Presentation given by Robin Burgess, KAPTUR Project Officer for The Glasgow School of Art, at the DCC Roadshow Northeast Scotland, University of Dundee, 5th December 2012

1. Developing a Research Data
Management Policy
The Glasgow School of Art in conjunction with KAPTUR
Dr Robin Burgess
5th December 2012

2. Presentation Context
• Introduce the KAPTUR project
• Highlight policy development at GSA
• Comment on the issues and lessons learnt
so far
• Give details of the next steps in
development

3. KAPTUR
• Objective is to discover, create and pilot a
sectoral model of best practice in the
management of research data in the visual
arts.

4. Process
• Requirements set by funding bodies
• Discussions amongst project team on the
issues of data management
• Approach developed to involve
researchers and other infrastructure
• Interviews
• Environmental assessment

5. Interview Process
• 4 researchers from each institute chosen,
from a broad range of disciplines
• Areas discussed
- Terminology
- Role of the visual arts researcher
- Creation of visual arts research data
- Use/re-use of visual arts data
- Visual arts data in the longer term

6. Interview Findings
• The term ‘research data’ was not helpful
• Researchers undertake multiple roles
• Creation of data altered
• Awareness of use and re-use present
• Importance of archiving raised
• Brought about the environmental
assessment report

7. Quote from a researcher:
“… I am not sure what constitutes research
data… What is data? I mean, I talk to you about
my data as a researcher, but for the institution,
what does it consider data? Would it be
conference proceedings, would a performance
be data even if it was not recorded, sometimes I
don’t record my performances…”

8. Environmental Assessment
• Little consensus in the visual arts on what
research data is
• Described as tangible, intangible, digital,
and physical
• Visual arts data is heterogeneous and
infinite, complex and complicated
• http://www.vads.ac.uk/kaptur/

9. Policy Development
• Involvement of Kaptur
• Support from project partners
• Liaison with outside sources – e.g. the DCC
• Attendance at events – Conference in Leeds
• Involvement of interested parties at GSA – IT,
Information Services and the Library,
Research Office, Researchers
• Working Groups

10. Approach
• Context • Iterative process
• Definition of research data • Discussions held
• Policy statements • Obtaining feedback
• Implementation methods • Sign off and agreement

11. Comments
Issues: Lessons Learnt:
• Building the support • To be open and discuss
network at GSA the work fully
• Extensive focus on the • Identify the correct people
REF process to engage with
• Changes in management • Formulate an action plan
• Changes in staffing for development
• Expressing the • Communicate
importance of policies • Obtain by-in early on
• EPSRC letter

12. Next Steps
Moving Forwards: Additional Work:
• Complete 2nd draft policy • Present at an All Staff
document by 21st meeting about Kaptur
December 2012 • Educate the research
• Share with Head of office on the importance
Information services of the policy for bid
• Make relevant changes writing/funding
and share with research • Educate research staff
office through workshops and
• February 2013, present to training
research and knowledge • Promotional work
exchange committee • Conferences

13. What is Arts Research
Data?
What is arts research data? What is arts research data?
What does it mean to you? We tried to find out
Research art design architecture We asked various researchers
I’m going to tell you And this is what we found…

14. A-Z of research data…
•K is for KEEP
•A is for ARCHIVE
•P is for PROCESS
•T is for TEACHING
•U is for UNFINISHED
•R is for REPOSITORY

15. Acknowledgements
• The project officers from partner institutes
• VADS
• JISC for sponsoring the project
• DCC
THANKYOU!
http://www.vads.ac.uk/kaptur/