Evaluating and assessing ebooks: the academic library perspective
•Als PPTX, PDF herunterladen•
1 gefällt mir•483 views
Presented at the Canadian Library Association Collections Preconference in Winnipeg, MB on May 29, 2013.
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (20)
Andere mochten auch
Andere mochten auch (10)
Ähnlich wie Evaluating and assessing ebooks: the academic library perspective
Ähnlich wie Evaluating and assessing ebooks: the academic library perspective (20)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
Evaluating and assessing ebooks: the academic library perspective
- 1. Evaluating & assessing ebooks: the academic library perspective Canadian Library Association, May 29, 2013 Pamela Jacobs, University of Guelph pjacobs@uoguelph.ca @pamelajacobs
- 3. Why ebooks? • Declining use of print books • Increased pressure for user space • Popularity of online content
- 4. 4 • 55% of books published since 1990 have never circulated • 10.7% of the books in circulation on a given day were checked out to undergraduate students (34% to graduate students, 23.6% to faculty) http://staffweb.library.cornell.edu/system/files/CollectionUsageTF_ReportFinal11-22-10.pdf
- 5. 5 http://www.oclc.org/research/publications/library/2011/2011-06.pdf “80% of the circulation is driven by just 6% of the collection”
- 6. How do we measure use of a book? © Kristen M.
- 7. Standardized Usage Reports • COUNTER Book Report 2: Number of Successful Section Requests by Month and Title • Multiple platforms
- 8. …or not? Karin Bystrom, 2012. Everything that’s wrong with e-book statistics. Poster session, Charleston Conference.
- 9. Turnaways • COUNTER Book Report 3: Turnaways by month and title • Level of access will affect level of use
- 10. Comparing to print • Apples and oranges • But… – Newer stuff gets more use – Course-related materials get more use – 80/20 ish rule still applies
- 11. Cost and Cost/Use • As compared to print • Packages vs. individual titles • Aggregators vs. publishers • Patron and demand-driven models • Subscription vs. purchase vs. lending models • Workflow costs
- 12. Evaluating Patron Driven models – Royal Holloway, University of London • EBL – purchase and short term loan model • ₤10,000 available – 37 titles purchased = ₤270/title – 900 titles purchased or loaned = ₤11.11/title – 1500 titles viewed = ₤6.50/title http://ebookchallenge.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/patron-driven_e- books_RHUL_Anna_Grigson_Sept2012.pdf
- 13. ARL LibVALUE ebook study • Low cost/title 2012 $19.29 • Low cost/use* 2012 $1.38 • Elsevier user survey – 24/7 access – Easy to search and navigate – Download to laptop http://www.libqual.org/documents/LibQual/publications/2013/libvalue-assessing-the- value-of-ebooks.pdf
- 14. Complicating Factors • User experience – Platform issues/preferences – Problem of defining exactly what is an e-book – Textbooks vs. reference vs. scholarly monographs – Course readings and e-reserves • Discoverability – MARC records availability and quality – Semantic linking – Library catalogue as main access point
- 15. Thank you for listening… …questions? pjacobs@uoguelph.ca
Hinweis der Redaktion
- So after you have somehow navigated your way through the perplexities of actually getting some ebooks for your library – how do you evaluate them? What does success look like? What metrics are available? What are the factors that effect ebook usage?
- Cost of keeping a book on the shelf Courant and Neilson, 2010 $4 for open stacks, Unsustainability of creating a comprehensive print collection – volume of new titles published, difficulty in predicting what will be used – nature of scholarly publishing – a lot of books with very specific topics at an advanced level with a limited audience… digital storage and retrieval just makes sense for thisGideon Burton “long tail of scholarly publishing”
- Cornell studyhttp://staffweb.library.cornell.edu/system/files/CollectionUsageTF_ReportFinal11-22-10.pdf‘given day’ is April 19, 2010
- By using detailed data the expectation is that the OhioLINK community can begin to create a set of collecting rubrics that will help reduce unnecessary duplication, allocate resource dollars more effectively, and increase diversity of collections across the state. Primary examples of the use of this data would be to infer how many copies of books in particular LC classification ranges are desirable in the system, or to estimate the ideal size of subject collections. It is also expected that engagement with and use of this data by selectors, individually and in groups, will contribute significantly to the evolution of selector thinking and behavior as a general move takes place toward more cohesive collecting practices across the state.
- Evaluating UsageUsage metrics are different for print and electronic booksThe experience of using a print book – effort to actually get the book from the library, usage recorded only once at checkout. Browsing usage often not counted. Number of times the book is opened, number of pages read, etc., never counted. Could argue that usage is underrepresented as recorded by circulation statistics. Interaction with the physical artifact – smell, touch, browsing, index. Article about how students intuitively used the index of a print book but didn’t even think about using it for an ebook.Ebook usage metrics based on page views, downloads, searches or sessions. It depends on the ebook platform as to what is actually counted. Experience of using the book differs considerably between vendors and even between vendors with different interfaces (Ebrary app vs Browser). Student interactions with book – did not look at index, immediately go to FT browsing (reflecting their digital rather than book habits).Scholarly books (excluding textbooks) content is virtually identical. Interactivity and multimedia rare. Simply a digital edition of the same book. Missed opportunity?
- What is being countedBR1 and others…Staggering numbers
- Very useful – if you can actually upgrade; also provides evidence for likely user experience frustrations
- Some generalizations we can make for both e and p book usageCourse materials – ex from Brock 58% of materials in top 100 ebooks were titles that had been on reserve at one pointNext slide for OHIOLink Study
- Are we evaluating ebooks as books or as electronic resources? Traditionally our approach to evaluating the two has been quite different.To be honest we haven’t set a very high standard for cost/use of print book. Cornell study shows that 55% of post-1990 books in collection have NEVER circulated.Sue Polanka, author of No Shelf Required, “Rule #1, You are not buying content. You are buying content, software, licenses, DRM and an ongoing relationship with a vendor.”When we buy packages – what are our expectations for cost/use? Do we expect to get a lot of titles that don’t get used as a trade off for a low cost/title. Is our goal to buy just in case or just in time? What is our long term collection strategy? Where do ebooks fit into that strategy?PDA/DDA programs are premised on usage=valueWe look at acquisition costs, but what about workflow costs? Is cost/use the appropriate metric? Need to put into context of collection assessment – how does the resource meet the needs of the institution?
- Full referenceEmphasize the need to understand what your goals are and how you would define success…
- Webcast on April 18, 2013ARL and University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUsage measured by BR2 or similar, only available for 82% of ebook publishersQualitative user stuff … .leads into some of the UX/Discoverability factors that need to be considered
- Complicating factors that affect useDifficult to use platforms are a disincentive to use; figures may reflect platform not contentSurveys, focus groups – problem of defining what exactly is an e-book – context, context, context…Semantic linking – enhanced metadata at the chapter level – make relevant content more discoverable; focus is on the subject matter, not on the book title.We keep hearing that users don’t go to our websites when starting their research – for many our main access point is via our library catalogue and/or discovery service; this is a problem…