Support for Research Data Management among U.S. Academic Institutions: Results from a National Survey Page: 4
This report is part of the collection entitled: UNT Scholarly Works and was provided to UNT Digital Library by the UNT College of Information.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Research Data Management: Survey Results
3.4.4. Collaborative: actively participating in and guiding scholars' research data managementAnswer Count Percentage
Negligible 3 4.6%
Somewhat Useful 6 9.2%
Useful 11 16.9%
Very Useful 27 41.6%
Critical 18 27.7%
Total 65 100%3.4.5. Archival: preserving and providing access to research data.
longer resides at the university
Answer Count Percentage
Negligible 0 0.0%
Somewhat Useful 3 4.5%
Useful 10 15.2%
Very Useful 15 22.7%
Critical 38 57.6%
Total 66 100%once a scholar or research project no
Respondents' Comments on Question 4 (N=18)
Ideally we would like to be able to list all of the categories above as "critical", but we must be realistic
about our time and budgetary constraints. Ultimately, at our institution the library will probably take a
mostly instructional role, with guidance on archival issues as we grapple with electronic records
issues.
Indexing/Cataloging - Making research data easily locatable by other researchers in standardized shared
databases. Making data search-able without having to do full data downloads.
The above selections reflect the instruction phrase about what the roles "are likely to be at your
institution." The selections do not reflect my thoughts of what should be. Several library
administrators approached science department chairs about the role of the Library in data curation
and were told in no uncertain terms that the scientists know how to handle their data and do not
need help from librarians. Perhaps our social scientists will be more amenable to the possibility of
help from the Library.
Collaborative in another sense - that is doing this work at the consortial level rather than at the local level.
For actual storage we are envisioning a partnership with central university IT
Must be conceived in a multi-institutional context
Advocacy for things like open access and shared data such as in repositories. Education about
copyright/ownership of data.
Provide and advocate for transparency, teach intellectual property issues, open access, etc. All these
things overlap in some ways and are very different in others. It is important to have as clear an
understanding of this as possible. Librarians should be leaders in this area.
Collaborative with academic computing organizationTexas Center for Digital Knowledge February 2011
Texas Center for Digital Knowledge
February 2011
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
Moen, William E. & Halbert, Martin. Support for Research Data Management among U.S. Academic Institutions: Results from a National Survey, report, January 26, 2012; (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc181695/m1/6/: accessed April 25, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT College of Information.