In this keynote presented at the FSCI 2019, Juan Pablo Alperin discusses the role of incentives in opening access to scholarly research.

Juan Pablo Alperin

<em>
 Keynote presented by Juan Pablo Alperin at FSCI on August 9, 2019.
</em>
Overview  Introduction The case for open access Barriers to open access The role of incentives What do we know about incentives? The Review, Promotion, and Tenure project Digging further into open access What do the RPT documents ask for? What are we to make of all this?

Would including open scholarship in tenure guidelines move the needle?

Key takeaways from this year’s FORCE11 Scholarly Communication Institute—a jam-packed week of learning, discussion, and celebration of all aspects of scholarly communication.

Alice Fleerackers

![Group photo of FSCI 2019
attendees](https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.39.22-AM.png){.alignnone
.wp-image-2202 .size-full loading="lazy" decoding="async" width="1413"
height="538"
srcset="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.39.22-AM.png 1413w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.39.22-AM-300x114.png 300w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.39.22-AM-768x292.png 768w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.39.22-AM-1024x390.png 1024w"
sizes="(max-width: 1413px) 100vw, 1413px"}

Each year in August, researchers, librarians, educators, students, and
open access advocates gather together for the [FORCE11 Scholarly
Communication Institute
("FSCI")](https://www.force11.org/fsci/2019){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}---a jam-packed week of learning, discussion,
and celebration of all aspects of scholarly communication. This year, I
was lucky enough to be one of them---thanks to a generous travel
scholarship. The experience was one I'll never forget.

Over the course of the week, I had the chance to learn from an
incredible community of people. I heard from librarians, publishers, and
researchers about their changing role within scholarly communication and
the challenges and opportunities that come with it. I gained
perspectives from Mexico, Japan, Sudan, and beyond about the unique
state of scholarly communication in each of these nations. I took part
in conversations about open knowledge, open pedagogy, and open culture,
as well as the many different forms these ideas can take.

I left FSCI2019 with many answers, but also with many questions. I'm
summarizing just a few of them here for those who couldn't attend in
person:

# Is "access" to knowledge enough?

What audiences are overlooked by 'traditional' scholarly publishing
models? Does making research available actually make it *accessible*?
And how do factors like geography, culture, infrastructure, and
education influence who has access to knowledge and who doesn't?

These questions came up again and again in all of my
[courses](https://force11.org/fsci/post/fsci-2019-course-abstracts/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener"}, as well as in many of the [lightning
talks](https://force11.org/wp-content/d7/d7/project/880/fsc2019lt.pdf){target="_blank"
rel="noopener"} and plenaries. Presenters highlighted the importance of
offering educational materials in multiple languages, depositing
publications in open repositories, writing for non-academic audiences,
and more.

<figure id="attachment_2196" class="wp-caption alignnone"
aria-describedby="caption-attachment-2196" style="width: 900px">
<img
src="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.24.20-AM.png"
class="wp-image-2196" loading="lazy" decoding="async"
srcset="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.24.20-AM.png 902w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.24.20-AM-300x213.png 300w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.24.20-AM-768x544.png 768w"
sizes="(max-width: 900px) 100vw, 900px" width="900" height="638"
alt="Thomas Hervé Mboa Nkoudou delivers his keynote at the FSCI plenary session. Image via Access Initiative" />
<figcaption aria-hidden="true">Thomas Hervé Mboa Nkoudou delivers his
keynote at the FSCI plenary session. Image via Access
Initiative</figcaption>
</figure>

But what struck me most was Thomas Hervé Mboa Nkoudou's plenary keynote,
"[Scholarly Communication reimagined from Post
Colonies](https://www.force11.org/fsci/2019/fsci-2019-plenary-sessions){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}." During the talk (and, later, in his class
on the same subject), he emphasized how contemporary academic publishing
keeps researchers in the so-called 'Global South' at the periphery of
research production. Highlighting the colonial nature of scholarly
communication, he pushed us all to reconsider our own roles as
producers, consumers, and disseminators of knowledge:

### *"We should explore alternative ways for communicating research, aside from a traditional, published journal article." ---Thomas Hervé Mboa Nkoudou* {#we-should-explore-alternative-ways-for-communicating-research-aside-from-a-traditional-published-journal-article.-thomas-hervé-mboa-nkoudou}

# What does the scholarly future look like?

The changes undergoing academic publishing were another key topic of
conversation at FSCI this year. Should we 'open' up the peer review
process or abandon it entirely? Is the preprint a viable alternative to
a scholarly journal article? How do traditional publishing frameworks
disadvantage early career researchers?

Questions such as these sparked fascinating conversations, especially in
Cameron Neylon and Nicky Agate's course, *Inside Scholarly Communication
Today.* Through hands-on activities and lots of group discussion, we dug
deep into the current nature of scholarly publishing---and brainstormed
some creative ways it could be improved.

<figure id="attachment_2197" class="wp-caption alignnone"
aria-describedby="caption-attachment-2197" style="width: 900px">
<img
src="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.28.48-AM.png"
class="wp-image-2197" loading="lazy" decoding="async"
srcset="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.28.48-AM.png 904w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.28.48-AM-300x226.png 300w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.28.48-AM-768x579.png 768w"
sizes="(max-width: 900px) 100vw, 900px" width="900" height="678" />
<figcaption>“Life cycle of an article” by Alice Fleerackers, Chuck
Kalish, Giancarlo Romeo, Peter Zhang, Dede Leshey, and Ye
Li</figcaption>
</figure>

<figure id="attachment_2199" class="wp-caption alignnone"
aria-describedby="caption-attachment-2199" style="width: 900px">
<img
src="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.30.52-AM.png"
class="wp-image-2199" loading="lazy" decoding="async"
srcset="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.30.52-AM.png 1183w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.30.52-AM-300x227.png 300w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.30.52-AM-768x582.png 768w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.30.52-AM-1024x776.png 1024w"
sizes="(max-width: 900px) 100vw, 900px" width="900" height="682"
alt="Our group’s “Life cycle of an article” included lots of moving parts: manuscripts, DOIs, rejection letters, and plenty of tequila. " />
<figcaption>Our group’s “Life cycle of an article” included lots of
moving parts: manuscripts, DOIs, rejection letters, and plenty of
tequila.</figcaption>
</figure>

# Can we build a scholarly communication system on collaboration, rather than competition?

How did a system meant to encourage sharing and collaboration become
obsessed with maintaining power and prestige? Is a more open, inclusive
approach to scholarly communication even possible? What would that mean
for science---not to mention society?

From the classroom to the dinner hall, countless conversations centered
on the rivalry that permeates so much of academic life. We discussed
everything from peer-review sabotage to scholarly superiority complexes,
brainstorming ways to prevent them. We daydreamed about the possibility
of creating a more "generous" academic system---one built on trust and
mutual support, rather than competition.

<figure id="attachment_2200" class="wp-caption alignnone"
aria-describedby="caption-attachment-2200" style="width: 900px">
<img
src="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.33.21-AM.png"
class="wp-image-2200" loading="lazy" decoding="async"
srcset="https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.33.21-AM.png 905w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.33.21-AM-300x225.png 300w, https://www.scholcommlab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-14-at-7.33.21-AM-768x577.png 768w"
sizes="(max-width: 900px) 100vw, 900px" width="900" height="676"
alt="Juan Pablo Alperin delivers the FSCI2019 closing keynote. " />
<figcaption>Juan Pablo Alperin delivers the FSCI2019 closing keynote.
Photo by @NativeLibrarian (via Twitter)</figcaption>
</figure>

The final talk of the week---by the ScholCommLab's own Juan Pablo
Alperin---ended these conversations on a more positive note. Citing
recent [research about how faculty perceive their professional
futures](https://www.scholcommlab.ca/2019/07/30/rpt-publishing-decisions/){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}, he shared that many academics really *do*
value openness, but feel pressured to pursue prestige-oriented
publishing strategies because of what they think their peers value. This
research wasn't new to me, but I saw it in a new light after everything
we'd covered during the previous sessions.

### *"No problem is too big, but every problem is too big if you constrain how you think"--- Anita Bandrowski*

As we wrapped up the closing remarks, I was reminded of something Anita
Bandrowski said during one of the earlier presentations: "No problem is
too big, but every problem is too big if you constrain how you think."
When it comes to changing our academic system, we still have a long way
to go. But if we can address our misconceptions and be honest about what
we truly value, change really is possible. *  
*

***Find out more about the FORCE11 Scholarly Communication Institute [on
their website](https://www.force11.org/fsci/2019){target="_blank"
rel="noopener noreferrer"}. ***


Each year in August, researchers, librarians, educators, students, and open access advocates gather together for the FORCE11 Scholarly Communication Institute (“FSCI”)—a jam-packed week of learning, discussion, and celebration of all aspects of scholarly communication. This year, I was lucky enough to be one of them—thanks to a generous travel scholarship. The experience was one I’ll never forget.

Messaggi di Rogue Scholar

Would including open scholarship in tenure guidelines move the needle?

FSCI2019 | A deep dive into scholarly communication