Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

Publishing Behind Paywalls – An Academic Crisis

19 May 2022 | Story Nonkululeko Nxumalo

Should the UFS continue to subscribe to academic journals that are behind a paywall?

On 12 May 2022, the University of the Free State (UFS) held an online seminar on Open Science, posing this question.

The seminar was facilitated by Prof Corli Witthuhn, Vice-Rector: Research and Internationalisation, who was joined by the following experts: Colleen Campbell from the Max Planck Digital Library (MPDL) in Munich, Germany, where she coordinates the Open Access 2020 Initiative; Ellen Tise, Senior Director of Library and Information Services at Stellenbosch University (SU); Glen Truran, Director of the South African National Library and Information Consortium (SANLiC); and Charlie Molepo, Deputy Director at the UFS Library Service. The discussion centred around the issues of accessing and publishing academic content behind a paywall, and what open access initiatives are doing to transition scholarly work to an open access (OA) paradigm.

“Publishing academic content behind a paywall not only limits access to scholarly work, but also prevents research output from being visible and making maximum impact,” the university stated.

Paywalls vs Open Access

A paywall is a figurative wall used to limit access to certain prestigious academic content. Overcoming this wall usually means a one-time purchase option where the reader buys the content from the publisher, or it could be subscription-based where you pay a subscription fee for a fixed period. OA, on the other hand, seeks to make any scholarly work freely available to anyone interested in accessing it, including those who cannot afford the subscription fees.

"Currently, authors are required to give up copyright of their research articles to publishers. We want to move to a fully open paradigm where authors can redeem and openly license their articles so that they are free to share, use, and reuse their work so that science can move forward faster. By making it open, we gain a wider possible readership that will help improve the quality of science,” Campbell said.

Furthermore, not only are publishers making a profit from subscription fees, but they also benefit significantly from hefty publishing and author fees.

“Researchers are paying to publish their research output, and libraries are paying to access it in what is known as double-dipping by publishers, leading to what we term ‘serial crisis’. Research institutions pay twice and still do not see their research widely available to be read.”

Transformative Agreements

The panel explained the use of transformative agreements as a strategy to achieve full OA publishing. This strategy includes OA initiatives that organise investments around open research communication, demanding price transparency from publishers, as well as reorganising workflow and building up the capacity to make OA a default.

With Truran presenting statistics on OA in South Africa, he highlighted that “only 46% of South African journals are available freely, the rest are still out of reach of those who cannot afford to pay the costs associated with paywalls”. Tise touched on some negotiation principles for a transformational transition to OA. “Inclusivity and social justice must be core. Publishers must have an equity, diversity, and inclusion plan that addresses the challenges of researchers in the Global South.”

Should the UFS continue to subscribe to academic journals that are behind a paywall?

Truran answered this question by saying: “If we’re going to cancel subscriptions, then we should do it in unity and at the appropriate time. At the same time giving transformative agreements a go."

In his closing remarks, Molepo clarified the university’s stance on OA: “The UFS has taken a decision to publish all our journals in-house. We have flipped from subscription to full OA, and in the process, have seen a huge improvement in terms of citation. The impact of those journals has improved drastically from 2015 to 2021. We are content with that. The route to OA is the route this university should be taking,” he said.

News Archive

MBA Programme - Question And Answer Sheet - 27 May 2004

2004-05-27

1. WHAT MUST THE UNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE (UFS) DO TO GET FULL ACCREDITATION FOR THE MBA PROGRAMMES?

According to the Council on Higher Education’s (CHE) evaluation, the three MBA programmes of the UFS clearly and significantly contribute to students’ knowledge and skills, are relevant for the workplace, are appropriately resourced and have an appropriate internal and external programme environment. These programmes are the MBA General, the MBA in Health Care Management and the MBA in Entrepreneurship.

What the Council on Higher Education did find, was a few technical and administrative issues that need to be addressed.

This is why the three MBA programmes of the UFS received conditional accreditation – which in itself is a major achievement for the UFS’s School of Management, which was only four years old at the time of the evaluation.

The following breakdown gives one a sense of the mostly administrative nature of the conditions that have to be met before full accreditation is granted by the CHE:

a. A formal forum of stakeholders: The UFS is required to establish a more structured, inclusive process of review of its MBA programmes. This is an administrative formality already in process.

b. A work allocation model: According to the CHE this is required to regulate the workload of the teaching staff, particularly as student numbers grow, rather than via standard management processes as currently done.

c. Contractual agreements with part-time staff: The UFS is required to enter into formal agreements with part-time and contractual staff as all agreements are currently done on an informal and claim-basis. This is an administrative formality already in process.

d. A formal curriculum committee: According to the CHE, the School of Management had realised the need for a structure – other than the current Faculty Board - where all MBA lecturers can deliberate on the MBA programmes, and serve as a channel for faculty input, consultation and decision-making.

e. A system of external moderators: This need was already identified by the UFS and the system is to be implemented as early as July 2004.

f. A compulsory research component: The UFS is required to introduce a research component which will include the development of research skills for the business environment. The UFS management identified this need and has approved such a component - it is to take effect from January 2005. This is an insufficient element lacking in virtually all MBA programmes in South Africa.

g. Support programmes for learners having problems with numeracy: The UFS identified this as a need for academic support among some learners and has already developed such a programme which will be implemented from January 2005.

The majority of these conditions have been satisfied already and few remaining steps will take effect soon. It is for this reason that the UFS is confident that its three MBA programmes will soon receive full accreditation.

2. WHAT ACCREDITATION DOES THE UFS HAVE FOR ITS MBA PROGRAMME?

The UFS’s School of Management received conditional accreditation for its three MBA programmes.

Two levels of accreditation are awarded to tertiary institutions for their MBA programmes, namely full accreditation and conditional accreditation. When a programme does not comply with the minimum requirements regarding a small number of criteria, conditional accreditation is given. This can be rectified during the short or medium term.

3. IS THERE ANYTHING WRONG WITH THE ACADEMIC CORE OF THE UFS’s MBA PROGRAMMES?

No. The UFS is proud of its three MBA programmes’ reputation in the market and the positive feedback it receives from graduandi and their employers.

The MBA programmes of the UFS meet most of the minimum requirements of the evaluation process.

In particular, the key element of ‘teaching and learning’, which relates to the curriculum and content of the MBA programmes, is beyond question. In other words, the core of what is being taught in our MBA programmes is sound.

4. IS THE UFS’s MBA A WORTHWHILE QUALIFICATION?

Yes. Earlier this year, the School of Management – young as it is - was rated by employers as the best smaller business school in South Africa. This was based on a survey conducted by the Professional Management Review and reported in the Sunday Times Business Times, of 25 January 2004.

The UFS is committed to maintaining these high standards of quality, not only through compliance with the requirements of the CHE, but also through implementing its own quality assurance measures.

Another way in which we benchmark the quality of our MBA programmes is through the partnerships we have formed with institutions such as the DePaul University in Chicago and Kansas State University, both in the US, as well as the Robert Schuman University in France.

For this reason the UFS appreciates and supports the work of the CHE and welcomes its specific findings regarding the three MBA programmes.

It is understandable that the MBA review has caused some nervousness – not least among current MBA students throughout the country.

However, one principle that the UFS management is committed to is this: preparing all our students for a world of challenge and change. Without any doubt the MBA programme of the UFS is a solid preparation.

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept