Open Science/Week 6: Diverse Paths to Open Science
Learning Outcomes edit
- Compare multiple schools of thought that feature in the development of open science.
- Explain how earlier schools of thought about open science are reflected in the UNESCO Recommendation.
- Analyze key relationships between the priorities of open access and replicability in open science.
Readings edit
Open Science: One Term, Five Schools of Thought, Fecher B., Friesike S. In: Bartling S., Friesike S. (eds) Opening Science, 2014, CC BY-NC. 30 pages.[1]
Plan S Principles, Coalition S, 2018, Copyright © 2021 European Science Foundation.[2]
"From the 'Replicability Crisis' to Open Science Practices" in Rajiv S. Jhangiani; I-Chant A. Chiang; Carrie Cuttler; and Dana C. Leighton, Research Methods in Psychology - 4th Edition , 2019, licensed under a CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted, 7 pages.[3]
Discussion Question edit
Consider the five schools of thought[1] that contribute to open science. Describe how one of these schools of thought is relevant to a scientific context with which you are familiar. You can describe an institutional, geographic, or disciplinary context. End your post with a question posed to other participants in the discussion.
Self-check Questions edit
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Fecher, Benedikt; Friesike, Sascha (2014). Bartling, Sönke. ed. Open Science: One Term, Five Schools of Thought (in en). Cham: Springer International Publishing. pp. 17–47. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_2. ISBN 978-3-319-00026-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_2.
- ↑ "Plan S Principles | Plan S". www.coalition-s.org. Retrieved 2021-12-17.
- ↑ "From the 'Replicability Crisis' to Open Science Practices" in Jhangiani, Rajiv (2019). Research methods in psychology. I-Chant A. Chiang, Carrie Cuttler, Dana C. Leighton, Kwantlen Polytechnic University, BC Open Textbook Project, BCcampus (4th edition ed.). Surrey, B.C.. ISBN 978-1-9991981-0-7. OCLC 1156393793. https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1156393793.