![Background Why Summon? Summon implementation & launch Student focus groups Quick tour of Summon! Usage stats Contents [2]]()
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Destaque
Destaque (20)
Semelhante a Ucr summon
Semelhante a Ucr summon (20)
Mais de Academic and Research Libraries Group Yorkshire & Humberside
Mais de Academic and Research Libraries Group Yorkshire & Humberside (13)
Último
Último (20)
Ucr summon
- 1. Summon at Huddersfield Dave Pattern Martin Philip University of Huddersfield d.c.pattern@hud.ac.uk
- 2. Background Why Summon? Summon implementation & launch Student focus groups Quick tour of Summon! Usage stats Contents [2]
- 3. E-Resource ProvisionA Word Document! (2000)
- 4. E-Resource ProvisionITS OneLog (2003)
- 5. E-Resource ProvisionEx Libris Metalib (2006)
- 6. E-Resource ProvisionWoot! Woot! Federated Search!
- 7. E-Resource ProvisionFederated Search?! Meh…
- 8. Meanwhile, in the real world…Google Scholar (launched Nov 2004)
- 9. “To provide ease of searching and access for the user, whilst reducing the workload for Systems and Technical Services, and remaining within current budget levels.” Electronic Resources ReviewApril 2009
- 10. “Make recommendations for future provision, e.g. for the next 5 years, taking into account system interoperability and future-proofing.” Electronic Resources ReviewApril 2009
- 11. First class search engine - relevancy ranking, facets, fast results, etc The “one-stop shop” - personalisation, reduce silos of data, etc Improved systems management - interoperability, usage stats, open standards, etc Improved value for money Electronic Resources Review“The Vision”
- 12. Small selection of suppliers invited to give 45 minute product demos Products rated against “The Vision” Report to Library Management Group 3 options for moving forward with pros & cons Electronic Resources Review“The Vision”
- 13. Huddersfield Adopts SummonAugust 2009 “This is the transformational technology which has long been needed to meet student and academic staff expectations in an increasingly complex information environment.”
- 14. 94% of our subscribed journals were already full-text indexed in Summon… other vendors were unable and/or unwilling to supply data …therefore, no need to make do with a compromise(d) solution using federated search for the non-indexed material Why Summon?
- 15. New platform, developed with Open Source software Serial Solutions have fed their improvements back to the Lucene/SOLR developer community Excellent developer APIs for both Summon and 360 Link Why Summon?
- 17. Sep 2009 implementation starts Oct 2009 Summon instance delivered Feb 2009 360 Link goes live Mar 2010 Summon “soft launch” Aug 2010 Summon replaces Metalib Implementation Timelinetaking it nice and slow! …actually, we were ready togo fully live in January 2010!
- 19. resolved majority of off-campus issues
- 20. more seamless than Athens & Shibboleth
- 21. Students encouraged to report problems
- 22. Journal print holdings added to 360 Core
- 25. provides access to a selection of databases
- 26. linked to from within Summon via “dummy” MARC records
- 27. Journal title links added to Summon
- 29. Knowledge base for Summon and 360 Link
- 32. Promoted to all staff from early 2010
- 34. “Coming soon…”
- 35. “Get ahead of the game…”
- 36. “Test drive it today and give us your feedback!”
- 38. Summon pens with logo & URL
- 39. bags with “Summon – Research in the bag”
- 41. “Research has never been so easy”
- 42. “A serious Research engine”
- 44. 26 Summon Launchon-campus publicity
- 45. 27 Summon Launchon-campus publicity
- 47. by Dec 2010, logins were up 20% on the same period in 2009
- 48. 83.8% of students have heard of Summon and have used it at least once
- 50. Conducted as part of the implementation of Summon (and my dissertation) 5 Focus Groups (33 students) 18 PG Taught 13 UG 2 PG Research 30 Focus Groups
- 51. To examine the existing search behaviours of students questionnaire To observe how students use Summon observation and group discussion To explore participants initial responses to using Summon observation and group discussion 31 Focus Groupsobjectives
- 52. Completed before taking part in the search task and group discussion Collected demographic information from participants name, course, level, year of study 32 Focus Groupsquestionnaire
- 53. General questions asked about their experience of using resource discovery products, e.g. “When searching for information, do you type one or two words into the search box?” “Do you use advanced search?” 33 Focus Groupsquestionnaire
- 54. Structured task used alongside questionnaire and group discussions Lasting around 15 to 20 minutes, designed to replicate real situation of a participant using Summon to find information for their studies Sample questions provided if students couldn’t think of anything to search of 34 Focus Groupsobservation
- 55. Notable behaviour was recorded using checklist body language more specific information seeking-related behaviours inspired by Stephan et al’s (2006) usability study of a university library homepage One facilitator with approximately three observers per participant 35 Focus Groupsobservation
- 56. Discussion inspired by Brantley et al (2006) User comments are extremely useful for identifying navigation and layout problems data gathered from this study enabled us to evaluate Summon and it’s intuitiveness 6 Group discussions recorded and transcribed 36 Focus Groupsgroup discussion
- 57. Inputting one or two keywords into search engines was most popular search method Recorded in previous studies, Tallent (2004:70) 37 Focus Groupsfindings
- 58. Evidence from this and other studies, clearly shows that students are transferring their search behaviour from web search engines, to academic research 38 Focus Groupsfindings
- 59. 18 out of 33 participants said they regularly made use of the advanced search function within search engines 39 Focus Groupsfindings – advanced search
- 60. Limitation of this study majority of participants were MSc, so it is to be expected that they had more advanced skills than undergraduates. (Oberhelman, 2006) 40 Focus Groupsfindings – advanced search
- 61. Before observation, majority of students stated that they use a search engine regularly for academic research Only 8 participants said they didn’t use Metalib or an equivalent more than once a week Evidence that as one student puts it “they can find lots of useful information on Google” 41 Focus Groupsfindings
- 62. Preview of article feature was joint most used feature in in Summon 30 out of the 33 participants made use of this feature, which suggests they found it a very useful tool for their research Although intuitive and relevant results retrieved, resource discovery products need such features that add-value Literature is littered with examples of students’ frustrations with poor resource discovery systems 42 Focus Groupsfindings
- 63. Generally, participants did not use the refining facets within Summon reason may be 20 minutes time during structured search task could also be impatience? (Oberhelman, 2006) 43 Focus Groupsfindings – refining facets
- 64. Interesting to note prominence of facets: Google added refining facets onto their results page in 2009 students therefore maybe more likely to use such features on Summon when conducting academic research 44 Focus Groupsfindings – refining facets
- 65. General consensus from students, after using Summon and sharing their thoughts, was that they were very impressed easy and intuitive, especially when compared with Metalib quick to retrieve results received lots of results some more experienced users questioned the quality of results 45 Focus Groupsgroup discussion
- 66. 46 Focus Group Commentseasy/intuitive I felt like there was a lot you could do without needing any help. You’ve not got as many fiddly bits to do; you just type in what you want. It’s almost like Google Scholar, so I like it for that. Richard Nicole I think if you were coming across both (Metalib and Summon) for the first time, you’d probably have more success straight away with Summon on your own. Maria
- 67. 47 Focus Group Commentslots of results I think you get a lot more articles from Summon because (in Metalib) you’ve got to search within each different database and your research takes you a little bit longer. Caroline
- 68. 48 Focus Group Commentsquality of results What’s coming up? Or is this really what I was looking for? [I] wasn’t particularly sure about how useful [results] were for what I was trying to find out about. Jo ...some useful, some not so useful but that’s the way it is with everything; it’s the same with a Google search and Metalib search, any search. The more you refine it, the more relevant your results will be. Richard
- 69. (Morrison, 2005) argues implementation of resource discovery systems is key to their success products generally regarded by users as good systems and appear to satisfy the need of the students, are still not used by students – instead they turn to Google lack of promotion 49 Focus Groups
- 70. Literature suggests despite excellent feedback on Summon, at least for undergraduates, it doesn’t yet have strong enough brand presence wasn’t fully launched until July 2010 Ongoing promotion required – likelihood of users forgetting Summon and inevitably defaulting back to Google 50 Focus Groups
- 71. The purpose of study was to see if students liked Summon and to compare findings with the current literature 51 Focus Groupssummary of findings
- 72. Summary: the sample of students used Summon and thought it was excellent based on the observational data collected it was clear participants thought Summon to be a vast improvement on Metalib they found it to be intuitive; fast at retrieving results and also that it provided lots of results 52 Focus Groupssummary of findings
- 73. Summary: the participants felt they needed some instruction when making use of the additional features such as the refining facets it was suggested that more advanced users would require specific instruction as well, to best make use of the additional features 53 Focus Groupssummary of findings
- 74. Summary: hoped this research can contribute to the ongoing discussion surrounding resource discovery system many of the findings correspond with much of literature – suggests that undergraduate students would like a good quality one-stop-shop to use for their academic research 54 Focus Groupssummary of findings
- 75. Summary: because of Summon, there were some continuing students who were very much looking forward to their studies next year! 55 Focus Groupssummary of findings
- 76. Brantley, S, Armstrong, A, and Lewis K. M. (2006). "Usability Testing of a Customizable Library Web Portal", College & Research Libraries, 67 (2), 146-163. Flick, U. (2009). An Introduction to Qualitative Research. London: SAGE Publications. Gibson, I, Goddard, C. L. and Gordon, S. (2008). "One Box to Search Them All: Implementing Federated Search at an Academic Library." Library Hi Tech, 27 (1), 118-133. Korah, A, and Cassidy, E. D. (2010). "Students and Federated Searching: A Survey of Use and Satisfaction" Reference & User Services Quarterly, 49 (4), 325-332. Morrison, P. J. (2005). "The Patron Strikes Back: A Review of Recent Library Web Site Usability Studies". [Online] Kent State University Information Use and Services. [Accessed 14 July 2010]. Oberhelman, D. (2006). "The Time Machine: Federated Searching Today and Tomorrow." Reference Reviews, 20 (3), 6-8. Stephan, L. M., Cheng, D. T., and Young, L. M. (2006). "A Usability Study at the University of Mississippi Libraries for the Improvement of the Library Homepage." [Online] Journal of Academic Librarianship, 32 (1), 35-51. Stubbings, R. (2003). "MetaLib and SFX at Loughborough University Library." Vine, 33(1), 25-32. Tallent, E. (2004). "Metasearching in Boston College Libraries – a case study of user" reactions. New Library World, 105(1/2), 69-75. 56 Focus Groupsbibliography
- 77. 57 A Quick Tour of Summon
- 78. Library catalogue books, videos, DVDs, scores, etc Journals (print & electronic) mixture of subscription & Open Access content University repository Off-air TV & radio recordings (UniTube) 58 What’s in Summon now?
- 79. University Archives Embedded multimedia e.g. off-air recordings 59 What’s not Summon yet?
- 82. 62 Summonrefine to peer-reviewed articles…
- 83. 63 Summoninclude/exclude subject terms…
- 84. 64 Summoninclude/exclude subject terms…
- 85. 65 SummonWeb of Science citation counts…
- 86. 66 Summonsearch beyond the library collection…
- 91. 71 Electronic Resources Wikilibrary.hud.ac.uk/wiki/
- 93. 74 Electronic Resources Bloglibrary.hud.ac.uk/blogs/er/
- 94. 75 Electronic Resources Blog library.hud.ac.uk/blogs/er/
- 95. 76 “Report a Problem”
- 96. 77 Usage Stats
- 97. 78 Full Text Downloadsresource 1
- 98. 79 Full Text Downloadsresource 2
- 99. 80 Full Text Downloads resource 3
- 100. 81 Full Text Downloadsresource 4
- 101. 82 One final word...
- 102. “Summon is bloody brilliant. It blows Metalib out of the water! It gives fast, efficient and above all relevant research results. I found on Summon in 2 days what would have taken 2 weeks on Metalib.” Abdul, PHD student and part-time lecturer 83 One final word...
- 103. Any questions? d.c.pattern@hud.ac.uk martin.philip@hud.ac.uk 84 Thank you!
Notas do Editor
- http://www.serialssolutions.com/news-detail/university-of-huddersfield-is-uks-first-commercial-adoption-of-the-summon-s/
- As part of my dissertation, I wanted to contribute to the literature in this area. Although studies had been done before me, I wanted to see if students wanted this kind of academic search engine.As part of the Summon implementation, the focus groups, during the beta stage, enabled us to make tweaks where necessary an feed stuff back to Serial Solutions if necessary.
- Benefits of short questionnaireFlick (2009: 164) allows “you to collect the data, which [is] less relevant than the topics of the interview itself before the actual interview”
- Benefits of short questionnaireFlick (2009: 164) allows “you to collect the data, which [is] less relevant than the topics of the interview itself before the actual interview”
- as Flick (2009: 222) puts it, an observation of someone using something allows us “to find out if [Summon] actually works.” Influenced by Gibson et al’s (2009) usability study of Memorial University’s (Canada) federated search engine. Gibson conducted a search based task to assess if the search engine was clear and had consistent navigation. The aim was to evaluate the use and perception of the search engine based on its effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction.
- First part of observational checklist centred on body language and how participants appeared to behave when using Summon.Following that was series of more specific information seeking-related behaviours that were to be marked on the observational checklist.Inspired by Stephan et al’s (2006) usability study of the University of Mississippi’s library homepage.Measured participants’ behaviour such as the number of clicks they made on each icon and any satisfaction, signs of frustration or indecision they exhibited.
- Inspired by previous usability studies found in the literature.Brantley et al (2006) note that the main benefit of having group discussions is that the user comments recorded are extremely useful in terms of identifying navigation and layout problems. It is hoped that like the University of Illinois, the data gathered from this study will enable the University of Huddersfield to evaluate Summon and it’s intuitiveness. 6 Group discussions recorded, then transcribed.
- Inputting one or two keywords into search engines was most popular search method. Recorded by previous studies, Tallent (2004: 70) points that having a keyword based method “is not just the approach (students have) to this resource, but to database searching in general.”Evidence from this and other studies, clearly shows that undergraduate students are transferring their search behaviour from web search engines, to academic research.21 of our participants said when searching for academic information using an information retrieval system, they inputted one or two keywords into a search box. 30 out of the 33 participants were observed exhibiting these same search behaviours. This evidence, plus the recorded comments made by students in the group discussion, corresponds with much of the studies that have already been conducted. This would suggest that libraries should be providing what students, as Oberhelman (2006: 6) puts it, “have long wished for”, namely “a clean, Google-like box into which they can plug a keyword or two for a search and… instantly get the results they want.”
- Inputting one or two keywords into search engines was most popular search method. Recorded by previous studies, Tallent (2004: 70) points that having a keyword based method “is not just the approach (students have) to this resource, but to database searching in general.”Evidence from this and other studies, clearly shows that undergraduate students are transferring their search behaviour from web search engines, to academic research.21 of our participants said when searching for academic information using an information retrieval system, they inputted one or two keywords into a search box. 30 out of the 33 participants were observed exhibiting these same search behaviours. This evidence, plus the recorded comments made by students in the group discussion, corresponds with much of the studies that have already been conducted. This would suggest that libraries should be providing what students, as Oberhelman (2006: 6) puts it, “have long wished for”, namely “a clean, Google-like box into which they can plug a keyword or two for a search and… instantly get the results they want.”
- 18 out of 33 said they regularly made use of the advanced search function within search engines. Limitation of this study: Majority of participants were MSc, so it is to be expected that they have a reasonable experience of academic.(Oberhelman, 2006) too confirms that students of this level should be more ‘savvy’ when conducting their research and therefore making use of additional features such as advanced search.
- 18 out of 33 said they regularly made use of the advanced search function within search engines. Limitation of this study: Majority of participants were MSc, so it is to be expected that they have a reasonable experience of academic.(Oberhelman, 2006) too confirms that students of this level should be more ‘savvy’ when conducting their research and therefore making use of additional features such as advanced search.
- Questionnaire data and group discussion transcripts:When students were asked about their existing academic search behaviours, the majority stated that they use a type of search engine regularly. Only 8 participants said they didn’t use Metalib or an equivalent more than once a week. Usage of these systems evidenced by participants statements such as “they can find lots of useful information on Google”.A main theme throughout the findings was constant comparison of Summon with Metalib or a similar product. The sample of students from this study are familiar with using a search-engine style system to conduct academic research. Literature supports this evidence: Tallent’s (2004) usability study found that students were familiar with and therefore desired a search engine-style interface for their academic studies. This study and supporting evidence from the literature would suggest that students want a one-stop-shop like Summon to be able to easily navigate library collections.
- From the observations the preview of article function was the joint most used feature when participants spent twenty minutes using Summon. 30 out of the 33 participants made use of this feature, which suggests they found it a very useful tool for their research. Apart from the intuitiveness and relevant results of a resource discovery product; such systems also need to provide features to add-value. The literature (Stubbings, 2003; Oberhelman, 2006; Korah & Cassidy, 2010) is littered with examples of students being frustrated with poor one-stop-shop products or ones that have been poorly implemented.
- From the observations and the group discussion it was clear that, generally, participants did not make use of the refining facets within Summon. Facets are numerous tick boxes where users have the capacity to narrow their results down further.Eg. including or excluding subject terms; date, content type, peer-reviewed material, etc. Participants didn’t fully explore Summon and make use of some of the additional features. Only 20 minutes allotted for participants to use Summon probably had a big bearing on whether participants used the additional features or not. Interestingly not about facets or the refining style:Google added refining facets onto their results page in 2009As students become more accustomed with facets in their general web searches, they are more likely to use such features on Summon when conducting academic research.Hope is that, resource discovery products such as Summon, may end up being the search engine of choice for undergraduates, as they ‘do’ the basic search very well but also provide more options for the more advanced user.Firstly, much of the literature (Oberhelman, 2006), as we have seen, describes students’ search behaviour as impatient, and that they are unwilling to spend a lot of time analyzing the initial list of retrieved results.
- From the observations and the group discussion it was clear that, generally, participants did not make use of the refining facets within Summon. Facets are numerous tick boxes where users have the capacity to narrow their results down further.Eg. including or excluding subject terms; date, content type, peer-reviewed material, etc. Participants didn’t fully explore Summon and make use of some of the additional features. Only 20 minutes allotted for participants to use Summon probably had a big bearing on whether participants used the additional features or not. Interestingly not about facets or the refining style:Google added refining facets onto their results page in 2009As students become more accustomed with facets in their general web searches, they are more likely to use such features on Summon when conducting academic research.Hope is that, resource discovery products such as Summon, may end up being the search engine of choice for undergraduates, as they ‘do’ the basic search very well but also provide more options for the more advanced user.Firstly, much of the literature (Oberhelman, 2006), as we have seen, describes students’ search behaviour as impatient, and that they are unwilling to spend a lot of time analyzing the initial list of retrieved results.
- Much of the literature (Morrison, 2005) that supports the idea of creating a one-stop-shop for students, to best navigate themselves through the bewildering amount of subscribed resources, argues that the implementation of the product is a key component in the success of a product and how well received it is by library users. He documents how products generally regarded by lecturers and librarians alike as good systems and appear to satisfy the need of the students, are still not used by students. Instead they turn to Google. This is invariably because of the amount of resources, or lack of, that the institution is able to put behind the launching and promotion of the product. The evidence suggest that despite Summon appearing not to require large amounts of instruction, at least to use it at a basic level, it still doesn’t have anywhere near the same amount of brand presence that Google has for example.This will mean that although in the first instance Summon will not need much instruction to be delivered, for it to be used by students regularly throughout their course, it still needs to be heavily promoted by librarians and lecturers. If this is not the case, the likelihood is that, as has been aforementioned, students will not be aware of the one-stop-shop and inevitably default back to Google.
- Much of the literature (Morrison, 2005) that supports the idea of creating a one-stop-shop for students, to best navigate themselves through the bewildering amount of subscribed resources, argues that the implementation of the product is a key component in the success of a product and how well received it is by library users. He documents how products generally regarded by lecturers and librarians alike as good systems and appear to satisfy the need of the students, are still not used by students. Instead they turn to Google. This is invariably because of the amount of resources, or lack of, that the institution is able to put behind the launching and promotion of the product. The evidence suggest that despite Summon appearing not to require large amounts of instruction, at least to use it at a basic level, it still doesn’t have anywhere near the same amount of brand presence that Google has for example.This will mean that although in the first instance Summon will not need much instruction to be delivered, for it to be used by students regularly throughout their course, it still needs to be heavily promoted by librarians and lecturers. If this is not the case, the likelihood is that, as has been aforementioned, students will not be aware of the one-stop-shop and inevitably default back to Google.
- Hope is that, resource discovery products such as Summon, may end up being the search engine of choice for undergraduates, as they ‘do’ the basic search very well but also provide more options for the more advanced user.The purpose of study was to see if students liked Summon, as a resource discovery system, and to compare findings with the current literature. Summary:The sample of students used Summon and thought it was excellent.They found it to be intuitive; fast at retrieving results and also that it provided lots of results.The participants felt they needed some instruction when making use of the additional features such as the refining facets.It was suggested that more advanced users would require specific instruction as well, to best make use of the additional features.Summon could be seen as a benchmark for one-stop-shops as this study suggests it achieves much of what federated search engines are lacking.It is clear that the findings from this study correspond with much of the literature that suggests that undergraduate students would like a good quality one-stop-shop to use for their academic research.It is hoped that this piece of research can contribute to the ongoing discussion surrounding resource discovery system.
- Hope is that, resource discovery products such as Summon, may end up being the search engine of choice for undergraduates, as they ‘do’ the basic search very well but also provide more options for the more advanced user.The purpose of study was to see if students liked Summon, as a resource discovery system, and to compare findings with the current literature. Summary:The sample of students used Summon and thought it was excellent.They found it to be intuitive; fast at retrieving results and also that it provided lots of results.The participants felt they needed some instruction when making use of the additional features such as the refining facets.It was suggested that more advanced users would require specific instruction as well, to best make use of the additional features.Summon could be seen as a benchmark for one-stop-shops as this study suggests it achieves much of what federated search engines are lacking.It is clear that the findings from this study correspond with much of the literature that suggests that undergraduate students would like a good quality one-stop-shop to use for their academic research.It is hoped that this piece of research can contribute to the ongoing discussion surrounding resource discovery system.
- Hope is that, resource discovery products such as Summon, may end up being the search engine of choice for undergraduates, as they ‘do’ the basic search very well but also provide more options for the more advanced user.The purpose of study was to see if students liked Summon, as a resource discovery system, and to compare findings with the current literature. Summary:The sample of students used Summon and thought it was excellent.They found it to be intuitive; fast at retrieving results and also that it provided lots of results.The participants felt they needed some instruction when making use of the additional features such as the refining facets.It was suggested that more advanced users would require specific instruction as well, to best make use of the additional features.Summon could be seen as a benchmark for one-stop-shops as this study suggests it achieves much of what federated search engines are lacking.It is clear that the findings from this study correspond with much of the literature that suggests that undergraduate students would like a good quality one-stop-shop to use for their academic research.It is hoped that this piece of research can contribute to the ongoing discussion surrounding resource discovery system.
- It is hoped that this piece of research can contribute to the ongoing discussion surrounding resource discovery system.It is clear that the findings from this study correspond with much of the literature that suggests that undergraduate students would like a good quality one-stop-shop to use for their academic research.Because of Summon, there were some continuing students who were very much looking forward to their studies next year.
- It is hoped that this piece of research can contribute to the ongoing discussion surrounding resource discovery system.It is clear that the findings from this study correspond with much of the literature that suggests that undergraduate students would like a good quality one-stop-shop to use for their academic research.Because of Summon, there were some continuing students who were very much looking forward to their studies next year.