November 17, 2008 John MacColl European Director, RLG Partnership, OCLC Research
Supporting Research Dissemination John MacColl European Director, RLG Partnership James Toon ERIS...
-
Upload
sarah-gallegos -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
Transcript of Supporting Research Dissemination John MacColl European Director, RLG Partnership James Toon ERIS...
Supporting Research Dissemination
John MacCollEuropean Director, RLG Partnership
James ToonERIS Project ManagerEdinburgh University Library
RLG Partnership Annual Meeting, Chicago, June 2010
Supporting Research Dissemination 2
Context
Supporting Research Dissemination 3
Minnesota: anthropological approach
Supporting Research Dissemination 4
Actionable intelligence … Assisted thinking
Analysis and synthesis of the available evidence base
Improved understanding for library management
oclc.org/research/publications/library/2009/2009-02.pdf
Supporting Research Dissemination 5
accessing
assessing
chaining
disseminating
networking
Interdisciplinary
probing
translating
Humanities
Sciences direct
searching
scanning
co-authoring
coordinating
monitoring
data-sharing
browsing
collecting
re-reading
assembling
consulting
note-taking
Breaking behaviours down by discipline
Adapted from C. Palmer, L. Teffau, C. Pirmann (2009)
Supporting Research Dissemination 6
RIM: overlapping environments
Supporting Research Dissemination 7
Meeting researchers’ needs
Supporting Research Dissemination 8
RIN
Supporting Research Dissemination 9
Ithaka
Supporting Research Dissemination 10
UCB
Supporting Research Dissemination 11
Our joint project with UK Research Information Network: Support for research workflows
Supporting Research Dissemination 12
New elements to our study
•Focus on dissemination excluding traditional journal and monograph publishing
•Focus on subject librarians/faculty liaisons•Focus on repository support for scholarship
Supporting Research Dissemination 13
Enhancing Repository Infrastructure in Scotland
Supporting Research Dissemination 14
Scotland and Open Access
Supporting Research Dissemination 15
Some history: Scottish Collaboration in Open Access
• History of collaborative activity (i.e. SCURL, SHEDL, SDLC, IRIScotland, ERIS)
• Open Access as a reaction to the ‘scholarly communications crisis
• Open Access meeting 11th October 2004, Royal Society of Edinburgh
• Scottish Declaration on Open Access launched at that meeting (OATS)
• First joint OA project IRIScotland funded by JISC June 2005 and ran until 2008
Supporting Research Dissemination 16
Scope, aims and objectives
• Development, assessment and engagement of user communities
• Raise issues surrounding the longevity and broader value of research output
• ‘Attending to the demand side’, technologically
• Strategic recommendations, business planning and sustainability
Supporting Research Dissemination 17
Scottish toes in the water …
Supporting Research Dissemination 20
A few findings from our work
http://www.flickr.com/photos/adambot/2733161467/
Supporting Research Dissemination 21
Levels of engagement
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Aware of your IR? Ever used it? Ever used SRs?
Arts &Humanities
Biosciences
Science &Engineering
SocialSciences
• 69.7% (216) of respondents were aware of the existence of a repository
• 44.8% (139) have deposited something in their repository, with 80% finding it either very easy, or easy to do.
Supporting Research Dissemination 22
Levels of engagement
Keep on my local PC/Laptop
40%
Copy to a CD/DVD and file offsite
11%
deposit in my institution's repository
15%
Send them to a departmental
administrator to manage/store
7%
Put an approved copy on my personal or
departmental website12%
Deposit in a subject based repository
3%
Put the approved copy of the submission onto a networked drive at my
institution so it is backed up
12%
However on average, only 15% submit to their IR as a matter of course as well as to publishers
15%
Supporting Research Dissemination 23
Levels of engagement
Referral to institutional
repository (via search engine
or personal referral)
59%
Direct search using
institutional repository19% (11% own, 8% other)
Never used an institutional repository
22%• Repositories are
being used for research, but very rarely are they used directly.
• Normally via referral (43% via search engine, and 16% referral from colleague
Supporting Research Dissemination 24
From focus group work (some key points) – open access
• Researchers generally see repositories as being there to support their institutions support for OA
• Personally they are generally supportive of OA, but there are pro’s and con’s and no single convincing argument (and don’t think their should be)
• Researchers have been doing OA – if they wanted to – for years now, by fair means or foul!
• Variation in support across career paths (early career to senior academic)
• The drive to OA can be damaging in some cases
Supporting Research Dissemination 25
From focus group work (some key points)• The pressure to publish in recognised journals
is significant, and is an administrative and career need (in the UK at least)
• Must have ability to exercise personal control over everything that is in the repository (to provide or revoke access at will)
• Repositories don’t offer anything that the researcher finds sufficiently of value to motivate deposit.
• Library providers are disconnected from the researchers real needs (as far as researchers are concerned)
Supporting Research Dissemination 26
Long term availability and reuse of research
• Those responsible for service and support are unequipped;
• Low awareness of digital curation and preservation issues, and little to no practical experience
• Policies that do exist are part of corporate initiatives and are often box ticking exercises
• Domain specific guidance for preservation and curation policy tends to sit outside of the institution, indicating issues of leadership and direction
Supporting Research Dissemination 27
Long term availability and reuse of research• Those responsible for research are unequipped;
• Open access is easy in relation; [insert your term here] curation is hard.
• Potentially huge overhead for the researcher
• Services for preservation and curation support are generally lacking
• ‘We can't stand on the shoulders of giants if we only have access to their knees1’
• Growing support for principle of open scholarship, but requires change in philosophy, not practice.
1. Quote from Vision Learning Blog, may 24th 2010 http://visionlearningcommunity.blogspot.com/2010/05/journal-nature-continues-open-access.html
Supporting Research Dissemination 28
Indication of the scale of the issuePut the approved copy
of the submission onto a networked drive at my
institution so it is backed up
12%
Deposit in a subject based repository
3%
Put an approved copy on my personal or
departmental website12%
Send them to a departmental
administrator to manage/store
7%
deposit in my institution's repository
15%
Copy to a CD/DVD and file offsite
11%
Keep on my local PC/Laptop
40%
Supporting Research Dissemination 29
Indication of the scale of the issuePut the approved copy
of the submission onto a networked drive at my
institution so it is backed up
12%
Deposit in a subject based repository
3%
Put an approved copy on my personal or
departmental website12%
Send them to a departmental
administrator to manage/store
7%
deposit in my institution's repository
15%
Copy to a CD/DVD and file offsite
11%
Keep on my local PC/Laptop
40%
63%
Supporting Research Dissemination 30
Research pooling• Not just for assessment, but for effective
strategic management of research
• Genuine desire for full text and bibliographic data for knowledge management (KT really important)
• Have strong backing from their members. Discipline trumps institution.
• Data must be broader than just IR – need to include HR, Finance, Knowledge data, Grant data, Funder data…….
• They know they want data, but they don’t know what they want or how to define it.
Supporting Research Dissemination 31
A few observations (not conclusions)
• Systems and services not based on user needs
• Repository use often by ‘accident’
• There is no single approach – every institution/discipline/researcher is different
• Its all about me, me, me.
• We can often talk in a foreign language
• We can often not talk at all
• Failure to add value has meant that we had to resort to mandates/requirements – sticks not carrots.
Supporting Research Dissemination 32
‘What is the future of the repository?’• As it is – are we heading
the way of the Dodo?
• Must gain trust of the users
• Two clear paths – support for knowledge and research, and support for research management
• Institutional repositories are only part of the eco-system of systems servicing the research life cycle
http://www.flickr.com/photos/44124372821@N01/167871469
Supporting Research Dissemination 33
Work with users to gain trust and define direction• Stakeholder communities are identifiable and
similar across Higher Education
• Many varied needs.
• Roles and mission are however not universally well defined in context.
• Lack of internal support means they are often looking outside their institutions for comfort.
• Stakeholder groups want to collaborate and communicate
• Need greater facilitation. Opportunities for national networks
Supporting Research Dissemination 34
Develop roles and up-skill support services • All through the ERIS exercise, the need for
effective research support has been key
• Need to develop specialist roles to support the research life cycle
• Take a role in helping researchers with the dissemination of knowledge
• Work more closely together with research offices as ‘information specialists’
• Economies of scale in services need to be considered for cost/benefit (unpopular)
Supporting Research Dissemination 35
Support the dissemination of knowledge• Open access is still a goal, but not *THE* goal of
repositories. Discuss.
• Open scholarship/knowledge revolves around effective curation of ‘data’. Discuss.
• “The coolest thing to do with your data will be thought of by someone else1”
• Being linked and being open is important (open standards esp.)
• How to engage in an open, social world. Participate, collaborate and innovate – not reinvent the wheel.
1. Attributed to Rufus Pollack, via http://blogs.talis.com/nodalities/2007/05/xtech_day_3_rufus_pollock_and_.php
Supporting Research Dissemination 36
Research Information Management Systems
Image reproduced with kind permission of the Universities of Aberdeen and St Andrews
Supporting Research Dissemination 37
Make change to an objective, outcome based approach.
• Programme of activity to develop enhanced capability over time.
• Investment in enabling activities
• Services for researchers
• Services for strategy and management
• Services for ‘service managers’
Supporting Research Dissemination 38
The study
Supporting Research Dissemination 39
Researcher behaviours
• This Working Group will look at the use of repositories – institutional and subject – and other venues where attention is focused by various communities
• It will examine social networking mechanisms for dissemination, considering the spectrum of community services grouped around research activity (including informal community spaces, blogs, blog aggregation services, microblogging, etc )
• Faculty participants will also be asked about tools and services not currently available that they would value, at institutional and at domain levels
• Focus will be on the use of repositories, not the deposit process
Supporting Research Dissemination 40
Library responses
• How are changing researcher practices being monitored by libraries?
• What does the use of these tools and services imply for libraries (eg in respect of harvesting, curation, bibliometric services and preservation)?
• What new services should libraries provide (eg bibliometric data reports generated from repositories)?
• Is there missing infrastructure that might valuably connect discrete data sources to serve research bibliographic and data curation needs?
• How do libraries support scholarship rather than administration?
Supporting Research Dissemination 41
U Minnesota: Karen Williams on changing faculty liaison roles (ARL study): from new Position Description Framework
Jim Neal: ‘
Subject Libraria
n 2.0’
Supporting Research Dissemination 42
Nil desperandum … Hugh Glaser (Computer Scientist, U Southampton); email to JISC-REPOSITORIES, 2 June 2010
‘the pages the School was offering for me by embedding my publication data in the official profile pages was far superior to anything I could make myself’
Supporting Research Dissemination 43
U Minnesota: Karen Williams on changing faculty liaison roles (ARL study)
Supporting Research Dissemination 44
Process
Supporting Research Dissemination 45
RLG-RIM SRD group – Plan/Process (1)
• Identify and define scope of stakeholders and how are they going to contribute to the project
• Establish contact with contributing group
• Write and agree project definition work
• Arrange telcon to sign off approach with stakeholders at end June
• Project Website and social tools to be used for user communication and collaboration
• Set up and make available communication routes
• Set up simple communications plan by end June
Supporting Research Dissemination 46
RLG-RIM SRD group – Plan/Process (2)• Liaison librarian engagement plan
• Agree data collection method, questions and targets for work by end June
• Prepare materials for project participants
• Prepare datasheets, questions, check-sheets etc for data collection by mid July
• Compiled, ordered data from sources
• Data returned, sorted and ordered by end August
• Mid August partner telcon to discuss progress and push if necessary
• Data analysis
• Review of collated data and order for reporting by end Sept
Supporting Research Dissemination 47
RLG-RIM SRD group – Plan/Process (3)
• A Final report on the RLG/RIM SRD activity for publication
• First draft out for review by mid Oct.
• Partner telcon at end Oct to sign off report for publication
• Publication due mid November.
• Planning for alternative dissemination routes
• Set activities to promote final report (presentations, blog posts) on ongoing basis
• Closure report, identifying follow on actions including handover and wind-down activities
• Project wind down and hand over to RLG by end November
Supporting Research Dissemination 49
Next up
4:00Lightning Rounds
Buckingham