« Hits & thoughts ain't evidence | Main | What markets do to open access »




Hi Martin,
Fully agree. It's absolutely contradictory to publish articles on openness in closed journals. I was thinking about this recently and wonder if it's more related to the need to publish in higher quality journals, or at least in journals with higher impact factors (the two may not necessarily be the same).

I was looking recently at open access journals to publish something in, that also contained a high impact factor. It's a challenge, unless you're prepared to pay $2000 (for Computers in Education, etc). I worked though a few of the top edtech journals according to Google Scholar Metrics (http://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?view_op=top_venues&hl=en&vq=eng_educationaltechnology) but many tend to want paying for open access. This seriously bugs me - paying to be published surely raises an ethical dilemma???


Hi Peter, I wouldn't want to go down the 'which OA route' is best argument really. I think if you can afford to pay (eg you have a research grant from one of the councils and fees are built in), then that's fine. If not look at other journals eg IRRODL, JIME. I think you're right about the impact, but that's the price here, you can't have your open cake and eat it. Part of the reason people will cite your paper or publish it is because openness is of interest. It has a 'market' value - so we shouldn't let people get that value without sharing back is my view. That's just the price of researching this area - accept it or go and research multimedia in classrooms or something. I'm quite strident about it - I don't care quite so much about other aspects of openness, I understand that people may not use open source software, or sign up with Coursera etc, I don't think there's one way to do openness. But sharing research about openness openly is non-negotiable for me.


Preach on, Brother Martin!


I agree completely, Martin. It is very hypocritical of a researcher or journal to publish about open education but have the resulting publication NOT open. It's kind of like a "share-alike" creative commons agreement, isn't it? Only it is not stated that way. I've actually even gone and thought about what the "share-alike" means when citing sources - if I write an academic article that cites mostly open access journal articles, wouldn't it be fair to have the resulting article open access as well? (I know that's not what "share alike" means, but one could interpret it that way).

The comments to this entry are closed.


  • www.flickr.com
    This is a Flickr badge showing public photos and videos from edtechie99. Make your own badge here.

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter