Posted by a staff member: I would like to see subject as an additional option in the drop-down menu for the ALICE catalog.
Response: We have heard this from a librarian or maybe two. Who we have not heard this from are students or faculty. We are behind Amazon and Barnes & Noble (so you may be thinking we are not Amazon or Barnes & Noble. True, but this is where our users draw their expectations from). They do not make you select author or title or keyword. Amazon and Barnes & Noble just let the user search and are pretty good about getting what the user wants. Amazon does provide an advanced search that has author, title, ISBN, publisher, and other fields, including a pull down menu of subjects. I could not find the equivalent for Barnes & Noble (let me know if you know where Barnes & Noble’s advanced search is). Like Amazon, we consider the subject search an advanced search feature (along with call number and ISBN/ISSN). From each of the simple searches on the home page, we have provided easy access to the advanced search (lower right there is a link). And the ALICE Catalog link from “resources” is also one click access to the subject search and more.
Posted by a staff member: I miss INFOTREE..........it is/soon-to-be was really helpful to have a quick look at the best databases [top picks] for any subject. Anyone who works a service desk knows questions come in all varieties and wading through a variety of libGUIDES is 10 times slower
Response: We have heard comments about InfoTree from faculty, staff, and students. We knew InfoTree would be missed, even though it was not the web team’s decision whether to use the ERM or InfoTree. Regardless, it was decided ERM would be used and OU will have to mourn InfoTree. Some tips to surviving without InfoTree: 1) Look for the "Quick Start" tab to LibGuides (maybe this will reduce the wading). Over a year ago, subject librarians were asked to add a "Quick Start" tab to all of their guides to direct users to the top resources within their subject area. 2) If you have not had the opportunity, familiarize yourself with ERM. Regardless of whether you like it or not, ERM is the future. Let Janet or Anita know if there are any problems. 3) Make referrals. I know we all want to help but there are times it is good to ask a colleague. I cannot speak for all subject librarians, but I can say I am happy to work with engineering faculty and students any time. I recognize because we are not all here 24 hours that this does not always work. and 4) Try out ArticlesPlus. I know it will take time to adjust to it but it can be a helpful tool.
Posted by a staff member: Website looks great! I think the libraries url ending should be ohio.edu not ohiou.edu to keep it consistent with the rest of the university's web pages.
Response: Thank you! We like consistency so thank you for catching this. Mark Mace at some point during his tenure with the library attempted to work with OIT to change the library from ohiou.edu to ohio.edu. For some technical reason OIT said it could not be done. Alex has been notified of this comment.
Posted by a staff member: Looking fwd to new site--it looks great. Only suggestion I have is ILL should be under Resources heading, just below Ohio Link & above Course Reserves---bit too difficult to find in current format. Congrats on outstanding work & excellent tech tips for Spring Qtr!
Response: Thank you! You are correct with “research” changed to “resources” it makes sense that ILL should be included. I do not think we are finished with the “resources”. When we did usability testing, the word “research” really did not work for students (or faculty when asked in University Library Committee) so on the suggestion of graduate students we changed it to “resources.” We had a student make a rather radical suggestion of completely eliminating it because there was duplication between it and the home page search box. We will be doing another round of usability testing and will have several questions on “resources.”
Interlibrary loan is the third column on “borrowing” (within services). We have observed students unable to find information on the borrowing page and we have had comments from faculty that it is confusing. We are working with circulation, interlibrary loan, and Ohio LINK (Pcirc) to making it less busy and confusing.
An update interlibrary loan has been added to "resources" (and citing was removed because it seemed out of place and we did not want to make the list too long). You can also access information about interlibrary loan from "services" then "borrowing." And lastly a interlibrary loan is under "my accounts."
Posted by a staff member: "I won't know what was missed for a while, just flip the switch and let's have a go at it. In future, don't respond to questions or issues with the usual dismissive answer - listen carefully and give respectful answers. All you guys did was refute what people kept saying/suggesting.
Don't delete anything until the public service staff say it's ok to do it, leave it where it can be found easily. This isn't one size fits all, it's going to take some time to transition completely. "
Response: You are a cannon ball dive into the pool kind of a person not a stick my toe in to test the water kind of a person – I like it! And soon (June 12) you will have your wish.
You could have caught someone on a bad day or rushing to get somewhere. We are all human. So I hope you will engage a web team (for lack of a better name or description) member or two (or ask for a time at a future meeting) in a dialogue about your idea and how it is beneficial to users at the very least I hope you seek a reason or reasons why it was not implemented. If you feel you have been treated unjustly and irrespectively, your supervisor is there to talk things over with and take action if needed.
Kelly has asked people for sections of the website that they will need access to until they are able to complete all of their pages on the new website. If there are sections that you would like to continue to have access to, please submit your request to Kelly. The sheer number of pages and size of the old website (we are talking gigabytes - I cannot remember the exact size Alex said) prevents making the whole thing accessible (it is not impossible but Alex starts shacking his head no and he does not do that often so when he does you take him seriously).
From a staff member: looks and works well. be interesting to see how patrons work with it. thanks.
Response: Thank you! We are glad you like it. We have conducted some usability testing to see exactly that -- how users interact with it. It has produced interesting results and has helped us make changes. I believe Kelly has created a wiki page for the website and I will add the usability results to it (look for it later today).
From a staff member: In general, I like it. It's clean and easy to grasp.
The site search is good; a big leap over the old version. I usually find what I'm looking for.
Articles+ is both wonderful and awful, as I suspected it would be. I really really really want a list of what's in it and not in it, even if it's not entirely up to date, etc. Close enough is close enough.
The ERM is still very weak. The database subject listing does not find all my databases. The ERM listings are boring looking and don't make sense to users. They get to that thing and say, ""What's this?"" Especially as listed in an ALICE search among other items, they look weird and confuse the user.
A lot of page content is still missing, of course, and several units haven't grasped the lighter, less wordy new feel. That will come with time.
Response: Thank you! We glad to hear you think we have made steps in the right direction with the website and site search.
I think your request for what is and/or is not in ArticlesPlus should be made to Janet (or maybe a member of the team worked on selecting a discovery tool).
See my early comment about the ERM. I cannot encourage you enough to send suggestions to Janet and/or Anita.
I agree with time we will get all the content out there (and discover that some that is already there does not need to be). And people will hopefully embrace less is more.
From a staff member: I really don't like change so it will take me awhile to adjust but I like the new site. I think there has been a trade off. Some things come up with less clicks, some take a few more.
Response: You are not alone. Change is not a friend to many. I hope if there is a something a web team member (or members) or your supervisor can do to make the transition a bit smoother for you that you will ask. And I am glad to hear you like it (even though it represent change).
I agree with you. For example, finding the hours is so much easier (and this is a really good thing). But it was horribly painful to watch students “click” 4 times to get to information on printing from their laptop during the paper prototype usability testing. Let us know if there is anything you find horrible painful to get to. I cannot make any promises but we can see what we can do (with the top menu and the flyouts that have been added, it is 2 mouse-overs and 2 clicks to find out how to print from your laptop so slight improvement and I think there might be a way to eliminate one of those clicks).
From a staff member: I like the ""pop-up"" or drop-down feature that goes with the site search box. It will be especially useful until I learn which topics fall under certain categories.
I think losing InfoTree will be a big handicap for staff and students. The ERM doesn't seem very user friendly for undergrads trying to navigate databases and find the ""top picks."" Libguides are thorough, but seem like they will be awkward for undergrads to navigate or even locate without assistance from a librarian.
Response: Thank you! Alex gets all the credit for the functionality of the search box. Great job, Alex!
See my June 2, 2012 12:24 PM post about InfoTree. We know losing InfoTree will be the biggest adjustment for library staff and many of our users. I cannot speak for Janet or Anita but they seem open to suggestions though we have to remember we are more restricted since ERM is from a third party. Together with time, some adjustments to LibGuides, and tweaking of ERM, we can survive without InfoTree.
From a staff member: Different way of thinking. I'm sure there was stuff that was missed. One thing I don't like is the Ask Me balloon, it's too far to the right of the screen and blends in too much with the back ground. It needs to be made more obvious.
Response: It is a bit different and we are hoping better. Time will tell if anything was missed. I will share your comments about the Ask Us balloon with the creator.
From a staff member: I will get used to it. I think we needed a change so need to start somewhere.
Response: True, with time everyone will get used to it. You have an excellent point. This is a start. We knew it was time for a new website and LibQual data reflects this (question IC2 – website for independent exploration – results were not good). I hope we can think of the website as more of an iterative process.
From a staff member: I don't find it easy to use. The articles plus search often produces nothing and just sits there unresponsive. It seems that several times the links I followed led me back to the OLD website...so why are bothering with a new site, when it just leads you back to the old site? That's just creating more steps and seems to be a waste of time....just my opinion.
Response: ArticlesPlus will take a while to get used to. The next time ArticlesPlus is not responsive please send Carrie an email with details about what you are doing so the terms you used, the browser, etc. Without details it is difficult to troubleshoot.
There are certain areas (e.g., Mahn Center) that will have links back to the old website until fall. Several areas were given a different deadline than June 12 and permission to link to old pages (staff creating web pages were asked not to do this during training) because of quantity of pages and staff workflow.
Posted by a staff member: My comment is WOW, how nice it is to have multiple ways of accessing the same information. This is much more user friendly!!
ReplyDeleteResponse: Thank you! We are glad you like and appreciate hearing it.
Posted by a staff member: I would like to see subject as an additional option in the drop-down menu for the ALICE catalog.
ReplyDeleteResponse: We have heard this from a librarian or maybe two. Who we have not heard this from are students or faculty. We are behind Amazon and Barnes & Noble (so you may be thinking we are not Amazon or Barnes & Noble. True, but this is where our users draw their expectations from). They do not make you select author or title or keyword. Amazon and Barnes & Noble just let the user search and are pretty good about getting what the user wants. Amazon does provide an advanced search that has author, title, ISBN, publisher, and other fields, including a pull down menu of subjects. I could not find the equivalent for Barnes & Noble (let me know if you know where Barnes & Noble’s advanced search is). Like Amazon, we consider the subject search an advanced search feature (along with call number and ISBN/ISSN). From each of the simple searches on the home page, we have provided easy access to the advanced search (lower right there is a link). And the ALICE Catalog link from “resources” is also one click access to the subject search and more.
Posted by a staff member: I miss INFOTREE..........it is/soon-to-be was really helpful to have a quick look at the best databases [top picks] for any subject. Anyone who works a service desk knows questions come in all varieties and wading through a variety of libGUIDES is 10 times slower
ReplyDeleteResponse: We have heard comments about InfoTree from faculty, staff, and students. We knew InfoTree would be missed, even though it was not the web team’s decision whether to use the ERM or InfoTree. Regardless, it was decided ERM would be used and OU will have to mourn InfoTree. Some tips to surviving without InfoTree: 1) Look for the "Quick Start" tab to LibGuides (maybe this will reduce the wading). Over a year ago, subject librarians were asked to add a "Quick Start" tab to all of their guides to direct users to the top resources within their subject area. 2) If you have not had the opportunity, familiarize yourself with ERM. Regardless of whether you like it or not, ERM is the future. Let Janet or Anita know if there are any problems. 3) Make referrals. I know we all want to help but there are times it is good to ask a colleague. I cannot speak for all subject librarians, but I can say I am happy to work with engineering faculty and students any time. I recognize because we are not all here 24 hours that this does not always work. and 4) Try out ArticlesPlus. I know it will take time to adjust to it but it can be a helpful tool.
Posted by a staff member: Website looks great! I think the libraries url ending should be ohio.edu not ohiou.edu to keep it consistent with the rest of the university's web pages.
ReplyDeleteResponse: Thank you! We like consistency so thank you for catching this. Mark Mace at some point during his tenure with the library attempted to work with OIT to change the library from ohiou.edu to ohio.edu. For some technical reason OIT said it could not be done. Alex has been notified of this comment.
Posted by a staff member: Looking fwd to new site--it looks great. Only suggestion I have is ILL should be under Resources heading, just below Ohio Link & above Course Reserves---bit too difficult to find in current format. Congrats on outstanding work & excellent tech tips for Spring Qtr!
ReplyDeleteResponse: Thank you! You are correct with “research” changed to “resources” it makes sense that ILL should be included. I do not think we are finished with the “resources”. When we did usability testing, the word “research” really did not work for students (or faculty when asked in University Library Committee) so on the suggestion of graduate students we changed it to “resources.” We had a student make a rather radical suggestion of completely eliminating it because there was duplication between it and the home page search box. We will be doing another round of usability testing and will have several questions on “resources.”
Interlibrary loan is the third column on “borrowing” (within services). We have observed students unable to find information on the borrowing page and we have had comments from faculty that it is confusing. We are working with circulation, interlibrary loan, and Ohio LINK (Pcirc) to making it less busy and confusing.
An update interlibrary loan has been added to "resources" (and citing was removed because it seemed out of place and we did not want to make the list too long). You can also access information about interlibrary loan from "services" then "borrowing." And lastly a interlibrary loan is under "my accounts."
DeletePosted by a staff member: "I won't know what was missed for a while, just flip the switch and let's have a go at it. In future, don't respond to questions or issues with the usual dismissive answer - listen carefully and give respectful answers. All you guys did was refute what people kept saying/suggesting.
ReplyDeleteDon't delete anything until the public service staff say it's ok to do it, leave it where it can be found easily. This isn't one size fits all, it's going to take some time to transition completely. "
Response: You are a cannon ball dive into the pool kind of a person not a stick my toe in to test the water kind of a person – I like it! And soon (June 12) you will have your wish.
You could have caught someone on a bad day or rushing to get somewhere. We are all human. So I hope you will engage a web team (for lack of a better name or description) member or two (or ask for a time at a future meeting) in a dialogue about your idea and how it is beneficial to users at the very least I hope you seek a reason or reasons why it was not implemented. If you feel you have been treated unjustly and irrespectively, your supervisor is there to talk things over with and take action if needed.
Kelly has asked people for sections of the website that they will need access to until they are able to complete all of their pages on the new website. If there are sections that you would like to continue to have access to, please submit your request to Kelly. The sheer number of pages and size of the old website (we are talking gigabytes - I cannot remember the exact size Alex said) prevents making the whole thing accessible (it is not impossible but Alex starts shacking his head no and he does not do that often so when he does you take him seriously).
From a staff member: looks and works well. be interesting to see how patrons work with it. thanks.
ReplyDeleteResponse: Thank you! We are glad you like it. We have conducted some usability testing to see exactly that -- how users interact with it. It has produced interesting results and has helped us make changes. I believe Kelly has created a wiki page for the website and I will add the usability results to it (look for it later today).
From a staff member: In general, I like it. It's clean and easy to grasp.
ReplyDeleteThe site search is good; a big leap over the old version. I usually find what I'm looking for.
Articles+ is both wonderful and awful, as I suspected it would be. I really really really want a list of what's in it and not in it, even if it's not entirely up to date, etc. Close enough is close enough.
The ERM is still very weak. The database subject listing does not find all my databases. The ERM listings are boring looking and don't make sense to users. They get to that thing and say, ""What's this?"" Especially as listed in an ALICE search among other items, they look weird and confuse the user.
A lot of page content is still missing, of course, and several units haven't grasped the lighter, less wordy new feel. That will come with time.
Response: Thank you! We glad to hear you think we have made steps in the right direction with the website and site search.
I think your request for what is and/or is not in ArticlesPlus should be made to Janet (or maybe a member of the team worked on selecting a discovery tool).
See my early comment about the ERM. I cannot encourage you enough to send suggestions to Janet and/or Anita.
I agree with time we will get all the content out there (and discover that some that is already there does not need to be). And people will hopefully embrace less is more.
From a staff member: I really don't like change so it will take me awhile to adjust but I like the new site. I think there has been a trade off. Some things come up with less clicks, some take a few more.
ReplyDeleteResponse: You are not alone. Change is not a friend to many. I hope if there is a something a web team member (or members) or your supervisor can do to make the transition a bit smoother for you that you will ask. And I am glad to hear you like it (even though it represent change).
I agree with you. For example, finding the hours is so much easier (and this is a really good thing). But it was horribly painful to watch students “click” 4 times to get to information on printing from their laptop during the paper prototype usability testing. Let us know if there is anything you find horrible painful to get to. I cannot make any promises but we can see what we can do (with the top menu and the flyouts that have been added, it is 2 mouse-overs and 2 clicks to find out how to print from your laptop so slight improvement and I think there might be a way to eliminate one of those clicks).
From a staff member: I like the ""pop-up"" or drop-down feature that goes with the site search box. It will be especially useful until I learn which topics fall under certain categories.
ReplyDeleteI think losing InfoTree will be a big handicap for staff and students. The ERM doesn't seem very user friendly for undergrads trying to navigate databases and find the ""top picks."" Libguides are thorough, but seem like they will be awkward for undergrads to navigate or even locate without assistance from a librarian.
Response: Thank you! Alex gets all the credit for the functionality of the search box. Great job, Alex!
See my June 2, 2012 12:24 PM post about InfoTree. We know losing InfoTree will be the biggest adjustment for library staff and many of our users. I cannot speak for Janet or Anita but they seem open to suggestions though we have to remember we are more restricted since ERM is from a third party. Together with time, some adjustments to LibGuides, and tweaking of ERM, we can survive without InfoTree.
From a staff member: Different way of thinking. I'm sure there was stuff that was missed. One thing I don't like is the Ask Me balloon, it's too far to the right of the screen and blends in too much with the back ground. It needs to be made more obvious.
ReplyDeleteResponse: It is a bit different and we are hoping better. Time will tell if anything was missed. I will share your comments about the Ask Us balloon with the creator.
From a staff member: I will get used to it. I think we needed a change so need to start somewhere.
ReplyDeleteResponse: True, with time everyone will get used to it. You have an excellent point. This is a start. We knew it was time for a new website and LibQual data reflects this (question IC2 – website for independent exploration – results were not good). I hope we can think of the website as more of an iterative process.
From a staff member: I don't find it easy to use. The articles plus search often produces nothing and just sits there unresponsive. It seems that several times the links I followed led me back to the OLD website...so why are bothering with a new site, when it just leads you back to the old site? That's just creating more steps and seems to be a waste of time....just my opinion.
ReplyDeleteResponse: ArticlesPlus will take a while to get used to. The next time ArticlesPlus is not responsive please send Carrie an email with details about what you are doing so the terms you used, the browser, etc. Without details it is difficult to troubleshoot.
There are certain areas (e.g., Mahn Center) that will have links back to the old website until fall. Several areas were given a different deadline than June 12 and permission to link to old pages (staff creating web pages were asked not to do this during training) because of quantity of pages and staff workflow.
From a staff member: It's exciting but it will take a while to get use to this new site.
ReplyDeleteResponse: We think it’s exciting too! And yes all change takes time to adjust to.