1 / 14

This house believes that A&I is RIP

This house believes that A&I is RIP. JIBS Workshop 13 November 2009. Disclaimer!. This presentation does not reflect the views of the University of Huddersfield Nor does it necessarily mean ALL A&I databases!. Context. University of Huddersfield 50,000 e-journals 50,000 e-books

kellie-travis
Download Presentation

This house believes that A&I is RIP

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. This house believes that A&I is RIP JIBS Workshop 13 November 2009

  2. Disclaimer! This presentation does not reflect the views of the University of Huddersfield Nor does it necessarily mean ALL A&I databases!

  3. Context • University of Huddersfield • 50,000 e-journals • 50,000 e-books • 1,000+ full text repository items • 200,000 library records • 80 A&Is • First European customer for Serial Solutions Summon

  4. Are we fighting a losing battle? • By relying on A&Is: • Do we support our users in the way they expect and demand? • Do we overload them with different systems or lack of intuitive interfaces? • Is Google actually a problem? • Can we afford to cut journals and keep A&Is?

  5. Quality vs. Cost (1) Article abstracts: many A&I databases are still only indexes, which is often frustrating to the user Cover to cover indexing: An A&I with a low proportion of core content or a high proportion of tertiary content is at risk Duplication of content: Two resources with similar content are not economically justifiable Full-text linking: an A&I that does not link does not promote resource discovery

  6. Quality vs. Cost (2) Date coverage: unless specifically covering an archive period, A&I databases that purport to be current, but index a high number of ceased titles are not relevant Geographical Coverage: if specific geographical areas are not adequately covered then the A&I is not valuable for research

  7. Quality vs. Cost (3) • Publisher coverage: libraries want to use A&I databases to achieve a good spread of publishers; if this is not the case, then the resource is little better than searching a publisher’s platform • Intuitive interface: is the resource as easy to use as Google? • Shibboleth authentcation, EZProxy access as standard: any A&I database that relies on individual usernames and passwords for access is creating a barrier to use

  8. Quality vs. Cost (4) • Unrestricted access: analysis of turnaways and usage data at the University of Huddersfield shows that resources that restrict access by number of simultaneous users often leads to dramatic drop in usage over a period of time as users become frustrated by turnaway messages • COUNTER compliant usage data: a lack of COUNTER compliance means that accurate comparisons cannot be made

  9. Primary material • In a digital environment this information is becoming more retrievable – A&Is only cover a small proportion of what is out there • JISC Digitisation Programme • Sound, images, journals, moving pictures, newspapers etc. • UK Research Data Service Feasibility Study final report • Research data has remained a “substantially untapped resource” and that it is “often unstructured and inaccessible to others”.

  10. Federated (Meta) Searching (1) • Many librarians do not recommend federated search • “[f]ederated systems remain controversial because they focus on what we think users want, at the expense of functionality, precision, and finesse. They are still a long way from providing a single, simple solution to information retrieval.” Tenopir, C, Online databases: Can Johnny search? Library Journal, 2007, 132(2), 30. http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6407784.html?industryid=47130

  11. Federated (Meta) Searching (2) • Research at Stockholm University shows that students were not enthusiastic about Google Scholar or MetaLib; however, they agreed that Google Scholar was easy to use Nygren, E, Haya, G and Widmark, W, Students experience of Metalib and Google Scholar, 2006, Stockholm, universitetsbiblioteket • Is federated searching a transient technology like the CD-ROM and is the real Holy Grail just over the horizon?

  12. Pre harvested search:the true one-stop shop? • The key for the medium term is to provide Google-like interfaces with Google-like results • There is a race to provide this through systems that use preharvested data rather than federated searching • Primo (Ex Libris) • Summon (Serials Solutions) • WorldCat Local (OCLC)

  13. This house believes that A&I is RIP • “Why is Google so easy and the library so hard?” Duddy, C, A student perspective on accessing academic information in the Google era, 32nd UKSG Annual Conference and Exhibition, 30 March - 1 April 2009, Riviera International Conference Centre, Torquay • “Why do we want to teach our users to be librarians?” Pattern, D, OPAC 2.0 and beyond. 32nd UKSG Annual Conference and Exhibition, 30 March - 1 April 2009, Riviera International Conference Centre, Torquay. http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/4143/

  14. …and finally… Visualization

More Related