The Epistemic Value of Open Science

Open science refers to all scientific culture that is described by its openness. It may often include features of open access, open data, and open source. Fecher and Friesike (2014) identify five open science schools of thought: the public school, which is about the accessibility of knowledge creation; the democratic school, which is about equality of access to knowledge; the pragmatic school, which is about collaborative research; the infrastructure school, which is about the technological architecture; and the measurement school, which is about alternative impact measurement. This article argues that there are only two open science schools, the public and democratic iterations, that can defend themselves against the serious epistemic objections to open science. In addition, if society supports an “open discussion” policy, societies will gain much more benefit from open science. These two schools, therefore, have more epistemic value than the other schools

Open Science: One Term, Five Schools of Thought

Open Science is an umbrella term that encompasses a multitude of assumptions about the future of knowledge creation and dissemination. Based on a literature review, this paper aims at structuring the overall discourse by proposing five Open Science schools of thought: The infrastructure school (which is concerned with the technological architecture), the public school (which is concerned with the accessibility of knowledge creation), the measurement school (which is concerned with alternative impact measurement), the democratic school (which is concerned with access to knowledge) and the pragmatic school (which is concerned with collaborative research)

An Organizational and Governance Model to Support Mass Collaborative Learning Initiatives

Funding text 1 This study was supported by the Center of Technology and Systems (CTS-UNINOVA). Funding text 2 Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (project UIDB/00066/2020) and European Commission ERASMUS + through grant n° 2020-1-FR01-KA202-080231 ED-EN HUB.Mass collaboration can bring about major transformative changes in the way people can work collectively. This emerging paradigm promises significant economic and social benefits and enhanced efficiency across a range of sectors, including learning and education. Accordingly, this article introduces, demonstrates in use, and evaluates an organizational and governance model designed to provide guidance and execution support for the implementation and operation of mass collaborative learning initiatives. The design science research process is adopted to guide the design and development of the proposed model. The model stands on three streams of work, addressing key aspects and elements that have a supporting influence on community learning: (i) identify the positive and negative factors in existing and active examples of mass collaboration; (ii) adopt contributions of collaborative networks in terms of structural and behavioral aspects; and (iii) establish adequate learning assessment indicators and metrics. The model is used for a case study in which vocational education and training meet the needs of collaborative education–enterprise approaches. Initially, the validation of the model is verified by the partners and stakeholders of a particular project in the area of education–enterprises relations to ensure that it is sufficiently appropriate for applications in a digital platform developed by such projects. The three first steps of (the proposed) applicability evaluation (adequacy, feasibility, and effectiveness) are then performed. The positive results gained from model validation and its applicability evaluation in this project indicate that not only is the model fairly adequate, feasible, and effective for applications in the developed digital platform but also that it has a high potential for utilization in supporting and directing the creation, implementation, and operation of mass collaborative learning initiatives. Although the validation was carried out in the context of a single project, in fact, it was based on a large “focus group” of experts involved in this international initiative, which is in accordance with the Design Science Research method. Thus, this article reflects a kind of applied research of a socio-technical nature, aiming to find guidelines and practical solutions to the specific issues, problems, and concerns of mass collaborative learning initiatives.publishersversionpublishe

Open science and public engagement: Exploring the potential of the open paradigm to support public engagement with science

Open science, a practice in which the entirety of a research project is made available, via the Internet, using a variety of tools and techniques, is an emerging approach to the conduct of science. The hypothesis that open science therefore has the potential to support public engagement with science has been investigated through the research outlined in this thesis. The research has also sought to address the related issues of how, or if, the science thus made available therefore needs to be translated and narrated for public consumption and how, or if, open science can or should develop as a deep and bidirectional mode of engagement between members of the public and researchers.The research employed two methods of qualitative enquiry (interviews and case studies) and one method of quantitative enquiry (a web-based questionnaire survey) to enable appropriate validation through methodological triangulation. The interview participants, recruited through purposive sampling, took part in semi-structured interviews, which were analysed using a grounded theory approach. Three exploratory case studies were selected using a descriptive decision matrix. The case studies were conducted using a mixture of ethnographic observations of events, meetings and other situations involving personal contact, documentary studies of project websites, available materials and so on, and interviews with project members. Finally, a web-based survey was carried out to establish baseline data on the scientific and cultural background, motivations and opinions of visitors to open science project websites.The results suggest that although the principle of openness is widely accepted, there are a number of issues to be addressed as research is opened up to a wider public. These include the development of shared praxis between researchers and members of the public, for example understanding of data analysis techniques and how to support judgements of validity and trustworthiness of information. Problems of data ownership are also foreseen, both in terms of proprietary and intellectual property rights, the maintenance of reputation, precedence and priority and in how to value non-professional and non-traditional contributions to research.The results also indicate that open science has the credentials to claim a place in the ranks of public engagement strategies. This research indicates that open science is not yet a tightly-defined practice; as a flexible, innovative methodology, it offers a variety of routes for engagement for both scientists and members of the public. For scientists, it could be a mode for communication in which the communicative activities are part of daily scientific work. For members of the public, it could enable them to follow a project in which they are interested, offering direct access to data, publications and other research outputs. For both communities, it could support the development and sustaining of public participation in research, and enable dialogue and collaboration throughout the scientific process, from defining the research question, to research design, to experiment, to analysis