Byte Me:
Megabytes,
Gigabytes, and
Terabytes at the
University of
Missouri
Jeannette E. Pierce
Associate Director for Research &
Information Services
MU Libraries
April 18, 2014
1
The University of Missouri
•
American Association of Universities (AAU)
•
Research University/Very High (Carnegie)
•
Innovation and Economic Prosperity University
Research by the Numbers - 2012
•Research Expenditures – $239,000,000
•Research Proposals – 1,474
•Active Projects – 1,952
•11 Research Centers
•9 Core Facilities
Research Data Dilemmas
• Storage – secure
• Storage – cost effective
• Storage –
ourselves or with others?
• Storage – who pays?
• High performance computing capacity
• Every lab “an island” vs. “centralized support”
Research Data Dilemmas
•
To keep or not to keep
•
How long to keep
•
Public vs. private (open vs. dark)
•
Discoverability
•
Access
•
Curation
Did I mention
storage?
http://www.adaptivecomputing.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/43088_original1.jpg
Research Data Stakeholders
• Researchers – priorities are to identify or create, and analyze
• Support the Mission
• Create knowledge/contribute to discipline
• Use resources efficiently, but also need an efficient research process
• Successful grants
• Meet compliance obligations
• Collaborate with colleagues (locally & beyond)
• Citations (author metrics)
Research Data Stakeholders
• University Administration/Office of Research – priorities are to
know what is produced and meet standards/requirements
•
Support Mission
•
Enhance institutional identity
Successful grants
Ensure compliance
Identify entrepreneurial opportunities
Create educational opportunities
•
•
•
•
Research Data Stakeholders
• Department of Information Technology (DoIT) – priorities are to
ensure information security and performance capacity
Support Mission
• Support Researchers & Administration
• Efficient use of resources
•
• MU Libraries – priorities are data discovery, access, & preservation
• Support Mission
• Support Researchers & Administration
• Efficient use of resources
Research Data Stakeholders
Worldwide Research Community
Research Data Environment
• Strong network capacity, but concerns about storage capacity
• Highly decentralized data storage & management, leading to some
concerns about data security
• Individual PI’s responsible for compliance
• Few standards, policies, or guidelines relating to research data
management, though we do have policies related to data security
especially as relates to human subject data
Research Data Environment
• Data storage capacity driving conversation about data
management on campus
• Need to create strong data management plans just beginning to
lead to more conversation about data management and data
accessibility
• Requirements for open data recognized, but not yet a driving force
for researchers
• Researchers need training and available expertise to consult on
research data management
Cyberinfrastructure Council
• Group of research data stakeholders brought together by CIO,
Gary Allen, in January 2013.
Understand cyberinfrastructure necessary to support research & discovery
• Identify strategic investments & services to be provided by IT
•
• Accomplishments
April/May 2013 - Conducted campus survey
• August/Sept 2013 - Follow-up survey focused on High Performance Computing
• Fall 2013 – Completed CI Plan
• Fall 2013 - Sponsored inaugural Cyberinfrastructure Day
•
Detailed info at:
http://doit.missouri.edu/ci/
Cyberinfrastructure Council
“Cyberinfrastructure is defined to mean the research
environments that support advanced data acquisition, data
storage, data management, data integration, data mining, data
visualization, and other computer and information processing
services. It is meant to include no only the technology but also
the human resources necessary to make it useful and effective.”
Detailed info at:
http://doit.missouri.edu/ci/
MU Campus Cyberinfrastructure
(CI) Plan
Vision
“MU is committed to providing and supporting
the cyberinfrastructure necessary to excel in
the discovery, dissemination, and application
of knowledge in an environment of rapidly
changing technologies, so we may optimally
fulfill our research, education, outreach, and
economic development missions.”
http://doit.missouri.edu/pdf-files/ci-plan.pdf
MU Campus Cyberinfrastructure
(CI) Plan
“Research data is an important asset of the
University and should be protected and
preserved accordingly. The University should
provide appropriate data dissemination and
data security, preservation and curation
services, and researchers need to take
advantage of these services.”
http://doit.missouri.edu/pdf-files/ci-plan.pdf
MU Campus Cyberinfrastructure
(CI) Plan
Summary of 8 recommended actions:
• Effective partnerships with investigators
• Participation in regional/national collaborations
• Increased availability of hardware & services
• Create workforce learning and development opportunities
• Raise awareness
• Continue to assess priority needs
• Maintain & expand network possibilities
• Enhance pursuit of partnerships with business & industry
http://doit.missouri.edu/pdf-files/ci-plan.pdf
MU Campus Cyberinfrastructure
(CI) Plan
Five working groups:
• Data Management Storage & Curation
• High Performance Computing
• Networking
• Security
• Data Analytics & Visualization
http://doit.missouri.edu/pdf-files/ci-plan.pdf
CI Plan Details: Data Management,
Storage, and Curation
• Existing Resources
• MOspace – institutional repository
• Data Storage
• Basic File Services
• Bengal
• UMBC Data Storage
• Kaltura
• Data Transfer
• DropOff
• Secure TransmIT
CI Plan Details: Data Management,
Storage, and Curation
• Recommendations
• Develop a plan to communicate with campus researchers about available
storage options and define guidelines for data management and curation in
support of federal mandates and preservation of University intellectual assets.
• Hire three to five data curation specialists to work with researchers for
consultation on implementation of guidelines and compliance with federal
requirements. (Libraries & DoIT)
• DoIT recently hired for a new position titled “Director, Research Computing
Support Service.”
• Increase awareness and compliance with evolving data management and
curation recommendations/guidelines.
• Invest in additional campus and cooperative research-data repository
resources to meet growing storage, preservation, and curation needs.
CI Plan Details: Information
Security
• Existing Resources
• Policies on data classification and security standards
• DoIT security experts
• Authenticated identity management
• Gaps
• Distributed/de-centralized IT support and systems
• Varying levels of training
• Varying awareness of data classification and security standards
CI Plan Details: Information
Security
• Recommendations
• Provide a data security awareness education course for use by faculty and staff
• Provide training on best practices for securing, protecting, and curating research
data
• Provide additional means to secure and disseminate data
•
DoIt recently implemented Box
• Consolidate IT infrastrucuture to ensure compliance
• Consider pursuit of Silver certification through InCommon
MU Libraries & Research Data
• Provide data archive services
ICPSR
• Government and other publically available statistics
•
• Support access to scholarly publication
Journals
• Books
• Databases
•
• Educational outreach & training
Promote awareness of resources
• Database training
• Citation management
• Citation metrics
• Research consultation services
•
MU Libraries & Research Data
• New Digital Services Department
• MOspace – a permanent digital storehouse focusing on works created by those
connected the University
• Expanding capacity for digital asset management
• Campus Collaborations
• Cyberinfrastructure Council
• Digital Humanities Commons
• Digital Curator position in partnership wish Reynolds Journalism Institute
• E-Science Institute
• Strategic directions (in process)
MU Libraries & Research Data
• Collaboration with regional/national partnerships
• D4 (Data Federation of University Research) – GWLA
•
•
•
•
Complete an environmental scan of data management initiatives & needs
Host a two-day workshop on managing, sharing, and preserving research data
Create a plan for a multi-institutional approach to research data management
SHared Access Resource Ecosystem (SHARE) – ARL/AAU/AAUP
•
•
•
A distributed content and registry layer
A discovery layer across repositories
A content-aggregation layer
National Digital Stewardship Alliance (NDSA)
• ORCID
•
MU Libraries & Research Data
• Individual librarians taking initiative
to
• Consult on data management plans
• Share information about author rights
• Assist with identifying relevant data repositories
• Promote MOspace & identifying content to include in MOspace
• Promote open access opportunities
• Assist with compiling author metrics
• Support Digital Humanities initiatives
More on MOspace
•
Strengths
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Persistent URL
Open Access
Optimized for search engines
Institutional identify
Curated environment
Bit level preservation (file fixity)
Ongoing questions related to data
inclusion
•
•
•
•
•
•
File size
File type(s)
Need for richer metadata
Automated submission process
Versioning
Rights
MU Libraries – Possibilities
• Expand capacity to support data management across the
disciplines
Hire additional expert staff in areas of data curation, programming, and digital
preservation
• Explore value of new data consortium memberships
•
• Define specific education/outreach role as relates
to data
management across the research lifecycle
•
Examples from profession include training related to file naming, metadata, data
documentation, data management plan options, author rights, researcher
identity, etc.
MU Libraries -- Possibilities
• Expand capacity to support Open Access (OA) initiatives
• Provide education about benefits of OA
• Identify OA opportunities & funding support
• Library as publisher?
•
Continue to strengthen relationship with all campus stakeholders
Researchers
• DoIT
• Office of Research
• SISLT (School of Information Science & Learning Technologies)
•
• Join Digital Preservation Network (DPN)
MU Libraries – Ongoing Questions
• If we build it, will they come? Should individual libraries provide
data repository services?
• How do we create awareness and build trust?
• Should we only support data that is openly accessible and
intended to be preserved? Do we collaborate with IT &
researchers to support “dark” archives of data?
• How do we acquire new competencies and expertise necessary to
support data management?
• How do we fund new positions?
Questions
Contact Jeannette Pierce, piercejea@Missouri.edu