Reinventing Scholarly Communication for the Electronic Age is an article written by J. Lynn Fink and Philip E. Bourne of the founding team where they explain some of the thinking behind SciVee.
Now that the blog facility is up and running, I'm sure that we can look forward to more thoughts on the progress of the SciVee adventure. It would be good to hear some discussion of the vision for SciVee as it evolves—both from the founders and from users.
Scientific publishing is changing. See, for example, The Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Harvard University "...Votes to Distribute Research Free", as reported by Bloomberg News. It was only last month that the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) released a Revised Policy on Enhancing Public Access to Archived Publications Resulting from NIH-Funded Research policy.
These developments are certain to affect the rate of change in the publishing world. How are the traditional journals responding? How can we keep their treasures of talent and information from deminishing with the electronic introductions?
You can help decide!
See the news blog at the The Chronicle of Higher Education for some recent feedback on the Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences' decision "to disseminate faculty research and scholarship more broadly." See also BioMed Central's Open Access links for references to many open access movement websites.
SciVee serves to promote learning from all sources.
Finally in. This seems like the place to start if we're talking about reinventing communications, scholarly or otherwise.
Perhaps a good place to start is at janetcollaborate. Janet is Internet2's equivalent in the UK, aarnet in Australia, Karen in New Zealand, etc. This appears to be similar to what you're trying to do here. The UK tends to talk about "virtuous circles" between the research outputs and its communication, and then back, a bit like Scivee's diagram.
My virtual libraries revolve around Wikimedia Foundation's projects like Wikipedia, Wikiversity and another 120, where we are struggling with trying to improve the communications between the global groups who put together the articles and events.
Ultimately (it appears) we are ALL trying to support GLOBAL groups, each of who will want to have quiet conversations during their research time, and then publish their findings (loudly) when they're at a certain point of development. It's either "go away" or "come and look at what we've found!". So one of the most important common routines seems to be that each group needs to set times, on a regular basis, when they talk to the outside world. They need a moderator/librarian who deals with the outside world and ensures their publications are in "the right (shared) directory".
The problem with the scivee/researchchannel (etc) approach is that we have, on the front page of their domains, what appears as a jumble of all the programmes produced by many communities. It's a bit like having a TV without a tuner or library without a classification system. So can I make the suggestion that we attempt to encourage a collaboration with engineers on the National Research and Education Networks and aim to build multicast stations around the global groups.
I have made the same approach to aarnet and janetcollaborate, just to see what they think. It seems like it's an idea that might just be stupid enough to grow legs. In brief, we would have a directory in each NREN which would fall under groups.edu, (groups.edu.au, groups.ac.uk, etc). The directory for them would be built on a bibliographic classification system like the Dewey Decimal System. So we would aggregate the videos, blogs, wikis, forums (etc) and libraries for (say) this group http://ddc.typepad.com/ as 025.431.groups.edu in the U.S. domain, and so on. The primary goals are to save duplication, while creating a directory which crosses languages, so any interested student can find a global group's collaboration space (apps) and evolving research and developments.
As a starting point, and I'm using my friends at the Wikimedia Foundation as my barometer, we could really use an OS, SIP Skypecast type product immediately. Some of the guys use Skypecast to produce the Wikipedia Weekly, a radio programme whose podcast blog you can find. But we could really use something a bit more robust. I'm not that much of a scholar, but thirty years in media tells me we're watching the beginnings of some global TV networks built around clusters of interest. Now if only we can find a way to help global groups tune into one another. regards, simonfj
I wanted to just respond to your comment about virtual libraries that revolve around Wikimedia Foundation's projects like Wikipedia, Wikiversity, etc.
Wikipedia entries have been added at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SciVee
The main SciVee page as well as the term pubcast has been accepted, (or at the very least, not denied) while an entry for the term postercast has been rejected. I was wondering if you had any tips or advice with regard to acceptance of new content, and perhaps your experience with it.
It's been a while, so I hope you're still around. I've had to wait for a few happenings to mature before we began this conversation. Probaly a good starting point is a conference which has just happened for some network operators in Australia. It's a good orientation point as many (forms of) .edu's use a moodle (for 'course delivery') around the world.
I'll point you at http://qn2009vc.usq.edu.au/mod/forum/view.php?f=51
I hope you'll take the time to look at the videos which were captured over the two days, particularly the one from Mike Foley fro mthe World Bank. His two main messages were "Communities of Practice" and "real time communication".
My main message to anyone who wants to promote scholarly education is "capture, not produce" (although there is obviously a need to help poor lecturers improve their presention skills (or support them with editors and tools).
Over on the wikipedia foundation's list, they're beginning to talk about "chapter related issues" = what can or should we do to encourage grassroots groups that want to support our mission, but may not fit into the chapters framework?
The problem we all have is that although we understand that we want to promote, and aggregate scholarly information, we always make a basic mistake. We don't ask ourselves' "if there are hundreds of thousands of Communities-of-Practice (both national and global), which, at the moment can be easily found at conferences, why don't we try and capture the conferences (at a fixed point in cyberspace) and bring the information to these communicating hubs, rather then setting up separate places in cyberspaces with different (language) names for different types of media."
The problem is not that we can't all see where scivee, or the researchchannels in every country are going. The problem is they - the national COP's (real time) communication's hub - don't share a common directory, so we can't capture their COP's global conferences, and leave their archive on the same page, from which they are streamed live. E.g. http://qn2009vc.usq.edu.au/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=118