Evolving RDM Maturity at the University of Plymouth through Participation in the JISC Research Data Shared Services (RDSS) Pilot Project
Background
Back in late 2015, like many UK HEIs, the University of Plymouth was looking grimly at what appeared to be a big stick wielded menacingly by the EPSRC above its mandate and deadline for open data deposit.
At that stage we had no institutional infrastructure to support dataset deposit, little expertise in research data management (RDM) or knowledge of researcher requirements and the systems needed to support RDM. The gap seemed large. Other institutions were developing their own separate data repositories which seemed to be the solution to the problem, and our focus was on making a business case to either do the same or buy something in.
The main goal at that point in time was to be able to deposit datasets to meet the requirement of EPSRC mandate, and ensure that researchers could be considered for further funding applications.
Then an opportunity for the University to participate as a pilot partner in the JISC Research Data Shared Service (RDSS) project came along. It offered the promise of collaboration with institutions that were more mature in terms of RDM, to benefit from the technical expertise and experience that the JISC project would bring, and contribute towards the development of a sector wide, shared service solution. The Software as a Service / Platform as a Service model proposed met our institutional requirements for the technical architecture of new systems – and we felt we may get to contribute some of our own needs to the design of the final service.
The big stick from EPSRC failed to materialise, our own understanding began to evolve, and circumstances at the institution were starting to change by the time the project started in Spring 2016. We were no longer looking to implement and support a separate data repository, and wanted to rationalise our infrastructure. The requirement was for a platform that could directly replace our existing repository, providing a more cost effective tool that would integrate with our CRIS, and handle dataset deposits as one option alongside all other format types, supporting the institutional policy for wider open scholarship.
As Plymouth got deeper into the project, and collaborated with other institutions and JISC, we began to realise our own requirements more clearly. Dataset deposit activity was low, and the demand to upload them to University systems just not there. Project activities such as undertaking a research data audit, and taking part in the research data specific Financial X-Ray, helped us understand our University research environment better, and by following the trickle of dataset deposits upstream, we started to discover the dams that were blocking the flow.
Our immediate need wasn’t for an infrastructure to support dataset deposit and preserve it forever, but for a wider framework to support good data management practice throughout the data management lifecycle.
This meant developing a new Research Data Policy – aligned to the UKRI Open Research Data Concordat and wider FAIR data principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) – and implementing this (a work still in progress). It meant embedding governance for research data management into the wider research ethics governance framework, and aligning it to GDPR, the Research Ethics Policy, and to University Data Protection, and Information Security policies.
It meant assigning clear roles and responsibilities for data asset owners and stewards, and creating a new role of data peer reviewer. Above all, giving our Faculty Research Ethics and Integrity Committees a core role in ensuring RDM governance, and monitoring the completion and submission of Data Management Plans (DMPs). Chairs of these Committees are nominated as Data Asset Owners, with key accountability for the ethical, legal and regulatory management of research datasets within their portfolio.
Elena Menendez-Alonso, Research Repository and Curation Manager, University of Plymouth
Participating in the project has been a fantastic development opportunity with many benefits.
A good example of this was conducting a research data audit at the University as part of the project using the Data Asset Framework methodology developed by JISC.
Naked bribery (Amazon vouchers and food) encouraged a wide response to the initial survey from senior researchers, right through to PGR students across many discipline areas, and their attendance at subsequent focus groups. Analysis of the results was revealing, and disclosed that there were wide variances between individuals, disciplines, and grades, around RDM knowledge and the principles of open data sharing. Culturally, there was a lot of ground to cover in terms of raising RDM awareness and good practice.
Amongst the findings from the 2016 survey were:
- 63% of respondents generated data for research projects that were not externally funded, and therefore were complying with different expectations around data management and sharing principles
- The vast majority of survey respondents generated digital data in the form of documents or reports (.doc. pdf files, etc.), spreadsheets, text files, audio or video files, observational, survey or interview transcripts, and images
- Many generated their own research data, and only expected to share it with other researchers at their own, or other academic institutions (and not more widely). Data was shared via email, personal cloud account, or by external hard drive / memory stick. Activity to publish data (in a journal, alongside an article, or by deposit) was low
- Most data was stored in non-preferred locations – external hard drives, memory sticks, hard drives of personal computers, Dropbox, etc. Where data was stored in cloud services, 49% of respondents admitted to using a private account. Relatively few researchers kept data in University managed network storage, or the University Onedrive for Business solution.
- Over 50% of respondents had generated less than 50GB of data
- Over 50% of respondents had generated their data within the last 5 years. 40% did not expect to move their data at project completion to another storage location, although 52% had the expectation that their data would need to be preserved for 5-10 years
- 63% did not have, or were unsure if they had, a data management plan for their project
- 79% did not, or were unsure if they did, follow guidelines to document their data
It was clear from the audit, that awareness amongst our research community about RDM practice was inconsistent, and our services to support good practice were limited. Advice on suitable storage capability for researchers, according to data classification, has since been developed, and opportunities to utilise platforms implemented as part of the University’s move into the cloud have been exploited. Our guidance and training has been developed and refined throughout the lifespan of the project, drawing on project outputs such as the RDM Toolkit. RDM guidance and training is now embedded within the PGR pathway, developing the next generation of researchers with FAIR awareness.
Kate Russell, Senior Information Specialist, Charles Seale-Hayne Library, University of Plymouth
The Information Specialist role within the Library has broadened in recent years to include support for Open Research, and as a result of participation in the JISC RDSS project, has now expanded further to incorporate Research Data Management. At first, RDM was not met with the same sense of understanding as Open Access in terms of aligning with the work we do and certainly, the production of data in the stages of active research is not something we have traditionally been involved with.
For a researcher to be able to deposit their dataset in our repository (or provide a record for it if deposited elsewhere) in accordance with FAIR principles, they need to have first of all managed their data in such a way throughout the lifecycle of their project as to be able to do this without encountering issues of file format, ethics, copyright, selection of data to make available and also thought about how users will be able to access, understand and reuse their data in future. All of which requires guidance at an earlier stage of their project than the library had been involved with and was equipped to support.
We have embarked on the following approach to developing a service:
– Bringing together different professional service teams in a stakeholder workshop to analyse the contribution each team can offer with RDM support
– Working with the Doctoral College to provide an overview session on DMPs (it is now a requirement for our incoming PGRs to both attend a session and produce a DMP for internal review)
– Produce online guidance for PGRs on completion of a DMP and best practice considerations in RDM
Kim Davis, Information Specialist, Charles Seale-Hayne Library, University of Plymouth
Participation in the JISC RDSS project offered various training opportunities. As a new member of the Information Specialists team, with a research remit, I was largely unaware of research data management and repository and data needs. Through the project, I was able to attend events such as the ‘Engaging Researchers in Good Data Management’ event in Cambridge as well as the JISC RDM day, celebrating the Data Champion projects occurring in various institutions. This gave me a view into how different institutions dealt with engaging researchers and building advocacy for good RDM and Research Data services in their institutions, with different service configurations.
The University of Plymouth does not have a dedicated Research Data Service, and our Research Support spans both Research & Innovation as well as Library and Digital Support. It was exceptionally useful to see how different service set-ups dealt with the challenges of advocacy and supporting researchers in managing the variety of formats and sizes of data pertaining to different disciplines and research methods. This led to the creation of Data Champion roles, using our pre-existing Faculty Research Ethics and Integrity boards, to begin advocacy at the point of Data Management Plan submission for Ethical Approval. This small step will be a foot in the door, to create greater awareness of RDM issues at the point of need for researchers.
Learning about the JISC RDM toolkit in particular, as well as other institutions’ guidance, gave us insight into what training and support was already freely available. Therefore, when the Doctoral College became interested in establishing mandatory Data Management Plans for our Postgraduate Research projects, we were able to use the Toolkit alongside other tools to pull together best practice to support the breadth of training required across the different disciplines. It was important for the Doctoral College that guidance was specific to the needs of our Postgraduate Researchers, so we pulled resources into a new Research Data Management library guide that signposted to internal services and external resources.
Work is ongoing to upskill all Information Specialists so that they are all able to deliver the new DMP session to the Doctoral College and to advise researchers on any specific queries.
To create joined-up provision of internal services, we ran a workshop for professional services to discuss the data needs of our researchers. This has given us the framework for signposting our PGRs to internal services, allowing the service representatives to identify their role in the larger support framework. It was enlightening to see the reality of RDM at our institution, as the workshop confirmed that actually, many of the services were already dealing with RDM issues and the feedback we got from participants emphasised the benefit of sharing the experiences we each were facing.
This workshop again, may not have been possible without the background knowledge that participation the JISC RDSS project afforded us. The simple acts of sharing experiences and best practice with other institutions and being able to talk to researchers, who were already Data Champions, and therefore advocates for the importance of Research Data Management, empowered us to make our own in-roads towards engaging researchers at the University of Plymouth.
Further work is needed to bring together the framework developed from the stakeholder workshop into a signposting service to PGRs and indeed all our researchers, but once published, these groups will be able to identify who in the University can provide them with advice at any point in the RDM cycle.
James H Taylor, Portfolio Manager, Technology and Information Services, University of Plymouth
I joined the University late in 2015 and quickly got stuck into the JISC RDSS project. My involvement helped me foster a close working relationship with the Library, gain an understanding of the wider research lifecycle and requirements for data management, storage and preservation – all of which were new to me.
I was fortunate to participate with other institutions at JISC meetings and wider networking opportunities such as events run by the Digital Preservation Coalition. We also benefited in sending a solutions architect to a software preservation workshop which has allowed us to reflect on our internal Departmental procedures and work with our academic colleagues on best practice.
The JISC project coincided with our cloud strategy that has seen the majority of IT services migrated from our local datacentres to the cloud and provision of 1 TB minimum storage for research projects with Office 365. The timing of these initiatives provided us the opportunity to work with researchers early on in the research lifecycle to consider RDM and computing requirements upfront.
The University has also been considering its requirements for document preservation and archiving, and the opportunity to look at preservation options and workflows within the project has given us some insight into the power of tools like Preservica and the internal resources required for a successful implementation.
A key realisation has been the identification of the gap for the active management of data during the project lifecycle, and efficiency of cost recovery for full economic costing is realised through grant income. Both the research data audit and Financial X-Ray exercises undertaken during the project have helped unveil these aspects. In response we are trialling several research solutions using a combination of cloud technologies such as database platform as a service, various storage tiers for durability and availability and archiving of data. Our future interests include research specific cloud services such as machine learning, FGPA / GPU, cognitive and AI services.
Jerry Roberts, Deputy Vice Chancellor for Research and Enterprise
Engagement with the JISC RDSS project has been a great way to confront some of the issues relating to Research Data Management and also network with other institutions who are experiencing the same challenges as ourselves. During the journey we have learnt a great deal from others and have used this knowledge to develop bespoke procedures for our own institution. We have not yet reached our final destination but believe that the direction we are taking will be of benefit to researchers both across the University and our partners around the world.
Conclusion
The project has delivered the JISC Open Research Hub (JORH), already a sector leading tool for dataset deposit, with fast developing capacity for articles and theses. Although we are not in a position to replace our PEARL repository with JORH, we are watching its development closely, and looking forward to a time when it may offer a full repository that can support the wide range of University outputs associated with truly open scholarship, from datasets to rich media project portfolios in the Arts and Humanities, and the preservation of unique digital objects such as theses and author accepted manuscripts or pre-print versions.
If JORH can deliver this, with intuitive deposit for researchers, lean workflows for Library and administrative staff, analytics capability for reporting and decision-making, and integrations with our CRIS system – at the right price – then it will be hard to beat.
For the time being however, our focus is on establishing the right governance, guidance, and support frameworks to enable good RDM practice to flourish.
All of the work undertaken while participating in the project may remove some of the blockages that we found upstream and provide us with our pipeline, releasing a flow of datasets for deposit – in expectation of which, we are improving our current repository, for data discovery.