Interim Report: Assessing the Future Landscape of Scholarly Communication

The Center for Studies in Higher Education, with generous funding from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, is conducting research to understand the needs and desires of faculty for inprogress scholarly communication (i.e., forms of communication employed as research is being executed) as well as archival publication. In the interest of developing a deeper understanding of how and why scholars do what they do to advance their fields, as well as their careers, our approach focuses in fine-grained analyses of faculty values and behaviors throughout the scholarly communication lifecycle, including sharing, collaborating, publishing, and engaging with the public. Well into our second year, we have posted a draft interim report describing some of our early results and impressions ased on the responses of more than 150 interviewees in the fields of astrophysics, archaeology, biology, economics, history, music, and political science.Our work to date has confirmed the important impact of disciplinary culture and tradition on many scholarly communication habits. These traditions may override the perceived "opportunities" afforded by new technologies, including those falling into the Web 2.0 category. As we have listened to our diverse informants, as well as followed closely the prognostications about the likely future of scholarly communication, we note that it is absolutely imperative to be precise about terms. That includes being clear about what is meant by "open access" publishing (i.e., using preprint or postprint servers for scholarship published in prestigious outlets versus publishing in new, untested open access journals, or the more casual individual posting of working papers, blogs, and other non-peer-reviewed work). Our research suggests that enthusiasm for technology development and adoption should not be conflated with the hard reality of tenure and promotion requirements (including the needs and goals of final archival publication) in highly competitive professional environments

Lost Cause Textbooks: Civil War Education in the South from the 1890s to the 1920s

This thesis analyzes the origins, creation and implementation of Lost Cause history textbooks in the South in the decades following the Civil War and Reconstruction. Directed by secondary source material relating to the topic, primary source materials—magazines, newspapers, board minutes, etc.— were explored to find evidence for the motives of rewriting a history of the Civil War more favorable to the former Confederate states. These motives included the positive reflection of former Confederates by future generations of white Southerners and the advancement of white supremacy in the Jim Crow era. Several textbooks from both northern and southern authors, published in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were compared differentiate the Lost Cause narrative of the war from that of the victorious North. The Lost Cause narrative in these history textbooks promoted the following: the constitutionality of southern secession, the benevolence of the institution of slavery, the belligerency of Abraham Lincoln, and the heroism of Confederate soldiers and officers during the war. Primary source material was also discovered that showed how Confederate organizations like the United Confederate Veterans, United Daughters of the Confederacy, and the Sons of Confederate Veterans worked with state governments to expel textbooks deemed unfriendly to the South in favor of history books which promoted the Lost Cause. As a result of this educational movement, students throughout the South, both black and white, were taught the inferiority of the African race, the injustices done against the Confederacy by the North, and that the Southerners were right in all their actions for several decades to come

Some Day : When The War Is O\u27er

https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/mmb-vp/5423/thumbnail.jp

Photovoltaic array performance model.

This document summarizes the equations and applications associated with the photovoltaic array performance model developed at Sandia National Laboratories over the last twelve years. Electrical, thermal, and optical characteristics for photovoltaic modules are included in the model, and the model is designed to use hourly solar resource and meteorological data. The versatility and accuracy of the model has been validated for flat-plate modules (all technologies) and for concentrator modules, as well as for large arrays of modules. Applications include system design and sizing, 'translation' of field performance measurements to standard reporting conditions, system performance optimization, and real-time comparison of measured versus expected system performance

Performance model for grid-connected photovoltaic inverters.

This document provides an empirically based performance model for grid-connected photovoltaic inverters used for system performance (energy) modeling and for continuous monitoring of inverter performance during system operation. The versatility and accuracy of the model were validated for a variety of both residential and commercial size inverters. Default parameters for the model can be obtained from manufacturers specification sheets, and the accuracy of the model can be further refined using measurements from either well-instrumented field measurements in operational systems or using detailed measurements from a recognized testing laboratory. An initial database of inverter performance parameters was developed based on measurements conducted at Sandia National Laboratories and at laboratories supporting the solar programs of the California Energy Commission

Comparison of Module Performance Characterization Methods

The rating and modeling of photovoltaic PW module performance has been of concern to manufacturers and system designers for over 20 years. Both the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) have developed methodologies to predict module and array performance under actual operating conditions. This paper compares the two methods of determining the performance of PV modules, The methods translate module performance to actual or reference conditions using slightly different approaches. The accuracy of both methods is compared for both hourly, daily, and annual energy production over a year of data recorded at NREL in Golden, CO. The comparison of the two methods will be presented for five different PV module technologies

FAPRI Environmental Projects 2000

Since 1995, the Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute at the University of Missouri (FAPRI) has been providing analytical support in several areas around the state as communities try to come to grips with various water quality issues thought to derive from production agriculture's two underlying facts of life. This report provides a summary of the lessons learned as the unit has looked at and worked with these communities. It also discusses the specific projects underway in the unit, again focusing on issues directly related to the interface problem.This project is a cooperative effort of the Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute at the University of Missouri and the Natural Resource Conservation Service. The work is supported by EPA grant X997396-01, Region VII U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, under section 104 (b) (3). The Missouri Department of Agriculture appropriated funds to support the work in this report

Methodologies for Housing Justice Resource Guide

This Resource Guide is the outcome of a Summer Institute on Methodologies for Housing Justice convened by the Institute on Inequality and Democracy at UCLA Luskin as part of the Housing Justice in Unequal Cities Network, which is supported by the National Science Foundation (BCS 1758774). Held in Los Angeles in August 2019, the Summer Institute brought together participants from cities around the world. As is the case with the overall scope and purpose of the Housing Justice in Unequal Cities Network, it created a shared terrain of scholarship for movement-based and university-based scholars. Dissatisfied with the canonical methods that are in use in housing studies and guided by housing justice movements that are active research communities, the Summer Institute was premised on the assertion that methodology is political. Methodology is rooted in arguments about the world and involves relations of power and knowledge. The method itself – be it countermapping or people’s diaries – does not ensure an ethics of solidarity and a purpose of justice. Such goals require methodologies for liberation. Thus, as is evident in this Resource Guide, our endeavor foregrounds innovative methods that are being used by researchers across academia and activism and explicitly situates such methods in an orientation towards housing justice