This article suggests a procedure to categorize the enormous amount of educational tools in the market. My approach uses a framework of three well-grounded learning theories: Instruction, Cognition, and Construction based on presentation modes (one-way teaching), dialog settings (two-way education), and collaborative scenarios (learning by mastering complex situations). As a proof of concept, I will use the [Top Tools for Learning](https://www.toptools4learning.com/) (TT4L), compiled by [Jane Hart](https://www.toptools4learning.com/jane-hart/) as a result of the 13th Annual Learning Tools Survey (published 18. September 2019).
This article is the second post of a series of ten contributions about a better understanding of the different aspects of Open Science. I want to collect material to develop a taxonomy of Open Science (TOS). Here I will outline the rationale and significance behind the Open Citation movement. Citations are the links that knit together our scientific and cultural knowledge. They need to be freely accessible, separated from their sources, such as journals, articles or books, machine-readable, and reusable. They have to be open to facilitate research on their structure and relationships.
This post starts a series of ten contributions about a better understanding of the different aspects of Open Science. I want to collect material to develop a taxonomy of Open Science (TOS). The primary goal of this undertaking is not only to build a hierarchical system where every notion is unambiguous but to develop a heuristic tool useful for further research.
By discussing different definitions of ‘Open Science’ quoted in the literature, the post develops a particular perspective: We argue that openness must include not only scientific findings but also the process of knowledge creation. The article is the first of a series and contrasts a holistic understanding of Open Science with the concepts of eScience, Cyberscience or Science 2.0, Libre Science and Open respective Libre Knowledge.