Steve Schafer, Director, Library Services, Athabasca University (AU): Canada’s Open University
AU specializes in distance learning and is one of the fastest-growing institutions in Canada, with course registrations nearly doubling in 5 years. Schafer looks first at how library services to distance students contribute to student success and to the growth of AU, then discusses how AU library services might evolve, integrating new technology into its processes to meet the unique expectations of the "video game generation" and those who are using handheld PDA devices.
My notes:
Mobile Learning
Students want more online.
Continuous partial attention (the concept that cropped up in the keynote speech).
Digital Reading room - challenge to provide online course reserves.
Flexibility, security, mobility
PDA accessible
Athabasca has a French class that repurposes existing material - got license to rip French learning CDs to mp3 - available to download to desktop & pda.
Learning extends beyond text & desktop.
mp3 with text display - using flash
Visually disabled students who are used to listening to materials with a mechanical voice, tend to prefer mechanical voices reading material.
Podcasting - can use audio & digital files like slides in iTunes.
Friday, November 04, 2005
Self Discovery: Federated Search Engines & Subject Pages
Frank Cervone, Assistant University Librarian for Information Technology, Northwestern University
Darlene Fichter, Data Library Coordinator, University of Saskatchewan
Numerous usability studies demonstrate that library Web site visitors have difficulty locating and retrieving articles. The speakers describe two different approaches that work hand in hand for helping users locate relevant materials. Cervone shares recent results about the best placement of federated search boxes, display of search results, and design decisions in creating topical groups. Find out what works and what doesn’t. Fichter describes the results of a series of tests looking at the effective design of browsable library subject pages. Through a rapid cycle of testing, design changes, and retesting, subject pages were adapted and changed based on user behavior. Both discuss challenges and lessons learned.
Powerpoint presentation
My Notes:
Federated Search Services
Users understand searching Google or individual databases, but not what 'metasearch' means.
In testing, they introduced a metasearch engine and asked the users what they'd call it. Nobody used 'metasearch' or anything like that. They called it the 'catalog.'
To appeal to undergrads it needed simple interface.
Faculty not concerned about 'databases' per se, but about the journal.
In federated search engine, users prefer simple search - a Googlelike experience. Users won't use complex query statements. They feel succcesful in simple search environment because they find articles, even if the articles aren't exactly what they searched for. Unexpected advantages to this - find new resources & citations previusly unaware of, the browsing factor.
Most people who are not librarians tend to search the same way.
Their expectations: They want to see things in relevance order, even when it is not clear how relevance is determined. When results are not displayed that way, patrons often figure out display order but they don't like it and when they have the opportunity, they change over to relevance.
Overall most patrons prefer simple search interface instead of going into a long list of databases and checking them off. (made me think of something from the from the first session - too much text?) - often say that long lists like that make them feel stupid.
------------
Designing Effective Subject Pages
Testing at teh University of Saskatchewan: 66% of time their site failed to support users looking for articles. Only 33% of users could locate databases by topic. (i.e., when given a questions such as: Find two useful full text databases on religion.) Many gave up after trying for 3 or more minutes.
They found that simple terms like this sucked students in:
Databases: subject | title
Electronic Journals
Users love the feature of 'limit to scholarly peer reviewed'.
When confronted with lists of cryptic database names - what do people do when? They either click first one or they leave the page.
Lacking the librarian's mental model or organization - not looking for databases to find an article. Users headed for electronic journals instead of article databases - "if only I knew a journal title!" Faculty, when confused or confronted with intimidating interface send research assistants to do everything. Faculty know the articles they want from word of mouth and find them via Google more than the library.
How do people look for information? Undergrads look by format: article, book, then subject then journal title.
Who are you designing for? Amorphous mass of 'users' not good. U of Saskatchewan's library webpage is not designed for expert user but novice user who doens't know where to start.
Best Bets section - if you don't know where to start, start here.
When designing, think Just In Time information, not Just In Case.
- online access info (licensing restrictions)
- removing unnecessary info.
- Design for recognition, not recall.
- Give the users just enough info to make next step of journey; don't overwhelm them with verbiage.
- Less is more; the page should scan quickly, with a very brief info to reduce information pollution and cognitive overhead.
- Group similar things together (format, tutorials, library info).
- Use structure, layout, & position to organize info.
- Create zones with whitespace to route things.
When unfamiliar with a new domain, browsing may be more effective than searching
Experts don't get stuck in Best Bets-type of sections, but go down the page, so no worries.
Default to journal articles - #1 thing people look for & have trouble looking for.
Best Bests - looks kinda like Google - brief annotations. In testing, nobody clicked a detail page, just went straight to the database.
Need clear udnerstanding of purpose of page. Simple & easy to use is not always simple & easy to design.
(Thoughts for our library: add brief annotations to database alpha list.)
People tended to use the database they knew best, even if switching areas of study.
Darlene Fichter, Data Library Coordinator, University of Saskatchewan
Numerous usability studies demonstrate that library Web site visitors have difficulty locating and retrieving articles. The speakers describe two different approaches that work hand in hand for helping users locate relevant materials. Cervone shares recent results about the best placement of federated search boxes, display of search results, and design decisions in creating topical groups. Find out what works and what doesn’t. Fichter describes the results of a series of tests looking at the effective design of browsable library subject pages. Through a rapid cycle of testing, design changes, and retesting, subject pages were adapted and changed based on user behavior. Both discuss challenges and lessons learned.
Powerpoint presentation
My Notes:
Federated Search Services
Users understand searching Google or individual databases, but not what 'metasearch' means.
In testing, they introduced a metasearch engine and asked the users what they'd call it. Nobody used 'metasearch' or anything like that. They called it the 'catalog.'
To appeal to undergrads it needed simple interface.
Faculty not concerned about 'databases' per se, but about the journal.
In federated search engine, users prefer simple search - a Googlelike experience. Users won't use complex query statements. They feel succcesful in simple search environment because they find articles, even if the articles aren't exactly what they searched for. Unexpected advantages to this - find new resources & citations previusly unaware of, the browsing factor.
Most people who are not librarians tend to search the same way.
Their expectations: They want to see things in relevance order, even when it is not clear how relevance is determined. When results are not displayed that way, patrons often figure out display order but they don't like it and when they have the opportunity, they change over to relevance.
Overall most patrons prefer simple search interface instead of going into a long list of databases and checking them off. (made me think of something from the from the first session - too much text?) - often say that long lists like that make them feel stupid.
------------
Designing Effective Subject Pages
Testing at teh University of Saskatchewan: 66% of time their site failed to support users looking for articles. Only 33% of users could locate databases by topic. (i.e., when given a questions such as: Find two useful full text databases on religion.) Many gave up after trying for 3 or more minutes.
They found that simple terms like this sucked students in:
Databases: subject | title
Electronic Journals
Users love the feature of 'limit to scholarly peer reviewed'.
When confronted with lists of cryptic database names - what do people do when? They either click first one or they leave the page.
Lacking the librarian's mental model or organization - not looking for databases to find an article. Users headed for electronic journals instead of article databases - "if only I knew a journal title!" Faculty, when confused or confronted with intimidating interface send research assistants to do everything. Faculty know the articles they want from word of mouth and find them via Google more than the library.
How do people look for information? Undergrads look by format: article, book, then subject then journal title.
Who are you designing for? Amorphous mass of 'users' not good. U of Saskatchewan's library webpage is not designed for expert user but novice user who doens't know where to start.
Best Bets section - if you don't know where to start, start here.
When designing, think Just In Time information, not Just In Case.
- online access info (licensing restrictions)
- removing unnecessary info.
- Design for recognition, not recall.
- Give the users just enough info to make next step of journey; don't overwhelm them with verbiage.
- Less is more; the page should scan quickly, with a very brief info to reduce information pollution and cognitive overhead.
- Group similar things together (format, tutorials, library info).
- Use structure, layout, & position to organize info.
- Create zones with whitespace to route things.
When unfamiliar with a new domain, browsing may be more effective than searching
Experts don't get stuck in Best Bets-type of sections, but go down the page, so no worries.
Default to journal articles - #1 thing people look for & have trouble looking for.
Best Bests - looks kinda like Google - brief annotations. In testing, nobody clicked a detail page, just went straight to the database.
Need clear udnerstanding of purpose of page. Simple & easy to use is not always simple & easy to design.
(Thoughts for our library: add brief annotations to database alpha list.)
People tended to use the database they knew best, even if switching areas of study.
Users Driving Web Site Changes
Karen Coombs, Head of Web Services, University of Houston Libraries
Steve McCann, Digital Projects Librarian, University of Montana
We can discover a lot about our users and how they use our Web sites if we take time to observe their behavior online. Coombs offers an overview of the tools and systems used to capture information, including log files from Web servers, proxy servers, OPAC, and statistics from Interlibrary Loan system and OpenURL resolvers. She talks about how to create a picture of what library’s Web-based resources are being used and where, as well as the path followed to discover them. McCann describes how "user personas" can effectively help with Web site design. User personas function as a way to capture a user’s point of view while filtering out a site designer’s own personal prejudices. McCann walks you through the process of building user personas based on analysis of Web site traffic logs and through a usability study at his university. Take away lots of ideas for creating more effective Web sites.
Blog links:
Schwagbag
My Notes:
Entry points for library's site - what are the pages that users come into the site on?
A lot of activity on library site doesn't actually happen on the library site itself; it involves going offsite to other sites and databases. It's hard to trace what users do and where they go. If you track exit points you can see where they're making those hops off and where they're going - database, Google, whatever - and find out where they get frustrated enough to leave the site and search for information elsewhere. If a page with no external links is an exit point there is something frustrating about that page.
How do people link into the site? The ohmepage or deeper into the tree structure? (if so, they get more hits and more use if links are deep)
Referer reports can be used to track paths through the site.
Think about what the students are doing and why. In one case, students were going to computer labs instead of the reference desk in their library. Turns out the comptuers in the Reference area had no productivity software like Word. They saw an overall increase in the number of questions in reference once productivity software was installed.
OpenURL data - requesta & clickthroughs by source - why don't people go on through the OpenURL window? - few clickthroughs.
Session path tracing - script that constructs xml files to trace path through site - how are people getting to particular pages? many commercial services just guess. This script says specifically what path. This generates a ton of data - only turn on for certain amount of time.
User Personas
Create one archetype to make all your design decisions. Then have secondary personas, then have a persona who you are not designing for. This will help you make decisions about structure and design, because you know exactly how your user behaves and what they are looking for.
Steve McCann, Digital Projects Librarian, University of Montana
We can discover a lot about our users and how they use our Web sites if we take time to observe their behavior online. Coombs offers an overview of the tools and systems used to capture information, including log files from Web servers, proxy servers, OPAC, and statistics from Interlibrary Loan system and OpenURL resolvers. She talks about how to create a picture of what library’s Web-based resources are being used and where, as well as the path followed to discover them. McCann describes how "user personas" can effectively help with Web site design. User personas function as a way to capture a user’s point of view while filtering out a site designer’s own personal prejudices. McCann walks you through the process of building user personas based on analysis of Web site traffic logs and through a usability study at his university. Take away lots of ideas for creating more effective Web sites.
Blog links:
Schwagbag
My Notes:
Entry points for library's site - what are the pages that users come into the site on?
A lot of activity on library site doesn't actually happen on the library site itself; it involves going offsite to other sites and databases. It's hard to trace what users do and where they go. If you track exit points you can see where they're making those hops off and where they're going - database, Google, whatever - and find out where they get frustrated enough to leave the site and search for information elsewhere. If a page with no external links is an exit point there is something frustrating about that page.
How do people link into the site? The ohmepage or deeper into the tree structure? (if so, they get more hits and more use if links are deep)
Referer reports can be used to track paths through the site.
Think about what the students are doing and why. In one case, students were going to computer labs instead of the reference desk in their library. Turns out the comptuers in the Reference area had no productivity software like Word. They saw an overall increase in the number of questions in reference once productivity software was installed.
OpenURL data - requesta & clickthroughs by source - why don't people go on through the OpenURL window? - few clickthroughs.
Session path tracing - script that constructs xml files to trace path through site - how are people getting to particular pages? many commercial services just guess. This script says specifically what path. This generates a ton of data - only turn on for certain amount of time.
User Personas
Create one archetype to make all your design decisions. Then have secondary personas, then have a persona who you are not designing for. This will help you make decisions about structure and design, because you know exactly how your user behaves and what they are looking for.
Library Terms that Users Understand
John Kupersmith, Reference Librarian, University of California, Berkeley
Your site may have superb content, elegant design, and cutting-edge technology, but do the users understand your text and know what the links mean? Kupersmith's widely used Web site is a clearinghouse of data mined from usability studies that indicate which library terms users do—and don't—understand. This session is packed with ideas and best practices for improving your site's terminology and incorporating this factor in your usability testing.
Kupersmith is the author of the page Library Terms that Users Understand at:
http://www.jkup.net/terms.html
Links:
Powerpoint presentation and handout.
Other blog entries:
See Also...
Library Web Chic
Schwagbag
My notes:
Searches for journals and databases are successful only 50% of the time. Why? Site organization, designs where links are hidden or not easily available, excessive verbiage, but most of all, terminology.
According to Jakob Nielsen, in studies a sample size of 5 will give you 80% of the problems on your site.
Acronyms and brand names were most often cited as problematic. The term "database' is, too, because it's used for a collection of data and a collection of articles and users don't realize they can find articles there.
Some terms not understood at all. Brand names like "Expanded Academic" aren't understood until the user learns the code. Terms such as "periodical" and "reference" don't mean anything.
The word "resources" means nothing to most people – in a test of possible useful terms, nobody used "resources".
"Catalog" means everything, the books, journals, articles, everything.
"Database" is run into in too many contexts to understand.
"E-journal" is misunderstood in a hopeful sense.
What are understood are verb phrases involving the word "find" and target phrases like "books" or "articles", and annotated links (short annotations, not too wordy). Other attractors are terms like "Journal," "Services," (for course reserves and other such services) and "Search."
"Electronic Resources" is a weak attractor.
Another way to look at it is - what do students say? They tend not to understand categories like 'Arts & Humanities' and 'Science & Engineering.' They are literal-minded - looking for the word 'journal' when an assignment to find articles is given. They are used to and looking for instant results, and don't know the language or mental models librarians use when organizing libraries and websites.
Librarians are often concerned about dumbing down websites, however we're contaminated as designers by what we know, by our specialized language and mental models.
Best practices: test users' understanding and preferences.
Testing:
link choice (preference) - is a microusability test - give users a description of the page to go to, give them a list of alternative link names and ask them to pick which one they'd try first.
link naming - give a link name and ask them to explain what they think it means.
card sorting - difficult to get clear consensus. if you do, esp. w/ terminology, send it to him.
category membership testing - pre-existing list of top-level categories into which to sort.
Use natural-language terms on top-level pages - 'borrow from other libraries' or 'find books' in addition to the catalog name - Berkeley's solution is to retain both. Use target words like 'Book' or 'Article.' For reference-email, chat, phone next to the reference link. Introduce more precise technical terms as you go along, and provide intermediate pages: 'find books' leads to page of options with the catalog, ILL, worldcat, etc.
Provide alternate paths to resources within the website. 'Find journals' usually means people expect to find articles, not journal titles. Use 'find artcles' *and* 'find journals'.
Enhance or explain potentially confusing terms - additional words or graphics, mouseovers with ALT and TITLE attributes, glossary of terms on HELP page.
Be consistent throughout website, printed material, and signage. (For us - keep Ref & IC together on webpage under "Information Commons" heading?)
Your site may have superb content, elegant design, and cutting-edge technology, but do the users understand your text and know what the links mean? Kupersmith's widely used Web site is a clearinghouse of data mined from usability studies that indicate which library terms users do—and don't—understand. This session is packed with ideas and best practices for improving your site's terminology and incorporating this factor in your usability testing.
Kupersmith is the author of the page Library Terms that Users Understand at:
http://www.jkup.net/terms.html
Links:
Powerpoint presentation and handout.
Other blog entries:
See Also...
Library Web Chic
Schwagbag
My notes:
Searches for journals and databases are successful only 50% of the time. Why? Site organization, designs where links are hidden or not easily available, excessive verbiage, but most of all, terminology.
According to Jakob Nielsen, in studies a sample size of 5 will give you 80% of the problems on your site.
Acronyms and brand names were most often cited as problematic. The term "database' is, too, because it's used for a collection of data and a collection of articles and users don't realize they can find articles there.
Some terms not understood at all. Brand names like "Expanded Academic" aren't understood until the user learns the code. Terms such as "periodical" and "reference" don't mean anything.
The word "resources" means nothing to most people – in a test of possible useful terms, nobody used "resources".
"Catalog" means everything, the books, journals, articles, everything.
"Database" is run into in too many contexts to understand.
"E-journal" is misunderstood in a hopeful sense.
What are understood are verb phrases involving the word "find" and target phrases like "books" or "articles", and annotated links (short annotations, not too wordy). Other attractors are terms like "Journal," "Services," (for course reserves and other such services) and "Search."
"Electronic Resources" is a weak attractor.
Another way to look at it is - what do students say? They tend not to understand categories like 'Arts & Humanities' and 'Science & Engineering.' They are literal-minded - looking for the word 'journal' when an assignment to find articles is given. They are used to and looking for instant results, and don't know the language or mental models librarians use when organizing libraries and websites.
Librarians are often concerned about dumbing down websites, however we're contaminated as designers by what we know, by our specialized language and mental models.
Best practices: test users' understanding and preferences.
Testing:
link choice (preference) - is a microusability test - give users a description of the page to go to, give them a list of alternative link names and ask them to pick which one they'd try first.
link naming - give a link name and ask them to explain what they think it means.
card sorting - difficult to get clear consensus. if you do, esp. w/ terminology, send it to him.
category membership testing - pre-existing list of top-level categories into which to sort.
Use natural-language terms on top-level pages - 'borrow from other libraries' or 'find books' in addition to the catalog name - Berkeley's solution is to retain both. Use target words like 'Book' or 'Article.' For reference-email, chat, phone next to the reference link. Introduce more precise technical terms as you go along, and provide intermediate pages: 'find books' leads to page of options with the catalog, ILL, worldcat, etc.
Provide alternate paths to resources within the website. 'Find journals' usually means people expect to find articles, not journal titles. Use 'find artcles' *and* 'find journals'.
Enhance or explain potentially confusing terms - additional words or graphics, mouseovers with ALT and TITLE attributes, glossary of terms on HELP page.
Be consistent throughout website, printed material, and signage. (For us - keep Ref & IC together on webpage under "Information Commons" heading?)
Internet Librarian 2005: OPENING KEYNOTE — Shifting Worlds: Internet Librarians at the Forefront
Program: Lee Rainie, Director, Pew Internet and American Life Project
Our world is definitely shifting with the Internet at the core of changes in behavior. Rainie discusses his project’s current findings about how people use the Internet and looks at the profound impact ubiquitous connectivity is having and will have on the way people interact, participate in groups, and influence their surroundings in the future.
Blog entries for the session:
InfoToday Blog 1
InfoToday Blog 2
My notes:
The term "continuous partial attention" crops up over and over during the conference, as a way to describe how people are working and utilizing technology today. This is not the same thing as multitasking. It means scanning incoming information for the one best thing to seize upon. This is a major behavioral change with implications for social life, commerce, political life, etc.
The "long tail" concept also cropped up – here's a definition by the person who coined the term. It originally refers to an economic distribution curve, where a few items have high demand and a lot of items have low demand – the curve exhibits a long tail for those items. Traditionally, suppliers have concentrated on the few items that fall into the high points of the curve, but the most demand is actually in the long tail, where people want niche items that fit their needs and wants more specifically. This applies to information, too: people seeking information often want the more specific, less one-size-fits-all information in the long tail, and librarians are specialists in finding where that information is hidden away. (Google hits the high points, librarians find the long tail.)
Items that the Pew Internet and American Life Project have found in their research:
Teens are all connected today, IMing, cellphones. They're redefining what it means to be present with other people. They play with their identities, using images, quotes, etc. to define themselves online. They are surrounded by media and create media themselves through art, stories, blogs, and websites. They're multitaskers.
"Social capital" – civic engagement. Is the Internet helping restore civic ties? Turns out that people who use the Internet for political news are more likely to vote than people who don't.
Are people using the personalization aspect of the Net to isolate themselves from opposing views? No, the opposite was found, Internet users do not limit their exposure to opposing viewpoints.
Our world is definitely shifting with the Internet at the core of changes in behavior. Rainie discusses his project’s current findings about how people use the Internet and looks at the profound impact ubiquitous connectivity is having and will have on the way people interact, participate in groups, and influence their surroundings in the future.
Blog entries for the session:
InfoToday Blog 1
InfoToday Blog 2
My notes:
The term "continuous partial attention" crops up over and over during the conference, as a way to describe how people are working and utilizing technology today. This is not the same thing as multitasking. It means scanning incoming information for the one best thing to seize upon. This is a major behavioral change with implications for social life, commerce, political life, etc.
The "long tail" concept also cropped up – here's a definition by the person who coined the term. It originally refers to an economic distribution curve, where a few items have high demand and a lot of items have low demand – the curve exhibits a long tail for those items. Traditionally, suppliers have concentrated on the few items that fall into the high points of the curve, but the most demand is actually in the long tail, where people want niche items that fit their needs and wants more specifically. This applies to information, too: people seeking information often want the more specific, less one-size-fits-all information in the long tail, and librarians are specialists in finding where that information is hidden away. (Google hits the high points, librarians find the long tail.)
Items that the Pew Internet and American Life Project have found in their research:
Teens are all connected today, IMing, cellphones. They're redefining what it means to be present with other people. They play with their identities, using images, quotes, etc. to define themselves online. They are surrounded by media and create media themselves through art, stories, blogs, and websites. They're multitaskers.
"Social capital" – civic engagement. Is the Internet helping restore civic ties? Turns out that people who use the Internet for political news are more likely to vote than people who don't.
Are people using the personalization aspect of the Net to isolate themselves from opposing views? No, the opposite was found, Internet users do not limit their exposure to opposing viewpoints.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
