This is a read only archive of See the shutdown announcement for details.

open_versus_traditional_science Open vs Traditional Science Session
Thursday 17 July 14:00-15:00, OKFest14, M1

Hashtag: #ovcs

## Participants - name, contact (if you want to leave it), number of attendees


Daniel Mietchen posted a great blog post about this session at which is copied below:
Researchers  spend a lot of their time thinking about how to test  assumptions or  hypotheses and how to separate different effects that  jointly influence  some observation or measurements. In their famous experiment  in the  late 1890s, for instance, Michaelson and Morley took great care  to  measure the speed of light both in the direction of the Earth’s   rotation, and perpendicular to it. Within a small observational error,   the two speeds were identical, which provided the first crucial hints   that the speed of light might actually be a constant in a given medium,   and that there may actually be no ether involved in transmitting light   through space.
Surprisingly,  similar rigor is not normally applied to the practice of research  itself: we do not know  what research funding and evaluation schemes are  best suited to make  specific kinds of research most efficient, we keep  the Journal Impact  Factor as a means of evaluating articles,  researchers, institutions and  all sorts of other non-journal things  despite knowing that it is  ill-suited for those purposes, and we do not  know whether the status quo  of keeping the research process out of  public view (and publishing some  rough summary at the end) is actually  beneficial to the research system  as a whole.
We  want to tackle the latter issue by putting research practice to a  test  in which we compare the efficiency of traditional to that of open   science. While there is some anecdotal evidence, this has never been   investigated systematically before. That’s why we are organizing a  session at OKFest (Thursday, July 17 • 14:00 – 15:00) to develop a  framework for:
We hope to see you there in person or via the session’s Etherpad.
The  idea is to turn this framework into a research proposal that  stands  realistic chances of getting funded in some way. The outcomes of  the  session will then be fed into a whole-day open grant writing session  at  Open Science, Open Issues  on August 19, at the end of which we hope to  have a draft proposal that  covers all major aspects of the topic and  can easily be adapted for  submission to suitable funding schemes around  the globe. 
Even  if these proposals are being rejected, the submissions will help  to  raise awareness of the issue amongst funders and reviewers, and if  such  a proposal actually gets funded, then we can finally put research  to a  test to find out whether openness increases research efficiency or   not.

The four main groups people could choose to join covered:

As  background, some of the discussion in the open and collaborative  science for development workshops funded by IDRC and organised by OKF  and the OpenUCT initiative in 2013 were mentioned, you can find the  working paper arising from that project which is openly licensed and  open for comment and suggestions here:


In which contexts could we study open science?

How could we fund research into open science vs traditional science?

How to study efficiency of open science?


Daniel will be taking these results to Rio in August for a whole day open grant writing session at Open Science, Open Issues
The etherpad here will remain live, we will look into setting up further methods of communication around the topic for the months (and years!) to come.

Interested in Participating?
Register you interest and contact details below and we'll make sure you're sent links to relevant documents.
Jacopo Durandi, @jdurandi