30 research outputs found

    Peer Review Guidelines Promoting Replicability and Transparency in Psychological Science

    Get PDF
    More and more psychological researchers have come to appreciate the perils of common but poorly justified research practices, and are rethinking commonly held standards for evaluating research. As this methodological reform expresses itself in psychological research, peer reviewers of such work must also adapt their practices to remain relevant. Reviewers of journal submissions wield considerable power to promote methodological reform, contributing to the advancement of a more robust psychological literature. We describe concrete practices that reviewers can use to encourage transparency, intellectual humility, and more valid assessments of methods and statistics

    Embedding open and reproducible science into teaching: A bank of lesson plans and resources

    Get PDF
    Recently, there has been a growing emphasis on embedding open and reproducible approaches into research. One essential step in accomplishing this larger goal is to embed such practices into undergraduate and postgraduate research training. However, this often requires substantial time and resources to implement. Also, while many pedagogical resources are regularly developed for this purpose, they are not often openly and actively shared with the wider community. The creation and public sharing of open educational resources is useful for educators who wish to embed open scholarship and reproducibility into their teaching and learning. In this article, we describe and openly share a bank of teaching resources and lesson plans on the broad topics of open scholarship, open science, replication, and reproducibility that can be integrated into taught courses, to support educators and instructors. These resources were created as part of the Society for the Improvement of Psychological Science (SIPS) hackathon at the 2021 Annual Conference, and we detail this collaborative process in the article. By sharing these open pedagogical resources, we aim to reduce the labour required to develop and implement open scholarship content to further the open scholarship and open educational materials movement

    Teaching open and reproducible scholarship: a critical review of the evidence base for current pedagogical methods and their outcomes

    Get PDF
    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

    Teaching open and reproducible scholarship: A critical review of the evidence base for current pedagogical methods and their outcomes

    Get PDF
    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

    Implicit Beliefs of Future Teachers about General Ability

    Get PDF

    The Quantitative Implications of Definitions of Giftedness

    No full text
    Educational psychology is replete with verbal or qualitative definitions through which students can be considered members of categories, such as learning disabled, autistic, or gifted. These conceptions carry quantitative implications regarding the incidence rates of the phenomena they describe. To be scientifically useful, such definitions should have sufficient specificity and internal consistency. We analyzed four influential definitions of giftedness and assessed their internal consistency by computing the giftedness rate implied by each. Results reveal that the proportion of individuals who meet the standard of giftedness under some definitions is unrealistically high (e.g., >75% in some conditions). The implication of this work is that the rigor and internal self-consistency of educational concepts requires improvement. The field must carefully consider the quantitative implications of its concepts, statements, and definitions. An Open Science Framework project page containing R code, a technical appendix, and all figures and tables from this paper is available at https://osf.io/6e7g9/
    corecore