optional presentation title 1 rutgers, the state university of new jersey evolving research data...
TRANSCRIPT
Optional Presentation Title
1Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Evolving Research Data Services
Laura Palumbo June 16, 2015
Rutgers University Libraries
@LauraBPalumbo [email protected] & Physics Librarian/Science Data Specialist
Rutgers University Libraries, New Brunswick, NJ
Rutgers University Community Repository
2010: Launch of RUcore2011: Able to accept data
RUresearch created2012: Pilot data projects
accepted2013: Questions re copyright
& legal issues
History of RUcore
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jurvetson/
Task Force for Research Data Implementation
● Data Librarians (2)
● Health Science Librarians (2)
● Research Data Manager
● Digital Library Architect
● Metadata Librarian
● Digital Humanities Librarian
CHARGE: Environmental scan for administrative structures and evaluation processes for technical, legal, and confidential issues.
Consult with research offices; staffing, storage, and funding requirements.
Environmental Scan
https://www.flickr.com/photos/michaelcasey/
● 35 Repositories● 34 Review Criteria from ARL SPEC Kit
334, Research Data Management Services
● 5 categories: ○ Research Data Management
Services ○ Data Archiving Services ○ RDM Service Staffing ○ Partnerships ○ Research Data Policy
Highlights
● Many institutions provided data management consulting, regardless of level of data acceptance.
● Most repositories were operated by libraries; some in collaboration with OIT and/or OVPR.
● Number of staff varied from 2-18; many had part-time responsibilities for data management.
● Most placed responsibility for evaluation of data with the PI.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/katerha/
● Most allowed self-deposit of data or self-deposit and mediated deposit
● Data deposit agreements were common, similar
● Privacy was addressed by statements, stripping of confidential information, encryption
● Information about storage capacity was limited. Restrictions to file size typical,10 - 500 GB free of charge
● Funding models were not found, although a few mention fees for additional storage, and extra staff time.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/42931449@N07/
Policies
● Data Policies at an institutional level are not a given
● Most policies, where available, share a similar
format:○ the university owns the data
○ the principal investigator is the steward of that data and is responsible for complying with any restrictions or legal requirements
○ protocols exist in the event the PI leaves the institution
Image by Leo Reynolds, Flickr
A few good examples
Johns Hopkins http://jhuresearch.jhu.edu/Data_Management_Policy.pdf
New York University http://www.nyu.edu/content/dam/nyu/research/documents/OSP/PolicyonResearchData030110.pdf
Ohio State http://orc.osu.edu/files/2011/01/ResearchDataPolicy.pdf
University of Wisconsin-Madison http://researchdata.wisc.edu/research-data-policies/
Image by Mariusz Kluzniak, https://www.flickr.com/photos/39997856@N03/
Policy vs policy
Libraries can make policies which should support an institutional Policy on research data, but first need to determine:
What is the Library’s role in research data?
What are the risks involved in accepting and sharing research data? How much control will you have?
Is your institution- Library Administration, Research Office, General Counsel- comfortable with the perceived level of risk?
Deposit Agreements
Deposit agreements typically stated:
● the depositor is legally allowed to deposit the data
● data does not contain confidential or sensitive information
● the depositor holds the institution harmless
● the repository may take actions to describe, preserve, and maintain the data
Proposed Guidelines for Data Acceptance
● Will accept both science and humanities data
● Will accept funded and unfunded research data, but funded may be given preference
● The “responsible researcher” must be Rutgers faculty or staff, and must initiate the deposit process
● Data associated with grad students electronic D & T will be accepted
● Short term embargoes will be allowed
● The depositor will sign a deposit agreement
Proposed Guidelines for Initial Implementation
● Mediated deposit only
● Initial projects will be 100 GB or less without fees
● Data must be in digital format
● No human or animal subjects
● No commercial interests
● No data which would require system modificationsImage by Alan Levine https://www.flickr.com/photos/cogdog/
Future development ?
● Full implementation would allow self-deposit, with online forms for deposit agreement, checklist, and application form for metadata
● Metadata entry would ideally be automated
● Data would be subject to a brief review for technical and possible copyright or legal issues
● Special projects would be mediated- very large, special formats, system modifications, other?
Considerations
● Funding- how will your service become sustainable?
● Metadata- staff-time intensive or automated? How much is enough?
● Data service responsibilities- will this be a part-time function for many, full-time for a few, or both?
● Will your service be easy and efficient, so that researchers want to use it?
● What value does your library add to the research process?
