150 likes | 404 Views
MetaLib/SFX and Public Libraries. Jukka Pennanen & Leena Salminen The National Library of Finland 3.9.06 IGeLU Stockholm, Sweden. Consortia in Finland . 3 sectors using MetaLib/SFX: university, polytechnic and public libraries 64 portals (MetaLib instances) 20 university (19 live)
E N D
MetaLib/SFX and Public Libraries Jukka Pennanen & Leena Salminen The National Library of Finland 3.9.06 IGeLU Stockholm, Sweden
Consortia in Finland • 3 sectors using MetaLib/SFX: university, polytechnic and public libraries • 64 portals (MetaLib instances) • 20 university (19 live) • 29 polytechnic (18 live 2006 ) • 15 public (5 live 2006) • 0 special libraries 2006 • 5 SFX instances (3-5 institutions each)
Public libraries’ sector • 19 regional libraries (Aland Islands excluded) • 431 municipalities (2006) • Implementation administered and steered by regional libraries • Working groups in libraries: project managers, resource experts, librarians • Meetings with project managers ~4/year • Domestic training, mailing lists, help files • Trainees work as local trainers in libraries
Regional portals • Started in 2005 • 1 MetaLib installation, 15 instances • 5 SFX instances • Pohjanportti: 3 regional libraries • Pohjalaisten Nelli: 3 regional libraries • Rest have their own MetaLib instances • 5 SFX shared instances (3−5/SFX) • 1 MetaLib/SFX server for all libraries • 1 regional portal has applied authentication against the patron database of their library system • The rest are waiting some solution to authentication?
Distribution of workbetween libraries and Nelli office • Based on the agreement of services • Each regional library approves and signs it • Regional libraries work for the libraries in the province • Regional libraries work with libraries in the province • To add local licensed resources to the portal • To train them to use the local portal • How to make local resources compatible with MetaLib? • Nelli office • Maintains the Nelli server • Updates software and knowledgebases • Works with central domestic configurations (FinELib licensed)
Problems and challenges • Not enough manpower and skills • Lack of MetaLib compatible local resources • Lack of configuration for the local resources • Challenge: to develop a portal especially addressed to public libraries’ customers • Locally/regionally profiled portal (e.g. sub portals)
Benefits • Participate in developing of national library portal services and e-services generally • Public libraries do not be a separate from other libraries and their e-services’ development
MetaLib for public libraries in Finland • Four portals for public libraries • Pohjanportti, Pirkanmaan Nelli, Varsinais-Suomi, Keski-Suomi • Pohjanportti = three regional libraries together • Varsinais-Suomi = 53 public (municipal) libraries, bilingual • Pirkanmaa = population 500 000, a web service with 33 libraries with two different ILS, long traditions of regional cooperation
Experiences from libraries • Training as a challenge… • How libraries did it? • How many were trained? • Problems, challenges • Possibilities…
Training of library staff was started before the portals were in production Development / usability ideas from the staff? (From patrons?) Self-made training materials (shared materials) based on training materials provided by Nelli-office Experienced trainers in all regions (in the first phase trained by Nelli-office) Patrons have not been trained yet! Training as a challenge…
How libraries did it? • 1,5-3 hours training sessions • Introduction • Basics in searching • Hands on • Summary, development, problems • Visions, discussion • Brush ups, workshops • Continuing local training
How many were trained? • Pohjanportti: 50 training sessions for 515 library professionals of 645 totally in the region • Varsinais-Suomi : 81 + 41 + 14 (training on site in libraries in small groups) • Pirkanmaa started training for staff two years before production, 1/3 had been trained when portal was opened
Problems, challenges • Metalib was experienced complicated • Lack of searchable databases that are suitable for public libraries • Lack of licenced databases for public libraries • Configurations for free materials? • Small public libraries miss the expertise • LS not necessarily standardized – costs for libraries to integrate local resources • Technical problems (more than expected) • Usability?
Possibilities… • Consistency (search interface, search results) • Tailoring, customizing (not easy though) • Can replace link/database lists • Descriptions of databases are useful • Possibility to use effective search techniques