Abstract
Objective – At a large research university in Canada, a research data management (RDM) specialist and two liaison librarians partnered to evaluate the effectiveness of an active learning component of their newly developed RDM training program. This empirical study aims to contribute a statistical analysis to evaluate an RDM instructional intervention.
Methods – This study relies on a pre- and post-test quasi-experimental intervention during introductory RDM workshops offered 12 times between February 2022 and January 2023. The intervention consists of instruction on best practices related to file-naming conventions. We developed a grading rubric differentiating levels of proficiency in naming a file according to a convention reflecting RDM best practices and international standards. We used manual content analysis to independently code each pre- and post-instruction file name according to the rubric.
Results – Comparing the overall average scores for each participant pre- and post-instruction intervention, we find that workshop participants, in general, improved in proficiency. The results of a Wilcoxon signed-rank test demonstrate that the difference between the pre- and post-test observations is statistically significant with a high effect size. In addition, a comparison of changes in pre- and post-test scores for each rubric element showed that participants grasped specific elements more easily (i.e., implementing an international standard for a date format) than others (i.e., applying information related to sequential versioning of files).
Conclusion – The results of this study indicate that developing short and targeted interventions in the context of RDM training is worthwhile. In addition, the findings demonstrate how quantitative evaluations of instructional interventions can pinpoint specific topics or activities requiring improvement or further investigation. Overall, RDM learning outcomes grounded in practical competencies may be achieved through applied exercises that demonstrate immediate improvement directly to participants.
Publisher
University of Alberta Libraries
Reference28 articles.
1. Agogo, D., & Anderson, J. (2019). “The data shuffle”: Using playing cards to illustrate data management concepts to a broad audience. Journal of Information Systems Education, 30(2), 84–96. http://jise.org/Volume30/n2/JISEv30n2p84.html
2. Bernard, H. R., Wutich, A., & Ryan, G. W. (2016). Analyzing qualitative data: Systematic approaches. SAGE Ppublications.
3. Briney, K. A., Coates, H., & Goben, A. (2020). Foundational practices of research data management. Research Ideas and Outcomes, 6, Article e56508. https://doi.org/10.3897/rio.6.e56508
4. Cox, A. M., Kennan, M. A., Lyon, L., & Pinfield, S. (2017). Developments in research data management in academic libraries: Towards an understanding of research data service maturity. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(9), 2182–2200. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23781
5. Ducas, A., Michaud-Oystryk, N., & Speare, M. (2020). Reinventing ourselves: New and emerging roles of academic librarians in Canadian research-intensive universities. College & Research Libraries, 81(1), 43–65. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.81.1.43