1. SLA 2012 Annual Conference
Chicago, IL
July 16, 2012
Harry Kaplanian – EBSCO Publishing
Debra Kolah, Rafal Kasprowski – Rice University

2. Speakers
Harry Kaplanian
 Director of Product Management, Discovery Services, EBSCO
Publishing
 Harry Kaplanian is currently the Director of Product Management
for Discovery Services at EBSCO Publishing. Prior to joining
EBSCO, Harry was Director of Product Management at Serials
Solutions. Harry also worked for Microsoft developing Live
Search Books, served as Vice President of Development at
Mandarin Library Automation and previously Director of
Development at SIRS Publishing. Harry holds a degree in
Computer Science from Florida State University. His interests are
skiing, gardening and all things related to libraries.

3. Speakers
Debra Kolah
 User Experience Librarian, Rice University
 Debra is at Rice University in Houston, Texas in the User Experience
Office, and is also the librarian for Physics, Math, Statistics, and Astronomy
at Rice University. She has 15 years of experience in libraries, including
Branch Manager of a public library, an intern at a semiconductor
company, and adjunct faculty at a community college library, which gives
her a unique perspective of service and users in a variety of settings. She is
currently leading an ethnographic project at Rice to examine the ways that
faculty adopt and use iPads in a classroom setting, and a usability study of
the Institutional Repository. She has an MLIS from the University of Texas
and has most recently done graduate level work in Ethnography at Rice
University. Additionally, she is the Convener of the SLA UX Caucus, formed
in January 2011.

4. Speakers
Rafal Kasprowski
 Electronic Resources Librarian, Rice University
 Rafal received an MLIS from McGill University and has been an electronic
resources librarian since 2003. His areas of responsibility have covered
license negotiation, e-resource acquisitions, OpenURL and discovery
platform implementations, remote access maintenance, and collection
development. He has organized conference sessions, presented, and
published on e-resource management topics, and has chaired interest
groups for SLA and the American Society for Information Science &
Technology. He currently works at Rice University, rotates as instructor for
ALA’s Fundamentals of Electronic Resources Acquisitions web course, and
participates in the development of standards and best practices related to
e-resource management as a working group member for NISO.

5. History of Discovery
 How did we get here?
 Federated Search
 Catalog Layers – Local Discovery
 Web-Scale Discovery

6. The 1st Discovery Service (~1901)

7. Cataloging at LC, 1910/1920

8. MARC & OPAC (1980 – 1995)
 1968 – 50,000 MARC records in existence
 1982 – Card catalogs disappear
 OPACs appear in the library on a single desktop computer
Pros Cons
 Users can search the entire  Users can only search catalog
physical collection quickly  Metadata searching only
 Tight ILS integration
 One place to search

9. Uncork those bottles…
 1990’s - Electronic databases appear
 Not part of the physical collection
 They change often
 Multiple tools needed for searching content
 Students and faculty no longer know where to look
 And the e-content just keeps on coming…

10. Federated Search
Pros: Cons:
 Single search box for all  Speed
content  Many indexes
 Currency of content  Multiple ranking algorithms
 Larger result sets incomplete
 Internet Traffic
 Content provider traffic

11. Catalog layers
Pros Cons
 Single index for all local  Usually combined with fed
content search for e-content
 Speed  Difficult setup and software
 Complete result sets updates
 Not tightly integrated with
ILS

12. Web-Scale Discovery
Pros Cons
 Search all content, one place  Not tightly integrated with
 Single search box ILS
 Single index  Easier setup (vendor
 Single Relevance Ranking
maintains index)
 Speed
 Bandwidth
 Complete result sets This isn’t web scale
 No local hardware management…
 No local install

13. Resource Discovery
Tools Working Group
8 member team- representatives from
Cataloging, IR, IT, User Experience, ERM
Charged in late December 2010 to find a new
discovery layer-Interim report in March 2011; 3
products were chosen to trial; Final report
generated in late July 2011
EDS went live in January 2012

14. Onsite demonstrations
Conference presentations
Conversations
Literature and online research
Vendor interviews
Ethnographic study
Product testing
Vendor surveys/questionnaires/follow-up
questions

19. The Foundation
Nancy Foster
https://urresearch.rochester.edu/viewResearcher
Page.action?researcherId=25
Andrew Asher
http://www.erialproject.org/participants/anthropolo
gists

20. Bootstrap UX
http://www.txla.org/sites/tla/files/conference/hand
outs/289BOOTSTRAP.pdf
What is it? Short ethnographic projects 6-15
weeks in length. A small team, of four to six
librarians is ideal. It is good to have a range of
skills represented: librarians that are good at
interviewing, solving problems, and doing project
management. It is crucial to have a person that
has authority to make service changes as a
research team member.

21. Research Discovery
Tools Report
"None was overwhelmingly favored over the
others and all are imperfect"

22. Perfect is the enemy of
the good.
Voltaire

23. Lessons Learned
More usability testing at all points
A clearer plan for Marketing and training- librarian
as enduser and researcher enduser
More carefully chosen subjects for ethnographic
study

24. User Experience Office
Ethnography
Usability
Great Experiences
Fondren Library UX office
activities included in
SPEC Kit 322 from ARL

25. Bibliography
Fagan, Jody Condit and Meris A. Mandernach, Carl S. Nelson, Jonathan R. Paulo, Grover
Saunders. Usability Test Results for a Discovery Tool in an Academic Library. Information
Technology and Libraries. March 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.6017/ital.v31i1.1855.
Khoo, Michael, and Lily Rozaklis, Catherine Hall. A survey of the use of ethnographic
methods in the study of libraries and library users. Library & Information Science Research.
Volume 34, Issue 2. April 2012, pp. 82-91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2011.07.010.
Promise Fulfilled? An EBSCO Discovery Service Usability Study (Aug 2011) - Illinois State
University - Interesting comparisons with federated search usability studies and use of
pre/post limiters and refinements. Journal of Web Librarianship,Vol. 5, No. 3. (July 2011), pp.
179-198. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19322909.2011.597590.
Web Scale Discovery Services (2011) This work by Jason Vaughan is probably the first
comprehensive work on Discovery systems so far available. There are chapters on WorldCat
Local, Summon, Ebsco Discovery Service and Primo Central.
http://www.alatechsource.org/taxonomy/term/106/web-scale-discovery-services
Wiki "Articles on Discovery" by Aaron Tay.
https://sites.google.com/site/urd2comparison/articles-on-discovery

26. Ethnography Resources
Asher, Andrew and Susan Miller. So You Want to Do Anthropology in Your
Library? or A Practical Guide to Ethnographic Research in Academic
Libraries. The ERIAL PROJECT. Accessed April 2, 2012 at
http://erialproject.org/
Foster, Nancy and Susan Gibbons, eds. 2007. Studying Students: The
Undergraduate Research Project at the University of Rochester. Chicago:
Association of College and Research Libraries.
http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/publications/booksand
digitalresources/digital/Foster-Gibbons_cmpd.pdf.
Small, Mario. 2009 "How many cases do I need?" On science and logic of
case selection in field-based research." Ethnography 10(1):5-38.

27. Web-scale Discovery
Product Selection
 What should you look for in a product?
 Each vendor may provide some, but not all, of
the possible features.

28. Unified index or Federated searching
Advantage of web-scale over federated searching:
 Records from content providers are entered into a single
index.
 Search results are combined and relevance ranked as if
they came from a single source following the same
metadata organization.
Is the web-scale discovery vendor providing that?

29. Unified index or Federated searching
Vendors may:
 Claim to not use federated searching, but results are NOT
combined and relevance ranked independently of native
database scheme.
 Provide complementary federated searching (in addition
to true unified index), in case
 content is not covered by agreements with vendors or
 users prefer functionality of native database interface
 Use a grand unified index of all records and present a
library’s individual holdings as a subset of the larger
index.

30. Hosted by vendor or library
Discovery product may be hosted:
 on external vendor server, as SaaS (software as a service);
customizations may be possible via:
 tech support (online/voice/email);
 administrator module: direct online changes by library.
 ready widgets: may be added to available features;
 APIs: allow certain functions/features to be coded.
 on local library server, possibly with code-level access:
 library can make extensive and unique customizations;
 vendor updates not made automatically on local server;
 code-level local version may cost more.

31. Content Coverage
Providers covered:
 Number and variety
 Types: academic, business, popular literature, etc.
 Formats: periodicals, newspapers, books, etc.
Areas covered:
 Strong/weak disciplines
 Fit with your institution’s specializations
Metadata depth of index:
 Mostly title, author, pub. date, etc. or also abstract, full text?
 Does vendor enrich records, e.g. w/ subject headings?

32. Institutional records
 Loading records to discovery system from ILS and IR:
 Frequency: daily / weekly / monthly / every 6 months?
 Full ILS dump or incremental load of updated records?
 Availability in discovery system: couple of days or weeks?
 ILS & discovery system: how well do they work together?
 Compatibility: sharing of similar standards
 Conformity to shared standards: interpreting shared
standards in the same way.

33. Fitting Local Practices  ILS  Discovery System
E.g.: Displaying on-order records:
 For all discovery vendors connectivity is attained through
Z39.50 protocol.
 ILS sends status info to discovery service via Z39.50 from MARC
926 $b.
 How Rice catalogs record status:
In Stacks: 926 $a FONDREN $b STACKS $c PS3563.C337 A44 1992 $d BOOK $f 1
On order: 926 $a FONDREN $c PJ25 .L36 2012 $f NONE
 Local workflow: On order status is indicated in Status field instead.

34. Fitting Local Practices  ILS  Discovery System
Solution:
 Check beforehand if working solution can be reached for all
factors involved:
 protocol used by discovery service,
 if/how protocol is used by ILS,
 local cataloging practices for entering data into ILS .
 Find workaround:
 e.g., link to catalog for item status.

35. Example of on order item

36. Full-Text Linking Options
Full texts native to discovery platform
 Discovery service vendor is also content provider.
 Discovery service vendor’s content is available directly through discovery
platform.
Proprietary external links
 Discovery service vendor establishes linking protocol with individual
content providers
 Static linking is predictable, works as long as links remain unchanged
 Links created one provider at a time: limited, but growing in scale
OpenURL links
 Link resolver checks library’s A-Z list and links to matching full text
 Existing standard: scales across most providers
 Dynamic linking can be fickle: no holdings; source/target formats different

37. Conditional Custom Links
• Some records (e.g., books, audio, video, music scores) may not have
enough metadata to populate and run link resolver.
• Create custom link for problem formats to run search (e.g. title +
author) in third-party index with good metadata for these formats
(e.g., rice.worldcat.org).
• Set up OpenURL in third-party index to run resolver &
 get to desired item or
 request item via ILL or document delivery service.
• Result: every record in discovery service has link &
 users can always get or request item
 with no manual data entry;
 Last resort, just Check for availability.

38. Check availability via third party

39. Customization Options
 Default search method
 Boolean / phrase (terms in results are separated by defined number of words)
 Find all search terms / Find any search terms
 Result display preferences
 by data set (library’s catalog / IR records displayed before other indexes)
 by selected indexes (delisting undesired indexes in admin module)
 by type of full text links (native full texts, proprietary links, OpenURL links, etc.)
 Interacting with other services using widgets / APIs
 Display results from external sources (images from Flickr, videos from YouTube,
results from Google Books, etc.)
 Provide links to frequently-used content sources, such as LibGuides
 Post custom messages or other text, such as Library hours or upcoming events
 Faceting preferences (date, subject, format, ...); Visual display, etc.

40. Licensed e-journal content
 Provided in A-Z list, which is a separate service linked to
discovery service.
 Indicates available “full-text records” to discovery service
search filters.
 May be used as the knowledge base for OpenURL link
resolver.
 If A-Z service is from a different company, content is
updated in discovery service by periodic manual loads.

41. Changes to related services
 Switching subscriptions to providers whose databases are
indexed in discovery service.
 Customizing external platforms involved in discovery
process.
 E.g.: http://rice.worldcat.org/
 Streamlining text & enhancing graphically resolver menu
page as OpenURL use is increased.

42. Enhanced OpenURL menu
Matthew Reidsma, “jQuery for Customizing Hosted Library Services", http://matthew.reidsrow.com/articles/11 (accessed July 24, 2012)

43. Some other points to consider
 Quality of customer service and technical support.
 Number of sites with similar ILS and IR software that
implemented – not just purchased – the service.
 Degree of integration with vendor’s other services.
 Availability and extensiveness of admin module vs sole
reliance on vendor’s tech support.
 Compatibility with your remote access software (proxy, VPN).

44. Some other points to consider
 Possibility to search unlicensed content (catalog and IR) off
site w/o prior authentication: “guest access”
 Scoping by subsets for specific library branches, e.g.
business
 Exporting data: printing, emailing, downloading, RSS
feeds, compatibility with citation management
formats, etc.
 Possibility for users to create personal accounts.

45. Some other points to consider
 Availability of mobile version.
 Usage data: search count over-representation (e.g. z39-50) vs.
full-text retrievals; compliance with COUNTER protocol.
 Cost: one-time, maintenance, training, multi-year
contracts, other services included for free, etc.
 Time required for implementation to be completed:
weeks, months?

46. Lessons Learned
 Difficult to ask all the right questions when dealing with unknown:
 Develop a method for product search & know what questions to ask;
 Trust the process.
 Ask in detail: One detail may reveal more questions.
 Assume as little as possible: check what you understand by asking.
 Fight urge to find the ultimate product:
 all solutions are imperfect;
 redo product search every 2 – 3 years.
 There will always be problems: make sure customer support is solid.

47. Contributors
 Harry Kaplanian, Director of Product Management,
Discovery Services, EBSCO Publishing, hkaplanian@ebscohost.com
 Denis Galvin, ILS Supervisor, dgalvin@rice.edu
 Rafal Kasprowski, Electronic Resources Librarian, rk11@rice.edu
 Debra Kolah, User Experience Librarian, dkolah@rice.edu
Rice University, Fondren Library MS44,
6100 Main Street, Houston, TX 77005
The presentation will be available at http://www.slideshare.net/rkaspro