Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

ALA midwinter (Chicago) 2015 discovery white paper

790 views

Published on

The results of a survey of 252 librarians were released today in a new SAGE White Paper (the third in an annual series).

The full title of the white paper is:

Improving the Discoverability of Scholarly Content: Academic Library Priorities and Perspectives
by Lettie Y. Conrad and Elisabeth Leonard.

Published in: Education
  • Login to see the comments

  • Be the first to like this

ALA midwinter (Chicago) 2015 discovery white paper

  1. 1. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC Improving the Discoverability of Scholarly Content Academic Library Priorities and Perspectives Elisabeth Leonard, MSLS, MBA Executive Market Research Manager, Online Products Team
  2. 2. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC Recent SAGE white papers ● Improving the Discoverability of Scholarly Content in the Twenty- First Century (2012) ● Collaborative Improvements in the Discoverability of Scholarly Content (2014) ● The State of Reference Collections (2014) ● Improving the Discoverability of Scholarly Content: Academic Library Priorities and Perspectives (2015)
  3. 3. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC Main research questions ● What do librarians believe has the greatest impact on finding resources? ● What do libraries expect of publishers when it comes to promoting and enabling discoverability of scholarly content? ● What’s at stake for libraries if we don’t all get discoverability right?
  4. 4. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC What has the greatest impact?
  5. 5. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC Tension between good and best ● “I have to say that open web is probably where our students are currently doing most discovery. We have to teach students to use library resources and hopefully they get the message, but it’s not clear to what degree our library instruction is actually changing how students conduct research when they are in a time crunch and stakes are high.”
  6. 6. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC Prevalence of discovery services
  7. 7. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC How can publishers optimize discovery?
  8. 8. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC How publishers can optimize discovery?
  9. 9. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC Commercial impacts
  10. 10. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC SAGE responses ● Discovery service teamwork ● Metadata enrichment ● Promoting transparency
  11. 11. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC THE IMPORTANCE OF MARC?
  12. 12. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC For which of the following does your library use MARC records? Please select all that apply. Answer Number of responses Percentage Print books 198 94.74 E-books 182 87.08 Print journals 168 80.38 E-journals 142 67.94 Data sets 25 11.96 Databases 84 40.19 Streaming video 86 41.15
  13. 13. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC MARC records from publishers?
  14. 14. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC MARC and discovery services ● We use MARC records for any content which we can access and for which we can get (free) MARC records! But now that we have EDS, the really important ones are for print books and ebooks. For content that is available via the EDS index, MARC records are not so important. ● MARC records are key to the discoverability of our books and ebooks. Most of the use of our ebooks comes as a result of users seeing the MARC records that show up in their search results in our catalog and in our discovery layer (Summon) and clicking on those records to link to the books.
  15. 15. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC Using MARC ● Batch-loaded records (62%) ● Individual MARC records (41%)
  16. 16. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC Quality and timing ● The quality of ebook records varies considerably. Also there are great differences in timing of when publisher metadata is distributed to knowledge base providers (e.g., link resolver, ERM, OCLC). It would be extremely beneficial to end users (as well as to libraries) if the distributed metadata were more robust and distributed in a more timely manner.
  17. 17. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC SAGE and MARC ● MARC for ebooks since 2010 – soon for video, cases, and data ● Quarterly updates ● Prepared with industry-leader MARC experts, BDS
  18. 18. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC Research guides
  19. 19. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC Widgets
  20. 20. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC SAGE and widgets
  21. 21. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC What’s not easily discovered? ● A/V materials, multi-media ● Ebooks ● Archival material ● Dissertations ● Small-publisher content ● OA content ● Business, legal content
  22. 22. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC What’s next for SAGE? ● Hard-to-find content ● Further transparency ● More collaboration with librarians
  23. 23. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC SAGE ● New roles, staff development ● Prioritize metadata development ● Participate in standards formation
  24. 24. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC SAGE ● Discoverability checklists ● Librarian advisors ● White papers like this one!
  25. 25. Los Angeles | London | New Delhi Singapore | Washington DC Thank you! The white paper is free online: www.sagepub.com/repository/binaries/pdfs/disc overability2015.pdf or http://bit.ly/1z4lMa0 Email Elisabeth : elisabeth.leonard@sagepub.com Email Lettie: lettie.conrad@sagepub.com

×