Open scholarship (some call it Open Science) refers to all efforts that serve to make scientific activities, processes and the resulting products freely accessible. Besides research activities itself, open scholarship also includes practices and circumstances before the actual act of research (e.g. mentoring, collaborations, pre-registrations, etc.) and after the actual act of research (all kinds of data and knowledge exchange). Furthermore, the term also includes scientific activities that are not directly related to research practices, such as teaching or external scientific communication (Burgelman et al. 2019; Peroni et al. 2020).

Utrecht University argues that openness in science acts as a driver for a more comprehensive and fairer evaluation in the reward and recognition system within scholarship (Utrecht University 2021)). Reward and recognition in scholarship include performance measurements of scientific quality and output in scholarship. Often, these measurements are based on quantitative indicators (i.e., scientometric indicators such as publication or citation rates). Those indicators are considered for example in career assessment procedures (O´Carroll et al. 2017).

The impact of open scholarship metrics in the reward and recognition system is twofold: on the one hand, openness enables broader access to research practices and thus ensures a less restricted view of research performance. In this way, the expansion of the reward and recognition system responds to widely voiced criticism of the existing performance evaluation system. On the other hand, the inclusion of openness in performance evaluation is important to further establish open scholarship as a standard in science and to create incentive structures (Pampel et al. 2020, 3).

The quantitative measurement of research quality, however, is not easy to implement and requires some knowledge about the behavior and impact of the indicators in a particular field of research. This paper examines the potentials and difficulties of open scholarship metrics in educational research. The discipline under consideration plays a role with regard to metrics. Among other things, this has to do with discipline-specific publication cultures and conditions in application and appointment procedures. There are metrics that make sense in the context of some disciplines and are inappropriate in others.

The research questions of the present work are:

• What are the possibilities and limitations of open scholarship metrics in education science?
• What effects and impacts could open scholarship metrics have in education science?

This research is divided into three studies. The first study is a systematic review that presents the current state of research on open scholarship metrics. For this purpose, a very detailed literature search is conducted, which identifies all publications that are thematically related to these metrics. This is followed by two screening procedures that examine the search hits for relevance. Finally, the publications identified as relevant are analyzed and interpreted. Study 2 develops and evaluates a set of indicators that captures open performances and products that are made in higher education teaching. Teaching is an essential part of the science system, yet it does not appear in science evaluations. I see this contradiction as an imbalance between the academic community's claim to provide good teaching and to support the next generation on the one hand, and the lack of appreciation of the actual performance of good teaching on the other. Accordingly, a set of indicators is being developed to capture open teaching performance. To evaluate this, focus groups will be held in which educational and scientific researchers will discuss the impact and effects of such an indicator set. The third study focuses on open scholarship practices in the third mission. Besides research as the first mission and teaching as the second mission, the third mission of a university is usually understood as "contribution to society" (Laredo 2007; Compagnucci and Spigarelli 2020). All three missions represent important sub-areas of science. Although they are of course related in terms of content, they are, however, separate in terms of their orientations and the activities of scientists. Missions are more abstract and can be understood at the level of institutions. If these are broken down into concrete tasks, they can often no longer be definitively divided into the three categories. Nevertheless, it should be possible to reward all three areas, as they are all relevant. Currently, this is not the case, as the reward and recognition system usually refers to research activities. The third study of this thesis explores the concrete practices of open science communication and the connection between these practices at the researcher level and the third mission at the institute level. Study three will also use the focus group method. Educational researchers will be interviewed about their open third mission practices. In the group, they will have the opportunity to discuss the meanings of these practices.

The three studies pursue the aim of broadly addressing the topic of open scholarship metrics in educational research.

Burgelman, Jean-Claude; Pascu, Corina; Szkuta, Katarzyna; Schomberg, Rene von; Karalopoulos, Athanasios; Repanas, Konstantinos; Schouppe, Michel (2019): Open Science, Open Data, and Open Scholarship: European Policies to Make Science Fit for the Twenty-First Century. In: Front. Big Data 2. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdata.2019.00043. Compagnucci, Lorenzo; Spigarelli, Francesca (2020): The Third Mission of the university. A systematic literature review on potentials and constraints. In: Technological Forecasting and Social Change 161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120284 Laredo, Philippe (2007): Revisiting the Third Mission of Universities: Toward a Renewed Categorization of University Activities? In: Higher Education Policy 20 (4). Doi: 10.1057/palgrave.hep.8300169 O´Carroll, Conor; Rentier, Bernard; Cabello Valdes, Cecilia; Esposito, Fulvio; Kaunismaa, Eeva; Maas, Katrien; Metcalfe, Janet; McAllister, David; Vandevelde, Karen (2017): Evaluation of research careers fully acknowledging Open Science practices. Rewards, incentives and/or recognition for researchers practicing Open Science. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Pampel, Heinz; Ferguson, Lea Maria; Messerschmidt, Reinhard; Faensen, Katja (2020): Indikatoren für Open Science: Diskussionspapier des Helmholtz Open Science Office. URL: https://gfzpublic.gfz-potsdam.de/rest/items/item_5004269_2/component/file_5004271/content Peroni, Silvio; Shotton, David (2020): OpenCitations, an infrastructure organization for open scholarship. In: Quantitative Science Studies 1 (1), S. 428-444. DOI: 10.1162/qss_a_00023. Utrecht University (2021): Open Science. Recognition and Rewards. URL: https://www.uu.nl/en/research/open-science/tracks/recognition-and-rewards#gallery-167250