The University of Cambridge, SPARC Europe and Jisc announce winner of
the Data Engagement Management Award
The Winner Is
The University of Cambridge, SPARC Europe and Jisc are pleased to announce the winner of the Data Engagement Management Award, a first-ever competition launched to elicit new and imaginative ideas for engaging researchers in the practices of good Research Data Management (RDM).
The winning entry, Manage it locally to share it globally: RDM and Wikimedia Commons, was submitted by Nick Sheppard from Leeds University Library – and was selected for its originality, impact and replicability. The idea involves linking RDM with the Open Science movement via the Wikimedia suite of tools.
As the winner, Mr. Sheppard will receive £1750 to bring the program to life.
The Submissions & Reviews
In the spirit of transparency, we are sharing the evaluations for each of the entries – together with the full submissions in hope that these ideas may inspire and motivate others to join in the effort to help foster good RDM practices. Listed first, is the winner. The rest of the entries appear alphabetically by entry title.
Winning Entry: Manage it locally to share it globally: RDM and Wikimedia Commons
Nick Sheppard, N.Sheppard@leeds.ac.uk, @mrnick
Leeds University Library
This project proposes a one-day editathon for three universities in the UK where data is added to improve Wikipedia and enrich Wikimedia with more research data. The evaluators appreciated the originality of the proposal. It has the potential to provide increased access to research data by engaging researchers with an information resource of public interest, which will in turn help increase the societal and public impact of research. It is also a good idea to select a topic of high public interest such as climate science or conservation to stimulate more researchers to share more research data.
However, outcomes are limited to participants of the day, thereby limiting the potential impact. Reviewers would recommend raising targets for each participant, and aiming for significant numbers of researchers would increase the influence of this proposal on good RDM practice and access to research. It would have been helpful to have more information on how to get researchers to attend; inviting researchers who are and are not already practiced data-sharers would have clear benefits. Reviewers believe that there is high potential to transfer this concept to others to hold similar events in the future based on the same format were this written up as a case study and guidelines made available. Furthermore, packaging this up as a format for others to use would be important to receive the funding. The given method is thought not to be financially or otherwise feasible for all, so reviewers would recommend creating an online package that others could re-use in their own environments.
OTHER ENTRANTS IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER
Gymkhana of research data
Remedios Melero; Fernanda Peset; Josep Manuel Rodriguez-Garin
IATA-CSIC; IUMPA; Universidad Politécnica de Valencia; Universitat de Barcelona
The proposal concerns providing a game to encourage researchers to share and reuse data using a problem-based approach focussed on the needs of individuals. The gymkhana method here seems novel, also using referees and keepers having the potential to provide solid learning outcomes based on the player’s specific data challenges, which is a clear strength. Too few details are provided on the exact contents of the game and the settings in which it may be played, however, to be able to evaluate its feasibility and success. It is also unclear as to how much time it would take and what costs this would entail. A further concern is with the methodology itself: that researchers may not have the time or preference for learning using games. Evidence to prove the contrary would have been important. This, and the absence of a budget and timeline, makes judging its feasibility, impact and value for money difficult, unfortunately.
FUNDATA (Crowd-funding data)
Miguel Angel Vera Baceta, firstname.lastname@example.org
Universidad de Murcia
This project proposes to build a platform for crowdsourcing data, i.e. re-using data by offering data rather than waiting for it to be discovered, which reviewers welcomed very much as an idea. The model has the potential to be of significant value across the world. There are some concerns, however, as to how to judge the feasibility and impact of the proposal since the proposal lacks information on how researchers would be engaged, how data might be vetted, how the service would be developed or maintained, and when and how user testing would take place. It is furthermore felt that the attitude of sharing data amongst researchers may not be mature enough to make proper use of the system and change engagement with RDM. Making references to related platforms would also have been helpful to place it in the bigger context of other crowdfunding services and to set it apart from these. Unfortunately, it is also difficult to judge its value for money as no budget has been provided.
Guiding researchers to find the appropriate RDM solution
Marina de Giorgi, email@example.com
University of Groningen/University Medical Center Groningen
This proposal uses a hackathon to develop a machine-learning algorithm and portal to support researchers in RDM practice / decision-making. The proposal has addressed an important challenge: once researchers want to share their data and, not knowing how, hereby providing a central place to ask those questions online. However, the approach does not seem feasible within the given budget and time frame. Questions have been raised as to whether the machine-learning will work since large datasets are needed to be able to reach the goal. Furthermore, perhaps three days for the UX is insufficient. Including plans to review the algorithm over time – to adapt with the evolving landscape – would also have been important. Its success will very much depend on strong requirements, the knowledge base and infrastructure, etc., all hardly mentioned in the proposal, making it difficult to envisage the success of the project. Furthermore, it is a pity that the case has not explicitly been made as to how making the information readily available could increase engagement with research data. For example, it is unclear as to how the idea would impact 3,000 local researchers locally. As regards transferability, making the code open source is an asset. However, it is currently unclear how easy it would be for other institutions to adapt and re-use the tool and, therefore, how interoperable it would be if that were the plan.
The Impact! Game
Georgina Parsons, Emma Turner
Cranfield University Library Service
This proposal describes using a board game to teach RDM. The evaluators highly appreciated the clarity of the case made and the solidity on which the proposal is based since it has already been prototyped. The intention is to further test it in three other countries, which is s strength. The idea also seems easily transferable and adaptable for different disciplinary, institutional and national settings. In addition to helping researchers, it was felt that the game was a good way of up-skilling librarians. It could also be made available in the library for students to explore informally.
Nevertheless, the proposal has some drawbacks. How far adaptations and what parts of the tool come at a cost are rather unclear. However, the largest concern is with the methodology itself. There are significant concerns that researchers may well not have the time or preference for learning using games. Evidence to prove the contrary would have been important. It was felt that the game could well be incorporated into training programmes rather than used in a stand-alone event, perhaps seeing increased researcher participation. Learning goals were neither provided to be able to measure growth in RDM knowledge, and it is envisaged that there would be a long delay in knowledge transfer using this method.
Gavin Kennedy, Peter Sefton
Queensland Cyber Infrastructure Foundation; University of Technology Sydney
This sound proposal concerns the online hosting of ReDBox, a tool that integrates several elements of the research data management workflow and promotes the re-use of entered data through data management plans, workspace creation, etc., encouraging RDM efficiency. The tool appears to be already relatively mature, which is a strength. Nonetheless, the case has not been made on how the tool will help drive researcher engagement with research data management, which is the core goal of the award. How transferrable this solution is in other contexts, however, has not been specified sufficiently to evaluate this positively here, e.g. in various countries with varied infrastructure. Furthermore, no budget has unfortunately been provided, making reviewers partly unable to assess the value for money.
Shaping a Research Data Management Policy through Researcher Engagement
Hilde van Zeeland, Shauna Ní Fhlaithearta, Jacquelijn Ringersma
Wageningen University & Research
This proposal follows up on a new data management policy at Wageningen University & Research. It demonstrates how a policy can be promoted within an institution, engaging with researchers using the popular medium of video to disseminate. Reviewers appreciate how policy is coupled with the research community to embed it more firmly in the institution. However, the proposal could have done more to explicitly justify how the proposal would lead to greater engagement with research data management apart from involving selected researchers in the policy development process.
This proposal’s downfall is that its transferability is limited since the activities are specific to one university. Although the author recognises that the model could be carried out at any institution, the proposal fails to highlight how its work will facilitate that. This unfortunately limits the impact on researchers and the value for money of the proposal. It would therefore have been useful had the proposal included plans to disseminate the policy-embedding approach to others without an institutional data policy. This could include implementation guidelines or a tool-kit for other institutions to use in their own settings. Reviewers feel that disseminating this more broadly would be of value to the international RDM policy community. It seems to be a valuable case study, and it would be encouraged to write it up and submit for a publication in a peer-reviewed journal and to share it more broadly with the international RDM community.
We want to facilitate the existing resources for young researchers
Fernanda Peset; Remedios Melero; Josep-Manel Rodríguez-Gairin
IUMPA-UPV; IATA-CSIC; Universitat de Barcelona
This pragmatic proposal concerns an experiment to facilitate better access to essential RDM resources for young researchers using practical tools such as USB sticks and Dropbox folders for example. It uses known technology and clearly describes how to provide RDM resources more optimally to researchers. The model also seems easily transferable to other institutions. However, although the main goal of the award is to engage researchers with data management, the proposal does not specify what the incentives are for researchers who are not willing to engage with data management, to get involved or, even if they participated, what exactly they would learn or how this would stimulate their engagement. Further details on how to recruit and select the young researchers, i.e. from which domain, and what the survey would measure are lacking, although the proposal does laudably describe an evaluation process. There are some further concerns as regards the project’s feasibility with respect to its relevance to certain types of data such as sensitive data. Good practice examples would have supported the proposal. It is furthermore considered that the timeline might also be somewhat ambitious and the budget seemed somewhat unfeasible given the idea.
The submissions were evaluated by a team comprised of the following individuals:
Dr. Lauren Cadwallader, University of Cambridge
Dr Stephen Eglen, University of Cambridge
Prof Sverker Homgren, Uppsala University
Prof Laura Janda, UiT, The Arctic University of Tromso
Dr Nicole Jung, KIT
Claudia Kramer, KIT
Gustav Nilsonne, Stockholm University & Karolinska Institutet
Vanessa Proudman, SPARC Europe
Paul Stokes, Jisc
Dr Marta Teperek, Delft University of Technology
For questions, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org