I searched “Open Scholar” in the Plaza forum and could find any direct match… might be a topic to discuss
Colleagues from ZHAW organised an OER workshop over several weeks and within this workshop, with Sandrine, we created an OER, in the form of a basic poster, on the Open Scholar.
Gaining insights from your feedback to enhance the resource would be very helpful. Also if you feel like engaging, please do not hesitate! For the time being, the current draft of the OER is attached (in pdf format only since odp does not seem to be supported).
Looking forward to your comments!
20221205-V1-PosterOpenScholar.pdf (137.3 KB)
Thank you for sharing the poster on attributes and elements of being an Open Scholar.
You are seeking feedback or are you wondering about some means to have a group of people, maybe through, OEG work through these sections and share their discoveries, experiences? I for one would be interested in a way for people to engage with this together/asynchronously.
A first thought is we might frame discussion around this through web annotation of the poster and/or the papers referenced.
Or if you are wanting direct feedback, yes this could be the place.
Thanks for your comment about file formats- I have just enabled OEG Connect to accept as uploads files with the Open Document formats (.odf, .odp, .ods, and .odg) – I have made the switch myself to not using that large Office Product in lieu of LibreOffice.
PS- not sure if it is related but I have a growing interest in the use of Scholia in our work https://scholia.toolforge.org/
Thank you for your immediate reaction. When I posted the message, I was thinking of getting feedback on the content of the poster but what you suggest is much more interesting and ambitious. Starting with collaboration annotation sounds a great idea - thanks also for changing the file types supported. From this google drive, both formats are available for annotation. Please do feel free to make changes you see fit to make annotation easier.
Looking forward to the sharing of your insights and experiences and to working closer together with some of you on this topic
This is a super helpful introductory resource.
What I like:
- I like the two column format with the first column providing an introduction and the second column suggesting ways to operationalize
- I like the links to relevant resources
- I like how short and concise it is
- I like seeing OEGlobal listed as a relevant society in the footer
What I wish:
- I wish it addressed the motivations for why a scholar should become an open scholar. What’s in it for them?
- The Food for thought at the end of column one asks some interesting questions. I wish the end of column two asked similar questions and perhaps provided a link to a longer more comprehensive set of guidance.
- The Food for thought at the end of column one introduces new concepts like open citizenship, the commons, technology i.e. AI. These all need links otherwise someone new will not understand what these are in the context of being an open scholar.
- I wondered just who the term “open scholar” applies to. Who is the target audience for this document? Is it teachers and faculty? Researchers? Citizens? Can students be open scholars?
- I wish the operational side of this document included recommendations for the potential open scholar to engage with others involved with open scholarship. Being an open scholar has a social aspect involving networking and collaborating with others.
- I think the References, Societies, Conferences, Journals list in the footer should be expanded and linked to separately along with profiles of existing open scholars who are considered inspirational.
It’s so hard to cover “open” in a one pager. I think this does an admirable job and hope it piques interest.
Barbara, thanks again for sharing this draft, it is quite a tall challenge to fit so much into a single page. And thanks @paulstacey for responding with suggestions.
I think perhaps I jumped too quickly to annotation- I think that would be a productive way for say a workshop or a group working through some activities with this document might interact with it. For feedback/comments we can ask the community to write here, maybe a future draft could be a shared version people can add comments on.
The first thing I came across was your reference to it as “the Open Scholar” which sounds like something that is easily understood as a reference. When I did web searches (as I usually do) I came across many projects, organizations, even software that use “Open Scholar” as almost a brand name.
If I understand correctly, the aim here is “Characteristics of an Open Scholar” or “What is an Open Scholar” or “On Being an Open Scholar”. This is tiny in relevance, but a name is important.
I would also want to avoid turning into a binary comparison, like Open versus closed, I like to think about openness being on a spectrum so one can always become incrementally “more open”.
As Paul mentioned the structure of pairing the informational “Focusing… on” sections to “operationalizing” is commendable. If this were all to become too complex to fit everything into a single document, I might approach it as a series of similar structured ones each focus on an element like Open Education, Open Science, etc. That might free up the constraints.
I am reading this as something of a self paced activity (?) it suggests 10 hours of work time, but the content is more weighted on the information and reading than specific activities. Or does this serve as some kind of intro that might be used to frame a series of activities participants might do to practice the operationalising?
On more details, under Introducing Openness, a lot of this is in naming the opens, it seems to be missing something about what is the value gained in all these domains by an open approach?
And more granular, for some of the references, I would want to go more upstream to the sources who created them. For example the link for Ten Facts about OERs is to a copy of the resource at another agency, I would use a link for the original publisher (Contact North)
Again, this is a tremendous task to take on to cover so much possible information, and my thoughts are really from a first read.
We hope more people here in OEG Connect can contribute suggestions for Barbara, that is how open can work!
Dear Paul and Alan,
A big thank you for taking the time to read through and comment. I agree with all that you say. In the coming weeks, we will try with Sandrine and hopefully other members from OEG to come up with a second updated and more comprehensive version taking into account these comments.
Best and looking forward to more insights and comments… and workforce joining
Thank you for your valuable feedback which helped me upgrade the resource.
Attached the new version for your new comments.
20230329-V1-2-PosterOpenScholar.odp (138.3 KB)
20230329-V1-2-PosterOpenScholar.pdf (136.6 KB)
Looking forward to reading you,
Answering myself Here is the version 1.3 of the one page OE poster. Looking forward to some insightful comments! Thanks
20231105-V3-PosterOpenScholar.pdf (250.8 KB)
Just so you know it’s been seen, thanks for sharing this latest version, Barbara and also for attaching this topic thread as the discussion space. It’s a challenge I am sure to add any more text, most of the space is used.
If anything was to come to mind it might be something about where to find communities of open scholars, e.g. like GO-GN, Humanities Commons, Center for Open Science, probably many more that will not fit.
I think it’s really up now to more people here to chime on and maybe less on what to add/modify and more how the Open Scholar one sheet document can be used.
Many thanks again!
Thanks a lot Alan:
20231107-V3-PosterOpenScholar.odp (143.9 KB)
I have added GO-GN of course!