“A Multi-Dimensional Framework for Academic Support”: Humanities and Social Science Scholars’ Behaviors Participating Publisher Meeting May 2006 Kate McCready, Library Project Coordinator

Project Focus & Goals funded by Mellon Foundation Within the Humanities and Social Sciences, what are the discipline-specific and general needs for: –Facilities –Information content –Services/Expertise –Tools What takes us beyond the realms of the traditional library? What can we build or improve?

Project Team Wendy Lougee, University Librarian/Principal Investigator CLA Dean & Associate Dean (Planning and Technology) Karen Williams, Associate University Librarian Cecily Marcus, Post-Doctoral Fellow Kate McCready, Librarian Project Coordinator Two Graduate Research Assistants Digital Library Development Lab Programming Support: –John Butler –Paul Bramscher –Shane Nackerud –Jen Tantzen

Project Strategy Target Audience: 16 Departments within the College of Liberal Arts - African and African American Studies, American Studies, American Indian Studies, Anthropology, Asian Languages and Literatures, Chicano Studies, Classical and Near Eastern Studies, Cultural Studies and Comparative Literature, English, French and Italian, Geography, German, Scandinavian, and Dutch, History, Political Science, Sociology, Spanish and Portuguese Studies Departmental Profiles Interviews with faculty from the departments Focus groups with graduate students Survey of CLA faculty and graduate students (target audience ~1150, over 50% response rate)

Key Question Areas Research Practices: What methodologies are used? What usage trends can be identified? What is an ideal research environment? Interdisciplinary & Collaborative Research: What are unique information/data needs of each “discipline”? Interdisciplinary research? Collaborative research? Library Research: What role do libraries play in meeting needs? What expertise is needed where? Resource Organization and Storage: What materials do researchers use, collect and preserve?

General Researcher Characteristics: Data

Analysis and Prototype Development 1. Identify Primitives 2. Attach Behaviors 3. Support with Data 4. Create New Services/Tools

Discover ShareGather Create Primitives Mellon

Discover Structured Finding Serendipitous Finding Primitives => Behaviors Keeping Current Collaborative Finding Mellon

Discover Gather Structured Finding Serendipitous Finding Primitives => Behaviors Keeping Current Collaborative Finding Collecting Organizing Acquiring Mellon

Discover Gather Create Structured Finding Reviewing & Rating Writing Annotating Analyzing Serendipitous Finding Primitives => Behaviors Keeping Current Collaborative Finding Collecting Organizing Acquiring Mellon Describing

Discover ShareGather Create Structured Finding Data Sharing Reviewing & Rating Writing Annotating Rights Publishing Analyzing Serendipitous Finding Primitives => Behaviors Keeping Current Collaborative Finding Collecting Organizing Acquiring Teaching Mellon Describing

Discover ShareGather Create Structured Finding Data Sharing Reviewing & Rating Writing Annotating Rights Publishing Analyzing Serendipitous Finding Primitives => Behaviors => H/SS Data Keeping Current Collaborative Finding 49% - Less than Effective at Keeping up with their Field. 87% - Draw on Literature from Multiple Fields 43% - Problem: Too Few Sources 85% - Important: Browsing Stacks 56% - Use Archival Research Methodologies Collecting Organizing Acquiring Teaching 43% - Less than Effective Storing Notes/Drafts 73% - Would Use Assistance Organizing/Storing Materials 39% - Less than Adequate Methods for Organizing Materials 35% - Most Challenging: Acquiring Materials 37% - Have Unique Research Collection 52% - Collaborate with Colleagues at Other Institutions Faculty Rely on Colleagues’ Recommendations 67% - Seek Assistance with Presentations 68.5% - Faculty work Collaboratively 56%- Less than Effective: Disseminating Research 46% - Collaboration Obstacle: Distance from Colleagues 60% - Share Source Materials via Hard-Copy Mellon % - Seek Assistance with Analysis or Synthesis of Sources 57% - Problem: Obscurity of Topic Describing 76% - Share ideas via Emali or in Person Lack of Knowledge: Campus Resources/Expertise

43% - Problem: Too Few Sources Discover ShareGather Create Structured Finding Data Sharing Reviewing & Rating Writing Annotating Rights Publishing Analyzing Serendipitous Finding Primitives => Behaviors => Services Keeping Current Collaborative Finding 49% - Less than Effective at Keeping up with their Field. 87% - Draw on Literature from Multiple Fields 85% - Important: Browsing Stacks 56% - Use Archival Research Methodologies Collecting Organizing Acquiring Teaching 43% - Less than Effective Storing Notes/Drafts 73% - Would Use Assistance Organizing/Storing Materials 39% - Less than Adequate Methods for Organizing Materials 35% - Most Challenging: Acquiring Materials 37% - Have Unique Research Collection 52% - Collaborate with Colleagues at Other institutions Faculty Rely on Colleagues’ Recommendations 67% - Seek Assistance with Presentations 68.5% - Faculty work Collaboratively 56%- Less than Effective: Disseminating Research 46% - Collaboration Obstacle: Distance from Colleagues 60% - Share Source Materials via Hard-Copy Mellon % - Seek Assistance with Analysis or Synthesis of Sources 57% - Problem: Obscurity of Topic Describing 76% - Share Ideas via or in Person Lack of Knowledge: Campus Resources/Expertise U Knowledge Map Customized Search Archives ID & Mining Current Awareness-RSS TOC MNCAT Archives/UDC - Lit. databases Browsing Tool Scholar’s Horizon Current Awareness-RSS - TOC - MNCAT - Archives/UDC - Lit. databases Personal Info Mgmt. System -Collector’s tool -Citation Mgmt. Integrated Request Processes Grants Manager File Storage U Goals Annotation Tools Text, Stats, Geospatial, Design Analysis Tools Bookmarking, Tagging, Mark-up Metadata Tools Listable.EDU Digg.EDU Blogs, Wikis, Lists, Chat Copyright, Schol. Comm. Decision Tools Collaborative File Space Shared, Group Info Mgmt. Sys. Feeds, Bookmarks, Object Sharing Course Support & Integration Digital Conservancy 43% - Problem: Too Few Sources Recommender Sys.

Focus for the Future Identify and pursue changes in physically-based services: use of Library spaces, book delivery, and more Develop online research methodologies tutorial for graduate students Develop model to integrate tool-based research services in an online context….My Field

Online Research Environment for Scholars - Prototype Each “Primitive”: Discover Gather Create Share has a page – bound by the UGoals

Additional Discover Components:

Additional Gather Components:

Additional Create Components:

For More Information Kate McCready, Library Project Coordinator – Project Website: