Librarian Support in Teaching Open Science Research Practices in Higher Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29173/istl2791Keywords:
Open science, Open scholarship, Reproducibility, Replicability, Librarian support, Librarian instruction, Pedagogical trends, Curriculum integrationAbstract
This exploratory study examines trends in librarian teaching support for open science (OS) practices in higher education. The study was conducted through semi-structured interviews with academic librarians and a survey that was distributed through academic librarian interest groups. The results indicate that academic librarians have varied approaches to teaching OS and different opportunities to collaborate within institutions. There were common pedagogical OS topics and perspectives on teaching OS practices in higher education. The findings also include insights regarding professional development needs and opportunities for librarians.
Downloads
References
Abele-Brehm, A. E., Gollwitzer, M., Steinberg, U., & Schönbrodt, F. D. (2019). Attitudes toward open science and public data sharing: A survey among members of the German Psychological Society. Social Psychology, 50(4), 252–260. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000384
Azevedo, F., Liu, M., Pennington, C. R., Pownall, M., Evans, T. R., Parsons, S., Elsherif, M., Micheli, L., Moreau, D., & FORRT (FORRT Community). (2021). Written evidence submitted by the FORRT (Framework for Open and Reproducible Research Training). FORRT - Framework for Open and Reproducible Research Training. https://gala.gre.ac.uk/id/eprint/34525/2/34525_EVANS_Towards_a_culture_of_open_scholarship.pdf
Azevedo, F., Liu, M., Pennington, C. R., Pownall, M., Evans, T. R., Parsons, S., Elsherif, M. M., Micheli, L., Westwood, S. J., & Framework for Open, Reproducible Research Training (FORRT). (2022). Towards a culture of open scholarship: The role of pedagogical communities. BMC Research Notes, 15(1), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-022-05944-1
Bruton, S. V., Medlin, M., Brown, M., & Sacco, D. F. (2020). Personal motivations and systemic incentives: Scientists on questionable research practices. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(3), 1531-1547. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00182-9
Chopik, W. J., Bremner, R. H., Defever, A. M., & Keller, V. N. (2018). How (and whether) to teach undergraduates about the replication crisis in psychological science. Teaching of Psychology, 45(2), 158-163. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628318762900
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39(3), 124–130. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Crüwell, S., Van Doorn, J., Etz, A., Makel, M. C., Moshontz, H., Niebaum, J. C., Orben, A., Parsons, S., & Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M. (2019). Seven easy steps to open science: An annotated reading list. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 227(4), 237–248. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000387
European Commission. (n.d.). Open science. https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/strategy/strategy-2020-2024/our-digital-future/open-science_en#documents
Frankowski, S. D. (2023). Increasing participation in psychological science by using course-based research projects: Testing theory, using open-science practices, and professionally presenting research. Teaching of Psychology, 50(3), 291-297. https://doi.org/10.1177/00986283211024200
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications.
Hanna, S., Pither, J., & Vis-Dunbar, M. (2021). Implementation of an open science instruction program for undergraduates. Data Intelligence, 3(1), 150-161. https://doi.org/10.1162/dint_a_00086
Jekel, M., Fiedler, S., Allstadt Torras, R., Mischkowski, D., Dorrough, A. R., & Glöckner, A. (2020). How to teach open science principles in the undergraduate curriculum: The Hagen cumulative science project. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 19(1), 91-106. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475725719868149
Korstjens, I., & Moser, A. (2018). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 4: Trustworthiness and publishing. European Journal of General Practice, 24(1), 120-124. https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2017.1375092
Lane, K. A., Le, B., Woodzicka, J. A., Detweiler-Bedell, J., & Detweiler-Bedell, B. (2020). Open science at liberal arts colleges. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/437c8
Lyon, L. (2016). Transparency: The emerging third dimension of open science and open data. Liber quarterly, 25(4), 153–171. https://doi.org/10.18352/lq.10113
Marshall, E. C., & Underwood, A. (2019). Writing in the discipline and reproducible methods: A process-oriented approach to teaching empirical undergraduate economics research. The Journal of Economic Education, 50(1), 17-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.2018.1551100
Medeiros, N., & Ball, R. J. (2017). Teaching integrity in empirical economics: The pedagogy of reproducible science in undergraduate education. In M. K. Hensley & S. Davis-Kahl (Eds.), Undergraduate research and the academic librarian: Case studies and best practices. Association of College & Research Libraries. https://scholarship.haverford.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1189&context=economics_facpubs
Pownall, M., Azevedo, F., Aldoh, A., Elsherif, M., Vasilev, M., Pennington, C. R., Robertson, O., Tromp, M. V., Liu, M., Makel, M. C., Tonge, N., Moreau, D., Horry, R., Shaw, J., Tzavella, L., McGarrigle, R., Talbot, C., Parsons, S., & FORRT. (2021). Embedding open and reproducible science into teaching: A bank of lesson plans and resources. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000307
Read, K. B., Lieffers, J., & Massie, M. (2022). Integrating open science education into an undergraduate health professional research program. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 110(4), 429–437. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2022.1457
Sayre, F., & Riegelman, A. (2018). The reproducibility crisis and academic libraries. College & Research Libraries, 79(1), 2-8. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.2
Sayre, F., & Riegelman, A. (2019). Replicable services for reproducible research: A model for academic libraries. College & Research Libraries, 80(2), 260-272. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.80.2.260
Sarafoglou, A., Hoogeveen, S., Matzke, D., & Wagenmakers, E. J. (2020). Teaching good research practices: Protocol of a research master course. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 19(1), 46-59. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475725719858807
Stodden, V., Bailey, D. H., Borwein, J., LeVeque, R. J., Rider, W., & Stein, W. (2013). Setting the default to reproducible: Reproducibility in computational and experimental mathematics. ICERM Workshop. https://icerm.brown.edu/topical_workshops/tw12-5-rcem/icerm_report.pdf
Strand, J. F., & Brown, V. A. (2019). Publishing open, reproducible research with undergraduates. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 564. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00564
Toelch, U., & Ostwald, D. (2018). Digital open science: Teaching digital tools for reproducible and transparent research. PLOS Biology, 16(7), e2006022. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2006022
Wagge, J. R., Brandt, M. J., Lazarevic, L. B., Legate, N., Christopherson, C., Wiggins, B., & Grahe, J. E. (2019). Publishing research with undergraduate students via replication work: The collaborative replications and education project. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 247. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00247
Watson, M. (2015). When will ‘open science’ become simply ‘science’? Genome Biology, 16(1), 101. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-015-0669-2
The White House. (2022, August 25). OSTP issues guidance to make federally funded research freely available without delay. The White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/news-updates/2022/08/25/ostp-issues-guidance-to-make-federally-funded-research-freely-available-without-delay/
Zečević K., Houghton C., Noone C., Lee H., Matvienko-Sikar K., & Toomey E. (2020). Exploring factors that influence the practice of open science by early career health researchers: A mixed methods study [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]. HRB Open Research, 3. https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13119.2
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Sanja Gidakovic
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
While ISTL has always been open access and authors have always retained the copyright of their papers without restrictions, articles in issues prior to no.75 were not licensed with Creative Commons licenses. Since issue no. 75 (Winter 2014), ISTL has licensed its work through Creative Commons licenses. Please refer to the Copyright and Licensing Information page for more information.
