Let's be honest: The most important room in any department is the kitchen. There you get coffee or tea and meet your colleagues for quick chats about daily life and work. Open Science Kitchen is a series of regular, virtual meetings of around 60 minutes with changing topics that are free to everyone. These meet-ups hopefully help to get to know each other better and across departments. The goals are to
- provide a space to discuss topics in the context of Open Science,
- make people think about Open Science regularly, and
- present current developments people at UT and Saxion University should know about.
However, the OSCT is a bottom-up community. This means that you make the topics. Feel free to suggest topics that should be discussed and bring in any ideas you have in mind. Just fill out the form and tell us about your idea. This also applies to the monthly newsletter and the blog posts to which you can contribute.
See you in the kitchen ;).
The first event of the new season (30th September at 14hrs) will be dedicated to the recent developments around the rewards and recognition system in the context of Open Science.
Abstract: Many scholars aim to make the next step in their academic career. The decision about hiring, promotion, and tenure is often based on quantitative metrics, such as the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) and h-index. Such citation-based indices are perceived by many as concrete and clear evaluation criteria. Still, the Utrecht University abandoned the JIF and would like to focus more on Open Science-based evaluation frameworks, such as the San Francisco Declaration of Research Assessment (DORA). But what is wrong with using citations as an evaluation criterion? What are the limitations of the JIF and h-index that make some universities refrain from these metrics? In this talk, I would like to overview the limitations quantitative metrics have and what the alternatives are. Also, I would like to pay attention to the discussion between proponents and opponents that followed Utrecht’s decision. As always, for the second part of the event, the floor will be yours. What is your opinion? Can you imagine that your department or university makes a similar move?
I am looking forward to an interesting discussion.
Spread the word, see you in the kitchen!
Engaging society: How public outreach meets Open Science
Abstract: The work of scientists is sometimes perceived as a black box and often people will only hear about new discoveries and exciting prospects in the news which can result in them losing interest in science. However, we need the public to support what we do because they all contribute to our work. Showing the public who scientists are and what they are working on also fits perfectly within the Open Science movement. It is essential to engage people, for example, by visiting schools to give interesting lectures and demonstrations, inviting school classes for a hands-on day in the lab, and organizing open days to offer people an opportunity to get to know the scientists and science behind university or industry doors. Such outreach activities are a tremendous help in showing that science is fun and fascinating and why so much effort is put into science every day.
Open Reproducible Research – Challenges and Opportunities
Abstract: Reproducibility is an essential Open Science practice and consequently a cornerstone of computational research. Publishing the code and the data underlying the results in the paper allows reviewers to verify the results, readers to understand the finding in more detail, and other researchers to build upon the work. Nevertheless, for several cultural and technical reasons, publishing open and reproducible results is challenging to realize. This presentation will introduce basic concepts and issues around reproducibility. It will then provide an overview of existing tools that help researchers publish open reproducible research and which aspects users should consider to select the right tool for the own work.
Open Access Diamond Journals study
Bianca Kramer and Jeroen Bosman from Utrecht University Library talked about their Open Access Diamond Journals study.
Abstract: Open access does not necessarily mean authors are asked to pay APCs to publish in a journal. So-called diamond open access journals are free to read and publish in, and therefore accessible to all researchers, also when they are not affiliated with a rich university. How is that possible? And which journals use such a model? Are they comparable to APC-charging journals? Are they sustainable? And how can they be supported if diamond is the way to go to provide sustainable, fair and global open access? Bianca Kramer and Jeroen Bosman from Utrecht University Library were part of a large consortium executing a study into diamond open access journals. They will tell you all about it and are of course open to questions and discussion. If you wish to take a look at the study outcomes in advance, please take a look. Warning: this is an extensive report in 2 parts - findings and recommendations - but: there is an executive summary.
Publishing 100% Open Access. How can we help you?
The National Program Open Science (NPOS) and the association of universities in the Netherlands (VSNU) just released reports on the feasibility of 100% open access in the Netherlands. Unfortunately, nearly all communication about this is only available in Dutch, but the management summaries are available in English. Long story short: Things need to change. In this Open Science Kitchen, there will be a presentation by Nicole Loorbach, one of the UT specialists on Open Access. She’ll give a short overview of how you can already publish your work open access as a UT author and how the UT will give open access a boost this year. A boost is necessary, because the UT set itself the objective of making 100% open-access publishing the norm by 2023 (Shaping 2030, p.22) and we’re currently publishing about 75% of our work open access. Nicole will also present the major findings of the NPOS/VSNU reports. These reports will be the starting point for a new national strategy and for new open-access policies of universities in the Netherlands.
As a UT author, you know best what needs to change nationally and at the UT for you to publish all your work open access. That’s why we’d like to spend most of the event discussing:
- What are your experiences with open-access publishing?
- What is holding you back now to publish all your work open access?
- If anything was possible, what would open-access publishing look like?
- What would really make a difference for you?
- What can the UT do to help you publish all your work open access?
- What can be organized nationally, for all universities, to help you publish all your work open access?
Preregistration and Registered Reports
The February edition of the Open Science Kitchen event was dedicated to "The Benefits and Limitations of Preregistration and Registered Reports". Why this topic? Some of you might have attended the last Open Science Kitchen event in January, where we discussed potential issues. Preregistration was the first item on the list, so apparently, there is some demand for it. It is also a relatively new concept and not very common, for example, in the geoscience and social sciences. The goal of the event was consequently to raise awareness for the two ideas.
Open Science Community Kick-off
On the 28th January, we had our first OSCT event. More than 30 participants attended the virtual kick-off session. We discussed what Open Science Communities are, how people can join and contribute, and which topics the participants are interested in. Curious? Check the SLIDES or the recording below.
Contributions from the community are key to the success of our OSCT. We consequently strongly encourage our members to initiate and organize their own events related to Open Science, e.g., workshops and hackathons. Member initiatives will be announced on this website and promoted through social media. If you have an idea in mind, please send us a message.