TAB clustering and tagging of groups in RDA

Kathleen, Michael, and Wolfram, all ~
congratulations for implementing the survey and sharing the results. i don't see any following discussion on the list. perhaps because the results are on target; although, it may be that you received feedback directed to you folks specifically.
either way, just want to say nice work!
best wishes, jane greenberg
- Show quoted text -From: mwitt=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] On Behalf Of mwittin
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 1:34 PM
To: ***@***.***-groups.org
Subject: [rda-libresearchdata] TAB clustering and tagging of groups in RDA
Following up from P5, we solicited input from you on the Technical Advisory Board's clustering and tagging of our L4RD group among the other groups. [1] The means of 26 respondents to our survey situated us smack dab in the middle of both planes (technical to social, data producer to data consumer) - within 0.8 of dead center on the two 10-point scales. The co-chairs discussed the results, and we propose sending TAB this feedback:
"Prior to the Fifth Plenary RDA Meeting, the Technical Advisory Board performed a clustering of interest and working groups in quadrants on two planes: technical versus social, and data producer versus consumer. The Libraries for Research Data Interest Group (L4RD) introduced the clustering to its members at the meeting and polled them afterwards for their input on placement. Twenty-six members responded to the poll and indicated the group feels strongly that it bridges both planes with the mean response landing very nearly at the intersection of the middle of both planes. Clearly members of the group are coming together with different backgrounds and intentions to make contributions to all quadrants. Without precluding potential impacts to the other quadrants, the co-chairs of L4RD intend to steer the near-term focus of the group's outputs on social and data producer aspects, which is our preference for the initial situation of our group among the clusters. The tags or keywo rds that we propose are: Libraries, Data Literacy Education, Digital Preservation, Metadata, and Research Data Management."
In addition to the clustering, we are able to include 3-5 keywords that will help newcomers identify sub-interests of the groups. The keywords we propose are in the statement above and were gleamed from the survey responses, all of which are listed below.
If you have any comments or other input on this draft, please reply or otherwise let us know before next Friday, when we'll submit the feedback to them.
Thanks, and apologies for two long emails in two days.
Kathleen, Michael, and Wolfram
-
Full suggested list of tags from member survey:
* data literacy
* training
* curation
* organizational models
* roles
* skills
* education
* support services
* best practices
* literacy
* not-just-for-books
* open access
* discovery
* education
* services
* workflow
* data publishing
* data discovery
* research support
* data management training
* data retrieval
* data management
* data service
* data lifecycle
* data consultancy
* bridging
* preservation
* education
* universities
* institutional repositories
* curricula
* training
* data curation
* research data management services
* data stewardship
* research data management
* library Services
* interdisciplinary
* practices
* context
* quality
* education
* data discovery
* education
* preservation
* education
* engagement
* repository
* metadata
* management
* curation
* research data management
* data publishing
* education
* engagement services
* knowledge services
* data semantics
* data discovery
* data management
* data sharing incentives
* data publication
* engagement and education
* digital preservation
* data management planning
[1] https://www.rd-alliance.org/sites/default/files/AreaClusters-WG-IG_MOU_1...
-
Michael Witt, Purdue University
Head, Distributed Data Curation Center (D2C2) Associate Professor of Library Science http://www.lib.purdue.edu/research/witt/
=