Cambridge Workshop - Directions in RDM

A report of a joint ARMA, RLUK, RUGIT, SCONUL, UCISA and Jisc workshop that underpins the "Directions in Research Data Management" report. Presentations from the event can be found at: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/events/directions-for-research-data-management-in-uk-universities-06-nov-2014 A blog post about the event can be found at: http://researchdata.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2014/12/04/directions-in-research-data-management/

Keeping Research Data Safe 2 (KRDS2)

Data has always been fundamental to many areas of research but in recent years it has become central to more disciplines and inter-disciplinary projects and grown substantially in scale and complexity. There is increasing awareness of its strategic importance as a resource in addressing modern global challenges and the possibilities being unlocked by rapid technological advances and their application in research (NAS2009). The first Keeping Research Data Safe study funded by JISC made a major contribution to understanding of long-term preservation costs for research data by developing a cost model and identifying cost variables for preserving research data in UK universities (Beagrie et al, 2008). The Keeping Research Data Safe 2 (KRDS2) project has built on this work.

Knowledge Exchange meeting on Research tools

Knowledge Exchange investigated the diversity and complexity of research tools, techniques and researchers' behaviours to identify how and where the initiative can eliminate barriers to cooperation between different parts of the whole system. Experts from the partner organisations and beyond exchanged knowledge and experiences, during our meeting on Research Tools which took place on 27 June 2012, in Utrecht, the Netherlands. Experts considered ‘the use of digital technologies in research' or ‘digital research tools' with a view to informing future Knowledge Exchange activities.

KE Workshop report: Report Knowledge Exchange workshop Making data count - Research Data and Research Assessment

The possibilities of digital research have altered the production, publication and use of research results. Academic research practice and culture are changing or have already been transformed, but to a large degree the system of academic recognition has not yet adapted to the practices and possibilities of digital research. This applies especially to research data, which are increasingly produced, managed, published and archived, but play hardly a role yet in practices of research assessment. The aim of the workshop was to bring experts and stakeholders from research institutions, universities, scholarly societies and funding agencies together in order to review, discuss and build on possibilities to implement the culture of sharing and to integrate publication of data into research assessment procedures. The report 'The Value of Research Data - Metrics for datasets from a cultural and technical point of view' was presented and discussed. Some of the key finding were that data sharing should be considered normal research practice, in fact not sharing should be considered malpractice. Research funders and universities should support and encourage data sharing. There are a number of important aspects to consider when making data count in research and evaluation procedures. Metrics are a necessary tool in monitoring the sharing of data sets. However, data metrics are at present not very well developed and there is not yet enough experience in what these metrics actually mean. It is important to implement the culture of sharing through codes of conducts in the scientific communities. For further key findings please read the report.

Research Software Sustainability: Report on Knowledge Exchange Workshop

The report introduces software sustainability, provides definitions, clearly demonstrates that software is not the same as data and illustrates aspects of sustainability in the software lifecycle. The recommendations state that improving software sustainability requires a number of changes: some technical and others societal, some small and others significant. We must start by raising awareness of researchers’ reliance on software. This goal will become easier if we recognise the valuable contribution that software makes to research – and reward those people who invest their time into developing reliable and reproducible software. The adoption of software has led to significant advances in research. But if we do not change our research practices, the continued rise in software use will be accompanied by a rise in retractions. Ultimately, anyone who is concerned about the reliability and reproducibility of research should be concerned about software sustainability. Beside highlighting the benefits of software sustainability and addressing the societal and technical barriers to software sustainability, the report provides access to expertise in software sustainability and outlines the role of funders. The report concludes with a short landscape of national activities in Europe and outside Europe. As a result of the workshop steps will be explored to establish European coordination and cooperation of national initiatives.