Open Access Publishing Biases OER

Abstract

Academic publishing processes are shaped by the ways in which scholars within the field review and evaluate the work of their peers. In an ideal world, these methods would simply promote the publication of the best forms of research without prejudice or subjectivity. In reality, issues such as Knobloch-Westerwick, Glynn, and Huge’s Matilda effect, Merton’s Matthew effect, Blank’s institution bias, and Robert’s and Verhoef’s gender bias shape the ways that scholarly inquiry are evaluated. Knowing that the peer review process can introduce issues of bias, what then of other aspects of the publishing cycle? For example, what of the subvention funding provided by some institutions to support their faculty in pursuing dissemination of research in Open Access (OA) journals? This Open Educational Resource (OER) will present an overview of the OA landscape and provide learners with tools to develop their own inquiries into the inequities present within the OA publishing industry. All assignments include suggested grading rubrics and build upon one another in a cumulative manner.