July 21, 2011
I understand that RCUK have started user acceptance testing (internal at RCUK) this week and intend to approach research organisations to do some testing in a few weeks and a pilot circa September.
Initially HEI’s will need to think about reporting of outputs that are mandated e.g. publications but the other outputs will be visible so staff will be able to enter them and we will need to be able to manage this.
On updating my gap analysis against our internal data I noticed the spec was missing patents which is meant to be on there so there may be a few other corrections to be done. I expect an updated version and definitions will be available once the testing is complete and I will share my gap analysis once I have reviewed the updated version.
RCUK representatives will be presenting at our IRIOS London event tomorrow and I will update this blog with any significant news.
January 12, 2011
Related to our mission to make research outputs more accessible you may be interested in the knowledgeblog (kblog) project. This project is augmenting wordpress to provide a simple, easy-to-use, and extensible framework for scientific publishing. So far, it has been used for material that might previously have been published in a book on Ontologies:
and the Taverna workflow engine:
However, kblogs could be used for any form of scientific publishing including primary research. Kblogs support standard authoring tools (Word, Latex, Open Office). Currently, the k-blog team are adding better support for formal reviewing of articles, references and reference lists. All software is freely available.
URL’s from items published using the kblogs features could be added to institutional systems.
Visit the site:
October 29, 2010
A short poll has been done by UKCoRR.
The background is:
All UK Research Councils have OA mandates which require copies of peer review publications to be deposited into ‘appropriate OA Repositories’. Councils wish to monitor compliance with these mandates and hope in (the near) future to be able to do this by harvesting from Institutional and Thematic Repositories any publication where a Research Council is mentioned in the “funder” field.
At the University of Glasgow, as some of you may know from our presentations and blog entries, we have associated award information from our Research System with items in Enlighten (our repository). So it is easy for us to provide the funder name and grant reference and any other information we hold about awards. We currently do not show the grant reference on our repository but that is easy to amend if we wish to do so.
If Research Council’s require comprehensive output information from us via an extract from our systems we need to have a drive internally to encourage completion and ensure any gaps are filled.
I suspect many other organisations do not have funder information associated with the publications.
It will be interesting to see the results.
June 1, 2010
The MRC survey of award holders closed in December 2009. High level results are now available.
This month’s Network magazine, published online via the MRC web site, contains a double-page feature summarising some of the findings from the survey. http://www.mrc.ac.uk/consumption/idcplg?IdcService=GET_FILE&dID=26031&dDocName=MRC006818&allowInterrupt=1
Additionally, you may be interested to read the interview with Dr Ian Viney, the head of evaluation at the MRC, which was published in the last edition of Research Fortnight.
Research Fortnightly Article May 2010
The first detailed analysis to be published will be on data collected for MRC publications and is planned for late June. A series of analyses will subsequently be published at intervals thereafter, with the aim of publishing initial findings from all the sections of MRC e-Val by October 2010.
If you have any questions about these data or MRC approach to analysis please do not hesitate to contact: Dr Ian Viney – Head of Evaluation – email@example.com
Dr Bev Sherbon – Evaluation Programme Manager – Beverley.firstname.lastname@example.org
May 18, 2010
Just back from a lovely holiday in Northern Ireland. Prior to that I attended a JISC programme meeting to outline what we are doing with the Enquire project www.gla.ac.uk/enquire and to hear what the other projects in the programme are planning.
The projects are:
CRISPool, University of St Andrews
Using CERIF-XML to integrate heterogeneous research information from several institutions into a single portal
Enquire – University of Glasgow
Enrich and Research Outputs and Impact
RIM Tools, Imperial College
Developing tools to inform the managment of research and translating existing good practice
RIM Process Management, University of Huddersfield
Using Business Process Management Tools and Methods for Building Research Information Management
RIM Manager Role, University College
Defining a new role: the embedded Research Information Manager
Some of the points I found interesting were:
At the University of Glasgow we maintain the Unit of Assessment against each staff member in our Research System from where it is re-used in other core systems and rep0rts. Some HEI’s do not have this database at all or are working on it.
One of the JISC projects is proposing providing a Research Information Management handbook for their academics.
March 30, 2010
I’ve been liaising with my colleagues in the library regarding the details of linking research outputs on the Repository with relevant awards. If the initial setting on the award was for no publicity then the staff might enter an award onto the system as ‘free text’. We then need to check if it is already in the list available in the Repository or if it is marked as publicity ‘no’ in our Research System therefore excluding it from the current data feed. If it is on the Research System as publicity ‘no’ we need to check with Research and Enterprise specialist in case there is an IP issue or sensitivity. If not we contact the lead person on the award and ask if they want the publicity flag changed to ‘yes’ so that the award can be associated with thier output. We record the confirmations as an audit trail.
Some awards are specifically open access awards so where for example the person has an award from Wellcome they might also have another award on the same project to represent open access funding. Both awards can be associated with the output but we might use the flag that identifies the open access funding to exclude this particular award from certain reports.
Remember if you want to know what our default publicity settings are do please ask.
March 12, 2010
Today we’ve had a look at Sharepoint and continue to think about how we might integrate use of this for managing research collaboration with our other Research System’s and processes.
Maybe this is another option for sharing files in support of funding applications with funders.
I’ve also been looking at the Open Access process and drafted a suggestion on how this can be amended at the University of Glasgow to manage decisions on applications for open access funds and use the repository to check we are complying with funders terms on Open Access. This might take a bit of iteration with colleagues. We have an Open Access Working Group but apart from the specific Wellcome funds we don’t actually have an agreed central pot or pots yet. We’ve looked at other models and found some inspiration in those so hopefully we will arrive at a University of Glasgow version sometime soon.
Our Library staff are members of UKCoRR
The professional organisation for UK open access repository administrators and managers.
UKCoRR’s members are very active in discussing management of research outputs across a range of institutional systems not just Repositories and this is recognised by RCUK as Jenny Delasalle who is Chair of UKCoRR is one of my colleagues on the RCUK Research Outcomes Focus Group.
I also fixed the coffee machine.