Upload
jeff-wisniewski
View
2.967
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Citation preview
Web-Scale Discovery Reality Check
Frank CervoneVice Chancellor and CIO
Purdue University Calumet
Jeff WisniewskiWeb Services Librarian
University of Pittsburgh
Original idea…
DISCOVERY
TOOL SMACKDOWN!
Here’s the problem…
•The ILS is no longer integrated•Libraries don’t work with their ILS but
around it▫Duplicate data entry
Bibliographic Financial transactions
•Digital materials are the majority of the collection▫Often managed by separate staff in
separate, often inefficient workflowsBurke, Jane. 2012. Sometimes you just have to start over. Serial Solutions Words, January 24, 2012. Online at http://www.serialssolutions.com/en/words/detail/sometimes-you-just-have-to-start-over
Important point #1
0% of users start their research on your library’s website, so discovery needs to be
diffuse
Important point #2
Fulfillment is just as important as discovery
•All of these need to be as seamless and integrated as possible:▫Remote access▫openURL ▫ILL▫Requesting and other catalog functionality
Some bizarre arguments
•Users generally do not tag or review in next generation catalogs
Common arguments•No need for broad
searches•Aggregated indices are
opaque•Encourages lazy searching•We can/should/are
teaching users to search “properly”
•Google Scholar already does this
No need for broad searches• Searching through millions of items is not
necessary and tends to confuse users No real evidence to support this claim
• There are better more discipline specific tools This is true, so use them when appropriate In most cases though, this is not really the issue
• As research becomes more complex, most researchers are interested in the long-tail results
Aggregated indices are opaque
•Is it full text? Metadata? •What about “quality?”•Balancing the needs of
certainty vs. sufficiency▫Satisficing
•Discovery tools are simply easier to use
Howard, D., and Wiebrands, C. (2011). Culture Shock: Librarians' Response to Web Scale Search. Information Online Conference. Online at http://www.information-online.com.au/sb_clients/iog/data/content_item_files/000001/paper_2011_A1.pdf
Connaway, L. S., Dickey, T. S., Radford, M. (2011). If It Is Too Inconvenient, I’m Not Going After It: Convenience as a Critical Factor in Information-seeking Behaviors. OCLC Research. Online at http://www.oclc.org/research/publications/library/2011/connaway-lisr.pdf
Discovery is only as good as the content included or excluded
•Yes, but it’s our job to know that and work to get problems fixed
•Our patrons don’t know and (generally) don’t care
•Favoritism – a legitimate concern
Encourages lazy searching•Quick and dirty searches
•Welcome to the real world!
•People expect to be able to search easily
•Tools tend to increase usage of library resources▫Serendipity
Way, D. (2010). The Impact of Web-scale Discovery on the Use of a Library Collection. Serials Review, 36(4), pp. 214-220. Online at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.serrev.2010.07.002
“…dramatic increase in the use of full-text resources from full-text database and online journal collections…”
Which is a dramatic increase in ROI
Doug Way, The Impact of Web-scale Discovery on the Use of a Library Collection, Serials Review, Volume 36, Issue 4, December 2010, Pages 214-220, ISSN 0098-7913, 10.1016/j.serrev.2010.07.002.
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0098791310000882)
We can/should/are teaching users to search “properly”
Users failed:• Finding the correct starting-point for the search• Using search terms that were indexed and therefore
searchable• Got lost clicking subject heading and call number
linksWHY?
“Participants expected library searching to behave like their other search experiences”
-Nancy Kress, Darcy Del Bosque, Tom Ipri, (2011) "User failure to find known library items", New Library World, Vol. 112 Iss: 3/4, pp.150 - 170
Speaking of teaching…
“Bibliographic instruction is much better received and easier to provide, as Primo has freed librarians to spend more time teaching the finer points of research resources and methods…instead of basic search mechanics.”
Discovering what works: thinking of implementing a discovery service? Successful pioneers of several products describe their experiences.
Zinthia C. Briceno-Rosales, Rebecca Fernandez, Amanda Clay Powers, and Ken Varnum. Library Journal. 136.19 (Nov. 15, 2011
Google scholar already does this
• Google Scholar is free • Interface is user friendly• Outperforms discovery tools?
▫Not true Found wanting on validity and reliability Many of the results did not add any
significant value to the topic in question http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0361526X.2011.592115
• Customization is not easy▫Affiliation settings are pretty hiddenTimpson, H., and Sansom, G. (2011). A Student Perspective on e-Resource Discovery:
Has the Google Factor Changed Publisher Platform Searching Forever? The Serials Librarian 61(2), pp. 253-266. Online at http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0361526X.2011.592115
Discovery tool may not completely replace the online catalog?
Repeat after me…
I am not our users
I am an information professional
My users neither search nor think like me
Unlike Janet Jackson, we’re NOT in control
So we need to stop thinking like we have to be
We don’t need to host locally, really
Traditional in-house implementation
Advantages• Complete
control
Disadvantages• Complete
responsibility
Alternative modelsHosted services
SaaS (Software as
a Service)
Vendor assumes
some responsibilit
y
Vendor assumes primary
responsibility
Bottom line benefits
Higher return on assets Cost savings
Decreased cycle time
Deployment time is decreased
Agility
• Lack of specific skill sets in house
• Internal policies• In house regulatory
compliance
Practical benefits
Has increased usage of
electronic resources
Eliminates major
responsibilities in keeping
systems operational
Can help safeguard applications• Separate location
Fast system restoration• Based on scalable architecture at vendor site
Saves time and effort• Failed hardware• Natural disaster
Advantages for the libraryDemonstrab
ly less expensive to implement
Much faster deployment
Allows us to focus on “value added” servicesSocial
computing benefits
Thanks• Jeff Wisniewski – University of Pittsburgh
▫Facebook.com/wisniewski.jeff▫Twitter.com/jeffwisniewski
• Frank Cervone – Purdue University Calumet▫Facebook.com/fcervone▫Twitter.com/fcervone