After a late start due to some unexpected things-that-must-be-done-now, I arrived and began to dig into the action items delayed from yesterday. This included responding to OCLC with information about a billing error, filing my notes from the discovery service presentation, and following-up on a related query from a colleague.
Added a new ejournal to our knowledgebase, but the default URL is different from what the publisher gave me. Added the custom URL and a note in Outlook to check on Monday to make sure the OpenURL linking works with the custom URL. Our KB provider does nightly refreshes of profile changes, so things we do behind the scenes aren’t live until the next day.
Unlike most of the reference librarians, there is one in particular who refuses to provide me with descriptions and coverage details of resources that go with their links on our website and LibGuides. I end up searching for descriptions on other library sites, and usually find something that will work. I added two resources for this librarian today, and rather than a simple copy/paste from the email generated by the form that every other librarian is able to send me, I spent about 20 min digging around for the information I needed. If it’s wrong, the only people who will care are the users, since I doubt this librarian even checks this stuff. This was evident because the librarian asked me to add three other resources that are already listed on the website and in LibGuides.
I tried to keep on slogging through, but the waves of nausea I’d been ignoring all morning were becoming harder to ignore. I decided it would be better to ride them at home than trying to work and maybe staying too long. Good thing I did, because the next 12 hours were very unpleasant, and the 12 after that less so. I’m posting this now a day late, and I’m finally starting to feel human again.
So, for library day in the life round eight, I’m signing out with a whimper.
How to Lie with Statistics by Darrell Huff & Irving Geis
My day began with organizing and prioritizing the action items that arrived yesterday when I was swamped with web-scale discovery service presentations. I didn’t get very far when it was time to leave for a meeting about rolling out VuFind locally. Before that meeting, I dropped in to update my boss (and interim University Librarian) on some things that came out of the presentations and subsequent hallway discussions.
At the VuFind meeting, we discussed some tweaks and modifications, and most everyone took on some assignments to revise menu labels, record displays, and search options. I managed to evade an assignment only because these things are more for reference, cataloging, and web services. The serials records look fine and appear accurately in the basic search (from the handful of tests I ran), so I’m not concerned about tweaking anything specifically.
Back at my desk, I started to work on the action items again, but the ongoing conversations about the discovery service presentations distracted me until one of the reference librarians provided me with a clue about the odd COUNTER use stats we’ve received from ProQuest for 2011.
I had given her stats on a resource that was on the CSA platform, but for the 2011 stats I provided what ProQuest gave me, which were dubious in their sudden increase (from 15 in 2010 to 4756 in 2011). She made a comment about how the low stats didn’t surprise her because she hates teaching the Illumina platform. I said it should be on the ProQuest platform now because that’s where the stats came from. She said she’d just checked the links on our website, and they’re still going to Illumina.
This puzzled me, so I pulled the CSA stats from 2011, and indeed, we had only 17 searches for the year for this index. I checked the website and LibGuides links, and we’re still sending users to the Illumnia platform, and not ProQuest. So, I’m not sure where those 4756 searches were coming from, but their source might explain why our total ProQuest stats tripled in 2011. This lead me to check our federated search stats, and while it shows quite a few searches of ProQuest databases (although not this index, as we hadn’t included it), our DB1 report shows zero federated searches and sessions.
I compiled all of this and sent it off to ProQuest customer support. I’m eager to see what their response will be.
This brought me up to my lunch break, which I spent at the gym where one of the trainers forced my compatriots and I to accomplish challenging and strenuous activities for 45 min. After my shower, I returned to the library to lunch at my desk and respond to some crowd-sourced questions from colleagues at other institutions.
I managed to whack down a few email action items before my ER&L co-presenter called to discuss the things we need to do to make sure we’re prepared for the panel session. We’re pulling together seasoned librarians and product representatives from five different electronic resource management systems (four commercial, one open-source) to talk about their experiences working with the products. We hashed out a few things that needed hashing out, and ended the call with more action items on our respective lists.
At that point, I had about 20 min until my next meeting, so I tracked down the head of research and instruction to hash out some details regarding the discovery service presentations that I wanted to make sure she was aware of. I’m glad I did, because she filled in some gaps I had missed, and later she relayed a positive response from one of the librarians that concerned both of us.
The meeting ended early, so I took the opportunity of suddenly unscheduled time in my calendar to start writing down this whole thing. I’d been so busy I hadn’t had time to journal this throughout the day like I’d previously done.
Heard back from ProQuest, and although they haven’t addressed the missing federated search stats from their DB1 report, they explain away the high number of searches in this index as having come from a subject area search or the default search across all databases. There was (and may still be) a problem with defaulting to all databases if the user did not log out before starting a new session, regardless of which database they intended to use. PQ tech support suggested looking at their non-COUNTER report that includes full-text, citation, and abstract views for a more accurate picture of what was used.
For the last stretch of the day, I popped on my headphones, cranked up the progressive house, and tried to power through the rest of the email action items. I didn’t get very far, as the first one required tracking down use stats and generating a report for an upcoming renewal. Eventually, I called it a day and posted this. Yay!
"PowerPoint effects" from Noise To Signal by Rob Cottingham
I had just enough time to log on and clear out the email inbox before the first team of vendor reps arrived to demonstrate their discovery service, and then it was off to the auditorium where I would spend most of the rest of the day.
These presentations are the latest iteration of our years long internal debate over whether or not the current crop of “web-scale discovery services” can fulfill an unmet need for our students (and faculty). We’ve considered several in the past, but could not get sufficient buy-in from the research & instruction librarians to request the funds to pay for them. After a cooling period, and many discussions with key individuals, we sent out an RFI to some targeted companies, and now we’re providing the opportunity for them to give live demonstrations/pitches.
It’s an unusually warm day here in Richmond, and the library’s HVAC — like most large buildings with sections of various ages and walls that didn’t exist when the building was originally designed — isn’t keeping up with the change. So, after a much-needed lunch break, I came back to the warm auditorium for rounds two and three.
I wish I could share my thoughts about the day’s presentations, but I can’t. Ultimately, there were many examples of things done well and things done not so well, both in the products and in the presentations. We know where the bar has been set, so now it’s a matter of matching our expectations to what can be delivered. There is one more presentation to go, and these have been quite valuable for clarifying what is important to us in a discovery service.
After one last pass through the email inbox, bumping most action items to tomorrow, library day in the life round eight day three has ended.
After a late start due to some unexpected things-that-must-be-done-now, I arrived and began to dig into the action items delayed from yesterday. This included responding to OCLC with information about a billing error, filing my notes from the discovery service presentation, and following-up on a related query from a colleague.
