Open Science Skills and Knowledge Clips
Get inspired by your colleagues or by their results.
Open Science Rankings: Yes, No, or Not This Way?
A debate on developing and implementing transparency metrics
Should we develop alternative rankings and metrics for Open Science? This was the key question of a debate organized by Journal of Trial & Error, and supported by OSCT. The debate was recorded, and you can (re)viewed here.
Should we develop Open Science metrics? What purposes do they fulfil? How should Open Science practices be encouraged? Are (transparency) rankings the best solution? These questions and more were addressed in a dynamic and interactive debate (15 June 2021) with three researchers of different backgrounds: Etienne LeBel (Independent Meta-Scientist and founder of ERC-funded project ‘Curate Science’), Sarah de Rijcke (Professor of Science and Evaluation Studies and director of the Centre for Science and Technology Studies at Leiden University), and Juliëtte Schaafsma (Professor of Cultural Psychology at Tilburg University and fierce critic of rankings and audits).
This event was organized by the Journal of Trial and Error, and supported by the Open Science Community Tilburg, the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS, Leiden University), and the Open Science Community Utrecht.
Pre-registration for qualitative research
For anyone who does not think pre-registration could be helpful for qualitative studies, for instance in the fields of Humanities and Law: maybe it is time to reconsider.