Open science at KI, where are we now? – Annual update from the Open Science Working Group
This is the third year KIB meet with Patrik Magnusson, chair of the Open Science Working Group (OSWG) at KI, for an annual update.
What issues have you, OSWG, pursued in the past year?
Our main task this year has been to advance the KI action plan for open science (Handlingsplanen), which is a key mission of our working group and has required continuous effort throughout the year. We have also finalized a policy on open data at KI and presented and discussed CoARA in all major committees and boards before our President signed the agreement. Additionally, we have evaluated open science practices in applications for Assistant Professorships. Furthermore, we have prepared KI's response on the proposal for National guidelines for open science by the National Library of Sweden (KB).
We hosted open science seminars with speakers such as John Ioannidis, who spoke on Research Assessment for Transparency and Reproducibility, and Robert Thibault, who spoke on From Policy to Practice: Lessons from an Open Science Initiative in Research Funding. Our participation extended to SULF and VR reference group meetings on open science topics, meetings of the CoARA National Chapter, and engaging in EOSC-A meetings and activities.
As you mentioned before, the President of KI has signed the CoARA agreement (Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment). And also this year, The National Library of Sweden (KB) has published national guidelines on open science. How do you think these two documents will impact KI:s work with open science?
The CoARA signature should influence the mindset and practices when it comes to evaluations and judgements of quality of research when it comes to individuals, projects and research environments. Science is a diverse activity that demands skilled contributions in a variety of ways. This needs to be appreciated.
Where a person has been working or where an article has been published should not top what has been done and achieved when judging people or scientific contributions. We should try to move away from letting external ranking systems be prime rulers. The guidelines from KB I think to large extent echoes what has already been put forward by SUHF roadmap [only in Swedish].
What would you like to see happening at KI during the coming year?
That we move towards more flexible and modern approaches to research assessment, such as updating the KI Qualifications Portfolio (Meritportföljen) to allow open science practices to be listed and positive valued along with traditional publications.
That the action plan for open science can be finalized and becomes used in the movement forward toward open science across all of KI.
Anything else you would like to add?
Legal hindrances for open science practices such as collecting, holding and sharing data for future research needs to be improved. One step in the right way is the new law proposition “Long term regulation of certain research databases” [only in Swedish].
OSWG (Open Science Working Group)
Patrik Magnusson chair (MEB), Per Svenningsson (CNS), Gustav Nilsonne (UF, SND), Kristiina Tammimies (KBH) and Sverker Holmgren (MEB)
Adjunct seats: Fredrik Persson (KIB) and Janina Neufeld (Junior Faculty, KBH)
Management support Adina Feldman (UF, NVS) and Carl Sundström (UF)
Previous interviews with Patrik Magnusson regarding OSWG
If you would like us to get back to you, please submit your contact information in the form below along with your feeback.