[open-science] Open Science MOOC - feedback open!

Mon Mar 5 14:06:29 UTC 2018

Ni!

Cool, added to the resources in the tiny Manual for Open Science
<https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=pt&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Fpt.wikiversity.org%2Fwiki%2FManual_para_Ci%25C3%25AAncia_Aberta&edit-text=&act=url>
maintained by the Brazilian OS community.

On to some observations:

The choice of topics in OpenSciencMooc, considering both the doc and the
site, makes it clear this is about "open science for academic scientists",
which is great. However I think the communication should be more clear
about that, helping people understand there are other issues and
perspectives under the umbrella open science which escape the
institutional-corporate agenda reflected in the syllabus. I don't expect
this Mooc to deep dive into non-academic science, science hacking,
traditional knowledges, open education (not OER), hackerspaces etc, but it
would be nice to give students semantic room for those and others,
specially since the claim is to be telling them about the "open science
movement".

I see Open Hardware is present as an issue within reproducibility, yet I
wonder if one should make it more visible alongside Open Software - perahps
have the latter called Open Tools/Instruments.

Regarding Peter's observation, at least from the content in Puneet's repo,
I'm not sure what Puneet called responsible research is actually the same
thing Peter was thinking of. In any case, I would like to highlight there
is an important aspect of responsible research which is about the
responsibility of researchers towards society, to consider and be open to
the people potentially affected by innovation. In the Mooc, this is
somewhat present in "Public engagement with Science", however this is more
about "Science engagement with the public", which makes me think this
section should be expanded in this direction and the title adapted. Perhaps
it should be called "responsible open science" or "public engagement and
engaging with the public".

Finally, don't take this in a bad way, but I find the "diversity statement"
on the site kinda creepy. Not sure what was aimed for but I find it goes
into way more specifics than needed, and when entering that level it ends
up failing to properly address the issues. In example, among others, better
not refer to Africa, Latin America and Oceania as "the rest of the world".
I would advise you to keep it simple. And, by the way, the actual all-white
almost-all-european and all-euroancestry-anyway steering committee together
with that statement makes it hard to take it seriously.

Cheers and all the best,

ale
.~´

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 12:34 PM, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:

> Thanks very much Puneet,
> I think "responsible Science" is a very good central concept.
> And also great to see you have worked with Sophie Kay-Kershaw - one of our
> first OKF Panton Fellows. Sophie has done a great pioneering job in
> developing tools and methodology for responsible data-rich science.
>
> P.
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 2:49 PM, Puneet Kishor <punk.kish at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Some time back I had started work on an open science course covering
>> “things I would have liked to learn 20 yrs ago knowing what I know now.”
>> Unsurprisingly, my work on this has stalled a bit but here it is, all under
>> CC0, in case any of it is useful
>>
>> https://github.com/punkish/open-science-course
>>
>> I do intend to reboot it soon.
>>
>> --
>> Puneet Kishor
>> Just Another Creative Commoner
>> http://punkish.org/About
>>
>> On Feb 25, 2018, at 2:49 PM, Jon Tennant <jon.tennant.2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I hope this email finds you all well. I'm writing to you on behalf of the
>>  Open Science MOOC <https://opensciencemooc.eu/>, a training and
>> education platform that is being built by the global research community
>> (including many of you!).
>>
>> For the last couple of weeks, we have been hammering away at the
>> structure and outline as a foundation for future development, and including
>> learning outcomes and objectives, tasks, key resources, and topical
>> components for each of the 10 modules. I'm happy to say that the first
>> draft has just been finished, and is open for feedback and suggestions
>> from, well, anyone. The document is openly available *here
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KuTSECSYHXZmZX15GDjyD65pJ90eRMhHVEZ-1trsw30/edit?usp=sharing>*,
>> and we welcome comments from all of you, no matter what your background or
>> experiences in open science might be.
>>
>> I would be especially grateful if any of you could find the time here,
>> given your collective knowledge and enthusiasm for all things open
>> science/research/scholarship/education. If anyone would like to know
>> more, or speak about this project on a more personal basis, please feel
>> free to contact me however you prefer. Hopefully we should have some more
>> good news on this front in the coming weeks too. For updates, those of you
>> on Twitter can follow the project here
>> <https://twitter.com/OpenSci_MOOC/>.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Jon
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> open-science mailing list
>> open-science at lists.okfn.org
>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Peter Murray-Rust
> Reader Emeritus in Molecular Informatics
> Unilever Centre, Dept. Of Chemistry
> University of Cambridge
> CB2 1EW, UK
> +44-1223-763069 <+44%201223%20763069>
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-science mailing list
> open-science at lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20180305/ca35faff/attachment-0002.html>