Critical literacies for a datafied society: academic development and curriculum design in higher education

Atenas, Javiera; Havemann, Leo; Timmermann, Cristian

doi:10.25304/rlt.v28.2468

Cited by 23 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 84 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Those working in environments where these are in short supply might be put at a disadvantage [136,142,151]. Additionally, making use of Open Data is closely linked to data literacy, potentially marginalizing those that cannot engage with data effectively [152][153][154]. Edelenbos et al [155] argue that Open Data 'are particularly accessible to research institutes with more budget'.…”

Section: Inequities In Open Data and Fair Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamics of cumulative advantage and threats to equity in open science: a scoping review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open Science holds the promise to make scientific endeavours more inclusive, participatory, understandable, accessible and re-usable for large audiences. However, making processes open will not per se drive wide reuse or participation unless also accompanied by the capacity (in terms of knowledge, skills, financial resources, technological readiness and motivation) to do so. These capacities vary considerably across regions, institutions and demographics. Those advantaged by such factors will remain potentially privileged, putting Open Science's agenda of inclusivity at risk of propagating conditions of ‘cumulative advantage’. With this paper, we systematically scope existing research addressing the question: ‘What evidence and discourse exists in the literature about the ways in which dynamics and structures of inequality could persist or be exacerbated in the transition to Open Science, across disciplines, regions and demographics?’ Aiming to synthesize findings, identify gaps in the literature and inform future research and policy, our results identify threats to equity associated with all aspects of Open Science, including Open Access, Open and FAIR Data, Open Methods, Open Evaluation, Citizen Science, as well as its interfaces with society, industry and policy. Key threats include: stratifications of publishing due to the exclusionary nature of the author-pays model of Open Access; potential widening of the digital divide due to the infrastructure-dependent, highly situated nature of open data practices; risks of diminishing qualitative methodologies as ‘reproducibility’ becomes synonymous with quality; new risks of bias and exclusion in means of transparent evaluation; and crucial asymmetries in the Open Science relationships with industry and the public, which privileges the former and fails to fully include the latter.

show abstract

Section: Inequities In Open Data and Fair Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamics of cumulative advantage and threats to equity in open science: a scoping review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Those without the resources to implement Open Research practices may have their research viewed less favourably than those who do implement them, given that quality is increasingly equated with transparency [17]. Lack of resources, along with the digital divide and differences in digital literacy have been found to influence the adoption of Open Research practices [18][19][20], in particular the ability to implement and benefit from open data practices [21][22][23][24][25][26][27]. In an environment of 'data inequalities' [28], those at well-resourced institutions benefit while those at lessand under-resourced institutions are at a distinct disadvantage [29][30][31].…”

Section: The Resource-intensive Nature Of Open Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward equitable open research: stakeholder co-created recommendations for research institutions, funders and researchers

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open Research aims to make research more accessible, transparent, reproducible, shared and collaborative. Doing so is meant to democratize and diversify access to knowledge and knowledge production, and ensure that research is useful outside of academic contexts. Increasing equity is therefore a key aim of the Open Research movement, yet mounting evidence demonstrates that the practices of Open Research are implemented in ways that undermine this. In response, we convened a diverse community of researchers, research managers and funders to co-create actionable recommendations for supporting the equitable implementation of Open Research. Using a co-creative modified Delphi method, we generated consensus-driven recommendations that address three key problem areas: the resource-intensive nature of Open Research, the high cost of article processing charges, and obstructive reward and recognition practices at funders and research institutions that undermine the implementation of Open Research. In this paper, we provide an overview of these issues, a detailed description of the co-creative process, and present the recommendations and the debates that surrounded them. We discuss these recommendations in relation to other recently published ones and conclude that implementing ours requires ‘global thinking’ to ensure that a systemic and inclusive approach to change is taken.

show abstract

“…Those working in environments where these are in short supply can fear that opening data sets will put them at a disadvantage [136,142,151]. Making use of open data is also closely linked to data literacy, potentially marginalising those that cannot engage with data effectively [152][153][154]. Edelenbos et al [155] argue that open data "are particularly accessible to research institutes with more budget".…”

Section: Inequities In Open and Fair Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamics of Cumulative Advantage and Threats to Equity in Open Science - A Scoping Review

Ross-Hellauer¹,

Reichmann²,

Cole³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open Science holds the promise to make scientific endeavours more inclusive, participatory, understandable, accessible, and re-usable for large audiences. However, making processes open will not per se drive wide re-use or participation unless also accompanied by the capacity (in terms of knowledge, skills, financial resources, technological readiness and motivation) to do so. These capacities vary considerably across regions, institutions and demographics. Those advantaged by such factors will remain potentially privileged, putting Open Science’s agenda of inclusivity at risk of propagating conditions of “cumulative advantage”. With this paper, we systematically scope existing research addressing the question: “What evidence and discourse exists in the literature about the ways in which dynamics and structures of inequality could persist or be exacerbated in the transition to Open Science, across disciplines, regions and demographics?” Aiming to synthesise findings, identify gaps in the literature, and inform future research and policy, our results identify threats to equity associated with all aspects of Open Science, including Open Access, Open/FAIR Data, Open Methods, Open Evaluation, Citizen Science, as well as its interfaces with society, industry and policy. Key threats include: stratifications of publishing due to the exclusionary nature of the author-pays model of Open Access; potential widening of the digital divide due to the infrastructure-dependent, highly situated nature of open data practices; risks of diminishing qualitative methodologies as “reproducibility” becomes synonymous with quality; new risks of bias and exclusion in means of transparent evaluation; and crucial asymmetries in the Open Science relationships with industry and the public, which privileges the former and fails to fully include the latter.

show abstract

Critical literacies for a datafied society: academic development and curriculum design in higher education

Cited by 23 publications

References 84 publications

Dynamics of cumulative advantage and threats to equity in open science: a scoping review

Dynamics of cumulative advantage and threats to equity in open science: a scoping review

Toward equitable open research: stakeholder co-created recommendations for research institutions, funders and researchers

Dynamics of Cumulative Advantage and Threats to Equity in Open Science - A Scoping Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About