Blog Archives
Ensure your research outputs are eligible for the next REF… in 5 Simple Steps!
You have spent many long hours pouring over your research, verifying your findings, finding the best journal to submit to (before submitting do check on Think Check Submit to ensure you are publishing in a trusted journal), your article is accepted for publication… before the celebrations begin… take a few minutes to ensure that you article does not become ineligible for submission in the next REF.
Ensure that you upload the accepted manuscript to NECTAR (Institutional Repository) as soon as your article is accepted… Well.. Okay.. Maybe the day after, when the celebrations are over… But before you start work on your next output… And within a month of acceptance. This gives our staff time to check through the output and metadata and make any changes necessary, whilst also ensuring that your research output will not fail to be submitted to the REF due to failing to comply with an administrative process.
Please take a moment to check out our five simple steps, that will ensure that your outputs remain eligible for submission in the next REF.
Top 10 Research Outputs from 2016
Happy New Year to all, looking forward to making more research available and easily found, so that others can benefit from the research done here in Northampton.
| Nie, M. and Armellini, A. (2012) Enhancing curriculum design and delivery with OER. In: Cambridge 2012: Innovation and Impact – Openly Collaborating to Enhance Education, Conference Proceedings. Milton Keynes: Support Centre for Open Resources in Education, The Open University. 9780749229375. pp. 365-369. | 2812 |
| Mackley, J. S. (2012) The Anglo Saxons and their gods (still) among us. Lecture presented to: The University of Northampton Staff Research Forum, The University of Northampton, 12 March 2012. (Unpublished) | 1971 |
| Livingstone, I. and Warren, A. (1996) Aeolian Geomorphology: an Introduction. Harlow: Longman. 058208704X. | 1242 |
| Mortimer, K. and Laurie, S. (2012) Barriers to the implementation of Integrated Marketing Communications: the client perspective. In: Proceedings of Academy of Marketing Conference 2012. Southampton: Academy of Marketing. 9780854329472. | 1050 |
| Arvinen-Barrow, M. (2009) Psychological rehabilitation from sport injury: issues in training and development of chartered physiotherapists. Doctoral thesis. The University of Northampton. | 936 |
| Wilson, J. M. (2012) Antipodean rewritings of Great Expectations: Peter Carey’s Jack Maggs (1997) and Lloyd Jones’s Mister Pip (2007). In: Glenn, D., Haque, M. R., Kooyman , B. and Bierbaum, N. (eds.) The Shadow of the Precursor. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. pp. 220-235. | 816 |
| Hollinshead, R., Farley, R. and Keating, E. (2010) Public art strategies. Newcastle Upon Tyne: Grit & Pearl. | 631 |
| Mackley, J. S. (2007) The medieval legend of Judas Iscariot: the Vita of Judas and the Gospel of Barnabas. Paper presented to: York Medieval Religion Research Group Meeting, King’s Manor, University of York, 01 February 2007. (Unpublished) | 603 |
| Stickley, A. (2015) An exploration of occupational therapy practice in social enterprises in the UK. Doctoral thesis. The University of Northampton. | 588 |
| Watley, G. (2012) Identity and consumption practices of Northamptonshire Caribbeans c.1955-1989. Doctoral thesis. The University of Northampton. | 566 |
Open Access at the University of Northampton: state of play
Since 2007 Library and Learning Services have been offering services to researchers wishing to engage with the Open Access (OA) agenda. This post summarises the policy, services and support now available at the University of Northampton.
Open Access policy:
In December 2015 the University Research and Enterprise Committee approved an OA policy for the University. Aligned with, and supporting, HEFCE’s open access policy for the REF, the University policy states: “the University supports the principle of open access and expects researchers to share their research outputs freely, subject to legal, ethical, commercial or contractual constraints”. The policy requires researchers to ‘act on acceptance‘ in depositing their work in the University’s institutional repository, NECTAR.
Your online thesis: what you need to know
The PGR Thesis and Examination Policy states that it is mandatory for final, post-examination copies of research degree theses to be deposited in NECTAR. But what does this mean for PGR students (and their supervisors)?
This post will outline the policy and procedure for depositing your thesis in NECTAR and some the issues you need to consider when doing this.
Gather your strength and read on…
Dates changes to NECTAR deposits
We’ve made some changes to the way dates are recorded in NECTAR with a new plugin called Dates, Dates, Dates. This will enable us to capture multiple date types for research outputs, which will improve the data we record, and enable us to capture required information to support HEFCE, RCUK and other funder policies.
This post explains the changes and tells you what you need to know to use the new Dates field.
REF – OPEN ACCESS
Each Unit of Assessment will need to submit a section on “open research”, detailing the submitting unit’s open access strategy, including where this goes above and beyond the REF open access policy requirements, and wider activity to encourage the effective sharing and managment of research data.
To assist us in meeting this criteria, please ensure that all research outputs that are accepted for publication are uploaded to NECTAR as soon as they have been accepted
Note – copyright will be checked, and all publisher’s policies will be respected. What can be made open, will be!
Note – by depositing your work in NECTAR this does not make your work automatically open access.
If you have any questions about embargo periods or credibility of journals that you are looking to publish in please email openaccess@northampton.ac.uk
Open Access Requirements for all journal articles and conference proceedings accepted for publication from the 1st of April 2016 are:
Deposit – within 3 months of acceptance
Embargo Periods – 12 months – Panel A and B (STEM), 24 Months Panel C and D
The NECTAR journey: from acceptance to compliance
The University’s new Open Access policy – driven by HEFCE requirements for the post-2014 REF – has a simple message at heart for publishing researchers: act on acceptance. In practice, this means timely deposit of items in NECTAR, and we’ve made a few changes to help with this. This post takes a look at the NECTAR workflow, from acceptance to publication.
By any other name: rchive.it, RoMEO and your self-archiving rights
Can you self-archive your e-print? How would you know? What does it even mean? Why am I bothering you with this? These are all perfectly valid questions that may now have a more straightforward answer thanks to a rchive.it. Read on for details of how this web service can simplify an important part of the self-archiving process for NECTAR deposits.
