Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Supporting Research Dissemination John MacColl European Director, RLG Partnership James Toon ERIS Project Manager Edinburgh University Library RLG Partnership.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Supporting Research Dissemination John MacColl European Director, RLG Partnership James Toon ERIS Project Manager Edinburgh University Library RLG Partnership."— Presentation transcript:

1 Supporting Research Dissemination John MacColl European Director, RLG Partnership James Toon ERIS Project Manager Edinburgh University Library RLG Partnership Annual Meeting, Chicago, June 2010

2 Supporting Research Dissemination2 Context

3 Supporting Research Dissemination3 Minnesota: anthropological approach

4 Supporting Research Dissemination4 Actionable intelligence … Assisted thinking Analysis and synthesis of the available evidence base Improved understanding for library management

5 Supporting Research Dissemination5 accessing assessing chaining disseminating networking Interdisciplinary probing translating HumanitiesSciences 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)

6 Supporting Research Dissemination6 RIM: overlapping environments

7 Supporting Research Dissemination7 Meeting researchers needs

8 Supporting Research Dissemination8 RIN

9 Supporting Research Dissemination9 Ithaka

10 Supporting Research Dissemination10 UCB

11 Supporting Research Dissemination11 Our joint project with UK Research Information Network: Support for research workflows

12 Supporting Research Dissemination12 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

13 Supporting Research Dissemination13 Enhancing Repository Infrastructure in Scotland

14 Supporting Research Dissemination14 Scotland and Open Access

15 Supporting Research Dissemination15 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 11 th 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

16 Supporting Research Dissemination16 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

17 Supporting Research Dissemination17 Scottish toes in the water …

18 Supporting Research Dissemination18 ERIS Use case: Research Pooling (1) Formed after 2001 Research Assessment Exercise Subject to massive investment by Scottish HEI, Scottish Funding Council and others Demonstrated value following 2008 Research Assessment Exercise Specific needs for reporting and strategic development More than £383 million invested to date across13 initiatives.

19 Supporting Research Dissemination19 ERIS Use case: Research Pooling (2) Are research pools representative of specific disciplinary needs? Assessment of pooling performance indicators Identify and understand information drivers Review of research pool (meta)data needs plus gap analysis against existing repository landscape Develop virtual repository space to facilitate reporting

20 Supporting Research Dissemination20 A few findings from our work

21 Supporting Research Dissemination21 Levels of engagement 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.

22 Supporting Research Dissemination22 Levels of engagement However on average, only 15% submit to their IR as a matter of course as well as to publishers 15%

23 Supporting Research Dissemination23 Levels of engagement 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

24 Supporting Research Dissemination24 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 pros and cons and no single convincing argument (and dont 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

25 Supporting Research Dissemination25 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 dont 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)

26 Supporting Research Dissemination26 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

27 Supporting Research Dissemination27 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 knees 1 Growing support for principle of open scholarship, but requires change in philosophy, not practice. 1. Quote from Vision Learning Blog, may 24 th 2010

28 Supporting Research Dissemination28 Indication of the scale of the issue

29 Supporting Research Dissemination29 Indication of the scale of the issue 63%

30 Supporting Research Dissemination30 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 dont know what they want or how to define it.

31 Supporting Research Dissemination31 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.

32 Supporting Research Dissemination32 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

33 Supporting Research Dissemination33 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

34 Supporting Research Dissemination34 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)

35 Supporting Research Dissemination35 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 else 1 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

36 Supporting Research Dissemination36 Research Information Management Systems Image reproduced with kind permission of the Universities of Aberdeen and St Andrews

37 Supporting Research Dissemination37 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

38 Supporting Research Dissemination38 The study

39 Supporting Research Dissemination39 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

40 Supporting Research Dissemination40 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?

41 Supporting Research Dissemination41 U Minnesota: Karen Williams on changing faculty liaison roles (ARL study): from new Position Description Framework Jim Neal: Subject Librarian 2.0

42 Supporting Research Dissemination42 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

43 Supporting Research Dissemination43 U Minnesota: Karen Williams on changing faculty liaison roles (ARL study)

44 Supporting Research Dissemination44 Process

45 Supporting Research Dissemination45 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

46 Supporting Research Dissemination46 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

47 Supporting Research Dissemination47 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

48 Discussion!

49 Supporting Research Dissemination49 Next up 4:00 Lightning Rounds Buckingham

Download ppt "Supporting Research Dissemination John MacColl European Director, RLG Partnership James Toon ERIS Project Manager Edinburgh University Library RLG Partnership."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google