Open Access isn’t as Limiting as We Think | Official GRAD 5104 Blog

"After looking through the blogs for this week’s open access discussion, I came to realize I am not very familiar with the details of open access. I thought I remembered hearing somewhat negative comments in relation to OA, but I couldn’t remember their exact nature. In trying to broaden my understanding of OA, I stumbled across an article addressing six myths of OA. The article, http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2013/oct/21/open-access-myths-peter-suber-harvard, seemed to address the aspects of OA I have heard as the main reasons against it. More specifically, individuals must pay to publish in open access journals and open access journals are of low quality. On more than one occasion, I have heard a professor joke about the credibility of any academic who has ever paid to publish their own work. This is the main reason I thought OA journals were low quality, but since it seems we are moving to that system, there doesn’t seem to be a distinction between those who would have paid and those who would have been accepted to prestigious journals (because everyone would be required to pay). Given the myths the article addresses, as well as the responses and truths, it seems to me that open access is a very good idea. Since the research with which many academics are involved is often publicly-funded, it seems logical that those findings should be available to the public. Other than the possibility of electronic journals with low prestige masquerading as having high prestige behind the cloak of the internet, I see no huge problems with academic journals moving to open access. In my opinion, it would be more effective if all journals became open access, so as not to create an unnecessary distinction among them. I can understand researchers’ hesitancy about publishing in open access journals, especially since the findings can be copied, distributed, and reused for virtually any purpose. Personally, I think I would be hesitant to publish my work if I didn’t know how it was being used. However, if all journals were made open access, it would quell some of the concerns I had. Although I agree with open access journals, I can easily see the problem with open access to books. Why would students ever buy another textbook? Articles and studies are often largely electronic, making the use of open access journals logical. Books are, for the most part, dominated by print. This is how the authors are compensated for their authorship and the book’s construction. If books became open access, wouldn’t this decrease the amount of books published each year? I could be completely wrong, but this seems like it could create a huge problem when it comes to choosing the best book for a course, especially if there are only one or two from which to choose."