IST-Data Services Blog

The topic of Big Data and the associated trends for research are part of our future here at DS. The recent issue of Nature looks at issues and trends around the topic, and while uneven, has some good material in it that folks should check out. Here’s my blow by blow on the sections:

The opening editorial calls for push to make annotating data be a major component of research and of grants. Sound familiar? Let’s hope funders listen.

The section on the next Google trots out a lot of familiar and frankly pretty dull options. Skip it.

Big data: Data wrangling poses important question about data collection. We might have the sense is that there is so much data, it is just a matter of managing it. However, David Goldston notes that there are also huge holes in the dataverse, and these are a result of political policy. Further, if a political entity controls the data, politics can (and will) shape and filter the data in fair-reaching ways.

Cory Doctorow’s Gee whiz piece is irritating (unless you’re into technoporn), and is easy to skip.

A piece on wikiomics is an excellent description of how community can make a difference, and the social dynamics of a collaboratory.

Cliff Lynch has a good piece on what data production projects must do to rationalize their data management, and what services must be provided by groups like IST/DS, to support these projects.

Frankel & Reid present an interesting discussion of mining and visualization, and include a compelling, cautionary note:

“The ingrained habits of highly trained scientists make them rarely as adventurous as these young minds. We think we are on the path to insight when shading reveals contours in 3D renderings, or when bursts of red appear on heat maps, for example. But the algorithms used to produce the graphics may create illusions or embed assumptions. The human visual system creates in the brain an apparent understanding of what a picture represents, not necessarily a picture of the underlying science. Unless we know all the steps from hypothesis to understanding — by conversing with theorists, experimentalists, instrument and software developers, visualization scientists, graphic artists and cognitive psychologists — we cannot be sure whether a display is accurate or misleading.”

The closing essay is human interest and could be skipped in the interest of time. However, it is short, and like the best human interest stories, is surprising and inspiring.

The Office of the CIO and Information Services and Technology are working with the UC Berkeley community to develop a campus strategy on how to use technology to best support collaborative work on campus, now and in the future.

You have an opportunity to shape this strategy and hence the future of collaborative technology used on campus.

As we did with our findings, today we are releasing a draft of the collaborative tools strategy for review and comment.

We are distributing this strategy widely in draft form to elicit comments, feedback, and guidance from the campus and higher education communities.  We believe only through that method can we develop a strategy that will support the creation of an environment where collaboration is easy and natural. We would greatly appreciate any guidance, perspectives, corrections, or suggestions.  The development of the strategy to this point has been heavily dependent on the insight, comments and feedback we have from well over 200 people throughout the process.  Our thanks to everyone who has taken the time to participate.

It is only through further input that we will be able to refine this into a strategy that is truly useful across campus.

Review the Strategy

Strategy, Draft 2 (PDF, 11 pages)

Several of the goals in this strategy are discussed in more detail in individual “Spotlight” documents. If you have particular interest or expertise in those areas, we would also appreciate feedback on those documents.

Providing Feedback

After reviewing the draft strategy, you may comment directly below, in the comments section of this blog post.  We may include quotes from any comment posted below in the report. If you’d like to be acknowledged for any quotes from your comments, please include your name, title, and organization in your comments. If you wish to submit a comment that will not be shared beyond the project team, send it to Ian Crew at icrew@berkeley.edu.

[Edit: A draft of the findings based on this strategy is now available.  Comments continue to be greatly appreciated.]

The Office of the CIO and Information Services and Technology are working with the UC Berkeley community to develop a campus strategy on how to use technology to best support collaborative work on campus, now and in the future.

You have an opportunity to shape this strategy and hence the future of collaborative technology used on campus. Today, we are pleased to release for your review the first draft of three sections of the upcoming Campus Collaborative Tools Strategy document.

We are intentionally releasing these first three sections of this strategy document at an early stage to elicit comments, feedback, and guidance from the campus community. We believe only through that method can we accurately represent the many collaborative practices and perspectives on the Berkeley campus. We would greatly appreciate any guidance, perspectives, corrections, or suggestions. We’re particularly looking for more guidance around the needs for collaborative technologies in research and teaching.

As of today, the final recommendations to be included in this strategy have not yet been written. We have made the decision to release these initial findings before the recommendations, in order to ensure that the recommendations reflect your feedback, and that of many others on campus, on this early stage draft of the document.

For more information

For more detailed information about this project, please see section II of the strategy document, “Introduction & Goals of the Strategy.”

If you have any questions, please contact Ian Crew, icrew@berkeley.edu.

Read the strategy

Section II-Introduction & Goals of the Strategy

Section III-Definition of Collaborative Tools for the purposes of this strategy

Section IV-Findings

Reviewer’s guide

We would greatly appreciate any response you might wish to offer. As you comment, you may wish to include:

• Your reactions to the data we’ve gathered
• Issues or data we’ve missed or omitted
• Your suggestions of additional issues the campus should consider
• An overview of the discussions or decisions taking place in your organization in these areas
• Your recommendations for strategic directions and next steps for the campus

We do realize that there is a great deal of information here. An outline of the first three sections of the complete strategy document, released today for your review and comment, appears below. If your time is limited and you can only focus on a single section of these findings, please focus on section IV.C, starting on page 50 of that section.

2. Introduction & Goals of the Strategy (PDF, 5 pages)
   1. Key Questions
   2. Background for this work
   3. Methodologies
3. Definition of Collaborative Tools for the purposes of this strategy (PDF, 4 pages)
   1. What is “collaboration”?
   2. Why is collaboration important?
   3. What are “collaborative tools”?
   4. What types of collaborative tools are available?
4. Findings (PDF, 74 pages. If you can only focus on a single section of these findings, please focus on section IV.C, starting on page 50.)
   1. What are the primary contexts of collaboration on the campus, and how do people use tools to facilitate them?
   2. What collaborative tools are campus IT providers currently providing or using?
   3. What are key campus needs?
   4. What are the services and service models being offered by external providers?
   5. What are the costs of campus services and alternative services?
   6. What are other peer institutions doing? Why?
   7. What are other policy, legal, etc. issues we need to be aware of?

After reviewing these sections, you may comment directly below, in the comments section of this blog post.  We may include quotes from any comment posted below in the report. If you’d like to be acknowledged for any quotes from your comments, please include your name, title, and organization in your comments. If you wish to submit a comment that will not be shared beyond the project team, send it to Ian Crew at icrew@berkeley.edu.

The deadline for comments on this draft of the strategy document is Friday, April 11, 2008. The complete strategy document, including recommendations, will be released for another round of comments in late April.

The first draft of the UC Berkeley Campus Collaborative Tools Strategy will be posted here shortly.  Stay tuned. See http://istpub.berkeley.edu:4201/bcc/Spring2008/1189.html for more details.