This document summarizes a presentation about implementing a resource list management system (RLMS) at Nottingham Trent University. The presentation discusses how the university transitioned from managing reading lists to managing multi-format resource lists through the Talis Aspire RLMS. It describes the challenges this posed for libraries and how key decisions were made during implementation regarding list creation, existing data migration, and training support. Metrics on adoption rates before and after implementation are provided. The workflow for populating, reviewing, acquiring, and making available resources on lists is examined along with ongoing challenges for libraries.

1. 18 March 2022
1
Enhancing life-long learning, teaching and research through
information resources and services

2. 18 March 2022
2
Resource lists and e-resources –
discovery and management challenges
Dr Richard Cross, Resource Discovery and Innovation Team Manager
Libraries and Learning Resources, Nottingham Trent University
UKSG Conference 2012

3. Abstract
• In the academic sector the concept of the multi-format resource list is
rapidly displacing the notion of largely book-bound, print-bound reading
lists. This opening up of the notion of the resource list has, as a result,
expanded the pedagogic opportunities for academics and the learning
options for students. For libraries charged with running a web-based
resource list management system (RLMS) on behalf of a learning institution,
the challenges raised by the need to ‘resource the resource lists’ can be
profound. This presentation will assess the impact that the introduction of
the Talis Aspire RLMS has had on the resource discovery and resource
management practices of Libraries and Learning Resources at Nottingham
Trent University, with particular focus on electronic serials, e-books and
other online resources. The results will be of interest to any academic
librarians involved in the selection, acquisition and discovery of electronic
resources whose library service is considering the implementation of a
resource list solution.
18 March 2022
3

4. 18 March 2022
4
Agenda
• Resource Lists vs. Reading Lists
• Implementing a Resource List Management System (RLMS) at
Nottingham Trent University
• What the adoption of RLMS has meant (staff, students, librarians)
• The ‘library review’ process – resourcing the resource list
• Challenges for the library
• Simple innovations to support library’s work
• Future developments

5. Nottingham Trent University and the RLMS
• Information Systems
 Virtual Learning Environment (VLE)
 Shibboleth
 Libraries and Learning Resources
 Information Resources
 Acquisitions
 Metadata services
 Document supply and digitisation
 Technical services
 Customer Services
 Front-line support for students
 Academic liaison
 Information literacy
 Advocacy and promotion

6. My role in NTU Resource List project…
• Lead Resource Discovery and Innovation
Team within Information Resources
• Technical lead for the Resource List
project group
• Administrator of NTU’s Talis Aspire
Tenancy
• Member of the RLMS management team
• Manage the team responsible for resource
list ‘link checking’
• Liaison between LLR and VLE team
• Liaison between LLR and Information
Systems (including Shibboleth)

7. 18 March 2022
7
Resource lists – and the resource list challenge

8. 18 March 2022
8
What is the difference between a Reading
List and Resource List?
Reading List Resource List
• Books
• Journal articles
• Books / eBooks
• Journal / eJournal articles
• Web sites
• Learning materials
• Surveys, quizzes and tests
• Blogs, wikis, social media
• Photos and illustrations
• Online video and audio
• Statistics and data sets
• Search strategy guidance
• And more…

9. 18 March 2022
9
What is the difference between a Reading
List and Resource List?
Reading List Resource List
• Lists of materials
• Groups chronologically or
thematically
• Prescriptive
• Collections, selections,
groups, sub-groups,
groups-within-groups of
materials
• Dynamically sortable and
filterable
• Ranking and weighting
• Embedded guidance and
pedagogic context
• Prescriptive and open &
indicative

10. Resource lists and information skills at NTU
• Raising information and literacy skills – an increasing priority
• Key aims: facilitate development of the ‘independent learner’; and
support ‘directed study’ through access to information resources
• Student feedback reported failings in delivery of ‘direct reading’
“I can’t find the things my lecturer told me to
read”
•Existing resource/reading list management was not up to task
“I can’t find a list of things from my lecturer
that I ought to read”

11. How were reading lists being ‘managed’?
• No guarantee to the student: no certainty that course offerings
would provide the learner with a reading list; experiences differed
• No consistent ‘format’: not physical format; nor structure; nor
extent; nor over reach and range of materials
• No single point of student discovery: some lists were held in the
VLE database; some as VLE documents; some as print-only
• No consistent method for library discovery: library sought to
acquire as many lists as possible, but only accessed a small
percentage (circa 20%, at the very best)
• No rigorous workflow: lists were not seamlessly processed from
the academic, through the library service, to the student
• No fully supportive policy framework: to underpin service

12. 18 March 2022
12
Adopting Talis Aspire

13. New Resource List solution had to deliver
• For students….
– Consistent, good quality Resource Lists with (much) improved availability
– Clearer guidance on different types of material (Core, Recommended, etc.)
– Simple access to the lists (primarily through the learning space in the VLE)
• For academic staff…
– Easy population of lists from the library discovery systems and other sources
– Required resources ‘on shelves’ (actual, virtual) quicker, with less effort
– Fewer complaints from students!
• For library staff…
– Resource acquisition with a proven correlation to learning and teaching need
– Support for real-world library workflows (without being prescriptive or fixed)
– Fewer complaints from students!

14. Resource List Management System project
• Project team set up, with full backing of the university, to
implement a RLMS; beginning with a procurement process
• Selected the Aspire product (from Talis) – new generation product,
in use at a growing number of UK universities
18 March 2022
14

15. Key implementation decisions
• RLMS service: a centralised or devolved resource list environment?
• List creation: a mediated service or direct academic creation?
• Existing data: import legacy data or fresh start?
• Launch: targeted pilot or big bang?
• Library contract: strong and explicit or limited and secondary?
18 March 2022
15

16. Key implementation decisions: at NTU
• RLMS service: a centralised resource list environment
• List creation: direct academic creation
• Existing data: import legacy data (where existed) and fresh start
(where needed)
• Launch: big bang
• Library contract: strong and explicit
18 March 2022
16

17. Implementation plan
• Target live date – September 2010
• Parallel strands to implementation process
 Deliver technical aspects
 Securing policy environment
 Providing training to academics
 Preparing library to underpin live service
• Went live to students in September 2010!
• Now in second full academic year of RLMS – first list set has been
‘rolled over’ for the new session

18. Resource lists - students
• Delivering resource lists to
students, across disciplines and at
all levels;
• Populated, authored and owned
by academics;
• Integrated with VLE (1-to-1
match: module to list)
• Materials are validated (metadata
and linking) by the library
18 March 2022
18

19. Resource lists - academics
• Own, author, populate and revise resource lists
• Benefit from automatic and dynamic association with modules
• Utilise a variety of methods for capturing resources (‘bookmarks’)
• Have access to training and support when-and-where needed
• Recognise ‘contract’ with the library to resource lists
18 March 2022
19

20. Resource lists – library service
• Resource list management now central to
library activity
• Front facing teams working with academics;
supporting students
• Back-of-house teams working with list
validation and acquisitions processing
18 March 2022
20

21. Take-up and adoption
Prior to implementation of Aspire RLMS
• Library service was aware of <20% of
potential reading lists
• Student discovery of list materials was ad-
hoc and unmanaged
With the implementation of Aspire RLMS
• Library service now working with >68% of
potential resource lists
• Students benefit from managed, integrated,
QA-ed discovery
Adoption target: 100%
18 March 2022
21

22. 18 March 2022
22
Creating and managing resource lists

23. Populating a resource list with items
18 March 2022
23
• A JavaScript based web browser plug-in enables metadata to be
auto-extracted from online resource records
‘Bookmark’ items online – from
the library discovery system,
and elsewhere
Populate lists with items –
arrange, organise and annotate
as required
• Academics (or librarians) create lists through a two stage process

24. Adding citation data to a bookmark library
• Range of citation and reference
management applications offer
automated or part-automated metadata
extraction from electronic resources
• Aspire utilises a range of similar
technologies to read-in metadata
• Pulling ‘recognisers’ web page code
• Reading in OpenURL and COinS data
• Leveraging look-ups from CrossRef,
OpenLibrary
• Augmenting metadata from local
catalogue sources
• Accepting RIS (Research Information
Systems) file loads
18 March 2022
24

25. 18 March 2022
25

26. 18 March 2022
26

27. 18 March 2022
27

28. The library discovery system preference
18 March 2022
28
• A list author begins a search on Amazon, bookmarking an Item…

29. • Aspire extracts ISBN values from the Amazon record; checks for a
match in the LMS; if it finds a match, it sources data from the
library system; if not, it pulls data from Open Library
18 March 2022
29

30. The Bookmark browser plug-in
Any web location can be Bookmarked:
 Extracts page title and URL
• Minimal metadata
• URL may not be persistent or authentication-aware
Web locations configured for the Bookmark plug-in:
 Extracts identifiers to perform an additional look-up (LCN, ISBN, DOI)
 Returns far richer metadata
 Enables more appropriate linking (without need for intervention)
18 March 2022
30

31. 18 March 2022
31
Resource List – preparing the student view
• Adding and organising items – authoring (direct or mediated)
• Item priority status – set by list author
• Item annotation – added by list author

32. Authoring a Resource List – drag-and-drop
18 March 2022
32

33. 18 March 2022
33
Resource List – Item view (physical stock)
• Item data – extracted from library discovery system record
• Library availability – a live holdings look-up
• ‘View in library catalogue’ – a LCN deep-link
• ‘Other formats/editions’ – a Title/Author search (or alternative)

34. Resource List – Item view (electronic book)
18 March 2022
34
• Item data – extracted from library discovery system record
• Link – $856 URL presented in Resource List record

35. Resource List – Item view (journal article)
18 March 2022
35
• Item data – CrossRef and OpenURL resolver integration
• Article/Journal – presents ‘is part of/has part’ elements

36. Resource List – Item view (YouTube video)
• Embedded object (auto-extracted when bookmarked from YouTube)
18 March 2022
36

37. 18 March 2022
37
Student access to resource lists

38. VLE: accounts for 95%+ of access requests
18 March 2022
38

39. 18 March 2022
39
The ‘library review’ process

40. The Library Review of Resource Lists
• Academics submit completed resource lists for Library Review
18 March 2022
40

41. Meeting the challenges of RLMS support
No single set of ‘correct’ how-to responses
The individual library service’s response depends on…
• The institutional momentum of the RLMS project
• The nature of the library’s contract with academics
• Synergies or conflicts with wider teaching and resourcing strategies
• Library resources: budgetary and staffing

42. Nature of the contract with academics at
Nottingham Trent University
• “The RLMS is the tool which enables you
to deliver the university’s
expectation over resource list
provision”
• “The library will resource the resource
lists”
• “The library will operate an e-preference acquisition model by
default”
• “The priority status of items matters: directly impacting on
provision”
• “To expedite acquisition, simple formulas (matching module
numbers against relative priority) will inform purchase decisions”

43. Contract with academics: challenges
• Lists are visible to students (‘list publication’) independent of ‘library
review’
• Commitment to resource the lists is non-conditional (in principle)
• Encouraging consistent good resource list practice (in terms of
length, material balance, estimated cost)
• Working with a recognition of resource lead times
• Instances of lecturer reluctance (‘The line of list resistance’)

44. Review of lists:
Academic Liaison
Team
Processing of Lists:
Information
Resources
Making
resourced lists
available to
students
The processing of resource lists under review
18 March 2022
44
• An opportunity to rethink and refashion existing workflows
• Aim to deliver the most efficient and timely resourcing of lists
• Profound impact on existing ways of working – for all teams involved

45. The Information Resources workflow
18 March 2022
45
Link
checking
Digitisation
Acquisitions
• Researching e-availability
• One-touch ordering, whenever possible
• Updating the RLMS and LMS in parallel
• Improving quality of descriptive metadata
• Updating electronic links to be persistent
• Ensuring access available from any location
• Processing items marked for digitisation
• Enabling linking through the RLMS
• Supporting delivery through VLE

46. Acquisitions – challenges
• Promoting RLMS adoption whilst managing
expectation
• RLMS support and collection development –
balancing the two needs appropriately
• Weighing the benefits of discretion against the
gains of automation
• Limits to the availability of materials in
electronic format
• Edition vs. format tensions
• Academic interest in out-of-print titles
• Mapping workflows new acquisition models
Make
available
Acquire
Describe

47. Acquisitions challenges – Patron Driven
Acquisition
• Large PDA records sets can
be found by academics in
discovery systems
• Materials can be added to
resource lists that the library
service does not yet own
• PDA resourcing needs to
allow for end of process
acquisition

48. Linking validation – challenges
• Varied quality of electronic resource
bookmarks
• Bookmarked links can include
unwanted values – which break links
• Lack of support for deep-linking on
some information resources
• “The things academics find on the
interwebnet…” (which raise
provenance, copyright,
appropriateness, et al issues)
• Which librarians fix this stuff?
(systems team, eResource team,
metadata team)

49. Linking challenges – full-text services
• Referencing of full-text materials in aggregator packages (potential
impact of cancellation)
• Post-cancellation legacy access for direct electronic subscriptions?
• Aggregated collections are typically dynamic – content profiles change

50. Digitisation – challenges
• Academic requesting vs. library identification
of need
• Lead times for satisfying digitations requests
differ (hint – they’re rarely shorter)
• No capacity to store (or authenticate access
to) materials within Aspire – so the RLMS will
need to point to some managed,
authenticated environment

51. Resource list review – and LLR’s processes
• Launch of RLMS has led to significant realignment
of staff resources
• Funding has been realigned to meet the RLMS
commitment
• All stock management and collection development
processes have had to become RLMS-aware
• Training for staff; revisions to existing workflows;
embedding new processes – needs to be
accounted for in rollout planning
• “If your library service goes for a ‘big bang’ RLMS
launch you probably won’t get every library
management process right from the off…”

52. 18 March 2022
52
Local RLMS innovations at Nottingham
Trent University

53. Local technical and service innovations
• Relic – Resource List Item Checker (using an Aspire API)
• http://www.urko.org.uk/library/rlms/relic/index.php?type=doi&sear
ch=10.1177/0309132509105004
18 March 2022
53

54. Local technical and service innovations
• SlyFox (SFX OpenURL generator) and CatNip (Catalogue DLG)
18 March 2022
54

55. Local technical and service innovations
• LLR developed an SFX-
RLMS bookmarking
service
• Uses the Bookmarking
API for Aspire (now
supports OpenURL)
• Enables any OpenURL
supporting service to
become a bookmarking
source
18 March 2022
55
• Any metadata received by SFX can be sent to Aspire
• Several other customers have deployed this target service

56. 18 March 2022
56
RLMS and Aspire – future developments

57. Aspire enhancements anticipated by LLR
• Extending the bookmarking tool (to
improve quality of item records)
• Better Management Information
reporting (especially self-service)
• Acquisitions workflow extension
(enabling LLR to bring more processing into
Aspire)
• Improving RefWorks integration (moving
to selective, direct export)
• Synchronisation API VLE-to-Aspire (to
dispense with manual processes)
• Improved digitisation management

58. RLMS goals at Nottingham Trent University
• 100% adoption of resource lists for all taught courses
• Evidential increase in student satisfaction with resource list
provision
• Academic buy-in built on: (a) ease of use of the RLMS system; (b)
recognition of the value of the library contract; (c) proven student
satisfaction
• Library demonstrates the ability to support resource lists in agile,
timely, consistent and efficient ways
• For the library service, the positive momentum of a resource list
management system delivers: (a) a better collection; (b) improved
consultation with the library over the implications of course design

59. 18 March 2022
59
Questions or comments?
NTU Resource Lists
http://resourcelists.ntu.ac.uk
Richard Cross
Resource Discovery and Innovation Team Manager
Libraries and Learning Resources, Nottingham Trent University
richard.cross@ntu.ac.uk