
There has been renewed enthusiasm in recent weeks for greater data-sharing practices in the social sciences, due in no small part to the Reinhart-Rogoff controversy. Here, data curation specialist Carly Strasser provides answers to some frequently asked questions from those still sceptical about the technical, practical, and theoretical barriers to data sharing.
If you are a fan of data sharing, open data, open science, and generally openness in research, you’ve heard them all: excuses for keeping data out of the public domain. If you are NOT a fan of openness, you should be. For both groups (the fans and the haters), I’ve decided to construct a “Frankenstein monster” blog post composed of other peoples’ suggestions for how to deal with the excuses.
I have drawn some comebacks from Christopher Gutteridge, University of Southampton, and Alexander Dutton, University of Oxford. They created an open google doc of excuses for closing off data and appropriate responses, and generously provided access to the document under a CC-BY license. I also reference the UK Data Archive‘s list of barriers and solutions to data sharing, available via the Digital Curation Centre‘s PDF, “Research Data Management for Librarians”.


In Big Data: A Revolution That Will Transform How We Live, Work and Think, two of the world’s most-respected data experts reveal the reality of a big data world and outline clear and actionable steps that will equip the reader with the tools needed for this next phase of human evolution. Niccolo Tempini finds that rather than showing how the impact of data-driven innovations will advance the march of humankind, the authors merely present a thin collection of happy-ending business stories.
Big Data: A Revolution That Will Transform How We Live, Work and Think. Kenneth Cukier and Viktor Mayer-Schonberger. Hodder. March 2013.








At a time when researchers are expected to demonstrate ‘impact’, it can be tempting to rely on heroic research narratives that paint the researcher as a kind of evidence-based savior.
From its inception in 1991, the National Curriculum has been subject to many government reviews, conducted through largely clear and open frameworks, inclusive to the diverse range of expert voices. 








