I'll address some of Ted's points directly in a subsequent post, but first I'd like to add a few amens to Ross Singer's response.
[Ted Gemberling]
> > Keep in mind, though, that this is a specialized database [...]
> > So they will probably get bibliographic instruction for using it.
[Ross Singer]
> But, really, a dependency on B.I. is always going to
> be a losing proposition.
Amen. At our university we have a userbase of over 25,000 and a public services
staff (reference plus information literacy) of about 25. And it's not even the same 25,000 users every year as we get a new crop of freshman, transfers, new graduate students, and new faculty. The numbers simply don't work.
In some respects, I would liken bibliographic instruction to bailing out a boat that has sprung a leak. It's obviously an essential function, but the overarching goal should be to minimize the need for bailers by finding and fixing the leaks. The "leaks" being problems with our systems that make them hard to use. In fact, I see the most important task of BI staff being to help us identify those bottlenecks, whether they are in OPAC functionality, signage, library layout, whatever. Unfortunately, success in that task is a lot harder to quantify and the payoff isn't as obvious when a department's "success" is evaluated mainly on the number and variety of BI classes taught.
[Ross Singer]
> If our systems require training, our users will go elsewhere.
Amen again. Our users having other choices is what has changed while the OPAC has remained the same. The users don't care that we (the library and OPAC) are "special". We can continue to beat our breasts and knash our teeth and declaim (and rightly so) that those other information systems aren't as good/scholarly as the catalog, but that doesn't change the fact that our users will choose those other systems over a catalog with an obtuse and hard to use search interface.
-- Michael
# Michael Doran, Systems Librarian
# University of Texas at Arlington
# 817-272-5326 office
# 817-688-1926 cell
# doran_at_uta.edu
# http://rocky.uta.edu/doran/
________________________________
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries on behalf of Ross Singer
Sent: Sat 7/28/2007 10:58 AM
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] The problem with OPACs [was: New subject keyword search]
On 7/27/07, Ted P Gemberling <tgemberl_at_uab.edu> wrote:
> Keep in mind, though, that this is a specialized database for people
> studying films. So they will probably get bibliographic instruction for
> using it. It's not UCLA's general catalog.
>
Frankly, I think this explanation is 'part of the problem'. If the
answer is 'they will get bibliographic instruction to know how to use
our interfaces', we have failed on several fronts.
1) it's probable that a sizable percentage of users would never get
bibliographic instruction.
2) if they get it, it's probable that they won't remember all of it.
3) B.I. could be spent doing much more useful things (like explaining
what is in the collection, when it would be useful and why) if we
didn't have to train people how to navigate our difficult to navigate
systems.
But, really, a dependency on B.I. is always going to be a losing
proposition. If our systems require training, our users will go
elsewhere. It's a principle of the path of least resistance.
> Let's say I use your advanced search and type in Spanish civil war, as a
> phrase, in subjects. I get nothing. ...
> You don't have to examine hundreds of titles to find the
> specific ones you need. Which system is more "user friendly" when you
> factor in that?
Ted, this whole exercise confused me. The 'default' search (which is
all a vast majority of our searches are) for spanish civil war
(automatically boolean ANDed for the user) returns 228 results of what
seem perfectly reasonable results for spanish civil war.
Sending the user down the rabbit holes of pre/post coordinated subject
headings isn't productive. Our interfaces should help the user find
relationships for them (with the option of the user being able to do
whatever she wants, as well), but just typing spanish civil war
should, in an effective system (and I'm certainly not saying UTA's
Voyager catalog, nor any other WebVoyage catalog, is one) should place
the user in a search/browse interface that effectively, intuitively
and, most importantly, efficiently and simply locates the sorts of
items the user is pursuing.
-Ross.
Received on Sat Jul 28 2007 - 12:24:40 EDT