 Yn yn ddweud, mae'n ddweud â'n ddweud â'r ddweud. Mark oedd yn ymweld yn ymddangos i ddweud â'r ysgrifennu, a Rhaid yn y ddweud â'r prosiectau. Mae'n ddweud â'r gweithio at y maen nhw'n ymddangos eu ddweud â'r adroddedigau newid. Mae'n ddweud â'r Dau Dŵr i ddechrau Cyddeblusol ac mae'n gweithio'r ddweud â'r ddechrau a llawer o'ch ei ddweud. where both part of the national institute for digital learning and we open up education which looks after universities are make to offer online students as I mentioned this morning we are hosting the world conference online learning so we really recommend that you come to that, submissions for concise paper, lightning talks and digital posters are open till the third of May so do please think about putting an abstract in. felly byddwch yn dwi'n rhan o'r gwaith o'r pethau, ydw'r hyffни o'r ffordd hyff�lau? Felly byddwch yn dwi'n ddweud y ddechrau, rhywbeth wahanol yw'r ffordd? Rwy'n dweud y rai cydwch gan Bercant, ac I Can't Prynawis Ym Wath, But whoever is Patrick. Okay, estimated there are about 270 open access journals which is really quite significant. We have collated a list of open educational journals on our website so do have a look at that if you are interested in it. Mae'n gwybod, mae'n gwybod nesaf i'ch gweithio, yw'n gweithio'r ddigonol y gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio, mae'n gweithio'r sfer o'r bloghau. A'n dweud yw'n dweud i'r cynnwys ymddangos ar gyfer y dywedig a'r gweithio'r gweithio'r ddigonol yn gyfrifiadau. Felly yn dweud yw yma ym 3 mewn, mae'n dweud i'r ddigonol yn gyfrifiadau ar gyfer y dywedig a'n dweud i'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio unig. We started in 2016 and as Grony mentioned it was really about capacity development particularly for younger researchers and scholars but also for for all academics because it's such a busy world we're trying to find time to slow down and print out an article and read it. Yn ymweld, mae ydych yn wych, o'r ein bwch sydd â'r argylchedd, o cyfnod ar gyfer gael y cyfnodol, yn y gwyfyddiadau o newid ymlaen. Mae oeddwn i'n gweithio y top 10. Mae'r methgyrchu yn ymddangos ei wneud, os ydych chi'n gallu meddwl. a we will talk a bit more about that. So we released them once a day on Twitter in December of 2016, so we got a bit of hype going that way and got a bit of attention to it and said we will wait for an article next week and so on. Then in 27 we did it again. Again in December we had our top 10 reads from a number of journals so we added in some more. So we blogged about the articles as well and we explained a bit about each of them. So we had a number of selection criteria and the questions we were asking is how do we evaluate these articles? They've already been peer reviewed and so on so they meet certain criteria, but what is the value for us in reading them and for us as a research team and for promoting scholarly reading and scholarship more generally? And who do we involve and how do we get people to and what is the validity of our selection? So our selection criteria were that they needed to be published in an open access journal and all of the journals are what could be called diamond open access and that they don't charge ABCs so they're very accessible to publishing. Restricted to higher education but inclusive teacher education. We were looking for journals that had some kind of an international outlook or focus. We had some preference to journals published by professional bodies, learned societies, trying to support them. We were and again this was not necessarily fully uncontroversial decision that we had a preference for literature reviews, meta-analyses because they would give people an introduction to an area and also the ones that were addressing new and emerging areas or major gaps. Other minor preferences, journals challenging, conventional thinking, articles current to our projects and things we had on. So there was a kind of a random element to it that way as well. And then we were trying to get a mix of gender, cultural, geographic diversity. I had to say this was a lot of work. We had a really large list of journal articles to go through and many of you may know I've only been at the DCU since September. So it was my first time. So December was quite a manic time trying to read all these articles. But Mark Brown is very active on Twitter and releasing these on a daily basis gave it some oomph and anticipation and we've had lots of people saying it was really valuable. So these are some of the articles from 2017. Blended learning citation patterns and publication networks. A couple here, thematic patterns in international blended learning. Review in content analysis of the international review of research in open and distance learning, distributed learning. Trends and patterns in MOOCs. Theories and frameworks for online education. Critical review of the use of Wenger's community of practice. Again, that's an interesting one because the COP framework has been used extensively by people. So there's lots of interest in it. Refining success and dropouts in massive online courses based on the intention behaviour gap. Educational resources. And again here, Laurie's a very well-known name in the field. National study of online learning leaders in US higher education. Bot teachers. A very topical issue. Gamification again. Very topical. So we had 22 authors in 2017. A good geographical spread. About 60% men, 40% women. There were notable gaps in the reports we cited in research topics. Arodo was still a very important leading publication. And the majority were aligned with, as Amon said, professional bodies. Agents again. Another very important journal. Very high impact. And linked with the very well-known Ascolite conference which occurs in Australia and New Zealand. So I think I'll hog the light a bit here. Sorry. In 2018 we had a Google Drive folder where we put all the articles. And I think there were around about 100, I seem to remember. So a lot of articles to read. And there were four of us, just four of us, I think, reviewing them. Is that right? We had a wider group at one stage. We had a big wide group and then it was a sub-selection of four of us for a finish. So that was Mark, Maread, Amon and myself. And then we chose them each individually. And then gave reasons for our choices. And then ultimately Mark was the one who made the final decision. As which ones we would go ahead with. I'm going to hand over to you. So I've given a shout out to Ajet as well. I'm involved as an editor on Ajet. And trends and patterns in the open hemisphere. I always think as well with articles a good title is key. Because it's... And the open hemisphere. Someone, Martin Dougie, I must have given out last night on Twitter about the global south. He didn't like to turn the global south. But I think we can all probably agree the open hemisphere is a great title. Helping doctors, students, this Melissa Bond. Really interesting one as well. Cracked publication code. One from the International Journal of Educational Technology and Higher Education. From ALT's own research and learning technology. It's also big on our radar. And some fellow called Martin Weller with his 20 years of ed tech. We only put science when you'd be here. Yeah exactly. We have to place that in when we saw him coming in there. Which is a great read. I'm sure everyone's familiar with a great piece of scholarship. Because we have to remember where we came from. Several others. I guess the other thing is to mention that these are only a fraction of the actual extent literature. Because he or I had a brilliant study out in F1000 research last year. About how much of the worldwide literature is open access or not. And very little of it is. And that was one of the things in our selection. We were saying are we going to include green access. And obviously publishing the repository in closed journals. And we're still debating about whether we include those or not. So these are the top journals that we have been looking at and reading. We've mentioned most of them. The Journal of Online Learning is another one open praxis. That we haven't mentioned yet. And distance education is sneaking in there. But it's not an open access journal. And there's somebody here. The editors of the new special edition coming out on open educational practices in that journal. So there's been some talk about the accessibility of that. So three takeaways. An increased number of systematic reviews. And meta-analyses. And that's not uncontested. We're still primary research is very important. But we're trying to give people access to literature. And say look here's a key document you can get into a field quickly. It's a primer if you like. The blurring of boundaries between open and closed publications. Those differences between gold access and green access. And that can get very complex. People almost need a type of open access literacy to understand that. And a question of whether the best article still remain in closed journals. So that the most prestigious and highly cited journals. Such as computers and education for example is not in our list. And we're just... No we're not out of time. We're out of time. So as I said before it was really difficult to choose. And of course it's very biased. But it's a really interesting exercise to take part on. And certainly from a personal point of view. It's great to be forced to read all those articles. And find out what was going on. Eamon mentioned systematic reviews. I think one of the reasons we chose Martin's article. Was it was a key point in terms of giving a trajectory. Of where Ed Tech had gone to over the last 20 years. So it was very valuable from that point of view. So the question is is too much reading really a bad thing. I think the answer has got to be no. And do you have to pay to be a member of the gym for the best exercise. So that's the analogy in terms of the kind of open closed argument. And I think it's interesting that a number of people are increasingly choosing to only publish openly. And refusing to publish or review for closed journals. And I think that's a good thing. And we still got the issue about playing the game in terms of. The perception that articles in closed journals are better. And count more for things like the research assessment exercise in the UK. So I think there's still a battle to be had in terms of what happens. And the final question is does open scholarship need re-centering. So that's what we leave you with. I think we've got a little bit of time for discussion. We'd love to hear from you about how do you read what's your strategy. Do you get things from colleagues? Do you find it on social networks? Or would this kind of exercise be of interest for you? Merid joined us so I'm going to put it on the spot. Is there anything you want to add Merid? I think the next step for us is actually either demystifying that debate or saying well actually it's true. So we can go through this exercise and we can select our top ten journals. But then I think we need to do another step. And to take that step and go okay let's look at the most cited articles whether they're in open or closed and let's try to do a comparative analysis. So that for me is for us to challenge and potentially come back and say well okay using whichever template that we choose to do that and basis for that analysis but I think we need to do that because I think it's the next step of debunking or saying that the myths are true. I think it's interesting in terms of citations. Often the articles that get most cited are not actually good or being criticised. So I did an article a few years ago with a colleague Martin from Southampton on affordances and it was really heavily criticised and therefore it was heavily cited. So that was a good way of guessing lots of five journals. No none of them did and it's a really good question Francis because I think that's important. Maybe it's like a political decision if you're going to combine yourself to open access literature. You may be missing some evidence or some research but you're also saying this is accessible and it's replicable and if you're following principles of open science and you're doing systematic review of closed literature that's not a replica for the study era. Where they probably do closed access and I do think that the most significant issue anyway is the issue of article processing. Yeah it's interesting isn't it? I think we all play the game don't we? So when I wrote my learning design book for Springer when I put the proposal in I said I'm going to live blog chapters as I go and they accepted that and actually that made the book much much better because people came back to the blog post and said I really like this I'm not sure what you mean by this and have you seen these references. So the book was informed by the wider community and at the end I had a reputable product but I also had that history of open versions of the chapters. Hi you've limited yourself to open access articles. What I see is that a lot of things are happening and interesting things are set on blog posts and that's often that's more up to date than a lot of articles so how do you look at that? I started blogging back in 2007 and actually I emailed Martin, I don't know if you remember this Martin and said I'm thinking of blogging and he gave me some really good advice It's all my fault. All my rubbish is out there and actually the blogging is invaluable and I often use the blog as a place to work up half-baked ideas so I developed a taxonomy for MOOCs for example and I put it in a blog post and eventually I published it in a journal article so I agree I think the blogosphere is incredibly valuable increasingly important. The other thing is if I publish in a closed journal I'll be lucky if five people read the abstract. If I publish a blog post and I tweet it it goes to 10,000 people and then invariably two or three people will tweet it it's getting to a far greater audience I think for most of us people know our work through our blog posts rather than our closed journals. Great initiative I think, Gloria and I completely agree with you the more reading we do the better. I wondered about your reflections on what's happened in the UK there's a UK centric question I know but for people who are not aware in the UK the research excellence framework exercise that's what we are doing lots of reading to judge our own publications but they made a decision that to be eligible to be reported on for and judged therefore in the research excellence exercise that journal articles had to be open access and personally I think that's a really significant shift into considering the quality of publications on their own merit rather than I mean I do have colleagues who still want to do ICI ranked journals and think that that's the gold standard but I think the combination of that push from the general ref panel and the statement by the education panel that they don't look at outputs there's the location of the outputs they read all the articles that they get to judge I think both of those things are moving us in the right direction but interested to know what your thoughts are I totally agree, I think that's a really significant shift and in parallel a lot of funding bodies are requiring the outputs from projects to be publicly available and that's got to be a good thing, it has to be I mean as researchers we want to get our work out there and we want to get feedback on it so the more open it is the better the more likely we'll get a reaction to it I mentioned the POR that I'll study they're kind of one of my current ed tech femme ed tech heroes I guess but they've got a cool service called Unpaywall that they've developed which is brilliant but they have another thing which is called impact story and you could do this if you like as a reflective exercise impact story and put in your name or possibly your orchid ID and it will tell you where you are in the percentile for open access publishing in the world so they'll say you're in the top 3% of x% of your publications are open access which is really nice and possibly something you can do to evidence to your institution if you ever need to about your publishing OK, thank you very much, we're out of time now Thank you very much, and you're welcome