Last month we celebrated the second birthday of SAGE Open, the world’s first broad-spectrum open access journal for the humanities and social sciences. This coincided with a breakout session I convened at this year’s UKSG Annual Conference in Bournemouth to share SAGE’s experiences of open access publishing in the social sciences.

Why SAGE Open?

Since opening for submissions in December 2010, and launching with 6 published papers just a few months later in May 2011, a huge amount has been happening in open access publishing in the UK and around the world. In particular, the challenges the social sciences face in finding funds to cover Article Processing Charges (APC’s) for gold open access publishing remains subject to important ongoing debate.

As a leading independent academic and professional publisher, and the foremost publisher of the social sciences, SAGE is uniquely placed to launch and develop the premier open access destination for the social sciences. Founded as a social science publisher, for nearly 50 years we have championed research across the social and behavioural sciences. In SAGE’s already long-established history, the development of SAGE Open has an especially natural fit in nurturing and creating new fields of international and interdisciplinary research. A core vision in launching SAGE Open was to continue to support new research, and the connections and discoveries between and within disciplines that will serve to shape and enrich our understanding of society for future generations to come.

What have we achieved so far?

SAGE Open has had a fantastic first two years. Not only has it attracted nearly 1,000 article submissions in the first year of launch alone, but it has now been recognised with an APEX award for excellence . We are currently projecting to reach 3,000 submissions by the end of 2013. Authors are submitting from around the world with papers from over 75 countries, demonstrating SAGE’s outreach around the globe. Our fundamental commitment to quality is reflected in a high rejection rate (around 70% of submitted papers are rejected).To date, we have published just over 180 articles and are currently publishing on average 10 new articles per month which we expect to grow significantly over the longer term.

What have we learnt?

Launching a broad based open access journal in the social sciences that spans all disciplines, inevitably requires a large amount of support from the academic community it is seeking to serve, all the more so when open access remains very much in its relative infancy in the social sciences and humanities. While open access awareness has increased dramatically in the last 12-18 months, driving submissions and delivering quality, high volume open access publications requires significant editorial and marketing investment. Different research cultures in the social sciences and humanities often present very different evaluative measures in establishing quality research. In the more established open access publishing fields of the natural sciences, an open access journal is able to accept a high percentage of papers on technical scientific criteria alone.

We are indebted to SAGE Open’s Advisory and Editorial Boards and the hundreds of article editors and reviewers now supporting SAGE Open. Only through their time and commitment in ever increasing numbers have we been able to significantly improve our turnaround times since launch, for example, and to attract more authors to an open access alternative. We are also proactively working with our social science editor and society partners to partner with us in referring authors to SAGE Open.

The future?

We are excited about the research we are publishing for a future generation of social scientists and humanities researchers and the world at large in SAGE Open. There remain, however, very real challenges in building sustainable open access alternatives for the social sciences and humanities compared to STEM subjects. From our own research, we know, for example, that less than 15% of our social science journal authors received any form of direct funding for their published research article. As an independent publisher SAGE is able to take a long term view in supporting the development of open access publishing for existing and new fields of research in areas long core to our vision and mission. We will continue at the same time, however, to lobby against a one-size-fits all approach and remain a passionate defender of the social sciences, mixed business models and the need for increased, not less, funding for social science research.

To learn more about SAGE Open please visit the SAGE Open homepage

In this three part series, Alex Osmond, author of Academic Writing and Grammar for Students), discusses three common issues faced by students in academic writing. Providing helpful tips and advice on how you can help your students overcome the common pitfalls in academic writing, this series is not to be missed!

In this final post, Osmond discuss expletive constructions. Missed the first two posts in this series? Don’t worry you can check them out here and here.

Issue #3:  ‘There are…/there is…’

For this final post, I’ve chosen one of the ‘lighter’ issues my book deals with.

 Nobody will lose marks for using the phrases ‘there are’ or ‘there is’ in their assignments. In the interests of conciseness and clarity, though, it is worth knowing that these phrases, known as ‘expletive constructions’, can often be removed.  (Unfortunately, ‘expletive constructions’ have nothing to do with obscenity-littered essays. I personally got away with profanity in one assignment. That said, I was studying creative writing. I think this is my second digression.) The resulting sentences are shorter, simpler – they more quickly ‘get to the point’.

Take a look at this example:

There are many historical examples that shed doubt on the dictum ‘violence never solves anything’.

Now remove ‘there are’, then remove ‘that’ to repair the grammar.

Many historical examples shed doubt on the dictum ‘violence never solves anything’.

Does anybody disagree that the second version is more effective?

Here’s another:

There is another school of thought which focuses on the idea of prison as rehabilitation.

This becomes:

Another school of thought focuses on the idea of prison as rehabilitation.

Again – isn’t the second one better?

Exceptions to this rule do exist, of course. As always, the writer should try something, and then check for correct grammar and clear meaning. In the next example, the possible new versions are quite different from the original:

There is a risk of complacency among non-smokers.

Clearly, ‘a risk of complacency among non-smokers’ isn’t a complete sentence. What is missing? It has a subject, and an object – so it needs a verb. (The subject-verb-object idea is explained in my book). Following other advice from my book, let’s use a clear, strong verb:

A risk of complacency threatens non-smokers.

Something still isn’t right. Surely ‘a risk’ is threatening? So it follows that if something is threatening you, you are at risk of it? And as such, if we use ‘threatens’, we don’t need ‘a risk’? Let’s try it:

Complacency threatens non-smokers.

Or, if we want to put the emphasis on the people in the sentence, and include the word ‘risk’:

Non-smokers are at risk of complacency.

We’ve seen that in most cases, sentences including ‘there is’ or ‘there are’ can be quickly and easily improved.

In the more complex cases, the writer must think through exactly what they are trying to say, and craft a sentence that says that – no more, no less – in clear and grammatically correct terms.

This idea repeatedly comes up in my book.

And isn’t it what academic writing is really about?

The above post not enough? Then head to Alex’s Facebook page for more great writing tips and resources! Get your students to like the book’s site and Alex can provide personalised one-to-one advice on their essays!

Want to know more? Then Click here to watch a series of videos where Alex talks about his new book, common mistakes found in student essays and how students can keep their writing concise and clear.

About Alex Osmond
Alex Osmond still can’t believe his first book has been published by SAGE. He has taught academic and writing skills at Cardiff Metropolitan University and Brunel University. Alex just spent two years managing Brunel’s VLE upgrade and is now developing a programme that enhances the attributes of the University’s graduates.  Alex can’t stand run-on sentences and won’t get a good night’s sleep until they have been eradicated (we managed to get rid of smallpox, after all…).

Last month the Journal of Health Services Research & Policy published an academic paper regarding the Horizon 2020 programme, the European Commission’s science funding programme, due to start up in 2014. The paper argues that in order for Europe to fully exploit the €70 billion being spent on research and development under Horizon 2020, the EU will need to make some key innovations.

To learn more about the programme and the opinions surrounding it, lead author Mike Galsworthy has provided us with a taster summary to  tell us a little more about how the programme is shaping up. To learn more you can read the full journal article here.

Horizon 2020 is an ambitious new programme which aims to bring together all EU research and innovation under one single funding scheme, promising to better previous European science programmes by simplification, reduction of bureaucracy, a focus on key issues such as health and sustainability, and better economic exploitation of R&D activities through integration with small businesses in particular. This is no ‘small order’, but it reflects the importance of R&D in Europe’s future. The Commission and many others believes science and innovation to be key to driving the economy forward, maintaining Europe’s competitive place in the world, and improving quality of life and sustainability.

So far so good in terms of vision, but how are its emergent plans looking to meet the task practically? In our new paper “Horizon 2020 – how is it shaping up?” we sought to explore the current state of research funding alongside the new plans. What we argue is that although some solid progress is on the cards, reforms are necessary in four key areas in order to go beyond merely tidying up some obvious problems and instead harnessing the fuller potential of EU research and innovation. Those four areas are:-

1. Reduction of red tape at the interface between small business and academia. While the EC has taken welcome steps to reduce bureaucratic burdens, we would like to see a removal of compulsory tendering, thus allowing research projects and small to medium enterprises (SMEs) to interact with each other dynamically and choose each other freely.

2. Better mapping and linking of the research funded. There is increasing recognition of the benefit of mapping research, but the central database of projects funded needs to be better categorised, linked to academic outputs, and open for all to explore and analyse. We give the RePORTER website of the American National Institutes of Health (NIH) as a good example.

3. Leading in open data. There is a need to guarantee outputs from projects. Increasingly, funders are encouraging data-sharing plans, but getting scientists to declare data management plans upfront can add unwanted bureaucracy and efforts have had mixed success. We suggest that the EU could set a new gold standard in data preservation were it to demand raw data as an end-of-project “deliverable”, check those data for third-party usability, and archive the databases in a central searchable resource with unique citable reference codes. Open data is reusable data which will become a critical resource in the future of science.

4. Ending inegalitarian salary policies that block Eastern European competitiveness. The original 15 member states (“EU-15”) have received a staggering 34 times more health research funding under FP7 than the 12 newest member states (“EU-12” in the Commission’s new parlance), representing dramatic funding differences, even allowing for population and GDP differences. Much analysis of under-representations of these regions has ignored the level of the individual scientist. Currently, scientists on EU projects are paid not according to their work regardless of geography, but rather at their local funding rate – driving east to west brain drain. Our paper recommends paying researchers in new member states comparable salaries to those in Western Europe, enabling Eastern Europe to use its competitive advantage of marginally lower living costs to retain and even attract top researchers. At the moment, the salary policies are borderline protectionist towards the better-established countries.

With a funding programme of such scale, the proposed changes in central administration can have huge impacts on dynamism and productivity. As Horizon 2020 approaches, these are issues that need to be more widely debated in academic and public alike. Our opinion paper is one more step in this process and we welcome contact from stakeholders and researchers alike to gather more insights, interaction and discussion on the future of European science.

I recently had the privilege to listen to the current editor of the Journal of Urban History (JUH), David Goldfield, as he shared his journey of starting an academic journal from the ground up and how his relationship with SAGE has developed over the years. His story is inspiring to anyone who has a dream to explore new terrain in scholarship, and SAGE is happy to be a part of it.

As an ambitious “recent” graduate in 1972, David Goldfield was eager to spread his passion and knowledge of urban history. Since the topic was not considered a fully formed discipline at the time, Goldfield and some former classmates from graduate school decided to advance the field of study by starting their own academic journal. The only problem they faced was finding a publisher who would actually accept their work as it didn’t fit in with the other mainstream research.

“We liked SAGE because they were publishing interdisciplinary social science journals,” said Goldfield. After taking the trip to out to Beverly Hills to meet with SAGE Founder Sara Miller McCune, Goldfield wanted SAGE to be the publisher for his journal because of how hard everyone was working in such a modest and confined office building at that time in SAGE’s history.

“Everyone was typing away on their typewriters in such a small space that I had to walk sideways in order to get through. But you forget about it all when you hear Sara talk about two things: journal publishing in general, and second, the future of SAGE, and we were extremely impressed.”

After signing a deal to work with SAGE, JUH published its first article in 1974 and their partnership grew even stronger. One of the many things Goldfield admired about SAGE during his 40-year partnership is that SAGE employees didn’t lose their personal touch with their clients after they expanded and became an international and established company.

“SAGE is an integral part of the process, and we are all part of the same team,” said Goldfield. “We all know SAGE publishes hundreds of journals, but from our perspective they only publish one journal: The Journal of Urban History. That’s how personal our relationship is and I think that’s really important.”

As Goldfield celebrates many years of success with the journal during its 40-year anniversary, he is proud to report that JUH has received many awards and recognitions and has expanded the content to include urban history in environmental, race, and ethnic studies.

“The proof of our success is that the journal keeps winning awards…Although I’d like to take credit for it…SAGE is an important part of it.”

For more information about the Journal of Urban History, click here.

Bookmark the page now:  connection.sagepub.com

The move will make it even easier to stay up-to-date on the latest research trends along with the usual top tips and industry round ups you’ve come to expect from the blog and it will allow for the integration of SAGE Insight, which puts the spotlight on topical and interesting journal research, both new or from the archive of SAGE’s journals. Also, though the general look, content, and mission will stay the same, you will now have the option to navigate by category:

-          Industry News

-          Tips for You

-          SAGE News

-          Opinions

-          SAGE Insight

If you have not already received an email about the move, you will not be subscribed to the site when the move takes place. In order to make sure you stay up-to-date on SAGE Connection, please enter your email address here. You will receive a notification email once your registration has been transferred, which you will need to click to verify your registration. Additionally, you can continue to find all new posts on our twitter feed: twitter.com/SAGE_News.

We hope you continue to enjoy this blog. If it covers topics that you find interesting, use these articles to spread the debate: write about it on your blog, microblog, or newsletter, and leave a comment on any thought-provoking post.

If you have any questions, or would like to suggest a new topic to cover, please leave a comment in the box below to let us know!

SAGE passionately supports the advancement of scholarship. Since 1965 when our founder Sara Miller McCune signed our first journal, Urban Affairs Review, we have built publishing partnerships with many of the world’s leading scholarly societies, launched some 150+ new journals, and today publish more than 700 titles across a wide range of disciplines.

We’re well aware that our authors value high quality, and for journals that in particular means the guarantee of a high standard of peer review. We are therefore excited to be working with Sense about Science to host a peer review workshop for early career researchers here at SAGE in London on May 31st.

SAGE was a sponsor of Sense about Science’s early career guide to peer review that was published in 2012. What the workshop will offer is some practical advice from a panel of experts, along with the chance to engage in small groups to discuss how the peer review process works.

Numbers are strictly limited: to apply for a place at this exclusive event, read more information and fill in an application form from the Sense about Science website. The closing date for entries is this Monday (20th May) so don’t delay!

It wasn’t that long ago that if you wanted to use primary sources in your research, your choices were largely limited to fighting with the microfiche machine or traveling to far corners of the globe to sit in musty archives. Now that these resources are being digitized at a rapid pace, their use is being introduced to younger and younger students. Publishers like Adam Matthew Digital, now part of the SAGE family, release digitized, curated collections of primary sources, and institutions like the Library of Congress are posting materials in their special collections for wider use.

The ease of access to these collections has made their use de rigueur in undergraduate classes, transforming the level of teaching professors can provide at the undergrad level.  Rather than relying solely on texts that interpret records for students, students can interact with the primary source material and learn to interpret artifacts for themselves.  Even elementary school students have access to previously hard-to-find sources. Fifth graders studying immigration can look at photographs of life onboard an ocean liner during a trans-Atlantic crossing, ephemera advertising free English classes, and historical maps. At any level, this kind of interaction with historical materials makes learning more personal and engaging.

Online search functionality makes digitized resources easy to find and sort through. Companies like Adam Matthew offer added functionality, such as interactive timelines, essays that contextualize the material, citation functions, and customizable slideshows for teaching and presentations. The archive materials themselves benefit from digitization as well. Not only are the materials preserved online for posterity, but the ability of researchers to view the artifacts online means they can stay in climate-controlled storage, rather than being exposed and handled.  Digitization is crucial for materials in countries without the resources to properly care for them, as collections are crumbling to dust every day.

The acquisition of primary source material is a priority for many libraries, as it adds prestige to their collection and sponsoring institution. Universities and research libraries attract new scholars with the breadth of their primary source collections. Whether it’s bringing history alive for K-12 students or granting undergrad and graduate students easier access to materials they can use to form conclusions in their own research, digitized primary sources are changing the face of education while preserving the world’s precious historical materials for future generations.

(Please note this blog post was originally published on the LSE’s Impact Blog on 14 May 2013)

Which books first inspired your own interest in books and the world of publishing?

I’ve wanted to be an Editor my whole life. My grandmother, an incredible woman and a constant source of inspiration for me, was the editor of an American travel magazine when I was little and, even before I knew what an Editor did, I thought ‘that’s what I want to be!’. I read a huge amount as a child; every book was an inspiration. Originally I thought I wanted to work in fiction publishing, but it turns out that academic publishing, and the methods list at SAGE specifically, is exactly the right place for me. I believe that methods are the keystone of the social sciences and by publishing great methods books, SAGE can help to shape the future of social research and, through this, society.

SAGE is sponsoring the Methodology and Research prize at the forthcoming LSE Review of Books Awards. How important is this subject to SAGE’s identity?

Research Methods is at the heart of SAGE’s publishing and has been since the very beginning. SAGE’s founder, Sara Miller McCune, published SAGE’s first methods book in 1970. Today we have over 1,200 textbooks, reference works and journals in research methods as well as online products. In addition to publishing classic series such as the ‘Little Green Books’ and the ‘Little Blue Books’, SAGE has helped to shape the research methods landscape as a pioneering publisher of qualitative methods, including Miles & Huberman’s ground-breaking book on Qualitative Data Analysis (now in its third edition) and the influential Handbook of Qualitative Research edited by Norman Denzin and Yvonna Lincoln (now in its fourth edition).

What initiatives has SAGE undertaken to cater for our changing reading habits?

It’s true that some people’s reading habits are changing, though nothing beats the simple beauty and utility of a book for me (and they smell so good when they arrive on your desk!). SAGE is responding to changes by offering more choice in how readers can access our content. All of our books are now available as e-books, in a range of formats so readers can access on whatever device they prefer. We’ve also launched an e-book platform for libraries – SAGE Knowledge – and an online Research Methods tool and collection of digital content – SAGE Research Methods – as well as a range of other online resources for lecturers and students, such as StatLab and MobileStudy. It’s a really exciting time to be in publishing – I feel like we’re having conversations about a new online product every day! – but our top priority remains the same: to help our authors and editors disseminate their wonderful content to those who want it, in whatever format makes the most sense for them.

What big new releases from SAGE can readers look forward to in the next few months?

We have some really exciting stuff coming. March saw the launch of the fourth edition of Andy Field’s book, Discovering Statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics, which is SAGE London’s best-selling book. This month, we’ll be publishing a new edition of Doing Qualitative Research by another SAGE legend, David Silverman. We also have some really great books coming later this year, for example a new edition of Cathy Charmaz’s field-changing book Constructing Grounded Theory. We’ve also got some exciting things coming from rising stars on hot topics, such as Researching Social Media from Farida Vis and Mike Thelwall. Interested readers can check out the Research Methods catalogue for the full list of new books, reference works, journals and online products coming – there are a lot of them!

See the Events page for more information on the LSE Review of Books Awards 2013.

———————————————————–

Katie Metzler is Senior Commissioning Editor for Research Methods at SAGE and Chair of the SAGE Connect Group, which co-ordinates all of SAGE London’s charitable giving and volunteer activities, of which there are many. She’s also keen photographer and an unrepentant sushi addict. You can contact her on katie.metzler@sagepub.co.uk or follow her on Twitter @KMetzlerSAGE.

Guest post by Alex Osmond, author of “Academic Writing and Grammar for Students”

In this three part series, Alex Osmond, author of Academic Writing and Grammar for Students, discusses three common issues faced by students in academic writing. Providing helpful tips and advice on how you can help your students overcome the common pitfalls in academic writing, this series is not to be missed!

In this second post, Osmond discusses the challenges students face when referencing academic research within the field. Keep your eyes on SAGE Connection for the last post in this series which will look at expletive constructions.

Issue #2: ‘It has been said that…’

This issue is similar to the one I discussed in my previous post[d1] . They both involve writing becoming vague, unclear and un-academic. In both cases this happens because the writer is either not in control of, or not confident in, where certain ideas have come from. They can’t be clear and open with their readers about this.

Phrases like ‘it has been said that’, ‘it has been suggested that’, and ‘evidence suggests that’ often appear in essays. When supported, this is no problem. When they are not supported, however, there is a huge problem. (An unsupported ‘evidence suggests that…’ in a sentence making no effort to identify said ‘evidence’ would be particularly bold!)

Several possible causes exist. The writer might not remember who suggested something. They might think something is so widely accepted that they don’t need to provide evidence (this might be true – in which case using these phrases is misleading). Perhaps they haven’t read a particular argument or point anywhere, but conclude that someone, somewhere at some point must, surely, have suggested it.

Whatever the case, in their written work, students need to be clear about where ideas have come from.

I also see a link to the insecurity I mentioned in the previous post: the essay-writer wants to make a point. They feel uncomfortable making that point themselves (that is, without referencing) and so attach one of these ‘academic-sounding’ phrases. If they’ve made a point and it is clear how they’ve reached that idea, they don’t need to surround it with extraneous phrases – whether ‘it has been said that’ or ‘I believe’. If the point comes from an opinion they have held for years, it doesn’t belong in an essay.

The student needs to accept that, if they are going to attribute an idea to someone else, they must use referencing to clearly specify that attribution. If they can’t attribute a particular idea to someone else, they mustn’t pretend to. They can include that idea in their work if it is clear that they have reached it based on the points in the essay that they have attributed to others.

Alternatively, they can research their topic to see if a particular argument has been made, so they can attribute the idea to someone else.

If the above options have been exhausted, the point can’t appear in the essay.

Catch up – (Part 1) Issue #1: ‘I think’, ‘I feel’ & ‘I believe’

***

The final part of this three part series will be published on SAGE Connection in May so keep your eyes peeled!

The above post not enough? Then head to Alex’s Facebook page for more great writing tips and resources! Get your students to like the book’s site and Alex can provide personalised one-to-one advice on their essays!

Want to know more? Then click here to watch a series of videos where Alex talks about his new book, common mistakes found in student essays and how students can keep their writing concise and clear.

About Alex Osmond

Alex Osmond still can’t believe his first book has been published by SAGE. He has taught academic and writing skills at Cardiff Metropolitan University and Brunel University. Alex just spent two years managing Brunel’s VLE upgrade and is now developing a programme that enhances the attributes of the University’s graduates. Alex can’t stand run-on sentences and won’t get a good night’s sleep until they have been eradicated (we managed to get rid of smallpox, after all…).

SAGE has a well established global publishing programme in international relations, and International Journal ‘s unique cross disciplinary approach to the field combining both history, political science, anthropology and other social sciences, provides an even greater range of research and publication opportunities for our authors.

The field of international affairs is one of wide ranging social discourse, and one where there is a continual need for interdisciplinary discussion and platforms to debate and explore foreign policy, outside of esoteric arenas. International Journal plays an influential role in enabling the exchange of views and ideas on international relations and political science, supported by the CIC’s “Open Canada” which creates an active forum for Canadians to debate both foreign policy and Canada’s role in international affairs.

Key to our company vision is to support our publishing partners through the global dissemination of knowledge and education through the support of developing research in these fields. Being selected by the CIC and CCIH to publish International Journal highlights the close alignment of our goals and shared mission with our society partners – to open debates out to a wider audience and to help advance research and dialogues on global issues of significance.

We are increasingly excited about developing the global reach of International Journal and strengthening our engagement with the international politics community, both through our journal content and active presence at conferences, as well as by supporting international initiatives, such as the recent OAIS Awards to celebrate and recognise the pivotal work being done in this field.  Keep your eyes peeled for further information as we move through 2013!