Academic publishing is in a transformative state and disruptors are working at every stage of the research life cycle to offer innovative solutions and upset traditional models of prestige and access.
One project that has attempted to capture and record the proliferation of emerging products and tools is Innovations in Scholarly Communications
For this challenge, review their crowdsourced list of over 400 innovations under the DATA tab and select one innovation to review.
Complete this Activity
In the comments below, write a brief insight outlining the value of this service or tool and consider how you might incorporate it into your own research practice in a useful way.
A project that analyzes the way information is created, shared, and processed in academia.
Challenge Image Credit: Idea from Pxfuel licensed free for commercial use.
Looking through this list there are a few names that immediately stand out as somewhat well-established (at least within my own scholarly context), for me Zotero is the big one that I use daily and is a massive help for my own writing and bibliographical management. But I’m also surprised by the inclusion of certain things, like Endnote for example, which is not open nor free. I think I understand that the list is just any tools which innovate on scholarly communications and that perhaps this nuance is capture in the column marked “Open / Efficient / Good.”
My interest was piqued by the Open Access Button (https://openaccessbutton.org/), which is a Chrome extension that helps you locate open access materials by, first, searching for the materials online and, if that fails, contacting the author. It’s a great tool to recommend to our graduating students, who soon won’t have access to our university library system. I do wish they were a little more transparent regarding the requests they send to authors. Are they only sending requests to authors who have signed up to their system? That seems unlikely, so I hope these requests aren’t reaching the authors in a way that looks like spam.
One of the tools that I found through this list was Unpaywall (redirected from the oadoi.org link). It’s a browser extension that finds open access versions of pay-to-read scholarly articles from preprint repositories like arXiv. This caught my eye because it’s an easy to use tool that can automatically search for accessible research articles that aren’t hidden behind paywalls. It would be useful to me if I could not use library subscriptions to access articles, or even to access articles that aren’t included in library subscriptions. If I’m ever searching for an article and find myself blocked by a paywall, Unpaywall’s browser extension will search for accessible versions of the article if available.Then I would be able to continue with my research. Of course, not all articles will have a preprint or open access version available. However, I think that it’s ability to find freely available articles of the same paywalled article is already very useful..
I began scrolling through the 400+ Tools and innovations in scholarly communications list, TagTeam grabbed my attention. Exploring this further, I found that TagTeam is a Harvard Open Access Project (HOAP). TagTeam is a general-purpose tool, a handy tool for open-science and open-access research projects. One can combine the tags and tag feeds from numerous tagging platforms. You can tag an item if it has a unique URL, this would not work for print books, but good for online digital books or online metadata records. A tag library is synonymous to a feed. A project in TagTeam is called a Hub. Hub owners can add others to the project and give permissions depending on different roles. To create a Hub, you need to sign up for an account. http://tagteam.harvard.edu/
I thought that I knew about many of these kinds of innovations, only to discover that there are 100s more that I had never even heard about! I find this list in itself (which I did not know about) to be an incredibly valuable resource. Some of the items listed (e.g. PubMed, Medline, JSTOR, Addgene) are or used to be “staples” in my day everyday work toolkit, but for most of them, I did not even know that a resource with that kind fo function existed (e.g. something that extracts data from graphs and tables such as WebPlotDigitizer… never heard there was a tool to do that!). While I am not sure how or if I would use this particular tool in my research, it will certainly come in useful for preparing teaching materials and even to incorporate in some learning activities for at least one of my classes. LabFolder on the other hand is a tool that I had vaguely heard of, but never really explored; now taking a look at it I think that the free version would be a useful addition to the small research projects that I am often involved with in Summer, or even for lab courses.
This is a great list of resources for teaching and learning. I looked at WorldCat; it a global information database of library collections. WorldCat provides a listing of the resource you are looking for but it goes further, instead of searching within one library or library system, WorldCat gives you the library holdings for your local library as well as libraries within a specific distances within your location. You can search books, articles, and audiovisual materials. WorldCat also provide book reviews. As a researcher, instructor, library staff or student, Worldcat provides the functionality of a library catalogue but a distinguishing feature of WorldCat that I find unique is the ability to search both academic and public libraries.
Bookmarked this crowdsourced list immediately — a great example of open collaboration in itself (even if all the innovations are not free themselves). As a humanities and education researcher, I was however disappointed in the dearth of innovations related to these disciplines. There were still some treasures though. Europeana Collections (https://classic.europeana.eu/portal/en/about.html) caught my eye as an open access website to millions of digitized items across European institutions, such as artworks, artifacts, and music. Additionally, on their accompanying website Europeana Pro (https://pro.europeana.eu/page/europeana-a-digital-service-infrastructure) they invite users to share their data and stories, and have a number of blog posts written by Europeana staff about the challenges they’ve encountered in making creating an open and accessible database across language barriers. There is a filter in the collections that allows to specifically look for “free re-use” items. I think the website would be great to use in a teaching context to engage our other senses, like sight and sound, in learning about a topic.
I stumbled upon a resource on the list called TEI by Example. This module allows an individual teach themselves how to encode information in XML through a series of self-directed tutorials. It also offers a practice module for to practice and validate one’s own sample code. This is very useful for me as a student currently learning about metadata schemas.
https://teibyexample.org/tutorials/TBED00v00.htm
Crossref.org will be really helpful for me to collect DOIs of older academic articles. As a bibliographer for a subscription journal, I’m working on a project where I assign keywords to the older entries of the bibliography. The bibliographer did not include the DOI when they made their bibliography. By including the DOIs, it will allow for greater access to the older research for the journal’s readers.
At some point during my PhD I became very interested in the work being done via the open sicnece framework (OSF: https://osf.io/) I think for young scholars, the idea of sharing their thought process and making their work accessible to others has really high value. One reason for this may be because the path to academia is getting harder and harder to access, and so the idea of still being able to share the important (and exciting) work we do as graduate students feels more tangible than the elusive tenure track research professor position. At least that was my experience 🙂
OSF is a great repository for sharing your work, viewing ongoing and completed work by others. I have seen more and more of my colleagues sharing pre-prints and data through OSF than when I first started my academic graduate work over a decade ago.
It seems like I lost my comment before posting it 🙂
I’ve used Hypothesis https://hypothes.is/ before and it’s an excellent tool for collaborative annotation of PDFs or online content
In an Open data bank I quickly found some CO2 emissions data from different countries and was able to compare it (curious to see that the data source for both Canada and US was the US) https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?end=2016&locations=CA-US&start=1960&view=chart.
There was a great collection of syllabi in Humanities Commons (not sure if this was on the list or I came across this via a rabbit hole), for example this one on storytelling https://hcommons.org/deposits/item/hc:33883/.
Found an excellent collection of open access resources in French on the digit era https://books.openedition.org/392
I was surprised at the number and diversity of innovations in scholarly communication. I chose to look into the Creative Commons, which I’ve used in the past for images. The section of the site that provides the images gives the option to filter by use (commercial or the ability to modify or adapt). There is also a section that permits filtering by license or public domain (e.g., CCO, BY, BY-NC, BY-SA, etc.). This appears to be a fantastic resource for understanding copyright and for making openly licensed material more visible/easily accessible.
The success of a research project aside from having a good plan and following the structure is keeping track and on records of all the steps taken during the phases. “Labfolder” is an amazing tool that I would like to integrate into CANVAS as an amazing tool to bring together teams either internally and externally (in general all parties involved in the process).
” We use Labfolder mainly as a digital lab book, where we can import different types of file, to keep a more organized structure of progress in our research. The templates serve as the source of protocols and a place where we save datasheets and handbooks. We use the material database for creating lists of our minis, glycerin stocks, primers as well as for tracking the orders of laboratory consumables.”
I believe that open access can have extremely successful if all the work generated by students is on records in platforms like CANVAS and structured with integrated tools like “LabFolders.” – seems that this tool allows to easily provide feedback and make improvements in the work that is already there; giving the opportunity to other to come and review and understand what it has been done and the authors of it.
So it turns out the US Government has an app you can download to help you apply for government grant funding… not sure if that is a terrible idea or a genius one, but it’s something. My program has been discussing the idea of getting some funding grants in place for quite some time, so if that is the tool that gets us over the hump, then so be it.
I work in metadata and while I haven’t done much work with DBpedia, it has seemed useful so when I saw it on this list, I decided to learn more. Before, I knew that it was a site that provided a standardized vocabulary for many terms – I was introduced to it as a linked data resource for including metadata in MEI (Music Encoding Initiative) documents. After reading more information on the site, I have learned that it draws much of its information from Wikimedia projects. It requires a fair bit of technical knowledge to add to it directly, but I suppose that certain changes made in Wiki-related sites would eventually be reflected in DBpedia. Within the DBpedia knowledge base, one can construct queries using SPARQL to ask complex questions, which is pretty cool. I think this project could provide a useful model for libraries implementing linked data and a great tool to practice working with SPARQL queries.
I took a look at DHBox, which is a cloud-based lab space equipped with some essential tools for digital humanities investigations (NLTK, IPython, RStudio, etc). This seems great for avoiding setup difficulties, and could be especially useful in workshop contexts.
I took a look at AquaBrowser, a discovery layer that helps users navigate their library catalogue by suggesting associative search terms and providing a social networking feature to facilitate community-building. I found it interesting that this tool serves a librarian-esque role for the user by attempting to improve their search and connecting them to other people with experience with the catalogue. It can certainly make online catalogues more approachable for inexperienced users, a feature that is particularly helpful given the limited access to libraries during the pandemic.
I looked at https://openaccessbutton.org/, which is a search tool that helps researchers find papers to read legally and freely. This adds a lot of value to researcher time, as I can avoid searching around for a free legal & readable version of a paper and find it through this tool quickly (if available). I can see myself using it when researching articles for a paper that return a pay wall.
I actually decided to suggest an “innovation” I use, which is LibKey Nomad (https://thirdiron.com/downloadnomad/) through SFU. It essentially is a browser extension that allows you to access full-text articles on the web through your institution. But, it also has an option to search if certain journal articles are open access as well, which is quite useful if I am looking for something beyond SFU that is not available through them. So essentially it helps me get access to things by letting me know whether I have access to them through my institutions or open access online.
Two of these tools caught my eye:
Worldcat: As someone who works in an academic library I love that this tool lets the user discover resources in both both academic and public libraries in a familiar format (searching materials via their database- it lists local libraries). I appreciate how this bolsters connection between academic and public libraries and community engagement.
https://openaccessbutton.org/ – Paywalls can be frustrating and it’s helpful to find out through the use of a Chrome extension whether an article is available for me to download. While you need to know some information about an article to be able to search it and/or request access if not already available, it has a navigable search function and is quite straightforward to use. Somewhat comparable to an “open-access-only Google”- the next step would be if we could just type in a topic/keyword and MANY open access articles came up, rather than just the specific one being searched for! (Wouldn’t be surprised if this exists!)
I have already used many different types of reference managers, including Refworks, Zotero, Endnote, and Mendeley. These are all great for inserting references, creating bibliographies, etc. Using those reference manager software to manage the order in which citations appear in my bibliography can greatly reduce the amount of time I spend drafting an article, leaving more time for data collection and experimentation.
I’m definitely bookmarking this list for later! This is a great resource. I’ve used or heard of many of these tools from my work in libraries (JSTOR, Hathi, etc.) but there were so many more that I’m not familiar with. It’s interesting to think about the ways that these digital tools have fundamentally changed the way we create and disseminate scholarship. The Google Ngram viewer grabbed my attention. This tool shows how the prevalence of terms has changed over time in published literature. I’ve seen a lot of academic articles that use data from the Ngram viewer as evidence for their argument. I’m interested in the way that our reliance on these tools may bias our thinking and results. What books may or may not be represented in the data Google has? Can we rely on a for-profit corporation to give us data? How does capitalism and big tech shape the projects currently underway in the academy, and what can we do about it?
I decided to take a closer look at ORCID (http://orcid.org/)
I only recently got myself an ORCID iD but I see that 8539 profiles currently have an affiliation with UBC
In their “about” section, I noted the following:
• ORCID’s mission is to enable transparent and trustworthy connections between researchers, their contributions, and their affiliations by providing a unique, persistent identifier for individuals to use as they engage in research, scholarship, and innovation activities.
• ORCID is a global, not-for-profit organization sustained by fees from our member organizations.
• ORCID is an integral part of the wider digital infrastructure needed for researchers to share information on a global scale. Our work is open, transparent, and non-proprietary
• Principle #8: All software developed by ORCID will be publicly released under an Open Source Software license approved by the Open Source Initiative. For the software it adopts, ORCID will prefer Open Source.
In the help topics under “ORCID, GDPR, and your rights as a user” we learn that “ORCID has aligned with the European Union General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)” so that the Right to erasure (aka “right to be forgotten” is recognized by ORCID whereby “ this right includes the erasure of data added to your ORCID record by you or by any of your trusted individuals and organizations.”
I selected RefWorks which I have not used before but I know that the University of Toronto has a license with them as a current student so it is citation/reference management software I plan to use for future research projects. The value of this tool is that it collects, documents, and organizes your citations with appropriate metadata which is important when you are conducting literature reviews or any research with lots of citations. I am involved in a knowledge syntheses project which means searching the existing literature, so I see this reference tool being very useful.
It was difficult to select one tool among these very interesting and highly useful sources and tools. For this activity I selected Open Syllabus Project (https://galaxy.opensyllabus.org/). This is highly useful for faculty in teaching who want to design or improve an existing course. They are able to obtain access most frequently assigned texts based on more than 7,000,000 course syllabi. This will be highly useful for me as I plan to join academia after graduation and will help determine the best sources available for students.
I looked at https://hcommons.org/, a social network for scholars to share their research in WordPress form while connecting with others in groups. I looked into it because it seemed like something that would be useful to me, as someone looking to design a website to showcase my research, but it seems like it isn’t a very active social media platform. Nevertheless, I found researchers on there that I have cited in my work, and it seems like most people joined less than 6 months ago, so I’ll keep it in mind if I decide to host a WordPress through that avenue. I think it would be very cool if the website grows into something that connects established scholars and emerging scholars in a less formal setting!
The resource that I have the most experience with from this list would be JSTOR [https://www.jstor.org/] which I have used throughout my undergraduate and graduate education. This service hosted so many of the resources that I needed, such as articles and books, for conducting research for assignments during my studies. Admittedly this resources is more useful when I have an academia affiliated log-in which allows for further access of licensed materials. Nonetheless, it has proved to be a worthwhile starting point for many of my research projects that I must still praise its utility.
One interesting resource on the list that was new to me is TagTeam, created by Harvard as part of the Harvard Open Access Project. The resource is an open-sourced tagging platform and open feed aggregator. The project was originally developed as part of HOAP’s open access tracking efforts, but can now be used by anyone to create tags that search across platforms. Members of a research project can create tags for different resources that will alert scholars in the field on new developments. I can see how this is especially useful in a collaborative research setting as users can subscribe to specific tags and receive alerts, rather than having this information verbally communicated or discovered through personal research.
Google Docs is one of the items in the list that I currently use the most often. I make use of Google Docs both as an academic and as a literacy tutor for adult learners. Ultimately, I find that it makes it very easy to collaborate from a distance, which is very important during a global pandemic. One of the issues that I see with Google Docs, and with Google Suite in general, is that the information is hosted outside of Canada, which limits its use in a few scenarios. For example, when I am working as a teaching assistant, I avoid using Google Docs in order to protect the privacy of my students. This can also become an issue when proposing to use Google Suite as a place to store data during research, or to collect data (e.g. through Google Forms).
However, I still see it as a useful tool for collaboration for less sensitive information. It fulfills a lot of the key aspects of open access technology by being very easily accessible online.
Looking through this list, Zotero is the tool I use most frequently. After working in other institutions that supported paid tools like Refworks and Endnote, I always make sure to let students know that Zotero is a completely open source tool and that they will continue to have access to it even if not connected to an institution. I think it’s an extremely important tool for students to know about, not only to aid in citations, but also for storing their research.
I recently was able to see a demo of the Data Management Plan (DMP) Tool, which allows researchers to create data management plans that are often required by their funders. Creating a DMP from scratch is a daunting task; it is difficult fo find examples of them to look at that are relevant to your own research, especially because they are relatively new.
I think the approach of using a wizard-style DMP builder with a click-through structure is very helpful for those that are new to creating data management plans. I created one without a DMP Tool, and I can say that the experience would have been much easier using the DMP Tool, and I think the end product would have been of better quality.
That being said, the tool is only as useful as its implementation – you would still need someone with data management expertise to ensure proper implementation and customization at the institutional level. It doesn’t negate the need for specific expertise in this area.
There were some old favourites on the list (OJS, Zotero, etc.), but many of the tools were new to me. Given the prevalence of misinformation/disinformation about COVID-19 online, I decided to focus on the fact checking tools on the list. SciCheck, not surprisingly, has been particularly active in addressing COVID-19 misinformation. While largely focused on the US and misleading statements by US politicians, I did notice some corrections relating to news stories set in other countries (e.g. a Canadian doctor making false claims about vaccines increasing the incidence of stillbirth). It might be an interesting resource to share with students when talking about the need to critically evaluate all sources of information. Another useful resource on the list was Ask for Evidence (https://askforevidence.org/), an initiative that encourages readers to ask influencers, media, politicians for evidence to back up their claims. This site led me to the parent site for Sense about Science, which had some good resources like “I don’t know what to believe,” a guide to peer review, that might be useful when working with undergraduate students just learning how to navigate scholarly literature.
There were also some surprising omissions on the list, most likely due to when the list was crowdsourced. Pressbooks (https://pressbooks.com/) is a major open publishing platform that is heavily used in the creation of open educational works. You can search for examples of works on the platform using their directory (https://pressbooks.directory/). Libretexts (formerly known as Chemwiki) is another open education publishing platform that is particularly rich in content in the sciences.
This list is such a keeper! A few innovations are familiar and fit within the ‘open’ realm for scholarly communications (Zotero). Google Docs is a free online document collaboration editor resource tool; where researchers easily access and edit the same document simultaneously.
An interesting thing I didn’t know about is Open Access Button, a non-profit organisation which lives up to its purpose. It indeed advances awareness about Open Access. They work with authors around the world to show them why Open Access matters and how easy it can be.
Kaggle(https://www.kaggle.com/datasets) is a tool I had vaguely heard or explored; the platform is useful as it has all the code, datasets and notebooks for research analysis as well courses for learning how to code. Kaggle promotes the idea of collaboration and open access.
I checked out the Scimago Journal Rank. I find this site is easier to navigate than Scopus or Web of Science journal rankings. It is also useful that each journal has a profile on the site, which includes the journal homepage, information for authors and a contact email.
There is also a section that visualizes the publication statistics by country. It was very interesting to explore which disciplines publish the most in my country and how much of it is open access.
I’m a big fan of non-proprietary standards for written communication. So for this discussion, I’m going to highlight LaTeX and Markdown as major communication innovations. These standards are important because, unlike HTML, the syntax for writing is relatively easy to learn. Formatting of text using Markdown is much more consistent across programs that incorporate that standard. They also make web publishing (in WordPress for example) much easier, as all formatting imports perfectly. Since I’ve started using Markdown and Latex, I’ve noticed that my documents don’t ‘magically’ lose their formatting like older .docx. files seem to do. As I create more teaching materials, I want to start composing everything in Markdown or LaTeX for preservation purposes. If I share materials, I will provide documents in these formats in addition to .docx.
As someone who feels relatively clueless about conferences (where and when they happen, getting one’s foot in the door, general naive concerns) I was intrigued by the GlobalEventList. Unfortunately, the link returns a 404 error, and a Google search leads to https://www.elsevier.com/events, which appears to only list events related to/hosted by Elsevier.
One of these tools that I have actual experience with is Zotero, which has been endlessly useful for citation management and notes. One of the main things I appreciate about Zotero is the desktop application/online interaction, providing peace of mind/insurance that even if the worst happens to my computer, all is not lost.
I’ve reviewed OpenRefine (formerly Google Refine), and covered in a previous CE course in a conference. A few years ago I also used Google Refine to clean data sets that I had created from data that I had scraped from websites using the now defunct tool Needlebase. I found OpenRefine fairly easy to use with its find and replace tool as a preparation for using/re-using/sharing data. I had previously done some data cleanup and removing of white space (from formatted soft returns) in a CSV file using Notepad++, it did the job but the user interface for OpenRefine was a lot more user friendly for the tasks that we used in the CE course and I will likely use this tool for future research projects.
I can see using this resource in the future to learn about new tools that I could use in my work and research in the future. In my current work, I rely on Creative Commons a fair bit, so I was interested to see if it was included and it was. The main Creative Commons is a great resource for learning about each type of license available for materials you may wish to share openly, and they also have a License Chooser tool to help decide on the appropriate license for your material if you’re not sure which to select. They also have a great repository of CC licensed images and now audio files, where you can filter depending on your needs. This is especially helpful when you are incorporating external materials within an open resource you are creating and want to ensure the CC licenses are compatible.
This was a very extensive list! I took a look at the Knowledge Unlatched and PaperHive collaboration. KU makes content widely available while PaperHive is a platform that allows for collaborative reading and interaction on research documents. Not being a researcher myself (I work as an admin), I never thought about how much time researchers could potentially waste redoing research that’s already been done, or even repeat mistakes in studies that other researchers have already made. I think this is a great collaboration that hopefully streamlines the process for academics and allows more peer engagement through the interactive features on PaperHive. I browsed around on the website and liked the clean, user-friendly design of the website. I especially appreciated the way the information and modes of engagement were separated via tabs such as “discussions” and “activity”.
As I am coming from the staff-side of academia my knowledge of the challenges and pitfalls of academic journals is quite limited, however, as the saying goes, ‘knowledge is power’ and people do covet power!
After browsing the list of innovations the one that immediately caught my eye was MorphoMuseuM (M3), a partner journal to Palæovertebrata out of the “Institut des Sciences de l’Évolution” from Montpellier, France. M3 is an open publication that offers tools to support the creation of 3D models, facilitate and promote scholarly access to 3D models, as well as drive innovation behind the creation of 3D models.
As technology changes and evolves, research will ultimately take new forms, and the methods to disseminate this research should never be the factor slowing this forward movement. Currently, there are very few platforms that enable the distribution of 3D models, and the ones that do exist will often take some level of ownership over the models. This can result in the model being used for promotional or advertising purposes which renders those particular platforms unsuitable for certain research or educational use cases.
Although M3 focuses primarily on biology, paleontology, and paleoanthropology, it presents a very attractive and practical solution for the utilization of 3D models in journals in an Open Access environment.
This base is wonderful!!! I saved it on my desktop and I will work with this open all the time! It gave me a lot of ideas about how to maximize each stage of my research and connect with resources and people around the world in my area! However, I missed more platforms focused on the Education field connecting the community who has studied teaching and learning. Any specific suggestions?
Looking at the wide range of amazing tools, CORE stood out to me because they maintain a wide range of open-access research articles which is a very useful tool for anyone desiring/requiring to do research or wanting to stay updated on the latest research topics! However, with such a large collection, it would also be important to think about how the articles were assembled. How many of the papers were peer-reviewed/checked if there are so many papers and is potentially still a growing cluster of more papers to come? I see that CORE also has opportunities for memberships and sponsorships, and this could be a way to drive a personal agenda of a business or individual researchers. For example, CORE has cooperation with a program called Turnitin and authorizes them to use metadata, so CORE may not only be a tool that works alone. They also use data from data providers, meaning the papers they have collected, even if they have a wide quantity, can be defined by the data providers and what they are willing to provide. As I mentioned before, CORE still seems like an excellent tool for research, but it is also important to consider the pros and cons as well.
I’ve done some work in the past on disruption as a form of innovation so was happy to see that threaded through these ideas and link! Mind the Gap caught my attention, specifically, the Fulcrum, a multimedia integration platform. I’ve always wanted to pilot, and evaluate a teaching tool I created during my masters work but from a tech aspect it just hasn’t been feasible or accessible or affordable. But I think there is a lot of value in creating tools that encourage students to participate in on demand decision making – sort of a choose your own adventure.
While there were many tools & services in this list that piqued my interest, I focused my browsing on tools that can help with metadata extraction for digital archiving. CERMINE is a tool that stood out to me and is used for extracting metadata from PDFs. It’s designed to extract bibliographic information from PDFs, including title, journal information, authors & affiliations, keywords, abstract, and references. It seems like it could be a very useful tool for archiving batches of PDFs in open access repositories – I’m looking forward to diving into its features & outputs a bit more closely to see if I can make use of it in any of my workflows!
For this activity, I chose to review an innovation called the Manuscripts app. It is a dedicated editor for planning, outlining, editing, and collaborating on scholarly research. I have been trying to find a writing tool to help me write in a collaborative manner, and this might be the best one available! I particularly like the fact that it comes with built-in journal submission templates that can be used with existing files. Unfortunately, it seems that this app will be decommissioned in the future as it has been merged with Wiley Partner Solutions.
In going through this list, I was happy to see OJS (Open Journal Systems) listed. I recently had the pleasure of migrating the archives of my department’s film journal, “Cinephile” over to OJS hosting; where previously each issue was open-access but available only as a full PDF download, OJS allows each article to be available for individual download, and searchable via an abstract, keywords, and a unique DOI. I know that our journal alone has close to 200 innovative research articles now available on OJS, and it is just one of many quality journals available through this hosting. I am excited to see OJS continue to develop, and to utilize its treasure trove of research in my own projects.
I really think the data collection form “400+ Tools and Innovations in Scholarly Communication, Research Phase Number and Research Activities ” and conference and webinar videos, such as “Geneva Workshops on Innovations in Scholarly Communication”, provide excellent research workflow, steps and information for teachers and researchers to have a better understanding of the research phases and activities. The presentations delivered in conference and webinar videos really give teachers and researchers a more comprehensive understanding of the research knowledge and information, which can be helpful for our teachers’ teaching and research, and our students’ learning, and for the scholarship of teaching and learning. UBC Golden Key International Honour Society also offers teachers and students opportunities to read, watch and study with reading materials and conference and webinar videos for academic progress and achievements, and educational excellence. I really think this teaching practice not only promotes our teachers and students to read, watch and study with learning materials in fun and creative ways, but also provides our teachers and students with open access, education, research, data and inclusivity.