Ian Rowlands, University College London
UCL's project was to acquire qualitative data on usage (Longitudinal study from Univ Tennessee)
OCLC report – search associated with Google/Yahoo branding only; library associated with legacy print – how do we put our search tools in their environment
Google are easy & predictable, but not seen as a gateway to expensive publisher-created content.
Go for easy option – need clear mental map of premium content
GG not unique
Mental map – did we only have this mental map because the library was static – what now?
People have no idea what an electronic book is?
Get much closer to our users – well beyond satisfaction surveys
Deep log analysis of 9 digital library platforms challenges assumptions on how people read – jump around spend little time on actual content. through ‘metadata broth’ viewing rather than reading
Differences in number of keywords by different nationalities = Germans most structured, Italians power browsers; males prefer HTML, females PDF
Are people using these to check facts, to avoid reading, or rejecting resources, or unable to find relevant resources.
Continuity – differences lessen as older generations catch up & even overtake.
Are our mental maps based on our models of learning?
Listening to Students: Innovative Responses:
Betsy Wilson, Dean of University Libraries, University of Washington
CIBER report (2005) – no library had a department devoted to assessment of the user – a few have now developed expertise in assessment.
ARL Library Assessment Conference among those sponsoring many activities
Based on user behaviour, use & non-use, and related to outcomes.
Commitment to continual assessment & evaluation for positive outcomes
Dialogue with users for new services & discontinued services
Qualitative & quantitative methods; they have had a series of surveys since 1992
Most have moved to remote use – preferred method
Self-reliance is of high importance
Desktop top priority
Library as place to work, other visits drop
UWash. has a focus on bioscience; 70% of faculty & students have some interaction with bioscientists but there is no actual faculty of Bioscience
Print really dead
Library provides ejournal with big chequebook – what happens with OA
Need help with personal information
Fulfilment – library costs from transaction to delivery too high
Integrate discovery & delivery
Integrate collection development budgets
Get librarians out of the library
Can we generalise?
Disparity between faculty & UG usage greater than assumed
Move to desktop – faculty use of collections drop, but UG relatively static. Their activities in library also static. UG remote access increase not as steep as Faculty & Research
Survey that students agreed libraries make them more productive researchers
UG – space
Res – how to save time
Fac – collections
Discovery & delivery
Collection resource reallocation
60 regional ILL
114% international ILL
Maintain relevancy & centrality – increase since 1995 – refocus on student needs rather than faculty
Do students rate value with how difficult resource is to obtain
Use consumer mindset to judge materials also services
Print rather reading use
Log analysis based on the browser use