5 days off so far this semester

[PS4814]

Who blamed the students?

You did genius.

The snowflakes at University Park have had 5 days off this semester for either cold, snow, or ice. Today is the 5th day.

Unless you're referring to the faculty and staff who also didn't have anything to do with the decision to close.

But I guess that's still not right and you must have been referring to those in leadership positions at the college, the same leaders who are baby boomers which seems to be the generation that gets off on calling others "snowflakes" on this board.

But that can't be right because those people are salaried, work all year long and do not align to the semester schedule so it wouldn't make sense to say that they had off 5 days this semester.

So you must have been referring to students after all.

 

[psu1969a]

The snowflakes at University Park have had 5 days off this semester for either cold, snow, or ice. Today is the 5th day.

Times have changed. Many students now live off campus (not downtown) in apartment complexes several miles from campus. Discretion is better part of valor; i.e. students not having to drive cars to class.

 

[berklion]

We always blame the hipster youts. They're lazy. The male hipster youts have beards and wear winter hats when it's warm out. They buy records because they think they're cool, and they sit on the curb doing nothing most of the day. They live at home and complain that the world isn't giving them the living they've earned.

Careful, the doxer's will pick up on your Brooklyn accent and zero in on you. I'm not so worried. Noodle Doosie doesn't have internet and if they come for me the cows will raise a racket.

 

[kgilbert78]

Easier, perhaps. But it is not cheaper. Digital content is more expensive for academic libraries to purchase.

What is the most expensive copy of a book?

The first one. After that, it's just paper (or now, electrons).

That's something all of these "open access" folks do not seem to get. It actually takes a fair amount of work to edit, prepare for the internet with links, etc., and format a work--much less write it in the first place. Just because you are not using paper doesn't make it "free".

 

[kgilbert78]

Times have changed. Many students now live off campus (not downtown) in apartment complexes several miles from campus. Discretion is better part of valor; i.e. students not having to drive cars to class.

That was also true in the 1970s when I went to Dear Old State. Had a number of friends in apartments down by the high school that were dependent on CATA. I think it was Wapalani Dr.?? Hard to remember. It's been a while.

 

[anon_1eeb2b426hv3y]

Except, of course, all of the times that businesses do close due to the weather.

Yup. And once the schools are closed, many parents need to stay home with their kids. So even if offices stay open, many have to miss or work from home.

 

[manatree]

What is the most expensive copy of a book?

The first one. After that, it's just paper (or now, electrons).

That's something all of these "open access" folks do not seem to get. It actually takes a fair amount of work to edit, prepare for the internet with links, etc., and format a work--much less write it in the first place. Just because you are not using paper doesn't make it "free".

I work for the University, so I know it still takes the same amount of work & cost to create the content no matter if it is digital or paper. Also, I believe you are misunderstanding the stance that most academics have regarding Open Access. Essentially, the Universities are the ones creating the content (professor's research, etc) , and they give it to the publishers, who in turn sell it back to the Universities. The prices, and restrictions that the publishers are now using with the Universities has gotten completely out of hand. When Universities talk about Open Access, what they mean is since the Universities are creating the content, the Universities should be the ones to provide the content via an Open Access platform.

 

[kgilbert78]

I work for the University, so I know it still takes the same amount of work & cost to create the content no matter if it is digital or paper. Also, I believe you are misunderstanding the stance that most academics have regarding Open Access. Essentially, the Universities are the ones creating the content (professor's research, etc) , and they give it to the publishers, who in turn sell it back to the Universities. The prices, and restrictions that the publishers are now using with the Universities has gotten completely out of hand. When Universities talk about Open Access, what they mean is since the Universities are creating the content, the Universities should be the ones to provide the content via an Open Access platform.

You really do not want to read some of this stuff before it's edited.... Trust me. Most of the content these days is not from US universities, either (leading back to point 1). Who pays for the servers to store the data?? Who archives it?? Who pays for the editing? Who pays for the IT needed to keep those servers running (and secure). And let's be real--the universities do not pay for most of the research. Grants do. Most academics do not live in the real world.

Would you buy a car before it's assembled?? The research is only part of the deal.

 

[manatree]

You really do not want to read some of this stuff before it's edited.... Trust me. Most of the content these days is not from US universities, either (leading back to point 1). Who pays for the servers to store the data?? Who archives it?? Who pays for the editing? Who pays for the IT needed to keep those servers running (and secure). And let's be real--the universities do not pay for most of the research. Grants do. Most academics do not live in the real world.

Would you buy a car before it's assembled?? The research is only part of the deal.

The point that Universities are making for Open Access is for the Universities to provide and maintain access to the data. Is it going to ever be practical for the Universities to take back ownership of all the research? Of course not. However, they would be stupid not to start taking measures to take control of some of the content.

Also, with most academic digital content providers, you never get to buy the car. Hell, you don't even get to rent the car. It's more of a time share.

 

[stf110]

That was also true in the 1970s when I went to Dear Old State. Had a number of friends in apartments down by the high school that were dependent on CATA. I think it was Wapalani Dr.?? Hard to remember. It's been a while.

"Down by the high school" is now way closer then where many of today's students live.
I lived by the high school 20 years ago, and even then I was closer to campus then many of my friends.
There are way more who depend on driving in their cars to get to and from classes today.

 

[91Joe95]

Global warming is the cause of all this, Donald.

Yes, I too learned in my thermodynamic classes that adding heat to a system makes it colder.

 

[BBrown]

Edit: Nevermind I see its an old post that got bumped.

 

[kgilbert78]

The point that Universities are making for Open Access is for the Universities to provide and maintain access to the data. Is it going to ever be practical for the Universities to take back ownership of all the research? Of course not. However, they would be stupid not to start taking measures to take control of some of the content.

Also, with most academic digital content providers, you never get to buy the car. Hell, you don't even get to rent the car. It's more of a time share.

That costs a LOT of money. Someone has to pay. And the data has to be organized and searchable. Again, you need a lot of folks to do that.

What the some of the Open Access folks want it for it all to be free, edited, and easily available. And for someone else to pay for that (that's assuming they're not a prof who thinks their stuff doesn't need to be edited). And, at the same time, they want to get paid.

There's lots of different models you can use. But none of them are "free". All have their benefits--and flaws.

 

[interrobang]

It's all about liability, not actually the amount of bad weather.

Plenty of people out there looking to slip and fall on the ice and sue the university as a result.

 

[PennStateNate]

The snowflakes at University Park have had 5 days off this semester for either cold, snow, or ice. Today is the 5th day.

Is there anything you don’t complain about??

 

[PennStateNate]

It's all about liability, not actually the amount of bad weather.

Plenty of people out there looking to slip and fall on the ice and sue the university as a result.

This.

A lot different times today compared to when you guys went to school.

 

[manatree]

That costs a LOT of money. Someone has to pay. And the data has to be organized and searchable. Again, you need a lot of folks to do that.

Universities are already paying for, maintaining, and providing access to online content that they are creating. Have been for years.

 

[kgilbert78]

Universities are already paying for, maintaining, and providing access to online content that they are creating. Have been for years.

Not at the same level. And there would be no archives of older material that is still valuable. Unless, of course, copyright isn't important. That's been the Chinese model.

Then there's peer review--needed for the integrity of the process.

I recall some of the early advocates for Open Access. And the millions of dollars in grants they wanted to reinvent the wheel. Not quite as free as they were making it out to be. At some point, somewhere, somehow, you have to pay for it. One way or another.

 

[Woodpecker]

This.

A lot different times today compared to when you guys went to school.

No way!

 

[manatree]

Not at the same level. And there would be no archives of older material that is still valuable. Unless, of course, copyright isn't important. That's been the Chinese model.

Then there's peer review--needed for the integrity of the process.

I recall some of the early advocates for Open Access. And the millions of dollars in grants they wanted to reinvent the wheel. Not quite as free as they were making it out to be. At some point, somewhere, somehow, you have to pay for it. One way or another.

Academic Libraries have always been archiving older material, digital and print. Academic libraries have always followed copyright regulations. Who do you think actually does the peer reviewing on the publisher's behalf? The point of Open Access is that there are ways for universities to be the content providers, and pay less than they are paying the current providers. Will they ever be able to do it for everything? No. But they would be stupid not to explore ways to provide access themselves for less money.

 

[kgilbert78]

Academic Libraries have always been archiving older material, digital and print. Academic libraries have always followed copyright regulations. Who do you think actually does the peer reviewing on the publisher's behalf? The point of Open Access is that there are ways for universities to be the content providers, and pay less than they are paying the current providers. Will they ever be able to do it for everything? No. But they would be stupid not to explore ways to provide access themselves for less money.

You must be an academic librarian....

Librarians do NOT do peer review. Unless it's for a library journal. The researchers do.

It's interesting. Most universities have a University Press. Funny how those books aren't "free" but tend to be expensive. Every large University would have to become a boutique publisher--and that gets expensive. First copy--again. Unless you have a consortium. And then you become the very thing you are trying to eliminate. A large publisher. And someone, again, has to pay for it. PubMed's an example. It's "free"--but not really. The government (your tax dollars) pays for it--and it just recreated something that was already in existence. But it's "free".

 

[manatree]

You must be an academic librarian....

Librarians do NOT do peer review. Unless it's for a library journal. The researchers do.

It's interesting. Most universities have a University Press. Funny how those books aren't "free" but tend to be expensive. Every large University would have to become a boutique publisher--and that gets expensive. First copy--again. Unless you have a consortium. And then you become the very thing you are trying to eliminate. A large publisher. And someone, again, has to pay for it. PubMed's an example. It's "free"--but not really. The government (your tax dollars) pays for it--and it just recreated something that was already in existence. But it's "free".

I'm not a librarian, I'm merely staff.

Were did I say that Librarians are the reviewers? The people reviewing are often researchers, professors, that work for Universities.

Where did I ever say that it would be not cost money?

University employees create content for the publishers. University employees also are part of the reviewing process for the publishers. Universities have always been archiving, digitizing and providing access to various information. So tell me, why shouldn't Universities explore the idea of taking on more of an open access distribution responsibility if they can do it for less money than they are paying the current publication companies?

 

[kgilbert78]

I'm not a librarian, I'm merely staff.

Were did I say that Librarians are the reviewers? The people reviewing are often researchers, professors, that work for Universities.

Where did I ever say that it would be not cost money?

University employees create content for the publishers. University employees also are part of the reviewing process for the publishers. Universities have always been archiving, digitizing and providing access to various information. So tell me, why shouldn't Universities explore the idea of taking on more of an open access distribution responsibility if they can do it for less money than they are paying the current publication companies?

On the first point, if you read back on your post, you'll see where it sure sounds like it....

Academic libraries have always followed copyright regulations. Who do you think actually does the peer reviewing on the publisher's behalf?

What we have here really came from a bunch of Ph.D. who think the D in Ph.D. stands for deity. A lot of these folks think that because they know a lot about their topic (and they do) that it qualifies them to to know about everything else. It doesn't. There's an awful lot that goes on behind the scenes that they have no clue about. Stuff that costs money.

Cost? Again, I use my University Press model. Has it made books cheaper? No. It does allow for some specialty books to be printed, however. There's some value there. And in the end, you might just get something that's not too distinguishable from the current model. Like the Oxford University Press. There are also economies of scale as well as consistency. Smaller scientific presses are consolidating--or dying. I have buddies who once worked at a small scientific publisher for a scientific organization here in town. They eventually sold off their publishing arm, because it was too expensive for the small journals they had. One still has a job with the org but not in publishing. The other moved to a larger publisher.

In my case, I work for a not-for-profit publisher. We tried to follow an academic model, which worked for many year--but then came close to putting us out of business. At the end of the day, you have to produce and on schedule. Your readers and authors demand it. Many universities are not able to do this well--it's not their mission.

 

[manatree]

What we have here really came from a bunch of Ph.D. who think the D in Ph.D. stands for deity. A lot of these folks think that because they know a lot about their topic (and they do) that it qualifies them to to know about everything else. It doesn't. There's an awful lot that goes on behind the scenes that they have no clue about. Stuff that costs money.

My dept. has started and maintained two very small image databases so I have an idea as to how much work it takes to collect, create meta data, etc. It's not easy. Also, the glacial pace that Universities move on most things is a big hinderance for adaptation and change. Committees, task forces, hot teams, etc. However, I think we've bored enough other people to death on it hear. If you're up for some more mental ping pong, shoot me an email at my yahoo account. Same name that I use on the board. I'd be interested in picking your noodle about a few things.