#  1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY  
  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

**1.1**

</th>  
<th>

**ROLE/PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE OF THE DELIVERABLE**

</th> </tr> </table>

This Data Management Plan outlines how the research data collected was handled
during and after the ER4STEM project. It describes the data set, how it was
archived and preserved as well as how it will be shared. It also provides a
description on how the data was treated before been uploaded in the Zenodo
repository.  
  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

**1.2**

</th>  
<th>

**RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER ER4STEM DELIVERABLES**

</th> </tr> </table>

Research data was collected in work packages WP2 (Workshops and Curricula) and
WP3 (Conferences and Competitions). The evaluation process is described in
D6.1 (Evaluation Pre-Kit) and will be refined in D6.2. Deliverables D6.3, D6.4
and D6.5, which report the evaluation results with the data collected every
year. The dissemination deliverables D8.2, D8.3 and D8.4, especially the
report on scientific dissemination, are also closely linked to the data
management plan.  
  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

**1.3**

</th>  
<th>

**STRUCTURE OF THE DOCUMENT**

</th> </tr> </table>

The Introduction states the purpose of the document and explains the type of
information it contains. In chapter 3, the data collected during the project
is described in detail. Chapter 4 deals with standards and metadata. Chapter 5
elaborates on which data was shared with whom and how and chapter 6 gives an
overview on how the data was archived and stored during the project and
afterwards. Chapter 7 describes how the data was treated and structure before
being upload in the Zenodo repository.  
  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

**2**

</th>  
<th>

**INTRODUCTION**

</th> </tr> </table>

The ER4STEM Data Management Plan (DMP) outlines how the research data
collected during the project was handled during and after the project.

It is structured as suggested in [1] and describes:

  * the data set 

  

  * standards and metadata 

  

  * data sharing 

  

  * archiving and preservation 

  

Throughout these sections, reference is made to data protection, ethics, the
evaluation (WP6), publications and other forms of dissemination (WP7) as well
as to the two main activities of data collection (WP2 and WP3).

The DMP was not a fixed document; it evolved and gained more precision and
substance during the lifespan of the project. The first version of the DMP was
delivered in project month 6 (M6). It was updated at month 35 (M35), before
the final project review, to fine-tune it to the data generated and the uses
identified by the project consortium. The data management was discussed in
milestone MS2 in project month M4, where important decisions were taken for
the first version of the DMP document. The DMP was discussed during each
milestone reviews. Nevertheless, the biggest modification was done after the
final milestone M35, when was introduced the treatment that must be done to
the data before been uploaded to the Zenodo repository.  
  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

**3**

</th>  
<th>

**DATA SET**

</th> </tr> </table>

During the project research data was collected during the workshops and
conferences. As part of work packages 2, 3 and 6 (WP2, WP3 & WP6), data is
collected by partners from multiple sources at multiple sites. This data is
quantitative and qualitative in nature and will be analysed from different
perspectives for project development and scientific evaluation with results
published in scientific conferences and journals.

Data was only collected following the informed consent, and in the case of
minors, their parent or guardian.  
  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

**3.1**

</th>  
<th>

**DATA SET REFERENCE AND NAME**

</th> </tr> </table>

In this document data regarding the workshops conducted during the project by
each of the partners will be referenced to as **workshops data set** and will
include data of over 4000 children by the end of the project. A similar
approach will be followed for the conference data, but with smaller numbers.
This data set will be referenced to as **conferences data set** . Collected
data is anonymized by using participant numbers (a randomly assigned number
with partner code and project year). The participant key, which connects
participant information to participant numbers, is the only document that
contains personally sensitive material (name of the participant, age, parent
or school name and contact information) and will not be shared outside of the
partner organisation or with people in the partner organisation who do not
require direct access to this information. The participant key will be stored
securely according to Data Protection Laws and will not be removed from the
partner organisations.

##  3.1.1 WORKSHOPS DATA SET

Since the data comes from multiple sources, the workshops data set had its own
folder structure and following documents collected: Workshop information, pre-
questionnaire, post-questionnaire, observations, interviews, artefacts of
learning, tutor reflections, and encrypted sensitive data like videos and
audio files. These files will be named using the following convention:

  * For documents and templates created by the partner responsible for evaluation, Cardiff University, the data will be named after the organisation conducting the workshop or conference, a six-digit date of the workshop or conference, and the original file name. For example, 

  

PRIA_160416_ObservationSchedule.doc

  * If multiple documents from the same organisation on the same date exist, identifiers will be added as appropriate to the data, i.e. TutorName or GroupName. For example, 

  

TUW_250616_Lara_TutorReflection.doc or TUW_250616_Julian_TutorReflection.doc

  * If no Cardiff University template exists (typically for artefacts, audio and video), the name will state the organisation, the six-digit date, then the group name and data type. For example, AL_040216_RobotAddicts_AudioInterview 

  

  * The files will be stored in a folder structure as in Figure 1. The detailed process of planning and conducting the workshops is part of work package 2, their evaluation is part of work package 6 and already described in D6.1. 

  

**Figure 1: Workshop data folder structure**

##  3.1.2 CONFERENCES DATA SET

The conferences data set is a compact and slightly adapted form of the
workshops data set with fewer numbers of children and follows the same naming
conventions.

In ECER2016, roughly 300 students were expected to be present, many of whom
will have participated in preparatory workshops and thus will have already
contributed to the workshops data set.  
  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

**3.2**

</th>  
<th>

</th>  
<th>

**DATA SET DESCRIPTION**

</th> </tr> </table>

##  3.2.1 WORKSHOPS DATA SET

A detailed description of the evaluation method and the rationale behind it as
well as detailed information on the collected data is provided in D6.1. In
this document, the data set will be described as a summary.

The workshops data set includes following documents and information:

  * Workshop Session Information (.doc) 

  

  * Partner name 

  

  * Dates (to-from) 

  

  * Number of sessions 

  

  * Location 

  

  * Lead by 

  

  * Other tutors/mentors 

  

  * Age of students 

  

  * Total number of students 

  

  * Male/Female numbers 

  

  * Group sizes 

  

  * Total number of groups 

  

  * How were the groups formed? Why? 

  

  * Robotics kit 

  

  * Programming languages 

  

  * Domain 

  

  * Aims of workshop 

  

  * Please include all relevant lesson materials (e.g. activity plan, each session/lesson plan, handouts, etc.) in the folder with this document 

  

  * Draw a scientist (writings translated into English, anonymised and digitalised .pdf) 

  

  * Filled by the participants 

  

  * To answer the question “are popular gender stereotypes about STEM held?” 

  

  * Questionnaires (anonymised and online or .xls) 

  

  * Filled by the participants 

  

  * Pre- and post-workshop questionnaires are used to collect largely quantitative data 

  

  * Questions are split into personal information (age, gender and school), past experience and existing attitudes to STEM subjects and careers 

  

  * The post-workshop questionnaire also includes questions about the activities to help understand learners’ experiences of the workshop as a whole, what participants feel they have learned and what their future intentions are 

  

  * Paper questionnaire answers to be entered into the online system 

  

  * Free-text responses translated into English and entered into excel files 

  

  * Observations (translated into English, anonymised and digitalised .xls) 

  

  * Observation protocol filled by the workshop facilitators or other observers 

  

  * Video observation where possible to verify and expand upon observation notes, as well as sensitising data analysts to the context. 

  

  * Interviews (anonymised, transcribed and translated into English, .xls) 

  

  * With focus groups, audio-recorded 

  

  * Conducted to understand the experience of participants and their reasons for particular actions 

  

  * Artefacts of learning (translated into English where applicable, anonymised and digitalised .pdf) 

  

  * Created by the participants 

  

  * Identified as group work 

  

  * Participant reflections (translated into English, anonymised if applicable and digitalised if applicable, 

  

.xls)

  * Created individually and as a team 

  

  * Either as a blog which acts as a reflection tool and a living artefact of the learning process, or as a guided reflection document 

  

  * Tutor reflections (translated into English, anonymised and digitalised, .xls) 

  

  * Done by each of the tutors, mentors or workshop facilitators 

  

  * The purpose is two-fold: 1) To document changes to workshop plans and the reasons for these; and 2) to document the evolution of activity plans between workshops. 

  

  * Sensitive data (audio and video recordings) 

  

  * Audio recordings of interviews and any video recordings are encrypted and stored by the partner organisation and only encrypted video files are shared with evaluation partner Cardiff University for the purpose of analysis and archiving. 

  

The data was collected during the workshops by partner organizations mostly
from the workshop participants, children ages 7 to 18. Over 4000 participants
in five European countries were planned for the whole duration of the project.
The first year is regarded as a pilot year with approximately 1000 students
participating in the pilot evaluation. Collected data was used to improve
processes regarding the workshops as well as their evaluation. The data also
informed the development of the framework. It was planned that the results of
the data analysis will be used in scientific publications, along with
illustrative, fully anonymised extracts from the data set. Parts of the data
set will be made available via open access (details in section 5).

##  3.2.2 CONFERENCES DATA SET

The conferences data set is a compact form of the workshops data set with
fewer participants (in ECER2016 roughly 180 students participated). Collected
data was used to improve processes regarding the conferences as well as their
evaluation. The data will also inform the development of the framework. It is
planned that the data will be used in scientific publications and parts of it
made available via open access (details in section 5).

  * Conference Session Information (.doc) 

  

  * Partner name 

  

  * Dates (to-from) 

  

  * Number of sessions 

  

  * Location 

  

  * Lead by 

  

  * Other tutors/mentors 

  

  * Age of students 

  

  * Total number of students 

  

  * Male/Female numbers 

  

  * Group sizes 

  

  * Total number of groups 

  

  * How were the groups formed? Why? 

  

  * Robotics kit 

  

  * Programming languages 

  

  * Domain 

  

  * Aims of conference 

  

  * Please include all relevant materials (e.g. activity plan, each session/lesson plan, handouts, etc.) in the folder with this document 

  

  * Questionnaires (anonymised and online or .xls) 

  

  * Filled by the participants 

  

  * Used to collect largely quantitative data 

  

  * Questions are split into personal information, existing attitudes and conference experience. 

  

  * Paper questionnaire answers to be entered into the online system 

  

  * Free-text responses translated into English and entered into excel files 

  

  * Observations (translated into English, anonymised and digitalised .xls) 

  

  * Observation protocol filled by the conference facilitators or other observers 

  

  * Video observation where possible to verify and expand upon observation notes, as well as sensitising data analysts to the context. 

  

  * Interviews (anonymised, transcribed and translated into English, .xls) 

  

  * With focus groups, audio-recorded 

  

  * Conducted to understand the experience of participants and their reasons for particular actions 

  

  * Artefacts of learning (translated into English where applicable, anonymised and digitalised .pdf) 

  

  * Created by the participants 

  

  * Identified as group work 

  

  * Participant reflections (translated into English, anonymised if applicable and digitalised if applicable, 

  

.xls)

  * Created individually and as a team 

  

  * Either as a blog which acts as a reflection tool and a living artefact of the learning process, or as a guided reflection document 

  

  * Tutor reflections (translated into English, anonymised and digitalised, .xls) 

  

  * Done by each of the tutors, mentors or workshop facilitators 

  

  * The purpose is two-fold: 1) To document changes to workshop plans and the reasons for these; and 2) to document the evolution of activity plans between workshops. 

  

  * Sensitive data (audio and video recordings) 

  

  * Audio recordings of interviews and any video recordings are encrypted and stored by the partner organisation and only encrypted video files are shared with evaluation partner Cardiff University for the purpose of analysis and archiving. 

  

It was planned that the results of the data analysis was going to be used in
scientific publications, along with illustrative, fully anonymised extracts
from the data set. Parts of the data set will be made available via open
access (details in section 5).

#  4 STANDARDS AND METADATA

The ER4STEM project flowed the Ethical standards of the Cardiff School of
Social Sciences and has ethical approval from the School of Social Sciences
Research Ethics Committee. Besides following a rigorous evaluation protocol
that included informed consent of children participating in ER4STEM activities
as well as their legal guardian, the project will comply with national and EU
legislation on Data Protection, particularly the European Data Protection
Legislation (Directive 95/45/EC). All ER4STEM project collected data was
anonymised before research analysis and any data that might make personal
identification possible was protected with adequate measures. For details,
please see section 6.

The main purpose of the data collection was the evaluation of the impact of
the framework tools and activities on young people. The findings are available
via the project deliverables and scientific publications. Workshops are an
important part of the data collection, therefore metadata needed for the
workshops was defined through the cooperation of work packages 2 and 6 (see
section 4.1.1). This metadata or parts of it can used as search parameters in
an open access research repository that provides access to anonymised and
processed research data (details of data sharing is in section 5). The
metadata can also be made available in an appropriate form in the ER4STEM
repository (work package 5).

##  4.1.1 WORKSHOPS METADATA

The workshops metadata includes the following information for each session:

  * Partner name 

  

  * Dates (to-from) 

  

  * Number of sessions 

  

  * Location 

  

  * Lead by 

  

  * Other tutors/mentors 

  

  * Age of students 

  

  * Total number of students 

  

  * Male/Female numbers 

  

  * Group sizes 

  

  * Total number of groups 

  

  * How the groups were formed 

  

  * Robotics kit 

  

  * Programming languages 

  

  * Domain 

  

  * Aims of workshop 

  

##  4.1.2 CONFERENCES METADATA

The conference metadata includes the following information:

  * Partner name 

  

  * Dates (to-from) 

  

  * Number of sessions 

  

  * Location 

  

  * Lead by 

  

  * Other tutors/mentors 

  

  * Age of students 

  

  * Total number of students 

  

  * Male/Female numbers 

  

  * Group sizes 

  

  * Total number of groups 

  

  * How the groups were formed 

  

  * Robotics kit 

  

  * Programming languages 

  

  * Domain 

  

  * Aims of conference 

  

  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

**5**

</th>  
<th>

**DATA SHARING**

</th> </tr> </table>

All collected and anonymised data from the workshops and conferences as
outlined in the sections before, were disseminated in one form or another. So
far, these datasets do not include any information that the consortium
considers worth protection for exploitation. All collected data were used for
scientific evaluation and findings were published via scientific channels.
Open access to these publications are available in the repository. It is
important to highlight that these files correspond to the camera ready and not
the files available on the publisher website. However, not all of the raw data
can be made accessible to everyone for ethical reasons. Figure 2 outlines the
decisions made by the consortium on how to handle data sharing at this point
in time. In the following sections the decisions will be explained in further
detail.

Research

results and

data

Decision to

disseminate

Publications

Deliverables

Conference

Proceedings

Journals

Research Data

Open Access

Repository

Restricted

access

Restricted data

Decision to

exploit

**Figure 2: Data sharing plan**

##  5.1.1 RESEARCH RESULTS AND DATA

As a European project under Horizon2020, the ER4STEM project consortium has
declared its willingness to make all knowledge generated from the project
publically available and provide open access to its scientific publications
and research data [2]. Therefore, all deliverables of the project are open to
public and accessible via the project’s web page **er4stem.com** . The data
sharing decisions was taken regarding these data sets only and need to be
revised when other data sets are added.

##  5.1.2 DECISION TO EXPLOIT

The consortium agreed that the workshops data set does not include any
information that should be protected for exploitation reasons. However, the
project created an educational robotics repository (repository.er4stem.com),
which will be sustainable after the project. Therefore, some data or knowledge
generated or collected in the project might be identified as a unique selling
point worthwhile of protection.

##  5.1.3 DECISION TO DISSEMINATE

The consortium decided to disseminate findings from the research data in
scientific publications. The consortium also decided to use other non-
scientific means to promote the project and its tools as well as the
scientific findings. Scientix has already been proven to be a very competent
collaboration partner in reaching one of the main stakeholders – STEM teachers
– all over Europe.

The decision about dissemination channels was also affected by the cost factor
(such as open access for scientific publications) and, although some budget
was foreseen for open access publications, the consortium will prefer routes
that minimize costs in order to make the research and knowledge generated by
the project as diversely public as possible.  
  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

**5.1.3.1**

</th>  
<th>

**DELIVERABLES**

</th> </tr> </table>

Findings from the project research data were publish in deliverables D6.3,
D6.4 and D6.5.  
  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

**5.1.3.2**

</th>  
<th>

**CONFERENCE PRESENTATIONS AND PROCEEDINGS**

</th> </tr> </table>

Conference proceedings and books are very expensive for open access.
Nevertheless, conference camera-ready versions can be shared under certain
conditions. For example, IEEE and ACM allow authors to share cameraready
versions without problem, while Springer just allow authors to do the same
after 12 months. Therefore, camera-ready versions of the articles written in
the project and are available in the repository.  
  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

**5.1.3.3**

</th>  
<th>

**JOURNALS**

</th> </tr> </table>

Journal publications are open access and publicly available, linked through
via the repository. It is also a common route to publish first findings in
conferences, and then enhance them together with further findings in a journal
paper which then can be open access. It was decided that the final scientific
results that are going to be published in a journal paper could be gold
access. Other journal papers will have green access for financial reasons
(minimised cost, maximised dissemination).

##  5.1.4 RESEARCH DATA OPEN ACCESS REPOSITORY

The consortium committed to make all research data. However, the consortium
also decided that the data and the persons having access to the research data
should be restricted. In the following subsections the restrictions and the
rationale behind these are explained.  
  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

**5.1.4.1**

</th>  
<th>

**RESTRICTED DATA**

</th> </tr> </table>

The research data collected during workshops and conferences were anonymised
so that participants cannot be identified from the data. However, there is
always the potential that individuals can be identified in audio, video and
still images, even though they have been anonymised. Sharing this data with
third parties would infringe data and child protection laws of the consortium
countries. The consortium is not equipped with the competencies and time to
take measures against this kind of identification, and even if it did so, it
cannot guarantee that others could not apply countermeasures once in the
possession of these materials. Thus the consortium decided not to share with
third parties audio, video or still images which include any participant.

Even within the consortium, only the evaluation lead partner and partners who
originally collected the data will have access to this data, which has been
stored as described in section 6 of this document. The transcribed interviews
and observation protocols may be made available via open access but only if
they contain no identifying information.

The consortium decided that all research data needs to be “cleaned” and
processed, for example, school names or other identifying information needs to
be removed, and brought into a form that is useful for other researchers to
validate or replicate research results, and also fitting into the open access
repository metadata and search options. There needs to be a compromise between
the chosen repository and its data formats and the research data processed for
the repository. The consortium concluded that excel and word formats will be
best formats in an open access repository.

As part of the process of gaining informed consent to collect data from
participants, they must be informed of the storage, protection and use of the
data. If the data is made accessible to others, the consent is not fully
informed, as the consortium has limited means to identify for what purposes
the data will be used and by whom. Therefore, the open access pilot is
explained to participants and they are given the opportunity to opt out of
open access, thus data from participants who have opted out of open access
pilot will not be made accessible. In addition, the consortium will limit the
access to data to researchers who confirm their compliance with the same
ethical obligations stated in the informed consent process.  
  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

**5.1.4.2**

</th>  
<th>

**RESTRICTED ACCESS**

</th> </tr> </table>

In order to ensure that the research data is used by third parties as
explained to the participants with the informed consents, access to the data
needs to be restricted. The consortium needs to know who is accessing the
database and for what purpose. Criteria for access will include membership of
a research institution based in Europe and they must submit a plan outlining
how they will use the data (research questions and analysis approach) which
will be reviewed before any decision to grant access.

The time frame of access is also part of the restriction. The research data
cannot be made accessible before scientific publication. It therefore needs to
be decided how long after publication it could be useful for other researchers
to have access to the research data, this could range from one year post-
publication to five years after the project.

Each person who would be interested to have access to any data set must make a
request to the project team, stating the reason for access to the data and how
it will be used. Also the following are the condition of use:

  * The project team must be informed of intended publications arising from analysis of the data. 

  

  * The data set must be used in any publications with acknowledgement given to the authors and ER4STEM project. 

  

  * The dataset must not be used for commercial purposes and cannot be shared with others without express written consent from the project team. 

  

On the other hand, the internal procedure to process a new request is the
following: whoever picks up the request for access, must inform the partner
leads, who are Markus Vincze(TU Wien), Wilfried Lepuschitz (PRIA), Ivo
Gueorguiev (ESICEE), Angele Giuliano (AL), Chronis Kynigos (UoA) and Carina
Girvan (CU). This should include information about the person and their stated
reasons for wanting access to the data. The partner who collected the data can
veto any access requests - allow 1 calendar month for this. If there are no
causes for concern, access is granted.  
  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

**6**

</th>  
<th>

**ARCHIVING AND PRESERVATION**

</th> </tr> </table>

All research data will be stored until 2023. Partners also will need to
archive personal data about the participants (the participant key) in a
separate location, so that participants are able to use their right of
withdrawing from the research anytime. The project partners will comply with
national and EU legislation on Data Protection, particularly the European Data
Protection Legislation (Directive 95/45/EC).

Each project partner will store the research data that is collected by that
partner anonymously on a password protected server. Videos and audio files
(and files where participant can be recognized) will only be stored in an
encrypted drive and shared encrypted. Cardiff University will store all the
data in the same way for all partners to ensure archiving in two separate
locations. TU Wien will save Cardiff University research data for the same
reason. The consortium has agreed to use the software VeraCrypt for
encryption. For the needs of ER4STEM VeraCrypt provides sufficient security.
It is open source, can be used on different systems (Windows, OS, Linux), it
originates in Europe, is maintained by a French company, and is free of
charge.

Software:  _https://veracrypt.codeplex.com/_

Tutorial:
_https://veracrypt.codeplex.com/wikipage?title=Beginner%27s%20Tutorial_

The website er4stem.com, which stores all publications of the project for
public access, and the ER4STEM repository, which will store different tools
and plans developed in the project, will be available at least five years
after the project. Details about the research data open access repository can
be found in section 5.1.5.  
  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

**7**

</th>  
<th>

**UPLOADING DATA SETS IN ZENODO**

</th> </tr> </table>

Each partner will upload all the data sets created during the project in the
repository Zenodo  ( _https://zenodo.org/_ )  . This repository was selected
because it is located in Europe and it complies with all the requirements
demanded by Cardiff University, which was the institution with the strictest
and specific requirements between all partners. The following sections provide
important information that must be considered by each partner while they are
uploading the data sets. A guidance is provided in Annex A: Guidance for Open
Access Data Sets.  
  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

**7.1**

</th>  
<th>

**FOLDER STRUCUTRE**

</th> </tr> </table>

The following is the structure of each one of the data sets:

  * Country + Partner initials o Year X 

  

▪ Workshop + 3 digit code  Artefacts of learning o (Use sub-folders as
appropriate)

  * Draw-a-scientist 

  

  * Interviews 

  

  * Observation notes 

  

  * Questionnaires 

  

  * Reflections o Tutor o Student 

  

At the Country + Partner level, a **README.txt** file is included with the
following information:

  * Language used to ask questions: 

  

  * Note to say that answers were translated from X language to English 

  

Names of schools, tutors and teachers should be **REMOVED** from any file.
This is due to ensure the anonymity.  
  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

**7.2**

</th>  
<th>

**CLEANING DATA**

</th> </tr> </table>

Each partner has to follow the next steps to all the data generated by them:

Step 1: Remove any participant for whom there is no consent to make their data
open access.

Step 2: Anonymise all data

  * No names of students, teachers, tutors or schools in ANY data (replace with student ID as appropriate) 

  

  * No images of children, adults or school names (blurred or not these must NOT be included) 

  

  * No audio or video recordings 

  

  * No sensitive data 

  

  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

**7.3**

</th>  
<th>

**ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS**

</th> </tr> </table>

The following are additional considerations that each partner must take when
they are uploading any data set on Zenodo:

  * **Authors** : List all members of your team that did data collection and then add the following: 

    * George Sharkov; European Software Institute – Center Eastern Europe 

  

    * Wilfried Lepuschitz; Practical Robotics Institute Austria 

  

    * Angele Giuliano; AcrossLimits 

  

    * Chronis Kynigos; Kapodistrian University of Athens o Carina Girvan; Cardiff University o Markus Vincze; Technical University Wein 

  

  

  * **Description** : “This dataset was collected as part of the Educational Robotics for STEM (ER4STEM) project, funded by the European Commission’s Horizon 2020 programme, grant agreement No. 665792\. The dataset includes quantitative and qualitative data collected over 3 years of robotics workshops held in XXX (Replaces with the correct text). Only data with informed consent to be shared via an open access repository is included. Only anonymised data is included and some data is excluded to protect vulnerable participants.” 

  

  * **Keywords** : Educational robotics; ER4STEM; K-12; Science; Technology; Engineering; Mathematics; STEM; Quantitative; Qualitative 

  

  * **Licence** : Select - Restricted Access. The following text to conditions: “Access to this dataset is restricted. Access requests must be made to the project team, stating the reason for access to the data and how it will be used. Conditions for use: The project team must be informed of intended publications arising from analysis of the data. The dataset do must be used in any publications with acknowledgement given to the authors and ER4STEM project. The dataset must not be used for commercial purposes and cannot be shared with others without express written consent from the project team. 

  

  * **Funding** : 665792 OR ER4STEM 

  

#  8 CONCLUSION / OUTLOOK

The ER4STEM DMP Version 2.0 outlines how the research data collected during
the project was handled during and after the project. The document was
reviewed at each milestone meeting and adapted as the project progresses.
Also, it provides instructions on how to update the data sets on Zendodo,
which is the repository selected to store the data created from the project.

#  9 GLOSSARY / ABBREVIATIONS  
  
<table>  
<tr>  
<th>

EC

</th>  
<th>

European Commission

</th> </tr>  
<tr>  
<td>

ER4STEM

</td>  
<td>

Educational Robotics for STEM

</td> </tr>  
<tr>  
<td>

DMP

</td>  
<td>

Data Management Plan

</td> </tr>  
<tr>  
<td>

REA

</td>  
<td>

Research Executive Agency

</td> </tr>  
<tr>  
<td>

STEM

</td>  
<td>

Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics

</td> </tr>  
<tr>  
<td>

</td>  
<td>

</td> </tr> </table>

#  10 BIBLIOGRAPHY

  1. European Commision. Guidelines on Data Management in Horizon 2020\. Version 2.0. 30 October 2015 

  

  2. European Commision. Guidelines on Open Access to Scientific Publications and Research Data in Horizon 2020. Version 2.0. 30 October 2015