Driving academic adoption

315 views
256 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
315
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • 1-2-1 training more important in Bookmark Button olden days
  • Not mandatory – minimum specs say only A resource list + links to the library
  • Had to raid when no mod lead appointed at 11 th hour
  • 2012 Programme Reviews made this worse
  • Driving academic adoption

    1. 1. Enhancing life-long learning, teaching and research throughinformation resources and services 1 7 February 2013
    2. 2. Driving Academic Adoption at NTUIan Rogers, Liaison Librarian 2 7 February 2013
    3. 3. Email of 19th October 2012 reporting 100% take upof Aspire use at NTU RLMS Stats as of 11am Friday 19th October 2012 17 new Learning Rooms were added to the statistics this week from the Change Reports School List not Populated Unpopulated % needed A&D 446 158 0 100 AAH 905 303 0 100 ArchDBE 397 260 0 100 ARES 311 252 0 100 EDU 775 158 0 100 Graduate 62 7 0 100 School NBS 1135 316 0 100 NLS 416 131 0 100 SOC 561 323 0 100 SST 746 408 0 100 Others 32 1 0 100 Total 5786 2317 0 100 37 February 2013
    4. 4. Accompanying Chart 47 February 2013
    5. 5. Brief Background• NTU using Aspire since Summer 2010• Tied in tightly with VLE Structure and Acquisitions processes• Rolled out by Academic Liaison Team of 10 Liaison Librarians• Target of 2000+ Aspire Lists to be created by the Academic Staff• Some old-style reading lists copied to Aspire• Full scale roll out – no pilots• Widget linking to Aspire list prominently displayed in all modules of study on the VLE 57 February 2013
    6. 6. An NTU VLE “Learning Room” 67 February 2013
    7. 7. Methods of Engagement• Demonstrations of the system to strategically important groups• University-wide emails• Bespoke training sessions for Schools• General training sessions• Offers of one-to-one training at the lecturer’s desk• Reports on progress of School/Programme at Programme and School level committees 77 February 2013
    8. 8. Selling the system: Pros• GENERAL• Advantages of the system for the students• Accuracy of the lists produced by bookmarking• NTU SPECIFIC:• Sufficient books will be bought for Library• Articles and Chapters will be digitised• Links will be checked and made robust• Senior University Management support• The shame of having an empty widget?• Student focus groups 87 February 2013
    9. 9. Selling the system: Cons• Some academics struggled with the software• Some academics struggled with the concept of the toolbar button (or sometimes their computers did)• Lack of time to devote to the process• Happy with reading list in a different format• Inability to replicate specific referencing systems• Some lecturers not happy about open access to lists from outside the University 97 February 2013
    10. 10. Bookmarking from Primo 107 February 2013
    11. 11. 100% Target• After two years, take up plateaued at c. 70% of modules• University demanded 100% take up by October 2012• Library responsible for achieving 100% Target• “Non-populaters” allowed to email or post their old-style reading lists to Library to be converted into Aspire• Possibility of empty lists having to be filled by raiding VLE for indicative reading lists, which would then be converted to Aspire Lists 117 February 2013
    12. 12. Result• 100% achieved by October 19th 2012• However, statistics have to be collected on an on-going basis to continue to prove 100% take up• New modules appearing each week on VLE = new empty Aspire Lists = less than 100% take up!• More granular statistics required on modules labelled as “Resource Lists not Required” 127 February 2013
    13. 13. Quality of Lists• Some lists of questionable quality• How is “List Quality” measured – very different opinions• Currency, Length, Onlineness, Grouping, Ease of Obtaining Materials, Annotation (by staff and students), etc.• A high quality list is one that is “used and useful”• Dashboard helps us to see usage• More student focus groups• Any other suggestions? 137 February 2013
    14. 14. Why this is important to us?• Increasingly Talis Aspire lists shape the collection• Less emphasis on collection building by subject librarians• Less emphasis on Patron Driven Acquisition?• High quality lists = high quality collection = satisfied students (or am I just saying that…)• A list that satisfies the student = a high quality list 147 February 2013

    ×