Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Rim2 tech-synthesis
Rim2 tech-synthesis
Rim2 tech-synthesis
Rim2 tech-synthesis
Rim2 tech-synthesis
Rim2 tech-synthesis
Rim2 tech-synthesis
Rim2 tech-synthesis
Rim2 tech-synthesis
Rim2 tech-synthesis
Rim2 tech-synthesis
Rim2 tech-synthesis
Rim2 tech-synthesis
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Rim2 tech-synthesis

241

Published on

Published in: Economy & Finance
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
241
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. UKOLN is supported by: RIM2 technical synthesis (work in progress) 11 January 2012 RIM3, Edinburgh Rosemary Russell, UKOLN, University of Bath
  • 2. Overview: technical synthesis <ul><li>Based (mainly) on project reports </li></ul><ul><ul><li>also September workshop </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>blogs, RIM meetings etc </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Aiming to identify common threads running through the 4 projects </li></ul><ul><ul><li>plus significant individual project findings </li></ul></ul>
  • 3. RIM2 <ul><li>4 projects </li></ul><ul><ul><li>BRUCE </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>CERIFy </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>IRIOS </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>MICE </li></ul></ul><ul><li>February to July 2011 (with some extensions) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>short timescale… </li></ul></ul>
  • 4. RIM2 v RIM1 <ul><li>RIM2 united by CERIF! </li></ul><ul><ul><li>aimed to: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>expand the community of HE institutions and organisations using CERIF </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>realise some of the projected benefits </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>support an emerging community of practice in RIM </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>so all projects based on CERIF as core </li></ul></ul><ul><li>RIM1 had broader remit </li></ul><ul><ul><li>only CRISPool and BRIM used CERIF (and only implemented by CRISPool) </li></ul></ul>
  • 5. Some project features worth highlighting… moving things fwd <ul><li>open source CERIF-based reporting tool (BRUCE) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>new analysis of research data possible </li></ul></ul><ul><li>CERIF-based demonstrator ‘interrogation’ tool for RC funded projects and outputs (IRIOS) </li></ul><ul><li>extending CERIF to incorporate impact indicators and measures (MICE) </li></ul><ul><li>business process mapping – revealed many RIM similarities between institutions; data exchange between CERIFy CRIS and Thomson Reuters InCites (CERIFy) </li></ul>
  • 6. Common threads: <ul><li>CERIF engagement issues and what might help future projects </li></ul><ul><li>euroCRIS/JISC training, advice, resources </li></ul>
  • 7. CERIF (1): endorsement <ul><li>generally does the job… </li></ul><ul><li>considered fit for purpose - works as interchange language (IRIOS) </li></ul><ul><li>has hidden benefits (BRUCE) </li></ul>
  • 8. CERIF (2): issues/findings <ul><li>steep learning curve for majority [some views differ] </li></ul><ul><li>improved awareness and understanding of CERIF and its application needed </li></ul><ul><li>mapping is difficult! </li></ul><ul><li>but semantics even more difficult! </li></ul><ul><li>extensions to the standard often needed </li></ul><ul><ul><li>eg esteem measures, bibliometric data </li></ul></ul><ul><li>inaccurate CERIF compliance claims - often not tested </li></ul>
  • 9. CERIF (3): recommendations <ul><li>More promotion of CERIF needed [JISC?] </li></ul><ul><li>More initial training needed </li></ul><ul><ul><li>include input from previous projects </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Need to build on CERIF quickly (before proprietary formats emerge) </li></ul><ul><li>Standard mappings should be developed … </li></ul>
  • 10. Working with euroCRIS <ul><li>euroCRIS found to be receptive </li></ul><ul><li>and supportive (although also a partner in IRIOS and MICE) </li></ul><ul><li>CERIF should be free at the point of use </li></ul><ul><li>euroCRIS requires further support/ partnerships (ISO?) </li></ul><ul><li>projects need: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>more initial training </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>more integrated working across projects </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>best practice guidelines </li></ul></ul>
  • 11. CERIF use v engagement <ul><li>lots of use in UK now (JISC supported and beyond) </li></ul><ul><li>real engagement increasing little by little… </li></ul>
  • 12. Non-CERIF related issues… <ul><li>Identifiers [BRUCE, CERIFy] </li></ul><ul><ul><li>need to be ‘built into’ CERIF </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Inconsistent source data - creates major problems </li></ul><ul><ul><li>incl commercial bibliographic databases </li></ul></ul>
  • 13. Report <ul><li>Due early Feb… </li></ul><ul><ul><li>CERIF ‘landscape’ first </li></ul></ul>

×