3. Pilot overview
§ Why we decided to trial Talis Aspire
»
»
»
»
Standardise and improve access to course reading lists
To improve copyright compliance and reporting
Create efficiencies and align Library functions
Scale up the digitisation service
§ Griffith has unique requirements:
» Single Sign On
» Web encryption (SSL via HTTPS)
4.
5. Digitised Content (TADC) module
§ Griffith one of two testing partners in Australia
§ Current operational processes vs TADC processes
§ Findings so far:
+ Easy to use interface
+ time savings with automated metadata collection, when linked
with Reading Lists
+ Automated copyright compliance and CAL reporting
+ Cloud hosted digitisation repository
- Some functionality doesn’t operate as we expected
- Published Reading Lists may require adjusting
- Email notifications lack detail
6.
7. Reading Lists module
§ The findings:
+ Better for students
+ Ease of use
+ Integrated with Library catalogue
+ Good support from Talis, but time zone difficulties
+ Site metadata collection works on pre-requested sites
- Inconsistencies with current operational workflows
- Academic reluctance – they don’t want “more work”
- Student numbers – often not known; uneditable
- Lack of dedicated mobile device user interface
- Blackboard VLE integration – room for improvements
8. Griffith’s unique requirements
§ Single Sign On – achieved and delivered
» To uphold Griffith’s enterprise SSO for its web systems
» Based on SAML2 shared protocol
§ HTTPS web encryption – not yet delivered
» Based on Griffith’s web standards, privacy and ensuring
Single Sign On security
9. Where to from here?
§ Pilot concludes end of February; appraisal
§ Griffith to reconsider our approach, and question:
» “who owns, creates and maintains reading lists?”
» “what does Griffith want the readings lists to do?”
§ A key challenge faced
» obtaining user (academic) buy-in when the project has been
driven by the Library
§ Questions?
