We have moved forward with our weeding/deselection project. This project is being done working with the departments. We are using WorldCat Collection Analysis to identify titles held in the areas we are weeding. While I think this is a good tool for collection analysis (with lots of patience as it's still not intuitive), I'm not sure if it's good for weeding. I'm not sure it's bad, either.
You can only search by broad subject area, i.e. Sociology. From the matches you can drill down even further. It is easier than building a query in Millenium (III); the problem is there are subjects that may actually fall under a different program area, which means that each "sub" subject area must be exported separately. For example, I limited my query to Sociology and the 1960's (1960-1969). Not all areas were appropriate for my project. I wound up with 10 different spreadsheets since you can only either export at the top level or at each individual level. And, speaking of export, you can only export from WorldCat itself after viewing the list and it only does it in batches of 500. I find this a bit inconvenient. You also can't identify which fields you want to export.
My only other option at this point is to identify the call number areas and build the query in Millenium and then export from Millenium. However, query building in Millenium can be tedious itself and it does have some quirks. Plus, I believe the output in Excel from WorldCat Coll Analysis is cleaner. And, limiting by publication date is easier in WorldCat Coll Analysis.
I had a chance to chat with Bowker about their upcoming product while at the Charleston Conference. I think it will be better at identifying missing recommended titles, but I'm not sure it would be anymore useful for weeding.
Bottom line, this is my first major weeding project. I've had to review the titles pulled from our first round because they overlapped with other departments or we felt they should remain in the collection. I'm limiting areas to consider more, but winding up with a LOT of spreadsheets in the process. WorldCat Coll Analysis makes running the report easier, but it doesn't take all of the work out of the whole project. However, there probably isn't any tool that would do that. After about a month of this, I've decided that WorldCat Coll Analysis provides a good starting point for the weeding projects.
technorati tags: collection analysis weeding deselection
November 02, 2006
August 30, 2006
Academic Library Makeover - Part 1
In the summer of 2006, the Ottenheimer Library at UALR welcomed a new dean to their midst. Prior to her arrival, the head of the library was a Director position and had a person with a long-standing connection to the university. This new leader brought a world of fresh thought and direction to an already thriving community.
Strategic plans across campus were due July 1st and new deans were provided extended deadlines until the end of the year. Within in the first month, the dean organized a retreat of all library employees, leaving only a skeleton crew behind. An outside facilitator was retained to lead the group through a quick basic understanding of the strategic planning process. An agenda of Mission, Vision, and Strategic Directions were fare for the day.
Participation from all areas of the library allowed for lively inquiry into the direction of the library. Several strategic directions were enumerated within the allotted time period, providing the springboard for the "real work" about to begin.
Upon returning to daily routines, the Dean called for full staff participation on their choice of several "task groups" - Mission/Vision, Working with other libraries, Staff Development and Training, Building Redesign, Interdepartmental Communications, Fund raising, Community Outreach, Marketing, Assessment, Change Management, Collection Building, Offsite Storage, and Technology Advances in Education. The first group that was called to action was the Mission/Vision group.
Strategic plans across campus were due July 1st and new deans were provided extended deadlines until the end of the year. Within in the first month, the dean organized a retreat of all library employees, leaving only a skeleton crew behind. An outside facilitator was retained to lead the group through a quick basic understanding of the strategic planning process. An agenda of Mission, Vision, and Strategic Directions were fare for the day.
Participation from all areas of the library allowed for lively inquiry into the direction of the library. Several strategic directions were enumerated within the allotted time period, providing the springboard for the "real work" about to begin.
Upon returning to daily routines, the Dean called for full staff participation on their choice of several "task groups" - Mission/Vision, Working with other libraries, Staff Development and Training, Building Redesign, Interdepartmental Communications, Fund raising, Community Outreach, Marketing, Assessment, Change Management, Collection Building, Offsite Storage, and Technology Advances in Education. The first group that was called to action was the Mission/Vision group.
August 25, 2006
Chat .... more than a reference tool
I've been seeing a lot more on chat reference, particularly jobs allowing some librarians to work from home providing chat reference. However, I wonder if any libraries are using it as a "team" tool - for internal communications among staff.
My first experience with chat was in the late 1990's. I was on a customer service team that was spread across two countries and four time zones. We were trying to find a way to come together as a team and fell into using Yahoo! Messenger. It turned out to be great. We all had our little areas of expertise and the chat allowed us to pop off quick questions to the teammate in the know with very little down time. Let's face it, the phone is great, but there is always a little personal chit chat thrown in which takes up time. Using chat became the norm for our group. It was also used by other departments in the company. About a year or so after we began using chat, Lotus Notes rolled out a company chat program called SameTime. I admit I was happy to see this. The real downside to using Yahoo! Messenger at work was that it mingled my work and my personal contacts. I didn't always want co-workers to see me online on the weekends as I considered that "my" time.
Since leaving that job and moving on to librarianship, I still chat. A lot. And yes, I sometimes have it up at work, but once again, it's not just my personal contacts. It's also my librarian contacts and one person on my team here. It still has the same uses in this job as it did the previous job. Quick answers to quick questions. If I'm at the reference desk, my teammate knows this through my status and comes to the reference desk if she needs to speak with me (an added feature since I'm the second floor and she's not). But, it's not standard in the library. The only other librarian who used chat has since moved to another position half way across the country... but I can still bounce questions off of her or even ask "do you remember why we did it this way?"
School just started here and I envision this great little way of knowing who is available in case one gets swamped at the reference desk... check out the chat tool and see who is online. A quick "help!" and they'd be there. However, I've also seen chat become a monitoring tool, which took absolutely all the collaboration and creativity out of it. I definitely don't see that as a use of it, but have decided that most people need to embrace chat, at least on a personal level, on their own. When the organization is spread across two countries and four times zones, then they can mandate it's use. And, with good reason.
I wonder though, if any libraries do have groups of people on chat. There are times I know it would beat sending multiple e-mails back and forth. I will add though, that if the quick question mentioned above becomes complicated, we do pick up the phone and call. After all, we know the other person is in their office. :)
technorati tags: chat chat collaboration
My first experience with chat was in the late 1990's. I was on a customer service team that was spread across two countries and four time zones. We were trying to find a way to come together as a team and fell into using Yahoo! Messenger. It turned out to be great. We all had our little areas of expertise and the chat allowed us to pop off quick questions to the teammate in the know with very little down time. Let's face it, the phone is great, but there is always a little personal chit chat thrown in which takes up time. Using chat became the norm for our group. It was also used by other departments in the company. About a year or so after we began using chat, Lotus Notes rolled out a company chat program called SameTime. I admit I was happy to see this. The real downside to using Yahoo! Messenger at work was that it mingled my work and my personal contacts. I didn't always want co-workers to see me online on the weekends as I considered that "my" time.
Since leaving that job and moving on to librarianship, I still chat. A lot. And yes, I sometimes have it up at work, but once again, it's not just my personal contacts. It's also my librarian contacts and one person on my team here. It still has the same uses in this job as it did the previous job. Quick answers to quick questions. If I'm at the reference desk, my teammate knows this through my status and comes to the reference desk if she needs to speak with me (an added feature since I'm the second floor and she's not). But, it's not standard in the library. The only other librarian who used chat has since moved to another position half way across the country... but I can still bounce questions off of her or even ask "do you remember why we did it this way?"
School just started here and I envision this great little way of knowing who is available in case one gets swamped at the reference desk... check out the chat tool and see who is online. A quick "help!" and they'd be there. However, I've also seen chat become a monitoring tool, which took absolutely all the collaboration and creativity out of it. I definitely don't see that as a use of it, but have decided that most people need to embrace chat, at least on a personal level, on their own. When the organization is spread across two countries and four times zones, then they can mandate it's use. And, with good reason.
I wonder though, if any libraries do have groups of people on chat. There are times I know it would beat sending multiple e-mails back and forth. I will add though, that if the quick question mentioned above becomes complicated, we do pick up the phone and call. After all, we know the other person is in their office. :)
technorati tags: chat chat collaboration
August 03, 2006
Figuring out what you need
I've blogged previously (albeit breifly) about WorldCat Collection Analysis (WCA). When it came out a year ago, I was excited. I needed something to help weed our collection and appreciated the fact that WCA would sort holdings by publication date. For many subject areas this isn't really an issue, but for those that out date fast, it is. It's also proved helpful when running reports for departments seeking accreditation for new or existing programs.
WCA recently added the ability to compare your holdings to title lists. I was very pleased to see that and excited to give it a go. Well, it does tell me what titles I have that are on the title lists. I believe it also tells me what I don't have. Problem is, I'm having a hard time interpreting the data as WCA is presenting it. This just makes me more anxious to get a peek at Bowker's Book Analysis System for Academic Libraries.
The more I use, the more I realize that WCA does not present results in a intuitive fashion. They do provide documentation, but the examples are of comparisions between peer institutions and not those that are comparisons of title lists. They say it works the same. Then I view the results and, sadly, I'm not sure what I'm looking at.
In talking with another Collection Development Librarian, we discussed it a bit and why some other institutions have chosen not to go with WorldCat Collection Analysis. They weren't sure that the peer comparison was all that beneficial to them, which is a big piece of WCA. I tend to agree. So, now I start to wonder if WCA is redundent. I've been very successful at pulling holdings for my reports from my ILS system. It's a bit more tedious, but I also have the added ability to determine what fields I include in the exported Excel report. It's all standard with WCA.
I'd really like to use the same system to determine what I weed and what recommended titles I'm lacking. The goal is to beef up areas that aren't quite up to par. I'm still not sure WCA won't do this; I'm going to keep plugging away and see what I can come up with.
technorati tags: collection development, book analysis, collection analysis
WCA recently added the ability to compare your holdings to title lists. I was very pleased to see that and excited to give it a go. Well, it does tell me what titles I have that are on the title lists. I believe it also tells me what I don't have. Problem is, I'm having a hard time interpreting the data as WCA is presenting it. This just makes me more anxious to get a peek at Bowker's Book Analysis System for Academic Libraries.
The more I use, the more I realize that WCA does not present results in a intuitive fashion. They do provide documentation, but the examples are of comparisions between peer institutions and not those that are comparisons of title lists. They say it works the same. Then I view the results and, sadly, I'm not sure what I'm looking at.
In talking with another Collection Development Librarian, we discussed it a bit and why some other institutions have chosen not to go with WorldCat Collection Analysis. They weren't sure that the peer comparison was all that beneficial to them, which is a big piece of WCA. I tend to agree. So, now I start to wonder if WCA is redundent. I've been very successful at pulling holdings for my reports from my ILS system. It's a bit more tedious, but I also have the added ability to determine what fields I include in the exported Excel report. It's all standard with WCA.
I'd really like to use the same system to determine what I weed and what recommended titles I'm lacking. The goal is to beef up areas that aren't quite up to par. I'm still not sure WCA won't do this; I'm going to keep plugging away and see what I can come up with.
technorati tags: collection development, book analysis, collection analysis
July 20, 2006
Electronic Resources and Libraries Conference
This past March Alexis and I were selected to present at ER&L on our federated searching research. It was an honor to be a part of this inagural conference. I was inspired by the quality of presentations and discourse by not only the presenters but the attendees. This was the first time I had been involved with presenting that involved an online element. Participants were given access to Moodle to post questions and review powerp0ints as well as the actual presentation. I thought I would share this permanent link just released by Georgia Tech's Institutional Repository. It allows you to relive that presentation. I hope that our infomration on federated searching sparks more interest and allows the library field to start driving this discussion instead of letting the vendors - mostly IT - drive it.
http://hdl.handle.net/1853/10170
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)