Programme (preliminary)

Expand All +
  • Day 1

    March 11, 2020

  • Open science is everyone’s business, no one can create the change, facilities or opportunities for open science alone. But who should steer the direction of open science? How should the different layers of activity and actors collaborate to enhance open science? What is the need for a political agenda in research? Especially what is the role of national policy and agenda for open science and the case for coordinating national open science movements through the Council for National Open Science Coordination CoNOSC.

  • Despite supporting the idea of open science, researchers may not participate because it is unclear how to implement it in their own work. At the same time, they are struggling with data analysis, which without formal training becomes an individual, slow, and lonely burden. There is great opportunity to welcome scientists to existing open data science tools and communities that can meet their immediate needs and also catalyze a more open culture in science. Openscapes does this by engaging, empowering, and amplifying scientists with open data science, focused on establishing open mindsets and resilient, collaborative data practices within research teams (Lowndes et al. 2019, Nature; openscapes.org). Building on experiences from the Ocean Health Index and the Openscapes Champions program, I will discuss how open science is at the core of working towards better and kinder science in less time, together.

  • Presentation of most outstanding submissions for the 'Call for Project Presentations'.

    1. Driving institutional change for open, responsible research and innovation
    Helene Brinken

    2. The INOS Project: Integrating Open and Citizen Science Into Active Learning Approaches in Higher Education
    Vasso Kalaitzi

    3. Scientific Culture Change from Above and Below at UBCO: Implementation of a Comprehensive Open Science Library Information Literacy Program for Undergraduates
    Sharon Hanna

    4. Perspectives on the Nature of Open Data in Business Cooperation:
    Seliina Päällysaho

  • Presentation of most outstanding submissions for the 'Call for Project Presentations'.

    5. Empowering next generation open scholarship with an open science fellows program
    Moritz Schubotz

    6. A platform for mainstreaming citizen science and open science in Europe
    N.N.

    7. TRIPLE: A European discovery platform for the SSH
    Peter Kraker

    8. A decentralized high-intensity approach to foster data management best-practices and publication of open research data
    Harald von Waldow

  • Poster presentation of all 20 accepted submissions for the 'Call for Project Presentations'
    Coffee will be served from 16:30 – 17:00

    1. Driving institutional change for open, responsible research and innovation
    Helene Brinken
    2. The INOS Project: Integrating Open and Citizen Science Into Active Learning Approaches in Higher Education
    Vasso Kalaitzi
    3. Scientific Culture Change from Above and Below: Implementation of a Comprehensive Open Science Library Information Literacy Program for Undergraduates
    Sharon Hanna
    4. Perspectives on the Nature of Open Data in Business Cooperation
    Seliina Päällysaho, Anne Kärki, Anttoni Lehto, Pekka Lahti, Hanna Lahtinen and Eija Suikkanen
    5. Empowering next generation open scholarship with an open science fellows program
    Moritz Schubotz
    6. A platform for mainstreaming citizen science and open science in Europe
    N.N.
    7. TRIPLE: A European discovery platform for the SSH
    Peter Kraker
    8. A decentralized high-intensity approach to foster data management best-practices and publication of open research data
    Harald von Waldow
    9. Digital economy for Open Science
    Ann Shkor, Alex Shkor and Artyom Ruseckiy
    10. Realizing the Potential of Research Data: Subjectification as a Precondition for Reuse
    Daniel Spichtinger
    11. Supporting Researchers in Creating Data Management Plans
    N.N.
    12. Open Science (up)skilling and training programmes in Europe for researchers and academic libraries staff: from sketching the landscape with selective case-studies to sharing best practices
    Cecile Swiatek
    13. Catalyzing the Open Science Transformation by an Institutional Strategy
    Jochen Schirrwagen
    14. Leveraging Open Access publishing to fight fake news
    Charles Letaillieur
    15. (Re)Building Trust? Investigating the effects of badges on perceived trustworthiness in journal articles
    Jürgen Schneider
    16. Sunlight is the best disinfectant: retractions and the role of open access
    Jasmin Schmitz
    17. Between utopia and dystopia lays the land of knowledge or how to stimulate societal discourse based on fact, not fear
    Luiza Dr. Bengtsson
    18. A FAIR and User-centred Infrastructure for Learning Resources
    Tamara Heck and Sylvia Kullmann
    19. Developing Open RDI and Education
    Anne Kärki, Anttoni Lehto and Seliina Päällysaho
    20. A Sustainable Scholar-led Model Without Publication Fees
    Paula Clemente Vega

  • Day 2

    March 12, 2020

  • In 2017, a European dialogue process led to the development of the so-called “Open Science Career Assessment Matrix” (OS-CAM). Taking the OS-CAM as a reference point, the working group “Scientific Practice” within the Alliance Initiative “Digital Information” wanted to know which open science practices are actually considered for the purpose of research assessment, which practices should eventually be considered as beneficial for advancing one’s career, and what kind of barriers one encounters when evaluating with regard to open science. Drawing on quantitative as well as qualitative information received by an online survey that led to nearly 400 responses, the presentation will highlight some interesting variations in the research community’s perception of these issues.

  • Open science practices aim to improve the public value of science by opening up scientific processes and outcomes to broader audiences, inside and outside of academia. Despite this ambition, the question remains how public engagement is practiced in different fields of science.

    What actors are involved? What forms of engagement are used? How can they benefit science and society? What barriers have yet to be overcome? We address these questions in multiple case studies: in psychiatric research, in educational research, and in research into water quality. From each case lessons can be drawn for researchers and policy makers involved in open science. This presentation will focus on public engagement in psychiatric research, and relate the findings to the other case studies.

  • The global energy system is undergoing massive transformations that originate from far-reaching changes in societal, business, and technical paradigms. Data-driven energy system analysis embracing the open science paradigm is a prime tool to monitor, assess, and support necessary transformative changes. While the availability of new data collection and analysis techniques is boosting energy science, the growing degree of complexity and uncertainty through the integration of different types of data streams and numerous interlinkages within the socio-technical systems require new concepts to enable the documentation and eproducibility of scientific results. Open science research has a pivotal role to play in this respect because it enables the detection of conflicts across findings in different disciplines as well as harvests synergies between he disciplines involved. The presentationbwill discuss current practices and future directions of open, data-driven energy system research, drawing from a review of on-going practices and discussions in the European energy research community. It will also give a short introduction into the up-coming Horizon 2020 project EERAdata.

  • Open Science holds the promise to enhance science and society relationships by making scientific endeavours more inclusive, participatory, understandable, accessible and re-usable for audiences beyond the ivory towers of universities and research institutions. Equity is a key aim of Open Science, but could Open Science policies actually worsen existing inequalities? Open Science needs resources (funding, time, knowledge, skills), and the traditionally advantaged groups usually have more of them. Will their privilege mean that they are the ones to benefit most?

    The panel will focus on the impact of open science practices in academia, industry, and policy-making. It aims to engage researchers and Open Science practitioners who are often important gatekeepers as well as enablers for engagement in participatory research. Panellists will be asked to share their experiences with participatory processes and to reflect on possible barriers to and incentives for participation. Panellists will share their own experiences in facilitating research uptake (e.g. through participatory policy-making) and discuss the ways in which the voices of various stakeholders become effective.

    Questions to be addressed: How can Open Science help to foster the uptake of scientific expertise in academia, industry, and deliberative processes (policy-making)? What other factors might affect the uptake of research in and beyond academia? Will Open Science introduce new, unintended barriers and inequalities?

    Session Convenors: ON-MERRIT consortium
    The project ON-MERRIT (Observing and Negating Matthew Effects in Responsible Research & Innovation Transition) aims at contributing to an equitable scientific system that rewards researchers based on merit.

  • The ORION Open Science project has delivered nearly 40 different training workshops and events on Open Science for researchers and funders across Europe for over two years, and has recently created an online training course on Open Science in the Life Sciences. From the experience of doing this work the training team, based in Berlin at the Max-Delbrück-Center for Molecular Medicine, have gained several key insights into what works well for delivering effective Open Science training and revealing important lessons about what training methods are effective, and what areas researchers and research managers find challenging and engaging, and what workshop participants identify as next steps. In this talk these lessons would be presented and some of the key training methods shared. These include focusing on professional benefits, emphasising concrete but achievable next steps, and encouraging peer-to-peer learning.