Best Practices for Selecting the Best Fit

Metz-Wiseman, Monica; Griffin, Melanie; Borchert, Carol Ann; Henry, Deborah Boran

doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-1821-3.ch005

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The sample yielded eight libraries using Encore as their primary catalog (as opposed to their "classic" catalog), none of which provided access to articles through the Encore interface [13]. One Encore library instead used Serials Solutions' Summon for federated searching and directed patrons there to search for articles [14]. Of the three unique OPACs in the sample using Primo, one had not enabled article searching and another had separate tabs for searching the catalog and for searching articles [15].…”

Section: Validity Of the Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Next generation or current generation?

Yang

Hofmann

2011

Library Hi Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2010),"Evaluating and comparing discovery tools: how close are we towards next generation catalog?", Library Hi Tech, Vol. 28 Iss 4 pp. 690-709 http:// dx.If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The study described in this paper aims to identify the progress made in the efforts to model current online public access catalogs (OPACs) after the next generation catalog (NGC) in academic libraries in the USA and Canada. Design/methodology/approach -A random sample of 260 colleges and universities was selected from Peterson's Guide to Four-Year Colleges 2009, an estimated 10 percent of the total population of 2,560 listed academic institutions. A checklist of 12 features of the NGC was used to evaluate the OPACs of the 260 libraries in the sample. The authors took as the OPAC that which the library linked to as its "catalog," even though some might be more properly considered "discovery tools" or "discovery layers." Some libraries used more than one OPAC interface simultaneously; in this case, each OPAC was analyzed separately. In the case of several institutions using the same consortial OPAC, only the first instance of the OPAC was analyzed. About 15 percent of the institutions (n ¼ 40) in the sample either did not have web sites or did not provide access to their online catalogs. In all, a total of 233 unique instances of OPACs were analyzed. Data were collected from September 2009 through July 2010. The findings can be extrapolated to the population at the 95 percent confidence level with a confidence interval of^3. Findings -While bits and pieces of the next generation catalog are steadily working themselves into the current catalog, academic libraries still have a long way to go. About 16 percent of the OPACs in the sample did not show any advanced features of the NGC. More than half of the libraries (61 percent) had only one to five advanced features in their OPACs. Many of those with six or more NGC features were discovery tools. Only 3 percent of the OPACs in the sample (n ¼ 8) demonstrated seven to ten out of the 12 functionalities of the NGC, and they were instances either of WorldCat Local or Summon. The weak areas were federated searching, relevance based on circulation statistics, and recommendations...

show abstract

Section: Validity Of the Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Next generation or current generation?

Yang

Hofmann

2011

Library Hi Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Form An Evaluation Teammentioning

confidence: 99%

“…18 According to one survey, securing staff buy--in is the biggest challenge academic libraries face when implementing a web--scale discovery service. 19 Ensuring broad involvement early in the process will help to secure organizational buy--in and support for the selected product.While broad representation is important, having a large and diverse team can sometimes slow down the process; schedules can be difficult to coordinate, members may have competing views or demands on their time, meetings can lose focus or wander off topic, etc. The more members on your evaluation team, the more difficult the team may be to manage.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Web-Scale Discovery Services: A Step-by-Step Guide

Deodato

2015

ITAL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Selecting a web-scale discovery service is a large and important undertaking that involves a significant investment of time, staff, and resources. Finding the right match begins with a thorough and carefully planned evaluation process. To be successful, this process should be inclusive, goal-oriented, datadriven, user-centered, and transparent. The following article offers a step-by-step guide for developing a web-scale discovery evaluation plan rooted in these five key principles based on best practices synthesized from the literature as well as the author's own experiences coordinating the evaluation process at Rutgers University. The goal is to offer academic libraries that are considering acquiring a web-scale discovery service a blueprint for planning a structured and comprehensive evaluation process. INTRODUCTIONAs the volume and variety of information resources continue to multiply, the library search environment has become increasingly fragmented. Instead of providing a unified, central point of access to its collections, the library offers an assortment of pathways to disparate silos of information. To the seasoned researcher familiar with these resources and experienced with a variety of search tools and strategies, this maze of options may be easy to navigate. But for the novice user who is less accustomed to these tools and even less attuned to the idiosyncrasies of each one's own unique interface, the sheer amount of choice can be overwhelming. Even if the user manages to find their way to the appropriate resource, figuring out how to use it effectively becomes yet another challenge. This is at least partly due to the fact that the expectations and behaviors of today's library users have been profoundly shaped by their experiences on the web. Popular sites like Google and Amazon offer simple, intuitive interfaces that search across a wide range of content to deliver immediate, relevant, and useful results. In comparison, library search interfaces often appear antiquated, confusing, and cumbersome. As a result, users are increasingly relying on information sources that they know to be of inferior quality, but are simply easier to find. As Luther and Kelly note, the biggest challenge academic libraries face in today's abundant but fragmented information landscape is "to offer an experience that has the simplicity of Google-which users expect-while searching the library's rich digital and print collectionswhich users need." 1 In an effort to better serve the needs of these users and improve access to library content, libraries have begun turning to new technologies capable of providing deep discovery of their vast scholarly collections from a single, easy--to--use interface. These technologies are known as web--scale discovery services.Joseph Deodato (jdeodato@rutgers.edu) is Digital User Services Librarian at Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey.EVALUATING WEB--SCALE DISCOVERY SERVICES: A STEP--BY--STEP GUIDE | DEODATO doi: 10.6017/ital.v34i2.5745 20To paraphrase Hoeppner, a web--sca...

show abstract

An Unexpected Discovery: One Library's Experience With Web-Scale Discovery Service (WSDS) Evaluation and Assessment

Ellero

2013

Journal of Library Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Best Practices for Selecting the Best Fit

Cited by 4 publications

References 4 publications

Next generation or current generation?

Next generation or current generation?

Evaluating Web-Scale Discovery Services: A Step-by-Step Guide

An Unexpected Discovery: One Library's Experience With Web-Scale Discovery Service (WSDS) Evaluation and Assessment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About