Teaching open and reproducible scholarship: a critical review of the evidence base for current pedagogical methods and their outcomes

StatusVoR
Simple item page
cris.lastimport.scopus2025-11-13T04:10:15Z
dc.abstract.enIn recent years, the scientific community has called for improvements in the credibility, robustness and reproducibility of research, characterized by increased interest and promotion of open and transparent research practices. While progress has been positive, there is a lack of consideration about how this approach can be embedded into undergraduate and postgraduate research training. Specifically, a critical overview of the literature which investigates how integrating open and reproducible science may influence student outcomes is needed. In this paper, we provide the first critical review of literature surrounding the integration of open and reproducible scholarship into teaching and learning and its associated outcomes in students. Our review highlighted how embedding open and reproducible scholarship appears to be associated with (i) students' scientific literacies (i.e. students’ understanding of open research, consumption of science and the development of transferable skills); (ii) student engagement (i.e. motivation and engagement with learning, collaboration and engagement in open research) and (iii) students' attitudes towards science (i.e. trust in science and confidence in research findings). However, our review also identified a need for more robust and rigorous methods within pedagogical research, including more interventional and experimental evaluations of teaching practice. We discuss implications for teaching and learning scholarship.
dc.affiliationWydział Psychologii we Wrocławiu
dc.contributor.authorPownall, Madeleine
dc.contributor.authorAzevedo, Flávio
dc.contributor.authorKönig, Laura M.
dc.contributor.authorSlack, Hannah R.
dc.contributor.authorEvans, Thomas Rhys
dc.contributor.authorFlack, Zoe
dc.contributor.authorGrinschgl, Sandra
dc.contributor.authorElsherif, Mahmoud M.
dc.contributor.authorGilligan-Lee, Katie A.
dc.contributor.authorde Oliveira, Catia M. F.
dc.contributor.authorGjoneska, Biljana
dc.contributor.authorKalandadze, Tamara
dc.contributor.authorButton, Katherine
dc.contributor.authorAshcroft-Jones, Sarah
dc.contributor.authorTerry, Jenny
dc.contributor.authorAlbayrak-Aydemir, Nihan
dc.contributor.authorDěchtěrenko, Filip
dc.contributor.authorAlzahawi, Shilaan
dc.contributor.authorBaker, Bradley J.
dc.contributor.authorPittelkow, Merle-Marie
dc.contributor.authorRiedl, Lydia
dc.contributor.authorSchmidt, Kathleen
dc.contributor.authorPennington, Charlotte R.
dc.contributor.authorShaw, John J.
dc.contributor.authorLüke, Timo
dc.contributor.authorMakel, Matthew C.
dc.contributor.authorHartmann, Helena
dc.contributor.authorZaneva, Mirela
dc.contributor.authorWalke, Daniel
dc.contributor.authorVerheyen, Steven
dc.contributor.authorCox, Daniel
dc.contributor.authorMattschey, Jennifer
dc.contributor.authorGallagher-Mitchell, Tom
dc.contributor.authorBranney, Peter
dc.contributor.authorWeisberg, Yanna
dc.contributor.authorIzydorczak, Kamil
dc.contributor.authorAl-Hoorie, Ali H.
dc.contributor.authorCreaven, Ann-Marie
dc.contributor.authorStewart, Suzanne L. K.
dc.contributor.authorKrautter, Kai
dc.contributor.authorMatvienko-Sikar, Karen
dc.contributor.authorWestwood, Samuel J.
dc.contributor.authorArriaga, Patrícia
dc.contributor.authorLiu, Meng
dc.contributor.authorBaum, Myriam A.
dc.contributor.authorWingen, Tobias
dc.contributor.authorRoss, Robert M.
dc.contributor.authorO’Mahony, Aoife
dc.contributor.authorBochynska, Agata
dc.contributor.authorJamieson, Michelle
dc.contributor.authorVel Tromp, Myrthe
dc.contributor.authorYeung, Siu Kit
dc.contributor.authorVasilev, Martin R.
dc.contributor.authorGourdon-Kanhukamwe, Amélie
dc.contributor.authorMicheli, Leticia
dc.contributor.authorKonkol, Markus
dc.contributor.authorMoreau, David
dc.contributor.authorBartlett, James E.
dc.contributor.authorClark, Kait
dc.contributor.authorBrekelmans, Gwen
dc.contributor.authorGkinopoulos, Theofilos
dc.contributor.authorTyler, Samantha L.
dc.contributor.authorRöer, Jan Philipp
dc.contributor.authorIlchovska, Zlatomira G.
dc.contributor.authorMadan, Christopher R.
dc.contributor.authorRobertson, Olly
dc.contributor.authorIley, Bethan J.
dc.contributor.authorGuay, Samuel
dc.contributor.authorSladekova, Martina
dc.contributor.authorSadhwani, Shanu
dc.date.access2023-05-17
dc.date.accessioned2025-11-12T11:50:53Z
dc.date.available2025-11-12T11:50:53Z
dc.date.created2023-04-26
dc.date.issued2023-05-17
dc.description.abstract<jats:p> In recent years, the scientific community has called for improvements in the credibility, robustness and reproducibility of research, characterized by increased interest and promotion of open and transparent research practices. While progress has been positive, there is a lack of consideration about how this approach can be embedded into undergraduate and postgraduate research training. Specifically, a critical overview of the literature which investigates how integrating open and reproducible science may influence <jats:italic>student outcomes</jats:italic> is needed. In this paper, we provide the first critical review of literature surrounding the integration of open and reproducible scholarship into teaching and learning and its associated outcomes in students. Our review highlighted how embedding open and reproducible scholarship appears to be associated with (i) students' <jats:italic>scientific literacies</jats:italic> (i.e. students’ understanding of open research, consumption of science and the development of transferable skills); (ii) <jats:italic>student engagement</jats:italic> (i.e. motivation and engagement with learning, collaboration and engagement in open research) and (iii) students' <jats:italic>attitudes towards science</jats:italic> (i.e. trust in science and confidence in research findings). However, our review also identified a need for more robust and rigorous methods within pedagogical research, including more interventional and experimental evaluations of teaching practice. We discuss implications for teaching and learning scholarship. </jats:p>
dc.description.accesstimeat_publication
dc.description.issue5
dc.description.physical1-28
dc.description.sdgQualityEducation
dc.description.versionfinal_published
dc.description.volume10
dc.identifier.doi10.1098/rsos.221255
dc.identifier.eissn2054-5703
dc.identifier.urihttps://share.swps.edu.pl/handle/swps/1977
dc.identifier.weblinkhttps://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.221255
dc.languageen
dc.pbn.affiliationpsychologia
dc.rightsCC-BY
dc.rights.questionYes_rights
dc.share.articleOPEN_JOURNAL
dc.subject.enhigher education
dc.subject.enopen research
dc.subject.enopenscholarship
dc.subject.enopen science
dc.subject.enpedagogy
dc.subject.enteaching
dc.swps.sciencecloudsend
dc.titleTeaching open and reproducible scholarship: a critical review of the evidence base for current pedagogical methods and their outcomes
dc.title.alternative
dc.title.journalRoyal Society Open Science
dc.typeJournalArticle
dspace.entity.typeArticle