On Wednesday, April 29, data librarian Jenny Muilenburg will lead a learning session titled "Data Management Plans: Reading, Writing and Sharing," from 2-3:30pm in the Allen Auditorium (Allen Library, University of Washington). During this 90 minutes, attendees will spend time learning about the different disciplinary and/or agency requirements for data management plans (DMPs), and will look at some examples from different disciplines. Tools and resources available to UW patrons will also be introduced, including DMP consults by librarians and DMPTool.
If you're unfamiliar with data management plans (or research data management in general), these very short videos from the University of Minnesota are a great introduction, and will be good preparation for the session.
This workshop is the last in a series began last fall. The first two were "Data Librarianship: Skills and Definitions," and "Archives & Repositories." See the workshop links here: http://staffweb.lib.washington.edu/units/Research-data-services/news/monday-april-20-2-3-30pm-data-management-plans-reading-writing-and-sharing.
Showing posts with label data management plans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label data management plans. Show all posts
Monday, April 13, 2015
Thursday, April 2, 2015
Responses to NSF's (and Other Agencies') OSTP Response (Got That?)
Last month, the National Science Foundation released a report titled "Today's Data, Tomorrow's Discoveries: Increasing Access to the Results of Research Funded by the National Science Foundation." (We summarized yhehighlights in our blog post on March 18, 2015.) This plan is the first piece of the NSF goal to provide increased public access to NSF research outputs; more from NSF is expected this month.
There was a flurry of twitter-tivity following the report's release; you can follow the continued discussion via the hashtag #OSTPresp. You'll also be able to follow a discussion about other agencies' OSTP responses that were released in the few weeks prior to the NSF report. After several agencies updated or released new policies in close succession, Amanda Whitmire at Oregon State University updated her libguide describing Federal Public Access Plans, and also created a crowd-sourced document to keep track of agencies and their plans, available here: http://bit.ly/FedOASummary. Primarily maintained by academic library-based data specialists, the document is open to additions and edits, which will help everyone stay current as new plans come out (and old ones are edited). The document includes whether an agency's policy covers data as well as traditional research outputs, embargoes, data management plan (DMP) details, preferred repositories (if stated), and more.
The UW Libraries has created a simplified version of this document that is geared toward whether agencies have DMP requirements and what their preferred repository is, with an intended audience that is not in the librarian world. Here you'll find a list of agency requirements, where data and articles are made available, and whether or not there's a DMP requirement. It's a little easier for the layperson to digest than the full list, and can be helpful in presenting this information to faculty and researchers.
Continue to watch twitter and this blog for further information about OSTP responses and what they mean for researchers. And feel free to add anything we've missed in the comments.
There was a flurry of twitter-tivity following the report's release; you can follow the continued discussion via the hashtag #OSTPresp. You'll also be able to follow a discussion about other agencies' OSTP responses that were released in the few weeks prior to the NSF report. After several agencies updated or released new policies in close succession, Amanda Whitmire at Oregon State University updated her libguide describing Federal Public Access Plans, and also created a crowd-sourced document to keep track of agencies and their plans, available here: http://bit.ly/FedOASummary. Primarily maintained by academic library-based data specialists, the document is open to additions and edits, which will help everyone stay current as new plans come out (and old ones are edited). The document includes whether an agency's policy covers data as well as traditional research outputs, embargoes, data management plan (DMP) details, preferred repositories (if stated), and more.
The UW Libraries has created a simplified version of this document that is geared toward whether agencies have DMP requirements and what their preferred repository is, with an intended audience that is not in the librarian world. Here you'll find a list of agency requirements, where data and articles are made available, and whether or not there's a DMP requirement. It's a little easier for the layperson to digest than the full list, and can be helpful in presenting this information to faculty and researchers.
Continue to watch twitter and this blog for further information about OSTP responses and what they mean for researchers. And feel free to add anything we've missed in the comments.
Wednesday, August 6, 2014
Data Librarianship Workshops
Beginning in September, Data Services Curriculum and Communications Librarian Jenny Muilenburg will be offering three Data Librarianship Workshops to librarians and staff who work with people using data. Designed to teach some of the essential concepts necessary for those working in a data support role, these workshops will cover data management plans, data librarian skills, repositories and archives, and data best practices (among others!).
Prior to each workshop there will be a small amount of readings/videos/research for attendees to complete. This will allow workshop attendees to begin with the same background knowledge, as well as enable us to share what we all bring from our different fields/positions.
Session 1, Monday, September 8, 2-3:30pm
Data Librarianship: Skills and Definitions
Curious what it means to be a “data librarian”? This workshop will look at the skills and traits necessary to work as a data librarian, whether or not your current position includes that description, as well as what other libraries and institutions are providing in the way of data support and guidance. We’ll also talk about how to gain various kind of education and training to better support data-intensive research.
Session 2, Monday, January 26, 2-3:30pm
Data Librarianship: Archives & Repositories
There are so many archives and repositories out there it can be difficult to know where to start looking to help someone in your field (or especially a field you’re not familiar with).This workshop will look at some of the categories of archives and repositories, and we’ll have time to share some of the similarities and differences across disciplines. We’ll also talk about some of the usage and ethics considerations that come into play when researchers share their data.
Session 3, Monday, April 20, 2-3:30pm
Data Management Plans: Reading, Writing, and Sharing
The words “data management plan” get tossed around a lot in certain circles. In this session, we’ll spend time learning about the different disciplinary and/or agency requirements for DMPs. We’ll also have an opportunity to read case studies from several disciplines, and learn how to help someone create their own DMP using various resources and tools from the UW Libraries.For more information, contact us at uwlib-data at uw dot edu.
Wednesday, April 2, 2014
Research Data Management Workshops: Lessons Learned
From January 22 to March 5, 2014, three University of Washington librarians offered a seven-week course in research data management. As a complement to the two workshops we offered in 2013, which were geared toward research data management basics for librarians, this series was aimed at graduate students, primarily in the School of Forest and Environmental Sciences, Biology, Engineering, the iSchool and Health Sciences.
We ran the course as a pilot of the New England Collaborative Data Management Curriculum. Jenny Muilenburg, Mahria Lebow and Joanne Rich worked together to offer the class, which was designed as a one-hour meeting with lecture and exercises, meeting once a week for seven weeks. Students were asked to register, but the classes were not required, and no credit was given. Each of the weeks touched on one concept from the NECDMC curriculum, with one change made mid-course that combined two concepts into one lecture. We took each lecture module from NECDMC and modified it to suit our personal and institutional preferences, as well as adding UW-specific information. One primary lecture room was used on the main campus, where we both recorded the lecture and streamed it to a second location in Health Sciences, where Joanne Rich facilitated the streamed lecture and ran the exercises off-air.
Each class consisted of about 30 minutes of lecture, and 30 minutes of exercise and discussion. Module topics included types, stages and formats of data; metadata; storage, backup and security; legal and ethical considerations; sharing and reuse; and archiving and preservation. Experts from on campus were asked to contribute opinions and UW-specific information, specifically on metadata, storage and security, and legal and ethical information. Overall class evaluations after each lecture were positive, with good feedback about what to include in future iterations of the class.
It was a great first foray into RDM curriculum for non-librarians, although attendance with attrition was not as good as we'd hoped. Our next move will be to take this experience and the curriculum, modify and shorten, and present it to subject-specific librarian groups on campus. I'd like to see one for STEM disciplines and the social sciences, and the health science librarians are working on one for their disciplines. More information will be forthcoming as we pull together what we've learned and where we'll go from here.
We ran the course as a pilot of the New England Collaborative Data Management Curriculum. Jenny Muilenburg, Mahria Lebow and Joanne Rich worked together to offer the class, which was designed as a one-hour meeting with lecture and exercises, meeting once a week for seven weeks. Students were asked to register, but the classes were not required, and no credit was given. Each of the weeks touched on one concept from the NECDMC curriculum, with one change made mid-course that combined two concepts into one lecture. We took each lecture module from NECDMC and modified it to suit our personal and institutional preferences, as well as adding UW-specific information. One primary lecture room was used on the main campus, where we both recorded the lecture and streamed it to a second location in Health Sciences, where Joanne Rich facilitated the streamed lecture and ran the exercises off-air.
Each class consisted of about 30 minutes of lecture, and 30 minutes of exercise and discussion. Module topics included types, stages and formats of data; metadata; storage, backup and security; legal and ethical considerations; sharing and reuse; and archiving and preservation. Experts from on campus were asked to contribute opinions and UW-specific information, specifically on metadata, storage and security, and legal and ethical information. Overall class evaluations after each lecture were positive, with good feedback about what to include in future iterations of the class.
It was a great first foray into RDM curriculum for non-librarians, although attendance with attrition was not as good as we'd hoped. Our next move will be to take this experience and the curriculum, modify and shorten, and present it to subject-specific librarian groups on campus. I'd like to see one for STEM disciplines and the social sciences, and the health science librarians are working on one for their disciplines. More information will be forthcoming as we pull together what we've learned and where we'll go from here.
Monday, March 4, 2013
The New OSTP Policy and Data
The OSTP policy changes last month that mandate greater access to federally funded research left us wondering what, exactly, it'll mean for federally funded research data. There have been several good blog posts written that summarize what the policy states and an interpretation of what the changes might mean in the realm of data.
The Scholarly Kitchen gives a history of how the policy came to be, deciphers what it means, and provides a list of agencies covered (NIH, CDC, FDA, ARHQ, NSF, NASA, DOE, USDA, FAA, FHWA, NIST, NOAA, USGS, EPA, DOD, VA, USAID, Dept. of Education, and the Smithsonian), and some first impressions of what it means for public access to funded research papers.
Carly Strasser from California Digital Library takes a look at the policy from both a scholarly article and data perspective, providing a short-and-sweet summary in plain English about potential changes from the policy.
And last, Kristin Briney spends time looking at what the policy means for data in particular.
Basically, what all this means is that data management plans will now be required of researchers on federal grants, and these plans should be supported by the various agencies. There is no particular mandate for sharing, just the "maximizing of access to research data." There is a lot of potential there for increases in data management plan creation and support, open repositories and greater access to the content therein. Agencies have 6 months from the announcement to create a policy; come August, there will be some interesting things to discuss.
The Scholarly Kitchen gives a history of how the policy came to be, deciphers what it means, and provides a list of agencies covered (NIH, CDC, FDA, ARHQ, NSF, NASA, DOE, USDA, FAA, FHWA, NIST, NOAA, USGS, EPA, DOD, VA, USAID, Dept. of Education, and the Smithsonian), and some first impressions of what it means for public access to funded research papers.
Carly Strasser from California Digital Library takes a look at the policy from both a scholarly article and data perspective, providing a short-and-sweet summary in plain English about potential changes from the policy.
And last, Kristin Briney spends time looking at what the policy means for data in particular.
Basically, what all this means is that data management plans will now be required of researchers on federal grants, and these plans should be supported by the various agencies. There is no particular mandate for sharing, just the "maximizing of access to research data." There is a lot of potential there for increases in data management plan creation and support, open repositories and greater access to the content therein. Agencies have 6 months from the announcement to create a policy; come August, there will be some interesting things to discuss.
Wednesday, December 5, 2012
UW Data Management Guide gets recognized!
Our Data Management Guide got a nice write-up from Kevin the Librarian, an NLM librarian and archivist who has been compiling a list of libraries that have data management guides. Listed as one of his top five along with the University of Minnesota, MIT, California Digital Library, and Purdue, each resource listed offers a little something different, from examples of data management plans, data planning checklists, and information on the importance of data sharing.
If you want to keep reading, he has another excellent post from July 2012 on data curation and where librarians fit in. He talks about our skill set and why we're ready-made to help researchers take care of their data. He also summarizes some nice tidbits from the data curation lifecycle that will be familiar to anyone who's helped someone archive their research.
If you want to keep reading, he has another excellent post from July 2012 on data curation and where librarians fit in. He talks about our skill set and why we're ready-made to help researchers take care of their data. He also summarizes some nice tidbits from the data curation lifecycle that will be familiar to anyone who's helped someone archive their research.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)