Search

Policy Comes Last: Embedding Fair Data Practice At Delft University of Technology. A presentation for the Open Science Festival in Amsterdam, Netherlands, September 2022. The short presentation charts the progress of embedding good research data practices at Delft University of Technology. The following four themes are identified. 1. Hire Good People 2. Right People In Right Place 3. Establish Good Training 4. Finally, Build A Framework Policy

The concept of developing a national Open Knowledge Base for the Netherlands (NL-OKB) has been proposed in response to the strategic needs of the research community in the Netherlands. In parallel with the work of the Dutch Taskforce on Responsible Management of Research Information and Dataaddressing these opportunities and the preparation of a feasibility study by Dialogic, interested stakeholders were convened with the goal of identifying expert and user-community interests in and need for an NL-OKB. The goal in convening a workshop was: 1. To gather evidence on the feasibility of an NL-OKB 2. To test the community interest and appetite for developing an NL-OKB 3. To identify a practical pathway forward towards startup and implementation of an NL-OKB Over two days, 19-20 November 2020, 35 participants representing national and international organisations met in a virtual workshop. This included representatives of VSNU, NWO, NFU, SURF, DANS, CWTS and a range of Netherlands institutions alongside international stakeholders such as Crossref, ORCID, OpenAIRE, DataCite, SPARC North America, Jisc, UKRI and others. There was strong support for an NL-OKB amongst the assembled group. The group as a whole was strongly in favour of the development of an NL-OKB run on behalf of and controlled by the academic community. Of those present, virtually all indicated they had a direct stake and interest in supporting the development of an NL-OKB. International participants were also keen to see efforts in the Netherlands succeed as an exemplar to be drawn upon. The assembled group reached a series of consensus conclusions, that taken together provide the beginnings of a roadmap for further development. This report was prepared by the workshop conveners: Cameron Neylon (Curtin University), Magchiel Bijsterbosch (SURF), Alastair Dunning (TU Delft), Bianca Kramer (Utrecht University), Sarah de Rijcke (Leiden University), Clifford Tatum (SURF; Leiden University) and Ludo Waltman (Leiden University).Thereport may be re-used under a Creative Common Attribution v4 License.

Presentation given at Research Data Alliance 17, April 2021 The content concerns how research data service (or indeed any library or university service for researchers) need to work hard to distinguish itself from thousands of competitors)

This document outlines the framework for Data Stewardship at TU Delft 2020-2024. The document was endorsed, with modifications, by the Groepsraad (meeting of Deans) on 18 November 2019

In this paper, we explain our strategy for developing research data management policies at TU Delft. Policies can be important drivers for research institutions in the implementation of good data management practices. As Rans and Jones note (Rans and Jones 2013), " Policies provide clarity of purpose and may help in the framing of roles, responsibilities and requisite actions. They also legitimise making the case for investment”. However, policy development often tends to place the researchers in a passive position, while they are the ones managing research data on a daily basis. Therefore, at TU Delft, we have taken an alternative approach: a policy needs to go hand in hand with practice. The policy development was initiated by the Research Data Services at TU Delft Library, but as the process continued, other stakeholders, such as legal and IT departments, got involved. Finally, the faculty-based Data Stewards have played a key role in leading the consultations with the research community that led to the development of the faculty-specific policies. This allows for disciplinary differences to be reflected in the policies and to create a closer connection between policies and day-to-day research practice. Our primary intention was to keep researchers and research practices at the centre of our strategy for data management. We did not want to introduce and mandate requirements before adequate infrastructure and professional support were available to our research community and before our researchers were themselves willing to discuss formalisation of data management practices. This paper describes the key steps taken and the most important decisions made during the development of RDM policies at TU Delft.

This dataset is cited in the LCRDM task group Data Stewardship report, DOI10.5281/zenodo.2642066(April 2019).

Research data management (RDM) is increasingly important in scholarship. Many researchers are, however, unaware of the benefits of good RDM and unsure about the practical steps they can take to improve their RDM practices. Delft University of Technology (TU Delft) addresses this cultural barrier by appointing Data Stewards at every faculty. By providing expert advice and increasing awareness, the Data Stewardship project focuses on incremental improvements in current data and software management and sharing practices. This cultural change is accelerated by the Data Champions who share best practices in data management with their peers. The Data Stewards and Data Champions build a community that allows a discipline-specific approach to RDM. Nevertheless, cultural change also requires appropriate rewards and incentives. While local initiatives are important, and we discuss several examples in this paper, systemic changes to the academic rewards system are needed. This will require collaborative efforts of a broad coalition of stakeholders and we will mention several such initiatives. This article demonstrates that community building is essential in changing the code and data management culture at TU Delft.

This document aims to agree on a broad, international strategy for the implementation of open scholarship that meets the needs of different national and regional communities but works globally.Scholarly research can be idealised as an inspirational process for advancing our collective knowledge to the benefit of all humankind. However, current research practices often struggle with a range of tensions, in part due to the fact that this collective (or “commons”) ideal conflicts with the competitive system in which most scholars work, and in part because much of the infrastructure of the scholarly world is becoming largely digital. What is broadly termed as Open Scholarship is an attempt to realign modern research practices with this ideal. We do not propose a definition of Open Scholarship, but recognise that it is a holistic term that encompasses many disciplines, practices, and principles, sometimes also referred to as Open Science or Open Research. We choose the term Open Scholarship to be more inclusive of these other terms. When we refer to science in this document, we do so historically and use it as shorthand for more general scholarship.The purpose of this document is to provide a concise analysis of where the global Open Scholarship movement currently stands: what the common threads and strengths are, where the greatest opportunities and challenges lie, and how we can more effectively work together as a global community to recognise and address the top strategic priorities. This document was inspired by the Foundations for OER Strategy Development and work in the FORCE11 Scholarly Commons Working Group, and developed by an open contribution working group.Our hope is that this document will serve as a foundational resource for continuing discussions and initiatives about implementing effective strategies to help streamline the integration of Open Scholarship practices into a modern, digital research culture. Through this, we hope to extend the reach and impact of Open Scholarship into a global context, making sure that it is truly open for all. We also hope that this document will evolve as the conversations around Open Scholarship progress, and help to provide useful insight for both global co-ordination and local action. We believe this is a step forward in making Open Scholarship the norm.Ultimately, we expect the impact of widespread adoption of Open Scholarship to be diverse. We expect novel research practices to accelerate the pace of innovation, and therefore stimulate critical industries around the world. We could also expect to see an increase in public trust of science and scholarship, as transparency becomes more normative. As such, we expect interest in Open Scholarship to increase at multiple levels, due to its inherent influence on society and global economics.

Digitizing the past: next steps for public sector digitization, looks at at history of digitisation projects in the UK. It looks at the issues relating to programmes such as the Arts and Humanities Research Council Resource Enhancement Scheme, the lottery-supported New Opportunties Fund and the JISC Digitisation Programme. It reviews some of the reasons for successes and failures within these programmes, in particular looking at the greater emphasis being placed on sustainability and the need for managers of digital resources to ensure their digitised data is available from multiple locations.

Survey of research data management practices and attitudes within the 4TU Research Centres based on qualitative interviews with the Centres' Scientific Directors.

The method by which users have traditionally exploited digital resources such as Early English Books Online (EEBO) has been via keyword search. However, researchers are increasingly finding new ways to exploit entire corpora of digitized resources, treating the resource as a single entity to be analysed, rather than searching or sifting through the resource for individual parts. This article looks at the work of one research team at the University of Lancaster, exploring how they are using a corpus of seventeenth-century newsbooks to leverage open new areas of research. Using tools borrowed from linguistics and geography, the researchers can analyse the place names mentioned in the newsbooks and see which linguistic concepts (e.g. war, money) were associated with which geographical areas. Such work has implications not only for future research but also for the resource managers to negotiate and manage the licences related to such resources.

Wiki4R will create an innovative virtual research environment (VRE) for Open Science at scale, engaging both professional researchers and citizen data scientists in new and potentially transformative forms of collaboration. It is based on the realizations that (1) the structured parts of the Web itself can be regarded as a VRE, (2) such environments depend on communities, (3) closed environments are limited in their capacity to nurture thriving communities. Wiki4R will therefore integrate Wikidata, the multilingual semantic backbone behind Wikipedia, into existing research processes to enable transdisciplinary research and reduce fragmentation of research in and outside Europe. By establishing a central shared information node, research data can be linked and annotated into knowledge. Despite occasional uses of Wikipedia or Wikidata in research, significant barriers to broader adoption in the sciences or digital humanities exist, including lack of integration into existing research processes and inadequate handling of provenances. The proposed actions include providing best practices and tools for semantic mapping, adoption of citation and author identifiers, interoperability layers for integration with existing ‡ ‡ § |

This report was commissioned by the library of Delft University of Technology to provide a new vision for how it should manage access to, and publication in, scholarly journals. Information Power, the writers of the report, were asked to address the following strategic points Keeping the collection cost effective. Not only in terms of actual subscription costs but also the time needed by staff to administer the related licences and metadata. Maintaining a dynamic and responsive collection that relates to faculty needs and wider scientific trends, particularly interdisciplinary and cross-institutional research Providing a Collections Policy that is regarded as equitable and fair by faculty (and other stakeholders) Addresses whether there is a need for perpetual access Providing the library with its own sense of mission