The OE policy registry – An open benchlearning tool

The OER World Map platform facilitates access to materials and knowledge to promote OEP, acting as a source of information for everyone interested in Open Education. One of its newest developments is the OE Policy Registry, which aims not only to record the current policies in open education but to become the knowledge hub to support the wider OE community in developing OE policies, helping them to locate and bench-learn from existing policies and the people and organisations which have developed and promoted them. Much discussion of the need for open education policy has occurred at the supranational level. In some cases, nations and subnational governments have taken up the challenge of incorporating policy to enable open resources and practices into education policymaking agendas. What is less clear, and less straightforward to investigate, is the extent to which individual institutions are developing policies to support openness. This session reports on the current state of OE policies internationally, based on the OE Policy Registry dataset. Through engagement with the data held in the Policy Registry it has been possible to collect and examine a wide range of policy documents and sketch some key features of the OE policy landscape. Further auditing of this dataset is needed, in order that the registry can be used effectively to support policy benchlearning by OE advocates, researchers and policymakers. The session will cover the initial findings of a research project conducted using this dataset, and additionally, inputs gained during a series of workshops designed to support OE policy co-creation. We will present key features of the OE Policy Registry to support – OE advocates seeking to support and enhance practice through policy – Policymakers at institutional and governmental levels – Researchers interested in OE policy For these user groups, several different use-cases are addressed and presented: – Policymakers can showcase and find good practice policy exemplars, which they can adapt and reuse within their context. – OER advocates and advocacy networks can connect with each other, so that they can exchange experiences and cooperate in joint projects. – Researchers can collect data on policy activities in different educational sectors and geographical areas, gaining a deeper understanding of the functioning of OE ecosystems and develop strategies for mainstreaming. Recording available: https://youtu.be/ra34cClfd9w References Atenas, J., & Havemann, L. (2019). On the trail of OE policy co-creation. http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2654899 Atenas, J., Havemann, L., Nascimbeni, F., Villar-Onrubia, D., & Orlic, D. (2019). Fostering Openness in Education: Considerations for Sustainable Policy-Making. Open Praxis, 11(2), 167-183. http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.11.2.947 Inamorato dos Santos, A., Punie, Y. & Castaño Muñoz, J. (2016). Opening up Education: A Support Framework for Higher Education Institutions, JRC – EUR – Scientific and Technical Research Reports. https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/eur-scientific-and-technical-research-reports/opening-education-support-framework-higher-education-institutions Inamorato dos Santos, A., Nascimbeni, F., Bacsich, P., Atenas, J., Aceto, S. Burgos, D., & Punie, Y. (2017). Policy Approaches to Open Education – Case Studies from 28 EU Member States. https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/publication/policy-approaches-open-education-case-studies-28-eu-member-states-openedu-policie

European Arctic Initiatives Compendium

Julkaistu versi

Analysis of Knowledge-based Economy Development in Poland in the Light of Strategic Documents

The aim of article is to present and assess the most important documents referring to the strategy of knowledge-based economy development in Poland.Celem artykułu jest prezentacja i ocena najważniejszych dokumentów dotyczących strategii rozwoju gospodarki opartej na wiedzy w Polsce, tj. Strategii Rozwoju Kraju 2007-2015 (SRK), Narodowych Strategicznych Ram Odniesienia 2007-2013 (NSRO) i funkcjonujących w ich obrębie programów: Programu Operacyjnego Innowacyjna Gospodarka 2007-2013 (POIG) i Programu Operacyjnego Kapitał Ludzki 2007-2013 (POKL), jak również Strategii rozwoju nauki w Polsce do 2015 roku, Raportu "Polska 2030. Wyzwania Rozwojowe" i Programu Foresight, przygotowanego przez PAN

General cost analysis for scholarly communication in Germany : results of the "Houghton Report" for Germany

Management Summary: Conducted within the project “Economic Implications of New Models for Information Supply for Science and Research in Germany”, the Houghton Report for Germany provides a general cost and benefit analysis for scientific communication in Germany comparing different scenarios according to their specific costs and explicitly including the German National License Program (NLP). Basing on the scholarly lifecycle process model outlined by Björk (2007), the study compared the following scenarios according to their accounted costs: - Traditional subscription publishing, - Open access publishing (Gold Open Access; refers primarily to journal publishing where access is free of charge to readers, while the authors or funding organisations pay for publication) - Open Access self-archiving (authors deposit their work in online open access institutional or subject-based repositories, making it freely available to anyone with Internet access; further divided into (i) CGreen Open Access’ self-archiving operating in parallel with subscription publishing; and (ii) the ‘overlay services’ model in which self-archiving provides the foundation for overlay services (e.g. peer review, branding and quality control services)) - the NLP. Within all scenarios, five core activity elements (Fund research and research communication; perform research and communicate the results; publish scientific and scholarly works; facilitate dissemination, retrieval and preservation; study publications and apply the knowledge) were modeled and priced with all their including activities. Modelling the impacts of an increase in accessibility and efficiency resulting from more open access on returns to R&D over a 20 year period and then comparing costs and benefits, we find that the benefits of open access publishing models are likely to substantially outweigh the costs and, while smaller, the benefits of the German NLP also exceed the costs. This analysis of the potential benefits of more open access to research findings suggests that different publishing models can make a material difference to the benefits realised, as well as the costs faced. It seems likely that more Open Access would have substantial net benefits in the longer term and, while net benefits may be lower during a transitional period, they are likely to be positive for both ‘author-pays’ Open Access publishing and the ‘over-lay journals’ alternatives (‘Gold Open Access’), and for parallel subscription publishing and self-archiving (‘Green Open Access’). The NLP returns substantial benefits and savings at a modest cost, returning one of the highest benefit/cost ratios available from unilateral national policies during a transitional period (second to that of ‘Green Open Access’ self-archiving). Whether ‘Green Open Access’ self-archiving in parallel with subscriptions is a sustainable model over the longer term is debateable, and what impact the NLP may have on the take up of Open Access alternatives is also an important consideration. So too is the potential for developments in Open Access or other scholarly publishing business models to significantly change the relative cost-benefit of the NLP over time. The results are comparable to those of previous studies from the UK and Netherlands. Green Open Access in parallel with the traditional model yields the best benefits/cost ratio. Beside its benefits/cost ratio, the meaningfulness of the NLP is given by its enforceability. The true costs of toll access publishing (beside the buyback” of information) is the prohibition of access to research and knowledge for society

Best practice in undertaking and reporting health technology assessments : Working Group 4 report

[Executive Summary] The aim of Working Group 4 has been to develop and disseminate best practice in undertaking and reporting assessments, and to identify needs for methodologic development. Health technology assessment (HTA) is a multidisciplinary activity that systematically examines the technical performance, safety, clinical efficacy, and effectiveness, cost, costeffectiveness, organizational implications, social consequences, legal, and ethical considerations of the application of a health technology (18). HTA activity has been continuously increasing over the last few years. Numerous HTA agencies and other institutions (termed in this report “HTA doers”) across Europe are producing an important and growing amount of HTA information. The objectives of HTA vary considerably between HTA agencies and other actors, from a strictly political decision making–oriented approach regarding advice on market licensure, coverage in benefits catalogue, or investment planning to information directed to providers or to the public. Although there seems to be broad agreement on the general elements that belong to the HTA process, and although HTA doers in Europe use similar principles (41), this is often difficult to see because of differences in language and terminology. In addition, the reporting of the findings from the assessments differs considerably. This reduces comparability and makes it difficult for those undertaking HTA assessments to integrate previous findings from other HTA doers in a subsequent evaluation of the same technology. Transparent and clear reporting is an important step toward disseminating the findings of a HTA; thus, standards that ensure high quality reporting may contribute to a wider dissemination of results. The EUR-ASSESS methodologic subgroup already proposed a framework for conducting and reporting HTA (18), which served as the basis for the current working group. New developments in the last 5 years necessitate revisiting that framework and providing a solid structure for future updates. Giving due attention to these methodologic developments, this report describes the current “best practice” in both undertaking and reporting HTA and identifies the needs for methodologic development. It concludes with specific recommendations and tools for implementing them, e.g., by providing the structure for English-language scientific summary reports and a checklist to assess the methodologic and reporting quality of HTA reports

Real-time virtual sonography in gynecology & obstetrics. literature's analysis and case series

Fusion Imaging is a latest generation diagnostic technique, designed to combine ultrasonography with a second-tier technique such as magnetic resonance imaging and computer tomography. It has been mainly used until now in urology and hepatology. Concerning gynecology and obstetrics, the studies mostly focus on the diagnosis of prenatal disease, benign pathology and cervical cancer. We provided a systematic review of the literature with the latest publications regarding the role of Fusion technology in gynecological and obstetrics fields and we also described a case series of six emblematic patients enrolled from Gynecology Department of Sant ‘Andrea Hospital, “la Sapienza”, Rome, evaluated with Esaote Virtual Navigator equipment. We consider that Fusion Imaging could add values at the diagnosis of various gynecological and obstetrics conditions, but further studies are needed to better define and improve the role of this fascinating diagnostic tool