Pathway to the Future: Library Bibliographic Services for the 21st Century

1
Pathway to the FutureLibrary Bibliographic
Services for the 21st Century

• Amy Kautzman UCB
• Patti Martin CDL

2
University of California Overview

• 10 Campuses
• 10 ILS (Endeavor, ExLibris, III, home grown)
• Melvyl (UC union catalog)
• Shared Cataloging Program

3
A Wake-Up Call

• Our users expect simplicity and immediate
  reward and Amazon, Google, and iTunes are the
  standards against which we are judged.

4
Things are not ok

• The current Library catalog is poorly
  designed for the tasks of finding, discovering,
  and selecting the growing set of resources
  available in our libraries
• We offer a fragmented set of systems to
  search for published information

5
Increased recognition that

• Bibliographic systems are the foundation of
  library services
• Metadata is valuable and strategic
• Libraries are filled with undiscoverable yet
  extremely valuable material
• Examples to learn from OCLC WorldCat,
  RedLightGreen, NCSUs new catalog, etc.

6
The Time is Right

• The combined effect of these pressures
  suggests that the time has come to thoroughly
  review library bibliographic services and
  practices, workflows, and technologies
• UC University Librarians appoint Bibliographic
  Services Task Force, April 2005

7
The Charge (simplified and shortened)

• Inventory the middleware, workflow and processes
  involved
• Identify the problems that need to be solved
• Develop a vision and design principles for a new
  bibliographic services environment
• Identify potential actions
• Deliver a report with recommendations and
  priorities

8
Bibliographic Services Task Force

• John Riemer, (Chair, UCLA)
• Head, Cataloging and Metadata Center
• Luc Declerck (UCSD)
• Associate Univ. Librarian, Technology and
  Technical Services
• Amy Kautzman (UCB)
• Head of Research and Collections Doe/Moffitt
  Libraries
• Patti Martin (CDL)
• Bibliographic Services Manager
• Terry Ryan (UCLA)
• Associate University Librarian for the UCLA
  Electronic Library

9
In the (almost) Beginning
10
Thanks to MARC

• 01291nam 22002774a 4500
• 00113089236
• 00520040304134833.0
• 008030211s2004 enk b
• 001 0 eng
• 010   a 2003042916
• 020   a 0195161998 (alk. paper)
• 035   a (Sirsi) i0195161998
• 040   a DLC c DLC d DLC d OrLoB-B
• 042   a pcc
• 049   x jek
• 05000 a BS651 b .S54 2004
• 08200 a 213 2 21 1001  a Shanks, Niall, d
  1959-
• 24510 a God, the devil, and Darwin b a
  critique of intelligent design theory / c Niall
  Shanks.
• 260   a Oxford a New York b Oxford
  University Press, c 2004.
• 300   a xiii, 273 p. c 22 cm.
• 504   a Includes bibliographical references (p.
  259-268) and index.
• 50500 t Foreword / r Richard Dawkins -- t
  Introduction The Many Designs of the Intelligent
  Design Movement -- g 1. t The Evolution of
  Intelligent Design Arguments -- g 2. t Darwin
  and the Illusion of Intelligent Design -- g 3.
  t Thermodynamics and the Origins of Order -- g
  4. t Science and the Supernatural -- g 5. t
  The Biochemical Case for Intelligent Design -- g
  6. t The Cosmological Case for Intelligent
  Design -- t Conclusion Intelligent Designs on
  Society.
• 596   a 1

11
The Library ILS
12
(No Transcript)
13
(No Transcript)
14
(No Transcript)
15
Course Management Systems
16
(No Transcript)
17
(No Transcript)
18
(No Transcript)
19
(No Transcript)
20
Examples of Libraries Moving into the Future
21
(No Transcript)
22
(No Transcript)
23
(No Transcript)
24
(No Transcript)
25
(No Transcript)
26
(No Transcript)
27
Enhancing Search and Retrieval

• Provide users with direct access to item
• Provide recommender features
• Support customization/personalization
• Offer alternative actions for failed searches
• Spelling
• Suggestions for no results

28
Cont.

• Offer better navigation of large sets of research
  results
• Deliver bibliographic services where the users
  are
• Course management systems, campus portals
• Expose metadata to search engines
• Provide relevance ranking and leverage full-text

29

• And now, looking behind the curtain

30
Rearchitecting the OPAC

• Create a single catalog interface for all UC
• Support searching across the entire bibliographic
  space

31
Adopting New Cataloging Practices

• Rearchitect cataloging workflow
• Select the appropriate metadata scheme
• Manually enrich metadata in important areas
• Automate metadata creation

32
Resuscitate Metadata

• Metadata matters
• Make metadata work harder
• Avoid complexity that doesnt add value
• Add more metadata to support better services

33
Metadata is more than MARC

• MARC, Dublin Core, VRA Core, METS
• TOCs, book reviews, abstracts
• User comments, folksonomies, added information
• Data mining of full text, records of use,
  relationships

34
Make Metadata Work Together
ONIX MARC
DUBLIN CORE VRA
MARC User Tags
35
Work Smarter

• Adopt metadata created elsewhere
• Create and maintain records in one place
• Move from shared cataloging to collaborative
  cataloging
• Focus on being good enough instead of perfect
• Generate more management information

36
The Report Strikes a Chord

• Strong interest within the University of
  California
• Immediate community reaction
• Report hit the blogs
• Interviews by the Library press
• Invitations to present at conferences
• Guest lectures at library schools

37
Lita Blog January 26 2006 KG Schneider

• If there is one meta-trend I am seeing
  right now, it is this librarians are getting
  frisky. Were talking back, questioning
  authority, and in some cases taking names and
  kicking booty, as Andrew Pace did recently with
  the NCSU catalog (Andrew, can we call your OPAC
  Miss Piggy?) and as the UC system did with its
  must-read, put-this-under-your-pillow,
  OMG-this-is-hot BSTF Report.

38
Why the Buzz?

• Report gives voice to some popular opinions
• Our services must be user driven
• Our services need to be delivered where the users
  are
• Libraries need to act boldly if we are to reclaim
  our role in the information space
• Libraries still have a unique value-add to offer

39
Why the Buzz?

• Report gives voice to some controversial
  perspectives
• Our assumptions about metadata should be
  re-examined
• Metadata practices need to have proven value
• An intuitive interface is not by definition
  dumbed down or anti-scholarly

40
Why the buzz?

• Report challenges current practices
• Our catalogs are poorly designed
• Our bibliographic systems are fragmented
• Our bibliographic data dispersed
• Our workflows are cumbersome
• Work is duplicated

41
What Next?

• Campuses and UC committee feedback was due by
  March 31, 2006
• Four questions
• Which 3-5 recommendations are most important?
• Which specific recommendations should we do
  first?
• Are there any recommendations to add?
• Are there any recommendations we should NOT
  pursue?

42
Preliminary UC FeedbackPopular recommendations

• I. Enhancing Search and Retrieval
• I.1 Direct access to item
• I.4 Offer alternatives for failed searches
• I.5 Better navigation of large result sets
• I.6 Deliver services where the users are
• I.8 Better searching for non-Roman

43
Preliminary UC FeedbackPopular recommendations

• II. Re-architecting the OPAC
• II.1 Single catalog interface for all of UC
• II.2 Search across the entire info space
• III. Adopting New Cataloging Practices
• III.1 Re-architect cataloging workflow

44
Preliminary UC FeedbackRecommendations we love
to hate

• III.2.c Consider abandoning controlled
• vocabulary for topical subjects
• III.1.a Option 2 consolidate cataloging
• into one or two centers across
  
• the state

45
Surprises? Not really

• Intelligent well-intentioned people can
  disagree
• Not all agree that change is urgent or were
  doomed
• All agree that we need to preserve our values
  while changing practices, but not all agree on
  what is a value and what is a practice

46
Surprises? Not really

• Recommendations are difficult to discuss in
  the abstract
• Many of the underlying concepts are not well
  understood without explanation
• Many cant endorse a recommendation if they dont
  know how it will be funded
• Many are skeptical about the feasibility of
  accomplishing the recommendations

47
Surprises? Not really

• People have trouble moving beyond their
  expectations of current systems
• Many look at the examples that illustrate
  concepts and think the change will look the same
• Many assume we will implement with the same
  technology and/or the same organization

48
Surprises!

• Fear of making the system too easy
• If they dont need to ask us how to use it, we
  lose a teachable moment
• If the system looks like Google, the rich
  diversity of our collections is lost
• Belief that only undergraduates are demanding
  change
• Undergraduates need an easy system but true
  scholars like to see the complexity

49
Surprises!

• Fear that the new system envisioned will offer
  less flexibility than our current systems
• A Google-like search box may work fine if you
  just need a few good things, but wont support
  scholarly research
• Our users and collections are too diverse to be
  served by a single solution.

50
Next StepsMoving from vision to decision

• Apr 06 - Analyze feedback and provide
• report to the University
  Librarians
• Jun 06 - University Librarians decide on
• actions
• Jul 06 - Task Force reconvenes to develop
  
• action plans

51
http//libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/sopag
/BSTF/Final.pdf