Through or around scientific research data and the institutional repository
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 19

Through or Around? scientific Research Data and the Institutional Repository PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 60 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Through or Around? scientific Research Data and the Institutional Repository. Panel Presentation for the International Conference on University Libraries Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México November 6, 2013 Christopher Stewart, Ed.D . Assistant Professor

Download Presentation

Through or Around? scientific Research Data and the Institutional Repository

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Through or around scientific research data and the institutional repository

Through or Around? scientific Research Dataand the Institutional Repository

Panel Presentation for the International Conference on University Libraries

Universidad NacionalAutónoma de México

November 6, 2013

Christopher Stewart, Ed.D.

Assistant Professor

Graduate School of Library and Information Science

Dominican University


Enabling access to research data

Enabling Access to Research Data

Not a new issue for universities and academic libraries, but rapidly developing one…

Source: SHERPA/JULIET


Expanding the mandate

Expanding the Mandate

U.S. Office of Science and Technology Policy directive, 2/22/2013*

*Requires each Federal agency with over $100 million in annual conduct of research and development expenditures to develop a framework for awardees.


Research data can be

Research Data can be:

  • Heterogeneous

  • Unless accompanying publication, often “raw”

  • Highly idiosyncratic

  • Characterized by implied description rather than explicit description

  • Small and big


Big data can be

Big Data can be:

  • Unstructured

  • Unsuited for traditional (e.g., hierarchical, relational) database models

  • Complete, not sampled

  • Linked


Goals for describing scientific research data

Goals for Describing Scientific Research Data

  • Access

  • Re-use

  • Context

  • Content, not container (Yarmey, 2013)


Research lifecycle

Research Lifecycle

Source: University of Virginia Library, Data Consulting Group


Describing scientific research data semantic modeling

Describing Scientific Research Data: Semantic Modeling

  • Shared vocabularies provide metadata across a range of subjects

  • Ontologies allow for contextual relationships

  • Linked data enable multiple types of data, documents, etc. to be viewed as one database


Data description schemes greenberg 2013

Data Description Schemes (Greenberg, 2013)

  • Simple: interoperable, easy to generate, low barrier, multidisciplinary, agnostic, flat, general, 15-25 properties

  • Simple/moderate: interoperability with specific needs, requires expertise and greater domain focus, extensible, granular

  • Complex: hierarchical and granular, domain-centered, extensive, 100+ properties


Are research data collections

Are Research Data Collections?

  • Selecting: partially, though volume and scope of data challenge current digital collection development frameworks

  • Acquiring: partially, though data not “owned”

  • Describing: yes, although some content may reside elsewhere

  • Organizing: yes, but with not with “traditional” IR taxonomies


How academic libraries are working with research data now

How Academic Libraries are Working with Research Data Now

  • Institutional repositories are about all types of data, but are clearly set-up for research publications (Salo, 2010)

  • Most institutional repositories rely on Dublin Core, which is required as minimum operability by OAI-PMH, but most research and exchange standards use XML/RDF as base (Salo, 2010)

  • Geared for output, not context


Primary metadata use in institutional repositories

Primary Metadata Use in Institutional Repositories

Source: Simons & Richardson, 2012


Challenges for current data curation models in academic libraries

Challenges for Current Data Curation Models in Academic Libraries

  • Beyond metadata at project level, dataset level provides some context for data, but can be limited (Yarmey, 2013)

  • Discoverability in institutional repositories is generally limited to library websites, catalogs, and Google Scholar (Burns, Lana, & Budd, 2013)


Content in institutional repositories

Content in Institutional Repositories

Source: Burns, S. L., Lana, A., & Budd, J. M. (2013). Institutional Repositories: Exploration of Costs and Value. D-Lib Magazine, 19(1/2). Retrieved from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january13/burns/01burns.html


Domain repositories

Domain Repositories

  • Existing and developing metadata standards (e.g., Dryrad/DCAM, ICPSR/DDI)

  • Centralized or distributed (e.g., DataONE)

  • Evidence suggests that scholars who deposit materials in subject repositories prefer them over institutional repositories, and are not likely to use both (Xia, 2008)

  • Built around communities of interest

  • Cost sharing for cloud services


Data management education and programming opportunities for academic libraries

Data Management: Education and Programming Opportunities for Academic Libraries

  • Training and support for data management plans

  • Data librarianship

  • Data literacy


An evolving model

An Evolving Model


References

References

  • Burns, S. L., Lana, A., & Budd, J. M. (2013). Institutional Repositories: Exploration of Costs and Value. D-Lib Magazine, 19(1/2). Retrieved from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january13/burns/01burns.html

  • Greenberg, J. (2012, August 22). Metadata for Managing Scientific Research Data. Presented at the NISO/DCMI Webinar. Retrieved from http://dublincore.org/resources/training/

  • Salo, D. (2010). Retooling Libraries for the Data Challenge | Ariadne: Web Magazine for Information Professionals. Ariadne, (64). Retrieved from http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue64/salo

  • Simons, N., & Richardson, J. (2012). “New Roles, New Responsibilities: Examining Training Needs of Repository” by Natasha Simons and Joanna Richardson. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 1(2). Retrieved from http://jlsc-pub.org/jlsc/vol1/iss2/7/

  • Xia, J. (2008). A Comparison of Subject and Institutional Repositories in Self-Archiving Practices. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(6), 489–495.

  • Yarmey, K. A., & Yarmey, L. R. (2013). All in the Family: A Dinner Table Conversation about Libraries, Archives, Data, and Science - Archive Journal Issue 3. Archive Journal, Summer 2013(3). Retrieved from http://www.archivejournal.net/issue/3/archives-remixed/all-in-the-family-a-dinner-table-conversation-about-libraries-archives-data-and-science/


Image credits

Image Credits

  • Slide 7: http://www.newsrewired.com/2010/11/16/links-what-is-linked-data-and-why-does-it-matter-to-journalists-and-publishers/

  • Slide 10: http://dmconsult.library.virginia.edu/


  • Login