Building and supporting a community around open science

The peer review problem

One example of how Tanya engages the open science community is a panel discussion she organised on the topic of peer review. There had been a lot of talk amongst community members of the problems they see with peer review, she says, such as it being an unfair process that hinders the scientific progress rather than fostering it. To get a grasp on what the stance of the community is, the event facilitated people sharing their experiences and their positions related to new forms of peer review. Open science pioneer Bianca Kramer was invited to give an overview of peer review and what the problems are to ensure the diverse participants were comfortable with the discussion that followed. Two panellists from the Open Science Community Delft (Bas Hofland - TU Delft, Journal of Coastal and Hydraulic Structures and Junzi Sun - TU Delft, Journal of Open Aviation Science), as well as Anna Akhmanova from Utrecht University and the senior editor of eLife engaged in a discussion of how to better structure peer review in open access journals.

The topic of peer review seems to be a painful one for many people in the community. And though it was a productive discussion, Tanya said there was no single conclusion, but it did provide a lot of food for thought.

Voices of the community

Before joining TU Delft nearly two years ago, Tanya worked for international organisations like the United Nations and civil society organisations dealing with issues of human rights and disarmament. “It was this passion for having people’s voices heard and social change that drove me to open science,” she says. As Community Manager for the Open Science Programme at TU Delft, she coordinates a group of researchers and teachers that she describes as a peer-to-peer knowledge community that believes in open science as a standard scientific practice. “What attracted me to this position is that you can empower people to speak their mind and make their voices heard on a different level by bringing them into a community,” she says. “So this is where my passion for bringing people into the system to make a change comes into play.”

In her role, Tanya provides a wide range of support and resources to the community she serves. “I love bringing people together for the achievement of common goals,” she says. “The people I work with have excellent ideas, determination, and a drive to make things better. I empower and support them in making that happen.”

The hybrid event, which was recorded, had around 60 people attending in person and even more participating online from other universities in the Netherlands.

Citizens contribute to science

In addition to her Community Manager role, Tanya is also Project Lead for Citizen Science, a pillar of the Open Science Programme at TU Delft. A research methodology that involves people outside of academic institutions in research, citizen science breaks down traditional barriers between academic scientists and the broader public. Having citizens actively participate in different stages of the scientific process, from data collection and analysis, to interpretation and publication allows for broader impact with a more inclusive approach. Tanya and her team support researchers who are interested in choosing this method. “We're trying to make it easier for researchers to apply citizen science, because it's very time consuming and different than other types of research,” she says. “It requires you to have a lot of skills that you wouldn't normally associate with a standard research practice.”

In many ways, citizen science aims to increase research’s benefit to society. Bringing citizens into the conversation, making them part of the process, and allowing them a better understanding of the results also builds trust in the fact that research means something. This is particularly relevant now as we see more issues with reproducibility in the scientific community, notes Tanya. “If you're including citizens in your research, you need to make sure that everything from data that you collected to processes to the end results is available to them to do with it as they see fit,” she says. “And in order for you to be fair in recognising the people's contributions, you need to publish it in a in a way that is accessible to them, which means open publishing and no paywall.”

The people make the community

Working with people who are passionate and believe in the cause of open science is one of the best things about her job, says Tanya. “Without people, nothing can be done,” she says. “You can put money into it, you can write policies and guidelines and whatever else is available as an instrument of change, but without people's passion and dedication, nothing would move forward.” Thinking of the future growth and sustainability of community, she led an effort to create a board for the community last August. She has already been impressed by the group of dedicated people and the effort they've put in to provide advice and strategic direction.

The community is quite active and Tanya will continue to support efforts for engagement, learning, and collaboration. “There are lots of resources available and I’m one of them,” she says. “But if I’m not the resource they’re looking for then perhaps I can connect them to other resources, or at least brainstorm together how to look elsewhere for them. What I would like people to know is that what I do is for them and they reach out any time.”