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.

Tech, Reference, AND PATRON Views of our new Front-End


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Tech, Reference, AND PATRON Views of our new Front-End

  1. 1. Tech, Reference, AND PATRON Views of our new Front-End Peter Morris Systems Librarian DiMenna-Nyselius Library Fairfield University Fairfield, CT 06824
  4. 4. History of the Project In the spring of 2007, members of our administration had seen demonstrations of Encore at ACRL. In the summer of 2007 we undertook a formal study of faceted search front- ends. Our traditional OPAC vendor didn’t have a suitable product at the time we started our investigation. We considered the following products: AquaBrowser, WorldCat Local, Encore, and LibraryThing for Libraries. Some core functionalities were identified such as: Did you mean…? functionality. Tag clouds. Ability for patrons to tag records. Seamless integration with the existing OPAC.
  5. 5. History of the Project By late September we had narrowed the field down to two candidates: Encore WorldCat Local The decision was put to a vote of the Library Council; Encore was the favorite of the majority of our Library Staff. Negotiations with III led to our “developer-status”, and eventually our signing a contract in late October. The contract specified a 13 week implementation period, at which time a “Go Live” event/training would take place at the library with III staff. A full database dump of our bibliographic and holdings records was provided to III in November. At the start of December III requested I start working on “Delta Files”.
  6. 6. History of the Project Delta file procedure in place by January. Our “go-live” date was missed by a bit… Staff decided that it would not make sense to launch the new service mid- semester. We planned for a summer of testing, and an unveiling to our patrons for the fall 2008 semester.
  7. 7. Files provided Nightly Bibliographic update file: unicorn_bib_upd.bfts Holdings update file: unicorn_holdings_upd.cfts Bibliographic deletes file: unicorn_bib_del.txt Item delete file: unicorn_item_del.txt Holdings delete file: unicorn_holdings_del.txt There was also the caveat that a good ball-park figure of the number of records to be transferred each night would be around 5000.
  8. 8. CSH
  9. 9. Encore Dump 1
  10. 10. Encore Dump 2
  11. 11. ENCORE DUMP 3
  12. 12. KERMIT Kermit© Columbia University
  13. 13. Question one Do you use Encore as your first resource to look up material in the library?
  14. 14. Question two Do you Prefer Encore to iLink?
  15. 15. Question Three Do you feel the patrons prefer Encore to iLink?
  16. 16. Question FOUR Do you use Encore to perform your job’s functions?
  17. 17. Typical Comments Tech Services Reference • “I like that it (iLink) has • “I use Encore most of the more obvious search time, but I do use iLink options, with Encore I sometimes to perform my always find myself going to job’s function, such as ‘advanced-search’.” browsing on author’s last name or searching with several criteria”
  18. 18. Patron Survey Ten undergraduates polled during finals week, May 2009
  19. 19. Bottom Line Encore is a discovery tool.
  20. 20. You NEED GOOD DATA TO FACET UPON An analysis of the “sample” set of records provided by one vendor, showed that nearly half of the records didn’t have a single subject tracing, other than a useless “electronic resource” tag.
  21. 21. Record quality =520 $a The revolutionary seven dimensions that lead to sustainable business practice are identified and explored as well as the blind-spots that most corporate leaders have that prevent them from joining the revolution In one dump of a vendor’s MARC records there were over 40,000 of these Unicode conversion problems.
  22. 22. And records =LDR 00704nas 22001933u 4500 Like these… =001 XXX000961732 =003 XXXX =005 20090316193456.0 =006 md =007 crn =008 090316uuuuuuuuu||||||ss||||||||||||d =035 $a(XXXX)ssib000961732 =040 $aXXXXX$cXXXXX$dXXXXX The X’s in this record are my The X’s in this record are my =245 00$a{esc}{dollar}1!Be!0XKN7!ON!?u!(!X@{esc}(B$h[el redactions. The rest of the data is the redactions. The rest of the data is the ectronic resource]. full extent of the record as provided. full extent of the record as provided. =260 $a[S.l.] :$b[s.n.] =500 $aTitle from content provider. =506 $aLicense restrictions may limit access. =655 0$aElectronic journals. =856 40$zView availability and full-text electronic issues$uhttp://XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX/?sidX XXl&SS_jc=JC_000961732&title={esc}{dollar}1!Be!0XK N7!ON!?u!(!X@{esc}(B
  23. 23. • Facility to display holdings status directly from the Encore interface (Z39.50 New Features query against Unicorn for holdings). We have updated our SirsiDynix • Ability to allow patron We have updated our SirsiDynix system to the latest version of system to the latest version of tagging of records. Symphony. Symphony. Encore will be updated to version 3.0 Encore will be updated to version 3.0 • Chance to reload all of our in early June! in early June! data and “synch”. • New “Skins” available; further ability to modify look and feel.
  24. 24. Important Take- aways Number of records transferred per night can severely impact synchronization of the data. The need for good, standards-based cataloging is increased by offering a faceted search product. Patrons love it. It is simply a discovery tool. It cannot replace the traditional OPAC nor ILS. New features may or may not be tenable across cross- corporate borders.
  25. 25. Links Library Website: Sirsi iLink: Encore:
  26. 26. Thank YOU Questions? Peter Morris Systems Librarian DiMenna-Nyselius Library Fairfield University Fairfield, CT 06824