Harvard Faculty Adopts Open-Access Requirement

Vooch writes "Harvard University's Faculty of Arts and Sciences adopted a policy this evening that requires faculty members to allow the university to make their scholarly articles available free online." I may not be smart enough to go to college, but at least I can pretend to have a Harvard eduction. I don't think that will be enough to get a gig as a Simpsons writer.

Comments

Do you mean education?

[mysqlbytes]

A Harvard eduction?? Some of us learn english proper!

Re:Do you mean education?

[sm62704]

You didn't supply a link.

Nice of Them

[Mickyfin613]

Considering Harvard University's staggering $34 billion stockpile...

Re:Nice of Them

[dkleinsc]

Yeah, silly idea for a university to use their endowment to promote research (including this measure as well as their numerous grants), drop tuition for lower income students to improve learning, or recruit top-notch faculty. (in the interests of disclosure, I'm one of the few members of my family without a Harvard degree of some sort)

You'd almost think their purpose was promoting the advancement of human knowledge.

Re:Nice of Them

[poliopteragriseoapte]

This has nothing to do with Harvard's finances. In any case Harvard does not make money out of scholarly publications.

This is a coup against publishers, the likes of Elsevier and Springer. What Harvard is saying is that, as a condition of sponsoring research at Harvard, the results MUST be accessible in open form. Hence, when faculty transfer the copyright of their papers to the publishers (a step that happens each time a paper is published), a clause will have to be added that Harvard reserves the right to make the works available in an open access way.

This is great, and other universities are thinking the same (but acting with less courage).

This leaves open the point of why one must transfer copyright when publishing papers -- why would a license to use the content not be enough? But traditionally, faculty and researchers have been slaves to publishers. Harvard's decision is a sign that the balance of power is changing, due to the internet.

Faculty members can publish in any journal that...

[mhore]

Ok, that's fine and well that if the journal allows it, Harvard makes a copy of the article freely available. What about those journals (Nature and Science, maybe?) that do not allow this. Does this mean that Harvard faculty will not publish in Nature and Science? Somehow I doubt that. Does this mean that Harvard will break copyright agreements? Maybe? The article doesn't quite say.

Not a bad idea

[KublaiKhan]

One of my major frustrations is how it's very difficult to find serious scholarship outside of a certain number of journals, all of which require expensive subscriptions. It severely limits my ability to make a point on, say, evolutionary biology if I cannot cite and link to a peer-reviewed paper on said subject.

Hopefully, we'll be able to see some more of this sort of thing in the future.

Re:Not a bad idea

[nasor]

"Expensive" doesn't even begin to cover it. A subscription to the Journal of the American Chemical Society - which you pretty much must have if you want to do serious chemistry research - was $3165 last time I checked. And that was for online access only! These prices aren't "expensive," they're insane. Especially when you consider that the journals don't pay anything for the papers that they publish.

Re:Faculty members can publish in any journal that

[mhall119]

I think their theory is that journals that don't allow this will have to change their policy, as they wouldn't want to lose out on publishing articles from Harvard profs.

Eduction?

[timelorde]

... but at least I can pretend to have a Harvard eduction.

I was all set to make a snide comment about the esteemed Mr. Taco's spelling and/or typing abilities, perhaps combined with a Billy Gates Harvard dropout reference, but then I Googled "eduction":

Eduction

*Sigh* I am NOT smarter than a fifth grader.

Re:Faculty members can publish in any journal that

[immcintosh]

You call it Harvard arrogance, I call it a noble effort. They have a strong hand, and I think they have every ethical right to attempt to enforce a more open atmosphere of knowledge in the face of academic journals which seem to be working contrary to that end.

Whether anything comes with it is another matter, but I'm glad they're trying.

It's *BIG*!

[hawk]

The importance of this *cannot* be understated.

Junior faculty, in particular, are currently *forced* to publish in the "best" journal they can, with the bulk of those being the "sign it over" variety. To publish in a lesser journal is to risk tenure.

Now, suddenly, the University is providing a new list of top journals, and tenure will come from posting to the rest of those.

The academic publishing industry is a dinosaur in desperate need of elimination. It charges tens of thousands of dollars per school for journals that would be more useful as web sites--, not and available several months earlier. As it exists, journals are for the benefit of the publishing companies, not the world at large, academia, or the authors. The economic model is that the faculty write, are paid nothing, and the libraries pay huge fees to the publishing houses.

Will the publishers react to open up? I doubt it; they can't.

The *real* result of this will be top articles going to online journals, which will first rival and then displace the printed journals. This is a good thing for everyone except the publishing houses.

hawk, formerly junior faculty but now back in practice and paid well enough that *his* kids can go to school, too

Re:Faculty members can publish in any journal that

[aztektum]

It reminds me of the argument put toward the "MAFIAA": Adapt to a new way of doing business or die.

I don't see why Science or Nature should get a pass.