A New Approach to E-reserves The Seneca Libraries Experience OLA Superconference - February 3, 2007 Presented by: Jennifer Peters-Lise, Metadata & Digital Services Librarian Jane Foo, Manager of Digital Library Services & Information Systems

Todays talk Senecas experience Canadian e-reserves survey Prototypes Pilot Project

Definitions Print Reserves –Short term loan –Reserves do not include: items not related to a specific course/program textbooks

Definitions E-reserves –Traditional reserve-type material available online Scanned Selected from an electronic source

Definitions Additional course readings –Selected by faculty in addition to course reserves. –Research by Course pages

Sample Research by Course page

The problem… The student may have to visit multiple places (virtual and physical) to find their course materials. [ oh what will I do!]

Desired solutions: Collocate materials into one list Access as much as possible online Not online? Tell them where to find it! User friendly and inexpensive system

E-reserves Research Committee Oct Dec 2006 Examined: –Senecas current reserves practices –17 existing e-reserves projects across Canada –Available systems for e-reserves –Applicable copyright laws

Senecas current reserves Mixture of formats Paper copies damaged; pages lost Complaints about loan periods Line-ups everywhere!

Canadian E-reserves Scan Surveyed 17 universities across Canada Questions covered: –Systems –Copyright –Workflow –Statistics and marketing

Canadian E-reserves Scan findings E-reserves systems 8 use ILS 4 use home grown system 2 use a static web page 2 use Docuteks ERes Copyright policies 9 digitize print materials 8 seek copyright for faculty 7 pay for licenses 1 claims fair dealing

Canadian E-reserves Scan findings Processing time 9 days for non-copyrighted items 8 weeks for copyrighted items Staffing Each school different Ranged from 1 to 6 people Mixture of librarians and technicians

Canadian E-reserves Commonalities 1.ILS 2.Digitizing materials 3.Seeking and paying for rights 4.Password protection 5.Staffing according to own librarys needs.

Canadian E-reserves Weaknesses Multiple access points Statistics Marketing plans

E-reserves Prototypes

Docuteks ERes

Course dashboard

Course reserves page settings

Course dashboard

Documents and copyright

Add a document (metadata)

Add copyright information

Docuteks ERes What we liked –User friendly –Store copyright documents –Password protection –Self-maintenance available –Basic statistics –Administrative control

Docutek What we didnt like –Metadata not expandable –Duplicate data entry –Cost –Stand-alone system

Docutek ERes – the bottom line Avoid another stand-alone system Cost outweighed benefit Not enough bang for our buck!

Endeavors Voyager Senecas current ILS Print reserves system Staff familiar with cataloguing

Cataloguing template

Browsing

Results display – course code/instructor search

Embedding the link in Blackboard

Voyager What we liked: –Cataloguing templates –Reports and statistics –Search engine –Integration of print and electronic materials –Maintenance

Voyager What we didnt like –Results/browsing interface –Security –Unable to house documents

Voyager – the bottom line Display would confuse students Cataloguing issues Getting warmer, but we can do better!

Blackboard Senecas current LMS and Portal Content System –Virtual hard drive –Store files in an hierarchical folder structure –Link from course page into content system

Blackboard What we liked: –Students, staff and faculty are already familiar with the system –Access for students – we come to them, they dont come to us –Shows a hierarchy of their readings –Library has full access to a portion of the Content System –No extra cost

Blackboard What we did not like: –No cataloguing ability – only filename –Metadata is secondary – more of an afterthought –Cannot sort and re-arrange content from within the Content System –Cannot centrally store and share links / content across different courses form –No reports –Statistics only exist in the course pages to which we dont have access to –No administrative control over our content within BlackBoard

Blackboard – the bottom line Lacks sophistication required to maintain a large collection of materials Lacks reporting capabilities Statistics are not advanced and require faculty collaboration Lack of administrative access Not smart enough.

Encompass for Digital Collections Endeavors comprehensive system for local digital content creation, management and access. Has been used for the management and display for large historical and image collections (e.g., National Library of New Zealand)

EDC - Cataloguing template

Main page

Browsing by course code

Organizing readings by week

Alternate organization of readings

Search for course code

Results display

Encompass for Digital Collections What we liked –We already own it –Cataloguing workflow On-the-fly templates = no duplicate data entry Immediate error correction Top-down collection view = easy maintenance and organization –Can import MARC records –Staff uptake should be quick because it is similar to ILS system –Combines the user-friendly logical browsing of Blackboard with the cataloguing and data control of Voyager

Encompass for Digital Collections What we didnt like –password protection at document level –search display is okay, would rather have users browse for items

Encompass – customizations Highly customizable data retrieval and display using XML, XSLT and CSS Some legacy coding requiring cleanup One click from title to content / location Live link to library catalogue record for print items (e.g., textbooks) Custom field displays in records New search indices (course code, instructor)

ENCompass and BlackBoard Embedded search Link directly to browsing list from a course page in Blackboard

Encompass – the bottom line Economical choice Functionality fits – cataloguing and display We have the skills to customize the UI to our needs Perfect fit for now…except …

Support for ENCompass will be discontinued end of Will we be able to find something that fits our needs?

Policies and procedures

Policies and Procedures – content & staffing Workflow should connects course materials Merge Research by Course pages into the system Both reference and borrower services staff will catalogue materials for the system

Policies and Procedures - faculty Administer course readings using Blackboard Use Library Content and we will duplicate the readings list

Policies and procedures - copyright Fair dealing" does not apply to teaching materials. Access Copyright does not apply to digitization of print materials We must contact copyright holders for licensing

Policies and procedures - digitization Digitize faculty created items with opt-out available Seek copyright permission and scan as many print reserves as possible

Pilot project

Pilot project -- Jan-Dec 2007 Preliminary test with a small # of courses (Jan- Apr) Form the lead advisory & technical committee (Jan) Form implementation committees at each campus (Feb)

Pilot project -- Jan-Dec 2007 Weed print reserves & update/delete course pages (Feb-Mar) Staff training for scanning, e-reserves system and copyright (Mar) Retroactive cataloguing (Apr-May)

Pilot project -- Jan-Dec 2007 User testing and follow-up (Summer) Marketing sub-committee and plan (Summer) Larger pilot and evaluation (Sept-Dec)

Questions?

Jenn IM & Yahoo: senlibjenn Link to presentation Jane IM & Yahoo: senlibjane Seneca E-reserves Committee Final Report