December 30, 2009
I have nothing against journals charging for content. While I like the open access model I think that there are upsides to both systems. But seriously, there really are some things that should not be hidden behind a pay wall.
- Corrections of any kind: Errata, Corrigenda, etc. Assuming that I don’t have access to The Journal of X through my institution and I choose to purchase a paper from said journal that ends up containing an error, should I really have to pay again to find out what that error is. It’s like buying a new car that breaks down 6 months later and having to pay for a whole new car to get it fixed.
- Society business: Announcements, calls for nominations, etc. Presumably the goal of this sort of thing is to reach as wide an audience as possible… right?
- Acknowledgement of Reviewers: And now we come to the thing that triggered this post. PNAS’s Table of Contents showed up in my feed reader last night, and there, right at the top, was their annual Acknowledgement of Reviewers. I review for PNAS on occasion and thought I take a brief moment and go look at my name for a little boost during the grind of grant writing season. But no, sorry, I was working at home and so ran firmly into a pay wall. Seriously. So if I review for your journal, but don’t have a subscription then I can’t even look at an acknowledgement of my own, volunteer, activities. Sigh.
Now I know that in many cases the journals don’t intentionally put these sorts of things behind their pay walls. They just don’t think about it, but if you are going to have pay walls in place, isn’t it really your job/responsibility to think (ever so briefly) about what content you hide behind them?
UPDATE: Theoretical Population Biology’s Reviewer Acknowledgment just showed up in my reader. If you don’t have a subscription to TPB you can check out this document for the low, low, bargain price of $31.50.
Leave a Comment » |
science |
Permalink
Posted by Ethan
December 14, 2009
I’m going to be participating in a Royal Society Discussion Meeting and they’ve asked us to advertise this to interested parties so I figured I’d just post about it here. The meeting is on Biological Diversity in a Changing World and (other than your humble narrator) has a pretty impressive list of speakers. Here are the key bits of information (straight from the meeting’s web page).
Synopsis
We live in a world in which biological diversity is under threat as never before. This meeting will draw insights from organisms ranging from microbes to mammals to show why a deeper understanding of temporal processes in ecological communities is essential in coping with the changes that the natural world – and the humans that inhabit it – will experience over the next 50 years.
Speakers and chairs
Speakers and chairs include Professor John Beddington CMG FRS, Professor Mike Benton, Professor Anne Chao, Professor Andrew Clarke, Professor Rita Colwell, Professor Robert Colwell, Dr Maria Dornelas, Professor Anne Glover, Professor Nicholas Gotelli, Dr Jessica Green, Professor Jeremy Jackson, Dr Kathleen Lyons, Dame Georgina Mace FRS, Professor Anne Magurran, Lord Robert May FRS, Dr Rebecca Morris, Professor Marian Scott OBE, Professor William Sutherland and Dr Ethan White.
Registration
This meeting is free to attend, but pre-registration (online) is essential. Click here to register.
The online registration form and programme information can be found at royalsociety.org/events-diary.
Leave a Comment » |
ecology, meetings, science |
Permalink
Posted by Ethan
December 12, 2009
I’ve recently started reading two scientific programming blogs that I think are well worth paying attention to, so I’m blogrolling them and offering a brief introduction here.
Serendipity is Steve Easterbrook’s blog about the interface between software engineering and climate science. Steve has a realistic and balanced viewpoint regarding the reality of programming in scientific disciplines. The blog is well written, insightful, etc., but I think the thing that really won me over were his sharp witted responses to the periodically asinine comments he receives. For example:
I’d care a lot less about seeing all the source and data if I could just ignore climate scientists and shop elsewhere. But since I’m expected to hand over $$$ and change my lifestyle because of this research, your arguments ring hollow…
[You can shop elsewhere - there are thousands of climate scientists across the world. If you don't like the CRU folks, go to any one of a large number of climate science labs elsewhere (start here: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/data-sources/). An analogy: Imagine your doctor told you that you have to change your eating habits, or your heart is unlikely to last out the year. You would go and get a second opinion from another doctor. And maybe a third. But when every qualified doctor tells you the same thing, do you finally accept their advice, or do you go around claiming that all doctors are corrupt? - Steve]
Software Carpentry is the sister blog to an excellent online (and occasionally in person) course on basic software development for scientists. I strongly recommend the course to anyone who is interested in getting more serious about their programming and the blog is a nice complement pointing readers to other resources and discussions related to scientific programming.
Leave a Comment » |
computers, programming |
Permalink
Posted by Ethan
December 4, 2009
How then is it possible to modify and improve upon an academic culture populated by smart, creative individuals who are motivated by ideals more than by money, who have deep, intense interests, value substance over form, have little patience for conformity, think for themselves, do not defer to authority, and see their work not as a job but as a calling? Clearly the challenge is to find the incentives and rewards that will motivate this unique workforce to buy into desired changes and work willingly toward implementing them. But the first step is to explain clearly why change is nececessary and, even more important, why change does not mean abandoning core academic values. To win the hearts of academics, one first has to educate them.
- James C. Garland, Saving Alma Mater
This is just one of many brilliantly reasoned (and worded) arguments from Saving Alma Mater. If you are an academic, or an administrator at an academic institution, you really should read this book.
Leave a Comment » |
science |
Permalink
Posted by Morgan & Ethan
December 2, 2009
I went to graduate school with Ford and would strongly recommend that those looking for PhD opportunities on the quantitative side of ecosystem ecology consider the opportunity below. Ford is a smart guy, doing cool work, and he knows an awful lot about math, so it’s probably pretty hard to go wrong (and yes, we’re still friends so I’m totally biased).
The Ballantyne Lab at the University of Kansas is looking to recruit up to two graduate students for the fall of 2010. Current research is focused on modeling ecosystem stoichiometry, nutrient dynamics, microbial decomposition of soil carbon, systems-level regulation of metabolism, spatially explicit populations and the trophic structure of communities. Although most of our experiments are performed with phytoplankton and bacteria in the lab, the KU field station, 20 minutes from campus, is a great resource that is home to long-term studies of community assembly. Please direct inquiries to Ford Ballantyne (fb4 [at] ku [dot] edu). For more information about graduate study in the lab and EEB at KU please look at http://www.people.ku.edu/~fb4 and http://www2.ku.edu/%7Eeeb/graduate/ and http://www.kuerg.ku.edu/.
Leave a Comment » |
education, jobs, math |
Permalink
Posted by Ethan