1 / 17

Implementing PAGES at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Implementing PAGES at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Dave Hamrin 2013 STIP Meeting Des Moines, Iowa. Random Observations. As a taxpayer, I’ve never been fond of the relationship between federally funded research and scientific publishers.

myra-chaney
Télécharger la présentation

Implementing PAGES at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Implementing PAGES at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory Dave Hamrin 2013 STIP Meeting Des Moines, Iowa

  2. Random Observations • As a taxpayer, I’ve never been fond of the relationship between federally funded research and scientific publishers. • As a person who believes “you can’t have too many friends who are librarians,” I’ve long been sensitized to how journal pricing practices squeeze library budgets.

  3. Background on this talk • This talk will not contain any background on the drivers, etc., for PAGES because I believe these topics will be amply covered by OSTI speakers. • This talk will contain what I know so far about how ORNL plans to comply, based both on what I’ve heard and what I think.

  4. The Show So Far… • DOE told the Laboratory Directors that they needed to have a plan to institute PAGES, and the ORNL Deputy Director for Science and Technology met with me to discuss some issues. • I was told the following three things: • ORNL will comply • ORNL wishes to have full compliance with PTS (100% of documents get cleared) • ORNL will do what it takes to get full compliance

  5. “What issues do you see?” • That’s the question that was posed to me, and the following slides represent issues, problems, and potential solutions to problems • For the most part, if I say “this is what I think,” you can take it as “this is what ORNL thinks.” On matters of STI, I am the Subject Matter Expert.

  6. “ I can’t give you what I don’t have” • Every DOE-contractor-operated facility has a process that can logically be called “Review and Release.” In theory, this process captures all information leaving the facility for a public audience. Sending a journal article through the review-and-release process is a hard-and-fast requirement. Historically, providing the bibliographic information is a less hard-and-fast requirement.

  7. “I don’t have it…” (2) • In ORNL-speak, this problem is called “we have a clearance database, but we need a publications database.” • To solve this problem, the Publication Tracking System at ORNL sends out “nag-mails” that ask “Hey, did this ever get published? If it did, put that info into PTS. If you don’t, you’ll get these nag-mails with increasing frequency.”

  8. Sample PTS Entry

  9. Potential Solution • Change the text of the nag-mail to reflect the following: • We need the updated information to ensure the widest possible audience for your article • If you do this, great things will happen • It’s a requirement • If you don’t do it, bad things will happen • BOTTOM LINE: Shouldn’t be a show-stopper

  10. “Who’s In Charge Here”

  11. The authors’ affiliations

  12. Issues There are over twenty institutions on this article; ten are DOE labs. Should all ten sites “clear” this article? Should all ten sites send this article to OSTI? Should the listed corresponding author provide the preprint for PAGES? What if the corresponding author isn’t from a DOE facility?

  13. Potential Solution • In our Publications Tracking System, probably most of our publications have multiple authors. Often, they are ALL ORNL employees, so our database uses a “contact author” approach. We could either add text or add a field to ascertain who is either the corresponding author or the DOE person best suited to acting in that role.

  14. Don’t forget user facilities • While ORNL has a central database to capture its publications, ORNL also has several DOE User Facilities. So far as I know, we don’t have a nag-mail system. But we’re going to need one to capture the users’ journal articles.

  15. Other things I said during the meeting • We will have a problem with compliance if we fail to convincingly show our authors they have an identifiable self-interest in complying. • While I normally favor the “carrot approach,” I’m not unaware that “stick approach” has its benefits • If Lab management decrees, we could make proof of compliance a necessity for getting credit for publications during performance appraisal time

  16. So, what’s ahead? • Assuming continued upper management support, I think we’ll get there • At the end of the day, compliance is normally a top-down issue • I believe this OSTP mandate will provide an ample carrot to show authors that this change is extremely beneficial to them

  17. Questions? • Comments? • Suggestions? • Applause?

More Related