DISCOVERY TOOLS IN ACADEMIC LIBRARIES: AN EVALUATION OF WORLDCAT LOCAL IN A CARIBBEAN LIBRARY CONTEXT
Abstract
A thorough assessment of WorldCat Local (WCL) is presented, in light of its implementation at the Library System of the University of Puerto Rico in Rio Piedras (LS). First, a description of its structure, content coverage, configuration process and search interface is provided, in order to explore their impact on the discovery experience. Second, the results of a survey conducted among the academic community to find out its views about the discovery tool are offered. It is concluded that, although WCL has not fulfilled the expectations of the LS from an administrative perspective, users value the availability of a tool that allows them to speed up information search.Downloads
Metrics
References
ALVITE DÍEZ, M.L. Redefiniendo el catálogo: expectativas de las interfaces de descubrimiento centradas en el usuario. Investigación Bibliotecológica, 2012, vol. 2, no 56, p. 181-204.
ÁVILA GARCÍA, L.; ORTIZ REPISO, V. y RODRÍGUEZ MATEOS, D. Herramientas de descubrimiento: ¿una ventanilla única? Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 2015, vol. 38, nº 1, doi: 10.3989/redc.2015.1.1178.
BADKE, W. The convenience factor in information seeking. Online Searcher, 2014, vol. 38, no 6, p. 68-70.
BOYD, J. et al. The one-box challenge: providing a federated search that benefits the research process. Serials Review, 2006, vol. 32, no 4, p. 247-254.
BRAND, A.; DALY, F. y MEYERS, B. Metadata demystified: a guide for publishers. Hanover, Pennsylvania: NISO Press, Sheridan Press, 2003.
BREEDING, M. Library resource discovery products: context, library perspectives, and vendor positions. Library Technology Reports, 2014, vol. 50, no 1, p. 1-58.
BREEDING, M. Libraries.org: a directory of libraries throughout the world. 2016. Disponible en: <http://librarytechnology.org/libraries>. [Consulta: 17 de mayo de 2016].
BUTLER, A. y THOMPSON, L. Implementing discovery at the University of Alabama. The Southeastern Librarian, 2013, vol. 61, nº 1, p. 44-47.
CONNAWAY, L.S. y RANDALL, K.M. Why the Internet is more attractive than the library. The Serials Librarian, 2013, vol. 64, no 1-4, p. 41-56.
CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY. Discovery and access: recommendation and report. Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell University Library, 2011.
DARTMOUTH COLLEGE LIBRARY. An evaluation of Serial Solutions Summon as a discovery service for the Dartmouth College Library. Hanover, NH: Dartmouth College Library. 2009. Disponible en: <http://www.dartmouth.edu/~library/admin/docs/Summon_Report.pdf?mswitch-redir=classic>. [Consulta: 17 de mayo de 2016].
DJENNO, M.; INSUA, G.; GREGORY, G.M. y BRANTLEY, J.S. Discovering usability: comparing two discovery systems at one academic library. Journal of Web Librarianship, 2014, vol. 8, no 3, p. 263-285.
FAWLEY, N. y KRYSAK, N. Learning to love your discovery tool: strategies for integrating a discovery tool in face-to-face, synchronous, and asynchronous instruction. Public Services Quarterly, 2014, vol. 10, no 4, p. 83-301.
GEORGAS, H. Google vs. the library: student preferences and perceptions when doing research using Google and a federated search tool. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 2013, vol. 13, no 2, p. 165-185.
GEORGAS, H. Google vs. the library (Part II): student search patterns and behaviors when using Google and a federated search tool. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 2014, vol. 14, nº 4, p. 503-532.
GLASSER, S. Broken links and failed access: how KBART, IOTA, and PIE-J can help. Library Resources & Technical Services, 2011, vol. 56, no 1, p. 14-23.
GOODSETT, M. Discovery search tools: a comparative study. Reference Reviews, 2014, vol. 28, no 6, p. 2-8.
HERRRERA, G. Metasearching and beyond: implementation experiences and advice from an academic library. Information Technology & Libraries, 2007, vol. 24, nº 2, p. 44-52.
KELLEY, M. Coming into focus: web-scale discovery services face growing need for best practices. Library Journal, 2012, vol. 137, no 17, p. 34-40.
KING, D. Many libraries have gone to federated searching to win users back from Google: is it working? Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship, 2008, vol. 20, no 4, p. 213-227.
KULP, C.; MCCAIN, C. y SCRIVENER, L. Teaching outside the box: ARL librarian's integration of the "One-Box" into student instruction. College & Research Libraries, 2014, vol. 75, no 3, p. 298-308.
NFAIS. Survey comparison on discovery service participation and perceptions. Annapolis, MD.: NFAIS, 2014. Disponible en: <https://nfais.memberclicks.net/assets/docs/BestPractices/2014_surveycomparisons_disc.pdf>. [Consulta: 17 de mayo de 2016].
NISO. Understanding metadata. Bethseda, MD: NISO, 2004. Disponible en: <http://www.niso.org/publications/press/UnderstandingMetadata.pdf>. [Consulta: 17 de mayo de 2016].
OCLC. Databases and collections in WorldCat Local. 2016a. Disponible en: <https://www.oclc.org/worldcat-local/content/dblist.en.html>. [Consulta: 17 de mayo de 2016].
OCLC. WorldCat knowledge base. 2016b. Disponible en: <https://www.oclc.org/knowledge-base.en.html>. [Consulta: 17 de mayo de 2016].
PARRY, M. As researchers turn to Google, libraries navigate the messy world of discovery tools. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 2014, vol. 60, no 32, p. 18.
POPP, M.P. y DALLIS, D. Planning and implementing resource discovery tools in academic libraries. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2012.
PRESCOTT, L. y ERWAY, R. Single search: the quest for the Holy Grail. Dublin, Ohio: OCLC, 2011.
SPINK, A. et al. Searching the web: the public and their queries. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2001, vol. 52, no 3, p. 226-234.
STRYKOWSKI, J. Advanced vs. basic search: digital perception and library learning. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 2015, vol. 41, no 5, p. 689-691.
TENNANT, R. The right solution: federated search tools. Library Journal, 2003, vol. 128, no 11, p. 28-30.
TRAINOR, C. y PRICE, J. Rethinking library linking: breathing new life into open url. Library Technology Reports, 2010, vol. 46, no 7, p. 5-35.
VAUGHAN, J. Web scale discovery services. Library Technology Reports, 2011, vol. 47, nº 1, p. 5-61.
Las obras que se publican en esta revista están sujetas a los siguientes términos:
1. El Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Murcia (Editum) conserva los derechos patrimoniales ('copyright') de las obras publicadas, y favorece y permite la reutilización de las mismas bajo la licencia de uso.
2. Las obras se publican en la edición electrónica de la revista bajo la licencia Creative Commons Atribución Internacional CC BY 4.0. Se puede copiar y redistribuir el material en cualquier medio o formato y remezclar, transformar y crear a partir del material para cualquier finalidad, incluso comercial.
