OPEN SCIENCE AND THE SCIENCE EDUCATION FIELD: PERSPECTIVES AND DIALOGUES
A CIÊNCIA ABERTA E A ÁREA DE EDUCAÇÃO EM CIÊNCIAS: PERSPECTIVAS E DIÁLOGOS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21172021230102Palavras-chave:
Open Science, Science Education.Resumo
It presents the editorial practices of the journal to be implemented in the next quadrennium according to the open science movement.
Downloads
Referências
Bornmann, L., Herich, H., Joos, H., & Daniel, H.-D. (2012). In public peer review of submitted manuscripts, how do reviewer comments differ from comments written by interested members of scientific community? A content analisys if comments written for atmospheric chemistry and physics. Scientometrics, 93(3), 915-929. [ Links ]
Kelly, G. (2008). Inquiry, actitivity and epistemic practice. In R. Duschl & R. Grandy (Eds.), Teaching scientific inquiry: recommendations for research and implementation (pp. 288-291). Rottherdan: Holand: Tapei Sense Publishers [ Links ]
Kelly, G., & Licona, P. (2018). Epistemic practices and science education. In M. Matthews (Ed.), History, Philosophy and Science Teaching: New perspectives Springer International Publishing. [ Links ]
Longino, H. E. (1990). Science as a social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. New York: Princenton. [ Links ]
Longino, H. E. (2002). The fate of knowledge. Princenton: Princenton University Press. [ Links ]
Ross-Hellauer, T., Deppe, A., & Schmidt, B. (2017). Survey on open peer review: attitudes and experiente amongst editors, authors and reviewers. PLoS One, 12(12), e0189311. [ Links ]
Ross-Hellauer, T., & Görögh, E. (2019). Guidelines for open peer review implementation. Research integrity and Peer Review, 4(4), 1-12. [ Links ]
SciELO, Scientific Eletronic Library Online..(2018). Linhas prioritárias de ação 2019-2023. Disponível em [online]: https://www.scielo20.org/redescielo/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2018/09/L%C3%ADneas-prioritaris-de-acci%C3%B3n-2019-2023_pt.pdf [ Links ]
