Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2022.56.4.181

A Study about Building a Community of Practice of Experts for Sharing and Using Research Data  

Na-eun, Han (KISTI)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science / v.56, no.4, 2022 , pp. 181-203 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study analyzed domestic and foreign literature and examined cases of foreign Community of Practice(CoP) of experts to find out what benefits researchers can gain from participating in their CoP, how the CoP was established, and how data is shared within the CoP. In addition, this study discussed on how to establish a CoP of experts in Korea for sharing and using research data. By participating in the CoP of experts, members can be provided with the opportunity to build an experts' network and have a chance to meet with various experts, to acquire and share their expertise and information, to receive help from other experts, to learn about their expertise, and to have opportunities for professional experiences. In addition, this study discussed 4 factors such as operation method and management system, memberships and number of members, activities, and management of data and repository for establishing a CoP of experts for sharing and using research data. This study provides a knowledge base for building a CoP of experts in Korea.
Keywords
Community of Practice (CoP); Research Data Sharing; Research Data Use; CoP of Experts;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 2  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Woodgate-Jones, A. (2012). The student teacher and the school community of practice: an exploration of the contribution of the legitimate peripheral participant. Educational Review, 64(2), 145-160. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2011.590180   DOI
2 Cronin, B. (2008). On the epistemic significance of place. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(6), 1002-1006. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20774   DOI
3 Henri, F. & Pudelko, B. (2003). Understanding and analysing activity and learning in virtual communities. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(4), 474-487. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0266-4909.2003.00051.x   DOI
4 Ketelaar, E., McKemmish, S., & Gilliland-Swetland, A. (2005). 'Communities of memory': pluralizing archival research and education agendas. Archives and Manuscripts, 33(1), 146-174.
5 Framework Act on Science and Technology. Section No18727.
6 Han, Na-Eun & Kim, Seong-Hee (2014). Comparative analysis on digital curation process in foreign academic libraries. Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, 45(2), 93-116. https://doi.org/10.16981/kliss.45.2.201406.93   DOI
7 Han, Na-Eun (2022). Building a community of practice of research data curations: a qualitative study. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 56(3), 119-152.   DOI
8 Kim, Ji-Hyun (2012). A study on university researchers' data management practices. The Korea Journal of Library and Information Science, 43(3), 433-455. https://doi.org/10.16981/kliss.43.3.201209.433   DOI
9 Kim, Ji-Hyun (2015). A study on the perceptions of university researchers on data management and sharing. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 49(3), 413-436. https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2015.49.3.413   DOI
10 Kim, Sun-Tae, Hahn, Sun-Hwa, Lee, Tae-Young, & Kim, Yong (2010). A study on a model for using and preserving scientific data. Journal of the Korean Biblia Society for Library and Information Science, 21(4), 81-93.   DOI
11 Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information (2019). Establishment of Research Data Sharing and Dissemination System (K-19-L01-C03).
12 National Research and Development Innovation Act. Section No18645.
13 National Research Council of Science and Technology (2019). Research Data Management Guidelines (2019-07).
14 Seoul National University Research Ethics Guidelines. Seoul National University School Guidelines.
15 Gannon-Leary, P. & Fontainha, E. (2007). Communities of practice and virtual learning communities: Benefits, barriers and success factors. Barriers and Success Factors. eLearning Papers, 5.
16 Beagrie, N. & Houghton, J. (2016). The Value and Impact of the European Bioinformatics Institute, 1-96.
17 Belzowski, N., Ladwig, J. P., & Miller, T. (2013). Crafting identity, collaboration, and relevance for academic librarians using communities of practice. Collaborative Librarianship, 5(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.29087/2013.5.1.04   DOI
18 Butler, B. S. (2001). Membership size, communication activity, and sustainability: a resource-based model of online social structures. Information Systems Research, 12(4), 346-362. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.12.4.346.9703   DOI
19 Cummings, J. N. & Kiesler, S. (2005). Collaborative research across disciplinary and organizational boundaries. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 703-722. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312705055535   DOI
20 Fu, H. & Stvilia, B. (2016). Knowledge curation discussions and activity dynamics in a short lived social Q&A community. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM/IEEE-CS on Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL '16). New York. https://doi.org/10.1145/2910896.2925432   DOI
21 Gusfield, J. R. (1975). Community: A Critical Response. New York: Harper & Row.
22 Johnston, L. R., Carlson, J., Hudson-Vitale, C., Imker, H., Kozlowski, W., Olendorf, R., ... & Hull, E. (2018). Data curation network: a cross-institutional staffing model for curating research data. International Journal of Digital Curation, 13(1), 125-140. https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v13i1.616   DOI
23 Kazmer, M. M. (2010). Disengaging from a distributed research project: Refining a model of group departures. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(4), 758-771. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21281   DOI
24 Kraut, R. E. & Resnick, P. (2012). Building Successful Online Communities: Evidence-based Social Design. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
25 Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
26 National Science Foundation (2014). Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (nsf 15001).
27 Lazar, J. & Preece, J. (2002). Social Considerations in Online Communities: Usability, Sociability, and Success factors. London: Psychology Press.
28 Leimeister, J. M., Sidiras, P., & Krcmar, H. (2004). Success factors of virtual communities from the perspective of members and operators: an empirical study. In Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 37), Big Island, Hawaii.
29 Leimeister, J. M., Sidiras, P., & Krcmar, H. (2006). Exploring success factors of virtual communities: the perspectives of members and operators. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 16(3-4), 279-300. https://doi.org/10.1080/10919392.2006.9681204   DOI
30 Ramsey, D. & Beesley, K. B. (2007). ‘Perimeteritis' and rural health in Manitoba, Canada: perspectives from rural healthcare managers. Rural and Remote Health, 7(4), 1-11.
31 Sanchez-Cardona, I., Sanchez-Lugo, J., & VZlez-Gonzalez, J. (2012). Exploring the potential of communities of practice for learning and collaboration in a higher education context. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 1820-1825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.385.   DOI
32 Tenopir, C., Rice, N. M., Allard, S., Baird, L., Borycz, J., Christian, L., ... & Sandusky, R. J. (2020). Data sharing, management, use, and reuse: practices and perceptions of scientists worldwide. PloS one, 15(3), e0229003. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0229003   DOI
33 Tolle, K. M., Tansley, D. S. W., & Hey, A. J. (2011). The fourth paradigm: data-intensive scientific discovery [point of view]. Proceedings of the IEEE, 99(8), 1334-1337. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2011.2155130   DOI
34 Wenger, E., McDermott, R. A., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge. Massachusetts: Harvard business press.