NISO Virtual Conference: Web-Scale Discovery Services: Transforming Access to Library Resources
 

NISO Virtual Conference: Web-Scale Discovery Services: Transforming Access to Library Resources

on

  • 4,350 views

Web-scale Discovery Services are becoming an integral part of libraries' information gathering arsenal. These services are able to use a single interface to seamlessly integrate results from a wide ...

Web-scale Discovery Services are becoming an integral part of libraries' information gathering arsenal. These services are able to use a single interface to seamlessly integrate results from a wide range of online sources, emulating the experience patrons have come to expect from Internet search engines. But despite their ability to streamline searching, discovery services provide a wide set of challenges for libraries who implement them. This virtual conference will touch on both the potential of discovery services as well as some of the issues involved.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
4,350
Views on SlideShare
3,410
Embed Views
940

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
26
Comments
0

5 Embeds 940

http://www.niso.org 931
http://www.scoop.it 5
http://translate.googleusercontent.com 2
http://158.35.226.33 1
https://twitter.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dubpics/8685963533/LynnVisitors and Residents (V&R) data agree with other research projects that indicate that some individuals are frustrated with libraries and do not physically visit them because of limited hours, long travel distances, and the time needed to do their research in the library (Connaway 2013; Connaway, Lanclos, and Hood 2013a; Connaway, Lanclos, White, Le Cornu, and Hood 2013; Pullinger 1999; White and Connaway 2011-2012 ). Search engines (in particular, Google) are preferred because they are more convenient and faster—they are always available (De Rosa et al. 2005 ), and also because they are perceived to be reliable, as well as fast. (InfoKit, Convenient Doesn’t Always Mean Simple)Speed and efficiency are relatively conventional ways of defining “convenience,” and they are certainly factors in the decisions people make about where to go and what to use, when seeking information. (InfoKit, Convenient Doesn’t Always Mean Simple)Data from the V&R project reveal that individuals in all educational stages cite the relevance of convenience/ease of use to their decision-making, trumping all other reasons for selecting and using a source (White and Connaway 2011-2012 ; Connaway, White, and Lanclos 2011). (InfoKit, Convenient Doesn’t Always Mean Simple)Familiarity appeared to also be a major component of individuals’ perceptions both of authority and convenience. If an individual had done something/used something before, they were more likely to perceive that thing as being “convenient,” even if it objectively took more steps and/or time than other solutions. While the methods some individuals used to seek and assess information were inelegant, they had been developed at an early age, and had become well worn and comfortable, if not terribly efficient or sophisticated. They continued using these methods in part because they tended to yield effective results. (InfoKit, Convenient Doesn’t Always Mean Simple)Connaway, Lynn Silipigni. 2013. Why the internet is more attractive than the library. The Serials Librarian 64, no. 1-4: 41-56.
  • “And also the fact that Google doesn’t judge you.” Digital Visitors and Residents (UKF3 0:16:35 Male Age 52)“I don’t know, it’s habit. I know what it looks like and how to use it.” Digital Visitors and Residents (UKU9 0:19:06  Male Age 27) (speaking about Google) “I find Google a lot easier than going to the library website because I don’t know, it’s just like sometimes so many journals come up and when you look at the first ten and they just don’t make any sense I, kind of, give up.” Digital Visitors and Residents (USU7 0:34:11 Female Age 19)
  • Image: http://wp.me/pLtlj-fHCovert online study habitsWikipediaDon’t citeWidely usedGuiltStudents & teachers disagreeQuality sourcesThere is a “Learning Black Market”: learners use non-traditional sources but feel they cannot talk about them in an institutional context. Wikipedia usage is an example of this. (White & Connaway, 2011)White, D. S., & Le Cornu, A. (2011). Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday,16(9). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/3171/3049  “I mean if teachers don’t like using Wikipedia they don’t want you to use Wikipedia. A lot of students will still use Wikipedia and then cite another source. As long as it has the same information and it is not word for word or anything they’ll use Wikipedia because it is the easiest thing to go look up on Wikipedia. It will give you a full in-depth detailed thing about the information. Teachers don’t just like it because it’s not the most reliable source since anyone can post something on there even though the site is monitored, it’s because it’s too easy.” (USU3 0:30:59, Male Age 19)  Students’ Perceptions of Teachers’ opinions of Wikipedia:“Avoid it.” (UKS8 0:28:28.3, Female Age 16)  “They say it’s because anyone can make up – I mean, anyone can add information on there but I mean when I’ve actually looked into information it seemed the same as any information I find anywhere else. I mean, it’s not like if you look up fourth of July, it’s not like it gives you like some weird explanation of aliens or something.” (USU7 0:33:14, Female Age 19) Students’ on Wikipedia:“I use it, kind of like, I won't cite it on my papers but I, kind of, use it as a like, as a start off line. I go there and look up the general information, kind of, read through it so I get a general idea what it is. Then I start going through my research.” (USU7 0:33:49, Female Age 19) “Everyone knows that you try not to use Wikipedia as a source because it is a cardinal sin.” (UKU3 0:31:03, Female Age 19)
  • Enhanced discovery sounds almost too good to be true.
  • EDS is not a turn key solution.
  • Lots of documentation is not necessary. Clear documentation is critical.
  • Everyone on the team had real implementation work that required their expertise.
  • Our goal was to make the most effective, reliable system we could. We were not tied to any particular vendor only to succeeding in delivering the best possible implementation.
  • Results lack a link to full text.
  • Clicking on the title link delivers a lot of useful information but it doesn't deliver the content that we believe our patrons want.
  • Delivering a result that is NOT available from our library is like bait and switch. This isn't going to satisy our patrons.
  • Delivering a result that is NOT available from our library is like bait and switch. This isn't going to satisy our patrons.
  • Now links that say “Full Text” take you directly to the full text.
  • One click sends me to a prepopulated ILLiad request form. Ideally one click you have delivered the request. We will get there.
  • One click sends me to a prepopulated ILLiad request form. Ideally one click you have delivered the request. We will get there.
  • One click sends me to a prepopulated ILLiad request form. Ideally one click you have delivered the request. We will get there.
  • EDS limits to scholarly journals but our patrons care about scholarly articles.
  • EDS limits to scholarly journals but our patrons care about scholarly articles.
  • We eliminated MARC data loads because we want to deliver content not links to places to search. We ftp our ebooks directly to EBSCO instead of putting them in the ILS.
  • We eliminated MARC data loads because we want to deliver content not links to places to search. We ftp our ebooks directly to EBSCO instead of putting them in the ILS.
  • We eliminated MARC data loads because we want to deliver content not links to places to search. We ftp our ebooks directly to EBSCO instead of putting them in the ILS.
  • Reference and instruction provided search terms and performed scores of searches stratifying results across topics and content providers.
  • Libraries are not inherently good marketers so we asked EBSCO if we could use their marketing department. EBSCO took images, themes and color guidelines from UNF’s site to create a poster and bookmarks.
  • EBSCO’s powerful API gives us the ability to put the library where the students are and not force to the students to come to us.
  • EBSCO’s powerful API gives us the ability to put the library where the students are and not force to the students to come to us.
  • The collection of everything combined with a powerful API opens the door to fun, educational and rewarding projects.
  • We committed to EDS as the primary search tool and committed to making it as effective as possible.
  • EBSCO’s APIs allow us to be creative in delivering library content.
  • When NISO asked if I would speak about Web Scale Discovery maintenance, I hesitated with serious doubts. UCF's WSD has had its share of problems and hiccups. Perhaps those very problems makes me well prepared to tell you about maintenance, both expected and unexpected, that any library with a WSD service may face. I hope I can give you some insight to help avoid some problems we've experienced.I chose the title largely on a whim, but partially to invoke Zen calm and the pursuit of quality.Prisig’s famous novel weaves a philosophical exploration of quality into a narrative about a motorcycle trip with his son and a friend, with occasional illustrative expositions into motorcycle maintenance. My talk will be light on philosophy, and takes a decidedly pragmatic approach to achieving quality WSD services. I’ll recount a few UCF’s experiences in our on-going journey with WSD maintenance, some problems we’ve faced.
  • UCF's soft launch was June 2012In the 1.5 years since our launch we’ve experienced laborious climbs, peaks and vistas, smooth rides, and break-downs.The scenery has changed often.Some big changesSome had more impact on our WSD than others.Even if implementation is flawless, it will need maintenance just to keep up with constant changes in your setting.Implemented shared bib Broke the real time holdings call. We were seeing the call number, location, status, and 856 links for USF and other schools.Migrated to a new server for EZproxy Broke links everywhere. Our EBL catalog linksMigrated to the newest version of SFX Nothing broke!! Thank you FLVC! But, the change did mean a new look in the middle of the semester. LinkSource and AtoZBoth are linked to our EBSCOnet subscriptions. Great, because EBSCO handles over 90% of our e-journals. EBSCO automatically activates those subscriptions so users see them in our WSD, OneSerach.Terrible, when package renewals are delayed and thousands journals are set to no access (or greatly restricted holdings).Rolled out new EDS Discovery Layer Nothing broke!! Thank you EBSCOhost!! However, the change did catch the eye of some librarians.New server= new domain name = updating links in the WSD
  • UCF’s implementation process revolved around 4 questionnaires:CatalogRepositoriesContentBranding
  • At the very start, think of how you will maintain the WSDAny choice you make in implementation you will need revisit and refresh throughout the existence of your WSD
  • Discovery LayerLayout, labels and link texts, colors, branding, and widgets may all need to be revisited and updated, especially when new functionality is made available, or when a new version of the WSD is rolled out.Central IndexAs new content providers become available you will need to decide which to add to your implementation. Some may not be a good fit. Align the choices with your user needs and the philosophy/approach you took during implementationMARC loadYou will need to regularly sync your ILS records with your WSD.UCF loads the full catalog weekly, with nightly updates.The weekly full loads make sure that all records deleted from the ILS are removed from the WSD index. OAI harvesting done periodically, as well.Your selections for content providers / data sourcesConnections and linkingEmbedded search formsGuest access controls Links to external sites, i.e. OpenURL, 856, Custom connectionsReal time calls for item status, etc.
  • Even if you don’t plan to be hands on, find out what admin options you have Find out what you can change, what your vendor contact can change, and how to ask for those changesEBSCOadmin has do-it-yourself tools for most changeable aspects of the WSD, which I prefer.MARC, OAI, and ILS calls are *not* in the admin for EBSCO
  • Vendor: Find out who to contact if you need to make changes to any of the major elements of your WSD implementationLocal: Identify the people who will do regular maintenance – MARC exports, OpenURL exports, OAI, etc.
  • I have contacts here in the UCF libraryConsortial contacts, especially for anything to do with MARC extracts, loads, and real time item status calls.Notice the bottom row.
  • During implementation we had one contact, but once we were “finished” I just had the general tech support email, which put me in contact with a different person each time. I complained loudly.Not efficientSpent a lot of time establishing my tech credentials, giving out our Proxy details, and getting on the same pageOften explained the same problem to multiple support people
  • In addition to staying in contact with your rep, sign up for the discussion list, find any wiki or other pages.Some services may have user group meeting.
  • In the year and a half since we soft launched, we’ve faced many many problems and changes.Some problems arise form our local choices and misunderstandings about how EDS will work.Some result from our particularly complex shared ILS and shared bib situation, which has gone through 2 major changes during the year and a half.Some were caused by changes to UCF systems or services that EDS relies on or connects toSome were caused by changes made by EBSCO as new features and versions were rolled outSome were caused by user error and just general need for maintenance of all our access support and enhancement services
  • All the WSD release enhancementsNew features can be enabledNew uses for existing features can be exploitedTakes timeIf you build it, you have to maintain it.
  • Collections and contentFunctionalityOften front and center on the home page
  • Everything is connected, so AP041026015390
  • Publishers must decide what content is appropriate and at what level. respect the rights of the publisher and be sensitive to their business needs. Trust by the information provider that the information indexed is correct and updated. Sharing of information on the use of the indexed content. Show users only what they are allowed to see. Authority – indicate the source of the record. 3. Fair linking by discovery providers – typically in the hands of the library via OpenURL link resolvers.4. How can publishers assess use of their content in Discovery ServicesCmplexity and uncertainty pose barriers to participation
  • Currently working OK but still governed by private agreements between discovery service provider and content providers and relies on a wide range of formats and data exchange processes; Complexity and uncertainty pose barriers to participation.

NISO Virtual Conference: Web-Scale Discovery Services: Transforming Access to Library Resources NISO Virtual Conference: Web-Scale Discovery Services: Transforming Access to Library Resources Presentation Transcript

  • http://www.niso.org/news/events/2013/virtual/discovery NISO Virtual Conference: Web-Scale Discovery Services: Transforming Access to Library Resources November 20, 2013 Speakers: Lorcan Dempsey, Amy Hoseth, Cody Hanson, Michael Kucsak, Athena Hoeppner, Matthew Reidsma, Marshall Breeding
  • NISO Virtual Conference: Web-Scale Discovery Services: Transforming Access to Library Resources Agenda 11:00 a.m. – 11:10 a.m. – Introduction Todd Carpenter, Executive Director, NISO 11:10 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. – Selecting a Web-scale Discovery Service: Evaluating the Options Amy Hoseth, Coordinator for Onsite Services, Colorado State University Libraries **12:00 p.m. – 12:45 p.m. – Keynote: Library Discovery: Past, Present and Some Futures Lorcan Dempsey, Vice President, OCLC Research and Chief Strategist ** Due to technical difficulties, the Keynote appears second in the order of panelists. 12:45 p.m. – 1:30 p.m. – Lunch Break 1:30 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. – Why Web-scale Discovery Means the End of Build vs. Buy Cody Hanson, Acting Director, Web Development, University of Minnesota University Libraries 2:00 p.m. – 2:30 p.m. – Implementation: Delivering the Goods Michael Kucsak, Director of Library Systems and Technology, University of North Florida 2:30 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. – Zen and the Art of Discovery Maintenance Athena Hoeppner, Electronic Resources Librarian, University of Central Florida Libraries 3:00 p.m. – 3:15 p.m. – Afternoon Break 3:15 p.m. – 3:45 p.m. – The Library with a Thousand Databases: Web Scale Discovery and The Hero's Journey Matthew Reidsma, Web Services Librarian, Grand Valley State University Libraries 3:45 p.m. – 4:15 p.m. – Update on the NISO Open Discovery Initiative Marshall Breeding, Independent Consultant and co-chair, NISO Open Discovery Initiative 4:15 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. – Conference Roundtable Presenters return for a Q&A discussion lead by Todd Carpenter, Executive Director, NISO
  • Selecting a Web-scale Discovery Service: Evaluating the Options Amy Hoseth Colorado State University Libraries November 20, 2013
  • About Colorado State University • • • • Land-grant institution located in Fort Collins, Colorado Approximately 26,000 students, including 22,000 undergraduate and 4,000 graduate students The CSU Libraries includes Morgan Library on the main campus, and a small branch library on the veterinary campus Carnegie Research University; ARL library
  • Web-scale research at CSUL • • Summer 2009: Library / IT Task Force makes recommendations Fall 2009: Library dean convenes Discovery Tools Committee • • Six members represent key library departments: Tech services, metadata, collections and contracts, college liaisons, and access services Committee charge: Explore Web-scale discovery tools currently available, and recommend plan and budget for moving forward
  • Review process • Four products were evaluated: • EBSCO Discovery Service (EDS) • Primo Central (Ex Libris) • Summon (Serials Solutions) • WorldCat Local
  • Research Process • • • • RFIs issued to vendors Vendor presentations at CSU Other research: conferences, site visits, phone calls Six month process, start to finish
  • Comparing products • Identifying key criteria for evaluation was first challenge • • • • Useful, synonymous information needed for each product Committee developed a “comparison matrix” to gather, report, and compare information on each product Matrix included 40+ points of comparison Ultimately, the matrix could be distilled into five key criteria
  • Five key criteria 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Overall goal/purpose for acquiring a discovery tool Cost Coverage/content Usability Technology issues
  • 1. Goal/Purpose • • • • What will the Web-scale tool allow users to accomplish? What is the purpose of this tool for your library? How will it work with existing resources? Who are your users, and what kind of tool do they need?
  • 2. Cost • • • • What are the costs associated with each product? How will the implementation of this tool affect other subscriptions? Is consortium purchase/pricing an option? Costs for local staffing and support
  • 3. Coverage/content • • • What existing resources are covered by the new tool? How does it manage handoffs to native databases and resources? What resources are not indexed or included, and how will users access them?
  • 4. Usability • • • Need to conduct both formal and informal testing “Test drive” implementations as much as possible Key elements to consider include: • • • • • User interface Faceting Relevancy ranking Search options Customization options
  • 5. Technology issues • • • • How much local support is required for the Web-scale tool to run smoothly? How well does it integrate with existing library applications? Is the API customizable? Is it robust? Is the Web-scale discovery tool mobile-friendly? Does it effectively serve users with disabilities?
  • Other practical recommendations • • • Involve individuals from across the library in your overall analysis Conduct a thorough, methodical review of each product Contact institutions that are already using these products for their advice and feedback
  • Outcome at CSU • • Final report (June 2010) identified one web-scale tool as the product most likely to meet our needs Ultimately, no purchase was made • • • • Concerns about cost Questions about integration of tool with existing resources Products still new, maturing CSUL is now convening another committee to revisit the possibility of purchasing a Web-scale discovery tool
  • Questions? Amy Hoseth Coordinator for Onsite Services Colorado State University Libraries 970-491-4326 amy.hoseth@colostate.edu
  • Library discovery: past, present and some futures @LorcanD Lorcan Dempsey 20 November 2013 NISO Virtual Conference: Web-Scale Discovery Services: Transforming Access to Library Resources
  • Scope
  • Pretty general 20
  • Past: Present: Future: Some drivers Some responses Some directions 21
  • Drivers 1 The user environment The example of visitors and residents Lynn Silipigni Connaway, David White, Donna Lanclos, and Erin Hood. 2013. Meeting the Needs of Digital Visitors and Residents: Developing Engagement with Institutional Services Educause Annual Conference, 15-18 October 2013, Anaheim, California (USA).http://www.oclc.org/content/dam/research/activities/vandr/presentations/meetingthe-needs-of-digital-visitors-educause-2013.pptx Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Donna Lanclos, and Erin Hood. 2013. "I Find Google a Lot Easier Than Going To the Library Website." Imagine Ways to Innovate and Inspire Students to Use the Academic Library. ACRL 2013: Imagine, Innovate, Inspire, 10-13 April 2013, Indianapolis, Indiana (USA).http://www.oclc.org/content/dam/research/activities/vandr/presentations/acrl-vandr2013.pptx 22
  • “It’s convenience. It’s the immediacy of it.” (UKF3, Experiencing, Male, Age 52, Artist & Technical Support) Convenient Doesn’t Always Mean Simple Image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dubpics/8685963533/
  • “...Google doesn’t judge you.” (UKF3, Male, Age 52) Image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/cubmundo/6184306158/
  • “It’s like a taboo I guess with all teachers, they just“I just type itknow,Google they see what all say – you into when and explain the paper comes up.” (UKS2) they always say, “Don’t use Wikipedia.” (USU7, Female, Age 19) Learning Black Market Image: http://wp.me/pLtlj-fH
  • Then: Resources were scarce and time was abundant Now: Resources are abundant and time is scarce Convenience is an important value. 26
  • Drivers 2: The service environment “How can building a website be so difficult?” 27
  • Until recently ….. … library websites were providing a very thin layer of integration over two sets of heterogeneous resources, …. …which map more to legacy technical and business issues than to user behaviours. 28
  • 1. Systems 2. Databases Catalog/ILS A-Z lists Metasearch Legacy database boundaries map more to historically evolved publisher configurations and business decisions than to user needs or behaviors. Resolver Repository 29
  • Full text publishers A&I publishers Aggregators Discovery layer providers 30
  • Driver 3: The network environment Stuck in the middle 31
  • Webscale: operating at the scale of the web. We have seen many service providers emerge in recent years which operate at webscale. Facebook, Amazon, Expedia, Etsy. They concentrate capacity in platforms whose benefits can be broadly shared. The platform supports the aggregation of data and infrastructure at scale. Additionally, many of these services build strong communities - networks of participants who communicate, share, or trade on the platform.
  • Webscale and personal go together.
  • Webscale and personal go together. The institution is the squeezed middle?
  • Researchers prefer to adopt open source and social media technologies that are available in the public domain rather than institutional license-based applications ….. First the social media technologies facilitate networking and community building. Second, researchers prefer to use technologies that will enable them access to resources and their own materials beyond their institution-based PhD research. e.g. Mendeley, Zotero, Endnote
  • Then: users built their workflow around the library. Now: the library must build its services around its users workflow. 38
  • Users value convenience. Library destinations fragmented and demand too much work (cognitive and mechanical). The institution is being squeezed between the webscale and the personal. Have to get into workflows. 39
  • Discovery layer Users value convenience. Library destinations fragmented and demand too much work (cognitive and mechanical). The institution is being squeezed between the webscale and the personal. Have to get into workflows. The challenge of discoverability 40
  • Some responses 41
  • Some responses 1. Systems integration – unified discovery and unified backoffice workflows 2. Website integration – an integrated experience 3. Make discovery more like web search 4. Discoverability – a decentered network presence 42
  • 1. Systems integration – unified discovery and unified backoffice workflows 2. Website integration – an integrated experience 3. Make discovery more like web search 4. Discoverability – a decentered network presence 43
  • Worldshare MS ALMA Sierra Intota Kuali Ole
  • Worldcat Local Worldshare MS Primo ALMA EDS Sierra Summon Intota Kuali Ole
  • (Partial) systems integration Cloud-based. Workflow integration across purchased, licensed, digital? Central index. Best-of-breed vs Trend to single supplier ecosystems?
  • US Academic Libraries N = 881 Based on data from Marshall Breeding’s Lib-Web-Cats technology profiles, August 2013. Created by Constance Malpas, OCLC Research, using the Sankey template from Bruce McPherson.
  • 1. Systems integration – unified discovery and unified backoffice workflows 2. Website integration – an integrated experience 3. Make discovery more like web search 4. Discoverability – a decentered network presence 48
  • Some examples .. • Content management systems • Resource guides • Locally controlled search container – VuFind – Blacklight • Discovery systems – A unified view – Move work from user to system 49
  • 1. Systems integration – unified discovery and unified backoffice workflows 2. Website integration – an integrated experience 3. Make discovery more like web search 4. Discoverability – a decentered network presence 50
  • “Simple” search box to find everything
  • “Simple” search box Refine results 52
  • “Simple” search box Refine results A focus on fulfilment … 53
  • 1. Systems integration – unified discovery and unified backoffice workflows 2. Website integration – an integrated experience 3. Make discovery more like web search 4. Discoverability – a decentered network presence 54
  • Network Presence John Doe University Library Website Decoupled Communication John Doe University Library External Syndication Cloud Sourced
  • Flickr Decoupled Communication Blogs Facebook Twitter Google Youtube Discovery Knowledgebase Libguides Cloud Sourced Resolver
  • WorldCat ArchivesGrid Summon Metadata Scirus Blogs Suncat Catalogue RSS Mobilepp Ethos Proxy Toolbar OAI-PMH (Dspace) Linked Data (Catalog) Dspace Discovery Services Proxy Widgets Library APIs Z39.50 External Syndication Data Jorum Digital Archive Europeana
  • Creating conversations around collections: Sleevefacing at Bowling Green State Univ http://blogs.bgsu.edu/librarysleevefacing/2012/08/15/bookends/
  • „Discoverability‟ needs to be managed in parallel with „discovery‟ … Get into research and learning workflows … 60
  • Directions: some futures 61
  • Full library discovery Fulfillment at the point of need Ranking, relating, recommending Outside-in and inside-out From strings to things 62
  • Full library discovery
  • Bento Box? Ranking? Collections Resource Guid Website People Events … Image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/4563photo/3889124590/sizes/l/in/photostream/ 65
  • Ranking, relating, recommending Specialising to institution/person 66
  • Examples • Analytics – Improve user experience – Improve management decisions • Recommendations • Reading lists/course reserves • Specialise to courses 67
  • Fulfillment at the point of need … Buy, borrow, connect, … Demand driven acquisition … 68
  • 69
  • Outside-in vs inside-out
  • Outside in Bought, licensed Discovery layer Aim: to discover, to fulfill Inside out Institutional assets: special collections, research and learning materials (IR), institutional records, … Aim: to *have* discovered … discoverability
  • From strings to things
  • The social graph
  • Three benefits acc to Google: 1.Find the right thing 2.Get the best summary 3.Go deeper and broader
  • Examples • Include „cards‟ about: – People – Works – Institutions • Linked data backbones? • VIAF 76
  • Discoverability Discovery Image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/martindo/5975419889/ 77
  • Thank you @LorcanD ©2013 OCLC. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Suggested attribution: “This work uses content from [presentation title] © OCLC, used under a Creative Commons Attribution license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/”
  • Delivering the Goods Implementing Web Scale Michael Kucsak Director of Library Systems and Technology University of North Florida NISO Virtual Conference November 20, 2013
  • Promises • Google-like searching • ~98.5% coverage of library content • One click access to full text content • Everything is better with <insert product here>!!!
  • 3 Keys to a Successful Implementation 1. Support from management 2. Clearly defined goals 3. Diverse implementation team
  • Support from Management “We will be using the EDS first and foremost when we search; we will be teaching it first in classes; we will be using it first in one on one instructions; and we will be promoting it at the new service desk. And, we will keep very good statistics on all facets of the pilot.” An email to all library faculty from the Associate Dean of the Library
  • Clearly Defined Goals 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Primary search tool by September 30, 2011 Include all physical and covered eResources Seamless integration with our web site and EZProxy Successful link to full text ≥90% Staff trained Problem reporting process
  • Diverse Implementation Team • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Acquisitions Cataloging Instruction Reference Library Systems Information Technology Florida Center for Library Automation EBSCO Support
  • Changes to Make it Work • Dropped Serials Solutions 360 for EBSCO’s LinkSource and A-Z – Reduce finger pointing • Dropped ProQuest for EBSCO Databases – Increase reliability of full-text links
  • Initial Challenges
  • Initial Challenges
  • Initial Challenges
  • Simple Design Philosophy Connect our patrons to the knowledge they seek with as little effort on their part as possible
  • Solutions: Always Provide a link
  • Solutions: Always provide an option
  • Solutions: Always provide an option
  • Solutions: Always provide an option
  • Solution: Integrate core tools
  • Solution: Integrate core tools
  • Web Scale vs ILS 1. 2. Eliminate MARC serial data loads ILS access through a widget in the EDS results page (auto-populated)
  • Web Scale vs ILS 1. 2. 3. Eliminate MARC serial data loads ILS access through a widget in the EDS results page (auto-populated) Direct upload of e-content into EDS NOT ILS
  • Web Scale vs ILS 1. 2. 3. 4. Eliminate MARC serial data loads ILS access through a widget in the EDS results page (auto-populated) Direct upload of e-content into EDS NOT ILS EDS as primary search tool on library home page
  • Testing 1. 2. 3. 4. Inspected thousands of search results Analyzed individual content provider reliability Examined link resolver performance Confirmed remote access performance Achieved 90% reliability!
  • Training 1. 2. 3. EBSCO provided onsite training Library Systems/Instruction trained staff about the mechanics Library Instruction trained librarians, students and faculty on how to use the tool
  • Marketing
  • Blackboard Integration Blackboard Home Screen
  • Blackboard Integration
  • Multi-Touch Surface
  • Summary • • • • • • Links to full text Auto-populate ILLiad Ulrichs integration Union catalog widget Guest default/JIT EZProxy Available in the Library by default • Commitment to EDS • • • • • EBSCO link resolver/A-Z EBSCO content EBSCO marketing Eliminated MARC loads Pushed reliable vendors to the top • Made vendors work for their $$$
  • Fruits of our Labor • 107% increase full text downloads • >40% reduction in ILL • Collaborated with CS student senior projects • Opportunities to build partnerships • EBSCO Success story • Jacksonville BizJournal Tech Innovation Award
  • Thank you Questions? Michael Kucsak Director of Library Systems and Technology University of North Florida NISO Virtual Conference November 20, 2013
  • Zen and the Art of WSD Maintenance Web-Scale Discovery Services: Transforming Access to Library Resources NISO Virtual Conference Athena Hoeppner 20 November 2013
  • UCF’s Web Scale Discovery Journey
  • Soft launch was June 2012 • • • • • • • • Merged bib records from 11 libraries Added new content providers to the central index Implemented LinkSource and AtoZ Migrated EZproxy to a new server Upgraded to SFX v4 on a new server Moved digital collections to a new server Rolled onto the newest version of EDS Created API to search and embed FT links in Canvas course system
  • Implementation Questionnaires
  • Some choices we live not only once but a thousand times over, remembering them for the rest of our lives. -Richard Bach
  • Expected Maintenance • • • • • • • • • Branding Central Index Contents MARC loads OAI loads ILS integration OpenURL and Links Search forms APIs Any Customizations
  • Tip: Look Under the Hood • • • • • Searching Databases Viewing Results Linking Branding
  • Maintenance Team
  • Cataloging Systems Index Content Local • Kim • Joel • Bobby • Subject librarians FLVC • Gerald • Jean • Ned • Mark • Claire • Brian • Brian EBSCO • Brian
  • Technical Support Greeting Line • • • • • • • • • • • • Brian Jessica Elan Joseph Tyler Ellini Thomas Monica Susan Sherry Jillian Heather
  • Staying Informed Discussion List • • • • New content New features Problem sharing Grousing Wiki • • • • Content details Partners spreadsheet Technical specs Innovative applications Support Pages • FAQs • Common approaches
  • Still Calm?
  • Expect Problems
  • 1.5 Year’s Worth of Problems • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Embedded search form asking for login Shows MARC from other libraries Prefer different relevancy rankings English limiter eliminates results Auto-enabling new content providers Duplicate records showing Dedupping algorithm changes hit count Multiple full text/content links showing Full text links showing from 500 fields Bad data from content providers Insufficient data makes bad OpenURL Malformed DOIs from content providers Slow response time Duplicate/multiple login prompts • 50+ authors showing in the brief view • Full text HTML showing in the brief view • Punctuation and stop words causing • • • • searches to fail EBSCOnet renewals turned off full text in AtoZ and LinkSource. Sub-locations not showing for catalog items Myriad cookies, pop-up, browser and end-user setting problems Myriad article access problems - EZproxy dropped, host config problem, dropped from aggregator, incorrect holdings threshold set, etc.
  • KEEP CALM AND INVESTIGATE
  • KEEP CALM AND REPLICATE
  • KEEP CALM AND COMMUNICATE
  • KEEP CALM AND MITIGATE
  • KEEP CALM AND ALLEVIATE
  • Problem Response • Provide problem-report forms and options • Enlist a core team to respond and investigate • Replicate reported problems • Communicate the problem in detail to the vendor • Change the system to mitigate unresolvable problems • Fix resolvable problems
  • Example Maintenance and Problem Response • Purchased 12 Alexander Street Press video collections. Woot! • Checked EBSCOadmin for option to turn on indexing. It’s possible, BUT… • Checked options for linking to videos • Discussed options with Brian at EBSCO • Loaded ASP MARC into the catalog (thanks, Kim!) • Nightly update loaded the new MARC into our EDS • Checked 856s links in EDS – PROBLEM!
  • Say Old Man, Do You Play the Fiddle?
  • Say Old Man, Do You Play the Fiddle? • Checked representation in local view of catalog • Captured images of the screen in EDS • Reported problem to Kim, Gerald, Brian, with permalink and images • Brian passed the problem to a catalog specialist • Kim explained the 856 subfields involved • Gerald fixed the export and EBSCO fixed the processing It’s like music to my ears!
  • Beyond Maintenance  Placards  Profiles for subjects and content types  Discipline limitors  Specialized widgets for subjects and content types  Revamp header and footer  Load LibGuides as a content source  Shibboleth  More APIs
  • WSD Truisms
  • Everything is More Visible
  • Flaws are Magnified
  • Everything is Connected
  • Things Can Get Tangled
  • Tip: Cultivate a Team
  • Tip: Create a Sandbox
  • Tip: Seek Simplicity
  • Finis. Web-Scale Discovery Services: Transforming Access to Library Resources NISO Virtual Conference 20 November 2013 Athena Hoeppner athean@ucf.edu @cybrgrl
  • NISO Virtual Conference: Web-Scale Discovery Services: Transforming Access to Library Resources Update on the NISO Open Discovery Initiative Marshall Breeding http://www.librarytechnology.org/ http://twitter.com/mbreeding November 20, 2013 142
  • Index-based Discovery (2009- present) Search Results Usagegenerated Data Customer Profile Digital Collections Consolidated Index Search: ILS Data Web Site Content Institutional Repositorie s Aggregated Content packages … Open Access E-Journals Reference Sources Pre-built harvesting and indexing
  • Bento Box Discovery Model ILS Data VuFind / Blacklight Search Results Web Site Content Digital Collections Institutional Repositories Consolidated Index Search: Aggregated Content packages Open Access E-Journals Central index & search functionality
  • Web-scale search problem ILS Data Digital Collections Search Results Consolidated Index Search: Web Site Content Institutional Repositorie s Aggregated Content packages … E-Journals Problem in how to deal with resources not provided to ingest into consolidated index ?? ? Pre-built harvesting and Non indexing Participating Content Sources
  • Discovery Concerns • Important space for libraries and publishers • Discovery brings value to library collections • Discovery brings uncertainty to publishers • Uneven participation diminishes impact • Ecosystem dominated by private agreements • Complexity and uncertainty poses barriers for participation 146
  • Heterogeneous Representations • Content objects represented by – MARC Records for books and journal titles – Citation data for articles – Full text for articles – Full text for books – Abstracts and Indexing products – Other metadata or enrichment
  • Discovery index issues • Citations or structured metadata provide key data to power search & retrieval and faceted navigation • Indexing full-text of content amplifies access • Important to understand what is indexed – Currency, dates covered, full-text or citation – Many other factors 148
  • Library Perspective • Strategic investments in subscriptions • Strategic investments in Discovery Solutions to provide access to their collections • Expect comprehensive representation of resources in discovery indexes – Problem with access to resources not represented in index – Encourage all publishers to participate and to lower thresholds of technical involvement and clarify the business rules associated with involvement • Need to be able to evaluate the coverage and performance of competing index-based discovery products
  • Collection Coverage? • To work effectively, discovery services need to cover comprehensively the body of content represented in library collections • Why do some content providers not participate? • How are A&I resources represented? • Is content indexed at the citation or full-text level? • What are the restrictions for non-authenticated users? • How can libraries understand the differences in coverage among competing services?
  • Evaluating the Coverage of Index-based Discovery Services • Intense competition: how well the index covers the body of scholarly content stands as a key differentiator • Difficult to evaluate based on numbers of items indexed alone. • Important to ascertain how your library‟s content packages are represented by the discovery service. • Important to know what items are indexed by citation and which are full text
  • Some Key Areas for Publishers 1. Expose content appropriately 2. Trust that access to material will be controlled consistent with subscription terms 3. “Fair” Linking 4. Materials not disadvantaged or underrepresented in library discovery implementations 5. Usage reporting
  • ODI context Facilitate a healthy ecosystem among discovery service providers, libraries and content providers
  • ODI Pre-History • June 26, 2011: Exploratory meeting @ ALA Annual • July 2011: NISO expresses interest • Aug 7, 2011: Proposal drafted by participants submitted to NISO • Aug 2011: Proposal accepted by D2D • Vote of approval by NISO membership • Oct 2011: ODI launched • Feb 2012: ODI Workgroup Formed 154
  • Organization • Reports in NISO through Document to Delivery topic committee (D2D) • Staff support from NISO through Nettie Lagace • Co-Chairs – Jenny Walker (Ex Libris) – Marshall Breeding (Library Consultant) • D2D Observers: Jeff Penka (OCLC) Lucy Harrison (CCLA) 155
  • ODI Timeline Milestone Target Date Appointment of working group Dec 2011 Approval of charge and initial work plan Mar 2012 Agreement on process and tools Jun 2012 Completion of information gathering Jan 2013 Completion of initial draft Jun 2013 Completion of final draft Sep 2013 Public Review Period commences Sep 2013 Status 156
  • Balance of Constituents Libraries Marshall Breeding, Vanderbilt University Jamene Brooks-Kieffer, Kansas State University Laura Morse, Harvard University Ken Varnum, University of Michigan Sara Brownmiller, University of Oregon Lucy Harrison, College Center for Library Automation (D2D liaison/observer) Michele Newberry Publishers Lettie Conrad, SAGE Publications Roger Schonfeld, ITHAKA/JSTOR/Portico Jeff Lang, Thomson Reuters Linda Beebe, American Psychological Assoc Aaron Wood, Alexander Street Press Service Providers Jenny Walker, Ex Libris Group John Law, Serials Solutions Michael Gorrell, EBSCO Information Services David Lindahl, University of Rochester (XC) Jeff Penka, OCLC (D2D liaison/observer) 157
  • ODI Project Goals: • Identify … needs and requirements of the three stakeholder groups in this area of work. • Create recommendations and tools to streamline the process by which information providers, discovery service providers, and librarians work together to better serve libraries and their users. • Provide effective means for librarians to assess the level of participation by information providers in discovery services, to evaluate the breadth and depth of content indexed and the degree to which this content is made available to the user.
  • Subgroups for Info Gathering • Level of Indexing + Communication of Library Rights • Technical formats • Usage Statistics • Fair Linking 159
  • Specific deliverables • Standard vocabulary • NISO Recommended Practice: – Data format & transfer – Communicating content rights – Levels of indexing, content availability – Linking to content – Usage statistics – Evaluate compliance • Inform and Promote Adoption 160
  • ODI Stakeholder Survey • Collected data from Sept 11 thru Oct 4, 2012 • Each subgroup developed questions pertinent to it area of concern 161
  • Survey Responses • • • • 782 Librarians 74 Publishers 15 Discovery Services 871 Total 162
  • Selected results • Libraries: do you use a discovery service? – Yes: 74%, Planning to soon: 17%, No: 5%, Don‟t know: 4% • Smallest discoverable unit: – Component title: 9%, Article: 25%, Collective work record: 11%, All the above: 50% • Linking from A&I entry: 75 prefer linking to full text on original publisher‟s server 163
  • Librarian’s preferred Use statistics • Total Number of Searches • List of search query terms • Referring URLs 164
  • Content providers (74) • Contribute data: Yes-All: 44%, Some: 48%, No: 8% – Current data: 12%, Current + back files: 85 • Barriers to contributing: – IP concerns, technology, staff resources • Challenges in delivery: – Complicated formats: 15%, transmission of data: 18, allocation of personnel: 23%, can‟t automate: 12%, None: 20% 165
  • Issues surrounding A&I resources • Concern that A&I resources not be freely available to non authenticated users and only for subscribing institutions • How to “credit” A&I data that contributes to search results – Example: Index entry produced by enhancing full-text with A&I data • Preservation of the value added by A&I in the discovery ecosystem 166
  • ODO Survey Report • Issued January 2013 • NOT the final report for ODI • Survey findings, especially for those that responded to survey • One source of input for the ODI final report of findings and recommended practices 167
  • ODI Final Report • Issued for public Comment • Comment period closed November 18, 2013 168
  • Report Topics • Introduction – In scope / out of scope – Terms and definitions • Evolution of Discovery – Related initiatives • Recommendations 169
  • General Recommendations • Create oversight group • Actions for content providers and discovery service creators to assert conformance 170
  • Recommendations for Content Providers • Content providers should make items available to discovery service providers. – Basic: Citations: specific metadata elements – Enhanced: additional metadata + Full-text • Provide to Libraries: disclosure of participation in discovery services 171
  • Recommendations for Discovery Service Creators • Disclosure of content indexed – Specific metadata fields • Fair / non-biased linking – Mechanisms for libraries to choose versions preferred for linking – Annual statement regarding neutrality of linking or relevance – Provide links to A&I services when applicable • Usage statistics to Publishers – Searches 172
  • Report Highlights • What is in and out of Scope – Focus on content available to be indexed – Quantity and form of content (citations / fulltext) – Metadata fields contributed – Role of A&I products – Controlled Vocabularies • Out of Scope – Relevancy algorithms – User Interface issues 173
  • Technical recommendations • Transfer of data from content providers to discovery service creators – Make use of existing standards and protocols when possible 174
  • Current work Next Steps • Review comments received – Chairs + Workgroup members – Make any needed revisions – Submit for final approval by NISO D2D 175
  • Connect with ODI • ODI Project website: http://www.niso.org/workrooms/odi/ • Interest group mailing list: http://www.niso.org/lists/opendiscovery/ • Email ODI: odi@niso.org 176
  • NISO Virtual Conference Web-Scale Discovery Services: Transforming Access to Library Resources Questions? All questions will be posted with presenter answers on the NISO website following the webinar: http://www.niso.org/news/events/2013/virtual/discovery NISO Virtual Conference • November 20, 2013
  • THANK YOU Thank you for joining us today. Please take a moment to fill out the brief online survey. We look forward to hearing from you!