1. Implementing Federated Searching: A Colleges Perspective OLA 2005 Superconference Friday, February 4, 2004 2:00 – 3:15 pm Carolyn Lam, Jane Foo

2. About Seneca College Students Enrolment: Approx 18,000 full-time Approx. 678 FT faculty, 612 support, 138 admin 4 major campuses: Newnham, Seneca@York, King and Don Mills Library Holdings: –65 Web-based research databases with 12,000+ electronic books, 17,000+ full-text electronic journals –Print holdings: 82,000 books, 600+ periodicals –110,000 annual circulation –30000+ reference questions (3000 Virtual Reference Questions) CL

3. Why are we doing this session? Searching - the fastest growing sector in the IT industry?

4. Recent Developments – really! Most of the worlds knowledge will be digitized within 2 decades. Announcement - Google and large research libraries to digitize their holdings and make them available on the WEB. Announcement - LC and other international libraries including Canada CL (Google Adding Major Libraries, Dec 14 2004 & OCLC 2004 Information Format Trends)

5. Recent Developments – really! Major publishers have entered into a venture with Google and Amazon that will allow users to search the text of copyrighted books online and read excerpts. E-books are fastest growing segment of publishing industry. A study shows that almost 41% of academic libraries surveyed plan to reduce spending for print and increase expenditures for e-resources. CL (Google Adding Major Libraries, Dec 14 2004 & OCLC 2004 Information Format Trends)

6. Recent Developments – really! Research suggests that end users see the most important role for their libraries as making content available in their digital workspace. CL (Google Adding Major Libraries, Dec 14 2004 & OCLC 2004 Information Format Trends)

7. ENCompass for Resource Access CL PurchasedSpring 2002 TrainingSpring and Fall 2003 XML TrainingSummer 2003 Configuration, Technical Setup and Testing Fall 2003 and Winter 2004 Interface DesignSpring and Summer 2004 LaunchedSeptember 2004

8. Session Topics What is it Why did we buy it What you need to consider How does it work Limitations Successful implementation Live demo Customization and integration Future developments Q & A CL

9. What is Federated Searching?

10. JF © 1999-2005 www.barrysclipart.com Federated searching consists of transforming a query and broadcasting it to a group of disparate databases with the appropriate syntax, merging the results collected from the databases, presenting them in a succinct and unified format with minimal duplication, and allowing the library patron to sort the merged result set by various criteria. (Jacso, 2004)

11. JF © 1999-2005 www.barrysclipart.com As defined by the LCPAIG, portals may be characterized by their ability to: … Provide federated searching and information retrieval of descriptive metadata from multiple, diverse target resources, including but not limited to commercial or licensed electronic resources, databases, Web pages, and library catalogs. (The Library of Congress Portal Applications Issues Group)

12. At a Quick Glance… What it is: one-stop searching merged result lists information discovery customized research collections made up from different types of electronic resources JF What it is not: customizable to users a search-all (not yet) replacing library catalogues suitable for scholarly research a substitute for search methods

13. What motivated us to pursue this solution?

14. JF Web Evolution Usability in the Library Shifting User Needs Academia Goes Online Federated Search? Only librarians like to search; everyone else likes to find. (Roy Tennant)

15. 10 Years = 70 Web Years Dot.Coms and eCommerce HTML XHTML XML + XSL More (equitable) access to the Internet Late adopters High-speed broadband Increased online (inter)activity (see also the Pew Report, 2005) JF

16. Usability in the Libraries Library Web Site Student & Faculty Focus Groups in 2000 I know its there, but I cant remember where Web Library Usability: – Searching > Navigating – Breadth vs. Depth – Terminology – Keep it Simple JF Usability test results repeatedly show that even though Students cannot rely on Internet Web sites & search engines for their academic research needs, they prefer them because of their ease of access and ease of use

17. Baby Boomers, Gen X… Information-Age Mindset (Frand, 2000) 1.Computers Arent Technology* 2.Internet Better than TV 3.Reality No Longer Real 4.Doing Rather Than Knowing 5.Nintendo over Logic 6.Multitasking Way of Life 7.Typing Rather Than Handwriting 8.Staying Connected 9.Zero Tolerance for Delays 10.Consumer/Creator Blurring Born with the Chip (Abrams & Luther, 2000) Information Use: 1.Format Agnostic 2.Nomadic 3.Multitasking Learning Behaviours: 1.Experiential 2.Collaborative 3.Integrated Beliefs: 1.Principled 2.Adaptive 3.Direct Millenials = NextGens JF *see also Normans The Invisible Computer

18. A Lifelong Learner Anywhere Everything is going to virtual! And the academic institutions are fully endorsing it: –Print => online full-text –Classroom instruction => online course –Community => discussion boards, emails, Web conferencing –Essays => blogs –Computer lab workstations => Labtops, PDAs and cell phones JF

19. Why a Federated Search Solution? Stay current with the latest in Web technology and trends Maximize awareness of online research resources via discovery Simplify access and save time in the use of online research resources Provide an integrated search tool that will support student and faculty in online academic activities Increase college-wide information literacy levels Provide an information infrastructure that enables the library to create applications in support of college e-Learning strategies JF

20. Federated Search Solutions – factors to consider

21. Factors to consider Build or buy commercial Main players CL

22. Main Players Biggest Players MuseGlobal – MuseSearch Fretwell-Downing – Zportal Webfeat – Knowledge Prism Vendors of Library Systems Endeavor – Encompass Exlibris – Metalib Sirsi – SingleSearch and Room Others Serials Solutions – Central Search TDnet – TES Surfwax CL

23. Factors to consider Integrated solution Technology Number of targets Authentication Customer support End user community CL Build or buy commercial Main players

24. Implementing Encompass – how does it work? ENCompass for Resource Access HTTP XML Gateway Z39.50 Voyager API HTTP Resource AResource BResource CResource DResource EResource F Linkfinder Plus Report Due!

25. Federated Search Protocols Voyager API (Application Programming Interface) Search of any Voyager databases OPAC, local or other Stable protocol with quick, precise results CL ERA Voyager API Library Catalogue

26. Federated Search Protocols Z39.50 (ANSI/NISO Standard) Widely employed in libraries Connection to OPACs and other databases containing scholarly content Setup is straightforward Fairly stable connections Results are true to native interface CL ERA Z39.50 ProQuest

27. Federated Search Protocols XML Gateway Exchange of XML documents Structured way to search a database or resource Programmed specifically for each resource Stable and consistent results CL ERA XML Gateway Science Direct

28. Federated Search Protocols Http connectors Mimics end user searching through the generation of URLs Individually programmed for each resource Also called screen scraping Least structured and stable of the protocol types CL ERA HTTP Google

29. Limitations of Federated Searching Quality of Searching Database Coverage Search Details Database Licensing Issues Response Rate Limit of Hits per Database Results List Orders Record Details CL

30. Successful Implementation Understand the limitations Thoroughly test Staff expertise in metadata and XML Involve reference staff Provide staff training Invest in a development/testing environment CL

31. Demonstration Live Video Clip Screenshots

32. Integrating Federated Searching into Our Existing Services

33. Customizing Federated Searching JF

34. Committee Responsibilities tested search functions and connectors for each available resource discussed what types of search collections would be the most useful to students and faculty grouped the databases by subject areas that were relevant to the Seneca programs. reviewed, discussed and specified the layout and content of each page

35. Customizations Look & Feel Terminology (e.g., Linkfinder Plus) Hiding complexities –automatic search index selection –skipping Results by Database –eliminating unnecessary functions (e.g., login, Find a Resource) Collections –Seneca program-specific –annotated

36. Integration Discussions with the Web team No major Web site redesign Performance load considerations Some re-organization of information services (Find …) Reference staff reactions

37. JF

40. LCO Licensed Digital Databases Ask Us Now EZProxy Serials Solutions VoyagerERALFPEDC Our Current Information Infrastructure Library Catalogue ::Look up books, print periodicals, videos, DVDs, CDs ENCompass for Resource Access ::Find published articles & digital objects via one search ENCompass for Digital Collections ::Create & manage digital assets Linkfinder Plus ::Directly access full-text content across various sources Serials Solutions ::Find an electronic journal, magazine or newspaper EZProxy ::Access any restricted resources off-campus Ask Us Now ::Chat and interact with a librarian online Licensed Digital Databases ::Access and search for published content in electronic form JF

41. Whats Next?

42. Whats Next at Seneca? More reliability More access points (JIT search, GTA-wide catalogue search, etc.) More expansions (new content, new collections, new search functions) More integrations into existing college systems (portal, courseware, online Web conferencing, etc.) More involvement in the colleges technology developments (Sun Centre of Excellence, Learning Objects) Development and integration of digital collections at the college

43. Whats in Store for the (Web) Future? Searching – the next big industry on the Web More educational content & services More format independence Increased mobility More interactive systems Social publishing JF

44. Lets do something about it! Libraries are passive by nature; the patrons are the active component. (Michael Freeston, 2004) Content is no longer format-dependent and users are not dependent on traditional distribution channels for access to content. (OCLC, 2004) JF

45. Contact Us! JF Carolyn Lam Carolyn.Lam@senecac.on.ca 416-491-5050 x2097 Jane Foo Jane.Foo@senecac.on.ca 416-491-5050 x2011 Carolyn.Lam@senecac.on.ca Jane.Foo@senecac.on.ca