1. A New Approach to E-reserves The Seneca Libraries Experience End User – April 28, 2007 Presented by: Jane Foo, Manager of Digital Library Services & Information Systems Jennifer Peters-Lise, Metadata & Digital Services Librarian Sharon Tait, Digital Library Systems

2. Today’s talk Background on e-reserves project –Goals for e-reserves –Research committee –Prototypes Encompass for Digital Collections –Set-up & customizations –Metadata –Policies & procedures The future…

3. Seneca College Toronto, Ontario 18,000 FTE; 90,000 PT 678 FT faculty 4 campus libraries 12 FT librarians ; about 30 FT technicians Over 100,000 books

4. Goals for E-reserves Collocate all course materials into one list Access as much as possible online Not online? Tell them where to find it! User friendly and inexpensive system

5. Course materials Print Reserves E-reserves –Traditional reserve-type material available online Research by course pages

6. Research by Course pages

7. Seneca’s current reserves Mixture of formats Paper copies damaged; pages lost Complaints about loan periods Line-ups everywhere! Major disconnection between materials –Research by course pages on our website –Reserves in the OPAC –Textbooks on OPAC but separate from reserves

8. E-reserves Research Committee Oct 2005 - Dec 2006 Examined: –Seneca’s current reserves –Canadian E-reserves Scan 17 existing e-reserves projects across Canada –Available systems for e-reserves See final committee report for more information…

9. Systems tested for e-reserves Commercial system: Docutek Seneca owned systems: Blackboard, Voyager, EDC

10. Docutek

11. Course dashboard

12. Docutek’s ERes What we liked –User friendly –Self-maintenance available –Administrative control What we didn’t like –Duplicate data entry –Cost –Stand-alone system

13. Voyager

14. Embedding the link in Blackboard

16. Voyager What we liked: –Cataloguing –Integration of print and electronic materials –Maintenance What we didn’t like –Results/browsing interface

19. Blackboard’s Content System

22. Blackboard What we liked : –Familiarity with system –Access for students –Logical hierarchy of readings What we did not like : –No cataloguing – only filename –Limited searching capabilities –No reports and limited statistics –No administrative control over our content within Blackboard

23. Encompass for Digital Collections

25. Main page

26. Browsing by course code

27. Organizing readings by week

29. Alternate organization of readings

30. Search for course code

31. Results display

32. Encompass and BlackBoard Embedded Link directly to browsing list from a course page in Blackboard

35. EDC – what we liked Cataloguing workflow –Quick templates = no duplicate data entry –Immediate error correction –Top-down collection view –Maintain database integrity by limiting access to cataloguing Import MARC records Similarity to ILS system Combines logical browsing of Blackboard with the cataloguing and data control of Voyager

36. Setting Up EDC Base and Repository DMD –Collection DMD – Qualified DC (encdc.dtd) –Repo DMD – customized two dtds Complete Repo DMD Mapping to Collection DMD based on Crosswalk developed by Jenn MARC_ereserves.dtd …. MARC_ereserves_wrapper.dtd (validation DTD) …..

37. Search indices –Collection: Search Index – default qual-dublin-cm.xsl Access Points Index – modified existing qual-dublin-bu.xsl –Repo: Search Index: customized a new xsl based on the existing qual-dublin.xsl –New Search Key Indices: Instructor (Ikey) Public Course code (ckey) Public Date Created/Updated (dkey) – Staff search only Marctoqual-dublin.xsl - - - - 1"> ….

38. Bulk Loading v. Client-Based loading – Server Metaload generic-shredder.xsl - modified XmlLoader.properties – modified Started with concept of bulk loading but eventually Marc records were loaded individually through staff client Export from library catalogue – converted to xml via marcedit Marc to MARCXML script (in MarcEdit) - - - - - - - Voyager Export

39. Customizing the Metadata Wish list for metadata –Compared wish list to MARC, CanCore, Dublin Core –MARC won overall Chose a sub-set of MARC fields, added extra local fields Human readable field names to accommodate non-cataloguing staff AACR2 cataloguing rules

40. Metadata profile MARC fields title, URL, label for URL, author, corporate author, corporate author subordinate unit editor, series title, edition, date of publication, page numbers, periodical publication dates, source, notes Non-MARC fields course code, course name, begin reserve on, remove reserve on, instructor name, grouping, file size

41. Customizing the Metadata Print reserve records –Save bib from Voyager –Convert bib to xml using MARCedit Custom XSLT file defining our metadata profile –Import xml file into EDC

42. Metadata profile MARC fields title, URL, label for URL, author, corporate author, corporate author subordinate unit editor, series title, edition, date of publication, page numbers, periodical publication dates, source, notes Non-MARC fields course code, course name, begin reserve on, remove reserve on, instructor name, grouping, file size Placeholders for imported MARC records for print reserves. (no data is entered into these fields for e-reserves) unique identifier, ISBN, ISSN, call number, author dates, place of publication, publisher, publication frequency, subject, subject (general subdivision), subject (geographic subdivision), subject (form subdivision)

43. User Interface requirements Browse > search One-click from title Uncluttered (less is more) Can be embedded / integrated into other Web interfaces Language that makes sense to students Branding & identity

44. Customization notes XSLT, CSS … and APIs code cleanup modified: basic search, advanced search, results list, object record and view relationship pages display order custom metadata xsl files for field display custom search indices (course code, instructor, date added)

45. Custom field displays

46. Linking directly from browse and search 2 types of links: link (url tag) digital object (objResURL tag)

47. Live linking to Voyager automatically constructed live link to Voyager record using imported Bib ID (aka unique-identifier tag)

48. Re-purposing “View Relationships”

49. This is just the beginning … 2 iterations so far Faculty involvement from project onset Staff town hall and training sessions  distinction between electronic vs. print User-centered testing / feedback – Summer 2007 Explore and create more opportunities for embedding / integration

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

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

52. Policies and procedures - digitization Digitize faculty created items with permission Seek copyright permission and scan as many print reserves as possible

53. Pilot project -- Jan-Dec 2007 Staff training for scanning, e-reserves system and copyright (Mar) Retroactive cataloguing (Apr-May) User testing and follow-up (Summer) Marketing sub-committee and plan (Summer) Larger pilot and evaluation (Sept-Dec)

54. Digitool Plans Current status Migration Path Can we make it work? Administration Web forms Customization Metadata Exporting existing metadata Other digital repository projects A first look (demo) and initial ideas

58. Questions?

59. Jenn jennifer.peters-lise@senecac.on.ca jennifer.peters-lise@senecac.on.ca IM & Yahoo: senlibjenn http://people.senecac.on.ca/jennifer.peters-lise http://people.senecac.on.ca/jennifer.peters-lise Sharon sharon.tait@senecac.on.ca Seneca E-reserves Committee Final Report http://tinyurl.com/usnob http://tinyurl.com/usnob Jane jane.foo@senecac.on.ca jane.foo@senecac.on.ca IM & Yahoo: senlibjane http://people.senecac.on.ca/jane.foo http://people.senecac.on.ca/jane.foo