Skip to main content

Notice

We are in the process of rolling out a soft launch of the RDA website, which includes a new member platform. Existing RDA members PLEASE REACTIVATE YOUR ACCOUNT using this link: https://rda-login.wicketcloud.com/users/confirmation. Visitors may encounter functionality issues with group pages, navigation, missing content, broken links, etc. As you explore the new site, please provide your feedback using the UserSnap tool on the bottom right corner of each page. Thank you for your understanding and support as we work through all issues as quickly as possible.

Re: [rda-datamanagplans] AW: [rda-datamanagplans] AW: [rda-datamanagplans] A short…

  • Creator
    Discussion
  • #85408

    Marjan
    Member

    “NERC currently ask for two phases of the DMP. The pre-award plan is much lighter on detail and a fuller plan is only requested once the project has been funded.”
    This is also the approach taken by the Dutch funding organisations NWO and ZonMw in their respective pilot studies regarding data management: first a brief data section in the grant proposal, and later on a DMP. Both funders regard the DMP as a living document, to be updated and extended during the project. It would make sense to do this – at least – when a project progress report is due, although it would be better to document all major changes in the project plan if and when they occur; for reproducibility and re-use of the data, but possibly also for writing the Methods section.
    I strongly agree with Herman’s concern to keep DMP templates manageable and useful to the average researcher, who is usually not an expert on what data management entails. Therefore I hope that they will become integral parts of research proposals, research progress reports, and research publications. After all, data management should be all in a day’s work – of the researcher, their institutions and their academic disciplines. To this end, we should treat them as normal, low profile, et cetera, rather than trying to pack everything in them. A minimal set of reusable, modular, elements that various stakeholders can agree on might be the way to go. The items mentioned in the Horizon2020 Open Research Data Pilot could be a start, and we have included them in the template in the DANS brochure on http://dans.knaw.nl/en/training-consultancy/consultancy/research-data-ma
    Best regards,
    Marjan
    Dr Marjan Grootveld
    Senior policy officer
    +31(0)6 12 10 15 14
    Skype: mgrootveld1
    ***@***.***
    Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)
    DANS offers sustainable access to digital research data. Please visit http://www.dans.knaw.nl for more information and contact details. DANS is an institute of KNAW and NWO.
    From: on behalf of Joy Davidson
    Date: dinsdag 18 augustus 2015 14:26
    To: ‘mhemmje’ , ‘HermanStehouwer’ , “***@***.***” , ‘rduerr’ , ‘Active Data Management Plans IG’
    Cc: ‘mlangset’
    Subject: Re: [rda-datamanagplans] AW: [rda-datamanagplans] AW: [rda-datamanagplans] A short…
    Hi everyone,
    In my opinion, there are two key areas that a DMP can help to support. The first is to help support reproducibility and validation. The second is to outline plans for data sharing. Funders emphasise data sharing in most of their data related policies, so in the DCC we have been encouraging people to consider DMPs as plans to share (is it going to be appropriate? with who? when and how?). In some cases, sharing won’t be feasible but I think funders are looking to the pre-award DMPS to help them get a feel for what data might be available and accessible at the end of the project.
    Supporting validation of published finding is something that could only be supported through updating and fleshing out the DMP over the entire research lifecycle as others have noted. I think we need to cover both aspects. NERC currently ask for two phases of the DMP. The pre-award plan is much lighter on detail and a fuller plan is only requested once the project has been funded. This approach may work well and might be something for us to consider.
    In the UK, we are fortunate that RCUK outlined in their Common Principles on Research Data that it is acceptable to use public funds to support data management and sharing. However, it is highly unlikely that any funder would increase the award towards the end of the project to provide additional funding for RDM. So, it is crucial that we can get a good idea of what will be needed to support planned RDM and data sharing from the outset and be sure to have some way of resourcing these requirements – either in the HEI or externally. We encourage researchers to complete their pre-award DMP as a means of helping to identify infrastructure requirements and to be able to request sufficient funds to support RDM and data sharing in new grant applications. The UKDA have a great costing tool that helps researchers to consider additional activities and related costs and gives them an idea of when in the lifecycle the effort is most cost-effective. As we don’t have funder sponsored data centres in all disciplines in the UK, HEIs are expected to play a key role in supporting the retention and reuse of research outputs. This will make budgeting a key concern for institutions as well.
    All the best,
    Joy
    From: Matthias.Hemmje=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] On Behalf Of mhemmje
    Sent: 18 August 2015 09:26
    To: ‘HermanStehouwer’; ***@***.***; ‘rduerr’; ‘Active Data Management Plans IG’
    Cc: ‘mlangset’
    Subject: [rda-datamanagplans] AW: [rda-datamanagplans] AW: [rda-datamanagplans] A short note on DMPs
    I agree that requirements towards expected resources are needed.
    Regarding complexity, this is correct. However, not every thing has to be done by operative „average“ researchers.
    There are different roles involved and a process model regarding these different actors and their responsibilities will help.
    Best regards
    Matthias
    Prof. Dr.-Ing. Matthias L. Hemmje
    FernUniversität in Hagen – Fakultät für Mathematik und Informatik – Lehrgebiet Multimedia und Internetanwendungen
    Universitätsstrasse 1 – D-58097 Hagen – Germany
    Email: ***@***.***-hagen.de – Web: http://www.fernuni-hagen.de/
    Phone: +49 (2331) 987-304 – Mobile: +49 (172) 6840262 – Fax: +49 (2331) 987-4487 – Skype: Matthias.Hemmje
    Von:herman.stehouwer=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] Im Auftrag von HermanStehouwer
    Gesendet: Montag, 17. August 2015 19:51
    An: mhemmje ; ***@***.***; ‘rduerr’ ; ‘Active Data Management Plans IG’
    Cc: ‘mlangset’
    Betreff: Re: [rda-datamanagplans] AW: [rda-datamanagplans] A short note on DMPs
    Yes, but with early declaration of expectations wrt. used infrastructure and needed resources.
    Some of the parties involved (at least STFC, but I am sure others as well) do forward planning based on the DMPs for projects in their institutes.
    However, overall this is starting to sound quite complex.
    How can we keep it manageable and useful to the average researcher?
    (after all he/she is usually not an expert on data matters, let alone DMPs, and usually has no desire to become such an expert).
    You’ll have to excuse me for starting to sound like a broken record.
    Cheers,
    Herman
    On 17/08/15 19:23, mhemmje wrote:
    That is why I have said it is multidimensional planning with late binding of resources.
    During the proposal the DMP has to comply with the funding framework.
    During kick-off and enactement, the early project has to comply with work plan and mangerial structures as finalized in the grant agreement
    and ist attachements, as e.g. DOW.
    During execution the DMP has to copmly with the available resources which have to be assigned in terms of infrastructure, services,
    and human resources.
    Best regards
    Matthias
    Prof. Dr.-Ing. Matthias L. Hemmje
    FernUniversität in Hagen – Fakultät für Mathematik und Informatik – Lehrgebiet Multimedia und Internetanwendungen
    Universitätsstrasse 1 – D-58097 Hagen – Germany
    Email: ***@***.***-hagen.de – Web: http://www.fernuni-hagen.de/
    Phone: +49 (2331) 987-304 – Mobile: +49 (172) 6840262 – Fax: +49 (2331) 987-4487 – Skype: Matthias.Hemmje
    Von:herman.stehouwer=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] Im Auftrag von HermanStehouwer
    Gesendet: Montag, 17. August 2015 11:00
    An: ***@***.***; rduerr ; Active Data Management Plans IG
    Cc: mlangset
    Betreff: Re: [rda-datamanagplans] A short note on DMPs
    Hi David,
    As Jamie already noted the demands are not always consistent.
    Furthermore, what a researcher needs from a DMP is quite different from what the funder needs.
    That is, if a researcher has an overarching DMP for her research it would still have to be adapted for every grant. Which reduces the direct usefulness. (though having one would still be useful and helpful for developing good data praxis).
    Cheers,
    Herman
    On 14/08/15 22:11, ***@***.*** wrote:
    That funders seek a DMP does not necessarily mean a one to one mapping with their grant no? Cannot a single DMP be portable and reusable for all funders that request it?
    Sent while mobile.
    On Aug 14, 2015, at 3:55 PM, rduerr wrote:
    The biggest problem I’ve always seen with even the concept of an active/adaptable DMP is the concept that data sets and projects are related 1 to 1 or maybe many to 1; but not in the many to many fashion which is the way things really work. If I am a researcher who has bene pursuing a line of research for 20 years (e.g., how does volcano plumbing work or what’s going on with the Greenland ice sheet); I may well have a sizable collection of materials that intellectually speaking are one continuous, cohesive collection (e.g., XYZ’s geological study of Antarctica’s Dry Valleys or Joe Blow’s 30 year record of XYZ measurements at Summit Greenland); yet the odds of there only having been one grant and one funding agency involved is probably identically zero. Yes, sure maybe today being able to pursue a single line of research to a meaningful conclusion is more difficult; but I am not convinced that makes the situation better – I think it might actually make this disconnect worse!
    Back pre-digital era when that researcher retired and all of their stuff was handed to an archive, it would have been treated as a single collection. When descriptions of it are put on-line now (perhaps involving digitizing some analog materials), they probably would have been split into sub-collections, not by grant but by categories based on scientific utility. For example, in the Antarctic case, Dry Valleys rock samples, Dry Valley’s thin slices; Dry Valley’s chemical assays; etc. In the Greenland case, something like 30 year temperature record at Summit Greenland; 30 year snow albedo Summit, Greenland. Why would anyone want the data split into stuff collected using grant X, stuff collected using grant Y, etc.? Yet that is exactly what this active/adaptive DMP stuff tries to do, which is I think exactly what Herman was saying in the first bullet… What researchers do and what DMP’s aim to do are rather orthogonal at the moment… OK, yes funding agencies might like to see things organized by grant; but that certainly would not make it easy to re-use those data – in fact, organization by grant rather defeats the purpose of maximizing that data’s value.
    Now if I had a DMP that actually discussed my line of research that was updated not only during a grant; but to include stuff coming in under any new grants; that might be more realistic.
    My 2 cents…
    Ruth
    On Aug 14, 2015, at 11:19 AM, mlangset wrote:
    A couple of things that I have been thinking about with respect to active/adaptable DMPs:
    It would be great if various disciplines could map DMP elements to corresponding elements in their metadata standards. That way if the DMP is kept up-to-date, the end product could be a metadata record describing the data. Tools would likely need to be developed with targeted questions for initially writing the DMP, an interface for updating the DMP, and a utility for outputting standard XML metadata records.
    With respect to keeping the DMPs updated, the tools could incorporate a schedule tracker. Prior to the start of the project, PIs would input an anticipated schedule for key milestones in the project where deviations from the initial DMP tend to happen. The tool could push notices to the project team asking if certain elements are still accurate and providing an easy way to edit.

    Full post: https://www.rd-alliance.org/group/active-data-management-plans-ig/post/s
    Manage my subscriptions: https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
    Stop emails for this post: https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/49532

    Full post: https://www.rd-alliance.org/group/active-data-management-plans-ig/post/s
    Manage my subscriptions: https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
    Stop emails for this post: https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/49532

    Full post: https://www.rd-alliance.org/group/active-data-management-plans-ig/post/s
    Manage my subscriptions: https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
    Stop emails for this post: https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/49532

    Dr. ir. Herman Stehouwer
    Max Planck Computing and Data Facility (MPCDF)
    RDA Secretariat
    ***@***.*** 0031-619258815
    Skype: herman.stehouwer.mpi

    Full post: https://www.rd-alliance.org/group/active-data-management-plans-ig/post/a
    Manage my subscriptions: https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
    Stop emails for this post: https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/49557

    Dr. ir. Herman Stehouwer
    Max Planck Computing and Data Facility (MPCDF)
    RDA Secretariat
    ***@***.*** 0031-619258815
    Skype: herman.stehouwer.mpi

Log in to reply.