Open@RIT hosted the Summit around the state of Open Work and its future. More than 60 people from US, Spain, France, England, and Ireland participated in the event with attendees representing higher education, philanthropic entities, businesses, governments and ministries, and academic publishing:
Centers for Medicare/Medicaid Services
Ministry of Higher Ed and Research, France
Ministry of Higher Ed, UK
Berkeley Institute for Data Science
Code for Science and Society
Open Source Collective
University of Missouri
University of Vermont
Michigan State University
Invest in Open Infrastructure
Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
Bryan Alexander, Inc
The Open University UK
UC Santa Cruz
Red Hat Inc
Taylor and Francis
Trinity College Dublin
Keynotes, presentations, and primary topics of discussion
“Future Trends Forum session streamed with that community”
Government Panel discussing the accelerated push to Open and its effect on future funding.
Based on the feedback we received from the post-event survey, these were the most beneficial segments of the summit, which then developed into working groups.
Different Models for Open Work Policies, Practices, and Support in Universities
The goal of this working group was to understand better what are the current ways that university administration can support Open Work and generate some new ideas on how we can better advocate for the implementation of pro-open university policies, practices, and support.
Identify high-rank faculty and universities recently promoted to professors - What was their citation count? (imperfect)
Faculty are doing very narrow fields, which leads to so few people can review, making it hard for the school to review.
Promotion pathways (as at MSU) can include narratives that articulate holistic scholarship strategies and are not just a matter of metrics.
Address Contradictions in University Policy
Tension exists between proprietary and community goals. Presidents and trustees, and many faculty, have promoted entrepreneurship and turned inventions and creations into property that can be monetized.
Explore New Ways to Organize Ourselves
Moving away from scientific societies (publisher); data repositories need work, money, staff, and power, so people who submit data know the standards. ~ this can become the new standard across
Universities are not currently equipped to maintain products, for example, U of R, during the start of Covid-19 building a screening app.
Surfacing the “invisible” metrics and analytics for role diversity within Open projects
Both FOSS Communities and Academia are challenged in measuring documenting and supporting work in spaces like community management, design, documentation, and the impact those have on supporting the work of the enterprise and returning the value on investment, proving increased productivity, etc. They also do a poor job of showing how Role diversity, the efforts of those folks who do the work described above, improve work output and its impact. How are we thinking about these things in both sectors? How can we do a better job of it overall?
Tips for diversity:
Tokenism: It can’t be just inviting “diverse” participants
Fundamental flaws: It’s hard to tell a maintainer that their baby is ugly
There are multiple factors that represent a group. A single concrete number often cannot be representative of a group. We have to show a spectrum of the consistency of a group.
Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion often means different things to different people. We need a definition to drive our efforts to fix these issues
We also need to address systems of oppression and tearing down barriers that are preventing these barriers.
Find ways to share stories of underrepresented folks succeeding in open source
Safety criteria: What marginalized people use to identify whether a community is “safe” for participating. Perhaps a metric model around a clear goal that metrics would help define.
OSPOs in Academia. What could they do?
Four themes of an Academic OSPO
Understand the stakeholders, their interests, and their need for education on Open
Educate both academics and students
Enable involvement in open work — supporting grant-funded programs. Connect stakeholders with resources
Empower - Identify networking for opportunities for collaboration. An ongoing concerted effort on the above.
Survey results suggest that attendees are interested in regular asynchronous meetings (2-4 times per year) with in-person gatherings annually. The annual gathering could be stand-alone or pre/colocated/post another event.
There is a significant desire for ongoing community-building, networking, and group-think opportunities. The purpose is an ongoing conversation through BOF meetings, unconferences, and an online forum for presentation and discussion groups.