I like to think that I support the open learning movement. I would love, for example, to see online journals succeed because that would mean knowledge would get published MUCH quicker, and it would be more accessible to those who need it –practitioners who don’t (or can’t afford to) read research journals.
So when I received the proofs for a book review that I am publishing in Educational Technology, Research, and Development, I read the following note from the publisher, Springer: “Springer now offers authors the option, for a one-time fee, of making the published version of their articles available to all readers free of charge from SpringerLink.”
“Excellent!” I thought. “Wouldn’t it be great if all authors supported this so their content was freely available?” While I think it is ironic and funny that I was being asked to provide content without compensation to the journal and then pay for the privilege of making it freely accessible, this was still a step in the right direction. At least this would make the content available to others. We can argue the business model a different day.
But then I saw the price tag that I would have to pay to make my article freely available–$3,000! THREE THOUSAND DOLLARS.
Forget it. I can’t support open learning at that price! Who can?
In effect, Springer is putting on the facade of playing nice with the open learning movement, but they have changed nothing. Charging that much money effectively disqualifies education professors from being able to share their articles with others.
Why not publish in an online journal? I have before. But c’mon, since I am a student without a job, and will soon be a professor without tenure, who can afford to publish very much in unknown and still unrespected online journals?
I want to support open learning and share my work with others, I do! Does anyone else feel trapped by the system?