Abstract: This collaborative self-study examines how five higher education institutions in British Columbia (BC), Canada, have achieved momentum with openness and are implementing and sustaining their efforts. A goal of this research was to see whether an institutional self-assessment tool—adapted from blended learning and institutional transformation research—can help to assess how an institution has progressed with its open education initiatives. By adopting both an appreciative and a critical approach, the researchers at these five BC institutions compared the similarities and differences between their institutional approaches and the evolution of their initiatives. The paper includes discussion of how a self-assessment tool for institutional open education practices (OEP) can be applied to OEP initiatives at an institutional level and shares promising practices and insights that emerge from this research.
Loek Brinkman, Judith de Haan, Daniël van Hemert, Joost de Laat, Dominique Rijshouwer, Sander Thomaes, & Ruth van Veelen. (2021). Open Science Monitor 2020. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5725178
This is the first version of the Open Science monitor on awareness, attitudes and behaviours in relation to 10 open science practices. The monitor was conducted among academics at Utrecht University and UMC Utrecht (the Netherlands) in the summer of 2020 with the aim to gain insight in academics’ attitude and behaviours towards various open science practices, the opportunities these practices may provide for the scientific community and the barriers in implementing open science practices the researchers may experience.
With this monitor the university hopes to gain insight into what can be done to facilitate and support open science among academics at Utrecht University.
The Global Transition to Open: Structuring Library Sustainability Toward a More Equitable Knowledge Ecosystem, guest edited by Sharla Lair & Curtis Brundy, and featuring 15 articles by 23 authors
The theory of being open is great but what does it mean in practice to work openly, to make data, images, information and code open for others to re-use? And how could that benefit your organisation – or you as an individual?
At this hack event we will explore by practicing how we be more open and support some of the key concepts that Code The City was set up to champion.
We’ll have a number of challenges (which we will list further down this page and expand on as we get nearer the event). These will trigger prototype projects which we will work on in small teams throughout the weekend. These projects will explore
Open Data – creation, curation, finding, improving; data scraping; using the data to build new products and services.
Open Licensing – taking and sharing images with open licences
Open Working – sharing our code on Github for re-use under permissive licences.
Abstract: Presence-only biodiversity data are increasingly relied on in biodiversity, ecology, and conservation research, driven by growing digital infrastructures that support open data sharing and reuse. Recent reviews of open biodiversity data have clearly documented the value of data sharing, but the extent to which the biodiversity research community has adopted open data practices remains unclear. We address this question by reviewing applications of presence-only primary biodiversity data, drawn from a variety of sources beyond open databases, in the indexed literature. We characterize how frequently researchers access open data relative to data from other sources, how often they share newly generated or collated data, and trends in metadata documentation and data citation. Our results indicate that biodiversity research commonly relies on presence-only data that are not openly available and neglects to make such data available. Improved data sharing and documentation will increase the value, reusability, and reproducibility of biodiversity research.
Helgesson, G., Radun, I., Radun, J., & Nilsonne, G. (2021, November 10). Editors publishing in their own journals – a systematic review of prevalence and a discussion of normative aspects. https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/dc6je
Journal editors are the main gatekeepers in scientific publishing. Yet there is a concern that they may receive preferential treatment when submitting manuscripts to their own journals. The prevalence of such self-publishing is not known, nor the consequences for reliability and trustworthiness of published research. This study aimed to systematically review the literature on the prevalence of editors publishing in their own journals and to conduct a normative ethical analysis of this practice. A systematic review was performed using the following databases: Medline, PsycInfo, Scopus, and Web of Science. Articles that provided primary data about editors publishing in own journals were included. We identified 15 studies meeting inclusion criteria. There was large variability of self-publishing across fields, journals, and editors, ranging from those who never published in their own journal to those publishing extensively in their own journal. Many studies suffered from serious methodological limitations. Nevertheless, our results show that there are settings where levels of self-publication are very high. We recommend that editors-in-chief and associate editors who have considerable power in journals refrain from publishing research articles in their own journals. Journals should have clear processes in place about treatment of articles submitted by editorial board members.
Understanding data: Praxis and Politics is a one year project funded by the EPSRC ( EP/R045178/1) and the HDI+ network. Here you can find a more detailed description of the grant.
We live in a datafied society where decisions taken by corporations and governments are increasingly data and algorithm-driven. Whilst data are often said to be ‘collected’ as if pre-existing, thus reflecting reality, the processes through which data are generated and communicated are neither neutral nor devoid of adverse effects. Richterich (2018) reminds us that data are socially constructed and embedded in their structures. Data are political. Therefore we need technical abilities and media literacies weaved into a critical approach to understand the socio-political and cultural mechanisms that affect individuals and groups that find themselves increasingly navigating data-driven system in their daily lives.
The project aims to design, develop and pilot an OER (open educational resource) to support educators in improving their critical data literacies. The OER will provide educators with content and analytical tools to think about real-life situations that will connect them with the most recent issues and research in the field.
The OER will be tried out in four strategic pilot institutions that kindly offered their facilities: Tangaza University College, Nairobi; Universidad de la República, Uruguay; Universidad Oberta de Catalunya, Barcelona; and Bath Spa University, England. These pilots will allow us to explore what works and what doesn’t in our approach to refine/redesign the OER for a second iteration.
“In his Medium article “Scholarly publishing is stuck in 1999,”
Springer Nature product manager Stephen Cornelius reproaches the outdated publishing practices many academic journals are using to produce online content. He notes that, despite decades of technological advancement, “research publishing seems stuck with those that were employed when it first went online.” Cornelius points to many areas of digital journal publishing that have been designed to mirror print publishing, such as journals formatting online articles as print-based PDFs, despite there being better ways to produce and present content online….
PDFs are rife with limitations as compared to HTML because, unlike HTML, PDFs:
Cannot support embedded multi-media research files such as videos
Have a poor layout for online reading, generally using columns that require readers to scroll up and down to read content on the same page
Are nearly impossible to read on mobile devices because PDFs are a static page (whereas HTML can be made to have a responsive design)
Do not easily allow for clickable references within the text
Are overwhelmingly not search-optimized for online browsers…
A recent article in The Atlantic titled “The Scientific Paper Is Obsolete“ explores the limitations of PDFs and the need for journals, particularly in STEM fields, to adopt internet-based publishing formats in order to support more dynamic presentations of research as well as to make it easier for readers to find articles online….”
OA BOOKS WORKOUTS: SCHOLARS AT WORK
This series, hosted by Jeroen Sondervan, features different scholars talking about publishing Open Access books. Hear more about their projects, why they chose Open Access, and the challenges and triumphs they experienced along the way!
19 October 2021 (2-3PM BST / 3-4PM CEST): Janneke Adema, Living Books. Book your place here (it’s free!)
9 November 2021 (11.30AM-12.30PM GMT / 12.30-1.30PM CET): Lucy Montgomery, Open Knowledge Institutions. Book your place here (it’s free!)
30 November 2021 (2-3PM GMT / 3-4PM CET): Miklos Kiss, Film Studies in Motion. Book your place here (it’s free!)
14 December 2021 (2-3PM GMT / 3-4PM CET): Jeff Pooley, Social Media & The Self: An Open Reader. Book your place here (it’s free!)
11 January 2022 (2-3PM GMT / 3-4PM CET): Whitney Trettien, Cut/Copy/Paste. Book your place here (it’s free!)
Abstract: Growing concerns about the credibility of scientific findings have sparked a debate on new transparency and openness standards in research. Management and organization studies scholars generally support the new standards, while emphasizing the unique challenges associated with their implementation in this paradigmatically diverse discipline. In this study, I analyze the costs to authors and journals associated with the implementation of new transparency and openness standards, and provide a progress report on the implementation level thus far. Drawing on an analysis of the submission guidelines of 60 empirical management journals, I find that the call for greater transparency was received, but resulted in implementations that were limited in scope and depth. Even standards that could have been easily adopted were left unimplemented, producing a paradoxical situation in which research designs that need transparency standards the most are not exposed to any, likely because the standards are irrelevant to other research designs.
The Open Access Books Network organises a series of online events where scholars from different academic fields will present their open access book project. During the session they will briefly present their project, followed by a conversation about how the project came to be an open access book and what challenges they’ve encountered. During this talk we will also dive into how technologies like new publishing software, workflow processes, book sprinting and open peer review have shaped the project. The audience is invited to join the conversation and share thoughts, ideas and good practices.
“The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s Roundtable on Aligning Incentives for Open Science will host a public release of Developing a Toolkit for Fostering Open Science Practices: Proceedings of a Workshop on Thursday, September 30, 2021 from 3:30-4:30 pm EDT. Please register in advance to receive information on how to participate in the event.”
“The National Academies Roundtable on Aligning Incentives for Open Science, established in 2019, has taken on an important role in addressing issues with open science. The roundtable convenes critical stakeholders to discuss the effectiveness of current incentives for adopting open science practices, current barriers of all types, and ways to move forward in order to align reward structures and institutional values. The Roundtable convened a virtual public workshop on fostering open science practices on November 5, 2020. The broad goal of the workshop was to identify paths to growing the nascent coalition of stakeholders committed to reenvisioning credit/reward systems (e.g., academic hiring, tenure and promotion, and grants)to fully incentivize open science practices. The workshop explored the information and resource needs of researchers, research institutions, government agencies, philanthropies, professional societies, and other stakeholders interested in further supporting and implementing open science practices. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussion of the workshop.”
Abstract: This editorial seeks to encourage the increased applicationof three open science practices in eating disordersresearch: Preregistration, Registered Reports, and the shar-ing of materials, data, and code. For each of these prac-tices, we introduce updated International Journal of Eating Disorders author and reviewer guidance. Updates include the introduction of open science badges; specific instruc-tions about how to improve transparency; and the intro-duction of Registered Reports of systematic or meta-analytical reviews. The editorial also seeks to encourage the study of open science practices. Open science prac-tices pose considerable time and other resource burdens.Therefore, research is needed to help determine the valueof these added burdens and to identify efficient strategies for implementing open science practices.
Open Publishing Fest is a decentralized public event that brings together communities supporting open source software, open content, and open publishing models.
Held over two weeks in November this year, Open Publishing Fest will feature discussions, demos, and performances that showcase our paths toward a more open world.
Open Knowledge ?/= Open Publishing ?
For more info or to discuss ideas please email email@example.com.