A New Approach to E-reserves The Seneca Libraries Experience OLA Superconference - February 3, 2007...
-
Upload
marlene-lombard -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
0
Transcript of A New Approach to E-reserves The Seneca Libraries Experience OLA Superconference - February 3, 2007...
A New Approach to E-reserves The Seneca Libraries Experience
OLA Superconference - February 3, 2007
Presented by:
Jennifer Peters-Lise, Metadata & Digital Services Librarian
Jane Foo, Manager of Digital Library Services & Information Systems
Today’s talk
• Seneca’s experience
• Canadian e-reserves survey
• Prototypes
• Pilot Project
Definitions
• Print Reserves
– Short term loan
– Reserves do not include: • items not related to a specific course/program • textbooks
Definitions
• E-reserves
– Traditional reserve-type material available online• Scanned• Selected from an electronic source
Definitions
• Additional course readings
– Selected by faculty in addition to course reserves.
– Research by Course pages
Sample Research by Course page
The problem…
The student may have to visit multiple places (virtual and physical) to find their course materials.
[ “oh what will I do!”]
Desired solutions:
• Collocate materials into one list
• Access as much as possible online
• Not online? Tell them where to find it!
• User friendly and inexpensive system
E-reserves Research Committee
• Oct 2005 - Dec 2006
• Examined: – Seneca’s current reserves practices– 17 existing e-reserves projects across Canada– Available systems for e-reserves– Applicable copyright laws
Seneca’s current reserves
• Mixture of formats
• Paper copies damaged; pages lost
• Complaints about loan periods
• Line-ups everywhere!
Canadian E-reserves Scan
• Surveyed 17 universities across Canada
• Questions covered:– Systems– Copyright– Workflow– Statistics and marketing
Canadian E-reserves Scan findings
E-reserves systems
• 8 use ILS• 4 use home grown system• 2 use a static web page• 2 use Docutek’s ERes
Copyright policies
• 9 digitize print materials• 8 seek copyright for faculty • 7 pay for licenses• 1 claims fair dealing
Canadian E-reserves Scan findings
Processing time
• 9 days for non-copyrighted items
• 8 weeks for copyrighted items
Staffing
• Each school different• Ranged from 1 to 6 people• Mixture of librarians and
technicians
Canadian E-reserves Commonalities
1. ILS
2. Digitizing materials
3. Seeking and paying for rights
4. Password protection
5. Staffing according to own library’s needs.
Canadian E-reserves Weaknesses
• Multiple access points
• Statistics
• Marketing plans
E-reserves Prototypes
Docutek’s ERes
www.docutek.com
Course dashboard
Course reserves page settings
Course dashboard
Documents and copyright
Add a document (metadata)
Add copyright information
Docutek’s ERes
• What we liked– User friendly– Store copyright documents– Password protection– Self-maintenance available– Basic statistics– Administrative control
Docutek
• What we didn’t like– Metadata not expandable– Duplicate data entry – Cost– Stand-alone system
Docutek ERes – the bottom line
• Avoid another stand-alone system
• Cost outweighed benefit
Not enough bang for our buck!
Endeavor’s Voyager
• Seneca’s current ILS
• Print reserves system
• Staff familiar with cataloguing
Cataloguing template
Browsing
Results display – course code/instructor search
Embedding the link in Blackboard
Embedding the link in Blackboard
Voyager
• What we liked:– Cataloguing templates– Reports and statistics– Search engine– Integration of print and electronic materials– Maintenance
Voyager
• What we didn’t like– Results/browsing interface– Security– Unable to house documents
Voyager – the bottom line
• Display would confuse students
• Cataloguing issues
Getting warmer, but we can do better!
Blackboard
• Seneca’s current LMS and Portal
• Content System– Virtual hard drive – Store files in an hierarchical folder structure– Link from course page into content system
Blackboard• What we liked:
– Students, staff and faculty are already familiar with the system
– Access for students – we come to them, they don’t come to us
– Shows a hierarchy of their readings– Library has full access to a portion of the Content
System– No extra cost
Blackboard• What we did not like:
– No cataloguing ability – only filename– Metadata is secondary – more of an afterthought– Cannot sort and re-arrange content from within the Content
System– Cannot centrally store and share links / content across different
courses form– No reports– Statistics only exist in the course pages to which we don’t have
access to– No administrative control over our content within BlackBoard
Blackboard – the bottom line• Lacks sophistication required to maintain a large collection of
materials
• Lacks reporting capabilities
• Statistics are not advanced and require faculty collaboration
• Lack of administrative access
Not smart enough.
Encompass for Digital Collections
• “Endeavor’s comprehensive system for local digital content creation, management and access.“
• Has been used for the management and display for large historical and image collections (e.g., National Library of New Zealand)
EDC - Cataloguing template
Main page
Browsing by course code
Organizing readings by week
Alternate organization of readings
Search for course code
Results display
Encompass for Digital Collections• What we liked
– We already own it– Cataloguing workflow
• On-the-fly templates = no duplicate data entry
• Immediate error correction
• Top-down collection view = easy maintenance and organization
– Can import MARC records– Staff uptake should be quick because it is similar to ILS system– Combines the user-friendly logical browsing of Blackboard with
the cataloguing and data control of Voyager
Encompass for Digital Collections
• What we didn’t like– password protection at document level– search display is “okay”, would rather have users
browse for items
Encompass – customizations
• Highly customizable data retrieval and display using XML, XSLT and CSS
• Some legacy coding requiring cleanup• One click from title to content / location• Live link to library catalogue record for print
items (e.g., textbooks)• Custom field displays in records• New search indices (course code, instructor)
ENCompass and BlackBoard• Embedded search
• Link directly to browsing list from a course page in Blackboard
Encompass – the bottom line
• Economical choice
• Functionality fits – cataloguing and display
• We have the skills to customize the UI to our needs
Perfect fit for now…except …
Support for ENCompass will be discontinued end of 2008.
Will we be able to find something that fits our needs?
Policies and procedures
Policies and Procedures – content & staffing
• Workflow should connects course materials
• Merge Research by Course pages into the system
• Both reference and borrower services staff will catalogue materials for the system
Policies and Procedures - faculty
• Administer course readings using Blackboard
• Use Library Content and we will duplicate the readings list
Policies and procedures - copyright
• “Fair dealing" does not apply to teaching materials.
• Access Copyright does not apply to digitization of print materials
• We must contact copyright holders for licensing
Policies and procedures - digitization
• Digitize faculty created items with opt-out available
• Seek copyright permission and scan as many print reserves as possible
Pilot project
Pilot project -- Jan-Dec 2007
• Preliminary test with a small # of courses (Jan-Apr)
• Form the lead advisory & technical committee (Jan)
• Form implementation committees at each campus (Feb)
Pilot project -- Jan-Dec 2007
• Weed print reserves & update/delete course pages (Feb-Mar)
• Staff training for scanning, e-reserves system and copyright (Mar)
• Retroactive cataloguing (Apr-May)
Pilot project -- Jan-Dec 2007
• User testing and follow-up (Summer)
• Marketing sub-committee and plan (Summer)
• Larger pilot and evaluation (Sept-Dec)
Questions?
Jenn
IM & Yahoo: senlibjenn
Link to presentation
http://tinyurl.com/yrd3jh
Jane
IM & Yahoo: senlibjane
Seneca E-reserves Committee Final Report
http://tinyurl.com/usnob