the-unique-value-a-university-can-bring-introducing-open-knowledge-institutions/ doi:10.5281/zenodo.3549159 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode LSE Impact Blog In a globalised and networked world, what is the unique value a university can bring? Introducing Open Knowledge Institutions info:eu-repo/semantics/other other
oai:zenodo.org:3548174 2020-01-20T16:48:40Z openaire user-coki
Montgomery, Lucy Neylon Hosking Huang Ozaygen Wilson 2019-05-28 Universities are key sites of knowledge creation. Governments and research funders are increasingly interested in ensuring that their investments in the production of new knowledge deliver a quantifiable return on investment, including in the form of ‘impact’. Ensuring that research outputs are not locked behind paywalls, and that research data can be interrogated and built upon are increasingly central to efforts to improve the effectiveness of global research landscapes. We argue that mandating and promoting open access (OA) for published research outputs, as well as the sharing of research data are important elements of building a vibrant open knowledge system, but they are not enough. Supporting diversity within knowledge-making institutions; enabling collaboration across boundaries between universities and wider communities; and addressing inequalities in access to knowledge resources and in opportunities to contribute to knowledge making processes are also important. New tools are needed to help universities, funders, and communities to understand the extent to which a university is operating as an effective open knowledge institution; as well as the steps that might be taken to improve open knowledge performance. This paper discusses our team’s efforts to develop a model of Open Knowledge that is not confined to measures of OA and open data. The Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative is a project of the Centre for Culture and Technology at Curtin University. With funding from the university, we are exploring the extent to which universities are functioning as effective open knowledge institutions; as well as the types of information that universities, funders, and communities might need to understand an institution’s open knowledge performance and how it might be improved. The challenges of data collection on open knowledge practices at scale, and across national, cultural and linguistic boundaries are also discussed. https://zenodo.org/record/3548174 10.4000/proceedings.elpub.2019.19 oai:zenodo.org:3548174 eng url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode Open Knowledge, Open Access, Scholarly Communication Universities and knowledge sharing: Evaluating progress to openness at the institutional level info:eu-repo/semantics/article publication-article
oai:zenodo.org:3563262 2019-12-09T05:50:17Z user-coki
Neylon, Cameron Montgomery, Lucy 2019-03-29 When we think about the value of journal publishing, we have a tendency to think in terms of costs per article and the potential for new technologies to reduce these costs. In this post, Lucy Montgomery and Cameron Neylon argue that we should instead focus on the social life of journals and the knowledge communities they sustain. Taking this as a starting point they explore how changes to the business model of journal publishing have pushed existing forms of academic social organization to their limits. https://zenodo.org/record/3563262 10.5281/zenodo.3563262 oai:zenodo.org:3563262 doi:10.5281/zenodo.3563261 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode The value of a journal is the community it creates, not the papers it publishes info:eu-repo/semantics/other other
oai:zenodo.org:4034822 2020-09-24T06:18:31Z software user-coki
Neylon, Cameron Huang, Chun-Kai (Karl) 2020-09-17 This is a record of the codes and data used for performing text analysis of annual reports of Australian universities. The results of this analysis are included in the article: "Exploratory analysis of indicators for open knowledge institutions: a case study of Australian universities", available at http://dx.doi.org/10.17613/r2sx-xg40 A summary of the files: pdfprocess.py: this notebook defines a library of functions to transform PDF to text, transform text files to word tokens and use the tokens to derive proportions of occurrence of specified words or phrases script.py: this notebook executes the functions defined above and places results in specified folders words.json: this file contains the keywords and phrases of interest to this study and how they are grouped data/raw/2017: this folder consists of the raw annual reports downloaded manually from university websites in PDF format (these were publicly accessible at the time of download but remain copyright of the respective universities where applicable) data/processed_text/2017: this folder consists of the annual reports in text format after processing data/output/2017.json: the results after the text files are converted to tokens AU_2017.csv: the final results of counts and proportions, for each university https://zenodo.org/record/4034822 10.5281/zenodo.4034822 oai:zenodo.org:4034822 doi:10.5281/zenodo.4034821 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode Codes and data for text analysis of Australian university annual reports for 2017 info:eu-repo/semantics/other software
oai:zenodo.org:3548158 2020-01-20T16:49:03Z openaire user-coki
Montgomery, Lucy Neylon, Cameron Hosking, Richard Huang, Chun-Kai (Karl) Ozaygen, Alkim Wilson, Katie 2019-06-04 Universities are key sites of knowledge creation. Governments and research funders are increasingly interested in ensuring that their investments in the production of new knowledge deliver a quantifiable return on investment, including in the form of ‘impact’. Ensuring that research outputs are not locked behind paywalls, and that research data can be interrogated and built upon are increasingly central to efforts to improve the effectiveness of global research landscapes. We argue that mandating and promoting open access (OA) for published research outputs, as well as the sharing of research data are important elements of building a vibrant open knowledge system, but they are not enough. Supporting diversity within knowledge-making institutions; enabling collaboration across boundaries between universities and wider communities; and addressing inequalities in access to knowledge resources and in opportunities to contribute to knowledge making processes are also important. New tools are needed to help universities, funders, and communities to understand the extent to which a university is operating as an effective open knowledge institution; as well as the steps that might be taken to improve open knowledge performance. This presentation discusses our team’s efforts to develop a model of Open Knowledge that is not confined to measures of OA and open data. The Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative is a project of the Centre for Culture and Technology at Curtin University. With funding from the university, we are exploring the extent to which universities are functioning as effective open knowledge institutions; as well as the types of information that universities, funders, and communities might need to understand an institution’s open knowledge performance and how it might be improved. The challenges of data collection on open knowledge practices at scale, and across national, cultural and linguistic boundaries are also discussed. https://zenodo.org/record/3548158 10.5281/zenodo.3548158 oai:zenodo.org:3548158 doi:10.5281/zenodo.3548157 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode Open Access, Open Scholarship, Scholarly Communication, Open Knowledge Universities and Knowledge Sharing: The Curtin Open Knowledge Initaitive info:eu-repo/semantics/lecture presentation
oai:zenodo.org:3541521 2020-02-05T08:19:57Z software user-coki
Chun-Kai (Karl) Huang Cameron Neylon Chloe Brookes-Kenworthy Richard Hosking Lucy Montgomery Katie Wilson Alkim Ozaygen 2019-11-14 R codes and data to produce results and figures for the article on bibliographic cross validation. This is the first version release. https://zenodo.org/record/3541521 10.5281/zenodo.3541521 oai:zenodo.org:3541521 url:https://github.com/Curtin-Open-Knowledge-Initiative/bibliographic-cross-validation-2019/tree/1 doi:10.5281/zenodo.3541520 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess Codes and data for the article: Comparison of bibliographic data sources: Implications for the robustness of university rankings info:eu-repo/semantics/other software
oai:zenodo.org:3637947 2020-02-06T07:20:52Z software user-coki
Chun-Kai (Karl) Huang 2020-02-05 Version after final edits by authors https://zenodo.org/record/3637947 10.5281/zenodo.3637947 oai:zenodo.org:3637947 url:https://github.com/Curtin-Open-Knowledge-Initiative/bibliographic-cross-validation-2019/tree/accepted doi:10.5281/zenodo.3541520 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess Curtin-Open-Knowledge-Initiative/bibliographic-cross-validation-2019: Accepted version info:eu-repo/semantics/other software
oai:zenodo.org:3541550 2020-02-05T08:19:58Z software user-coki
Chun-Kai (Karl) Huang Cameron Neylon Chloe Brookes-Kenworthy Richard Hosking Lucy Montgomery Katie Wilson Alkim Ozaygen 2019-11-14 repository for r codes and data associated with the paper on cross-validation of bibliographic data sources. https://zenodo.org/record/3541550 10.5281/zenodo.3541550 oai:zenodo.org:3541550 url:https://github.com/Curtin-Open-Knowledge-Initiative/bibliographic-cross-validation-2019/tree/2 doi:10.5281/zenodo.3541520 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess Codes and data for the article: Comparison of bibliographic data sources: Implications for the robustness of university rankings info:eu-repo/semantics/other software
oai:zenodo.org:4279255 2020-11-19T05:32:20Z openaire user-coki
Huang 2020-11-18 The higher education sector is rapidly under pressure to evolve. One driving force is the commitment to “openness” in knowledge production and dissemination. While changes for open science and open access (OA) have picked up momentum in recent years, there remains much unknown in other areas of openness such as wider community engagements and inclusivity. “Open knowledge institutions (OKIs)” is a framework that advocates for universities to operate with principles of openness at their centre; not only should their research be made accessible, but they should lead positive changes to diversity, equity, transparency, etc. The Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative (COKI) is a project that sets out to explore different facets of OKIs. One of its aims is to build tools in supporting evidence-based strategies for universities to progress as OKIs. As such, COKI has collected and integrated data from a number of sources that relates to openness, including information on OA publications, research collaboration, social media activities, diversity, general online and physical accessibility; and, related aspirations and actions signaled through policies, infrastructure and annual reports. This presentation reports on the data and exploratory analysis for Australian universities focusing on the year 2016 as a case study. This includes 43 Australian universities and 26 potential indicators for OKIs (plus an indicator on revenue). Initial descriptive analysis shows that many of these indicators are characterised by extreme observations, in addition to skewness, missing values and largely different measurement scales. These make it necessary to implement robust statistical methods, such as the use of Spearman’s rank correlation, robust principal component analysis (PCA) and robust clustering methods. Our analysis shows that the OKI indicators can be largely characterised into three groups of “diversity”, “communication” and “coordination”, which closely resembles the OKI evaluation framework proposed by Montgomery et al. (2018). We also show that the information provided by these indicators are high-dimensional and complex. The results also show evidence of: large disparities in indicators such as indigenous employment and gender equity. a strong negative correlation between diversity and physical accessibility. traditionally higher ranked universities (in international rankings) performing relatively worse in diversity indicators. a preference for repository-mediated OA. low correlation between university revenue and OA publishing; and, lower ranked universities do not necessarily perform worse in terms of proportion of OA outputs. synergies across universities within the same university network, which is most prominent for the Group of Eight. Although the study draws on data focused on Australian universities, many of the findings can be related to wider literature on universities. For example, there is clear correspondence to the general consensus that advances in gender diversity remain less in senior academic positions, and the probable links between OA performance and local policy strengths. The work also provides insights into challenges of data collection, integration, and analysis; and, a number of potential links between different aspects of university openness. These lay foundations for further large-scale and longitudinal studies. Presented at the 2020 7:AM Altmetrics Conference https://zenodo.org/record/4279255 10.5281/zenodo.4279255 oai:zenodo.org:4279255 doi:10.5281/zenodo.4279254 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode How "open" are universities? An Australian case study info:eu-repo/semantics/lecture presentation
oai:zenodo.org:3913394 2020-07-07T04:10:22Z openaire user-coki
Wilson, Katie Neylon, Cameron Montgomery, Lucy Huang, Chun-Kai (Karl) Hosking, Richard Ozaygen, Alkim 2020-06-29 Abstract The adoption of institutional diversity, equity and inclusion policies and programs in recent decades highlights an ongoing need for structural and cultural change within higher education institutions. It also raises questions around gender, race and disability politics, the decolonisation of diversity and neoliberal management of higher education. How are institutionalised policies enacted and what are the outcomes? Charting the impacts of changes can be achieved through analysis of publicly available statistics. Demographic statistical data provide insights into the outcomes and impacts of diversity policies and practices. However, obtaining and analysing such data in order to understand institutional, national and regional diversity depends on multiple factors. Underpinning institutional diversity data collection and availability are national and international imperatives through policy and program reform, but also institutional reputation and world university rankings. Drivers for data collection include political and social change movements, government imperatives, priorities and funding programs. Gender equality or gender parity is now an expressed target in many countries, often in relation to professional level, disciplines and the percentages of teaching and research in academic faculty positions. More variable across geographic locations are data relating to institutional staff and faculty age, ethnicity, nationality, race, indigeneity and disability. Our project embraces diversity as an indicator of openness in higher education institutions on the path to Open Knowledge Institutions. Analysis of publicly available data relating to diversity in research and staffing (academic/faculty and professional/administrative) in order to understand institutional openness reveals a varied datascape. This article explores and discusses the data presence, gaps and significance in global higher education staff demographic diversity data. https://zenodo.org/record/3913394 10.17613/tyhv-h252 oai:zenodo.org:3913394 eng url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode higher education, staff, diversity, data collection, statistics, gender, ethnicity Global diversity in higher education staffing: Towards openness info:eu-repo/semantics/article publication-article
oai:zenodo.org:4020921 2020-09-10T21:08:39Z openaire user-coki
Neylon, Cameron 2020-09-09 What if the academy were actually in control of metadata? When we think about the key places of evidence in scholarly communications we often turn to bibliographic databases provided by third party media organisations. Increasingly these organisations are not only commercial parties outside of the control of academic institutions but are organisations that are entirely unrelated to scholarship. There has been much talk, not least by myself, of ‘community ownership’, and ‘open infrastructures’ but what does it take to make that a reality in practice? https://zenodo.org/record/4020921 10.5281/zenodo.4020921 oai:zenodo.org:4020921 doi:10.5281/zenodo.4020920 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode Turning the tables with sustainable infrastructure info:eu-repo/semantics/lecture presentation
oai:zenodo.org:3874080 2020-06-03T22:46:26Z openaire user-coki
Ozaygen, Alkim Montgomery, Lucy Neylon, Cameron Wilson, Katie Hosking, Richard Huang, Chun-Kai (Karl) 2020-04-18 This paper reports on a study of social media events relating to 28 Open Access (OA) monographs, published between 2014 and 2015. As with citations (Cronin 1981) social media events represent the frozen footprints of the journey that monographs take as they move through digital landscapes. The study captured mentions of the study-set of monographs via Twitter, Facebook, Wikipedia and online blogs; as well as user ratings on Google Books, Amazon and Goodreads. Information relating to the ways in which the books were bookmarked and cited was captured via the online reference managing platform Mendeley. The benefits and limitations of different altmetrics approaches to capturing and analyzing this data are discussed. Practical suggestions for researchers interested in the application of Altmetrics approaches to studies of monographs are also provided. https://zenodo.org/record/3874080 10.4000/proceedings.elpub.2020.18 oai:zenodo.org:3874080 eng url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode Open access, monographs, books, altmetrics How Can We Use Social Media Data Related to OA Monographs info:eu-repo/semantics/conferencePaper publication-conferencepaper
oai:zenodo.org:3549131 2020-01-20T17:00:07Z openaire user-coki
Chun-Kai Huang Cameron Neylon Chloe Brookes-Kenworthy Richard Hosking Lucy Montgomery Katie Wilson Alkim Ozaygen 2019-09-01 Universities are increasingly evaluated, both internally and externally on the basis of their outputs. Often these are converted to simple, and frequently contested, rankings based on quantitative analysis of those outputs. These rankings can have substantial implications for student and staff recruitment, research income and perceived prestige of a university. Both internal and external analyses usually rely on a single data source to define the set of outputs assigned to a specific university. Although some differences between such databases are documented, few studies have explored them at the institutional scale and examined the implications of these differences for the metrics and rankings that are derived from them. We address this gap by performing detailed bibliographic comparisons between three key databases: Web of Science (WoS), Scopus and, the recently relaunched Microsoft Academic (MSA). We analyse the differences between outputs with DOIs identified from each source for a sample of 155 universities and supplement this with a detailed manual analysis of the differences for fifteen universities. We find significant differences between the sources at the university level. Sources differ in the publication year of specific objects, the completeness of metadata, as well as in their coverage of disciplines, outlets, and publication type. We construct two simple rankings based on citation counts and open access status of the outputs for these universities and show dramatic changes in position based on the choice of bibliographic data sources. Those universities that experience the largest changes are frequently those from non-English speaking countries and those that are outside the top positions in international university rankings. Overall MSA has greater coverage than Scopus or WoS, but has less complete affiliation metadata. We suggest that robust evaluation measures need to consider the effect of choice of data sources and recommend an approach where data from multiple sources is integrated to provide a more robust dataset. https://zenodo.org/record/3549131 10.1101/750075 oai:zenodo.org:3549131 url:https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/750075v1 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode bioRXiv university rankings web of science scopus microsoft academic unpaywall opencitations open access Comparison of bibliographic data sources: Implications for the robustness of university rankings info:eu-repo/semantics/article publication-article
oai:zenodo.org:3874391 2020-07-01T04:30:30Z openaire user-coki
Wilson, Katie Kiuna, Antony Lamptey, Richard Veldsman, Susan Montgomery, Lucy Neylon, Cameron Huang, Chun-Kai (Karl) Hosking, Richard Ozaygen, Alkim 2020-06-03 This paper discusses research undertaken by the Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative (COKI) and participants during and following an Open Knowledge international workshop held in Mauritius in September 2019. The workshop brought together key experts to explore the role of open knowledge in the creation of equitable and inclusive global knowledge landscapes. This paper explores the role of open access and institutional repositories in knowledge sharing and the dissemination of research output from higher education and research institutions within the African continent. The paper reviews the landscape of research output from the African continent; analyses open access research output, overviews of institutional knowledge sharing positions and the dissemination of research output from Ghana, Rwanda, South Africa and Uganda. https://zenodo.org/record/3874391 10.4000/proceedings.elpub.2020.20 oai:zenodo.org:3874391 eng url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode Open knowledge, open access, research output, open science, Africa, institutional repositories, Ghana, Rwanda, South Africa, Uganda Open access and research dissemination in Africa info:eu-repo/semantics/conferencePaper publication-conferencepaper
oai:zenodo.org:3379703 2020-01-21T07:22:37Z openaire_data user-coki
Chloe Brookes-Kenworthy Chun-Kai (Karl) Huang Cameron Neylon Katie Wilson Alkim Ozaygen Lucy Montgomery Richard Hosking 2019-08-28 These are sets of data collected from the manual cross-validation of DOIs (and related research outputs) that are sampled from Web of Science (WoS), Scopus and Microsoft Academic (MSA). For each of the 15 universities, we initially collect all DOIs indexed by each of the three bibliographic sources. Subsequently, we randomly sample 40, 30 and 30 DOIs from sets of DOIs that are exclusively indexed by WoS, Scopus and MSA, respectively, for each university. A manual cross-validation process is then followed to validate certain characteristics across the data sources. This cross-validation process was carried out by a data wrangler, on a part-time basis over a few months, for which online data was accessed from 18 December 2018 to 20 May 2019. https://zenodo.org/record/3379703 10.5281/zenodo.3379703 oai:zenodo.org:3379703 eng doi:10.5281/zenodo.3379702 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess Manual cross-validation, Web of Science, Scopus, Microsoft Academic Manual cross-validation data for the article: "Comparison of bibliographic data sources: Implications for the robustness of university rankings" info:eu-repo/semantics/other dataset
oai:zenodo.org:3694944 2020-03-19T13:57:40Z openaire user-coki
Huang, Chun-Kai Neylon, Cameron Hosking, Richard Montgomery, Lucy Wilson, Katie Ozaygen, Alkim Brookes-Kenworthy, Chloe 2020-03-03 The role of open access has rapidly become central to the global research community (and beyond). This is increasingly so with organisations and governments mandating serious considerations for publishing in open access forms (e.g., Plan S). However, tracking the progress of open access at the institutional level remains a difficult problem, with most bibliographic databases lacking exhaustive open access and affiliation labelling, using non-standardised metadata formats, and having potentially significant differences in coverage. This necessitates methodologies in integrating diverse data sources to provide more complete evidence for open access performance at the institutional level. In this study, we build the first comprehensive and reproducible data workflow in combining digital object identifiers (DOIs) affiliated to individual institutions from Microsoft Academic, Web of Science, and Scopus. Subsequently, we normalise publication dates using Crossref metadata and query each DOI’s OA status through Unpaywall. We use this methodology to produce various open access scores for the Top 1000 universities in the Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2019, and supplement this list with additional universities from countries with a low presence. Analyses of the resulting data highlights the existence of different open access paths that universities take on and regional differences across the globe due to varying policies and infrastructure. We also present the top 100 performing universities in each of the categories of total open access, open access (gold) publishing and repository-mediated (green) open access percentages. The presence of African, Asian and Latin American universities in the top 100 shows encouraging progress in those regions. https://zenodo.org/record/3694944 10.5281/zenodo.3694944 oai:zenodo.org:3694944 eng doi:10.5281/zenodo.3694943 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode Open access Evaluation framework Unpaywall Microsoft Academic Web of Science Scopus Evaluating institutional open access performance: Methodology, challenges and assessment info:eu-repo/semantics/article publication-article
oai:zenodo.org:3549127 2020-01-20T15:14:52Z openaire user-coki
Chun-Kai Huang Cameron Neylon Lucy Montgomery Katie Wilson Richard Hosking Alkim Ozaygen Chloe Brookes-Kenworthy 2019-10-21 This study examines the effects of shifting data sources in the rankings of universities. In particular, universities are ranked according to their levels of average citation counts (ACC) and open access (OA) for publications indexed by each of three different bibliographic sources, namely Web of Science (WoS), Scopus and Microsoft Academic (MSA). Metadata on ACC and OA are retrieved from two external databases, i.e., Unpaywall and OpenCitations, to avoid internal biases. The results demonstrate how changing the data source can have significant impact on the perceived performance of individual universities. This work forms part of the Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative (COKI) project [1], spearheaded by Curtin University. https://zenodo.org/record/3549127 10.5281/zenodo.3549127 oai:zenodo.org:3549127 eng url:https://conference.eresearch.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/2019-eResearch_144_Shifting-Data-Sources.pdf url:https://conference.eresearch.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Chun-Kai-Huang-eRA2019_Huang_ChunKai.pdf doi:10.5281/zenodo.3549126 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess university ranking web of science scopus microsoft academic unpaywall opencitations Shifting data sources in the rankings of universities info:eu-repo/semantics/conferencePoster poster
oai:zenodo.org:3549157 2020-01-20T16:49:37Z openaire user-coki
Chun-Kai Huang 2019-11-21 This is a presentation given at the 2019 CAUL Research Repositories Community Event, Sydney. It gives an introduction to the Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative (COKI) project and COKI's Dashboard for Open Access analysis of Australasian universities. https://zenodo.org/record/3549157 10.5281/zenodo.3549157 oai:zenodo.org:3549157 eng url:https://links.observatory.academy/dashboards/CAUL-Presentation url:https://www.caul.edu.au/sites/default/files/documents/cairss/cairss2019karlhuang.pdf doi:10.5281/zenodo.3549156 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative & Open Access in Australasia info:eu-repo/semantics/lecture presentation
oai:zenodo.org:3600031 2020-01-21T06:04:42Z openaire user-coki
Wilson, Katie Neylon, Cameron Montgomery, Lucy Huang, Chun-Kai 2020-01-07 Introduction. Open access to digital research output is increasing, but academic library policies can place restrictions on public access to libraries. This paper reports on a preliminary study to investigate the correlation between academic library access policies and institutional positions of openness to knowledge. Method. This primarily qualitative study used document and data analysis to examine the content of library access or use policies of twelve academic institutions in eight countries. The outcomes were statistically correlated with institutional open access publication policies and practices. Analysis. We used an automated search tool together with manual searching to retrieve Web-based library access policies, then categorised and counted the levels and conditions of public access. We compared scores for institutional library access feature with open access features and percentages of open access publications. Results. Academic library policies may suggest open public access but multi-layered user categories, privileges and fees charged can inhibit such access, with disparities in openness emerging between library policies and institutional open access policies. Conclusion. As open access publishing options and mandates expand, physical entry and access to print and electronic resources in academic libraries is contracting. This conflicts with global library and information commitments to open access to knowledge. https://zenodo.org/record/3600031 10.5281/zenodo.3600031 oai:zenodo.org:3600031 eng url:https://www.webcitation.org/76tOSpfrn url:http://InformationR.net/ir/24-1/paper809.html doi:10.5281/zenodo.3600030 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode Information Research 24(1) Open Access, Libraries, Scholarly Communication, Library Access Policy Access to academic libraries: an indicator of openness? info:eu-repo/semantics/article publication-article
oai:zenodo.org:3549121 2019-11-28T08:01:45Z user-coki
Lucy Montgomery John Hartley Cameron Neylon Malcolm Gillies Eve Gray Carsten Hermann-Pillath Chun-Kai Huang Joan Leach Jason Potts Xiang Ren Katherine Skinner Cassidy R Sugimoto Katie Wilson 2019-07-10 Can 13 authors, from the USA, Germany, Australia, China and South Africa, many previously unknown to one another, get together and, from scratch, write a 150-page book –– on a topic none of them has tackled before –– in 5 days? If the group in question is committed to the same goals as MIT’s PubPub platform, to “socialize the process of knowledge creation”; and if the process they use is a Book Sprint, a professionally facilitated “collaborative process that captures the knowledge of a group of experts in a single book,“ then the answer is yes. What drew our diverse group together is “open knowledge.” By this we mean not just the technical specifics of open access publishing or open source computing, and not just a general commitment to an open society, open government or open science, but a need to understand how these technical and social possibilities can be brought together in open knowledge institutions. Specifically, how can the most long-lasting, successful and expanding version of a knowledge institution –– the university –– face the mounting challenges of global, digital and contested knowledge systems, in order to transform universities into Open Knowledge Institutions? We present the results of our work here to the wider community for annotation, commentary, constructive criticism and engagement, with a view to extending the collaborative spirit further. We want the book to gain further analytical richness and precision from crowd-sourced expertise. You are invited to join us as we work through some of the issues that may enable or stand in the way of socialising knowledge itself. https://zenodo.org/record/3549121 10.21428/99f89a34 oai:zenodo.org:3549121 eng url:https://wip.mitpress.mit.edu/tos url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess MIT Work in Progress open knowledge open access higher education and research institutions universities research communication public engagement open knowledge institution Open Knowledge Institutions: Reinventing Universities info:eu-repo/semantics/article publication-article
oai:zenodo.org:3716263 2020-03-19T20:20:13Z openaire user-coki
Huang, Chun-Kai Neylon, Cameron Hosking, Richard Montgomery, Lucy Wilson, Katie Ozaygen, Alkim Brookes-Kenworthy, Chloe 2020-03-19 Open Access to research outputs is becoming rapidly more important to the global research community and society. Changes are driven by funder mandates, institutional policy, grass-roots advocacy and culture change. It has been challenging to provide a robust, transparent and updateable analysis of progress towards open access that can inform these interventions, particularly at the institutional level. Here we propose a minimum reporting standard and present a large-scale analysis of open access progress across 1,207 institutions world-wide that shows substantial progress being made. The analysis detects responses that coincide with policy and funding interventions. Among the striking results are the high performance of Latin American and African universities, particularly for gold open access, whereas overall open access levels in Europe and North America are driven by repository-mediated access. We present a top-100 of global universities with the world’s leading institutions achieving around 80% open access for 2017 publications. https://zenodo.org/record/3716263 10.5281/zenodo.3716263 oai:zenodo.org:3716263 eng doi:10.5281/zenodo.3694943 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode Open access Evaluation framework Unpaywall Microsoft Academic Web of Science Scopus Evaluating institutional open access performance: Methodology, challenges and assessment info:eu-repo/semantics/article publication-article
oai:zenodo.org:4040403 2020-09-24T06:19:41Z software user-coki
Huang, Chun-Kai Wilson, Katie Neylon, Cameron Ozaygen, Alkim Montgomery, Lucy Hosking, Richard 2020-09-21 This is the set of codes and data used for analysing a set of indicators for open knowledge institutions. Specifically, the anlaysis is focused on 43 Australian universities. The files include: 1. data_all_aus_2017.csv: main data file for input into the R codes for analysis. 2. analysis_corr_and_pca.R: the set of R codes for analysing the indicators. 3. Indicators for OKIs_ Australia.pdf: the article manuscript, also available at http://dx.doi.org/10.17613/r2sx-xg40 https://zenodo.org/record/4040403 10.5281/zenodo.4040403 oai:zenodo.org:4040403 doi:10.5281/zenodo.4040402 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode Codes and data for the analysis of open knowledge institution indicators: an Australian case study info:eu-repo/semantics/other software
oai:zenodo.org:4018842 2020-09-10T21:08:20Z openaire_data user-coki
Ozaygen, Alkim Neylon, Cameron 2020-09-10 This file describes data files provided as part of the preprint "More readers in more places: The benefits of open access for scholarly books" and as supporting information for the report "Diversifying readership through open access: A usage analysis for OA books". We provide the list of titles used in the study, the citation data, and webometrics in the processed form used in the article. The main data for the paper is usage and other collected data. This data is proprietary to Springer Nature. A short example of the data format is provided. For each table we provide a checksum of the data table (calculated as described below) held as a cloud SQL database table for processing. https://zenodo.org/record/4018842 10.5281/zenodo.4018842 oai:zenodo.org:4018842 doi:10.5281/zenodo.4014905 handle:www.springernature.com/diversifyingreadership doi:10.5281/zenodo.4018841 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode Data For: More Readers in More Places info:eu-repo/semantics/other dataset
oai:zenodo.org:3620965 2020-01-24T19:21:35Z openaire user-coki
Cameron Neylon 2020-01-22 Public version of slides for a talk given to the Egenis Centre at Exeter University on 13 January 2020. From the inside it feels as though universities are under threat. Trust in expertise and support from governments seems to be ebbing, at the same time as massive tech giants pose an apparent threat to our core business of disseminating curated knowledge to students and sites of innovation. Yet universities are amongst the oldest surviving institutions in western society, predating the nation state, the corporation, and modern government. They have weathered massive societal change in the past. Are they well placed to do so through the crises of today? And are the tools available to university leaders fit for purpose, or even actively dangerous to the future of our institutions? What could a university be in the 21st century? The Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative (COKI) draws on tools and concepts from social knowledge theory, communication studies, political economy, network theory, data science, and business strategy with the goal of providing universities with a credible answers to these questions. Our goal is to change the stories that universities tell about themselves, placing open knowledge practices at the heart of those narratives. We re-imagine the university as an “Open Knowledge Institution” – a set of platforms that support the negotiation of knowledge claims amongst diverse communities – and then work to provide a set of pragmatic tools and systems that are useful for university communities and leadership in navigating towards that ideal. https://zenodo.org/record/3620965 10.5281/zenodo.3620965 oai:zenodo.org:3620965 doi:10.5281/zenodo.3620964 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode open knowledge open research universities Open Knowledge Institutions: Is there a future for the university in a networked world? info:eu-repo/semantics/lecture presentation
oai:zenodo.org:4030673 2020-09-15T21:12:12Z openaire user-coki
Neylon, Cameron 2020-09-15 A talk given at the 13th Lagos State University Public Lecture on scholarly communication in the post-Covid-19 world. The talk focuses on the current state of open access globally and in Africa and Nigeria universities specifically. https://zenodo.org/record/4030673 10.5281/zenodo.4030673 oai:zenodo.org:4030673 doi:10.5281/zenodo.4030672 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode Global open access in the context of Covid-19: The contribution of African and Nigerian Universities info:eu-repo/semantics/lecture presentation
oai:zenodo.org:3549153 2020-01-20T13:31:43Z openaire user-coki
Friso Selten Cameron Neylon Chun-Kai Huang Paul Groth 2019-09-11 In this paper the ARWU, THE and QS global university rankings are studied. After a description of the ranking methodologies, it is shown that university rankings are stable over time but that there is variation between the three rankings. Furthermore, using Principal Component Analysis and Exploratory Factor Analysis, we show that the variables used to construct the rankings primarily measure two underlying factors: a universities reputation and its research output. By correlating these factors and plotting regional aggregates of universities against them, differences between the rankings are made visible. Last, we elaborate how the results from these analysis can be viewed in light of often voiced critiques of the ranking process. This indicates that the variables used by the rankings might not capture the concepts they claim to measure. This study provides evidence of the ambiguous nature of university ranking's quantification of university performance. https://zenodo.org/record/3549153 10.5281/zenodo.3549153 oai:zenodo.org:3549153 eng url:https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.10632 doi:10.5281/zenodo.3549152 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode arXiv university rankings longitudinal analysis comparative analysis principal component analysis factor analysis A Longitudinal Analysis of University Rankings info:eu-repo/semantics/article publication-article
oai:zenodo.org:3509969 2020-01-20T17:21:20Z openaire user-coki
Montgomery, Lucy Neylon, Cameron Chun-Kai, (Karl) Wilson, Katie Ozaygen, Alkim Hosking, Richard 2019-09-26 Universities exist to support the creation and transfer of knowledge. Efforts by universities to enable open knowledge have the potential to broaden the impact of higher education and research institutions. Our team is exploring the mechanisms that will allow universities to work more effectively with local and global communities in the production of knowledge; as well as those that support its uptake and application both within and beyond academia. The Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative (COKI) group is developing a broad program of work on the theme of ‘open knowledge institutions’, supported in the first instance through a 2-year strategic research grant from Curtin University. The goal of our project is to develop tools and data that will allow universities to understand how effectively they are operating as open knowledge institutions; and to support strategic change in higher education and research. https://zenodo.org/record/3509969 10.5281/zenodo.3509969 oai:zenodo.org:3509969 eng doi:10.5281/zenodo.3509968 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode Open Knowledge Institutions Equity Diversity Open Access Reimagining how we evaluate the production of knowledge: The Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative info:eu-repo/semantics/lecture presentation
oai:zenodo.org:3716067 2020-08-13T14:33:21Z openaire user-coki
Huang, Chun-Kai Neylon, Cameron Hosking, Richard Montgomery, Lucy Wilson, Katie Ozaygen, Alkim Brookes-Kenworthy, Chloe 2020-03-19 In the article “Evaluating institutional open access performance: Methodology, challenges and assessment” we develop the first comprehensive and reproducible workflow that integrates multiple bibliographic data sources for evaluating institutional open access (OA) performance. The major data sources include Web of Science, Scopus, Microsoft Academic, and Unpaywall. However, each of these databases continues to update, both actively and retrospectively. This implies the results produced by the proposed process are potentially sensitive to both the choice of data source and the versions of them used. In addition, there remain issues relating to the use of different definitions of the various open access categories, and selection bias in sample size and margin of error. The current work shows that the levels of sensitivity relating to the above issues can be significant at the institutional level. Hence, the transparency and clear documentation of the choices made on data sources (and their versions), definitions, and cut-off boundaries are vital for reproducibility and verifiability. A companion white paper to the article "Evaluating institutional open access performance: Methodology, challenges and assessment" https://zenodo.org/record/3716067 10.5281/zenodo.3716067 oai:zenodo.org:3716067 doi:10.5281/zenodo.3696857 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode Open access Sensitivity analysis Unpaywall Microsoft Academic Web of Science Scopus Evaluating institutional open access performance: Sensitivity analysis info:eu-repo/semantics/article publication-article
oai:zenodo.org:3696858 2020-08-13T14:33:21Z openaire user-coki
Huang, Chun-Kai Neylon, Cameron Hosking, Richard Montgomery, Lucy Wilson, Katie Ozaygen, Alkim Brookes-Kenworthy, Chloe 2020-03-04 In the article “Evaluating institutional open access performance: Methodology, challenges and assessment” we develop the first comprehensive and reproducible workflow that integrates multiple bibliographic data sources for evaluating institutional open access (OA) performance. The major data sources include Web of Science, Scopus, Microsoft Academic, and Unpaywall. However, each of these databases continues to update, both actively and retrospectively. This implies the results produced by the proposed process are potentially sensitive to both the choice of data source and the versions of them used. In addition, there remain issues relating to the use of different definitions of the various open access categories, and selection bias in sample size and margin of error. The current work shows that the levels of sensitivity relating to the above issues can be significant at the institutional level. Hence, the transparency and clear documentation of the choices made on data sources (and their versions), definitions, and cut-off boundaries are vital for reproducibility and verifiability. A companion white paper to the article "Evaluating institutional open access performance: Methodology, challenges and assessment" https://zenodo.org/record/3696858 10.5281/zenodo.3696858 oai:zenodo.org:3696858 doi:10.5281/zenodo.3696857 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode Open access Sensitivity analysis Unpaywall Microsoft Academic Web of Science Scopus Evaluating institutional open access performance: Sensitivity analysis info:eu-repo/semantics/article publication-article
oai:zenodo.org:3982927 2020-08-14T00:59:22Z openaire user-coki
Huang, Chun-Kai Neylon, Cameron Hosking, Richard Montgomery, Lucy Wilson, Katie Ozaygen, Alkim Brookes-Kenworthy, Chloe 2020-08-13 In the article “Evaluating institutional open access performance: Methodology, challenges and assessment” we develop the first comprehensive and reproducible workflow that integrates multiple bibliographic data sources for evaluating institutional open access (OA) performance. The major data sources include Web of Science, Scopus, Microsoft Academic, and Unpaywall. However, each of these databases continues to update, both actively and retrospectively. This implies the results produced by the proposed process are potentially sensitive to both the choice of data source and the versions of them used. In addition, there remain issues relating to the use of different definitions of the various open access categories, and selection bias in sample size and margin of error. The current work shows that the levels of sensitivity relating to the above issues can be significant at the institutional level. Hence, the transparency and clear documentation of the choices made on data sources (and their versions), definitions, and cut-off boundaries are vital for reproducibility and verifiability. A companion white paper to the article "Evaluating institutional open access performance: Methodology, challenges and assessment" https://zenodo.org/record/3982927 10.5281/zenodo.3982927 oai:zenodo.org:3982927 doi:10.5281/zenodo.3696857 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode Open access Sensitivity analysis Unpaywall Microsoft Academic Web of Science Scopus Evaluating institutional open access performance: Sensitivity analysis info:eu-repo/semantics/article publication-article
oai:zenodo.org:4107134 2020-10-20T00:26:56Z openaire user-coki
Cameron Neylon 2020-10-19 A talk given for the Academy of Sciences of South Africa Open Access Week program on October 20, 2020. There is accumulating evidence of large-scale global progress towards open access, with most current estimates placing the proportion of scholarly content that is freely available to read at around 50%. This progress has been accompanied with significant debate on the most efficient, most affordable, and most equitable routes towards a goal of 100%. Relatively little attention has been paid to how different regions and countries are achieving open access and the different routes they are taking. In this talk I will discuss global progress, and evidence that far from following that progress, many African institutions are leading it, with measured open access levels amongst the highest in the world. What are the policy implications for scholarly communications from Africa and how can we build greater visibility for African research on a global scale? https://zenodo.org/record/4107134 10.5281/zenodo.4107134 oai:zenodo.org:4107134 doi:10.5281/zenodo.4107133 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode open access Africa infrastructure Global open access to scholarly literature: Progress and evidence of African leadership info:eu-repo/semantics/lecture presentation
oai:zenodo.org:4014905 2020-09-10T21:08:21Z openaire user-coki
Ozaygen, Alkim Montgomery, Lucy Neylon, Cameron Huang, Karl Pyne, Ros Emery, Christina Lucraft, Mithu 2020-09-10 Open access to scholarly contents has grown substantially in recent years. This includes the number of books published open access online. However, there is limited study on how usage patterns (via downloads, citations and web visibility) of these books may differ from their closed counterparts. Such information is not only important for book publishers, but also for researchers in disciplines where books are the norm. This article reports on findings from comparing samples of books published by Springer Nature to shed light on differences in usage patterns across open access and closed books. The study includes a selection of 281 open access books and a sample of 3,653 closed books (drawn from 21,059 closed books using stratified random sampling). The books are stratified by combinations of book type, discipline and year of publication to enable likewise comparisons within each stratum and to maximise statistical power of the sample. The results show higher geographic diversity of usage, higher numbers of downloads and more citations for open access books across all strata. Importantly, open access books have increased access and usage for traditionally under-served populations. Data: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4018842 Code: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4019214 Github: https://github.com/Curtin-Open-Knowledge-Initiative/oa-book-geography https://zenodo.org/record/4014905 10.5281/zenodo.4014905 oai:zenodo.org:4014905 handle:www.springernature.com/diversifyingreadership doi:10.5281/zenodo.4018842 doi:10.5281/zenodo.4019214 doi:10.5281/zenodo.4014904 url:https://zenodo.org/communities/coki info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode More Readers in More Places: The benefits of open access for scholarly books info:eu-repo/semantics/preprint publication-preprint
https://zenodo.org/oai2d?verb=ListRecords&set=user-coki&metadataPrefix=oai_dc
zenodo.org
crawl=CC-MAIN-2021-04
96938
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:BATCMVBPV5HSM22FH7Q2VFHKQEM74R7K
<urn:uuid:34369228-d232-42ca-b4b7-3f7a05284df7>
2021-01-23T14:23:20Z
137.138.76.77
application/xml
sha1:ZU7AVUVQLSA6J67VIZACGMYPBKW3FTLM
<urn:uuid:c4a138f4-c0a9-4a56-8c3f-c0912f92da72>
https://zenodo.org/oai2d?verb=ListRecords&set=user-coki&metadataPrefix=oai_dc
response
<urn:uuid:1848e6c0-0d4f-4174-a286-fcca8de7ca07>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2021-04
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for January 2021
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-33.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.17 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.2-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/