RDS are usually cross-disciplinary, centralised services, which are increasingly provided at a university by the academic library and in collaboration with other RDM stakeholders, such as the Research Office. At research-intensive universities, research data is generated in a wide range of disciplines and sub-disciplines. This paper will discuss how providing discipline-specific RDM support is approached by such universities and academic libraries, and the advantages and disadvantages of these central and discipline-specific approaches.
A descriptive case study on the author’s experiences of collaborating with a central RDS at the University of Cambridge, as a subject librarian embedded in an academic department, is a major component of this paper. The case study describes how centralised RDM services offered by the Office of Scholarly Communication (OSC) have been adapted to meet discipline-specific needs in the Department of Chemistry. It will introduce the department and the OSC, and describe the author’s role in delivering RDM training, as well as the Data Champions programme, and their membership of the RDM Project Group. It will describe the outcomes of this collaboration for the Department of Chemistry, and for the centralised service.
Centralised and discipline-specific approaches to RDS provision have their own advantages and disadvantages. Supporting the discipline-specific RDM needs of researchers is proving particularly challenging for universities to address sustainably: it requires adequate financial resources and staff skilled (or re-skilled) in RDM. A mixed approach is the most desirable, cost-effective way of providing RDS, but this still has constraints.
I thank Marta Teperek, formerly Data Facility Manager at the OSC, now Data Stewardship Coordinator at TU Delft, who has consistently encouraged and supported me in all my RDM activities and who gave me the confidence to write and talk about this.
I thank Deborah Longbottom, Head of Graduate Education at the Department of Chemistry, for her enthusiastic support for the RDM training that has been so successful.
I thank my colleague at the OSC, Claire Sewell, for her wise words of advice.
Akers, K. G., and J. Doty. 2013. “Disciplinary Differences in Faculty Research Data Management Practices and Perspectives.” International Journal of Digital Curation 8 (2): 5–26. https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v8i2.263.Search in Google Scholar
Auckland, M. 2012. “Re-Skilling for Research: An Investigation into the Role and Skills of Subject and Liaison Librarians Required to Effectively Support the Evolving Needs of Researchers.” RLUK, Research Libraries UK, Report. http://www.rluk.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/RLUK-Re-skilling.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Bresnahan, M. and A. Johnson. 2013. “Assessing scholarly communication and research data training needs.” University Libraries Faculty & Staff Contributions. 7. https://scholar.colorado.edu/libr_facpapers/7Search in Google Scholar
Christensen-Dalsgaard, B., M. van der Berg, R. Grim, W. Horstmann, D. Jansen, T. Pollard, and A. Roos. 2012. “Ten Recommendations for Libraries to Get Started with Research Data Management.” Final report of the LIBER working group on E-Science/Research Data Management (Ligue des Bibliothèques Européennes de Recherche – Association of European Research Libraries. https://www.fosteropenscience.eu/content/ten-recommendations-libraries-get-started-research-data-management.Search in Google Scholar
Corrall, S. 2010. “Educating the academic librarian as a blended professional: A review and case study.” Library Management 31 (8): 567–593. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01435121011093360. https://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/01435121011093360.10.1108/01435121011093360Search in Google Scholar
Cox, A. M., M. A. Kennan, L. Lyon, and S. Pinfield. 2017. “Developments in Research Data Management in Academic Libraries: Towards an Understanding of Research Data Service Maturity.” Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 68 (9): 2182–200. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23781.Search in Google Scholar
Cox, A. M., and S. Pinfield. 2013. “Research Data Management and Libraries: Current Activities and Future Priorities.” Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 46 (4): 299–316. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000613492542.Search in Google Scholar
DCC. 2018. “Disciplinary RDM Training.” Accessed May 28, 2018. http://www.dcc.ac.uk/training/train-trainer/disciplinary-rdm-training/disciplinary-rdm-training.Search in Google Scholar
EPSRC. 2014. “Expectations.” Accessed May 28, 2018. https://epsrc.ukri.org/about/standards/researchdata/expectations/.Search in Google Scholar
Flores, J. R., J. J. Brodeur, M. G. Daniels, N. Nicholls, and E. Turnator. 2015. “Libraries and the Research Data Management Landscape.” In The Process of Discovery: The CLIR Postdoctoral Fellowship Program and the Future of the Academy, edited by J. C. Maclachan, E. A. Waraksa, and C. Williford, 82–102. https://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub167/ Washington, DC: Council on Library and Information Resources.Search in Google Scholar
Gabridge, T. 2009. “The Last Mile: Liaison Roles in Curating Science and Engineering Research Data.” Research Library Issues: A Bimonthly Report from ARL, CNI, and SPARC 265 (August 2009): 15–21. https://doi.org/10.29242/rli.265.4.Search in Google Scholar
GitHub. 2018a. “An Introduction to GitHub for Chemists.” Accessed May 28, 2018. https://github.com/semacu/20171024_GitHub_Chemistry_Cambridge/blob/master/README.md.Search in Google Scholar
GitHub. 2018b. “Introduction to ORCID.” Accessed May 28, 2018. https://github.com/semacu/20180223_ORCID_Chemistry_Cambridge/blob/master/README.md.Search in Google Scholar
Guy, M. 2013a. “Increasing Participation in Internal RDM Training Sessions.” DCC RDM Services case studies. http://www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/developing-rdm-services/increasing-participation-training.Search in Google Scholar
Guy, M. 2013b. “RDM Training for Librarians.” DCC RDM Services Case Studies. http://www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/developing-rdm-services/rdm-training-librarians.Search in Google Scholar
Higman, R., M. Teperek, and D. Kingsley. 2017. “Creating a Community of Data Champions.” International Journal of Digital Curation 12 (2): 96–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v12i2.562.Search in Google Scholar
Hiom, D., D. Fripp, S. Gray, and K. Snow. 2015. “Research Data Management at the University of Bristol: Charting a Course from Project to Service.” Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems 49 (4): 475–93. https://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/PROG-02-2015-0019.Search in Google Scholar
Kennan, M.A. 2016. “Data Management: Knowledge and skills required in research, scientific and technical organisations.” Paper presented at IFLA World Library and Information Congress, Columbus, OH, 2016. http://library.ifla.org/1466/1/221-kennan-en.pdfSearch in Google Scholar
Koltay, T. 2016. “Are You Ready? Tasks and Roles for Academic Libraries in Supporting Research.” New Library World 117 (1/2): 94–104. https://doi.org/10.1108/NLW-09-2015–0062.10.1108/NLW-09-2015-0062Search in Google Scholar
Lewis, M. J. 2010. “Libraries and the Management of Research Data.” In Envisioning Future Academic Library Services, edited by S. McKnight, 145–68. London: Facet Publishing. http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/11171/10.29085/9781856048750.011Search in Google Scholar
Morais, R., and L. Borrell-Damian. 2018. “Open Access 2016–2017 EUA Survey Results.” European University Association (February): 1–37. https://eua.eu/resources/publications/324:open-access-in-european-universities-results-from-the-2016-2017-eua-institutional-survey.html.Search in Google Scholar
ORCID. n.d. “ORCID.” Accessed May 28, 2018. https://orcid.org/.Search in Google Scholar
Pinfield, S., A. M. Cox, and S. Rutter. 2017. “Mapping the Future of Academic Libraries: A Report for SCONUL.” https://www.sconul.ac.uk/news/mapping-the-future-of-academic-libraries.Search in Google Scholar
Pinfield, S., A. M. Cox, and J. Smith. 2014. “Research Data Management and Libraries: Relationships, Activities, Drivers and Influences.” PLos One 9 (12): 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0114734.Search in Google Scholar
Sewell, C., and D. Kingsley. 2017. “Developing the twenty-first Century Academic Librarian: The Research Support Ambassador Programme.” New Review of Academic Librarianship 23 (2–3): 148–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614533.2017.1323766.Search in Google Scholar
Swan, A., and S. Brown. The Skills, Roles and Career Structure of Data Scientists and Curators: An Assessment of Current Practice and Future Needs. Report to the Jisc (Truro: Key Perspectives Ltd., 2008). https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/266675/.Search in Google Scholar
Tenopir, C., B. Birch, and S. Allard. Academic Libraries and Research Data Services: Current Practices and Plans for the Future. White Paper (American Library Association: June 2012). http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/publications/whitepapers/Tenopir_Birch_Allard.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Tenopir, C., R. J. Sandusky, S. Allard, and B. Birch. 2014. “Research Data Management Services in Academic Research Libraries and Perceptions of Librarians.” Library & Information Research 36 (2): 84–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2013.11.003.Search in Google Scholar
Tenopir, C., S. Talja, W. Horstmann, E. Late, D. Hughes, D. Pollock, B. Schmidt, L. Baird, R. Sandusky, and S. Allard. 2017. “Research Data Services in European Academic Research Libraries.” LIBER Quarterly 27 (1): 23–44. http://doi.org/10.18352/lq.10180.Search in Google Scholar
Teperek, M., R. Higman, and D. Kingsley. 2017. “Is Democracy the Right System? Collaborative Approaches to Building an Engaged RDM Community.” International Journal of Digital Curation 12 (2): 86–95. https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v12i2.561.Search in Google Scholar
TopUniversities. 2018. “Chemistry.” Accessed May 28, 2018. https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2018/chemistry.Search in Google Scholar
University of Cambridge. 2018a. “About the University. Timeline.” Accessed August 31, 2018. https://www.cam.ac.uk/about-the-university/history/timeline.Search in Google Scholar
University of Cambridge. 2018b. “Planning and Resource Allocation Office. Facts & Figures.” Accessed August 31, 2018. https://www.information-hub.admin.cam.ac.uk/files/facts_figures_2018_poster_for_web.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
University of Cambridge. 2018d. “Apollo – University of Cambridge Repository. Data – Chemistry.” Accessed May 28, 2018. https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/247062.Search in Google Scholar
University of Cambridge. 2018j. “Scholarly Communication. Open Access Project Board.” Accessed August 31, 2018. https://osc.cam.ac.uk/open-access/open-access-policies/cambridge-open-access-policy-framework/open-access-project-board.Search in Google Scholar
University of Cambridge. 2018k. “Chemistry Library. Open Data FAQs for Chemists.” Accessed May 28, 2018. http://www-library.ch.cam.ac.uk/open-data-faqs-chemists.Search in Google Scholar
University of Cambridge. 2018l. “Chemistry Library. Convert Your Files into an Open Data Format.” Accessed May 28, 2018. http://www-library.ch.cam.ac.uk/convert-your-files-open-data-format.Search in Google Scholar
Williamson, L. 2013. Roles, Responsibilities and Skills Matrix for Research Data Management (RDM) Support. ADMIRe Working Document. https://admire.jiscinvolve.org/wp/files/2013/05/RDM-roles-and-skills.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Williamson, L., and T. Parsons. 2013. “ADMIRe Project. UK HEIs RDM Service Models and Skills to Support Research Data Management.” (February): 3–17. https://admire.jiscinvolve.org/wp/files/2013/05/RDM_HumanInfrastructure.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Wilson, J. A., and P. W. Jeffreys. 2013. “Towards a Unified University Infrastructure: The Data Management Roll-Out at the University of Oxford.” International Journal of Digital Curation 2 (8): 235–46. https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v8i2.287.Search in Google Scholar
Wittenberg, J., and M. Elings. 2017. “Building A Research Data Management Service at the University of California, Berkeley: A Tale of Collaboration.” IFLA Journal 43 (1): 89–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/0340035216686982.Search in Google Scholar
© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston