Griffith University
Talis Aspire pilot
Q4 2013 – Feb 2014

Presenters: Philip Testa, Susan Tegg, Camille Furniss
Sample screen shot, displaying web branding
Pilot overview

§ Why we decided to trial Talis Aspire
»
»
»
»

Standardise and improve access to course reading lists
To ...
Digitised Content (TADC) module

§ Griffith one of two testing partners in Australia
§ Current operational processes vs TA...
Reading Lists module

§ The findings:
+ Better for students
+ Ease of use
+ Integrated with Library catalogue
+ Good suppo...
Griffith’s unique requirements

§ Single Sign On – achieved and delivered
» To uphold Griffith’s enterprise SSO for its we...
Where to from here?

§ Pilot concludes end of February; appraisal
§ Griffith to reconsider our approach, and question:
» “...
Griffith Talis Aspire User Group
Griffith Talis Aspire User Group
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Griffith Talis Aspire User Group

487 views
401 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
487
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Griffith Talis Aspire User Group

  1. 1. Griffith University Talis Aspire pilot Q4 2013 – Feb 2014 Presenters: Philip Testa, Susan Tegg, Camille Furniss
  2. 2. Sample screen shot, displaying web branding
  3. 3. Pilot overview § Why we decided to trial Talis Aspire » » » » Standardise and improve access to course reading lists To improve copyright compliance and reporting Create efficiencies and align Library functions Scale up the digitisation service § Griffith has unique requirements: » Single Sign On » Web encryption (SSL via HTTPS)
  4. 4. Digitised Content (TADC) module § Griffith one of two testing partners in Australia § Current operational processes vs TADC processes § Findings so far: + Easy to use interface + time savings with automated metadata collection, when linked with Reading Lists + Automated copyright compliance and CAL reporting + Cloud hosted digitisation repository - Some functionality doesn’t operate as we expected - Published Reading Lists may require adjusting - Email notifications lack detail
  5. 5. Reading Lists module § The findings: + Better for students + Ease of use + Integrated with Library catalogue + Good support from Talis, but time zone difficulties + Site metadata collection works on pre-requested sites - Inconsistencies with current operational workflows - Academic reluctance – they don’t want “more work” - Student numbers – often not known; uneditable - Lack of dedicated mobile device user interface - Blackboard VLE integration – room for improvements
  6. 6. Griffith’s unique requirements § Single Sign On – achieved and delivered » To uphold Griffith’s enterprise SSO for its web systems » Based on SAML2 shared protocol § HTTPS web encryption – not yet delivered » Based on Griffith’s web standards, privacy and ensuring Single Sign On security
  7. 7. Where to from here? § Pilot concludes end of February; appraisal § Griffith to reconsider our approach, and question: » “who owns, creates and maintains reading lists?” » “what does Griffith want the readings lists to do?” § A key challenge faced » obtaining user (academic) buy-in when the project has been driven by the Library § Questions?

×