On
November 18th 2013, the London School of Hygiene & Tropical
Medicine organised a two hour seminar for support staff interested or involved
in RDM developments. The seminar kick-started a week of events being organised
at the School to celebrate Explore Your Archives week[1],
examining the emerging role that digital collections have within libraries and
archives.
The
seminar format was intentionally unstructured – there would be no
presentations, just a set of broad topics to encourage discussion. The informal
nature of the discussion created a relaxed atmosphere, which was encouraging
for those who were new to the topic. The shortness of the seminar – just two
hours over lunchtime – was also seen as a benefit. Participants could simply
take an extended lunch break and go back to work, rather than spending half or
a whole day out of the office.
In total,
fifteen people attended - librarians, archivists, digital curators and policy
makers – from several institutions, including Birkbeck, Royal Veterinary
College, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, University College
London, University of East London and the University of Westminster.
The
session began with an introduction from Victoria Cranna, LSHTM Archivist &
Records Manager, who explained the motivation for establishing a Research Data
Management Service at LSHTM and the importance of sharing knowledge and
experience across the sector. It was recognised that RDM was a big topic that
had developed significantly over the past few years. To ensure that the
academic sector can adapt to evolving requirements, there was a need for mutual
support, sharing knowledge and expertise in order to address researchers’
evolving needs.
Following
introductions, each participant provided an overview of current work taking
place in their institutions surrounding Research Data Management. There was a
varying level of experience around the table from those who were actively
working on RDM project, to those that had been tasked with finding out more
information. For the most part, participants indicated that RDM work was being
led by the library or archives service. An exception to this is UCL, which has
RDM components being developed across the institution.
The drive
to develop RDM services was motivated by several factors, including a desire to
improve the likelihood that projects will be funded, comply with funder
expectations for short and long-term data management (particularly EPSRC),
support REF activities, provide join-up between disparate components, and
address researcher needs for storage and retention of data.
The
availability of funds was recognised as a key factor in the development of RDM
Services. While UCL, UEL and LSHTM had benefited from dedicated funding (from
JISC in the first two instances, Wellcome Trust in the latter case) other
institutional representatives were developing RDM expertise using institutional
funds, as a component of their existing role. As a result, work sometimes took
place at a slower rate.
This led
to a discussion on the relationship between institutional and national data
archives, such as the UK Data Service. Although national services were
considered to provide cross-sector support, they were not considered to be an
appropriate replacement for local knowledge and expertise. Additionally, it was
recognised that a significant percentage of research data in academia covers
subject areas that are beyond the subject or geographic domain of these data
repositories. Alternatives such as Dryad and Figshare are less restrictive, in
terms of the content they will accept, but considered to be less prestigious
for some researchers.
The role
of universities in ensuring long-term preservation of research data was raised.
Although, in principle, many types of data can be deleted after 10 years in
principle, the complexity of international and national regulations and
contractual obligations result in many institutions taking a risk adverse
approach, storing data for longer than is potentially necessary. In many
research communities, such as clinical trials, there is a desire to keep data
forever. Although there’s a desire in academic libraries and archives to curate
and preserve research data, many are unsure how they will fund such activities
in the long-term.
Participants
were asked if they were taking a proactive or reactive approach to RDM support.
Most admitted that they were reactive, responding to issues as they emerged.
However, there was a desire to provide institution-specific training workshops
and web-based courses, in order to promote good practice. Although a number of
sector-wide resources are available in this area, they were considered too
long, cumbersome and dry. To ensure RDM material are suitable, academics need
to take a leading role in its development, working in collaboration with
support staff, rather than relying upon support staff to perform work.
Finally,
it was asked how RDM issues could be forced on to the research agenda: should
horror stories be promoted? Participants believed that this would attract
attention, but may cause researchers to panic and refuse to engage. Instead,
case studies that promoted a positive message, explaining how RDM practices have
helped researchers to perform their work was seen as more effective.
Concluding thoughts
Events
such as the RDM Expertise Exchange are increasingly important for sharing
knowledge and experience between institutions. For several years, we’ve been
fortunate to receive support from JISC in establishing the RDM agenda, through
coordination of cross-institution activities. A grassroots approach is needed
to ensure that knowledge and experience continue to be shared.
The lunchtime
seminar fulfils a need that cannot be addressed by formal workshops.
Participants could fit the session into their working day, without having to
spend a significant amount of time out of the office. The informal nature of
the session created a relaxed atmosphere, which was encouraging for those who
were new to the topic, and allowed participants to have greater control over
the topics being discussed. Feedback on the session was positive, with all
indicating that they’d be interested in similar events being organised during
2014.
No comments:
Post a Comment