Tyler Walters, Virginia Tech, MacKenzie Smith, UC-Davis
SHARE – Ensuring broad and continuing access to research is central to the mission of higher education.
Catalyst was the February OSTP memo.
SHARE Tenets – How do we see the research world and our role in it? Independent of the operationalization of OSTP directive, the higher ed community is uniquely positioned to play a leading role in stewardship of research. How can we help PIS and researchers meet compliance requirements?
Higher ed also ahas an interest in collecting and pre servicing scholarly output.
Publications, data, and metadata, should be publicly accessible to accelerate research and discovery.
Complying with multiple requirements from multiple funding sources will place a significant burden on principal investigators and offices of sponsored research. The rumors are that different agencies will have different approaches and repositories, complicating the issue.
We nee to talk more about workflows and policies. We can rely on existing standards where available.
SHARE is a cross-institutional framework to ensure, access to, preservation and reuse of and policy compliance for funded research. SHARE will be mostly a workflow architecture that can be implemented differently at different institutions. The framework will enable PIs to submit their funded research to any of the deposit locations designated by federal agencies using a common UI. It will package and deliver relevant metadata and files. Institutions implementing SHARE may elect to store copies in local repositories. Led by ARL, with support from AAU and APLU. Guided by a steering committee drawing from libraries, university administration, and other core constituencies.
Researchers – current funder workflows have 20+ steps. Multiple funders = tangle of compliance requirements and procedures, with potential to overwhelm PIs. Single deposit workflow = more research time, less hassle.
Funding Agencies – Streamlines receipt of information about research outputs; Increases likelihood of compliance
Universities – Optimize interaction among funded research, research officers, and granting agency; Creates organic link between compliance and analytics
General Public – makes it easier for public to access reuse and mine research outputs and research data; Adotpion of standards and protocols will make it easier for search engines.
Project map: 1. Develop Project Roadmap (hopefully in January); 2. Assemble working groups; 3. Build prototypes; 4. Launch prototypes; 5. Refine; 6. Expand
Mackenzie – The great thing about SHARE is that it means something different to everyone you talk to. 🙂
Architecture (very basic at present) – 4 layers:
Thinking about how to federate content being collected in institutional repositories – content will be everywhere in a distributed content storage layer. Want customized discovery layers (e.g. DPLA) above that. Notification layer above that. Content aggregations for things like text mining (future), in order to support that will need to identify content aggregation mechanisms (great systems out there already).
Raises lots of issues:
- Researchers don’t want to do anything new, but want to be able to apply. Want to embed notification layer into tools they already use.
- Sponsored research offices are terrified of a giant unfunded mandate. So we have to provide value back to researcher and institution, and leverage what we already have rather than building new infrastructure.
- Who should we look at as existing infrastructure to leverage?
What’s the balance between publications and data? Both were covered in the memo, but was very vague. Most agencies and institutions have some idea how to deal with publications, but not the data piece. Whatever workflow SHARE deals with will have to incorporate data handling.
Want to leverage workflow in sponsored project offices to feed SHARE.
What do we know about CHORUS (the publisher’s response) at this point? Something will exist. It would be good to have notifications coming out of CHORUS – they are part of the ecosystem.
Faculty will get a lot more interested in what’s being put out on the web about their activities. Some campuses are tracking a lot of good data in promotion and tenure dossier systems, but that may not be able to be used for other purposes.
Will there be metadata shared for data or publications that can’t be made public? Interesting issues to deal with.
What does success look like? We don’t know yet – immediate problem is the OSTP mandate which will come soon. At base the notifications system is very important – the researcher letting the people who need to know that there is output produced from their research. Other countries have had notions of accountability for funded research for a long time. Even deans don’t know what publications from faculty are being produced. In Europe they don’t have that problem.
Want to be in a position by end of 2014 to invite people to look at and touch system. Send thoughts to share@arl.org
Oren Sreebny 