Imagining the "open" university: Sharing scholarship to improve research and education.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: McKiernan EC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5655613 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Imagining the "open" university: Sharing scholarship to improve research and education.
PLoS biology 20171024 10
Open scholarship, such as the sharing of articles, code, data, and educational resources, has the potential to improve university research and education as well as increase the impact universities can have beyond their own walls. To support this perspective, I present evidence from case studies, published literature, and personal experiences as a practicing open scholar. I describe some of the challenges inherent to practicing open scholarship and some of the tensions created by incompatibilitie ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:As part of a recent workshop entitled "Imagining Tomorrow's University", we were asked to visualize the future of universities as research becomes increasingly data- and computation-driven, and identify a set of principles characterizing pertinent opportunities and obstacles presented by this shift. In order to establish a holistic view, we take a multilevel approach and examine the impact of open science on individual scholars and how this impacts as well as on the university as a whole. At the university level, open science presents a double-edged sword: when well executed, open science can accelerate the rate of scientific inquiry across the institution and beyond; however, haphazard or half-hearted efforts are likely to squander valuable resources, diminish university productivity and prestige, and potentially do more harm than good. We present our perspective on the role of open science at the university.
| S-EPMC5437947 | biostudies-other
Project description:IntroductionDemonstrating research productivity for faculty and trainees is challenging in primarily community-based settings, where academic, structural, and financial resources for faculty development in scholarship may be limited. More tools are needed to guide faculty leaders in community-based settings to develop opportunities locally.MethodsAt our community-based children's hospital with recent academic affiliation and a new residency program, we developed an annual research symposium targeted to faculty and trainees. We refined tools for solicitation and scoring of abstracts, speaker selection, skill-building workshops, scholarly case report presentations, and a mentored poster session. We worked with available resources, kept costs flexible and low, and secured local partnerships to defray expenses. Evaluation consisted of session evaluations and trends in abstract submissions, institutional review board (IRB) submissions, and resident scholarly productivity over 4 years.ResultsScholarship improved over the symposium's first 4 years, with increased attendance (from 80 to 150), abstract submissions (from 29 to >50), IRB-approved research projects (from 65 to 123), and positive feedback on symposium evaluations. From our first three resident classes, 61 resident-authored abstracts were presented at our symposia, with 33 presented at regional and national meetings and 15 converted to peer-reviewed manuscripts.DiscussionWe have developed a local research symposium to meet the needs of a new hospital's faculty and trainees. Evaluation data have allowed us to tailor the program to stakeholder needs. We provide a tool kit of generalizable resources for community-based programs to build on these efforts in a high-yield and cost-effective manner.
| S-EPMC7780738 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Through the Public Health Research Data Forum, global health research funders are working together to increase the availability of public health and epidemiology research data in ways that are equitable, ethical, and efficient. The Wellcome Trust funded the research reported in this special edition as a first step toward building an evidence base on the perspectives of research stakeholders in low- and middle-income countries on the benefits and challenges of sharing health research data. We hope this work will make a key contribution to discussions aimed at creating policy frameworks for data access at local, national, and regional levels that are sensitive to different contexts and ensure the benefits to research and health are realized in an equitable manner.
| S-EPMC4547198 | biostudies-other
Project description:Concerns about reproducibility and impact of research urge improvement initiatives. Current university ranking systems evaluate and compare universities on measures of academic and research performance. Although often useful for marketing purposes, the value of ranking systems when examining quality and outcomes is unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate usefulness of ranking systems and identify opportunities to support research quality and performance improvement.A systematic review of university ranking systems was conducted to investigate research performance and academic quality measures. Eligibility requirements included: inclusion of at least 100 doctoral granting institutions, be currently produced on an ongoing basis and include both global and US universities, publish rank calculation methodology in English and independently calculate ranks. Ranking systems must also include some measures of research outcomes. Indicators were abstracted and contrasted with basic quality improvement requirements. Exploration of aggregation methods, validity of research and academic quality indicators, and suitability for quality improvement within ranking systems were also conducted.A total of 24 ranking systems were identified and 13 eligible ranking systems were evaluated. Six of the 13 rankings are 100% focused on research performance. For those reporting weighting, 76% of the total ranks are attributed to research indicators, with 24% attributed to academic or teaching quality. Seven systems rely on reputation surveys and/or faculty and alumni awards. Rankings influence academic choice yet research performance measures are the most weighted indicators. There are no generally accepted academic quality indicators in ranking systems.No single ranking system provides a comprehensive evaluation of research and academic quality. Utilizing a combined approach of the Leiden, Thomson Reuters Most Innovative Universities, and the SCImago ranking systems may provide institutions with a more effective feedback for research improvement. Rankings which extensively rely on subjective reputation and "luxury" indicators, such as award winning faculty or alumni who are high ranking executives, are not well suited for academic or research performance improvement initiatives. Future efforts should better explore measurement of the university research performance through comprehensive and standardized indicators. This paper could serve as a general literature citation when one or more of university ranking systems are used in efforts to improve academic prominence and research performance.
| S-EPMC5841788 | biostudies-other
Project description:Educators and education researchers report that their scholarship is limited by lack of time, funding, mentorship, expertise, and reward. This study aims to evaluate these groups' perceptions regarding barriers to scholarship and potential strategies for success.Core emergency medicine (EM) educators and education researchers completed an online survey consisting of multiple-choice, 10-point Likert scale, and free-response items in 2015. Descriptive statistics were reported. We used qualitative analysis applying a thematic approach to free-response items.A total of 204 educators and 42 education researchers participated. Education researchers were highly productive: 19/42 reported more than 20 peer-reviewed education scholarship publications on their curricula vitae. In contrast, 68/197 educators reported no education publications within five years. Only a minority, 61/197 had formal research training compared to 25/42 education researchers. Barriers to performing research for both groups were lack of time, competing demands, lack of support, lack of funding, and challenges achieving scientifically rigorous methods and publication. The most common motivators identified were dissemination of knowledge, support of evidence-based practices, and promotion. Respondents advised those who seek greater education research involvement to pursue mentorship, formal research training, collaboration, and rigorous methodological standards.The most commonly cited barriers were lack of time and competing demands. Stakeholders were motivated by the desire to disseminate knowledge, support evidence-based practices, and achieve promotion. Suggested strategies for success included formal training, mentorship, and collaboration. This information may inform interventions to support educators in their scholarly pursuits and improve the overall quality of education research in EM.
| S-EPMC5942034 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The paradigm of research universities linked to the emergence of university rankings has unified and universalized the criteria relating to the quality of higher education. This situation has led to multiple responses across global society, which has started rating the quality of higher education systems through these rankings, supported by a series of indicators aligned to the characteristics of research universities. Given that the quality of a country's higher education is one of the fundamental pillars of its development, many countries have started to take government action in this respect. In the case of Peru this has not taken long, with the approval of Law 30220 in 2014. This aims to regulate the quality of higher education through a series of specific conditions governed by a newly created body known as SUNEDU. This article uses a Delphi panel to analyze the existing relationship between the conditions imposed by SUNEDU and the research universities' intrinsic characteristics. During the Delphi panel a consensus was reached through an acceptable and stable level of responses, resulting in confirmation that there is alignment between the conditions imposed by SUNEDU and the intrinsic characteristics of research universities.
| S-EPMC5546694 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe growth of medical schools, faculty attrition, and reports of student disinterest in academia all stress the need to cultivate the next generation of academic physicians. Because medical educators serve as the largest segment of faculty, heightening diverse students' awareness of opportunities to engage in various educational roles and scholarship may help them consider future academic positions.MethodsWe implemented a workshop utilizing didactics and a small-group case discussion to help students learn how to (1) define educational scholarship and portfolios, (2) recognize the value of educational scholarship, and (3) identify how to get started with educational scholarship.ResultsOne hundred and fifty-six learners participated in the workshop at 11 regional conferences. Of learners from conferences 1-6, 100% (69/69) responded to the statement "The workshop INCREASED my confidence in achieving the following - Performing educational scholarship." Among these learners, 39 (56.5%) strongly agreed and 20 (29.0%) agreed with this statement. Of learners from conferences 7-11, 98.9% (86/87) responded to the question "How much confidence do you have in your ability to succeed along a clinician-educator track and publish your education-related work?" Using a paired-samples t test, a statistically significant increase in learner confidence was noted (p < .01) before and after the workshop.DiscussionDiverse learners appreciated a heightened awareness of educational roles and scholarship, which may help them gain confidence, interest, and experience in becoming future medical educators.
| S-EPMC6342247 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Open Science (OS) movement is rapidly gaining traction among policy-makers, research funders, scientific journals and individual scientists. Despite these tendencies, the pace of implementing OS throughout the scientific process and across the scientific community remains slow. Thus, a better understanding of the conditions that affect OS engagement, and in particular, of how practitioners learn, use, conduct and share research openly can guide those seeking to implement OS more broadly. We surveyed participants at an OS workshop hosted by the Living Norway Ecological Data Network in 2020 to learn how they perceived OS and its importance in their research, supervision and teaching. Further, we wanted to know what OS practices they had encountered in their education and what they saw as hindering or helping their engagement with OS. The survey contained scaled-response and open-ended questions, allowing for a mixed-methods approach. We obtained survey responses from 60 out of 128 workshop participants (47%). Responses indicated that usage and sharing of open data and code, as well as open access publication, were the most frequent OS practices. Only a minority of respondents reported having encountered OS in their formal education. A majority also viewed OS as less important in their teaching than in their research and supervisory roles. The respondents' suggestions for what would facilitate greater OS engagement in the future included knowledge, guidelines, and resources, but also social and structural support. These are aspects that could be strengthened by promoting explicit implementation of OS practices in higher education and by nurturing a more inclusive and equitable OS culture. We argue that incorporating OS in teaching and learning of science can yield substantial benefits to the research community, student learning, and ultimately, to the wider societal objectives of science and higher education.
| S-EPMC9770360 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDigital knowledge sharing (DKS) communities have emerged as a promising approach to support learning and innovation in online higher education. These communities facilitate the exchange of knowledge, resources, and ideas among educators, students, and experts, creating opportunities for collaboration, innovation, and lifelong learning. However, the impact and role of DKS communities in online education are not well understood, and further research is needed to explore their potential benefits and challenges.PurposeThis multi-objective qualitative study aims to investigate the impact and role of DKS communities in online higher education, identifying the factors that promote student success and the implications for the development of online education. The study collected data from 20 informants who have experienced teaching online during and after the pandemic. Data were collected through in-depth interviews and analyzed using thematic analysis. The informants were selected through theoretical sampling.MethodologyTo explore the impact and role of DKS communities in online higher education, this study employed a multi-objective qualitative research method. Data were collected through in-depth interviews conducted with 20 informants who possessed experience in teaching online during and after the pandemic. The informants were selected through theoretical sampling to ensure diverse perspectives and insights. The collected data were subsequently analyzed using thematic analysis, allowing for the identification of key themes and patterns.FindingsThe findings of this study provide valuable insights into the impact and role of DKS communities in online higher education. These insights encompass various aspects, including the benefits and challenges of DKS in online education, the factors that contribute to student success, and the implications for the ongoing development and innovation of online education.ConclusionsIn conclusion, this multi-objective qualitative study sheds light on the significance of DKS communities in online higher education. It underscores their potential to enhance collaboration, innovation, and lifelong learning. The findings also emphasize the importance of addressing challenges and fostering an inclusive and supportive online learning environment. These insights inform best practices and contribute to the continuous development and innovation of online education, particularly in the post-pandemic educational landscape.
| S-EPMC10540416 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Education scholarship continues to grow within emergency medicine (EM) and in academic medicine in general. Despite a growing interest, would-be education scholars often struggle to find adequate mentorship, research training, funding, and protected time to produce rigorous scholarship. The ways in which individual academic EM departments can support this mission remains an area in need of description.ObjectivesWe sought to describe academic EM department chairs' perceptions of education scholarship and facilitators and barriers to producing high-quality education scholarship.MethodsWe conducted a qualitative study using a grounded theory-derived approach. Participants were solicited directly, and semistructured interviews were conducted via telephone. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and were analyzed by three study investigators using a coding matrix. Discrepancies in coding were resolved via in depth discussion.ResultsWe interviewed seven EM chairs from academic departments throughout North America (six in geographically diverse regions of the United States and one in western Canada). Chairs described education scholarship as lacking clearly defined and measurable outcomes, as well as methodologic rigor. They identified that education faculty within their departments need training and incentives to pursue scholarly work in a system that primarily expects teaching from educators. Chairs acknowledged a lack of access to education research expertise and mentorship within their own departments, but identified potential resources within their local medical schools and universities. They also voiced willingness to support career development opportunities and scholarly work among faculty seeking to perform education research.ConclusionsAcademic EM chairs endorse a need for methodologic training, mentorship, and access to expertise specific to education scholarship. While such resources are often rare within academic EM departments, they may exist within local universities and schools of medicine. Academic EM chairs described themselves as willing and able to support faculty who wish to pursue this type of work.
| S-EPMC6001505 | biostudies-literature