31 Matching Annotations
  1. Oct 2022
  2. Jun 2020
  3. May 2020
  4. Apr 2020
    1. scoped to a particular domain.

      Climate Feedback group (see here and here) seems to be one of these Restricted Publisher Groups. However, it doesn't seem to be "scoped to a particular domain" (see for example here, here, or here).

      Is this a third configuration of Publisher Groups? Or a different kind of groups altogether? Or have these domains been enabled one by one to the Publisher Group scope? Is this behaviour explained somewhere?

  5. Dec 2019
  6. Nov 2019
  7. Oct 2019
  8. May 2019
  9. Mar 2019
    1. But given that most of this peer review is already done without compensation, it is not tethered to the existing system of journals. A better system for disseminating scientific knowledge in the modern age would not include paywalls and subscription fees. Instead, we should aspire to a truly open science, one that is both more efficient and higher quality than the current system.
  10. Jul 2018
  11. Feb 2018
    1. O’Reilly Media, Inc., 1005 Gravenstein Highway North, Sebastopol, CA95472.
  12. Oct 2017
    1. a study by the Connecticut Board of Governors for Higher Education published in 2006 found that only 58 percent of Connecticut state schools’ faculty knew how much the books they selected for their classes cost.

      Faculty aren't aware or don't care about textbook expenses. I think this is slowly changing for the better, but 58% is pretty bad.

  13. Jul 2017
    1. “bizarre” “triple-pay” system, in which “the state funds most research, pays the salaries of most of those checking the quality of research, and then buys most of the published product”.
  14. Feb 2017
    1. Still, she misses some of the resources traditional publishers offer. Before she switched to LibreText, her old textbook came with adaptive quizzes—which can help students identify what they need to spend more time studying—and she says they worked well. But at the same time, some of her students weren’t able to access those resources, because they weren’t able to purchase the textbook in the first place. “It’s sort of a catch-22,” she says. “It was improving student success—but only in those who could afford to buy it.”
  15. Jan 2017
    1. benefits

      Of course they do - but benefits like this cost money. Publishers run businesses; businesses need profits 2 keep shareholders happy. But, so far, the platforms make learning more costly for students.

  16. Nov 2016
  17. Oct 2016
    1. High-end digital products that directly or indirectly improve student outcomes Related services that help colleges improve student outcomes Services that help colleges improve the unsexy but critical aspects staying viable, from marketing to administration Loans to schools looking to make changes that will (theoretically) make them more sustainable in the long run but require significant up-front investment—preferably in the products and services of the company offering the loan
    2. Unbundling of Textbook Publishers
    1. The general rule at a TLT is that if you’ve had an eight year run without getting disbanded or dissolved due to faculty pressure you’ve had a good run, and it might be time to brush up that CV because it can’t possibly last. It’s worth noting as well that TLTs are usually disbanded as a way for institutional leadership to gain favor with faculty.

      Interesting "general" rule when it comes to disbanding/dissolving TLTs. In my experience faculty are more upset with the administration when their TLT support on campus is disrupted. Especially when it affects the efficiency/timeliness of their support. Maybe dependent on the number of faculty / size of TLT? Regardless the source of the "attack" TLTs are certainly susceptible as you've said.

  18. Sep 2016
  19. Jun 2016
  20. Mar 2016
  21. Nov 2015
    1. All six editors and all 31 editorial board members of Lingua, one of the top journals in linguistics, last week resigned to protest Elsevier’s policies on pricing and its refusal to convert the journal to an open-access publication that would be free online. As soon as January, when the departing editors’ noncompete contracts expire, they plan to start a new open-access journal to be called Glossa.”
  22. Aug 2015
    1. 77 cents of every dollar spent on textbooks go to publishers. Of those 77 cents, the publishing company makes about 18 cents in pure profit, while spending 15 cents on marketing, and roughly 32 percent to cover costs (paper, printing, employee salaries, etc). At the same time, the author - the person who dedicated hundreds of hours of research to write the book – only gets about 12 cents on the dollar on average.
    1. All these worries stem from a transfer of power: from publisher to platform; from content creator to content distributor

      A discussion about publisher as platform, or how we're defining publisher is in order here. These were previously connected, but no longer. Though some media still need it. fasicnating!

  23. Feb 2014
    1. For example, imagine you are annotating the second page of a New York Times article. You probably want to see your annotation when you are looking at the article later as a single page, right? Or perhaps you've annotated the HTML for a PLOS ONE article. Wouldn't you like to see those annotations when you are looking at the PDF version of the same article? If annotations were only associated with the URL you happened to be looking at in your browser then the scenarios above would not work, because the documents being annotated all have different URLs.

      Publisher Best Practices is a great idea that I would like to see codified in the authoring and publishing tools to make the practices commonplace by default.

      I would like to mix PBP with other techniques, though, for richer connection between source and rendering-- I have some source mapping ideas that make it possible to keep annotations linked even as the original source is edited over time.