Integrating open science education into an undergraduate health professional research program




open science, open science framework, education, curriculum integration, research transparency, open scholarship


Objective: Open science (OS) is a global movement focused on improving research equity, reproducibility, and transparency of research outputs in publicly funded research. This paper describes how a librarian collaborated with teaching faculty and a research program coordinator to integrate an OS curriculum into an undergraduate professional practice course and assess students’ perceptions of OS after participating.

Methods: A librarian developed an OS-specific curriculum for an undergraduate professional practice course in Nutrition. This course is part of the First Year Research Experience (FYRE) program, which is integrated into 13-week undergraduate courses to introduce students to core elements of the research process in their first year of study by carrying out a research project. The OS curriculum included an Introduction to OS class, a requirement that students share their research outputs in the Open Science Framework, and an assignment asking students to reflect on their experience learning about and practicing OS. Twenty-one of 30 students consented to having their reflection assignment undergo thematic analysis.

Results: Students indicated transparency, accountability, accessibility to research outputs, and increased efficiency as positive attributes of OS. The time commitment, fear of being scooped, and concerns over having research be misinterpreted were considered negative attributes. 90% (n=19) of students indicated that they intend to practice OS in the future.

Conclusion: Based on strong engagement from the students, we believe that this OS curriculum could be adapted to other undergraduate or graduate student contexts where a research project is required.

Author Biographies

Kevin B. Read, University of Saskatchewan

University Library, Associate Librarian

Jessica Lieffers, University of Saskatchewan

College of Pharmacy and Nutrition, Assistant Professor

Merle Massie, University of Saskatchewan

Office of the Vice President Research, Coordinator, Undergraduate Research Initiative Research Acceleration and Strategic Initiatives


Watson M. When will ‘open science’ become simply ‘science’?. Genome Biol. 2015;16(100960660, dxp):101.

Farnham A, Kurz C, Öztürk MA, Solbiati M, Myllyntaus O, Meekes J, et al. Early career researchers want Open Science. Genome Biol. 2017 Nov 15;18(1):221.

McKiernan EC, Bourne PE, Brown CT, Buck S, Kenall A, Lin J, et al. How open science helps researchers succeed. Elife. 2016 Jul 7;5.

Howe A, Howe M, Kaleita AL, Raman DR. Imagining tomorrow’s university in an era of open science. F1000Res. 2017;6:405.

Saraite Sariene L, Caba Pérez C, López Hernández AM. Expanding the actions of Open Government in higher education sector: From web transparency to Open Science. PLoS One. 2020;15(9):e0238801.

Naudet F, Siebert M, Boussageon R, Cristea IA, Turner EH. An open science pathway for drug marketing authorization-Registered drug approval. PLoS Med. 2021 Aug;18(8):e1003726.

Bosserdt M, Hamm B, Dewey M. Clinical trials in radiology and data sharing: results from a survey of the European Society of Radiology (ESR) research committee. European Radiology. 2019;29(9):4794–802.

Rockhold F, Bromley C, Wagner EK, Buyse M. Open science: The open clinical trials data journey. Clin Trials. 2019 Oct;16(5):539–46.

Sanjana NE. Voices of the new generation: open science is good for science (and for you). Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2021 Aug 11;

Hicks DJ. Open science, the replication crisis, and environmental public health. Account Res. 2021 Jul 30; ePub ahead of print:1-29.

Huston P, Edge VL, Bernier E. Reaping the benefits of Open Data in public health. Can Commun Dis Rep. 2019 Oct 3;45(11):252–6.

Hales AH, Wesselmann ED, Hilgard J. Improving Psychological Science through Transparency and Openness: An Overview. Perspect Behav Sci. 2019 Mar;42(1):13–31.

Seth AK, Hohwy J. Editorial: Open science in consciousness research. Neurosci Conscious. 2019;2019(1):niz018.

Owens B. DATA SHARING. Montreal institute going ‘open’ to accelerate science. Science. 2016;351(6271):329–329.

Poupon V, Seyller A, Rouleau GA. The Tanenbaum Open Science Institute: Leading a Paradigm Shift at the Montreal Neurological Institute. Neuron. 2017 Aug 30;95(5):1002–6.

Toribio-Flórez D, Anneser L, deOliveira-Lopes FN, Pallandt M, Tunn I, Windel H. Where Do Early Career Researchers Stand on Open Science Practices? A Survey Within the Max Planck Society. Front Res Metr Anal. 2020;5:586992.

Zečević K, Houghton C, Noone C, Lee H, Matvienko-Sikar K, Toomey E. Exploring factors that influence the practice of Open Science by early career health researchers: a mixed methods study. HRB Open Res. 2020;3:56.

Bukach CM, Bukach N, Reed CL, Couperus JW. Open science as a path to education of new psychophysiologists. Int J Psychophysiol. 2021 Apr 16;165:76–83.

Gonçalves OS, Nogueira JR, da Silva LL, da Silva GC, Martin JGP, Santana MF, et al. Summer school: a warm journey through teaching microbiology to undergraduate students. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2020 Dec 14;367(22).

Strand JF, Brown VA. Publishing Open, Reproducible Research With Undergraduates. Front Psychol. 2019;10:564.

Destro Bisol G, Anagnostou P, Capocasa M, Bencivelli S, Cerroni A, Contreras J, et al. Perspectives on Open Science and scientific data sharing:an interdisciplinary workshop. J Anthropol Sci. 2014;92:179–200.

Toronto International Data Release Workshop A, Birney E, Hudson TJ, Green ED, Gunter C, Eddy S, et al. Prepublication data sharing. Nature. 2009;461(7261):168–70.

Toelch U, Ostwald D. Digital open science-Teaching digital tools for reproducible and transparent research. PLoS Biol. 2018 Jul;16(7):e2006022.

Schöpfel J, Prost H, Jacquemin B, Kergosien E. PhD Training on Open Science in French Universities. 2019; Available from:

Schmidt B, Orth A, Franck G, Kuchma I, Knoth P, Carvalho J. Stepping up Open Science training for European research. Publications. 2016;4(2):16.

Foster ED, Deardorff A. Open Science Framework (OSF). Journal of the Medical Library Association. 2017;105(2):203–6.

Rovira Hazlett D. Libraries Develop Open Data Training Program. Library Journal. 2016 3/1/2016;141(4):24–6.

Lajoie EW, Terrell T, Eaton M. Training the Next Generation of Open Source Developers: A Case Study of OSU Libraries & Press’ Technology Training Program. Code4Lib Journal. 2015 Jan 21;(27):1–1.

Deardorff A. Why do biomedical researchers learn to program? An exploratory investigation. Journal of the Medical Library Association. 2020;108(1):29–35.

Lieffers JRL, Finch SL, Banow R, Loy K. A Course-Based First-Year Research Experience for Undergraduate Nutrition Students. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2020 Apr;52(4):451–5.

Roadmap for Open Science February 2020 [Internet]. Office of the Chief Science Advisor of Canada; 2020 p. 1–12. Available from:

Bezjak S, Clyburne-Sherin A, Conzett P, Fernandes P, Görögh E, Helbig K, et al. Open Science Training Handbook [Internet]. 1.0. Zenodo; 2018. Available from:

Sarah J. Tracy. Qualitative Research Methods : Collecting Evidence, Crafting Analysis, Communicating Impact [Internet]. Vol. Second edition. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell; 2020.

Saldaña J author. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. 3E [Third edition]. 2016.

Additional Files





Original Investigation