The Fair Open Access Breakdown of Publication Services and Fees

The Fair Open Access Alliance (FOAA) is pleased to present its Breakdown of Publication Services and Fees. A few years ago, FOAA invited several publishers and platforms in a consortium to formulate a response to the ORE call. Members of that group continued to meet informally to discuss the future of academic publishing in Fair Open Access. Specifically, discussions between FOAA and these individual publishers centered on identifying a set of service baskets that could group the various service components provided by an academic publisher, in the context of the price transparency requirement set forth by Plan S. Based on conversations with these publishers, FOAA developed the following breakdown

Variable tuition fees and widening participation: the marketing of English institutions through access agreements

This paper argues that the introduction of access agreements following the establishment of the Office for Fair Access (OFFA) has led to changes in the way that higher education institutions (HEIs) position themselves in the marketplace in relation to widening participation. However, the nature of these access agreements has led to obfuscation rather than clarification from the perspective of the consumer. This paper analyses OFFA's 2008 monitoring report and a sample of 20 HEIs' original 2006 and revised or updated access agreements (2008) to draw conclusions about the impact of these agreements on the notions of 'fair access' and widening participation. The authors conclude that institutions use access agreements primarily to promote enrolment to their own programmes rather than to promote HE generally. As a consequence of this marketing focus, previous differences between pre-92 and post-92 institutions in relation to widening participation and fair access are perpetuated leading to both confusion for consumers and an inequitable distribution of bursary and other support mechanisms for the poorest applicants to HE.</p

Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for the Visual Arts

This Code of Best Practices provides visual-arts professionals with a set of principles addressing best practices in the fair use of copyrighted materials. It describes how fair use can be invoked and implemented when using copyrighted materials in scholarship, teaching, museums, archives, and in the creation of art.The Code addresses the following five questions:Analytic Writing: When may scholars and other writers about art invoke fair use to quote, excerpt, or reproduce copyrighted works?Teaching about Art: When may teachers invoke fair use in using copyrighted works to support formal instruction in a range of settings, including online and distance teaching?Making Art: Under what circumstances may artists invoke fair use to incorporate copyrighted material into new artworks in any medium?Museum Uses: When may museums and their staffs invoke fair use in using copyrighted works -- including images and text as well as time-based and born-digital material -- when organizing exhibitions, developing educational materials (within the museum and online), publishing catalogues, and other related activities?Online Access to Archival and Special Collections: When may such institutions and their staffs invoke fair use to create digital preservation copies and/or enable digital access to copyrighted materials in their collections

Open Access Mandates and the "Fair Dealing" Button

We describe the "Fair Dealing Button," a feature designed for authors who have deposited their papers in an Open Access Institutional Repository but have deposited them as "Closed Access" (meaning only the metadata are visible and retrievable, not the full eprint) rather than Open Access. The Button allows individual users to request and authors to provide a single eprint via semi-automated email. The purpose of the Button is to tide over research usage needs during any publisher embargo on Open Access and, more importantly, to make it possible for institutions to adopt the "Immediate-Deposit/Optional-Access" Mandate, without exceptions or opt-outs, instead of a mandate that allows delayed deposit or deposit waivers, depending on publisher permissions or embargoes (or no mandate at all). This is only "Almost-Open Access," but in facilitating exception-free immediate-deposit mandates it will accelerate the advent of universal Open Access.Comment: 12 pages, 5 figures, 32 references. To appear in "Dynamic Fair Dealing: Creating Canadian Culture Online" (Rosemary J. Coombe & Darren Wershler, Eds.

Hmong Adults Self-Rated Oral Health: A Pilot Study

Since 1975, the Hmong refugee population in the U.S. has increased over 200%. However, little is known about their dental needs or self-rated oral health (SROH). The study aims were to: (1) describe the SROH, self-rated general health (SRGH), and use of dental/physician services; and (2) identify the factors associated with SROH among Hmong adults. A cross-sectional study design with locating sampling methodology was used. Oral health questionnaire was administered to assess SROH and SRGH, past dental and physician visits, and language preference. One hundred twenty adults aged 18–50+ were recruited and 118 had useable information. Of these, 49% rated their oral health as poor/fair and 30% rated their general health as poor/fair. Thirty-nine percent reported that they did not have a regular source of dental care, 46% rated their access to dental care as poor/fair, 43% visited a dentist and 66% visited a physician within the past 12 months. Bivariate analyses demonstrated that access to dental care, past dental visits, age and SRGH were significantly associated with SROH (P \u3c 0.05). Multivariate analyses demonstrated a strong association between access to dental care and good/excellent SROH. About half of Hmong adults rated their oral health and access to dental care as poor. Dental insurance, access to dental care, past preventive dental/physician visits and SRGH were associated with SROH