[GOAL] Re: Beall's list: crowdsource scholarly critique?

Tue Oct 6 14:09:45 BST 2015

Hi Heather: checking with your colleagues is the first item on our checklist (although perhaps we could phrase it more strongly: http://thinkchecksubmit.org/check/ )  Thanks for the positive feedback too!  Bev

From: goal-bounces at eprints.org [mailto:goal-bounces at eprints.org] On Behalf Of Heather Morrison
Sent: 06 October 2015 13:27
To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
Subject: [GOAL] Re: Beall's list: crowdsource scholarly critique?

Thank you, Scott, DOAJ, OASPA and LIBER!!

I think this is much more appropriate than either black or white lists. In the past I have pointed people to Beall's list but I will now point to think check submit instead, and encourage others to do the same.

May I suggest one addition? Consult with your colleagues (or supervisor if you are a student).

To illustrate why this is helpful: when a call for papers comes from colleagues we know and trust, eg our professor forwards the call to a departmental list, this is a good indication that this is likely a journal people they know and trust are involved with. A question about submitting to such a journal is likely to be well received and may yield additional help about suitability of one's work and what a scholar can do to increase chances of acceptance.

best,

Heather Morrison

On Oct 6, 2015, at 2:04 AM, "Scott Abbott" <Scott.Abbott at uts.edu.au<mailto:Scott.Abbott at uts.edu.au>> wrote:

Hi, apologies if this resource has already been shared on this list but I have been following bits of your thread and thought this resource by DOAJ, OASPA, LIBER etc. was relevant.

http://thinkchecksubmit.org/

<image001.png>

Many thanks and regards,

Scott

Scott Abbott | UTS eScholarship & UTS ePRESS | UTS:LIBRARY | University of Technology Sydney |

Tel +61 2 9514 3681 | Fax +61 2 9514 3687 | E mailto: scott.abbott at uts.edu.au<mailto:scott.abbott at uts.edu.au> | http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/

-----Original Message-----
From: goal-bounces at eprints.org<mailto:goal-bounces at eprints.org> [mailto:goal-bounces at eprints.org] On Behalf Of Dana Roth
Sent: Tuesday, 6 October 2015 6:15 AM
To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
Subject: [GOAL] Re: Beall's list: crowdsource scholarly critique?

Heather:  I fail to see that focusing on GOLD OA publishers is a distraction.  Jeffrey Beall is providing a unique service that should not be denigrated.  If "His own work could benefit from the same critical lens" ... I don't think he would object ... who is willing to step up?

Dana L. Roth

Millikan Library / Caltech 1-32

1200 E. California Blvd. Pasadena, CA 91125

626-395-6423 fax 626-792-7540

dzrlib at library.caltech.edu<mailto:dzrlib at library.caltech.edu>

http://library.caltech.edu/collections/chemistry.htm

________________________________________

From: goal-bounces at eprints.org<mailto:goal-bounces at eprints.org> [goal-bounces at eprints.org<mailto:goal-bounces at eprints.org>] on behalf of Heather Morrison [Heather.Morrison at uottawa.ca<mailto:Heather.Morrison at uottawa.ca>]

Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2015 8:23 AM

To: Global Open Access List

Subject: [GOAL]  Beall's list: crowdsource scholarly critique?

Assuming  that I am not alone in my concern about over-reliance on Beall's list, perhaps we can find a solution that targets this specific problem without more work than is really necessary? One thought for a remedy:  could we find a way to crowdsource objective, dispassionate scholarly critique of this list and the assumptions people make about it?

For example, the focus on OA publishers is a distraction from the fact that problematic practices can and do happen with all types of publishers. This is a serious limitation to Beall's list, which should be highlighted to the reader. As a peer reviewer or editor, I would insist that Beall do this before publishing his work, if this list were submitted to me for review.

A similar type of issue is an assumption that Beall categorizes all publishers on the list as predatory. Even Beall's title should make it clear that the range is potential, probable of actual predatory publishers. This is a system of assumption of guilt that does fit with expectations of justice in Canada or the US. Anyone is a potential criminal or predatory if a publisher; it is not possible to prove otherwise.

If we have evidence that Beall refuses to remove a publisher from the list when provided with proof that the publisher is legit, let's post the proof or at least provide a place where people can post. This might be helpful to scholars who have decided to ignore Beall in publishing choices for valid reasons.

Scholarly critique, including critique of OA practices, is necessary to advance our knowledge. Beall has done some good work in exposing poor practices. His own work could benefit from the same critical lens.

just a thought.

Heather Morrison

_______________________________________________

GOAL mailing list

GOAL at eprints.org<mailto:GOAL at eprints.org>

http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

_______________________________________________

GOAL mailing list

GOAL at eprints.org<mailto:GOAL at eprints.org>

http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

________________________________
UTS CRICOS Provider Code: 00099F DISCLAIMER: This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of the University of Technology Sydney. Before opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects. Think. Green. Do. Please consider the environment before printing this email.
_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
GOAL at eprints.org<mailto:GOAL at eprints.org>
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20151006/2bc7140a/attachment.html 