Four themes, with examples:

Citizen Science

Galaxy Zoo an example of collaboration – with other scientists and the public

Collective Intelligence

• Many Eyes
• Nature Precedings
• Tigr Rice Genome Annotation
• Open Wetware

We need tools to help us leverage Collective Intelligence as part of the VRE toolset

Data-centric science

http://chemtools.chem.soton.ac.uk/projects/blog/blogs.php/blog_id/24

http://www.signaling-gateway.org/

NNSA has announced 5 new centres of Excellence focusing on predictive Science

• Content is infrastructure e.g. protein data bank
• Today: primary data, images, text
• Tomorrow: digests, simulations, models
• Today: discovery to delivery
• Tomorrow: mine and model, simulate and synthesis
• Today: Statistics
• Tomorrow: Predictive Science

Mixed reality environments

E.g. The (virtual) London Polyclinic – joint project between National Physical Laboratory and Imperial College

After a good lunch (food was ok, and got to meet a few of the people on my ‘want to meet’ list, and an interesting conversation with Meredith Quinn from Ithaka following on from the SCA session), the first session of the afternoon is on Virtual Research Environments.

The first phase of the ‘Virtual Research Environment’ (VRE) was inspired by the Virtual Learning Environment work – with an idea that the VRE would be a bit like a VLE, but with perhaps slight variations in the tools etc.

However, what they found was this wasn’t the case (actually, I’d say that it turned out that VLEs were not what was originally envisaged, and what are currently provided in the packaged VLEs). The speaker (who didn’t introduce himself, but possibly David de Roure?) says that the VRE is the virtual environment in which a researcher works – sounds like a circular definition, but I understand what he means – there isn’t a strict definition, it centres around the tools that a researcher makes use of. And of course, this is the argument behind ‘Personal Learning Environments’ (PLEs) – that this centres on the tools a learner uses in the pursuit of education – but this has been difficult to realise from an institutional perspective.

Now the speaker is saying that there is a stack of infrastructure/standards/tools etc. that we can agree on some common elements (e.g. TCP/IP, http, ftp), but the question is how far up the stack we can go. The other extreme is those who think that research is so varied, you need a custom approach to each element.

However, there is clearly a middle ground (which probably most people inhabit) which says that there are some common elements which can be delivered as part of a ‘VRE’, and this is what the VRE program is going to look at.

First up, Liz Lyon from UKOLN is going to look at the future of VREs

BBC

The speaker from the BBC (Simon Delafond I think) is talking about some BBC initiatives – starting with Memory Share which tried to capture the experiences of people at a specific moment in time (http://www.bbc.co.uk/memoryshare/).

The BBC is now working on a new project with the SCA called ‘CenturyShare’ which from what I understood is meant to synthesise content from a vareity of providers – but the talk was so brief I almost missed it!

Ithaka

Itaka is a US (New York) based organisation, which is briefed to promote innovative uses of information technology to advance higher education worldwide. They do this via

• Strategic services, acting as a incubator for projects
• Research
• Shared administrative services for affiliate organizations

Overall, trying to play a similar role to that played by Venture Capitalists in the for-profit sector.

Ithaka observes that many scholarly digital project keep returning to funding agencies for additional grants to support core operations, but this limits the funds available to support new initiatives, so Ithaka wanted to address the question:

How can digital scholarly projects develop sustainability plans that will allow them to thrive over time?

Ithaka has published a paper on this, available at http://sca.jiscinvolve.org/2008/04/10/report-sustainability-and-revenue-models-for-online-academic-resources/ – which they would very much appreciate comments on.

This is very interesting, as it is a common criticism of JISC that the projects its funds never lead to concrete developments or services, and it is something that needs looking at – all too often a project leads to a report, and possible some interesting outcomes, but often this is as far as it goes.

Ithaka believes that we need to:

Engage in rapid cycles of innovation – including business model innovation

For example, the Guardian (guardian.co.uk). Mentioning the difference between the main Guardian office, and the ‘Guardian Professional’ (http://www.guardianprofessional.co.uk/) offices which reflect the difference in culture and approach. A key point is that Guardian Professional was tasked with setting up projects, but with a clear idea that some projects would be axed – and had clear criteria for axing projects. This allowed them to be ahead of the curve.

Seek economies of scale

The example of Time Inc.

Time Inc. decided that with a handful of flagship titles they would not allow magazines to have their own platform/space on the web. Time Inc. believes this has allowed them to capture more audience share, with a single strategy.

This is a big challenge to the academic sector

Understand your unique value to the user

The example of the Economist.com

Libraries are much more likely to say ‘we have this great special collection we’d like to digitise’, rather than ask their ‘customers’ what they want and follow this – don’t tend to do market research.

The Economist found that Economist readers regarded as reading the magazine as a ritual – something that they did each week in a period of time. This is interesting, as it reflects the way I read the Guardian – although it’s available online, I have a ritual with the paper – which order I read, when I read, and at the weekend, this is a household ritual as well as an individual one.

Implement layered revenue

All the media organisations that Ithaka spoke to have layered revenue streams (including the examples above) – there wasn’t enough time to say more about this.

Question

Q: Is the SCA trying to create a ‘cathedral’ rather than a ‘bazaar’ (using the terminology from Eric Raymond’s seminal essay)

A: SCA is focussed on delivering results in a short timescale – the Ithaka report being an example. The questionner came back suggesting SCA needs to engage more with the way users actually work – they don’t care about IPR etc., they just use content as they want. The SCA responded that they are working on two levels – both engaging with the practitioners and at the strategic policy (governmental) level.

BBC

The speaker from the BBC (Simon Delafond I think) is talking about some BBC initiatives – starting with Memory Share which tried to capture the experiences of people at a specific moment in time (http://www.bbc.co.uk/memoryshare/).

The BBC is now working on a new project with the SCA called ‘CenturyShare’ which from what I understood is meant to synthesise content from a vareity of providers – but the talk was so brief I almost missed it!

Ithaka

Itaka is a US (New York) based organisation, which is briefed to promote innovative uses of information technology to advance higher education worldwide. They do this via

• Strategic services, acting as a incubator for projects
• Research
• Shared administrative services for affiliate organizations

Overall, trying to play a similar role to that played by Venture Capitalists in the for-profit sector.

Ithaka observes that many scholarly digital project keep returning to funding agencies for additional grants to support core operations, but this limits the funds available to support new initiatives, so Ithaka wanted to address the question:

How can digital scholarly projects develop sustainability plans that will allow them to thrive over time?

Ithaka has published a paper on this, available at http://sca.jiscinvolve.org/2008/04/10/report-sustainability-and-revenue-models-for-online-academic-resources/ – which they would very much appreciate comments on.

This is very interesting, as it is a common criticism of JISC that the projects its funds never lead to concrete developments or services, and it is something that needs looking at – all too often a project leads to a report, and possible some interesting outcomes, but often this is as far as it goes.

Ithaka believes that we need to:

Engage in rapid cycles of innovation – including business model innovation

For example, the Guardian (guardian.co.uk). Mentioning the difference between the main Guardian office, and the ‘Guardian Professional’ (http://www.guardianprofessional.co.uk/) offices which reflect the difference in culture and approach. A key point is that Guardian Professional was tasked with setting up projects, but with a clear idea that some projects would be axed – and had clear criteria for axing projects. This allowed them to be ahead of the curve.

Seek economies of scale

The example of Time Inc.

Time Inc. decided that with a handful of flagship titles they would not allow magazines to have their own platform/space on the web. Time Inc. believes this has allowed them to capture more audience share, with a single strategy.

This is a big challenge to the academic sector

Understand your unique value to the user

The example of the Economist.com

Libraries are much more likely to say ‘we have this great special collection we’d like to digitise’, rather than ask their ‘customers’ what they want and follow this – don’t tend to do market research.

The Economist found that Economist readers regarded as reading the magazine as a ritual – something that they did each week in a period of time. This is interesting, as it reflects the way I read the Guardian – although it’s available online, I have a ritual with the paper – which order I read, when I read, and at the weekend, this is a household ritual as well as an individual one.

Implement layered revenue

All the media organisations that Ithaka spoke to have layered revenue streams (including the examples above) – there wasn’t enough time to say more about this.

Question

Q: Is the SCA trying to create a ‘cathedral’ rather than a ‘bazaar’ (using the terminology from Eric Raymond’s seminal essay)

A: SCA is focussed on delivering results in a short timescale – the Ithaka report being an example. The questionner came back suggesting SCA needs to engage more with the way users actually work – they don’t care about IPR etc., they just use content as they want. The SCA responded that they are working on two levels – both engaging with the practitioners and at the strategic policy (governmental) level.

There is more ‘stuff’ available to us as content users than ever before. Alongside this, everyone is a content creator and publisher as well as a content user.

So, its never been easier to access and reuse content, but IPR and licensing are central to the creation, shareing a delivery of content – and this is ever present. The growth of the individual as creator and publisher democratises IPR and licensing issues, as they become relevant to everyone.

IPR law sees content divided into:

• Sound 
• Music 
• Broadcasts 
• Film 
• Photographs 
• Other artistic works 
• Text 
• Typographical arrangements

All of these types of content have different laws or parts of the law that apply, and many pieces of content will have layers of rights that apply. It is incredibly difficult to understand what rights apply.

The law tries to strike a balance between use and protecting creators rights. But, it does not address the issue of ‘orphan works’ and doesn’t keep up with the latest technoloy developments – e.g. Web 2.0. Ultimately, the law restricts the flow of content.

Not only does the law restrict usage, but also there are different policies in different organisations, institutions and even different policies applied by individuals in specific organisations or institutions. Different terminology is used or the same terminology to mean different things.

Guidance can be complicated or inappropriate, staff often don’t understand copyright issues, and see it as something for ‘lawyers’ – but we all need to engage – for example academic staff signing away rights to publishers.

We are now seeing some common solutions, with International developments and standards appearing:

• Open Access Licensing initiatives 
• Protocols on access to research data: Science Commons 
• Orphan works: EU work e.g. Digital Libraries i2010 
• and more…

The SCA is a starting point rather than anything else.

I wish there was more time for the bits of this presentation – there were clearly areas Naomi could have spoken about in more detail usefully.

Following a brief break, during which I got my Wi-Fi access sorted (I should have done this first thing, but got chatting to someone instead).

I’m attending a session on the Strategic Content Alliance with speakers from Ithaka, the BBC and also Naomi Korn, who is a IPR consultant.

Stuart Dempster is opening the session introducing the Strategic Content Alliance, the rationale of which is ‘seamless access’, which they see as fundamental to lifelong learning. Reflecting on the stages of lifelong learning – pre-school, school, university, workplace, leisure etc.

There are a wide variety of access agreements, linked to different content, different organisations and different geographical areas. The SCA is developing the ‘UK Content Framework’ due to be delivered in spring 2009, providing a single point to find information about access to content.

There are two tiers of membership to the SCA – the first tier requires payment, and allows you to sit on the board etc. The second tier is ‘aligned organisations’ which requires the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding – missed what this brings as benefit though!

Stuart has just mentioned the SCA blog, which is at http://sca.jiscinvolve.org/

The SCA aims to build on a ‘common information environment’ underpinned by a framework of principles and good practices. Empasis on real world exemplars that are economically viable.

In the UK SCA has identified a nmber of change agents:

• Common licensing platforms 
• Common Middleware 
• Digital Repositories 
• Mass Digitisation 
• Devolved administrations 
• Service convergence 
• UK Government policy reviews – e.g. SCA made a joint submission to the UK IPO consultation 
• Funding

The SCA will deliver the UK e-Content Framework comprising:

• E-Content Policy and Procedures 
• E-Content ‘Service Convergence’ modelling 
• E-Content Exchange (interoperability) model development 
• E-Content Audit and Register 
• E-Content Audience analysis and modelling 
• E-Content Support and Embedding 
• Business Models and sustainability strategies 
• E-Content Advocacy Dissemination and Policy Development 
• E-Content Standards and Good Practices

It’s early days I guess for the SCA, and difficult to know how much of what comes out will be really useful. However, I think the joint submission to the Gower’s Review (http://sca.jiscinvolve.org/files/2008/04/sca_gowers_joint_dec.doc) is a sign that this initiative will have some concrete benefits.

 

I always find this kind of keynote the hardest to blog – David is talking about the use of technology in education, and stating that we don’t do anything like enough to exploit its full potential. He seems to be saying in the nicest possible way that we really aren’t very good at innovation in the education sector – perhaps specifically in the HE sector, as he is reflecting on how primary school teaching has changed, making the pupils the centre of the teaching experience – no longer does the teacher act as the ‘expert’, but as a facilitator for the students.

Of course, this is not a novel observation, but perhaps shows that these ideas have not filtered through to HE.

David Puttnam suggesting that resources will start introducing pay walls for their ‘best’ or most detailed information – in the way the FT do, and the Wall Street Journal is doing now it has retreated from its ‘everything for free’ idea. This is at odds with quite a bit of opinion in this area (there was an interesting discussion in the Guardian’s Media podcast a couple of weeks ago about the future of paid for content).

David noting that he has recently invested in a second screen for his PC – now uses one for email and communication, and the other for ‘data’ and information – and it has transformed his life. This is interesting, perhaps I should think about it for my own desk…

David has several times mentioned the resistance to innovation and change that he has encountered. He is talking about his experience in a parliamentary committee (House of Lords) and how they end up using their hands because of the lack of visual aids – and reflecting on the fact that the Chancellor of the Exchequer can’t use visual aids when presenting (for example) on the budget – and that this is then ‘spun’ by analysts and media organisations, who can use visual aids to interpret what the Chancellor is saying – so it isn’t a ‘neutral’ issue.

David now reflecting on how far Singapore and South Korea are ahead of the UK, and how they understand the link between great infrastructure and innovation.

If we don’t invest in technology infrastructure, we risk delivering a second class education in the future. Unversities and Colleges are in the position to be able to influence and change the future.

Questions

Q: Is there any evidence that we have a better workforce or society through investment in the Open University?

A: Avoiding the question of a ‘better society’, what we have managed to do is keep up with changes in the workplace. 15 years ago there was a large organised workforce (factories etc.) who didn’t need flexibility. Now (for example) the vast majority of the workforce need some level of IT skills. Although we may not have a workforce fit for the 21st Century, we at least have a workforce fit for the late 20th Century. Although we have made good inroads, it isn’t enough, and not all the right direction for where we need to go next.

I’m at the JISC Conference today in Birmingham, looking forward to what I hope is a day with some challenging and interesting stuff.

One of my colleagues is attending the main ‘digital libraries’ sessions, so I’ll be focussing on some of the other areas (one session on the ‘Strategic Content Alliance’ and another on Virtual Research Environments). I’ll be doing a combination of blogging here and also twittering – the relevant tags are ‘jiscconference08’ (for blogs and photos) and #jisc08 for twitter – in case of confusion, you can try http://tinyurl.com/52zure to get an aggregated view of posts from whatever source associated with the conference.

The keynote is going to be given by David Puttnam – so, here goes…

First, though, and introduction from Sir Ron Cooke, Chairman of JISC – reflecting on the overuse of acronyms by JISC – what do VKEE, IRCA, RoMEO, RIOJA, QJIMS stand for? Answers on a postcard please.

Sir Ron now reflecting on (his personal view of) the challenges facing the JISC, including:

• How will JISC continue to serve the UK as a whole? 
• Portability – as we see convergence of PC, Mobile, TV etc… 
• Increased datastorage – e.g. the IBM ‘racetrack’ technology (is that better than an acronym?) 
• Energy – green/sustainable computing agenda 
• National e-infrastructure – as users we expect to be able to handle the complex picture in a simple way – we want the mechanics to be invisible. There is a real challenge to us in managing the lifecycle of data, and we are facing an unprecedented amount of data via online publishing. Individuals need to develop analytical skills to assess information and data and make judgements about it. 
• The ‘Strategic Content Alliance’ – a JISC lead and managed alliance of 7 organisations – NHS, National e-Science Centre, MLA, British Library, Becta, BBC, JISC – more info at www.jisc.ac.uk/content http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/themes/eresources/contentalliance.aspx (and hopefully later on this blog today)

Sir Ron saying that ‘we’ tend to assume students are ‘computer literate’ – but the study out of UCL earlier this year suggests that they are really only familiar with basic tools – students easily move on when they don’t easily get what they need from a specific source.

Sir Ron, now asking ‘why do we adopt the ICT tools availble to us so poorly – skills of individual academics must be part of the answer.

Finally (says Sir Ron), we can no longer engage solely within the UK – we have to engage at a wider level (specifically European mentioned, but I think global would be more accurate – US, India, China etc.)

Sir Ron now introducing David Puttnam