Open Science Movement

This article delves into the theoretical underpinnings and policy imperatives crucial for understanding and reforming Elementary Teacher Education Institutions (ETEIs) in Bihar. It argues that the challenges confronting teacher education in the state, exemplified by its low educational quality indices, necessitate a profound examination beyond mere empirical evaluation. By synthesizing the historical evolution of teacher education in India and Bihar, analyzing key national policy frameworks such as the National Curriculum Framework (NCF) 2005 and the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, and critically reviewing existing literature, this paper identifies significant conceptual and systemic issues. The discussion highlights the complex mandate of ETEIs, the persistent gap between policy ideals and ground realities, and the theoretical implications of structural and pedagogical deficiencies. It posits that a robust theoretical grounding, which acknowledges historical legacies, socio-political influences, and the multifaceted nature of teacher development, is essential for formulating effective strategies to improve the quality and relevance of elementary teacher education in Bihar, ultimately contributing to the enhancement of the broader educational ecosystem.

This article delves into the theoretical underpinnings and policy imperatives crucial for understanding and reforming Elementary Teacher Education Institutions (ETEIs) in Bihar. It argues that the challenges confronting teacher education in the state, exemplified by its low educational quality indices, necessitate a profound examination beyond mere empirical evaluation. By synthesizing the historical evolution of teacher education in India and Bihar, analyzing key national policy frameworks such as the National Curriculum Framework (NCF) 2005 and the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, and critically reviewing existing literature, this paper identifies significant conceptual and systemic issues. The discussion highlights the complex mandate of ETEIs, the persistent gap between policy ideals and ground realities, and the theoretical implications of structural and pedagogical deficiencies. It posits that a robust theoretical grounding, which acknowledges historical legacies, socio-political influences, and the multifaceted nature of teacher development, is essential for formulating effective strategies to improve the quality and relevance of elementary teacher education in Bihar, ultimately contributing to the enhancement of the broader educational ecosystem.

This paper examines the organisational setup of ETEIs in Bihar, that is, the role of the state education department and other stakeholders-including institutions for teacher education, governing boards and instructors. The quality of elementary education in India is innately linked with the groundwork and training of teachers. It identifies the present mechanisms of governance at both state and local levels with an analysis of strengths and weaknesses of the administrative and operational models adopted by the institutions. The findings of the study are used to provide policy recommendations aimed at strengthening governance structures, improving quality assurance processes, and enhancing the professional development of teacher educators. Hence, this paper explores the structures of governance, quality assurance measures, and what impact they hold on teacher preparation, professional development, and eventually educational outcomes in these institutions.

This paper examines the organisational setup of ETEIs in Bihar, that is, the role of the state education department and other stakeholders-including institutions for teacher education, governing boards and instructors. The quality of elementary education in India is innately linked with the groundwork and training of teachers. It identifies the present mechanisms of governance at both state and local levels with an analysis of strengths and weaknesses of the administrative and operational models adopted by the institutions. The findings of the study are used to provide policy recommendations aimed at strengthening governance structures, improving quality assurance processes, and enhancing the professional development of teacher educators. Hence, this paper explores the structures of governance, quality assurance measures, and what impact they hold on teacher preparation, professional development, and eventually educational outcomes in these institutions.

Rapid technological changes are reshaping the way we discover, access, and manipulate data and are spawning new and innovative processes that facilitate the effective management and exchange of information between agencies, independent of their geographic location or proprietary infrastructure (Heus and Gregory 2010). Increasingly, however, these changes call into question traditional statistical data management approaches and systems. As government and private-sector data producers move away from traditional survey approaches (for example, 'design-collect-analyze-publish') toward more integrated structures, the challenge for producers of statistics is to exploit recent technological advances to develop new and innovative ways to manage, access, process, discover, and visualize data . Old paradigms need to be revisited, prior assumptions reviewed, and traditional research methods re-evaluated and updated as appropriate. Corti el al.'s (2014) book, Managing and Sharing Research Data: A Guide to Good Practice, addresses these daunting challenges. This clearly written, easy-to-follow handbook highlights best practices in research data management and sharing. However, it is not simply an anthology of data management and data sharing best practices, it is a comprehensive and contemporary primer on nearly every aspect of the research process firmly rooted in the research data lifecycle (Humphrey 2006). The book is organized into eleven related chapters and applies to a wide range of audiences, covering topics such as management and sharing of data, the research data lifecycle, data management planning, documenting and providing context for data, formatting and organizing data, storing and transferring data, legal and ethical issues, rights relating to research data, strategies for collaborative research, secondary research, publishing, and citing research data. The book is particularly timely in that funding agencies around the globe are formulating new laws, policies, and procedures that strongly encourage, if not require, researchers and grantees to provide data management plans or strategies as an integrated component of their research proposals. While these efforts are sound and aim to encourage knowledge sharing, collaboration, and open access to publicly-funded research data, they also raise new questions and challenges for data producers and end users that are adeptly addressed in this practical handbook.

Diferentes dispositivos neoliberales tanto al nivel discursivo como práctico e ideológico parecen agotar alrededor de la “gobernanza” o la “(nueva) gestión” del conocimiento los marcos mercantiles en los cuales la Universidad no está exenta de ser valorada desde (i)lógicas de mercado. Se clausuran así las posibilidades para que los usos de la generación del conocimiento científico estimen la afirmación de la vida humana, individual y colectivamente consideradas y en todas sus posibles dimensiones como su razón de existencia alrededor de una Universidad en Común y desde la Unidad-en-la-Diversidad: COMÚNiversidad.

Nas últimas décadas, o sistema de comunicação científica tem experimentado formas inovadoras de fazer ciência, já que os avanços tecnológicos se inserem nos processos e modificam a cultura do pesquisador no ciclo de investigação e publicação da pesquisa, introduzindo novos recursos que visam dar mais transparência, credibilidade, possibilidade de replicação, reutilização e reprodução da pesquisa. Esse fenômeno de transição recebeu o nome, pela comunidade científica, de Ciência Aberta. Ciência Aberta é um termo guarda-chuva, que envolve múltiplos níveis e escopos de abertura,  remetendo  tanto  ao sistema pragmático, no  sentido  de  permitir maior dinamismo  às  atividades  de Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação (CT&I),  quanto ao democrático,  no  sentido  de permitir maior abertura e participação da sociedade (ALBAGLI;  APPEL; MACIEl, 2014). A Ciência Aberta se apresenta em desenvolvimento contínuo, como um ecossistema que vai englobando distintas e independentes perspectivas com suas ...

Resumo: O objetivo central do estudo é investigar a construção epistêmica de autoria coletiva e autoridade científica nas produções científicas de pesquisas colaborativas sobre cannabis medicinal. Aplicou-se a metodologia de pesquisa bibliográfica e documental para apresentar, sob a lente da ciência aberta, os impactos ao compartilhamento de dados científicos oriundos de redes colaborativas. Debate as mudanças ocorridas nos direitos autorais com a introdução das tecnologias de comunicação. Analisa as diretrizes jurídicas acerca dos dados científicos e propõe o conceito de autoria coletiva. Utilizou-se o estudo de casos múltiplos aliado a aplicação de entrevistas a pesquisadores que estudam os efeitos medicinais da planta cannabis, para examinar as principais discussões e transformações sobre a concessão de autoridade na produção científica e os caminhos que as legislações de direitos autorais vêm traçando. Conclui-se que há uma possibilidade no campo científico para as propostas do movimento de ciência aberta, principalmente pelas vantagens da colaboração em diversas instâncias, mas os direitos autorais necessitam de avanços para amparar as disputas por capital simbólico.

In this article two scholars engage in a conversation about open access and open science in research communication with a specific focus on the Humanities. The two scholars have very different points of departure. Whereas Jean-Claude Guedón has been a professor of Literature in North-America for many years and part of the open access movements since its beginning, Thomas Wiben Jensen is in the early part of his carreer and fairly new to the concept of open access. The conversation begins with a focus on the Danish national strategy for open access and this strategy's consquenses for the journal NyS where Thomas Wiben is part of the editorial board. However, the conversation brings the reader on an unexpected journey through the history of science communication and through alternative ways of understanding knowledge production as frozen moments or crystals in the Great Conversation of science. It is the hope of the article editor and the contributors that the conversation can lead to a debate about innovative ways of communicating and distributing scientific results

Abstract
OBIETTIVO: Esame di documenti Monsanto de-classificati da contenziosi al fine di esporre l'impatto degli sforzi dell'azienda per influenzare la segnalazione di studi scientifici relativi alla sicurezza dell'erbicida glifosato.

METODI: È stato esaminato un insieme di 141 documenti recentemente de-classificati, resi pubblici nel corso di una controversia pendente sugli illeciti tossici, In Re Roundup Products Liability Litigation.

RISULTATI: I documenti rivelano il ghostwriting sponsorizzato da Monsanto degli articoli pubblicati nelle riviste di tossicologia e nei media laici, l'interferenza nel processo di peer review, l'influenza dietro le quinte sulla ritrattazione e la creazione di un cosiddetto sito web accademico come facciata per la difesa dei prodotti Monsanto.

CONCLUSIONE: L'uso di accademici terzi nella difesa aziendale del glifosato rivela che questa pratica si estende oltre la corruzione della medicina e persiste nonostante gli sforzi per imporre la trasparenza nella manipolazione dell'industria. 

Parole chiave: carcinogenicità, conflitti di interesse, ghostwriting, genotossicità, glifosato, erbicidi, Intertek, key opinion leader, Monsanto, linfoma non-Hodgkins, terzi, Roundup.

Resumo O artigo tem o objetivo de apresentar resultados de uma pesquisa concebida para responder à pergunta “Como atores-chave do ecossistema da comunicação científica estão lidando com a questão da abertura de dados de pesquisa subjacentes a artigos científicos em face do direito autoral?”. O trabalho envolveu busca e análise bibliográfica junto a: PubMed Central da Biblioteca Nacional de Medicina do National Institutes of Health, Web of Science, Scopus, Springer link; consulta à legislação pertinente; coleta e análise de dados em sites de periódicos, repositórios de dados e agências de financiamento à pesquisa nacionais e de países do norte global; análise de percepção de editores científicos do campo da saúde e de gestores de repositórios institucionais e de dados de pesquisa do país e do exterior, por meio de questionário eletrônico e entrevistas. Concluiu-se que há ainda desconhecimento e baixa prioridade, por parte de editores científicos e gestores de repositórios de dados, s...

In this article two scholars engage in a conversation about open access and open science in research communication with a specific focus on the Humanities. The two scholars have very different points of departure. Whereas Jean-Claude Guedón has been a professor of Literature in North-America for many years and part of the open access movements since its beginning, Thomas Wiben Jensen is in the early part of his carreer and fairly new to the concept of open access. The conversation begins with a focus on the Danish national strategy for open access and this strategy's consquenses for the journal NyS where Thomas Wiben is part of the editorial board. However, the conversation brings the reader on an unexpected journey through the history of science communication and through alternative ways of understanding knowledge production as frozen moments or crystals in the Great Conversation of science. It is the hope of the article editor and the contributors that the conversation can lead to a debate about innovative ways of communicating and distributing scientific results

Das strategische Ziel des Projektes „Nationaler Open-Access-Kontaktpunkt OA2020-DE“ ist es, Voraussetzungen fur eine grosflachige Open-Access-Transformation zu schaffen. In enger Zusammenarbeit mit dem transcript Verlag wurde durch den Kontaktpunkt daher ein Geschaftsmodell entwickelt, das den Transformationsprozess von eBooks in den Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaften unterstutzt und sowohl fur Verlage als auch fur Bibliotheken gleichermasen tragbar, transparent und okonomisch nachhaltig sein soll. Das Modell ist in erster Linie fur landessprachliche Forschungsmonographien und Sammelwerke konzipiert. Der Beitrag beschreibt die Entwicklung und die Anwendung des Modells auf die Frontlist der Fachdisziplin Politikwissenschaft des transcript Verlages im Jahr 2019 und die Reaktion der Open-Access-Community darauf und nimmt kurzen Bezug auf die erfolgreiche Wiederholung des Modells fur die Frontlist des Verlages im Jahr 2020.

Um die Umsetzung der zentralen Open-Access-Policy der Leibniz-Gemeinschaft datengestützt zu begleiten, wurde im Rahmen der Tätigkeit des "Arbeitskreises Open Access" der Leibniz-Gemeinschaft eine "AG Open-Access-Policy-Monitoring" damit beauftragt, die Einrichtungen im Rahmen von regelmäßigen Umfragen zu unterstützen, das bisher Erreichte zu dokumentieren und für zukünftige Entscheidungen nutzbar zu machen. Der AG gehörten folgende Personen an: Christina Schrader (ZMT), Thomas Jung (DIE), Uwe Geith (INM), Stephanie Paß (MfN), Jana Rumler (MfN) und Olaf Siegert (ZBW). Der vorliegende Bericht führt die Ergebnisse zweier Umfragen, die im Jahr 2018 und 2020 durchgeführt wurden, zusammen. Die Umfragen, die die Umsetzung der zentralen Open-Access-Policy der Leibniz-Gemeinschaft begleiten sollten, wurden im Frühsommer 2018 sowie im Frühsommer 2020 durchgeführt. Die zweite Umfrage war als Anschlussabfrage konzipiert und sollte erkunden, welche Entwicklungen in den dazwis...

In this article two scholars engage in a conversation about open access and open science in research communication with a specific focus on the Humanities. The two scholars have very different points of departure. Whereas Jean-Claude Guedón has been a professor of Literature in North-America for many years and part of the open access movements since its beginning, Thomas Wiben Jensen is in the early part of his carreer and fairly new to the concept of open access. The conversation begins with a focus on the Danish national strategy for open access and this strategy's consquenses for the journal NyS where Thomas Wiben is part of the editorial board. However, the conversation brings the reader on an unexpected journey through the history of science communication and through alternative ways of understanding knowledge production as frozen moments or crystals in the Great Conversation of science. It is the hope of the article editor and the contributors that the conversation can lead to a debate about innovative ways of communicating and distributing scientific results

Nel mese di febbraio del 2018, un gruppo di 14 esperti internazionali in Scienza Aperta e autori del manuale, si è riunito ad Hannover presso la "Biblioteca Nazionale Tedesca per le Scienze e le Tecnologie" per prendere parte alla co-creazione di questo manuale, aperto e in continua evoluzione, su come tenere un corso di formazione sulla Scienza Aperta nel migliore dei modi. Una formazione di alto livello può fare la differenza quando si tratta di cambiare un contesto culturale che si dichiari pronto ad accettare di mettere in pratica i principi della Scienza Aperta. Testi come questo possono essere di grande aiuto ai formatori e facilitatori della Scienza Aperta. Il manuale costituisce inoltre una risorsa fondamentale e un primo passo verso il futuro sviluppo dell´Accesso Aperto, dei corsi curriculari e della formazione in età avanzata in materia di Scienza Aperta. Il manuale, in quanto strumento mirato a rendere le attività formative più performanti, contribuirà a far raggiungere alla Comunità il suo pieno potenziale supportando e mettendo in rete tra loro tutti gli scienziati della Scienza Aperta che desiderano condividere e accrescere il bagaglio delle loro conoscenze. Dopo essersi reciprocamente scambiati esperienze e competenze acquisite durante la loro attività di training sui principi della Scienza Aperta, gli autori hanno realizzato uno strumento di conoscenza aperta e una risorsa didattica aperta utile per l´insegnamento sul campo. L´enfasi posta a questo nuovo strumento non è di divulgazione delle idee sulla Scienza Aperta ma di dare dimostrazione su come trasmetterle nella maniera più efficace possibile. Conferire a questo nuovo strumento la forma di un libro, nato da un processo di scrittura collettivo ha portato a massimizzare creatività e innovazione, e ha permesso di produrre un risultato encomiabile nel giro di solo pochi giorni. Il manuale raccoglie metodi, tecniche e pratiche e vuole supportare i formatori della Scienza Aperta. Il prodotto finale è un´utile guida su come meglio fare conoscere i principi della Scienza Aperta a tutta la nostra rete di contatti, istituzioni, colleghi e studenti. I formatori troveranno ispirazione e informazioni su come conseguire il massimo della qualità e dell´impegno. Mettendo in evidenza le sfide ma anche fornendo le soluzioni, il manuale vuole rafforzare la comunità dei formatori della Scienza Aperta impegnata a formarsi, informarsi e a trovare la giusta ispirazione. Commenti e critiche, da parte di tutti i lettori, sono sempre ben accetti, indipendentemente da quali siano le specifiche competenze e background. Per lasciare un vostro commento la procedura più semplice è ricorrere a hypothes.is. È altresì possibile creare una richiesta da Gitbook (website o app) o attraverso un qualsiasi altro strumento. Il contenuto del manuale è manutentato nell'archivio GitHub Ti interessa tenere un seminario insieme a noi? Sei interessato a partecipare o a tenere dei corsi o webinar basati sul manuale? Contattaci a questo

The open science (OS) movement has advocated for increased transparency in certain aspects of research. Communication is taking its first steps toward OS as some journals have adopted OS guidelines codified by another discipline. We find this pursuit troubling as OS prioritizes openness while insufficiently addressing essential ethical principles: respect for persons, beneficence, and justice. Some recommended open science practices increase the potential for harm for marginalized participants, communities, and researchers. We elaborate how OS can serve a marginalizing force within academia and the research community, as it overlooks the needs of marginalized scholars and excludes some forms of scholarship. We challenge the current instantiation of OS and propose a divergent agenda for the future of Communication research centered on ethical, inclusive research practices.

Zgodnie z dyrektywami UE, a w konsekwencji z zasadami najważniejszych grantodawców (jak choćby polski NCN), zebrane w ramach projektów finansowanych ze środków publicznych dane należy upubliczniać, a zatem umieszczać w otwartych repozytoriach. Co więcej, najlepsze czasopisma zaczęły wymagać od autorów udostępniania danych, na podstawie których powstał artykuł. Słynne oświadczenie: „Surowe dane zostaną przesłane na żądanie”, nie jest już akceptowane u większości wydawców. Jeśli ktoś planuje opublikować raport ze swoich ostatnich eksploracji w grupie takiej jak Springer Nature czy Elsevier, już teraz powinien rozejrzeć się za odpowiednim repozytorium i stosownie przygotować swoje dane. Nie jest to łatwym zadaniem i jego realizacja wymaga pewnej wiedzy. Czy pracownicy UAM otwierają swoje dane badawcze i posiadają taką wiedzę?

There are two spaces out there: Open Science which is about writing academic papers, and Wikipedia which is about creating an encyclopedia. The major contrast is, that at Wikipedia there is no Article processing charge, which means, that the editors doesn't have to pay if they like to press the edit button. The difference between the projects is, that Wikipedia has only 20k editors, while the Open Science movement which includes academic publishing companies consists of 10 million contributors. The interconnection between both domains are discussed in the following PDF paper.

Reproducibility is essential to science, yet a distressingly large number of research findings do not seem to replicate. Here I discuss one underappreciated reason for this state of affairs. I make my case by noting that, due to artifacts, several of the replication failures of the vastly advertised Open Science Collaboration's Reproducibility Project: Psychology turned out to be invalid. Although these artifacts would have been obvious on perusal of the data, such perusal was deemed undesirable because of its post hoc nature and was left out. However, while data do not lie, unforeseen confounds can render them unable to speak to the question of interest. I look further into one unusual case in which a major artifact could be removed statistically-the nonreplication of the effect of fertility on partnered women's preference for single over attached men. I show that the "failed replication" datasets contain a gross bias in stimulus allocation which is absent in the original dataset; controlling for it replicates the original study's main finding. I conclude that, before being used to make a scientific point, all data should undergo a minimal quality control-a provision, it appears, not always required of those collected for purpose of replication. Because unexpected confounds and biases can be laid bare only after the fact, we must get over our understandable reluctance to engage in anything post hoc. The reproach attached to p-hacking cannot exempt us from the obligation to (openly) take a good look at our data.

Inclusive Science is a vision which sparkles hope and shows the enormous potential of Open Science. Regardless of current legal and economic obstacles there is a broad alliance of stakeholders promoting the idea of reshaping our research landscape towards an inclusive and
accessible knowledge society. Citizen Science Projects like Wikipedia or the Copenhagen Wheel Project are showing the potential of generating knowledge through networking and crowd intelligence. Inclusive Science could also tackle structural problems and promote the best practises
and transparency. Last but not least it will accelerate scientific progress significantly. We are facing profound challenges in our current workflow.

Inclusive Science is embracing Open Access, Open Data, Open Methodology, Open Source, Open Review, Open Education, and Citizen Science. Not only scholars and scientific practises are subject to change, the communication of findings and new possibilities of their verification will give rise to a new form of scientific data journalism. Furthermore, enlightened citizens of the world are invited to contribute to the body of knowledge for the public. This requires not only an appropriate infrastructure but also a corresponding research methodology. This proposal will address both challenges.

Inclusive Science, like all Open Science movements, could also provoke a backlash. Therefore, tocrealise its full visionary potential, we will argue for a set of carefully designed small steps towards our vision of Inclusive Science.

In this article two scholars engage in a conversation about open access and open science in research communication with a specific focus on the Humanities.

The two scholars have very different points of departure. Whereas Jean- Claude Guedón has been a professor of Literature in North-America for many years and part of the open access movements since its beginning, Thomas Wiben Jensen is in the early part of his carreer and fairly new to the concept of open access.

The conversation begins with a focus on the Danish national strategy for open access and this strategy's consquenses for the journal NyS where Thomas Wiben is part of the editorial board. However, the conversation brings the reader on an unexpected journey through the history of science communication and through alternative ways of understanding knowledge production as frozen moments or crystals in the Great Conversation of science.

It is the hope of the article editor and the contributors that the conversation can lead to a debate about innovative ways of communicating and distributing scientific results.