Reflection of lecture 2017/04/11

For those not in the know, Open Access (OA) are years in the making. In science, for example, Open Access were common practises. The arXiv project (pronounced as ‘archive’) was created a bit more than two decades ago as an OA repository by Paul Ginsparg of Cornell University. But yet it has taken long (20 years) for OA to take off, in some cases (OA) it still remains at the margins of mainstream publication. In the modern era then, Open Access has spread like wildfire. It is where research papers are made available online, at no charge. This is unlike subscription journals that has hefty price tags. This had benefits for me and many other struggling students. For my research purposes I do download a lot of journals from the UWC databases without paying a cent for it. UWC are a signatory to the Berlin agreement, the Berlin Declaration was an event that established the OA movement. But I do have some burning questions regarding open access, and maybe my colleagues reading this post would like to comment. There has been concerns whether OA, despite its good intentions, would harm the peer review structure and compromise the quality of research on OA.

I know that many researchers benefit from Open Access, I also know that researchers rely on scholarships and their academic careers are judged on what they have published and the impact of the research that they (researcher) have published. With that said, Open Access publications are less established than subscription publications and are not necessarily followed on the kinds of impact it has in academia and society. I suppose as Open Access and the publications published on it develops more, so will its credibility. Younger researchers will be then able to embrace open access more. But for now, is OA articles considered less credible than subscription articles?

Open Access Explained!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5rVH1KGBCY