A Survey of Digitisation of Core
Readings in Higher Education:
preliminary results


Jane Secker, June Hedges & Ned Potter...
Context

   Survey builds on those carried out
    by Liz Hart and Jenny Delasalle
   New Comprehensive Licence
   Timi...
Survey topics

1. Background
      Your institution
      Digital readings at your institution
      Copyright Licensin...
Respondents
   44 institutions responded to the
    survey although some gaps
   24 Full Heron members (3
    Packtracke...
Volume of digitisation
   11 non-Heron members
   Vast range in amount of digitisation
    from 20 - 2844 readings
   5...
Staffing levels
   Variation from no staff to 5 or 6 in a
    team
   18 had a dedicated team
   19 did not have a dedi...
Motivations for scanning
   Improve access to course readings: 37 (highest)
   Support for e-learning: 31 (second highes...
CLA Licence
   All apart from one respondent had signed the new
    CLA Licence
   Only two had signed the comprehensive...
Impact of the New Licence
   Common themes include increase in
    workload as a greater amount of material
    is being ...
Impact on Paper Services
   Harder to quantify; often the library isn’t
    the keeper of relevant photocopying
    stati...
Licence Repertoire
   Of 34 respondents, 31 said they’d
    like to see the repertoire increased,
    2 said they saw no ...
Licence Repertoire (2)
               Regions HEIs would like to
               see included in the Licence

             ...
Copyright issues
   Do you get copyright permissions outside
    the licence - 11 / 38 responses did not
    (20%)
   Th...
Scanning
   Who does your scanning?
       In-house - 17
       Outsource - 6
       Both - 15
       Other – 1
   2...
Scanning (2)
   Do you provide text for visually impaired
    students?
       Yes 21
       No 10
       Don’t know 7...
Rejecting requests
   The question “Do you digitise all readings you are
    asked to?” got the biggest response of all t...
Delivery of readings
   Via catalogue 1
   Via reading list 11
   Via VLE 36 / 39
   Other 4

   Readings tend to be ...
Management and feedback
   Reading lists generally updated by library staff,
    less frequently by academic and admin st...
Responding to Usage Stats
   Of those who did collect usage
    statistics, only 3 currently act upon
    them
   Severa...
Collection management and e-
resources

   74% said their collection management
    policy took into account e-books
   ...
E-learning / VLEs
   All institution had a VLE
   30/39 library staff had access to it
   In only 4 cases were other
  ...
Further Issues
Issues raised in free text question at
   the end include:
 “Number of scans created is beginning to get
 ...
Further Issues (2)
   The issues of time, ongoing funding,
    difficulty of CLA reporting and problems of
    copyright ...
Any questions?
   Jane j.secker@lse.ac.uk
   June j.hedges@ucl.ac.uk
   Ned E.Potter@leeds.ac.uk
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Preliminary results from digitisation survey

1,222 views

Published on

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,222
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Preliminary results from digitisation survey

  1. 1. A Survey of Digitisation of Core Readings in Higher Education: preliminary results Jane Secker, June Hedges & Ned Potter Heron User Group Meeting 2nd July 2009
  2. 2. Context  Survey builds on those carried out by Liz Hart and Jenny Delasalle  New Comprehensive Licence  Timing: March - April 2009  Audience: Heron User Group members, but also LIS-Copyseek  Web-based survey
  3. 3. Survey topics 1. Background  Your institution  Digital readings at your institution  Copyright Licensing & compliance, incl. the new CLA Licence 2. Procedural Issues • Scanning • Delivery of readings • Management of readings 3. Wider Issues • Collection management • E-Learning
  4. 4. Respondents  44 institutions responded to the survey although some gaps  24 Full Heron members (3 Packtracker only)
  5. 5. Volume of digitisation  11 non-Heron members  Vast range in amount of digitisation from 20 - 2844 readings  563 average (mean)  Most anticipating a growth in numbers next year to an average of 866
  6. 6. Staffing levels  Variation from no staff to 5 or 6 in a team  18 had a dedicated team  19 did not have a dedicated team  A third had seen an increase in staffing to cope with demand but the majority (25 respondents) had not  Most promote their services (81%)
  7. 7. Motivations for scanning  Improve access to course readings: 37 (highest)  Support for e-learning: 31 (second highest)  Meeting student expectations: 22 (third highest)  Reduce need for multiple copies (save space): 13 (fourth highest)  Reduce need for multiple copies (save money): 8 (second lowest priority)  Raising the profile of your library: 6 (lowest priority)
  8. 8. CLA Licence  All apart from one respondent had signed the new CLA Licence  Only two had signed the comprehensive licence  Most regularly consult the CLA website (76% said they did)  65% (20 institutions) of all respondents saying it was ‘quite useful’ (only 3 people said they found it very useful and the remainder were indifferent)  15 institutions were using Packtracker for data reporting, 20 were using a central record sheet, 1 gets departs to complete, 2 using another method
  9. 9. Impact of the New Licence  Common themes include increase in workload as a greater amount of material is being scanned  Number of customers using HEI’s various digitisation services has widely increased  Almost everyone mentioned the addition of the US publishers as having a major impact  A few noted savings made due to no longer having to copyright-clear items
  10. 10. Impact on Paper Services  Harder to quantify; often the library isn’t the keeper of relevant photocopying statistics  General feeling is that paper copies may be reducing, but in line with general University policy rather than as a direct result of the Licence  A few libraries are trying to digitise their short-loan collections, but this is proving harder than anticpated
  11. 11. Licence Repertoire  Of 34 respondents, 31 said they’d like to see the repertoire increased, 2 said they saw no need for that, and 1 didn’t know  However, HEIs had extremely varied suggestions as to which countries should be included
  12. 12. Licence Repertoire (2) Regions HEIs would like to see included in the Licence Also mentioned 7 once each: 6 • Far East 5 • Japan 4 • France 3 • Spain 2 • South Africa 1 • “All English 0 Speaking Countries” nd via a da s y n lia an di nd ea na la ra na In m la op Ire st Ca da er er Au ur th G an lE Ne Sc Al
  13. 13. Copyright issues  Do you get copyright permissions outside the licence - 11 / 38 responses did not (20%)  The rest did, using: Heron (16), publishers (16) and the CCC (10) in the US  24 institutions have a copyright officer, 13 do not and one respondent wasn’t sure  LIS-Copyseek used by 35/38 respondents for queries, CLA consulted (29) colleagues (26), Copyright Officer (12)
  14. 14. Scanning  Who does your scanning?  In-house - 17  Outsource - 6  Both - 15  Other – 1  29 respondents said they outsourced to:  British Library (14)  Heron (11)  Other  13 respondents create text files, 23 do not and 3 didn’t know if they did!
  15. 15. Scanning (2)  Do you provide text for visually impaired students?  Yes 21  No 10  Don’t know 7  Source of scan  Original source 30 / 38  Photocopy 20 / 38  Copyright fee paid copies 34 / 38  Other 1  84% do NOT have a limit on the number of requests a lecturer can place for scans
  16. 16. Rejecting requests  The question “Do you digitise all readings you are asked to?” got the biggest response of all the ‘free text’ questions – key issue  Very few digitise all items requested to the extent of always obtaining clearance where necessary  Large proportion only scan what is eligible under the Licence; they do not typically copyright clear  Many take a mixed approach: “If the request falls outside the CLA Licence then a discussion is held with the academics as to whether we progress their request to the HERON service (at a cost)”  Some have an annual limit, either overall or per department / module
  17. 17. Delivery of readings  Via catalogue 1  Via reading list 11  Via VLE 36 / 39  Other 4  Readings tend to be stored on library server or in VLE although some institutions store in more than one place
  18. 18. Management and feedback  Reading lists generally updated by library staff, less frequently by academic and admin staff  15 of our respondents used Packtracker to manage the process, more had no system, although 6 had an in-house system  Requests for digitisation almost always came from academic staff, although subject librarians were sometimes involved  Only 14 respondents collected usage stats of readings (21 did not)  Only 5 respondents collect feedback on the service in their library survey
  19. 19. Responding to Usage Stats  Of those who did collect usage statistics, only 3 currently act upon them  Several say ‘not yet’ or ‘we intend to’, but it seems a tricky area – “We would [take action based on usage stats] if we could get the stats from Blackboard (sore topic!)”
  20. 20. Collection management and e- resources  74% said their collection management policy took into account e-books  Similar numbers check e-book availability before scanning  23 respondents would scan an e-book if they received a request but only 3 would scan a journal  27 respondents said e-availability impacted on paper collections
  21. 21. E-learning / VLEs  All institution had a VLE  30/39 library staff had access to it  In only 4 cases were other permissions for other (e.g. AV materials) managed by the library
  22. 22. Further Issues Issues raised in free text question at the end include:  “Number of scans created is beginning to get unmanageable in terms of renewals”  “Some staff would like to incorporate materials into complex learning objects…”  Many practitioners are finding work-load a problem, due to taking it on in addition to current roles rather than as a dedicated team  “Managing digital readings is demanding, and requires extra staffing to do it properly”
  23. 23. Further Issues (2)  The issues of time, ongoing funding, difficulty of CLA reporting and problems of copyright compliance come up time and again  All these problems are exacerbated by up-scaling of each library’s digitisation service – even if there not a concerted effort to increase through-put, just reusing items year on year means the time / reporting / staffing burdens are always increasing
  24. 24. Any questions?  Jane j.secker@lse.ac.uk  June j.hedges@ucl.ac.uk  Ned E.Potter@leeds.ac.uk

×