The impact of open access initiative on knowledge sharing

The main focus of this paper is to look at the role of the open access initiative (OAI) as a channel for knowledge sharing that could be used for the disseminate knowledge and research funding. For this purpose OAI was selected for analytical as role communication among the research. To assess if the articles found in the OAI contents knowledge sharing a method called contextual analysis was used. The result showed that OAI can aptly serve as a tool for disseminate knowledge and sharing ideas. By analysis is these material, OAI might be able to drive benefits directly or indirectly and eventually become beneficial took for scholars in their

Moving data into and out of an institutional repository: Off the map and into the territory

Given the recent proliferation of institutional repositories, a key strategic question is how multiple institutions - repositories, archives, universities and others—can best work together to manage and preserve research data. In 2007, Green and Gutmann proposed how partnerships among social science researchers, institutional repositories and domain repositories should best work. This paper uses the Timescapes Archive—a new collection of qualitative longitudinal data— to examine the challenges of working across institutions in order to move data into and out of institutional repositories. The Timescapes Archive both tests and extends their framework by focusing on the specific case of qualitative longitudinal research and by highlighting researchers' roles across all phases of data preservation and sharing. Topics of metadata, ethical data sharing, and preservation are discussed in detail. What emerged from the work to date is the extremely complex nature of the coordination required among the agents; getting the timing right is both critical and difficult. Coordination among three agents is likely to be challenging under any circumstances and becomes more so when the trajectories of different life cycles, for research projects and for data sharing, are considered. Timescapes exposed some structural tensions that, although they can not be removed or eliminated, can be effectively managed

Raising the visibility of protected data: A pilot data catalog project

Sharing research data that is protected for legal, regulatory, or contractual reasons can be challenging and current mechanisms for doing so may act as barriers to researchers and discourage data sharing. Additionally, the infrastructure commonly used for open data repositories does not easily support responsible sharing of protected data. This chapter presents a case study of an academic university library’s work to configure the existing institutional data repository to function as a data catalog. By engaging in this project, university librarians strive to enhance visibility and access to protected datasets produced at the institution and cultivate a data sharing culture

Illinois Digital Scholarship: Preserving and Accessing the Digital Past, Present, and Future

Since the University's establishment in 1867, its scholarly output has been issued primarily in print, and the University Library and Archives have been readily able to collect, preserve, and to provide access to that output. Today, technological, economic, political and social forces are buffeting all means of scholarly communication. Scholars, academic institutions and publishers are engaged in debate about the impact of digital scholarship and open access publishing on the promotion and tenure process. The upsurge in digital scholarship affects many aspects of the academic enterprise, including how we record, evaluate, preserve, organize and disseminate scholarly work. The result has left the Library with no ready means by which to archive digitally produced publications, reports, presentations, and learning objects, much of which cannot be adequately represented in print form. In this incredibly fluid environment of digital scholarship, the critical question of how we will collect, preserve, and manage access to this important part of the University scholarly record demands a rational and forward-looking plan - one that includes perspectives from diverse scholarly disciplines, incorporates significant research breakthroughs in information science and computer science, and makes effective projections for future integration within the Library and computing services as a part of the campus infrastructure.Prepared jointly by the University of Illinois Library and CITES at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaig

Establishing Incentives and Changing Cultures to Support Data Access

This project was developed as a key component of the workplan of the Expert Advisory Group on Data Access (EAGDA).EAGDA wished to understand the factors that help and hinder individual researchers in making their data (both published and unpublished) available to other researchers, and to examine the potential need for new types of incentives to enable data access and sharing. This is a critical challenge in achieving the shared policy commitment of the four EAGDA funders to maximise the benefit derived from data outputs and the considerable investment they have made over recent years in supporting data sharing.In addition to a review of previous reports and other initiatives in this area, the work involved in-depth interviews with key stakeholders; two focus group discussions; and a web survey to which 35 responses were received from a broad range of researchers and data managers.Although based on a relatively modest number of responses and interviews, the findings closely mirrored those of previous work in this area. In particular there was a clear, overarching view that the research culture and environment is not perceived as providing sufficient support, nor adequate rewards for researchers who generate and share high-quality datasets

Embracing the future: embedding digital repositories in the University of London. Briefing paper

This briefing paper captures the key findings and recommendations of a study commissioned by the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) on aspects of the strategic commitment of institutions to repository sustainability.1 This project, labelled EMBRACE (EMBedding Repositories And Consortial Enhancement) is aimed at enhancing the functionality, inter-operability and extensibility of the SHERPA-LEAP repository service, which currently supports the repositories of thirteen University of London institutions. This briefing paper aims to clarify the different motivations to use and invest in digital repositories, and potential ways to address the challenges to embedding these repositories in institutional strategy and daily operation are highlighted. It is designed for use by Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), who are encouraged to adapt the recommendations to their specific context

The role of institutional repositories in addressing higher education challenges

Over the last decade, Higher Education around the world is facing a number of challenges. Challenges such as adopting new technologies, improving the quality of learning and teaching, widening participation, student retention, curriculum design/alignment, student employability, funding and the necessity to improve governance are considered particularly in many literature. To effectively operate and to survive in this globalization era, Higher Education institutions need to respond those challenges in an efficient way. This paper proposes ways in which institutional data repositories can be utilized to address the challenges found in different literature. Also we discuss which repositories can be shared across the institutions and which need not to be shared in order to address those challenges. Finally the paper discusses the barriers to sharing Higher Education repositories and how those barriers can be addressed

Mediating boundaries between knowledge and knowing: ICT and R4D praxis

Research for development (R4D) praxis (theory-informed practical action) can be underpinned by the use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) which, it is claimed, provide opportunities for knowledge working and sharing. Such a framing implicitly or explicitly constructs a boundary around knowledge as reified, or commodified – or at least able to be stabilized for a period of time (first order knowledge). In contrast ‘third-generation knowledge’ emphasizes the social nature of learning and knowledge-making; this reframes knowledge as a negotiated social practice, thus constructing a different system boundary. This paper offers critical reflections on the use of a wiki as a data repository and mediating technical platform as part of innovating in R4D praxis. A sustainable social learning process was sought that fostered an emergent community of practice among biophysical and social researchers acting for the first time as R4D co-researchers. Over time the technologically mediated element of the learning system was judged to have failed. This inquiry asks: How can learning system design cultivate learning opportunities and respond to learning challenges in an online environment to support R4D practice? Confining critical reflection to the online learning experience alone ignores the wider context in which knowledge work took place; therefore the institutional setting is also considered

Principles in Patterns (PiP) : Institutional Approaches to Curriculum Design Institutional Story

The principal outputs of the PiP Project surround the Course and Class Approval (C-CAP) system. This web-based system built on Microsoft SharePoint addresses and resolves many of the issues identified by the project. Generally well received by both academic and support staff, the system provides personalised views, adaptive forms and contextualised support for all phases of the approval process. Although the system deliberately encapsulates and facilitates existing approval processes thus achieving buy-in, it is already achieving significant improvements over the previous processes, not only in reducing the administrative overheads but also in supporting curriculum design and academic quality. The system is now embedded across three faculties and is now considered by the University of Strathclyde to be a "core institutional service". Alongside the C-CAP system the PiP Project also cultivated a suite of approaches: an incremental systems development methodology; a structured and replicable evaluation approach, and; Strathclyde's Lean Approach to Efficiencies in Education Kit (SLEEK) business process improvement methodology Each is based on recognised formal techniques, providing the basis for a rigorous approach. This is contextualised within and adapted to the HE institutional context thus building the foundation not only for the project but ultimately for institution wide process improvement. This "institutional story" report summarises the principal outcomes of the Project

Open research data: Report to the Australian National Data Service (ANDS)

Main points Research data are an asset we have been building for decades, through billions of dollars of public investment in research annually. The information and communication technology (ICT) revolution presents an unprecedented opportunity to ‘leverage’ that asset. Given this, there is increasing awareness around the world that there are benefits to be gained from curating and openly sharing research data (Kvalheim and Kvamme 2014). Conservatively, we estimate that the value of data in Australia’s public research to be at least $1.9 billion and possibly up to$6 billion a year at current levels of expenditure and activity. Research data curation and sharing might be worth at least $1.8 billion and possibly up to$5.5 billion a year, of which perhaps $1.4 billion to$4.9 billion annually is yet to be realized. Hence, any policy around publicly-funded research data should aim to realise as much of this unrealised value as practicable. Aims and scope This study offers conservative estimates of the value and benefits to Australia of making publicly-funded research data freely available, and examines the role and contribution of data repositories and associated infrastructure. It also explores the policy settings required to optimise research data sharing, and thereby increase the return on public investment in research. The study’s focus is Australia’s Commonwealth-funded research and agencies. It includes research commissioned or funded by Commonwealth bodies as well as in-house research within research-oriented agencies wholly or largely funded by the Commonwealth. Government data or public sector information is a separate category of publicly-funded data – although there is some overlap at the margins (e.g. Commonwealth Government funding for Geoscience Australia). Main findings For the purposes of estimation, we explore a range of research funding and expenditure from total Australian Government funding support for research to the sum of government and higher education expenditure on research by sector of execution. The lower bound estimates are based on the labour-cost share of research funding and expenditure ($4.3 billion to$6.4 billion per annum), and upper bound estimates on total research funding and expenditure ($8.9 billion to$13.3 billion per annum)