Open access, Megajournals, And moocs: On the political economy of academic unbundling

SAGE Open

Volumn 3, Issue 4, 2013, Pages

  Wellen, Richard ^a  

^a YORK UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Academic productivity; Megajournals; MOOCs; Open access; Scholarly publishing

Indexed keywords

EID: 84904358665     PISSN: None     EISSN: 21582440     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/2158244013507271     Document Type: Article

References (110)

1. Anderson, C. (2006). The long tail: Why the future of business is selling less of more. New York, NY: Hyperion.
2. Association of American Publishers. (2013, February 22). AAP supports OSTP policy urging collaboration in public access. Retrieved from http://www.publishers.org/press/95/
3. Association of Research Libraries. (2012). ARL Statistics 2010-11. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.arlstatistics. org/home
4. Baker, S. (2011, June 30). White Paper: Small colleges to get a shot at title. Times Higher Education Supplement. Retrieved from http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/416663.article
5. Barber, M., Donnelly, K., & Rizvi, S. (2013). An Avalanche is coming: Higher education and the road ahead. Institute for Public Policy Research. Retrieved from http://www.ippr.org/ images/media/files/publication/2013/04/avalanche-is-coming_ Mar2013_10432.pdf
6. Baveye, P. C. (2010). Sticker shock and the looming tsunami: The high cost of academic serials in perspective. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 41, 191-215.
7. Benkler, Y. (2008). The university in the networked economy and society: Challenges and opportunities. In R. N. Katz (Ed.), The tower and the cloud: Higher education in the age of cloud computing (pp. 51-61). Washington, DC: Educause.
8. Bergstrom, T. (2001). Free labour for costly journals. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15(4), 183-198.
9. Bergstrom, T. (2010). Librarians and the terrible fix: Economics of the Big Deal. Serials, 23(2), 77-82.
10. Bergstrom, T., & Bergstrom, C. (2004). Can “author pays” journals compete with “reader pays?” Retrieved http://www.nature.com/nature/focus/accessdebate/22.html
11. Best, R. D. (2009). Is the “Big Deal” dead? The Serials Librarian, 57, 353-363.
12. Borrego, A., Anglada, L., Barrios, M., & Garcia, F. (2012). Use and availability of scholarly journals in Catalan academic libraries. Serials Review, 38, 243-249.
13. Bousquet, M. (2008). How the university works: Higher education and the low wage nation. New York: New York University Press.
14. Bowen, W. (2013). Higher education in the digital age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
15. Brembs, B., & Munafò, M. (2013). Deep impact: Unintended consequences of journal rank. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/ abs/1301.3748
16. Carroll, M. W. (2011). Why full open access matters. PLOS Biology, 9(11), e1001210.
17. Christensen, C. M., & Eyring, H. J. (2011). The innovative university: Changing the DNA of higher education from the inside out. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
18. Christensen, C. M., Horn, M. B., Caldera, L., & Soares, L. (2011). Disrupting college: How disruptive innovation can deliver quality and affordability to postsecondary education. Center for American Progress. Retrieved from http://www.americanprogress. org/issues/2011/02/pdf/disrupting_college.pdf
19. Christensen, C. M., & Raynor, M. E. (2003). The innovator’s solution: Creating and sustaining successful growth. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
20. Collier, K. (2013, February 5). An interview with Keith Collier, Co-Founder of Rubriq, The Scholarly Kitchen (M. Clarke, Interviewer). Retrieved from http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/02/05/an-interview-with-keith-collier-co-founderof- rubriq/
21. Courant, P. (2008). The future of the library in the research library. In No brief candle: Reconceiving research libraries for the 21st century (pp. 21-27). Washington, DC: Council on Libraries and Information Resources.
22. Coursera. (2013, May 1). Coursera terms of use. Retrieved from https://www.coursera.org/about/terms
23. Cronin, J. M., & Horton, H. E. (2009, May 22). Will higher education be the next bubble to burst? The Chronicle of Higher Education, p. A56.
24. Delbanco, A. (2013). Discussion. In W. G. Bowen (Ed.), Higher education in the digital age (pp. 129-144). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
25. Dobbs, D. (2013, April 12). When the rebel alliance sells out. The New Yorker. Retrieved from http://www.newyorker.com/ online/blogs/elements/2013/04/elsevier-mendeley-journalsscience- software.html
26. Earl, P. E. (2008). Heterodox economics and the future of academic publishing. On the Horizon, 16, 205-213.
27. Eaton, J. S. (2012). MOOCs and accreditation: Focus on the quality of “direct-to-students” education. Inside Accreditation, 9(1). Retrieved from http://www.chea.org/ia/IA_2012.10.31.html
28. The Economist. (2012, December 22). Learning new lessons: Online courses are transforming higher education, creating new opportunities for the best and huge problems for the rest. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/news/ international/21568738-online-courses-are-transforminghigher- education-creating-new-opportunities-best
29. The Economist. (2013, May 4). Free-for-all: Open access scientific publishing is gaining ground. Retrieved from http://www.economist. com/news/science-and-technology/21577035-openaccess- scientific-publishing-gaining-ground-free-all
30. Edlin, A. S., & Rubinfeld, D. L. (2004). Exclusion or efficient pricing: The “Big Deal” bundling of academic journals. Antitrust Law Journal, 72, 119-157.
31. Elsevier. (2011). International comparative performance of the UK research base - 2011. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/ file/32489/11-p123-international-comparative-performanceuk- research-base-2011.pdf
32. Field, K. (2013, March 19). Student aid can be awarded for “competencies,” not just credit hours, U.S. says. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/ Student-Aid-Can-Be-Awarded-for/137991/
33. Finch, J. (2012). Accessibility, sustainability, excellence: How to expand access to research publications. Report of the working group on expanding access to published research findings. London, England: Research Information Network. Retrieved from http://www.researchinfonet.org/wp-content/ uploads/2012/06/Finch-Group-report-FINAL-VERSION.pdf
34. Franck, G. (2012). Open access: A revolution in scientific publication? Or just a minor amendment of accessibility. Cell Cycle, 11, 4115-4117.
35. Frazier, K. (2001). The librarian’s dilemma: Contemplating the costs of the Big Deal. D-Lib Magazine, 7(3). Retrieved from http://www.dlib.org/
36. Fuchs, C. (2009). Information and communication technologies and society: A contribution to the critique of the political Economy of the Internet. European Journal of Communication, 24, 69-87.
37. Gargouri, Y., Lariviere, V., Gingras, Y., Brody, T., Carr, L., & Harnad, S. (2012). Testing the finch hypothesis on green OA mandate ineffectiveness. Open Access Week. Retrieved from http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/344687/
38. Gibney, E. (2013, May 16). Open access “waiver” schemes encouraged by government. Times Higher Education Supplement. Retrieved from http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/ open-access-waiver-schemes-encouraged-by-government/ 2003909.article
39. Harnad, S. (2010, July/August). No fault peer review charges: The price of selectivity need not be access denied or delayed. D-Lib Magazine, 16(7/8). Retrieved from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/ july10/harnad/07harnad.html
40. Henning, V. (2013, April 19). Mendeley and Elsevier—Here’s more info. Mendeley Blog. Retrieved from http://blog.mendeley. com/tag/victor-henning/
41. Hess, C., & Ostrom, E. (2007). Introduction: An overview of the knowledge commons. In C. Hess & E. Ostrom (Eds.), Understanding knowledge as a commons (pp. 1-26). Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
42. Hochberg, M. E., Chase, J. M., Gotelli, N. J., Hastings, A., & Naeem, S. (2009). The tragedy of the reviewer commons. Ecology Letters, 12(1), 2-4.
43. Horn, M., & Christensen, C. (2013, February 20). Beyond the buzz, Where are MOOCs really going? Wired. Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/02/beyond-the-mooc-buzzwhere- are-they-going-really/
44. Houghton, J., Rasmussen, B., Sheehan, P., Oppenheim, C., Morris, A., Creaser, C., Gourlay, A. (2009). Economic implications of alternative scholarly publishing models. Loughborough University. Retrieved from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/ publications/rpteconomicoapublishing.pdf
45. Houghton, J., Rasmussen, B., & Swan, A. (2013). Planting the green seeds for a golden harvest: Comments and clarifications on “Going for Gold.” D-Lib Magazine, 19(1/2). Retrieved from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january13/houghton/01houghton.html
46. House of Commons Science and Technology Committee. (2011). Peer review in scientific publications testimony of Mark Patterson. London, England: House of Commons.
47. Howard, B. (2013, January 23). SAGE makes open access more accessible to social science and humanities scholars (S. Connection, Interviewer). Retrieved from http://sageconnection. wordpress.com/2013/01/23/sage-makes-open-accessmore- accessible-to-social-science-and-humanities-scholars/
48. HSBC. (2013). Academic Publishing: Survey of funders supports the benign open access outcome priced into shares. HSBC Publishing. Retrieved from https://www.research.hsbc.com/ midas/Res/RDV?ao=20&key=RxArFbnG1P&n=360010.PDF
49. Ishii, N. (2012, January). The open access strategies of commercial publishers. SPARC Japan Newsletter. Retrieved from http://www.nii.ac.jp/sparc/en/publications/newsletter/11/fa1.html
50. Jessop, B. S.-L. (2012). Competitiveness, the knowledge-based economy and higher education. The Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 4, 1-24.
51. Jongbloed, B. (2004). Regulation and competition in higher education. In P. Teixeira, B. Jongbloed, D. Dill, & A. Amaral (Eds.), Markets in higher education: Rhetoric or reality? (pp. 87-112). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
52. Kapellar, J. (2010). Citation metrics: Serious drawbacks, perverse incentives and strategic options for heterodox economics. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 69, 1376-1408.
53. Kelly, A. P., & Hess, F. M. (2013). Beyond retrofitting: Innovation in higher education. Washington, DC: Hudson Institute. Retrieved from http://www.hudson.org/files/publications/ BeyondRetrofitting-InnovationinHigherEd--HessKelly0613.pdf
54. Kennan, M. A., & Cole, F. T. H. (2008). Institutional repositories as portents of change: Disruption or reassembly? Conjectures and re-configurations. In A. Grove & A. Rorissa (Eds.) ASSIST 2008 Proceedings of the 71st ASIS&T Annual Meeting: Vol. 45. People transforming information - information transforming people. Silver Springs, MD: American Society for Information Science and Technology.
55. King, D., & Tenopir, C. (2009). Scholarly journal information seeking and reading patterns of faculty at five U.S. universities. Learned Publishing, 22, 126-144.
56. Kolowich, S. (2013a, April 29). Why some colleges are saying no to MOOC deals, at least for now. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Why- Some-Colleges-Are-Saying/138863/
57. Kolowich, S. (2013b, May 2). Why professors at San Jose State won’t use a Harvard professor’s MOOC. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/ Why-Professors-at-San-Jose/138941/
58. Kostakis, V. (2012). The political economy of information production in the Social Web: Chances for reflection on our institutional design. Contemporary Social Science: Journal of the Academy of Social Sciences, 7, 305-319.
59. Laakso, M., & Bjork, B. (2012). Anatomy of open access publishing: A study of longitudinal development and internal structure. BMC Medicine, 10(124), 1-9. Retrieved from http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/10/124
60. Lederman, D. (2013, February 7). Expanding pathways to MOOC Credit. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered. com/news/2013/02/07/ace-deems-5-massive-opencourses- worthy-credit
61. Lewin, T. (2012, March 4). Beyond the college degree, online educational badges. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/05/education/beyond-the-collegedegree- online-educational-badges.html?_r=0
62. Lewis, D. W. (2004). The innovator’s dilemma: Disruptive change and academic libraries. Library Administration & Management, 23, 39-55.
63. Lewis, D. W. (2012). The inevitability of open access. College & Research Libraries, 73, 493-506.
64. Lyman, P. (1999). Digital documents and the future of the academic community. In R. Ekman & R. Quandt (Eds.), Technology and scholarly communication (pp. 366-379). Berkeley: University of California Press.
65. Mabe, M. (2003). The growth and number of journals. Serials, 16, 191-197.
66. Marginson, S. (2009). Open source knowledge and university rankings. Thesis Eleven, 96, 9-39.
67. Marklein, M. B. (2013, May 30). Universities bolster MOOCs for online learning. USA Today. Retrieved from http://www.usatoday. com/story/news/nation/2013/05/30/universities-courseramoocs- online-learning/2371421/
68. McCabe, M., & Snyder, C (2005). Open access and academic journal quality. American Economic Review, 95(2), 453-458.
69. McCabe, M., & Snyder, C. (2007). Academic journal prices in a digital age: A two-sided market model. The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis and Policy, 7(1), 1-37.
70. McGuigan, G. S., & Russell, R. (2008). The Business of academic publishing: A strategic analysis of the academic journal publishing industry and its impact on the future of scholarly publishing. Electronic Journal of Academic and Special Librarianship, 9(3). Retrieved from http://southernlibrarianship. icaap.org/content/v09n03/mcguigan_g01.html
71. Morrison, H. (2012). Freedom for scholarship in the digital age (Doctoral dissertation). Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada. Retrieved from http://pages.cmns.sfu.ca/heather-morrison/files/2012/01/Heather-Morrisonthesis- draft-Jan-21-2012.pdf
72. Morrison, H. (2013). Economics of scholarly publishing in transition. First Monday, 18(6), Retrieved from http://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/4370/3685
73. Mounce, R. (2013, April/May). Open access and altmetrics: Distinct but complementary. The Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology, Retrieved from http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Apr-13/AprMay13_Mounce.html
74. Neary, M., & Winn, J. (2013). Open education: Common(s), commonism and the new common wealth. ephemera, 12, 406-422.
75. Nentwich, M., & König, R. (2012). Cyberscience 2.0: Research in the age of digital social networks. Frankfurt-on-Main, Germany: Campus Verlag.
76. Neylon, C. (2013, February 7). House of commons business innovation and skills committee: Open access. Retrieved from http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/ cmbis/writev/openaccess/m59.htm
77. Noble, D. (1998). Digital diploma mills: The automation of higher education. First Monday, 3(1). Retrieved from http:// firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/ view/569/490
78. Odlyzko, A. (2013, February 4). Open access, library and publisher competition, and the evolution of general commerce. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=2211874
79. Office of Science and Technology Policy. (2013). Expanding public access to the results of federally funded research. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/02/22/expandingpublic- access-results-federally-funded-research
80. Pickard, T. K. (2012). The impact of open access and social media on scientific research. Journal of Participatory Medicine, 4. Retrieved from http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/768500_5
81. Pinfield, S. (2008). Libraries and open access: The implications of open access publishing and dissemination for libraries in higher education institutions. In R. Earnshaw & J. Vince (Eds.), Digital convergence: Libraries of the future (pp. 119-136). London, England: Springer Verlag.
82. Political Studies Association of the UK. (2013). Written evidence. In Science and technology select committee: The implementation of open access (pp. 243-248). Retrieved from http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-committees/science-technology/ Openaccess/OpenAccessevidence.pdf
83. Poynder, R. (2011a, March 7). PLoS One, open access, and the future of scholarly publishing. Open and Shut? Retrieved from http://poynder.blogspot.ca/2011/03/plos-one-open-access-andfuture- of.html
84. Poynder, R. (2011b, September). The Big Deal: Not price but cost. Information Today. Retrieved from http://www.infotoday.com/ it/sep11/The-Big-Deal-Not-Price-But-Cost.shtml
85. Poynder, R. (2013, June 17). Open access: Emerald’s green starts to fade. Open and Shut? Retrieved from http://poynder.blogspot.ca/2013/06/open-access-emeralds-green-starts-to.html
86. Priem, J. (2013). Scholarship: Beyond the paper. Nature, 495, 437-440. doi:10.1038/495437a
87. Priem, J., & Hemminger, B. M. (2012). Decoupling the scholarly journal. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 6(19). doi:10.3389/ fncom.2012.00019
88. Priem, J., Taraborelli, D., Groth, P., & Neylon, C. (2010). Altmetrics: A manifesto. Retrieved from http://altmetrics.org/ manifesto/
89. Public Library of Science. (2013). PLoS article level metrics: Measuring the impact of research. Retrieved from http://article- level-metrics.plos.org/
90. Research Councils UK. (2013). RCUK policy on open access and supporting guidance. Retrieved from http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/ documents/documents/RCUKOpenAccessPolicy.pdf
91. Rice, C. (2010, February 11). Science research: Three problems that point to a communications crisis. The Guardian Higher Education Network. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2013/feb/11/scienceresearch- crisis-retraction-replicability
92. Rivard, R. (2013, May 17). Three out of 2U. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com/ news/2013/05/17/three-universities-back-away-plan-poolcourses- online
93. Robinson, L. (2013). Open access journal publishing in the social sciences: Lessons learned and questions answered. Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/ UKSG/robinson-sage-open-uksg-presentation-18475892
94. The Russell Group. (February 23, 2013). Written evidence submitted by the Russell Group (House of commons business, innovation and skills committee: Open access). Retrieved from http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/ cmbis/writev/openaccess/m76.htm
95. Sabaratnam, M. (2012, December 5). Open access: HEFCE, REF2020 and the threat to academic freedom. Retrieved from http://thedisorderofthings.com/2012/12/04/open-access-hefceref2020- and-the-threat-to-academic-freedom/
96. SAGE Publications. (2013). Written evidence. In Science and technology select committee: Implementation of open access (pp. 341-344). Retrieved from http://www.parliament.uk/ documents/lords-committees/science-technology/Openaccess/ OpenAccessevidence.pdf
97. Science Europe. (2013). Principles for the transition to open access to research publications. Brussels, Belgium: Science Europe. Retrieved from http://www.scienceeurope.org/uploads/Public %20documents%20and%20speeches/SE_OA_Pos_Statement. Pdf
98. Suber, P. (2008, September 2). Thinking about prestige, quality and open access. SPARC Open Access Newsletter, (125). Retrieved from http://legacy.earlham.edu/∼peters/fos/newsletter/ 09-02-08.htm
99. Suber, P. (2012). Open access. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
100. Tabarrok, A. (2012, November 12). Why online education works. Cato Unbound. Retrieved from http://www.catounbound. org/2012/11/12/alex-tabarrok/why-online-education- works/
101. Taylor and Francis Group. (2013). Open access author survey. London, England: Author. Retrieved from http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/pdf/open-access-survey-march2013.pdf
102. Tilak, J. (2008). Higher education: A public good or a commodity for trade? Prospects, 38, 449-466.
103. Van Noorden, R. (2013). Open access: The true cost of science publishing. Nature, 495(7442). Retrieved from http://www.nature.com/news/open-access-the-true-cost-of-science-publishing- 1.12676
104. Walkiers, A. (2008). What means rich in publishing? Competition between for-profit and not-for-profit publishers from an economist’s point of view. Information Services & Use, 28, 113-119.
105. Walters, G. (2012). It’s not so easy: The completion agenda and the states. Liberal Education, 98(1). Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/liberaleducation/le-wi12/walters.cfm
106. Wardle, D. A. (2012). On plummeting manuscript acceptance rates by the main ecological journals and the progress of ecology. Ideas in Ecology and Evolution, 5, 13-15.
107. Wellen, R. (2004). Taking on commercial scholarly journals: Reflections on the “open access” movement. Journal of Academic Ethics, 2, 101-118.
108. Willetts, D. (2013, February 8). Written evidence submitted to house of lords science and technology subcommittee. Retrieved from http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/ cmselect/cmbis/writev/openaccess/m00.htm
109. Willinsky, J. (2006). The access principle: The case for open access research and scholarship. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
110. Wise, A. (2013, February 27). White house OSTP memo plots course for open access. Elsevierconnect. Retrieved from http:// elsevierconnect.com/white-house-ostp-memo-plots-coursefor- open-access/