Pilot evaluation: ResearchEquals Cohorts | spring 2023

“In February, we ran a pilot ResearchEquals Cohort. Seven sessions spread over four weeks, and five cohort graduates. Regardless of whether we continue, this is a delightful memory already. We met fantastic folk, learned from one another, and had fun. We’ve had some space and time to reflect on this, and with that it’s high time to evaluate and announce when the next Cohort will take place. We intended the  ResearchEquals Cohort to be a peer learning programme, to make learning something fun and less intimidating. We wanted to create a supportive space for cohort members to practice modular publishing, such that we can start growing this practice. We didn’t succeed on every front, but it’s been a tremendous first try….”

Biomedical supervisors’ role modeling of open science practices | eLife

Abstract:  Supervision is one important way to socialize Ph.D. candidates into open and responsible research. We hypothesized that one should be more likely to identify open science practices (here publishing open access and sharing data) in empirical publications that were part of a Ph.D. thesis when the Ph.D. candidates’ supervisors engaged in these practices compared to those whose supervisors did not or less often did. Departing from thesis repositories at four Dutch University Medical centers, we included 211 pairs of supervisors and Ph.D. candidates, resulting in a sample of 2062 publications. We determined open access status using UnpaywallR and Open Data using Oddpub, where we also manually screened publications with potential open data statements. Eighty-three percent of our sample was published openly, and 9% had open data statements. Having a supervisor who published open access more often than the national average was associated with an odds of 1.99 to publish open access. However, this effect became nonsignificant when correcting for institutions. Having a supervisor who shared data was associated with 2.22 (CI:1.19–4.12) times the odds to share data compared to having a supervisor that did not. This odds ratio increased to 4.6 (CI:1.86–11.35) after removing false positives. The prevalence of open data in our sample was comparable to international studies; open access rates were higher. Whilst Ph.D. candidates spearhead initiatives to promote open science, this study adds value by investigating the role of supervisors in promoting open science.

 

Nieuwe gids over open science speciaal voor beginnende onderzoekers | NWO

From Google’s English:  “What should I pay attention to in open science? How do I set up my research openly and transparently? Where can I publish? NWO has published a manual on open science in collaboration with UNL, DANS-KNAW and UKB (the partnership of university libraries and the KB). The guide answers a number of frequently asked questions from (young) researchers that they have when they start working with open science.”

White House Listening Session on: Open Science Possibilities for Training and Capacity Building: Perspectives from the Early Career Researcher-Supporting Community

“Open science carries with it a world of possibilities: spurring discovery and equitable innovation, bolstering public trust, democratizing access to research, strengthening evidence-based decision making, and creating a better life for all. These possibilities place open science at the heart of Biden-Harris Administration priorities – from curbing greenhouse gas emissions to reducing social inequalities to ending cancer as we know it.

To help realize these possibilities, the White House is taking action to elevate the needs, priorities, and experiences of those who will shape and inherit the future of open science: the early career research (ECR) community. The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) will host a series of virtual listening sessions to explore perspectives on the challenges and opportunities for advancing open science in the United States and solutions that might be implemented by the U.S. Government….”

Practical Guide on Open Science is available!

“Practical Guide on Open Science for Early-Career Researchers is published by the Dutch consortium of University Libraries and the National Library of the Netherlands (UKB), together with the Universities of The Netherlands (UNL), the Dutch National Centre of Expertise and Repository for Research Data (DANS) and the Dutch Research Council (NWO). The guide is fully open access and available to any researcher and interested party via Zenodo repository.

This guide will be useful for anyone looking for practical information about Open Science, but especially for beginning researchers such as PhD candidates and researchers who recently received their PhD. The practical guide is designed to accompany researchers from all disciplines at Dutch universities and research institutes. Every chapter provides help, tools, links and practices that can be applied immediately….”

Teaching open and reproducible scholarship: a critical review of the evidence base for current pedagogical methods and their outcomes | Royal Society Open Science

Abstract:  In recent years, the scientific community has called for improvements in the credibility, robustness and reproducibility of research, characterized by increased interest and promotion of open and transparent research practices. While progress has been positive, there is a lack of consideration about how this approach can be embedded into undergraduate and postgraduate research training. Specifically, a critical overview of the literature which investigates how integrating open and reproducible science may influence student outcomes is needed. In this paper, we provide the first critical review of literature surrounding the integration of open and reproducible scholarship into teaching and learning and its associated outcomes in students. Our review highlighted how embedding open and reproducible scholarship appears to be associated with (i) students’ scientific literacies (i.e. students’ understanding of open research, consumption of science and the development of transferable skills); (ii) student engagement (i.e. motivation and engagement with learning, collaboration and engagement in open research) and (iii) students’ attitudes towards science (i.e. trust in science and confidence in research findings). However, our review also identified a need for more robust and rigorous methods within pedagogical research, including more interventional and experimental evaluations of teaching practice. We discuss implications for teaching and learning scholarship.

 

Feedback wanted: building a Digital Research Academy ??

“Digital skills in research are needed more than ever. Especially in growing fields like Open Science, Data Literacy, and Research Software Engineering. What if we made these skills accessible for all? What if we had a network of skilled people who can train others?

Today I want to pitch to you my idea of a Digital Research Academy and I would love to hear your thoughts!…

I started giving trainings on Open Science and good practices in digital research, because I wanted to play a part in improving scientific quality and rigor. I just started doing this full time, but am already booked until the end of the year. So I know there is a market that longs for training on digital research skills and I cannot do it alone. One of my top skills is networking and bringing people together, so this is what I want to do through the idea of the Digital Research Academy….”

OpenCon Librarian Community Call: May 09, 2023 | Do new librarians feel prepared for scholarly communication positions?

“Scholarly communication and adjacent positions are now standard in most academic institutions, but do new librarians feel prepared? Join us in May to discuss what training you received (or what you wish you’d received), where you learn about new developments, and what you would tell people who are starting in these positions. We will use Etherpad with a moderator to have an engaging and anonymous conversation regarding MLIS education and scholarly communication. Also, as part of May’s call, we will begin conversations around this year’s Open Access Week theme, Community over Commercialization…”

Open science train-the-trainer tips | EIFL

“Enhancing open science and open research skills by organizing train-the-trainer activities, creating training materials, and advocating for research incentives and structures that support and promote the acquisition of open science and open research skills are among EIFL’s strategic goals. 

But bringing together trainers from almost 40 EIFL partner countries in Africa, Asia and Europe is a challenge – in-person meetings are too expensive. So we opted for free online meetings although we knew these would be challenging too, because it is difficult to find a time to suit many different time zones simultaneously, internet connectivity varies, and people joining online meetings from the workplace or home may get interrupted by work priorities and day-to-day life.

To minimize these difficulties, the bootcamp comprised synchronous meetings – live on Zoom – and asynchronous learning on OpenPlato, which is OpenAIRE’s Moodle e-learning management platform. OpenPlato had been used successfully in OpenAIRE train-the-trainer bootcamps that we helped to co-organize in 2022.”

Bringing Open Science to formal education

“Open Science is just good science in a digital age. And if we want students and early career researchers to become good scientist, we need to start implementing Open Science in formal education: In Bachelors and/or Masters degrees, in PhD programmes, and beyond.

At the Open Science Retreat (see previous newsletter issue) we came up with a syllabus for a one semester course (12 weeks) with 1.5 hours in-person sessions each week and preparation work before each session (blended learning/flipped classroom)….”

Buku: Perangkat Pendukung Sistem Repositori Institusi Basic to Expert | 01/27/2023 | ISIPII / Ikatan Sarjana Ilmu Perpustakaan dan Informasi Indonesia

Google translate: “…This book discusses in full how to run institutional repository applications. The initial stage is given an understanding of how to run a server and its supporting devices in implementing an institutional repository. Next is an understanding of several institutional repository applications that already exist such as the Walanae version of Omeka, Eprints and Difoss. The material that follows provides an overview and practical tips for developing some of the features that are already available at the application development stage. And finally, it explains in detail how to run the service API on Eprints so that it can become a database for developing eprints as a center for other applications such as statistical application services, digital preservation monitoring applications, and others….”

Published: Jakarta: ISIPII [Association of Indonesian Library and Information Professionals], 2023

Guest Post: Start at the Beginning – The Need for ‘Research Practice’ Training – The Scholarly Kitchen

“Something is rotten in the state of research. And while retracting work that is fraudulent or incorrect is very important, it is expensive and too late. We should be nipping the problem in the bud much earlier – back with the training researchers receive at university. Achieving Open Research (and therefore increasing reproducibility) requires the provision of systematic research training that focuses specifically on research practice….”

 

Reclaiming the Digital Commons: A Public Data Trust for Training Data

Abstract:  Democratization of AI means not only that people can freely use AI, but also that people can collectively decide how AI is to be used. In particular, collective decision-making power is required to redress the negative externalities from the development of increasingly advanced AI systems, including degradation of the digital commons and unemployment from automation. The rapid pace of AI development and deployment currently leaves little room for this power. Monopolized in the hands of private corporations, the development of the most capable foundation models has proceeded largely without public input. There is currently no implemented mechanism for ensuring that the economic value generated by such models is redistributed to account for their negative externalities. The citizens that have generated the data necessary to train models do not have input on how their data are to be used. In this work, we propose that a public data trust assert control over training data for foundation models. In particular, this trust should scrape the internet as a digital commons, to license to commercial model developers for a percentage cut of revenues from deployment. First, we argue in detail for the existence of such a trust. We also discuss feasibility and potential risks. Second, we detail a number of ways for a data trust to incentivize model developers to use training data only from the trust. We propose a mix of verification mechanisms, potential regulatory action, and positive incentives. We conclude by highlighting other potential benefits of our proposed data trust and connecting our work to ongoing efforts in data and compute governance.

 

Open Science course available on new knowledge platform | NWO

“NWO teamed up with the Research Council Norway (RCN) and the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS) to create an open science course. This course was offered last year to employees of NWO and RCN. Its content is now available to anyone through an open knowledge platform set up by CWTS….”

Ivy+ Text Data Mining Education for Advocacy (TEA) Task Force Phase One Report: Actions and Interventions to Address Concerns with Text Data Mining Platforms

“The Ivy Plus Libraries Confederation (IPLC) Digital Scholarship Affinity Group assembled the Text Data Mining Education for Advocacy (TEA) Task Force to develop shared, open, and accessible educational materials to improve researchers’ literacy on the current influx of third party vendor Text Data Mining (TDM) platforms. This task force was specifically entrusted to examine use and limitations related to the “closedness” of each platform and the direct and collateral effects of the monetization of data on these systems for transparency, collaboration, cross-platforming, and publishing. This report offers constructive criticism of the opaque box, all-or-nothing approach that vendors are taking in order to offer information to support researchers, openness, and equity. Over the course of six months, this task force produced a literature review to examine the current discourse on these emerging platforms, as well as prototype user profiles to clarify researcher needs and evaluate whether the platforms actually meet those needs. This report reflects the results of those efforts to identify exciting new opportunities for assessing emerging TDM platforms….”