Alicia Wise and Lorraine Estelle, writing in Insights:

The realization of a transformative deal can be a complex and time-consuming process. Success is not only determined based on the results of the negotiation process, but also in the execution of the contract. To help all parties involved in this journey, this document describes the process in all its phases from initial contact to signing the agreement, and from the implementation of an approval process, to monitoring and evaluating the fulfilment of the contract. The Workflow task and finish group identified the roles and the key information needed during the process.

This is like handing out drug-dealer kits: Transformative [sic] agreements are locking in the author-excluding APC-model, displacing the only fair alternative—collective funding.

A good statement from the American Association for the Advancement of Science (publisher of Science):

Gold OA journals, for which authors pay publication charges, work for senior scientists who are well-funded, tenured, and overwhelmingly male and white, but not so much for early-career scientists who may be poorly funded, not yet tenured, and much more diverse. Also disadvantaged are scientists at smaller schools, including historically Black colleges and universities, and in underfunded disciplines like math and the social sciences.

But the AAAS statement implies that its (mostly) subscription model is the equitable alternative. But that’s willful ignorance: direct, collective funding removes the barriers for readers and authors.

More surveillance publishing from Springer Nature:

Demonstrating research impact and setting a comprehensive strategy are critical tasks for any research organisation, but gathering trustworthy insights can be difficult and time-consuming. To support organisations in reaching their strategic goals, we are launching Nature Research Intelligence

The announcement has a bingo win: “solutions,” “holistic benchmark,” “AI powered,” and “forward-looking insights” all appear.

From AZ Inno: “VR edtech company connected to ASU raises $20M in series A funds”. The lede:

An immersive learning educational technology company developed in collaboration with Arizona State University has raised $20 million in series A funding as it continues building its virtual reality-enabled coursework and platform and putting them to work in classrooms. Dreamscape Learn, which is based in Santa Monica, California, was developed through a two-year partnership between ASU and VR company Dreamscape Immersive. That included input from ASU faculty in the development of materials that add a cinematic and emotional element to the learning, as well as the ability to give students a view beyond the classroom.

We college teachers have been asked to add cinema and emotion to our courses for some years now—but these “beyond the classroom” goggles should pick up the pace.

Thomas Klebel and Tony Ross-Hellauer, [reporting in *Quantitative Science Studies*](https://direct.mit.edu/qss/article/doi/10.1162/qss_a_00245/114729/The-APC-Barrier-and-its-effect-on-stratification) on their analysis of 1.5 million articles in the [DOAJ](https://direct.mit.edu/qss/article/doi/10.1162/qss_a_00245/114729/The-APC-Barrier-and-its-effect-on-stratification):

> The observed forces clearly perpetuate the system of cumulative advantage inherent to academia, as well-funded research groups are better able to secure OA publications in prestigious journals with high APCs, leading to citation advantages and further funding down the line. We believe that this demonstrates the impact of APC pricing on the scholarly landscape and that these charges may have a chilling effect on opportunity and equality for researchers from less prestigious or less wealthy institutions. Such stratifications in publishing, favouring traditionally-advantaged actors, will only exacerbate historical inequalities…

It’s getting harder and harder, with every study, to ignore that APCs are excluding authors in patterned, North-South ways.

From Sarah Kearns’ just-published [editorial manifesto](https://commonplace.knowledgefutures.org/pub/t5i7htvu/) for *Commonplace*:

> The landscape of knowledge sharing and dissemination is expansive. […] Moreover, critique floods the ecosystem partially rightly so given the many challenges and limitations of current infrastructures. There are few publications in the scholarly communications space that seek explicitly to focus on emerging models and to spark the inspiration and sustain the momentum needed for change. Through curated and co-created essays, series, podcasts, and other formats, *Commonplace* aims to be movement toward knowledge sharing futures and the cultures that sustain them.

The [outlet](https://commonplace.knowledgefutures.org), edited by Kearns, is published by the nonprofit [Knowledges Futures](https://www.knowledgefutures.org/about),[^1] on its PubPub platform (of which [I’m a fan](https://elephantinthelab.org/the-case-for-pubpub/)). Kearns’ [manifesto](https://commonplace.knowledgefutures.org/pub/t5i7htvu) comes on the heels of *Commonplace*’s [announcement that it will pay contributors and expand its pallet of formats](https://commonplace.knowledgefutures.org/pub/i07rh4za/release/1), itself not long after Kearns and co. released a [new style guide](https://commonplace.knowledgefutures.org/pub/qjny7ar3/).

[^1]: Just as *The Commonplace* appears to have dropped its *The*, the Knowledge Futures Group seems to have lopped off its third word.