Do biodiversity monitoring citizen science surveys meet the core principles of open science practices?

Citizen science (CS), as an enabler of open science (OS) practices, is a low-cost and accessible method for data collection in biodiversity monitoring, which can empower and educate the public both on scientific research priorities and on environmental change. Where OS increases research transparency and scientific democratisation; if properly implemented, CS should do the same. Here, we present the findings of a systematic review exploring “openness” of CS in biodiversity monitoring. CS projects were scored between − 1 (closed) and 1 (open) on their adherence to defined OS principles: accessible data, code, software, publication, data management plans, and preregistrations. Openness scores per principle were compared to see where OS is more frequently utilised across the research process. The relationship between interest in CS and openness within the practice was also tested. Overall, CS projects had an average open score of 0.14. There was a significant difference in open scores between OS principles (p =  < 0.0001), where “open data” was the most adhered to practice compared to the lowest scores found in relation to preregistrations. The apparent level of interest in CS was not shown to correspond to a significant increase in openness within CS (p = 0.8464). These results reveal CS is not generally “open” despite being an OS approach, with implications for how the public can interact with the research that they play an active role in contributing to. The development of systematic recommendations on where and how OS can be implemented across the research process in citizen science projects is encouraged

What is a scientific experiment?: The impact of a professional development course on teachers’ ability to design an inquiry-based science curriculum

Designing inquiry-based science lessons can be a challenge for secondary school teachers. In this study we evaluated the development of in-service teachers’ lesson plans as they took part in a 10-month professional development course in Peru which engaged teachers in the design of inquiry-based lessons. At the beginning, most teachers designed either confirmatory or structured inquiry activities. As the course progressed, however, they started designing guided and open inquiry lesson plans. We found four factors that accounted for this change: re-evaluating the need for lab materials, revising their views on the nature of science, engaging in guided and open inquiry activities themselves, and trying out inquiry-based lessons with their own students. Our results point to the importance of engaging teachers in prolonged and varied opportunities for inquiry as part of teacher education programs in order to achieve the challenge of changing teachers’ views and practices in science education.Fil: Pérez, María del Carmen B.. Universidad de Piura; PerúFil: Furman, Melina Gabriela. Universidad de San Andrés. Escuela de Educación; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentin

Public Participation Organizations and Open Policy:A Constitutional Moment for British Democracy?

This article builds on work in Science and Technology Studies and cognate disciplines concerning the institutionalization of public engagement and participation practices. It describes and analyses ethnographic qualitative research into one “organization of participation,” the UK government–funded Sciencewise program. Sciencewise’s interactions with broader political developments are explored, including the emergence of “open policy” as a key policy object in the UK context. The article considers what the new imaginary of openness means for institutionalized forms of public participation in science policymaking, asking whether this is illustrative of a “constitutional moment” in relations between society and science policymaking

Advocacy in the tail: Exploring the implications of ‘climategate’ for science journalism and public debate in the digital age

This paper explores the evolving practices of science journalism and public debate in the digital age. The vehicle for this study is the release of digitally stored email correspondence, data and documents from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in the weeks immediately prior to the United Nations Copenhagen Summit (COP-15) in December 2009. Described using the journalistic shorthand of ‘climategate’, and initially promoted through socio-technical networks of bloggers, this episode became a global news story and the subject of several formal reviews. ‘Climategate’ illustrates that media literate critics of anthropogenic explanations of climate change used digital tools to support their cause, making visible selected, newsworthy aspects of scientific information and the practices of scientists. In conclusion, I argue that ‘climategate’ may have profound implications for the production and distribution of science news, and how climate science is represented and debated in the digitally-mediated public sphere

Knowledge production in a cooperative economy

Knowledge here means something similar to but broader than science; reliable but not necessarily as systematic or explicit. A cooperative economy is contrasted with the competitive economy that has dominated political thinking almost everywhere for about half a century - the neo-liberal period. It is argued that the neo-liberal ideology and its economic ideas and practices are unjust and unsustainable. A model for a cooperative economy is described which would be more just and sustainable. Three main features of the model are outlined - basic income, asset and income limits, and a concept of work that counts all activity useful to human well-being rather than counting monetary profit. Knowledge in such an economy is considered in four main stages - production, review, dissemination and use. It is argued that, in the described cooperative economy, these stages would proceed more efficiently and lead to human well-being

Promoting Inquiry in Science Classrooms in European Schools : a Handbook for Tutors

In Scotland, PISCES stands for Promoting Inquiry Skills for a Curriculum for Excellence in Science. It is a CPD module for teachers of science, which has been developed in Scotland with the support of the S-TEAM project. However, this Handbook uses our international acronym in which PISCES stands for Promoting Inquiry in Science Classrooms in European Schools . It is, we believe, potentially equally as successful across Europe as it was designed around the idea of empowering teachers to think for themselves how to make their practice more-inquiry based, wherever they are. It is recognised that some school, social, policy and cultural environments may be more supportive of the idea of ‘more inquiry-based practice’ than others. PISCES empowers teachers to make small or large changes to their practice, according to those sorts of contextual factors, their own aims and how they perceive the needs of their pupils. You will note that we have been careful to use the word ‘more’ in ‘more inquiry-based.’ As befits the idea of empowerment to adapt to one’s own context, there is no single model of inquiry being ‘pushed’ here. Indeed, we count it as a measure of success of PISCES that the teachers who have participated did very different things in making their practice more inquiry-based. Strathclyde University is a leading partner in S-TEAM. Members of Strathclyde University, along with the Development Officer for Curriculum for Excellence for East Lothian, successfully developed and delivered a pilot version of PISCES as a module to a group of East Lothian teachers, in 2010/11. The module resulted in successful ‘experiments in practice’ and increased awareness of the benefits of inquiry-based teaching and learning. The same group of teachers have also taken part in a follow-up course (ARIES: Advanced Resources for Inquiry and Evaluation in Science). PISCES is a high quality CPD programme, valued by teachers and supportive of their professional self-development. It can be applied to both primary and secondary teaching, in all science subjects. Pupils benefit from learning experiences, which develop scientific inquiry skills. Feedback from participating teachers has been consistently positive

Innovating for Learning: Designing for the Future of Education

Teaching has moved online as the world has moved online and learning is losing its sense of physical location with the availability of many different options from mobile to MOOC (Massive Open Online Course). The impact of online learning is not confined to distance learning; when a student attends a campus university they are now as likely to meet with their fellow learners virtually as face to face. The education sector has yet to fully adapt to what this means, and indeed there strong signs of a built in resilience from providers, employers and students themselves which may mean an apparent evolution is more likely than a revolution. At the same time, there are some quiet changes underway that mean we should be preparing to innovate for the revolution to come. Some of those changes are considered in work undertaken at The Open University that has been disseminated in a series of Innovating Pedagogy reports. These reports allow the academic authors to be more speculative than is usual practice and engage in considering the future, while remaining based on a view of what is happening in the sector. In particular they adopt a position focused on pedagogy that balances technology-based futurology that can dominate yet fail to resonate with those actually involved in the teaching process. The annual Innovating Pedagogy reports cover 10 topics each, with some deliberate overlap from year to year and development of themes that show innovations moving into teaching practice. This is illustrated by two cases, the impact of MOOCs and the application of learning design and analytics. The development of MOOCs demonstrates the value of reviewing pedagogy that aligns with technology. While the use of learning design and learning analytics demonstrates how improvements in the way we describe our learning processes and the way we understand learner behaviour is helping determine how choices in pedagogy impact on student satisfaction, progression and success