User:Daniel Mietchen/Notebook/Open Science/2010/09/16

From OpenWetWare
Jump to navigationJump to search
What would science look like if it were open? Main project page
Previous entry      Next entry

Open Theses workshop at EURODOC 2011

Latest news
*The workshop is over - take a look at its conclusions and recommendations. It was only a start.
*We are continuing the survey to help us find out how open theses are across Europe
*We also continue to collect open metadata of theses (mashup of entries so far)
*Notes on the session have been taken collaboratively
*Background: blog post and poster
Twitter hashtags: #eurodoc, #opentheses, both, #jiscopenbib
Eurodoc group at Friendfeed


This page was used to organize a workshop on Open dissertation metadata, held on April 1, 2011 at the Eurodoc conference 2011. The conference theme is "Young generation in science: new fashion ERA? - The reflections of research traditions, models and relationships in a fast changing world."

The page shall be updated continuously as the preparation of the workshop proceeds. The short link to the most recent version is


  • Which (European) country or institution has the highest proportion of Open Theses?





  • Mathias Klang (one of the first to put his thesis under a CC license)


  • Two 90-min blocks on April 1 between 1pm to 5pm local time (11am-3pm UTC), with a coffee break and poster session (together 1h) in between. See also the conference programme.


This workshop has several aims: First, it shall provide some background on how the currently ongoing "digital revolution" affects the way PhD projects are being conducted and PhD theses are being written, reviewed, published, archived, disseminated and reused, and what the relative costs and benefits of paper and digital modes are. Second, the session shall provide a practical demonstration of cross-disciplinary and international collaboration via online tools. To this end, at least one of the speakers will deliver their talk remotely, and the local audience will be able to interact with online participants, using web-hosted collaboratively editable documents. Third, the session shall be integrated with the poster session taking place in between. To this end, an electronic poster shall be designed beforehand which displays the progress of the competition in real time, starting with some preliminary results and possibly continuing online beyond the duration of the session. Fourth, the workshop shall have a measurable outcome, while still providing for a decent dose of fun. We think that this can be achieved by introducing an element of competition by asking participants in both audiences to collect the metadata (in a standard format, e.g. JSON) of as many PhD theses as they can manage during this time. This goal of a collection of Open Theses metadata (some of which may point to Open content) is reflected in the title of the workshop. It should provide an estimate of the proportion of Open Theses in each country or institution covered, and of how many person months it would take to collect the metadata for all theses published around the globe, along with ideas on the extent to which this proportion could be increased, or its determination automated.
The organizers and speakers represent different disciplines, generations and nationalities: Peter Murray-Rust submitted a printed thesis and defended it way before the World Wide Web was started, while the theses of Mathias Klang and Daniel Mietchen are available on the web for everyone to read, reuse and share, subject to the conditions of a Creative Commons licence.

Intended audience

  • Early Stage Researchers and other interested parties physically present at the meeting
  • Online attendees with an interest in dissertations, bibliographical metadata, open science or European science


  • The attendance of Alfredo Ferreira is sponsored by JISCOPenBIB
  • The attendance of Daniel Mietchen is sponsored by AFR

Technical requirements

  • For video live streaming and recording: A dedicated computer with stable internet connection (preferably LAN), a webcam, a microphone (preferably connected to the microphones used in the room), and ustream or similar streaming software.
  • For speakers: A second dedicated computer with stable internet connection (preferably LAN), connected to a beamer. For remote speakers, audio in/out plus Skype (or a similar VoIP tool) are required in addition. If live streaming works, they can also follow the session beyond giving their talk.
  • For remote participation in general: A third dedicated computer with stable internet connection (preferably LAN), with Twitter or some other microblogging tool installed, and connected to a second beamer.
  • For the audience: Reliable internet connection (preferably W-LAN), and plenty of electrical sockets.

See also