Friday, February 4, 2011
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Call for proposals: Open access advocacy campaigns
Published: 31 Jan 2011
Open access advocacy campaigns in EIFL partner countries to reach out to research communities
EIFL Open Access (OA) programme in action ...
- Building capacity to launch open access repositories and to ensure their long-term sustainability.
- Offering training, supporting knowledge sharing, and providing expertise on open access policies and practices (open access journals, open access repositories, open access books, open data and open educational resources).
- Empowering library professionals, scholars, educators and students to become open access advocates.
- Advocating nationally and internationally for the adoption of open access policies and mandates.
The EIFL-OA programme invites proposals for organising national or institutional open access advocacy campaigns to reach out to research communities. We particularly wish to involve scholarly and scientific researchers, universities and colleges, and university presses and society publishers.
Some examples of the advocacy actions that could be implemented in partnerships with senior management and open access champions from the faculty:
- expanding educational materials on open access targeted toward researchers;
- preparing and distributing open access brochures along with supporting web and multimedia materials;
- using new media to educate researchers about open access and share best practices;
- presentation series at faculty meetings;
- hosting workshops and events;
- collaborating with university presses and scholarly societies on campus-based publishing partnerships;
- developing case studies to illustrate successful open access projects;
- promoting the adoption of campus-based, faculty-driven open access policies;
- collecting success stories, forming collaborations and networks that can deliver joint advocacy efforts;
- building national communities of Open Access practitioners.
Proposals should:
- Provide an overview of current open access activities in your country and institution.
- Describe your advocacy strategy: how do you plan to reach out to research communities.
- Describe your project work plan and time frame. Note that the duration of the grant can be from 3 to 10 months.
- Describe how your advocacy work will improve the current situation or how it will add to the evidence base.
- Describe your goals and the measurement(s) of success that you will use.
- Provide a budget to support your action plan. Note that EIFL financial contribution is limited up to 4,000 USD.
- Be written in English.
- Application deadline is February 28th, 2011.
The EIFL-OA programme manager will be available to support your work during implementation of your projects.
Who can apply
Libraries and organisations from EIFL partner countries are eligible to participate. Applications are invited from any individual libraries and organisations or pairings or groups of libraries and organisations under EIFL partner consortia umbrella.
How to apply and deadline
1. Please fill in the application form that can be downloaded here [Application form.doc].
2. Then, you MUST submit the application form online here.
3. In case you have technical problems, you can send your application form to iryna.kuchma[@]eifl.net
Application deadline is FEBRUARY 28th 2011.
Programme support
This programme is supported by Information programme, Open Society Foundations.
Evaluation procedure and publicity
Funding is granted on a competitive basis. Winners will be notified by approximately March 14, 2011.
Grant recipients will be featured on the EIFL website and Open Access Scholarly Information Sourcebook (OASIS).
Contact person
If you have any questions or need clarifications, please contact the EIFL-OA programme manager, Iryna Kuchma (iryna.kuchma[@]eifl.net).
Files / Images:
How open access repository policies are different from institutional open access policies?
In the open access repository policy you define an overall vision for your institutional repository, a collection policy, a submission policy, the content types that you will be including in your institutional repository, a deposit licence and policy and a re-use licence for your institutional repository, take-down policies and embargoes, a preservation policy, and rights, responsibilities and repository services, etc.
When you have a publicly stated open access repository policy for the permitted re-use of deposited items or for such things as submission of items, long-term preservation, etc, it simplifies matters for organisations wishing to provide search services, which in turn increases the visibility and impact of the repositories.
Institutional open access policy may be voluntary (i.e. it requests that researchers make their work open access in the institutional repository) or mandatory (i.e. it requires that researchers make their work open access in the institutional repository). The evidence (http://www.openoasis.org/images/stories/Sale%20study%20summary%20pdf.pdf) shows that only mandatory policies produce the level of self-archiving from researchers that fill repositories. So, although voluntary policies were initially popular, new institutional policies are now usually mandatory. Mandatory policies, on the other hand, do bring the high level of self-archiving that provides a university with the increased visibility and impact that open access promises.
The first university-wide mandatory policy was implemented by Professor Tom Cochrane, Deputy Vice-Chancellor at Queensland University of Technology in Australia, in 2004. Since then, growing numbers of universities and research funders have followed suit. A list of policies developed by universities, research institutes and research funding agencies is maintained at the University of Southampton: http://www.eprints.org/openaccess/policysignup/. As this is a self-registering service, supplemented by the list owners adding policies that they have discovered serendipitously, this list under-represents the actual number of policies in existence.
Mandatory policies should be coupled with a clear case explaining why the university wishes to collect its research outputs in one place – for internal record-keeping, for research assessment, as a central locus for access to the outputs of any individual, group or department, and so on. In this way, a mandate becomes a non-controversial part of institutional operations.
(from Institutional Policies section in the Open Access Scholarly Information Sourcebook: http://www.openoasis.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=144&Itemid=338)
Please read about the main issues to take into account in developing an institutional open access policy here: http://www.openoasis.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=145&Itemid=298
The Optimal Open Access Policy for Institutions: http://www.openoasis.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=148&Itemid=314
Open access policy options for funding agencies and universities written by Peter Suber, SPARC Open Access Newsletter, issue #130, February 2, 2009: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/02-02-09.htm#choicepoints
When you have a publicly stated open access repository policy for the permitted re-use of deposited items or for such things as submission of items, long-term preservation, etc, it simplifies matters for organisations wishing to provide search services, which in turn increases the visibility and impact of the repositories.
Institutional open access policy may be voluntary (i.e. it requests that researchers make their work open access in the institutional repository) or mandatory (i.e. it requires that researchers make their work open access in the institutional repository). The evidence (http://www.openoasis.org/images/stories/Sale%20study%20summary%20pdf.pdf) shows that only mandatory policies produce the level of self-archiving from researchers that fill repositories. So, although voluntary policies were initially popular, new institutional policies are now usually mandatory. Mandatory policies, on the other hand, do bring the high level of self-archiving that provides a university with the increased visibility and impact that open access promises.
The first university-wide mandatory policy was implemented by Professor Tom Cochrane, Deputy Vice-Chancellor at Queensland University of Technology in Australia, in 2004. Since then, growing numbers of universities and research funders have followed suit. A list of policies developed by universities, research institutes and research funding agencies is maintained at the University of Southampton: http://www.eprints.org/openaccess/policysignup/. As this is a self-registering service, supplemented by the list owners adding policies that they have discovered serendipitously, this list under-represents the actual number of policies in existence.
Mandatory policies should be coupled with a clear case explaining why the university wishes to collect its research outputs in one place – for internal record-keeping, for research assessment, as a central locus for access to the outputs of any individual, group or department, and so on. In this way, a mandate becomes a non-controversial part of institutional operations.
(from Institutional Policies section in the Open Access Scholarly Information Sourcebook: http://www.openoasis.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=144&Itemid=338)
Please read about the main issues to take into account in developing an institutional open access policy here: http://www.openoasis.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=145&Itemid=298
The Optimal Open Access Policy for Institutions: http://www.openoasis.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=148&Itemid=314
Open access policy options for funding agencies and universities written by Peter Suber, SPARC Open Access Newsletter, issue #130, February 2, 2009: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/02-02-09.htm#choicepoints
Friday, October 29, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)