Presentation on theme: "Google Scholar and the UML UML Reference Forum – April 2006."— Presentation transcript:
Google Scholar and the UML UML Reference Forum – April 2006
2 Outline History What Is Google Scholar? Google Scholar and Searching Pros & Cons Satisficing Quoting Lorcan Dempsey Other Libraries and Google Scholar Discussion
3 History October 2004: Google launches Google Scholar February 6, 2005: Google Scholar approaches UML with invitation to take part in pilot project: Hi Norma, I am a developer with Google Scholar. We provide search over scholarly content - journal articles, technical reports, books, etc. Your son Paul gave me your address. Collections committee investigating Google Scholar for metasearch. Google Scholar invitation dovetailed nicely. Task Force on UML & Google Scholar: Allison Erhardt; Lisa OHara; Elizabeth Serhal; Jared Whiklo
4 History October 2005 - Task Force presented report to Collections Recommendations and observations: Google Scholar provides metasearch functionality Bison and UMLinks should have the same content Provide electronic holdings list to Google Scholar Google Scholar link added to all UML Web pages
Google Scholar provides a simple way to broadly search for scholarly literature. From one place, you can search across many disciplines and sources: peer-reviewed papers, theses, books, abstracts and articles, from academic publishers, professional societies, preprint repositories, universities and other scholarly organizations. Google Scholar helps you identify the most relevant research across the world of scholarly research. Google Scholar aims to sort articles the way researchers do, weighing the full text of each article, the author, the publication in which the article appears, and how often the piece has been cited in other scholarly literature. The most relevant results will always appear on the first page. http://scholar.google.com/scholar/about.html
8 Quotes from Google Scholars Principal Engineer Dr. Anurag Acharya – Index has grown significantly since November 2004, but actual index size cannot be disclosed – We cannot share update information, but our long-term goal is to update every day. – Dec., 2005 over 500 libraries are participating in the program from all over the world; more are joining every week. – click through rate for libraries participating in the Library Links program is a factor of 3-6 higher than the click through rate for libraries that are included without holdings information.
9 Google Scholar and Searching Subject coverage: –Medicine 22% –Engineering 14% –Biology 13% –Sociology & Psych 13% –Chem & Physics 12% –Humanities, Business, Law 26%? Dr. A. Acharya. "Searching scholarly literature: a Google scholar perspective, a paper presented at the 9 th World Congress on Health Information and Libraries, Brazil, September 2005.
Recent Improvements March 2, 2006 - British Library announces Google Scholar users will see links to the British Library document service Early 2006 - Library Links program Mid 2005 - Advanced search features added Mid 2005 – Preferences Language Discipline Separate results window Yesterday? All articles | Recent articles
14 Pros... Patrons on campus search for & read articles on screen, just like our databases. No UML brand. Conclusion? Google Scholar provides free access UML should work with Google Scholar so patrons realize our important role Federated searching Citation tracking tool Single interface to library catalogues, databases, Web Interdisciplinary, full text galore Fast, easy to use and navigate Easy authentication and access 24/7 Google Scholar has high visibility
15 Google Scholar Student Newspaper Ad http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/5153/551/1600/scholar1.gif
16 Citation Analysis Thompson/ISI only source of large-scale inverted bibliographic data required for impact analysis. Google Scholar provides same ability. Analyzed 203 publications, cited by 4000+ other publications Surprisingly good agreement between counts provided by the two services. Additional robustness offered by multiple sources of such data promises to increase the utility of these measurements as open citation protocols and open access increase their impact on electronic scientific publication practices. Belew, R. K. Scientific impact quantity and quality: Analysis of two sources of bibliographic data. arXiv.org preprint arXiv:cs.IR/0504046, 11 Apr 05. www.cogsci.ucsd.edu/~rik/papers/belew05-iqq.pdf
17... and Cons Older articles presented first by default Coverage unclear, not always scholarly Size of index unknown Update frequency unknown CanCon weak One year behind in indexing PUBMED No advanced search features: publication type; date range; descriptors Citation management: no sorting, exporting or emailing
Citation Management Google Scholar is not Z39.50 compatible, however we are working with them on Direct Export. I cannot give an exact date for the Export but hope it will be soon. In the meantime you will have to manually add references that you find from Google Scholar into RefWorks. RefWorks Email, March 8, 2005
Satisficing Reasonable behaviour Different people have different requirements Our role: enable patrons to meet their necessary requirements, using a variety of appropriate tools Google Scholar can satisfice but may not be sufficient for scholarly comprehensiveness Do all of our patrons need to exhaust all avenues of scholarship all of the time?
Quoting Lorcan Dempsey Libraries have to find ways to introduce themselves into the user environment rather than expecting them to come to the library If you create a one-stop-shop, users will treat you as a one-shop-stop. If they dont find what they want on their first attempt, theyll move on to the next shop and out of the library. Google is the first and last resort for many people. We have to make library resources surface in these types of resources. The Library and the Network. Presentation at Access 2005, Edmonton.
More Lorcan … What do library users want? How do we embed ourselves in these activities? How are we doing? Hows Google Scholar doing? ActivityUMLGoogle Scholar Discovering Linking Gathering Annotating Depositing Creating Asking
Google Scholar & Other Libraries MIT: libraries.mit.edu/help/google-scholarlibraries.mit.edu/help/google-scholar U of T: main.library.utoronto.camain.library.utoronto.ca Harvard: e-research.lib.harvard.edu/V/FMBN49PTETH NVF81SXKFK5YPFJP JR5LJ3JGEUBIEE1IXAJUYFB-40624?func=find-db-1&pds_handle=GUESTe-research.lib.harvard.edu/V/FMBN49PTETH NVF81SXKFK5YPFJP JR5LJ3JGEUBIEE1IXAJUYFB-40624?func=find-db-1&pds_handle=GUEST U of Georgia: www.libs.uga.edu/www.libs.uga.edu/ California Digital Library: The CDL put together this fine report (pdf) based on a survey of University of California Libraries. On June 22, 2005, the CDL requested information from the campuses about librarian and library staff use of Google Scholar in their own work and at public service desks. Eight of ten campuses responded with a wealth of information about the creative ways in which the libraries use Google Scholar, as well as with their objections to its use. Immediately below is an overall summary of responses, followed by a document containing all the detailed responses received. At the end of the second section is a report from UCLA detailing how the UCLA library integrates and positions Google Scholar along with the rest of their electronic resources.this fine report (pdf)