Improving staff and student library relations at Wageningen University

1. Improving staff and student library relations at Wageningen University Wouter Gerritsma, Information specialist Wageningen UR Library

2. Pre-amble • This powerpoint is available at: http://www.slideshare.net/wowter • More information on the topics to be presented can be found at my blog: http://wowter.net

3. Introductions Myself • Information specialist plant sciences at Wagenigen UR library • Research evaluation • Library 2.0 • Information professional of the year 2007 • Wowter.net was selected as Péter’s picks in Online magazine Jul./Aug. 2009

4. Tagcloud of http://wowter.net

5. Wordle tagcloud of my delicious account

6. Photo credits: 芒果人

7. Introducing Wageningen UR My employer • Agricultural college established in 1876 • Agr. Research stations were spinned off • Wageningen's attained the status of an institute of higher education in 1918 • Wageningen University and research stations merged to form Wageningen UR in 1998 • Wageningen University and Van Hall Larenstein University of Applied Sciences merged in 2003

8. Size of Wageningen UR

9. Wageningen is an international University

10. Life Sciences at Wageningen UR • Wageningen UR for quality of life • Food and food production • Living environment • Health, lifestyle and livelihood

12. The library • Concentration to a single physical library • Innovative team And our users • Information junkies

13. Who are our users? • Students • Teachers • Researchers • External clients

14. Information literacy to reach out to students • Information literacy • Integrated in discipline oriented courses • First year introductory course • Third year refresher & deepening • MSc students optional • Highly recommended for 'foreign' MSc students

15. Information literacy for PhD students • 2 day course information literacy • 1 day introduction • ½ day EndNote course • ½ day Consultation homework under guidance of a subject librarian

16. Teachers • Not our primary target • We liaise with selected teachers for introductory courses “information literacy” • All teachers are researchers themselves

17. Researchers • They know their way to the digital library already • They are little aware of all the services the library offers • We have to find opportunities to engage them • Research evaluation is such an occasion

18. Research evaluation in the Netherlands • Based on a 6 year cycle • Supervised by Quality Assurance Netherlands Universities (QANU) • Each 6 years external international peer review • Each 3 years internal mid term review • Standard Evaluation Protocol (SEP) http://www.knaw.nl/sep

19. SEP protocol • Quality • Productivity • Societal relevance • Vitality and feasibility

20. What role does the library play? • Productivity of a group is extracted from databases maintained by library • Bibliometric analyses are input to assess the research quality • Bibliometric analysis is not stipulated in the (national) SEP! • In Wageningen included as additional requirement • Advanced bibliometric indicators are now standardly implemented on our repository

21. My article has been cited 22 times! But was does it mean? Image: www.rcac.net.au

22. How do we compare numbers? • Scientist Z. Math has a publication from 1998 with 17 citations • Scientist M. Biology has a publication from 2006 with 24 citations

23. Baseline mathematics from ESI

24. Baseline Molecular Biology from ESI

25. In practice: Normalization • Dicke, M. Agrawal, A.A. Bruin, J. (2003) Plants talk, but are they deaf? Trends in Plant Science 8 (9):403 - 405. • Times cited: 44 times • Trends in Plant Science(from journals menu ESI) • Plant & Animal Science • Baseline data (from ESI) • Article from 2003 in Plant & Animal Science: Average: 8.56 citations top 10%: 20 citations, top 1%: 65 citations • Crown Indicator = 44 / 8.56 = 5.14

26. Other bibliometric indicators • Number or percentage of highly cited articles, i.e. top 10% or top 1% most cited articles • Number or percentage of uncited articles • H-index (g-index etc…) • Balancing productivity and citedness

27. Differences with the CWTS approach (van Raan c.s.) • Normalization per publication type • We can’t normalize per publication type • Self citations • Much debated issue • Fixed citation windows • Some times used in research • Representativeness

28. Results per Graduate School

29. Also available for any group at Wageningen UR

32. Why bibliometrics in the library • We maintained the metadata archive for publications from the university already • We have experience with developing, and maintaining large publication databases • We license bibliometric databases used in these analyses • We are experienced in searching notoriously illogical databases such as Web of Science

33. Win/win for the library • Improvement of our repository • Many presentations on the bibliometric approach • Presentations on detailed analysis for individual science groups • Advice on bibliometrics to publication strategy

34. Matching our Repository and WoS 1161 peer reviewed articles not in WoS journals Missing from WoS, 1159 articles Repository 10933 p.r. articles WoS 9577 articles & reviews Missing in repository, 807 articles

35. Research administration system Project administration system Is this the only thing you do with the repository? Peer review Repository Univ. white pages Pers. pages Dept. pages

36. New roles for libraries • Application based on our own content • Enriched with data from third parties • Remixed and added value • To be used in other applications • Is it an example of a Web 2.0 application?

37. Conclusion • In the beginning our services concentrated on raking in the data, and calculating the advanced bibliometric indicators • Now the number crunching is largely automated, and we added value to our services by giving advice and consultations to many groups of researchers • For publication advice they come to the library!

38. Děkuji!