Data Management Training/meeting notes 20151203

From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
< Data Management Training
Revision as of 18:03, December 3, 2015 by Sophisticus (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Meeting Agenda - Data Management Training - 2015-12-03 9:00am PT


Link to webex: https://esipfed.webex.com/mw0401lsp11/mywebex/default.do?siteurl=esipfed Passcode: 23138372

Telecon: 1-877-668-4493 Access Code: 23138372


Attendees: Nancy Hoebelheinrich, Shelley Stall, Shannon Rauch, Tamar Norkin, Justin Goldstein, Matt Mayernik, Bob Downs, Ruth Duerr, Amber Budden, Sophie Hou


Action Items:

  1. Nancy - Contact Matt Jones at NCEAS to confirm potential collaborations between the clearinghouse project and NCEAS’ project.
  2. Nancy - Contact Harry Furukawa at AGU regarding sharing of our efforts, those of DataONE (with Amber) and other ideas for training on data management (with Ruth & Sophie).
  3. Amber - Contact Tracy Teal at Software Carpentry to apprise her of our efforts and to see if what organization might have the capability to host an environment where scientists could learn how to manage data in a learning environment that would allow more realistic experiences.
  4. Nancy - Contact Erin for the same information as above (in #3).
  5. Bob - Find out what might be the best way to engage the ESIP Education committee in collaborative efforts related to K-12, community college or possibly vocational college scenarios.
  6. All who can - Join the session at ESIP Winter on Sophie’s findings and discussion of next steps for the DMT work (http://commons.esipfed.org/node/8763)


Announcement:

Next meeting on January 7th will fall during ESIP Winter, so the meeting will probably not happen then; a special meeting may be held for the group to review / discuss the full USGS CDI Proposal as it will be due before the next regularly scheduled meeting on February 4th, 2016.


Agenda and Notes:

  • DMT Clearinghouse
1. Nancy provided an review of the proposal that was submitted.
2. Overall, the project was proposed for a period of six months between March 2016 to September 2016.
3. Matt mentioned an effort from NCEAS that had a very similar scope as this project.
i. Nancy had communicated and shared the clearinghouse project with Matt Jones of NCEAS and Erin. Further discussions would be needed to plan out how the two projects could collaborate and consolidated, if needed.
ii. Amber indicated that NCEAS’ project might be more focused on finding a suitable online educational training environment.
- Who / How to help
- Take advantage of opportunities to discuss at ESIP Winter Meeting?
- Timeline
1. Tamar - The full proposal can be based on the statement of interest with more details added, especially in terms of the timeline and budget.
2. Amber and Bob - Will be more available in January to assist with the full proposal.
3. Sophie - The session that was proposed by Sophie/Matt/Nancy had been scheduled on the preliminary Winter Meeting Schedule (http://commons.esipfed.org/node/8763); we could use this session as an opportunity to meet in person to discuss the full proposal further.


  • Other areas of activity that people have expressed interest in:
1. Sophie was funded to do a comparison/analysis of ESIP’s data management short course with similar modules from other organizations. Results will be summarized at Winter ESIP. She has identified some topics not covered by the ESIP modules.
2. Ruth - Covering gaps would be a higher priority for the next phase of the Short Course.
3. Shannon would be interested in creating modules when we are ready to do that based on documentation that she has already created for her scientists at BCO-DMO.
  • Assessment of current process of creation / editing / peer review for new ESIP Short course modules
1. Sophie - provide more of an interactive element to the modules (e.g. quizzes) to further engage users.
2. Amber - DataONE’s education modules were aimed to allow people to use the resources in their teaching both for themselves and for others; as a result, understanding how people use the modules was helpful in the improvement of the modules. However, getting feedback from users had been difficult. DataONE is looking for ways to solicit suggestions from their users. The discussion has also included finding ways to engage the users of the educational resources in some interactive fashion per Sophie’s point above.
3. Shelley - AGU also has a effort to create a training program (Amber would be interested in joining the discussion regarding the selection of the training platform).
  • Finding other collaborators (e.g., ESIP Education committee or AGU Education group?)
1. AGU - Nancy to contact
2. NCEAS - Nancy to contact
3. ESIP Education Committee
i. K-12, community college, and vocational school are all good opportunities for extending the outreach of the Short Course.
ii. Bob - Will help in double checking if there will be opportunities to meet with the Education Committee.
  • Evaluation of current modules: needed / how to do?
1. Sophie - The librarians at UCSB are currently going through the Short Course modules; could try to solicit feedback from them.
2. Ruth - Some of the modules are dated, so we should come up with a plan to review and reassess the modules for update/retirement.
3. Ruth - Helping investigators in working with the data that they already have would help in encouraging the engagement. Also, if we would like to increase our capabilities for the modules, we will need to have the appropriate technological support. Further, to provide feedback and online interaction, such as www.craftsy.com could be another way to engage the community.