An Institutional Approach to Developing Research Data Management Infrastructure

Abstract

This article outlines the work that the University of Oxford is undertaking to implement a coordinated data management infrastructure. The rationale for the approach being taken by Oxford is presented, with particular attention paid to the role of each service division. This is followed by a consideration of the relative advantages and disadvantages of institutional data repositories, as opposed to national or international data centres. The article then focuses on two ongoing JISC-funded projects, ‘Embedding Institutional Data Curation Services in Research’ (Eidcsr) and ‘Supporting Data Management Infrastructure for the Humanities’ (Sudamih). Both projects are intra-institutional collaborations and involve working with researchers to develop particular aspects of infrastructure, including: University policy, systems for the preservation and documentation of research data, training and support, software tools for the visualisation of large images, and creating and sharing databases via the Web (Database as a Service).

Developments in research data management in academic libraries: Towards an understanding of research data service maturity

“…There are a number of other key stakeholders in the RDM space. Previous studies indicate these to be the IT services department and research support office in particular (Cox & Pinfield, ; Pinfield et al, ) and the need for collaboration between these groups is emphasized in the literature (Akers, Sferdean, Nicholls, & Green, ; Si et al, ; Wilson, Martinez‐Uribe, Fraser, & Jeffreys, ). However, Verbaan and Cox () have identified “conflicts and tensions” that arise in institutions with regard to professional “jurisdictions” in relation to RDM, and although they propose a possible “division of RDM roles” across these professional groups, there remains considerable uncertainty in this area.…”

Research Data Management and Libraries: Relationships, Activities, Drivers and Influences

“…Good practice has also begun to emerge as institutions have set out to develop RDS and have published lessons learned based on real-world experience. Experiences in institutions such as Edinburgh [29] and Oxford [30] in the UK, and Purdue [31] and Johns Hopkins [32] in the US, have highlighted some important issues at institutional level. Differences in national approaches between Australia and US have also been usefully explored [33] .…”

Collaborative Approaches to Undergraduate Research Training: Information Literacy and Data Management

“…Later, Kuh and Schneider's (2008) highly influential High-Impact Educational Practices singled out undergraduate research as important for formulating questions, honing observational skills and working with advanced technologies as a means to enhance student engagement and increase student success. The intervening decade has witnessed a spate of descriptive studies outlining design and implementation of URE programs (Buckley, Korkmaz, & Kuh, 2008;Cuthbert, Arunachalam, & Licina, 2012;Howitt, Wilson, Wilson, & Roberts, 2010;Wilson, Martinez-Uribe, Fraser, & Jeffreys, 2011). Social work education programs are included in the incorporation of undergraduate research into student learning opportunities, both within the context of regular coursework and field placements (Rubin, Valutis, & Robinson, 2010), as well as supplemental URE mentored programs (Hughes, Ortiz, & Horner, 2012).…”