Data Management Training/meeting notes 20160505

From Federation of Earth Science Information Partners

Agenda for May 5th 2016 All Call Meeting:

  • Progress on the implementation of our DMT Clearinghouse
    • Re-focus on Roles to simplify; See new tab on the spreadsheet at: DMT_Clearinghouse Personas
    • Choices for Moderator, Reviewer & Editor Roles / Functions for the DMT Clearinghouse, See the Roles_Workflows tab on the spreadsheet link, above
  • Progress on discussions related to role-based analyses of needed topics for data management training
  • Future Meeting logistics' planning
  • Research Data Management (RDM) Educational Effort by Research Data Alliance (RDA)/US - Ruth
  • Next meeting: Shaun Smith, Florida State University, Model for establishing credentials (Marine Tech)


Attendees:

  • John Faundeen, Shelley Stall, David Bassendine, Tamar Norkin, Matt Mayernik, Shawn Smith, Ruth Duerr, Bob Downs, Amber Budden, Nancy Hoebelheinrich, Sophie Hou


Action Items:

  1. Consider how the Moderator role can be implemented/combined with other roles.
  2. Anyone on the call can add to the Roles_Workflows Google Sheet reference below (in i.).
  3. Reserving 9am PT/12pm ET on Thursdays for Data Management Training/Clearinghouse Project discussions.
  4. Find out what the USGS point of view is on the question of "Do the organizations involved in the Clearinghouse effort have an expectation of the openness of the resources?".


Next Meeting discussions:

  • Progress on discussions related to role-based analyses of needed topics for data management training.
  • Subject Librarian oriented data management training syllabus.
  • Review of spreadsheet suggesting topics by role & data information literacy competency.
  • Presentation by Shaun Smith, Florida State University, on a model developed for establishing Marine Tech credentials that might be useful for us as we continue our discussion of what are the core skills for data management, and the roles or jobs associated with the range of data management responsibilities and activities.


Notes:

1. Progress on the implementation of our DMT Clearinghouse.

  • Re-focus on Roles to simplify; See new tab on the spreadsheet at: DMT_Clearinghouse Personas.
i. Link to the “DMT_Clearinghouse Personas” and “Roles_Workflow” spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MYU1heO-zBGSMJHiji-E9qGUYQlbnig6K0hiX-rr13Y/edit#gid=1852474797
ii. This link is also available on the “Clearinghouse Project” wiki page under the “Working Documents” section: http://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/Clearinghouse_Project
iii. Nancy provided an overview of the “Roles_Workflows” tab under the “DMT_Clearinghouse Personas” spreadsheet.
iv. Sophie added that these roles represented the main types of interactions or uses that our users might have with our Clearinghouse system. As a result, we could use these roles to guide the design and the implementation of the features on our Clearinghouse interfaces.
v. David also added that the condensed personas provided insights into the types of facets/controlled vocabularies we might need to develop as well as the priority that we would place on the implementation.
  • Choices for Moderator, Reviewer & Editor Roles / Functions for the DMT Clearinghouse, See the Roles_Workflows tab on the spreadsheet link, above.
i. Registration: Currently, we would like the users to register in order to submit to the Clearinghouse. This way, we could help in minimizing the amount of spammers as well as be able to add/assign additional functions/capabilities, such as being a review or editor, to the registered user.
ii. Workflow: In general, a registered user can submit a resource. The submitted resource would then be reviewed. The comments/suggestions made by the Reviewers would then be either accepted or reviewed further as decided by an Editor.
iii. Ruth cautioned that the web resources can be unstable/volatile. As a result, it is important that the list is curated, such as allowing one of the roles to tag/reflect if the resource is still available or not.
1) There is a tool in Drupal that we can use to determine if the link is still online/active.
2) An approach that is similar to how ESIP listserv is conducted can also be desirable; i.e. a group of Moderators/Administrators can review the feedback from the users and each Moderator/Administrator can make decisions/provide response for the Clearinghouse.
iv. Matt: What are the levels of involvement for each of the roles?
1) Nancy: We might need to experiment with the responsibilities a little bit at the beginning of the project as most (all?) of the roles will probably be filled by volunteers. We will need to adjust how much responsibility each role should have as we learn from our experiences during the first phase.
v. David: Perhaps the role of “Moderator” can be combined with another role? It depends on who/how the role is assigned?
1) Shelley: A Moderator might not need IT skill versus an Administrator might.
2) Ruth: For long term, sustainability point of view, the system should aim to be self-moderated.
a. If the purpose of the Moderator/Reviewer is just to ensure the submission is not a spam, then this is a much lighter weight responsibilities than trying to implement a journal-like peer review/moderation process.
b. It is important for us to consider how to automate/crowd source as much as possible. This would help in minimizing the amount of work that each person in the Clearinghouse project needs to commit. Ways to automate the process might include:
- The capability to rate the resources on a scale of 1 - 5, for instance with the added functionality of being able to add brief comments (although the comments might also imply more work for someone).
- Another feature might be to allow tags for the learning resource by previous users to indicate the status of the resources (current, modified, superseded, etc.)
- The tags provided by users could also provide feedback to the Clearinghouse staff as another way to monitor the currency of the learning resource.
vi. John: It might be necessary to check back with the creator or submitter of the learning resource at a certain point, e.g., after 1 year to see if the resource is still current or should be refreshed? This is an issue to keep in mind as part of our assessment & future planning of the Clearinghouse at the end of the project in September. It also raises the Who will be the point of contact for the submitted resources?
1) Ruth raised the question that it may not be clear who should or will be the appropriate point of contact for a submitted resource in order to get back in touch with them on any refresh cycle. Based on the RDA’s effort, the individuals who submitted the resources might never have been involved with the resources.
2) Nancy: The ways that the continued viability of the Clearinghouse resources might need to be suggested, implemented and maintained by a Clearinghouse community of people interested in keeping the effort alive and viable, i.e., by contributing to efforts to monitor the Clearinghouse resources for their currency and availability.
vii. David: What are the criteria for accepting the resources?
1) Nancy: Do the organizations involved in this effort have an expectation of the openness of the resources?
a. Amber: For DataONE, everything is open for education purposes. Alternatively, the metadata can be used to flag whether or not a resource is associated with costs or other requirements, such as registration for use of data associated with a learning resource.
b. Need to find out what the USGS point of view is on this question.


2. Future Meeting logistics' planning.

  • Nancy: Asked everyone to pencil in 9am PT/12pm ET on Thursdays for the Data Management Training/Clearinghouse Project activities.
i. The first Thursday of each month will continue to be the All-Call meetings, while other weeks can be used as needed by sub-groups such as the tech and metadata working groups for the Clearinghouse, or the analysis of role-based topics for the broader DMT effort. If there is no need to meet, the meeting can be canceled.


3. Research Data Management (RDM) Educational Effort by Research Data Alliance (RDA)/US - Ruth.

  • Ruth: Most key points have been covered during the above discussion, but she will be available to discuss in more detail at the next meeting.