ROS User Forum

Attended ROS user forum in Swindon on Friday 30th November.

Introduction – Mari Williams, BBSRC, Corporate Policy and Strategy

• Why is ROS needed :
o ROS, eVal, GtR needed to support argument for continued investment in Research in next Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) .. was due 2013
o RCs subject to performance management by BIS
o Provide evidence for parliamentary questions (PQs)
o Lots of presentations and consultations to make case for research – need metrics

Aspirations
– RCUK continue to collaborate with HEFCE on alignment with REF
– Harmonise standards

Breakout sessions on Functionality and Communications

Priorities for Functionality

–       Reporting – HEIs want to get data back out and see where data is in workflow
–       integration with existing systems 2 way; bulk upload all data; how prevent individuals entering data also
–       standards and harmonization including lists instead of free-text
–       validation by HEIs ; sign-off .. similar to Je-S

Priorities for Communication and Guidance

–       why collecting .. roadmap/vision [tie-in to other data requirements eg HESA, REF, HEBCI]
–       simplicity of quantity of data ie descope
–       speaking with one voice [all ROS & RCs]
–       simple clear messages
–       actual examples of good practice
–       proper data specification
–       demarcation of responsibility … legal eg when leave or move; PI and CoI and how varies from institution to institution
–       does it replace final report; length of time to report over [RCs almost agreed about these] 

Gateway to Research

  • Using data collected from ROS (and eVal/ResearchFish and historical final reports)
  • Publications data and Impact and Key Findings
  • GtR project working to harmonise data collected via different routes

Important for CiA schema to be extended to include this core set of data – particularly Impact and Key Findings

Open Access

[I had to leave to catch a train … delays due to floods  …]

Understand from Gerry Lawson and Simon Kerridge that RIOXX project due to circulate draft application profile for funder metadata – OA compliance –  for Repositories before Christmas; initially DC but also looking at CERIF. RIOXX aiming to comply with OpenAire also but not confirmed yet.

Would be good to get agreement internationally … 

Advertisements

Research Information meets Research Data!

Presented at the DCC Roadshow in Dundee on ‘Research data meets research information: the IRIOS, C4D, CIA and CRISPool projects’

ROS includes data sets as an output so would be good to add this to CiA … so crossover with C4D work.

See details of workshop and presentations at http://www.dcc.ac.uk/events/data-management-roadshows/dcc-roadshow-northeast-scotland

CIA Workshop: London, 19th October 2012

Workshop: Transferring research data to RCUK and other organisations

*** FULL ***

Register your interest now for the opportunity to attend our free event on Friday 19th October in London.

Come along and hear about the work we have been doing on exchanging research data via CERIF-XML.

This event will include an overview and demonstration of prototypes to transfer information between organisations such as RCUK (via the Research Outcomes System [ROS]) and other Research Organisations using a standard CERIF format via various Research Information Systems; ultimately saving researchers and central research administrators’ time, allowing them time to concentrate on their core tasks.

The workshop will include discussion as to sustainability of the CERIF-XML model, and will include a short presentation from our RIM3 partner project IRIOS2, with whom we have been working closely to create a standard model for CERIF-XML.

Draft Agenda

CIA Workshop – JISC, Brettenham Woburn House, London (10am – 4pm)
 Time  Item  Introduced by
10:00 Registration (Tea & Coffee)
10:30 Welcome and Introduction, including aims of project and workshop Scott Brander, Project Manager
10:40 Research Information Management – Context Josh Brown (JISC)
10:50 Examples of use cases and demonstrations
  • Rachel Curwen (University of York)
  • Valerie McCutcheon/David McElroy (Glasgow)
  • Juergen Wastl (University of Cambridge)
11:30 Break
11:45 Future direction of ROS and RCUK Dale Heenan (RCUK)
12:15 Survey results (CIA & ROS) & further discussions James Toon, University of Edinburgh
13:00 Lunch
14:00 CERIF and related projects, etc. Brigitte Joerg, euroCRIS/UKOLN
14:30 Brainstorming, roadmap, etc. (Breakouts)  TBC
15:30 Conclusions and closure Anna Clements

How do I get to Brettenham HouseWoburn House?

Please find directions here for the location.

Where will I see outputs from the meeting?

Outputs from the workshop will be posted on this blog.  If you cannot make the event but want to be notified of the report please let us know via cia-workshop@st-andrews.ac.uk.

What do I do if I require further information?

If you have any further questions about the content, etc. of the workshop, please contact Scott Brander, Project Manager: scott.brander@st-andrews.ac.uk.

How to I request a place at the workshop?

To request a place please email cia-workshop@st-andrews.ac.uk with your name, organisation, job title, and any dietary requirements. Alternatively, please complete the following form:

Release of CIA survey – please participate

The project has just launched an online survey and we would be grateful if you could participate. The objective of the survey is to conduct a simple “before and after” comparison of institutional processes surrounding the transfer of research activity data by gathering data on the amount of effort required to manage these processes.

As stated elsewhere on the blog, the CERIF standard will be implemented so that information can be easily produced, transferred and used by any other compliant systems. The project is dealing with two use cases:

  • Transferring research activity data for staff moving between institutions; and
  • Uploading data to the RCUK Research Outcomes System (ROS).

This will then be compared with worked examples of information transfer using the new CERIF-XML approach – representing the ‘after’ data. The comparison data form a key part of the roadmap report looking at possible adoption paths for CERIF-XML.

The Use Case 1 survey above is completed anonymously. It contains 8 questions, and should take only a short time to complete and is available at: https://www.survey.ed.ac.uk/cia .

How will the “before and after” data be compared for upload to ROS?

The Use Case 2 assessment will be carried out in conjunction with RCUK as part of a review of early engagement with the Research Outcomes System, and a survey is being distributed concurrently by RCUK at: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/ROS-follow-up-survey .

When does the survey close?

The closing date for both surveys will be Friday 21st September.

Can anyone else complete the survey?

Please feel free to distribute these surveys to anyone whom you feel they may be relevant.

————-

Many thanks in advance for your help.

For and on behalf of the project team,
Scott

Roadmap for Adoption: Survey Plan

The next stage of the CIA project has been initiated with the production of a Survey plan. The aim is to propose a roadmap for adoption of the CERIF in Action approach and identify opportunities to extend and develop the proposed model. The following outputs are included in the plan:

  • Establishing the baseline: defining the current workflows and time/cost impact to various stakeholders;
  • Identifying issues: practical problems faced by these stakeholders;
  • Assessing potential impact of introducing CERIF in Action approach;
  • Estimating the costs to implement; and
  • Evaluating against the baseline and validating the implementation of the approach.

The stakeholders identified for participants in the survey are:

  • Research Administrators – those responsible for the practical aspects of processing transferring research information data for and on behalf of academic staff;
  • Researchers –  academic staff who are likely to be transferring between institutions and wish to take the record of their research activity with them to their destination institution;
  • Principal and Co-Investigators – those responsible for reporting on project outcomes to research councils;
  • Suppliers – Producers and maintainers of Research Information Systems;
  • Research Funders;
  • Funding councils; and
  • IT support staff – those responsible for supporting the process of exchange between institutions and from institutions to RCUK.

It is possible that we may be able to synchronise the surveys with those of RCUK to capture the elements above from an RCUK angle and, as a result, reduce duplication of effort on both project partners and participants in the surveys alike. It is anticipated that the RCUK survey will be released toward the end of June.