Developing research data management policy & services


Published on

Slides updated for presentation at DCC Northeast roadshow in Newcastle, April 2012.

Session ends with an exercise on developing a roadmap for research data management.

Presentation initially given by Sarah Jones at the DCC roadshow in Loughborough, February 2012.

See event details at:

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • This talk pulls together the lessons from the DCC roadshow to consider how to develop policies and services for Research Data Management (RDM)
  • We’ll cover who is responsible for RDM and what the potential components of a research data service are. The main part of the talk will focus on how other universities are addressing certain aspects to see where you can learn lessons At the end we’ll touch on developing roadmaps in light of the EPSRC policy requirement and do an exercise on this
  • There are lots of stakeholders with varied roles, both within organisations and external to them. Requirements and support can be external (e.g. from funders, publishers, data centres) but in terms of developing infrastructure, research organisations are taking a central role. Ensuring clarity of responsibility across stakeholders and bringing people together is key.
  • *Animated slide – components come in separately* This isn’t definitive. It’s just an idea of the building blocks involved and how they might be put together. - Storage is often though of first. It should be properly backed up with appropriate access controls and ability to access from anywhere - Also need an appropriate environment for research (instruments, hardware, software, VREs) tools and systems e.g. for grants - Aside from current work environments, we also need to consider facilities for archiving to preserve and share data - There’s an inherent need to access/share data, so we need standards, tools and approaches for metadata across the lifecycle - We have the basics of a system, but none of this works without people to keep things running and provide guidance and training - Also need policies to provide overarching governance - And to ensure uptake and maintenance you need buy-in across the board, incentives and financial backing We’ll now consider how different institutions are addressing certain aspects of this.
  • The data.bris team gave a case study at the DCC Roadshow in Cardiff in December 2011. This details here are abstracted from that talk. They are building research data services around their High Performance Computing facility to provide all researchers with adequate storage for their research data. The key things to note is the cost model – they provide a clear, up-front cost so additional storage can be written into proposals. Other Universities (Oxford, Leicester) have produced similar figures
  • A few institutions already run data repositories e.g. Edinburgh and Cambridge (both DSpace) Others are piloting them e.g. Essex and Southampton (doing extensions to existing ePrints repositories as part of JISC MRD02 programme) and Databank at Oxford. Key thing is that none of these services intend to replace established data services. Where there are more appropriate disciplinary data centres, for example, the data should be submitted there.
  • There are many external services – dedicated data centres supported by research funders and various structured databases and community initiatives. The list of data centres provided by DataCite is a useful reference for institutions and researchers to identify the most appropriate place of deposit.
  • This area is the aspect most in its infancy. No institutions appear to have a handle on exactly what research data they hold in order to systematically register & manage data, and expose appropriate metadata to facilitate sharing. However, several UK institutions have flagged a desire to develop institutional data catalogues so models are likely to emerge. EDINA at the University of Edinburgh started to investigate approaches in the RADAR project. A pertinent project to look at is C4D, which is developing an extension to the cerif standard to record information on research data. Research Data Australia – a discovery service for research data from Australian universities supported by ANDS – is a model the DCC is looking at to see how a similar service could be provided in the UK.
  • There are many examples of guidance and training – most are Creative Commons licensed so you can repurpose them. At the University of Glasgow, the Incremental project pulled together details of existing support to raise awareness of services that tended to be missed or misunderstood. Mantra provided excellent online training modules, as did other JISC RDMTrain projects. A current trend is to embed RDM into existing curricula e.g. core PhD skills courses. The research360 project is collaborating with a Doctoral Training Centre and reflect on this in their blog
  • Lots of training materials have been created on the JISC MRD programme. The outputs from the 5 disciplinary training projects are all freely available to reuse and are deposited in JORUM. We have mapped the modules & materials to the DCC lifecycle model to help people find relevant resources.
  • There are five institutional RDM policies at present (April 2012). These differ in approach: Oxford University doesn’t have a policy per se. They collaborated with the University of Melbourne on the EIDCSR project (c.2009) and realised that implementation is a stumbling block so first introduced a Statement of Commitment until infrastructure was developed. A proper policy is being developed on the DaMaRO project. The University of Edinburgh’s policy is exemplary and seems to be the biggest influence on policy development at other institutions. It was written by an external consultant (Chris Rusbridge) and is described as aspirational as they know there’s some way to go to make it a reality. The University of Hertfordshire has RDM requirements as part of a wider data management policy. The language/style is more legal, however an appendix provides much more practical guidance on data management. The University of Northampton reiterates the RCUK Code as its guiding principle and usefully provides guidance on procedures and support to explain how the policy should be implemented. An the University of East London has taken the Edinburgh policy as a model and made minor adjustments and additions – rewording, adding data review dates etc
  • Other universities are sharing lessons about how they are developing policy. We pulled together examples of how policies were being developed in December. The news post has links to blogs and draft policy texts. There was a JISC MRD workshop on policy development in Leeds in March 2012. Suggestion to have a high-level policy (fairly generic) and accompanying user guides & support (which won’t need to go through the whole ratification process each time they’re changed) Detailed guidance for implementation may be better at a departmental / group level
  • Uppermost on many minds at the moment is the requirement to develop a roadmap in response to the EPSRC. So what is a roadmap and where do you start? The key thing isn’t this outcome (i.e. the plan) rather the process of getting there – taking stock of your current position and realising what you need to do to be in a position to comply with the EPSRC policy in 3 years so you can plan for that activity.
  • The EPSRC policy is more specific than others in terms of what institutions should be doing e.g. register data, put metadata online within 12 months of creation, access = longer period of preservation... Looking for data to be shared (linked to publications) and curated/preserved to ensure ongoing access. These requirements are essentially the same as other funders, so don’t be too blinkered by what the EPSRC is looking for specifically.
  • In the exercise, please consider the potential components of a RDM service which we’ve covered here and the strengths and weaknesses you identified earlier in the CARDIO quiz to decide what you need to do, when and how.
  • Developing research data management policy & services

    1. 1. Facing the research data challenge:ldeveloping data policy and services Sarah Jones Digital Curation Centre Funded by: DCC Northeast Scotland roadshow, 5-6 December 2012
    2. 2. Outline• Who is responsible for RDM?• What are the components of a data service?• Learning lessons from other HEIs• Developing roadmaps #dcc_dundee
    3. 3. Who is responsible for RDM? FundersAdvisory Data bodies centres Research OrganisationsSupport Publishersservices Researchers #dcc_dundee
    4. 4. Components of a research data service? Tools Support staff & services Metadata and documentation Research Archive environment& Storage systems Preserve Back-up RDM policies & Share Access Advocacy (senior mgmt & researcher) #dcc_dundee
    5. 5. Data storage – Bristol example• £2m funding to date• Petascale facility – expandable• 3 machine rooms – resilience (tape archive 2012)• Available to all researchers for research data Blue Peta at Bristol 1st 5TB free per Data Steward then £400 per TB p.a. for disk storage; tape backup £40 per TB #dcc_dundee
    6. 6. Tools – an ‘academic dropbox’ Piloted at Lincoln & National level negotiation via Janet brokerage?
    7. 7. Archiving – institutional data repositories Not intended to replace national, subject or other Essex-RDR and DataPool at Southampton established data collections Acknowledge hybrid environment #dcc_dundee
    8. 8. Archiving – external data centres Research funders’ Structured databases data centres…Disciplinary& community List of data centres: initiatives #dcc_dundee
    9. 9. Data catalogues (metadata) • DataFinder at OxfordDevelop a research data • DDI metadata byextension to the cerif standard ResearchData@Essex JISC & DCC planning national coordination Can we learn lessons from overseas? #dcc_dundee
    10. 10. Guidance and trainingCollate Online training Embed into curriculum via Doctoral Training Centres e.g. Research360@Bath #dcc_dundee
    11. 11. Disciplinary training (RDMTrain) #dcc_dundee
    12. 12. Early research data policies“Statement of commitment” legal compliance style Infrastructure  policy a section in uni DM policy useful guide as appendix “10 commandments” mutual promises aspirational Based on Edin. with a fewBaseline of RCUK Code additions+ procedures & support #dcc_dundee
    13. 13. How are others developing policies? Theme from MRD workshop in Leeds: High level policy (ratified) + User guides, practical supportDeveloping data policies: + a trend for 2012 RDM Infrastructure (news post from Dec 2011) #dcc_dundee
    14. 14. Lots to think about and develop, so where to start? #dcc_dundee
    15. 15. Make a plan! “EPSRC expects all those it funds to have developed a clear roadmap to align their policies and processes with EPSRC’s expectations by 1st May 2012, and to be fully compliant with these expectations by 1st May 2015.” #dcc_dundee
    16. 16. What is the EPSRC looking for?• Know what you hold – publish metadata• Link publications and data• Share data wherever possible EPSRC-data-policy• Curate and preserve valuable data The same as other funders (i.e. good research practice) so think broadly when you develop your strategy #dcc_dundee
    17. 17. Questions?Slides are available at: CC-BY-NC-SA by sk8geek
    18. 18. Exercise: Developing a roadmap for RDMThink about the potential components of a RDM serviceBased on the strengths/weaknesses you identified in the quiz:• Draft a list of actions needed at your institution• Attempt to prioritise your list and pencil in timeframes (consider quick wins!)• Decide who needs to be involved to make this happen? #dcc_dundee