In recent years, the sharing of research data has been widely discussed and a lot of potential benefits for research and the society have been articulated, e.g. validating research findings, publishing results gained from publically funded research and delivering new insights through secondary data analysis. On a transnational level, the OECD created guidelines (Pilat, Fukasuku 2007). National funding agencies have called for the accessibility of data (e.g. DFG, NSA, NRC), and the European Commission initiated an Open Data Pilot for the Horizon 2020 program (Guedj, Ramjo 2015, EC 2015). Moreover, first studies indicate a clear benefit for the researchers themselves: studies that made their data accessible received more citations (9% to 30%) than similar studies that did not (Piwowar, Vision 2013).

While this picture looks promising, the practices of data sharing differ in the various research communities (Wessels, et al. 2014). A few scientific fields like genomics and astronomy have established a common sharing practice, otherwise data sharing is seen as a conundrum (Borgman 2012). Specific conditions in the different disciplines need to be understood to establish data sharing practices involving stakeholders from heterogeneous institutions, i.e. universities, research institutions, (digital) libraries, data centers or archives as well as publishers, funding agencies, research communities and societies.

This round table will discuss data sharing by focusing on the specific situation in Educational Research, a field that is characterised by different disciplinary approaches to studying education. Here, psychological, sociological, and anthropological methods are applied, subject to theoretical and empirical or qualitative and quantitative approaches. In large-scale assessments such as PISA, cognitive Laboratory studies or ethnographic studies, heterogeneous datasets are created (e.g. test data, interviews, videos, and transcripts of instructions). Recent studies have pointed out that this heterogeneity of a discipline needs to be recognised in order to establish a vibrant open ecosystem (Noorman et al. 2014: 69). The discussion will draw on the empirical findings of the RECODE project (http://recodeproject.eu/) that explored research practices and open data in the following areas: physics, health and clinical research, bioengineering, environmental science, and; archaeology.

An introduction will first be given by short presentations including input from recent studies, guidelines and domain-specific data solutions. The following questions will lead the discussion:  What are the main challenges and boundaries for establishing data sharing in Educational Research? What kind of specific needs can be identified in the heterogeneous research communities? What could be a European perspective for data sharing in Educational Research? Besides developers, administrators or practitioners of this field we would like to encourage educational researchers from different fields to participate at the broad but intensive discussion.

Borgman, C. L. (2012). The conundrum of sharing research data. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(6), 1059–1078. http://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22634 European Commission. (2015). Guidelines on Data Management in Horizon 2020. URL: http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/hi/oa_pilot/h2020-hi-oa-data-mgt_en.pdf Guedj, D., & Ramjoué, C. (2015). European Commission Policy on Open-Access to Scientific Publications and Research Data in Horizon 2020. Biomed Data Journal, 1(1), 11–14. http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.11610/bmdj.01102 Noorman, M., Kalaitzi, V., Angelaki, M., Tsoukala, V., Linde, P., Sveinsdottir, T., … Wessels, B. (2014). Institutional barriers and good practice solutions. URL http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:834090 Pilat, D., & Fukasaku, Y. (2007). OECD principles and guidelines for access to research data from public funding. Data Science Journal, 6, OD4–OD11. Piwowar, H. A., & Vision, T. J. (2013). Data reuse and the open data citation advantage. PeerJ, 1,e175. Wessels B, Finn RL, Linde P, Mazzetti P, Nativ S, Riley S, Smallwood R, Taylor MJ, Tsoukala V, Wadhwa K, Wyatt S (2014) ‘Issues in the development of open access to research data’ Prometheus: critical studies in Innovation, 32 (1) pp. 49-66, doi: 10.1080/08109028.2014.956505