Using a Federated Searching Solution to Keep Pace with User Expectations Digital Odyssey 2005 Friday, May 13 th, :30 am – 12:45 pm Carolyn Lam, Jane Foo

About Seneca College Student Enrolment: Approx 18,000 full-time; 90,000 part-time Approx. 678 FT faculty, 612 support, 138 admin 3 major campuses: Newnham, and King 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 – reference questions (3000 Virtual Reference Questions) CL

Recent Development Searching – the fastest growing sector in the IT industry Why? –# of digitization projects increasing –Deep web expanding –E-publishing increasing –Information seekers’ expectation expanding (2004 Information Format Trends, OCLC) CL

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

JF © “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)

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 (yet): customizable to users a search-all comprehensive scholarly research a substitute for search methodology replacing library catalogues

Why a Federated Search Solution? Maximize awareness of online research resources via discovery Simplify access to online research resources Save time in online research Provide an integrated search that supports student and faculty in online academic activities Develop an information infrastructure that enables the library to create applications in support of college e-Learning strategies JF

Usability in the Libraries Library Web Site Student & Faculty Focus Groups in 2000  “I know it’s there, but I can’t remember where” Web Library Usability: – Searching > Navigating – Breadth vs. Depth – Terminology JF Usability tests 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

A Typical Day on the Internet… 35 million adult Americans get their news from the Internet 24 million adult Americans do research for their job 14 million adult Americans do research for school or training online (Pew Internet Report, January 2005) “In total, more than 90% of patrons, including undergraduates, graduate students, and faculty, use search engines on a daily or weekly basis” (ARL Bimonthly Report, October 2004)

The New Generation Information-Age Mindset (Frand, 2000) 1.Computers Aren’t 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 Norman’s The Invisible Computer

mary poppins special fx

Factors to consider Main players CL

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

Factors to consider Integrated solution Technology Number of targets Authentication Customer support End user community CL Main players

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!

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

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

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

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

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

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

Demo Live Video Clip Screenshots

Customizing Federated Searching JF

Customize & Integrate Minimizing Complexities –automatic search index selection –skipping “Results by Database” page –eliminating unnecessary functions (e.g., login, Find a Resource) Terminology (e.g., Linkfinder Plus) Collections –Seneca program-specific –Annotated Learning Commons Online Look & Feel No major Web site redesign

“Find” Services

JF

What’s Next at Seneca? Resolving performance issues More access points (“JIT” search, GTA-wide catalogue search, etc.) Expansions (new content, new collections, new search functions) Integrating into existing college systems (portal, courseware, online Web conferencing, etc.) Development and integration of digital collections at the college level

Contact Us! JF Carolyn Lam x2097 Jane Foo x2011