[Francoise Genova]

 
Part 1 (15 min): Welcome

Short review of Group’s aims and activities: Initial IG activities

Part 2 (60 min): Discussion of the Group current and foreseen activities

Presentation of the “RDA role in the Evaluation of Research Landscape” document (15 20 min)

Solicit feedback (10 min)

Propose and solicit feedback for  use case collection and analysis WG (20 min)

Discuss proposals for other areas of activity (15 min)

Part 3 (15 min): Next steps

Confirm commitments to next steps (10 min)

Identify and align around goals for P23 (5 min)

The collaborative note document will be available and organised so as to gather written comments and contributions in addition to the discussion.

Additional links to informative material
 

IG web page and case statement

P19 BoF web page/notes/presentations

P20 BoF web page/ notes/presentations

P21 session web page/notes/presentations

Additional links will be added before the meeting taking into account IG activities until then.

Applicable Pathways
Data Lifecycles – Versioning, Provenance, and Reward, Other

Avoid conflict with the following group (1)
RDA for the Sustainable Development Goals IG

Brief introduction describing the activities and scope of the group
 
The evolution of the evaluation of research from being mostly bibliographic index-based is now recognized to be indispensable to enable Open Science. In the same way that Open Science promotes the open sharing of FAIR data and other research outputs, evaluators must also value and consider these outputs as part of the wider research evaluation framework. The RDA is an appropriate forum for addressing the evolving requirements of research evaluation as they relate to Open Science practices. RDA’s reach across the international community, including research organisations and funders, can help to facilitate and align a global discussion of research evaluation, drawing on data experts from a range of domains. 
 
The Interest Group “Evaluation of Research” organises the discussion on the subject in the RDA, in particular as it relates to data, and also in relation to RDA activities on research software. The initial topics for discussion identified for the IG are the following:

Mapping of the RDA activities relevant to research evaluation/assessment;

Gathering of links to relevant information, identifying relevant initiatives and determining how to engage with the initiatives and organisations that are most important to the group’s objectives and outcomes, in particular CoARA;

Liaison with the developments linked to CoARA and other initiatives identified as relevant and important;

Liaison with the relevant RDA Bodies, Interest Groups (IG) and Working Groups (WG);

Identifying additional topics and other initiatives with which to establish connection;

Act as an incubator for relevant RDA activities to be developed, in particular new WGs.

Group chair serving as contact person
Francoise Genova

I Understand a Chair Must be Present at the Event to Hold the Breakout Session
Yes

Meeting objectives
 
The Evaluation of Research IG was endorsed by RDA Council in June 2023. It held its first meeting in Saltzburg during Plenary 21, after two successful BoF meetings at P19 and P20. The meeting objectives are:

to get participants’ feedback on the first IG output, “RDA role in the Evaluation of Research Landscape”, which will likely be in RfC at the time of the meeting;

to discuss current and further IG activities, in particular the outcome of an IG meeting to  be held before the Plenary and a WG proposal aimed at gathering use cases on the evaluation of research from the RDA community.

The meeting will enable the IG to finalise the “RDA role in the Evaluation of Research Landscape” output and shape future activities, taking into account diverse approaches to research and its evaluation; respecting cultural, national, and disciplinary needs; and the requirements of the RDA community. 

Please indicate at least (3) three breakout slots that would suit your meeting.
Breakout 2, Breakout 5, Breakout 8

Privacy Policy
1

Discussion