Wikimedia Deutschland/Open Science Fellows Program/Berlin call to action
Berlin call to action for open science - Recommendations to research institutions edit
Open science makes the scientific research process accessible, comprehensible, and usable, from data collection to the publication of results. This should not only improve the quality of scientific research and teaching, but also the transfer of knowledge in society, business, and politics.
The ten young scholars funded within the context of the Free Knowledge Fellows Program, which was founded by Wikimedia Deutschland and the Stifterverband in 2016, have developed the following five recommendations for action. Directed at scientific institutions, they aim to improve the general conditions for open science and to promote the opening up of science at the institutional level.
1. Open Research Policy edit
Scientific institutions should clearly commit themselves to open science. Even small signs of support – for example in the context of remarks in the press or social media – can have a great effect. In the medium term, each institution should formulate methodological principles regarding open science and ethical standards..[1]
2. Promotion among staff edit
Scientific institutions should appoint staff members who are responsible for open science. They should primarily work internally by advising and supporting scientists in their open research activities. If a full-time position cannot be assigned, a part-time position should be appropriately recognized and, if necessary, made available.
3. Promotion through hiring edit
Appointment committees should already make open science a prerequisite in job postings. Contributions to open science belong to the list of criteria for appointments and should receive special recognition in applicants’ publication lists. The commitment to open science should be integrated into the stated goals of the professorships.[[2]
4. Recognition in teaching edit
Scientific institutions with teaching activities should reward the additional effort for open science and the production of open educational resources, for example, by means of reducing the teaching load.
5. Recognition in research edit
Open science makes research more transparent and thus more credible, reliable, and collaborative. Results can be freely examined and re-used. This is good scientific practice, which should be recognized through awards at the faculty or institutional level (with or without remuneration).[3]
Signed edit
| Name | Institution |
|---|---|
| Ruben C. Arslan | Georg-August-Universität Göttingen |
| Mirjam Braßler | Universität Hamburg |
| Marion Goller | Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität in Münster |
| Dr. Dr. Hanjo Hamann | Max-Planck-Institute for Research on Collective Goods |
| Dr. Adelheid Heftberger | Brandenburgisches Zentrum für Medien-wissenschaften |
| Benjamin Paffhausen | Freie Universität Berlin |
| Lena Reibelt | Universität Hildesheim |
| Nicolas Schmelling | Heinrich Heine Universität in Düsseldorf |
| Melanie Tietje | Museum für Naturkunde Berlin |
| Klara-Aylin Wenten | Munich Center for Technology in Society (TU München) |
| Dr. Daniel Mietchen | Data Science Institute, University of Virginia |
| Dr. Peter Kraker | Know-Center/Open Knowledge Maps |
| Prof. Dr. Claudia Müller-Birn | Freie Universität Berlin |
References edit
- ↑ Examples: Vienna Principles http://viennaprinciples.org; niederländischer National Open Science Plan http://www.nwo.nl/en/policies/open+science; Bouchout Declaration for Open Biodiversity Knowledge Management http://bouchoutdeclaration.org; Montreal Neurological Institute https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-017-1152-z.
- ↑ Examples: LMU München http://www.nicebread.de/open-science-hiring-practices; Washington University in St. Louis http://dbbs.wustl.edu/Resources/Pages/job_details.aspx?JID=2567
- ↑ examples: http://www.bitss.org/lr-prizes und http://openscienceprize.org; alternatives Modell bspw. https://www.internetbugbounty.org.