Skip to content
Please note that GitHub no longer supports your web browser.

We recommend upgrading to the latest Google Chrome or Firefox.

Learn more
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Todo: First draft of roadmap #16

Open
Protohedgehog opened this issue Dec 18, 2019 · 2 comments
Open

Todo: First draft of roadmap #16

Protohedgehog opened this issue Dec 18, 2019 · 2 comments
Assignees

Comments

@Protohedgehog
Copy link
Contributor

@Protohedgehog Protohedgehog commented Dec 18, 2019

See roadmap.md for details

@Protohedgehog Protohedgehog self-assigned this Dec 18, 2019
Protohedgehog added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 18, 2019
Protohedgehog added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 29, 2019
@wolass

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

@wolass wolass commented Jan 16, 2020

Thoughts for the roadmap:
SA should be seen as a teaching organisation with expertise on open and reproducible science. Our project nr 1 would be the teaching and certification of scientists using the mooc.'

2nd project for the FSA as I see it is the evaluation of scientists and science using an alternative measure. And here we may argue that it is going to be another impact factor. But we need to account for project 3.

Which is the nano-publication platform. So that our measure will be compatible with the current publishing standards and also with the new platform. It's going to be challenging but it might be a combination that is unique and complete. Do you also see another use case for the FSA?

@Protohedgehog

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@Protohedgehog Protohedgehog commented Jan 17, 2020

Agreed about teaching. In a P2P learning framework. I am not sure about the status of the MOOC, but given there has not been any development in around 3 months now, and the platform is still dead (Eliademy), I am not sure how much we can depend on that. We can certainly re-use all existing materials.

Thinking aloud on that. There are about 2.8/10 modules completed at the present. The latter .8 on Open Access, which I can complete independently, as I was the main contributor to that module anyway. Each module can be eg transformed into an e-book too. Or the whole thing in the end. I think the OS MOOC did start that, but status is the same as the rest of the project.

Evaluation. I like it, because it gears with the practical and political and community dimensions of the FSA. We will be going up against/with the OS Monitor though too. It needs substantial programming knowledge, I think.

There is a massive market potential at the moment for 'open metrics', which is still in its infancy and expected to grow (see eg INORMS and the OSM). There is a demand for metrics service providers, as most institutes do a shitty job of recording eg their OA publications. You can provide an economic reasoning for this too; for example, for every publication, some institutions will receive some money from a governmental agency or ministry. For every OA publication, the institution will receive the money multiplied by a factor. It mandates institutes to become economically interested in keeping efficient OA records, as one example. Can be done at the author-level too, and leverage things like Unpaywall/ImpactStory. Launch it as a non-profit project under the FSA. Imagine institutions proudly showing their OA scores and competing for funding based on a measurable openness of their research. So, let them be gamed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
2 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.