Create your own awesome maps

Even on the go

with our free apps for iPhone, iPad and Android

Get Started

Already have an account?
Log In

Trends of PEL Survey Our Recommendations in Bold, Meta-analysis support Pink by Mind Map: Trends of PEL Survey 
Our Recommendations in Bold, Meta-analysis support Pink
0.0 stars - 0 reviews range from 0 to 5

Trends of PEL Survey Our Recommendations in Bold, Meta-analysis support Pink

This is just a demo map that you can delete right away, if you feel like it...

Cottage industry vs Enterprise

Local data storage preferred over University- or cloud-level storage, both for initial storage and back-up. Data are stored indefinitely, and are shared with departmental colleagues, if at all.

Local contact works with end-users to help them understand better data storage solutions and collaborative opportunities.

Cloud computing

cost savings

common behavior

loss of control

outside image to NSF/NIH + outside institutions

too many industries

spa

collaborate/ovpr

rca

fac/student recruitment more difficult/ top 3 goals harder to reach

RCA's role

Local department/contact is primary end-user resource

Collegiate IT directors work with end-users in their college to identify local contacts. Directors then work with local contacts to inform them of new services and offerings.

Past: end user seeks out info from all units

Future: RCA acts as hub of information provider to enable local points of contact

To the extent that software applications and technology tools are funded they are largely funded at the researcher level; and researchers see the future of these applications and there support increasing in importance for theie success over the next 3 years.

we license the right software

Spokes on the wheel idea

Data storage:

users expect basic storage solutions for ALL of their data

centralized storage must not be allocated or capped per person, but must function flex

they want storage that is accessible daily, automatically backed up, securely stored, easily sharable, saved indefinably, with unlimited capacity

creating an inventory of data sets will enable resuse of valuable assets to the U. OVPR and OIT inventory current data storage use and storage capacity on collegiate, University, and cloud servers.

researchers want full control over their data storage needs and in a cost-effective way

storage solutions must be transparent to the user with little need for support and a high level of control

Terminology (eResearch)

Humanities feel that this survey did not ‘speak’ to them; however, humanities has self-identified cyberinfrastructure needs. These trends were evident in the comment section of the survey. [We are going to explore further this issue.]

Training/Awareness

End-users are poorly informed about CI resources and data management tools and how to complying with funding requirments

The survey comments suggest a need for communication and/or organization of cyberinfrastructure resources. The RCA should plan for broad dissemination of the resources available to meet these needs.

a website, tours, a liason brought into the department to meet with staff were suggested

End-users are unaware of funds available for staff training in learning and workforce development around cyberinfrastructure. [We are going to explore further these data.]

one database that pulls in all the training opportunities on campus

university policy is not apparent to the user but education is expected as a centralized role

research and data management policy should be incorporated into orientation at a centralized level

Consultation

Challenge to engage end-users and University leaders in this topic, especially if the jargon is discipline-specific. [Need to research jargon for multiple disciplines.]

Promo handout for IT staff "Questions to ask researchers about their IT needs"

researchers ask for grant support for CI, rather than investigating local options

PI grant funding process should include the local IT person who consults on the grant project.

not to limit the project but help leverage current resources avail

Documented inventory of resources, how do you obtain access, and funding questions in all categories yield high responses in the none/don’t know categories. Can we trust these responses?

[Comparing to Educause responses by Friday, May 8.]

New node

Many departments are prased for doing great work, how to understand and model this behavior?

Meta-analysis

libraries: understanding scientists

interdisciplinary/collab issues, lack of access to shared resources, varying communication/data sharing tools, lack of knowledge on tech use

data storage, obstacles in sharing data across disciplines, access issues, how relevant to others?, lack of edu on database/data sharing (file naming), security issues: competitive reasons for non-sharing

data management, how long to keep data, relevancy (science moves on), indefinitely: kept for all time

Celeste

need for layered approach (local up to central)

leveraging cottage industry, merge with established behavior, PI fund local IT from grants

local IT staff should be more aware of research

because of storage restrictions, data is lost due to lack of long-term storage solutions, need storage flexibility

Disciplines/practices may vary but..., everyone has data storage needs, everyone needs more support, potential to build in CI into grants, increase awareness of existing tech

Educause

terminology bad, cyberinfrastructure = eResearch

knowledge of CI rated high, available resources are rated low

know HPC, but dont know about software/tools

collab at instititions are rated low, as are effectivness at integrating CI technologies (worse)

less half institutions use HPC for research (cost restrictions)

access to CI technologies primarily through labs/personal, second = central IT for advacned network HPC

for CI sucess on campus: share CI research environment with research and central IT

get IT involved with writting grants

funding for central is essential for the support of research on campus

better communication/outreach for central IT would improve support (get IT involved with research)

IT must rely on researchers' specialized IT knowledge for capacity, localize support. centralize basic needs

OVPR

computing/imaging needs increase

move toward interdisciplinary research

global research/collaboration

invest based on large needs on campus versus biggest return

base these priorities on "clusters", imaging, aquatic/atmo modeling, behav/social sciences, media/arts/performing, Proteomics and spectroscopy, Research facilitation /labs/space, Spatial analysis / GIS, Digital media across arts & sciences, High performance Computing/MSI, New node

Software/tools

staff do not need to support all specialized software, but should understand the options avail across the universtiy

specific needs were outlined in order to be competitive

video conferecing

statistical support, SAS/SPSS/Matlab

collaboration tools

digital media/visulalization tools, image analysis, photoshop, R

GIS/spatial, arcGIS

High Performance computing/bandwidth, MSI

web development (basic level), web-based software

grant writing support, microsoft office

library/citation tools, endnote

want more open source tools to reduce costs

need virtual collabroation tools, wet labs, easy process of sharing data with other institutions

One

new workshop

lkhgladkhg

New node

klhsdglkhsl

lkdhglsdkh, .,sdgmsd;gkj, lskdhgsdkl