A. Sallans. "Practical Applications of e-Science." Presented at the 2011 eScience Bootcamp at the University of Virginia's Claude Moore Health Sciences Library. 4 March 2011

1. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
OF E-SCIENCE
Andrew Sallans
Head of Strategic Data Initiatives
University of Virginia Library
E-Science Bootcamp
Claude Moore Health Sciences Library, University of Virginia
4 March 2011

2. ROUND 2:
SCIENTIFIC DATA CONSULTING GROUP
 December/January 2010: rethinking the
model
 Budgetary pressures
 Changes in organizational priorities
 Emerging demand in research community
 Spring 2010: decision to focus on data
 May 2010: close of RCL, start of SciDaC
2

3. WHAT’S HOT IN 2010?
 Open data: growing governmental interest in
making publicly-funded research more
transparent and more available (NIH, NSF)
 Broader critical review: greater interest
evaluating original research data (Nature)
 Technological advances: sharing of research
results easier and faster (Repositories, Web 2.0)
 Reuse/preservation of research data:
increased consideration of the cost and value of
research data and need to ensure its longevity
3

4. “SCIENTISTS SEEKING NSF FUNDING WILL SOON BE
REQUIRED TO SUBMIT DATA MANAGEMENT PLANS”
Press Release 10-077, May 5, 2010
Current Policy:
o “To advance science by encouraging data sharing among
researchers”
o Data obtained with federal funds be accessible to the general
public
o Grantees must develop and submit specific plans to share
materials collected with NSF support, except where this is
inappropriate or impossible
On or around October 2010:
o All new NSF proposals will be required to include a data
management plan in the form of a 2 pg supplementary document
(peer reviewed)
o New policy is meant to be a 1st step toward a more
comprehensive approach to data management
o Exact requirements vague 4

5. THE CHALLENGE FOR INSTITUTIONS
Data is expensive
 Time, instrumentation, inability to reproduce
Increasing regulation
 Granting agencies and journals require
submission
Inadequate training
 No formal data management curriculum
Preservation is not a priority
 For most researchers, preservation takes time
away from the work that is rewarded
(publication, teaching) 5

6. SO…WHO’S GOING TO TAKE THIS ON?
 Researchers?
 VPR?
 CIO?
 OSP?
 UL?
6

7. WHY THE LIBRARY?
 Neutral: works across the entire institution
 Strong in relationship building: has
experience fostering discussion and relationships,
and cultivates an existing support network
 Intellectual Property experts: has dealt with
copyright, can translate to data
 Service-oriented: uniquely positioned as an
intellectual service unit within the institution
7

8. GETTING STARTED…
 Take what we learned in the RCL experience and
apply it to the focused demands around data
Steps:
 Conduct a stakeholder analysis
 Make a short term plan (12 months)
 Develop clear priorities
 Refine and standardize consulting methods
 Communicate heavily
8

9. STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS (ABBREVIATED)
Internal External
 Researchers  Funding agencies
 Graduate Students  Broader research
 Grant Administrators community
 Deans  “The Public”
 VP/CIO
 VPR
 OSP
 UL
9

10. SHORT TERM PLAN
 Survey OSP to match grant holders with
regulations
 Educate/engage subject librarians
 Build political awareness/support
 Build partnerships with
local/national/international groups
Resource requests:
 Staffing commitment
 Travel/partnership support
10
 Promotion of initiative to institution

11. CLEAR PRIORITIES
1. Data interviews/assessments
2. Response to NSF Data Management Plan
(DMP) Mandate
3. Leadership on data for the Institutional
Repository (IR)
11

12. CONSULTING METHODS
 Interviews/assessments
 DMP templates
 LOTS of documentation
 Constant and continuous refinement of process
 Adherence to core principle of helping the
researcher improve process (not approaching it
theoretically)
12

13. COMMUNICATE HEAVILY
 Internal
 Inform staff of processes, priorities, and progress
 Keep stakeholders engaged
 Reach the consumers from many angles
 External
 Discuss and share experiences with colleagues at other
institutions
 Create partnerships to share, build upon resources and
experiences, collaborate on tools
 Networking (Twitter, LinkedIn, listserves, conference calls,
conference presentations)
Bottom line: this is a big culture shift, and you do have to 13
say the same thing many times in different ways

14. HOW TO MAKE THIS WORK…
Librarians as partners
o Consult with and advise researchers
o Provide leadership to the institution
o Work with existing data organizations
In order to succeed, librarians need to:
• Build and develop specific expertise
• Facilitate communication
14

15. TIME OUT: NSF DMP UPDATE
 Now effective January 18, 2011
 Some earlier proposals also require DMPs (even
some in early December)
 Broad guidelines, but directorates may have
specific guidelines for their community
 Uploaded as 2-page supplemental document in
FastLane (with specific format requirements)
 Formally peer-reviewed, and will require status
updates in all progress reports
15

16. UVA SCIDAC NSF DMP RESPONSE
UVa Library’s Original Request
 Develop boilerplate for researchers to use in proposals
SciDaC Group’s Response
 No boilerplate, successful proposals need customized plans
 Our approach involves:
 Knowledge across many communities (“translational” opportunities)
 Leadership on policy/infrastructure development
 Development of a template that simplifies writing the plan
Principles
 Must be easy for researcher
 Must be supportable by available UVA resources/infrastructure
 Must be able to be followed-through on if grant is awarded
16

17. ONGOING ISSUES
 Training: how do you train librarians to meet
these new needs?
 Buy-in: how do you get effective buy-in from
people around the institution?
 Scalability: how do you scale this to support all
of the researchers who need support?
17

18. TRAINING LIBRARIANS
UVa Library Staff Model
 Scientific Data Consultants
 Subject Librarians
Current Training Model
 Brown Bag Data Curation
Discussions
 Data Interviews
Goals and Objectives
 Build Data Literacy
 Create Collaborative Opportunities
 Establish the Library for Data
Preservation
18

19. BUY-IN BY THE INSTITUTION
 Regulations are helpful
 Partnerships between key stakeholders:
 University libraries (UL)
 Central IT (CIO)
 Research Office (VP for Research)
 Sponsored Programs/Research
 Strategic investment: take ownership, allocate
resources, and demonstrate capability
19

20. SCALING UP TO MEET DEMAND
 Time: NSF research support alone is going to be
very time consuming (UVA had about 140
proposals over the past year, 44 in November
alone)
 Funding: work with leaders to find money
 Redirection/reallocation of grant overhead dollars
 Write-in of library staff on grants
 Strategy: decide how to invest
 How might units be reorganized?
 How could staff resources and expertise be refocused?
20
 What external partnerships would add value?

21. WRAP-UP
 Libraries are well-positioned to play a vital role
in research data support
 Open Data initiatives are a call to action
21

22. QUESTIONS?
 Please feel free to contact me with questions at
als9q@virginia.edu or 434-243-2180.
22