14 resultados para funding
em JISC Information Environment Repository
Resumo:
As part of an LSIS Regional Response Fund project, Otley College has developed an online toolkit for one-to-one tutorials, based on research undertaken with practitioners and learners. The toolkit has been developed to meet the needs of students and tutors, and attempts to fulfil the requirement for tutorials within a new straightened funding agreement.
Resumo:
Responsible Research Data Management (RDM) is a pillar of quality research. In practice good RDM requires the support of a well-functioning Research Data Infrastructure (RDI). One of the challenges the research community is facing is how to fund the management of research data and the required infrastructure. Knowledge Exchange and Science Europe have both defined activities to explore how RDM/RDI are, or can be, funded. Independently they each planned to survey users and providers of data services and on becoming aware of the similar objectives and approaches, the Science Europe Working Group on Research Data and the Knowledge Exchange Research Data expert group joined forces and devised a joint activity to to inform the discussion on the funding of RDM/RDI in Europe.
Resumo:
Oldham College have used on-line learning to offer certificated courses in Internet Safety, Environmental Sustainability, Health and Safety and Personal Finance whilst at the same time freeing up teaching staff and obtaining funding.
Resumo:
Through LSC funding, Thurrock Adult Community College (TACC) purchased a single-deck bus, equipped with all the essential equipment that has allowed them to deliver fundamental IT skills within local communities. The bus travels to various local towns and villages which in turn has brought learning to the learners. This has proved to be very useful for those who perhaps have difficulty travelling to the main campuses or do not have the confidence to enrol on a course.
Resumo:
Headjogs is a well established hair academy within the Essex and East of London region. This work-based learning provider is run by Stephen Daly, Director, and Debbie Scott. Around six months ago, Debbie participated in the e-Guides programme, where she gained the expertise to implement innovative technology into the curriculum. Since then they have received Association of Learning Providers (ALP) Learner Innovation Grant funding with which they plan to reinforce their innovative approach to hairdressing.
Resumo:
As part of an LSIS Regional Response Fund project, Essex Adult Community Learning (ACL) has created a toolkit. The toolkit provides training for foreign language tutors in producing digital resources which combine audio, video, text and communication activities. The toolkit which is now an integral part of a blended learning language course, has also developed tutors' skills in using technology for teaching and learning. The main aim has also been to provide an alternative and flexible method of delivery, especially where funding cuts have impacted on the cost of running taught courses.
Resumo:
This study has investigated the medium to long term costs to Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) of the preservation of research data and developed guidance to HEFCE and institutions on these issues. It has provided an essential methodological foundation on research data costs for the forthcoming HEFCE-sponsored feasibility study for a UK Research Data Service.It will also assist HEIs and funding bodies wishing to establish strategies and TRAC costings for long-term data management and archiving. The rising tide of digital research data raises issues relating to access, curation and preservation for HEIs and within the UK a growing number of research funders are now implementing policies requiring researchers to submit data management, preservation or data sharing plans with their funding applications.
Resumo:
Although some services that support Open Access have developed a sustainable business model, many started as projects and continue to run on recurrent project funding or goodwill. If these are critical components of the evolving scholarly communication system the foundation of Open Access is vulnerable. Knowledge Exchange has commissioned this study as part of a larger programme of work to look at the issue of sustaining key services into the long term. This report focuses on phases one and two of the programme. Phase one was a scoping exercise, carried out mainly through a literature review and an extensive stakeholder interview exercise, to describe the services that are currently available or would be valuable in the future. It also investigated what roles stakeholders could play in this future scenario. Phase two was a stakeholder consultation and engagement exercise. The aim was to engage stakeholders with the work programme so that they could contribute their views, get involved with the work and have a voice in the thinking about future scenarios. The key services are presented for three future scenarios: ‘Gold’ Open Access, fully ‘Green’ Open Access and Green’ Open Access supplementing subscription access as ‘Gold’ OA grows. Three strategic areas are identified as having particular potential for future work. These are embedding business development expertise into service development; consideration of how to move money around the system to enable Open Access to be achieved optimally; and governance and coordination of the infrastructural foundation of Open Access. The report concludes with seven recommendations, both high-level and practical, for further work around these strategic areas.
Resumo:
The report ‘Sustainability of Open Access Services - Phase 3: The Collective Provision of Open Access Resources’ discusses the economic and institutional issues faced by those sustaining free infrastructure services. It also identifies strategies to coordinate the collective provision of infrastructure services. These considerations are valuable input for the phases 4 and 5 of the project ‘Sustainability of Open Access Services’. This body of work will lead to practical recommendations for funders and project planners to consider when initiating an infrastructure service. The report was written by Raym Crow and funded by SPARC. Several key messages from the report are of interest. Providing infrastructure services as a public good imposes specific requirements on the design of the sustainability model. The challenge is to get enough institutions to reveal their demand for the service and support this. Arguments for an institution to support can be altruism or reciprocity or there being sufficient benefit to the institution for supporting a service. Institutions can also work together on a service through collective action (collecting voluntary contributions) and cross subsidies (funding collected by offering exclusive benefits to contributors).
Resumo:
This briefing paper offers insight into various open access business models, from institutional to subject repositories, from open access journals to research data and monographs. This overview shows that there is a considerable variety in business models within a common framework of public funding. Open access through institutional repositories requires funding from particular institutions to set up and maintain a repository, while subject repositories often require contributions from a number of institutions or funding agencies to maintain a subject repository hosted at one institution. Open access through publication in open access journals generally requires a mix of funding sources to meet the cost of publishing. Public or charitable research funding bodies may contribute part of the cost of publishing in an open access journal but institutions also meet part of the cost, particularly when the author does not have a research grant from a research funding body
Resumo:
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.
Resumo:
In contrast to cost modeling activities, the pricing of services must be simple and transparent. Calculating and thus knowing price structures, would not only help identify the level of detail required for cost modeling of individual instititutions, but also help develop a ”public” market for services as well as clarify the division of task and the modeling of funding and revenue streams for data preservation of public institutions. This workshop has built on the results from the workshop ”The Costs and Benefits of Keeping Knowledge” which took place 11 June 2012 in Copenhagen. This expert workshop aimed at: •Identifying ways for data repositories to abstract from their complicated cost structures and arrive at one transparent pricing structure which can be aligned with available and plausible funding schemes. Those repositories will probably need a stable institutional funding stream for data management and preservation. Are there any estimates for this, absolute or as percentage of overall cost? Part of the revenue will probably have to come through data management fees upon ingest. How could that be priced? Per dataset, per GB or as a percentage of research cost? Will it be necessary to charge access prices, as they contradict the open science paradigm? •What are the price components for pricing individual services, which prices are currently being paid e.g. to commercial providers? What are the description and conditions of the service(s) delivered and guaranteed? •What types of risks are inherent in these pricing schemes? •How can services and prices be defined in an all-inclusive and simple manner, so as to enable researchers to apply for specific amount when asking for funding of data-intensive projects?Please
Resumo:
Workshop Research Data Management – Activities and Challenges 14-15 November 2011, Bonn The Knowledge Exchange initiative organised a workshop to highlight current activities and challenges with respect to research data management in the Knowledge Exchange partner countries and beyond. The workshop brought together experts from data centres, libraries, computational centres, funding organisations, publishing services and other institutions in the field of research and higher education who are working to improve research data management and encourage effective reuse of research data. A considerable part of the programme was dedicated to sharing perspectives from these communities, leading to the development of a roadmap of practical actions for the Knowledge Exchange initiative, partner organisations and other stakeholders to progress over the next two years. On the first day, principal investigators and project managers from a great variety of recent projects shared their insights on objectives and methods for improving data management ranging from discipline-specific to more general approaches. A series of short presentations of selected projects was followed by an extensive poster session that functioned as a “trade fair” of current trends and activities in the field of research data management. Moreover, the poster session offered ample network opportunities for participants. The second day was dedicated to intensive group discussions looking at a number of data management challenges. First the most important findings from the "Surfboard for 'Riding the Wave'" report were presented. This included the state of the art on activities and challenges in the field of research data management. The subgroups will concentrate on the following key themes: funding, incentives, training and technical infrastructure. These discussions culminated in the identification of practical recommendations for future cooperation on practical as well as on strategic levels that should be taken forward by the KE partner organisations and beyond. These activities aim to improve the sustainability of services and infrastructures at both national and international levels.
Resumo:
On 23-24 September 2009 an international discussion workshop on “Main Drivers for Successful Re-Use of Research Data” was held in Berlin, prepared and organised by the Knowledge Exchange working group on Primary Research Data. The main focus of the workshop was on the benefits, challenges and obstacles of re-using data from a researcher’s perspective. The use cases presented by researchers from a variety of disciplines were supplemented by two key notes and selected presentations by specialists from infrastructure institutions, publishers, and funding bodies on national and European level. Researchers' perspectives The workshop provided a critical evaluation of what lessons have been learned on sharing and re-using research data from a researcher’s perspective and what actions might be taken on to still improve the successful re-use. Despite the individual differences characterising the diverse disciplines it became clear that important issues are comparable. Combine forces to support re-use and sharing of data Apart from several technical challenges such as metadata exchange standards and quality assurance it was obvious that the most important obstacles to re-using research data more efficiently are socially determined. It was agreed that in order to overcome this problem more efforts should be made to rise awareness and combine forces to support re-using and sharing of research data on all levels (researchers, institutions, publishers, funders, governments).