 Okay, okay. Perfect. So, hello, those of you who are with us today. Thanks for coming. The libraries are really excited to host today's session panel discussion with the College of Health Sciences and the profession, our file sciences and professions in the Heritage College of Medicine on the topic around open access publishing and self archiving research. We hope to raise awareness around the topic of Spark discussions among yourselves and today some of the panel will be discussing their experience on publishing open and self archiving their own research, the benefits of that, the drawbacks and why this conversations matters now in this moment. So we will have 10 to 15 minutes at the end of the session to have open questions from you, but please add comments and thoughts and questions in the chat. I will be monitoring the chat for questions for a panel to answer during this session. But we're also collecting your ideas and want more context because we want to host future events on this topic. So what do you want to hear? What questions do you have? And we might be able to address those topics in the future. Think about even workshops. We'll see. So my name is Hannah. I'm the health sciences and professions librarian as well as the interim head for subject liaison services and open access publishing interested me because I to move science and research forward. Everyone should be able to have a voice, not just those who can pay for access. So we think about evidence based practice and access to information and should be open for all of those to have access to it in order to do that also to increase informed citizens, something I am very interested in myself. So now I'm going to pass it to the other three panelists to introduce themselves and give you a little tidbit to why they are interested in open access publishing is self archiving as well. So let's start with Evan. Alright, so my name is Evan Harris. I use he him his pronouns and I'm an assistant professor in the Department of Social Work, which is in the College of Health Sciences and Professions. In short, I think that I'm interested in open access publishing because it's a way for me to really engage in practice of social work and uphold the values of the social work profession within academia. And I believe that really just the emancipation of information kind of like to hand us point is really empowering to me to community. So I think it's something that just kind of helps me do social work from my position in academia. Thank you, Berkeley, you want to go next. Thank you so much. So I am Berkeley Frans. I'm a faculty member in the Department of Social Medicine, the Heritage College of osteopathic medicine. I'm a sociologist by training. I'm really interested in open access publishing for a variety of reasons. The first is that, you know, the academic work that we do is rarely just just academic it has implications for health in my field for others for social change and other important contributions to society. So I just anytime you can make that information more widely available and all for it. Another thing that I found though professionally is that open access publishing allows me to collaborate better with others, including the students just having that, you know, kind of time saving ability to get access to something without going through a library website. It's really been helpful. So that's what interests me. Okay, thank you and Kelly. I'm Kelly Broughton. I am the assistant dean for research and education services in the university libraries. I've been interested in open access for, I think I gave my first author's rights workshop to librarians and faculty almost 20 years ago. And so this is something that as librarian I've kept on top of and have been interested in for a very, very long time and I'm super excited to have some faculty here with us and pushing us to have this conversation in a public way and helping us to advance our knowledge and understanding of all of this. And so I think Hannah wants me to start with definitions now, right? Okay, so I am going to throw a couple links in the chat as I can while I talk. I'm not good at talking and doing things at the same time, but I don't have a lot to do. So let me just start because we don't want to spend a lot of time talking about definitions and we certainly could spend an hour talking about definitions around this issue. So I'm going to do it real speedily. I sent a link to Wikipedia, which has some good basic information here. Open access OA as it is often referred to is a set of principles and a range of practices through which research outputs are distributed online free of cost and other access barriers. So our discussion today I think will mostly be around OA journal articles, but there are such a thing as OA books. And there are also colors of OA used as shortcuts to refer to how an article or journal becomes open or what kind of open it is. Now there's details in that Wikipedia article about that. And I also like this little glossary from the University of North Texas Libraries. Hopefully that link will work. And so for today, I'm just doing if we're going to talk about green and gold, right? So there's green OA and this is typically a version of an article made available by the author from some place other than the publisher's platform, like a disciplinary or an institutional repository or an author's webpage. Increasingly contracts or your author's agreement that what you sign when your articles been accepted with the publisher will give you as the author the right to post a version of your article like this. Typically the publisher does not allow you to deposit or or post the final formatted published PDF version of the article. It's usually the final MS word or latex version of your article usually post post peer reviewed typically but before the journal editors format it. So sometimes people call this version of the article that's made available using green OA practices a preprint. But unfortunately some people call it a postprint and some disciplines are in the practice of sharing their manuscripts even before peer review and they refer to those as preprints. Frustratingly confusing. So anyway for the practice of making a copy of your article available to the public for free. We refer to that as self archiving. But then there is also gold OA and this refers to the publishing model where the final publisher version of an article is available from the publisher openly to all readers. Sometimes entire journals are gold OA sometimes only certain articles and some journals are available gold OA. There are a few different ways that gold OA can happen and they're all legitimate and include high quality high impact journal titles. Some journals are entirely open that is their articles are made freely available to read on the publisher website or the entire journal in its entirety. The cost to create and maintain these journals is managed in some way other than libraries or individuals paying subscriptions or access. Historically for profit commercial publishers do not offer their journals in this model. Sometimes authors or researcher or research funders pay the publisher upfront to make the article open. This is often called article processing charges or APCs but I've seen publishers call it open access fees and other names as well. Journals that use this model are often called hybrid OA journals. Okay so that's my brief definitions green OA gold OA self archiving OA in general and if I missed anything any panel anybody else feel free to add that in. I have some more links that I will throw in the chat as we move on for anybody who wants to take a deeper dive into any of those definitions or practices. Thanks. Thank you Kelly for getting us kind of grounded in how we're defining open access and what we'll be focusing on today. So let's get started with the questions. The first question I have goes to Berkeley first. So when initially considering open access publishing what if any concerns did you have when you got started? That's a great question. In fact, I give a whole lecture to medical students who are embarking on research about some of the concerns about open access publishing. And for me the biggest concern as somebody who was on the tenure track was really how is this going to be perceived by others and how do I know that a journal that's offering open access publishing is legitimate. So I kind of dealt with those in a couple different ways. One is that I actually checked in with my promotion tenure committee and checked in with other colleagues at OU and mentors just to see how are some of these journals either that are entirely open access or those that offer it or even are converting to open access platform. A lot of journals in my discipline and social medicine are converting to open access in recent years. So I was just kind of curious how this would be interpreted. It was on my application for promotion and tenure. And the feedback that I got was pretty reassuring that it really was about journal quality and that the access format didn't matter as much as some of the traditional indicators like impact factor and not being predatory. So that kind of relieved some of those concerns. But then also just trying to figure out if a journal is truly legitimate or not. I think it takes some time to figure out there are some helpful lists out there that lists known predatory journals. But there are some journals that seem to operate in kind of a gray area that can make you feel uncomfortable especially when it comes to academic integrity. You definitely don't want to feel like you're somehow paying for a publication to support your career. And so that's a little nerve wracking I think is to know when a journal is offering this because they truly believe in democratizing academic research rather than just purely profiting off of it. So for me those are the two biggest concerns and I would say that they haven't dissuaded me from publishing open access. I still publish open access a fair amount maybe about 25 percent or maybe 20 percent of the journals that articles that I publish are open access journals and by choice. Which I can talk about a little bit later but some of the research funding that I have now actually requires that I publish open access. So I think there is this kind of growing acceptance and support for this work as long as you can ensure that the journal is above board. Any other two of our panelists want to address the question as well or kind of riff off what Berkeley mentioned. I definitely have gotten similar questions from students about is it legit if I open or if I publish an open access like what does that mean. So I think this is pretty common to have some of these doubts because it doesn't it doesn't always fit what we think traditionally what journal publication should look like. It should look like a week necessarily. So an open I think for a while prior to kind of like the move that you mentioned now that we're seeing that they are credible and they are peer reviewed and we know that now but there are still some like past lingering assumptions made about what this actually means. I am happy. I think we have an open access page someone sharing some resources so you mentioned some lists about where to go for open access kind of predatory watches. I think we have some lists like that as well but if you have a chance if we can go back to this chat and stick some of those links and there I think that would be helpful to folks. As well so I'm saying that out loud to also remind myself to do the same thing. Second question we're going to start with Kelly. What are the benefits of open access publishing and what are the drawbacks. Okay, so I'm sure I'm not going to list them all but I have a few that I would like to highlight on both ends of that question. First of all there is research that finds that open access articles are more highly cited. Now who cites them where they're being cited and the value of citation counts themselves that's all debatable for you in your P&T committees. Point number two another benefit the more and I think this is what Berkeley was referring to at the beginning the more people will be able to read your research if it's open just plain and simple. So you will have a greater ability to impact practice. So, of course, the level of importance of that particular thing to you is highly dependent on your research and your, you know, your field. So if the audience for your research is practitioners, I think that this can be a really important component of where you choose to publish. From a library's perspective, an academic library's perspective particularly we encourage researchers to push the scholarly communication system whenever and wherever they can, because the traditional commercial model is unsustainable and broken. And so we need a new system that's built on a sustainable business model where we're not relying on our faculty to produce research that then the institution has to turn around and pay outrageous subscription fees for commercial publishers so that our students have access to the research you just completed. What are the drawbacks I think really like the drawbacks are it's it's hard. It's hard to understand the system because it's so complicated right now. And I think the other drawback might be and is that it may not be the most prestigious journal in your field and then you have to navigate the P&T implications of that. That's a really good point I think about the complicated nature which if we are already I'm saying we kind of inclusively to the scholarly community we're used to publishing in journals we're used to publishing in or are well known. There's some comfort in that knowledge of what we already know versus this complicated system of like well what is gold and open and does it impact my tenure and then why spend that time and effort investigating when I could just continue to do what I do. Berkeley do you want to speak on this a little bit more as well. Sure I can just add a few other things and I definitely yeah just to support everything Kelly just said that's really helpful. For me personally some of the benefits that I found is that it really has actually been helpful for research collaboration I think I mentioned that in my intro but I've had people reach out because of open access articles because they were able to find them easily. And that's led to really productive research collaborations with individuals at other institutions that I may not have been able to connect with you know if it weren't at the same conference or something like that. So that's really valuable to me I definitely also find that when I work with students are more likely to have read articles that were published open access because again I think people are busy and they don't always want to go to the database. And pull an article even if they do have an academic affiliation so I think that that just kind of lends itself to that collaborative kind of collaborative research relationships which is something that I really enjoy in terms of my research. In terms of other benefits I mentioned so I'm currently I work with a colleague in CHSP and we have a Robert Robert Wood Johnson Foundation grant and they actually just started as we got our grant they started requiring all people who are funded to only publish and disseminate their findings through open access journals. So that can be another benefit is that I think funders like this because it really expands the impact of the work that researchers are doing so I think that also can get your work out there in ways that are helpful to you individually but also that might appeal to the people that are supporting your work. In terms of drawbacks I think the biggest ones have already been mentioned but it really just takes more time I think to figure out if a journal is legitimate you know. It may just be easier to go the traditional route because you know that journals is well respected in your field and a newer one may also be a great journal but then that's on you to really be careful and know that that's a legitimate place. And some of the things that you might look out for is like who's on an editorial board of a new journal I've heard stories of people being on editorial boards that they never agreed to be on so they can take your name sometimes and just put it on there. And you didn't consent to that and didn't know that but it makes it kind of lends its credibility that it doesn't actually have so they're kind of tricky sometimes and you have to be really willing to do some investigative work to see how legitimate they are. I'm sure everybody here gets you know emails asking for manuscripts to be submitted based on some other work that you've done and I certainly don't think at the stage of my career that I'm important enough to be contacted all the time by journals asking for me to write articles for them. And so that's usually a red flag that they are probably not a legitimate journal but again it's just you always have that kind of burden of wanting to prove that before you submit something which you don't always have with traditional format journals. Thank you. And Evan I'm going to prompt the next question to you but I feel like there's a real link between the drawbacks and kind of the perks of open access publishing with this question so feel free to blur the lines. Why does open access publishing appeal to you specifically. Yeah I mean I think for a lot of the reasons that we've discussed already. I think for sure as a social worker that it really allows me to provide that access to individuals within the field within the profession. So for one journal subscriptions are costly and as practitioners how do you decide which journal subscription is going to be the one that's going to serve you best. And so I don't think that we always think about how much it costs even our libraries to buy our content back and how much those subscriptions costs so once we graduate students then they're kind of out on their own not really being able to have access to that information. So I feel like I'm certainly supporting my profession by making sure that I'm getting as much stuff out there and open access or self archiving my content as much as possible. I do feel like that it's empowering communities. So just increasing access to individuals out there. But I also feel like there's always that little bit of a struggle at least for me and within social work that I think that we are supposed to provide research and support for a press population and that means we're going and doing work and conducting research with the press populations. So I feel like if I'm conducting research with those communities, if I'm doing open access and getting that information out there, then I feel that I'm better doing the job of making sure that I'm not taking advantage of that community for my sole benefit but I'm actually doing this research for them to get that back out there that they can use for themselves or others can. I feel like it kind of helps address that potential ethical issue with research. And I think so further as a researcher I want to reduce any barriers that I have for others to access my work and if my work has some meaning for someone that they can kind of connect with that and access it. And I think as a person kind of like what Kelly was talking about before I want to really reduce my contributions to systems that disempower others and I think, and that just don't otherwise seem just and with the academic kind of publishing complex. I feel like there's a lot of stuff in there that I just want to avoid contributing to as much as possible so I personally try to seek out Gold OA journals so just journals that are always open access and aren't at all connected to a larger academic publisher. But again those are kind of hard to find sometimes you can't find them on listservs and you kind of have to know about them and they are a little bit more difficult to kind of identify which ones are credible or not. But for me it seems like it's something that's worth it for me to put in that work because I think what they're doing is more in line with my values and the values within my profession. Yeah I want to talk a little bit more if we can about this idea of community research and then when that the final product when they're supposed to be shared partners or part of your research is now other from their access. I attend I remember tending a community research workshop and this was one of the core issues that folks had even related specifically to Ohio University it's like you say your focus on community and enrichment and work but yet the final product isn't always accessible to the local health department or to people who could actually use it to benefit the community intentionally. So you saying that open access kind of you know the loop then is closed a little bit more to make sure that they can use the resources even if it's not a person like a public person sitting in their house reading this report on Saturday night. It's probably not going to be the case but other people like professional or nonprofit organizations. I'm thinking health departments because I'm just in that mindset that mind space or even graduate students can use this to further the community. Do any other the panelists have thoughts on the implications of the practice or community. I want to add any more information on that. I will say I threw in the chat that one of the libraries most often asked questions of recent alum is how do I get access to all that library stuff I had before. And and it really does span the disciplines but a lot of people in business and teacher ed as well as the you know the auxiliary health field. And the answer is you if you don't have an affiliation through your new employer you've got your local public library who may or may not have you know access to scholarly literature at the level that you need. One of the times we're at the mercy of what the platforms and publishers will allow versus our own beliefs or ethics around what information literacy means and library access means to the public. It's not always an easy balance. I do want to real quick divert to the chat and sherry asks about. I think this is Berkeley when you were talking about some of those red flags you see when open access journals reach out to you specifically about publishing in their journal and she says what about may we translate article into another language is that something you see as a red flag or have you seen that. I personally have not had that request so I'd be curious to hear from others that yeah that would strike me as a strange request especially if they were you know hoping to have your work translated rather than you initiating that request but. Yeah I'm trying to think. I mean I've never had that request either. So I don't know if I can speak to that. No one on the panel. Okay. I'm curious because part of me. Thanks about inequality of English being kind of the default language and the problems with that. Versus feeling skeptical about someone reaching out to me about a language about my research that isn't a language that I speak and potential translation issues with that so. I might have to do more research on that. That's an excellent question. Thank you sherry. Okay next question for the panel starts with Kelly why are we having this conversation now what why is this an important conversation especially where we're at today. So I have a couple answers to that but I think part of that is an answer to Bill's question about is oh you able to provide full or partial support to cover the cost of publishing. Especially given these fees are usually more expensive. Do we recognize does oh you recognize the benefit for itself and its researchers of publishing. So. With the exception of and I might get the name wrong here of the researchers support fund that's not quite right that comes out of the VPR's office. Which I think is somewhere around $600 it might be $300 per faculty member somebody's you guys have gotten it probably is 600 Evan says it's 600. Other than that there is I am unaware of an institutional line item in support of faculties article processing charges or open access fees. There are a lot of different ways that faculty I've helped faculty navigate that right. Some people write it into their grant fund right that they're going to pay out of their grant fees. Some type of open access charge. Other people have been successfully solicited grants or funding from their professional organization who is also interested in pushing the scholarly communication network. And other people have paid it themselves are out of their own research incentive funds and other people just choose not to publish using the green away method. When the upfront fees are so expensive that they're it on affordable. So now I'm going to be the librarian perspective on article processing charges. For the most part me I'm not going to speak for my institution although I see other librarians here and they can chip in whenever they want. I hate them. They're in for almost all cases they are making us pay twice for the same stuff. We're already paying a library subscription fee and now we're going to pay an extra fee on top of that to make it open for everyone. I really we need to continue to experiment with different business models and different funding models and we do this in the library. We've done some experimentation with Ohio link and other and internally in the library about figuring out ways that we can support unique and interesting models of publication. Trying to break away from these models where we are paying for profit commercial publishers, a lot of money to publish the research that you guys are already doing often on the taxpayer dime. So sorry no I don't know of any great source to for your article processing charges. But this is one of the reasons why we were talking about this today because it's it. It's a common question all the librarians get how can I do this I want to publish open it but this is the journal I want and it's going to charge me $3,000. And we just don't have really good answers for that. The answer is let's talk about how to change the system and let's talk about how we can help you find quality gold. Oh a publishing options and let's encourage you to talk in your pnt committees about what that means for promotion intention and tenure and how you can support that publishing avenue. Okay, then the live and now my library answer sorry going on too long about this one, but we have just finished a new strategic plan in the library. We are looking to develop and promote our new new services and opportunities and align our practices in support of your research. Right. So we need to know from you what services, what expertise and what things can we deliver for you to advance your research and your teaching. And so this in conversation is really important to us in the library from a listening perspective we need to hear from all of you what are your barriers. What do you need to do next, and then we can try to figure out what supports we can build to make that happen for you. Thank you Kelly that wasn't too long. So if you have more to say for one of the panelists also want to add to that. That's fine as well I just see we got another chat does oh you have a repository for author manuscripts etc my feelings that these aren't not as accessed by open access sources themselves for author manuscripts. We, we kind of, I don't know how much I could talk about this I mean yes but we're still working on it. We're in the process of and I don't want to Kelly do you want to address this or do we want to call him. I don't know if we can. Janet's here and I will invite her to follow up on this. So I apologize for throwing Janet in the deep end but she showed up so I bet she suspected that I might. So we do have a new Ohio open library platform that other institutions typically use as an institutional repository. We do not have all of the super awesome bells and whistles that an expensive throw that in their bells and whistles that come with this platform, but we are navigating how to best support the within the resources that we have your needs as faculty, as well as how to build our case to advocate for additional resources to make it, you know, as efficient and as effective as possible. And I hope I did that. And there's a link that Hannah just put in there to the Ohio open library. Yeah, I didn't intend for this to be like library asking for resources show that wasn't the intention but to address the questions and just as kind of there. Let's move on to the next question so we make sure to not get too much on a tangent. So this one goes to Evan, who should be considering open publishing. In short, I think everyone. I think some specific kind of folks or maybe so if you're social justice oriented I think you know knowledge is power right so if we're having that information out there for everybody I think that that's an important thing. For sure anybody who's in a professional field because you can inform practices by increasing practitioner access to the information. And something that we haven't talked about too much so far is just like those who want to maintain their their rights to their labor and make their own decisions about their scholarly products because once we kind of give it away. It's for somebody else's decision we don't have all the rights there. And I think those invested in the diversity of thoughts so kind of how we talked about if it's out there for increasing access to our research then others around the world can have greater access to our work and build upon that. And I think those interested in kind of like what Kelly was talking about before really kind of shifting. Sorry, my dog is saying hello shifting that distribution of power. So I think academics, if we really think about it we spend time conducting research and writing it up and often we're doing that for free or at our own cost. And then we give that a research away, often to one of a few very large academic publishers. We're serving as free peer review for that and sometimes we're on those editorial boards for free. So we're doing all of this work for free for these publishers to make a lot of money off of that by then selling our work to back to our libraries or to the practitioners or the communities that we're trying to inform and support. So it is just kind of a system to where we have a lot of room to just say we're not going to give you our stuff for free anymore. And that where if we're giving it for free then it's really for free but you're not going to make money off of my work. And so I think that there's just a lot of ways for us to really focus on what we're doing and really change that process if we're getting more engaged with open access publishing. I could probably listen to you talk about this topic for 45 minutes straight. Not that I'm going to ask you to do that. But I just even wrote down some of your phrases about the increasing that diversity of thought and shifting this power dynamic of kind of taking, retaking ownership over our work in a way that makes sense to us and then making it available to people. It really does tie into a quality issues, frankly, it does for me at least. So I think that's really I just really like the way you phrased it in a way that makes it seem bigger than just I just need to get tenure or I just need to do this or when we think when we do our task list or we're writing that seems to be so individually, you know, smaller focused. But if we think about the impact of our work and what this means as a system, it really is quite powerful. I wonder if there's ways we can encourage, even if it doesn't start with, like, tenure committees, etc. But starting with our graduate students and helping to honor open access publishing and work with their dissertation or other ways we can help encourage this for younger scholars who are going to take our place right in the future in the academic world. I'm just kind of thinking out loud. And I see a couple of things in the chat here. Social justice and the connection to open absolutely. And then Janet home who is our other assistant dean at the library who is really doing a lot of great work with our Ohio open repository is giving a little bit of information as well as her contact information if you have further questions, which is great. And so thinking about open access and social justice, or who else should be considering open access I'm wondering I just want to kind of put that to the other two panelists to see if they want to add any more thoughts to that particular question. All right. How does plan as impact your feelings about open access plan s. I don't understand your question. Yeah, for me. This is a bit strange because I basically I'm just trying to understand the away landscape at OU be a new to OU in the past. Six months or so. And I guess coming at this from an NIH funded perspective always been mandated by the federal government for more than 10 years. Because of course it's the taxpayer who's paying for the research. But plan s is is a program that's been introduced by a number of funders, which is actually trying to mandate immediate open access publication. And also mandating what the subscription license requirements that the authors have to have. And the reason I ask that is because I feel that that is quite a step beyond open access being, say mandated where you have the green route and the gold route. And you have the ability to publish things. I mean, because I think on the one hand, I hear all the arguments about social justice and access to articles. But when you look at someplace like nature, that's now saying that they're going to charge about 40,000 US dollars for a gold open access paper. You know, that's more than a lot of people's entire annual budget for research. So I do worry a little bit that sometimes some of these away pushes are maybe going to have unintended consequences. And that's the reason that I asked that particular question, because I think plan s worries me a little bit more than say open access mandates do. That's a good question. I would just say that I do think plan s is not perfect. However, I guess I do appreciate a an effort to address it from a different angle. And so I think that if you look at the principles of plan s, they're generally in the right spot. I have a lot of, I guess, working in public higher ed, my entire adult life, my entire professional life, almost I have a lot of personal feelings about the for profitness of commercial publications in the research field, and so I like efforts that that attempt to kind of right size the publication field. I don't know that I personally would advocate that nobody it should be publishing our research in a for profit way, but I don't think it should be profit at the level of Apple or the NFL or you know the other things that that you read about in the for profit. In the for profit scholarly publishing field. So in that way, I appreciate the efforts that plan s goes to at a large scale. Thank you Kelly for shedding some light on that. I will have to do more research on this myself to come to my, see if I have any other thoughts or feelings on it. So I want to go to our last question that we have for officially for the panelists and then we can open it up. So this goes to Berkeley. How do you feel open access publishing stacks up against subscription journal publishing in relation to promotion 10 year? That's a great question. Yeah, so as I mentioned earlier, I tenure track faculty members, this has definitely been on my mind as I progressed towards promotion and tenure and the ways that I've kind of dealt with it is is just really reaching out for advice. So asking mentors, of course, acting asking directly might be in tea committee about how they interpret these journals and how to balance the kind of, you know, where I choose to publish. So and the feedback that I've received has been pretty expected that it really doesn't matter necessarily the format, but the same metrics that you would generally consider are important. And again, thinking about things like impact factor. And some of the things that I've done besides asking people directly is also looking at, you know, who's at peer institutions around me that might be writing letters for my P&T case and to see, you know, where are they publishing if these individuals are likely to be on a similar trajectory. As I am and there I've been able to also find, you know, like what percentage of articles are they publishing in open access and kind of follow those kinds of decisions. I will say in my field it seems like it's becoming increasingly more accepted in the medical field. I mean, major medical journals are either gone open access or have open access versions like JAMA just opened a new open access specific version. So I think there's growing acceptance and like we were just talking about NIH and other funders. There really is this mandate to publish things open access. So I think it's a bit more accepted. I don't I'd be curious to hear from others in different fields, perhaps in the humanities or social sciences to see if that's been their experience as well. But it definitely is something that I was worried about initially but was kind of reassured once I was able to see what others are doing and just get feedback from people here at OU. Yeah, though this panel does focus in health sciences and medicine that it wasn't the intention to be inclusive to this or like exclusive or inclusive to this group exclusive to other places. It's just we started having this conversation kind of casually and then we decided we need to have this on a bigger scale. So about open access publishing and so forth. So for those of you in attendance, if you have some thoughts, I'm going to go ahead and open it up. If you are an attendee and have thoughts to what Berkeley is saying about this tension. I guess I'm going to say between kind of traditional subscription journals and open access journals relation to your tenure. If you want to talk about that a little bit we can start opening it up to questions and start having a conversation among all of us now that we have all the questions out there. But I do have some backup questions just in case we have a little dialogue just in case. So I'm going to go ahead and open it up. So feel free to unmute yourselves or yeah type in chat. I'm just going to go ahead and say something about that real quick. So I think for me, since I just came to OU this year, when I was interviewing it was one of those things that I was really asking. So everybody I talked to so what's the, how does the department, how does the college see what's P&T's thought about open access, because it's something that I just really want to focus in that area and make sure that I'm doing that as much as possible. So I was more looking for an institution who was going to be supportive of that. And it did seem like within my college at least it did seem like that that was going to be an okay and acceptable thing. But I think that if we're not in places to where it's like that already, I think that we need to just be pushing on our P&T kind of committees and having those conversations. And so I think having these kind of talks now this panel and having more conversations about it I think are going to help to just kind of raise awareness and kind of change that thought process around P&T and publishing and subscription journals. I will say that from a librarian perspective, we're technically not faculty, so we don't go through the P&T process. And I think, and I don't know rightfully or not, we often think I'm like, oh, if they just put the focus in P&T, then maybe that'll help make a change. And that might be super naive on our and our points or in our mindset about, you know, our own motivations or what kind of, you know, efforts we want to see because we're not in it. We don't know what it's like. But it does seem to be like a good place to start having conversations about open access and self-archive as well as some other avenues of what impact looks like and what that means to the professions. But of course that varies widely across disciplines. So very curious for my own understanding to help serve you. What does that look like and why does it matter in what ways to your discipline? I mean, from a P&T perspective, it's a very difficult question. And I agree with what Evan said. I mean, it is different from institution to institution. But broadly speaking, I think for at least medicine, I mean, it may be different for some health disciplines. But, you know, there's always going to be a tension to say, well, actually, you need to be publishing in the best places. And when you've got places like nature that don't really want to come along with the open access ride, if you will, then that's going to create obvious tension for people in terms of promotion and tenure because there will always be people who say, well, I really don't care that you published in E-Life, you know, where's your nature paper? And the reason obviously I picked E-Life is because it's an open access journal that a lot of people actually are pushing as being kind of a premier biology open journal. But I think from looking at a lot of it, you know, the open access journals don't seem to be pushing up the impact factor rankings and the prestige rankings the same way that non-open access places are. And some of that may be down to some of the paywall content in terms of the editorials and other things that are not the original research. Right, and I do think you're right. We have continued work to do when it comes to the authority we give journals and just the reputation and this perceived, some of it is rightfully just, but some of it is kind of this also perceived assumptions that we've had for like that's always how we've done it, or this is what we're used to. We have continued conversations to do around that, I think, in all places. So I'd like to hear from the faculty what can the institution do other than pay for your article processing charges, other than give you an institutional repository. I think I've heard that a couple times, a place for yourself archiving. Like, are there things as an institution we should be doing to help you engage on this topic around P&T? Because I really do see it as key to advancing these efforts. If you are compelled to publish in the historical top not in nature, you're going to try to publish in nature. That's, I mean, that's protects your job and your reputation. So what can what are what are there ways that we can facilitate this conversation or help people start thinking differently? Okay, I see in a chat, I think a newsletter. Okay, so about kind of highlighting different open access journals and fields. I think that's an excellent idea. Love it. Meeting with P&T chairs to have a discussion about it. I'm reading these out loud in case some of you don't are on your phones or whatever and can't read chat too easily. Those are also really good suggestions meeting with P&T chairs and seeing from those chairs perspectives about what they're looking for or what might, what could change maybe in some of their wording or guidelines or what they may need from other units of campus might be really helpful. Excellent. Tracy, good question. Scopus does index open access journals if it is peer reviewed. I actually just submitted one that wasn't indexed. It's health veterans health journal veterans health. So now it's being reviewed because it is a peer reviewed open access journal. So you can actually make suggestions if you think open access journals should be indexed and then they will do an investigation to include the indexing. But yes, they do. And you can actually limit to open access in your searches. So this is something I do want to say if you have questions about how do I find open access journals? Where do we even start? What's a tool I can use to find these things? Please reach out to your librarian. You don't have to know this, right? Let us take some of that weight from you or help you do some investigation. It also helps us learn better about what you need to help tailor our services as well. So don't hesitate to reach out even if you feel like you should know the answer because we would say that to even grad students. It's like, of course, you don't know all the answers yet. We're still teaching you. We're kind of learning this together as well. So I would just on that Scopus question. So I think that happens like Scopus though. There are good OA journals not in Scopus. I want to make that clear. They have a pretty high bar for inclusion. And even within the hard science fields that they're good at, right? I think the OA journal has to be around for a certain number of years before they will even consider including it. So that puts a lot of new good journals off the mat for Scopus. And of course Scopus is really a very bench and medical health sciences oriented database and does not do a good job in the social sciences and terrible in the humanities. So just got to throw that out there. Unfortunately, there's no one great place to search to find what you're looking for and make life so much easier, but it doesn't really exist. Nicole's suggestion, couple suggestions there is really interesting as well about having faculty pages including links to open works and working papers. I think that's really interesting. Oh, I think, Nicole, your examples about linking to your Google profiles and your CVs being difficult on OU websites. I think that's something that the libraries in IT could start thinking about solutions for. And I would also suggest this is another plug for a tool called OrcID. OrcID is a good place to keep your scholarly profile that I would hope you would be able to link to from your university page. And if you need help with any OrcID stuff, please reach out to your librarian. I think also contributing to the conversation. So as far as what the library can do to support me, I think, with P&T, I think I understand that a lot of that is making a case for why I should have received promotion and tenure. And I think sometimes understanding that publishing an open access may have different benefits to me or to the field or to the profession. And so how do I then work on making that argument? I think that there's different ways of looking at different statistics and having different conversations that we may not have been prepared for because we were prepared to publish in certain journals and have these kind of conversations. But I think understanding more how we make those cases for ourselves I think would be beneficial. I think that's a great suggestion. Certainly workshops and discussions around scholarly metrics of all types. They could be valuable to us as a library and to you guys too. Yeah, that's a great idea. Intro to OA for PhD programs. That's a good idea too. Yeah. That may be happening in certain disciplines with certain subject librarians, but we certainly don't have a broad effort at that. I do think that HCOM might be asking their new students to have ORC IDs at orientation now, which is the scholarly profile I mentioned before. These are great ideas. Yeah, Mel, I can't help for so kind of when Evan you said like making a case to why this is important in a way that we traditionally may have not thought about those impacts gets to what Mel I think is saying, at least in my brain about evidence based practice. So if we're supposed to make clinical or like research and clinical decisions based on the literature, but people with actual clinicians or scientists not connected to university don't have access to the literature to make those decisions. How is that evidence based practice? It just doesn't make sense. So this for me is the biggest connection that that why I'm motivated to talk about this and continue to learn and stretch. So thank you for that. Okay, we only have a couple of minutes left. So I do want to add a form though this this chat conversation here is beautiful chef kiss because it's given me a lot of ideas of where we can go from here about future events conversations resources something because personally I don't want this to be just we did a panel and we did a thing I want to see a conversation moving forward. So there is a form that I just added to the chat for you to fill out to give a little bit more context about what you might want to see for you for students, whatever to see how we can move this forward. Yes, I can share the recording with participants. Yes, now that I have beautiful thing about teams, I have all your chats and participant list here. So I'll make sure to share the link. I'll probably also I'll upload it somewhere else where it'll live permanently other than this link. I'll send you an email. I'll send that information as well. Thank you Evan for pushing the recording because I wasn't sure. So I really appreciate that. Okay, any final thoughts from panelists. Please fill out the form Hannah just put in there everyone and give us your ideas about what you want to hear in our next session and our next conversation and all other ideas. Thank you. Okay, thank you again for talking and chatting and giving us ideas. Have a good rest of your Monday and I'll be in contact with a follow up email. Thank you. Thanks.