Loading...

Follow Library Connect on Feedspot

Continue with Google
Continue with Facebook
or

Valid
Library Connect by Libraryconnect@elsevier.com (elsevi.. - 9M ago

In 2017 librarians shared their knowledge and experience on a variety of topics including information literacy, scholarly communication, librarian roles, and research metrics via Library Connect articles, webinars and special content. Download the digest to get all the information in one place. Find out about services and priorities at other libraries, and use it to jump start discussions about what your library might want to try this year.

 

Download Digest

 

The Elsevier Library Connect program thanks the librarians, information professionals, scholars and colleagues from around the world who contributed to the webinars and newsletter in 2017:

  • Chris Belter, Bibliometrics Informationist, National Institutes of Health Library
  • Todd Bruns, Institutional Repository Librarian, Eastern Illinois University
  • Dudee Chiang, Senior Technical Librarian, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory
  • Ellen Cole, Scholarly Publications Librarian, Northumbria University
  • Helena Cousijn, Senior Product Manager for Research Data, Elsevier
  • Christian DeFeo, Product Marketing Manager, Mendeley
  • J. William (Bill) Draper, Reference Librarian, Biddle Law Library, University of Pennsylvania Law School
  • Max Dumoulin, V. President, Institutional Offerings, Elsevier
  • Anita de Waard, VP Research Data Collaborations, Elsevier
  • Nina Exner, Assistant Professor, Head of Research and Instructional Services, J.Y. Joyner Library East Carolina University
  • Donna Gibson, Director of Library Services, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
  • Gregory J. Gordon, Managing Director, SSRN
  • Karen Stanley Grigg, Science Liaison Librarian, University of North Carolina at Greensboro Libraries
  • Karen Gutzman, Impact and Evaluation Librarian Galter Health Sciences Library & Learning Center, Northwestern University
  • Tracy Harmon, Medtronic
  • Jonathan Hartmann, Senior Clinical Informationist and Head of Data Management, Georgetown University Medical Center
  • Hollie Hayward, Elsevier
  • Emily Kallevang, Medtronic
  • Andrea Michalek, Managing Director, Plum Analytics
  • Rick Misra, Discovery and Innovation Manager, Elsevier
  • Marianne Parkhill, Director of Product Management, Research Metrics Community and Adoption, Elsevier
  • Chinmay Panigrahi, Senior Product Manager, E-PIC
  • Robert Phillips, Information Technology, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida
  • Eleonora Presani, Product Manager, Scopus
  • Elaine Reynolds, Associate Professor of Biology and Neuroscience, Lafayette College
  • Pamela Shaw, Biosciences & Bioinformatics Librarian, Northwestern University Galter Health Sciences Library
  • Jean Shipman, VP of Global Library Relations, Elsevier
  • Meghan Turok, Medtronic
  • Ludo Waltman, Researcher, Leiden University
  • Katy Kavanagh Webb, Assistant Professor, Head of Research and Instructional Services, J.Y. Joyner Library, East Carolina University
  • Alainna Therese Wrigley, ORCID Community Team, ORCID
  • Akhilesh K.S. Yadav, Assistant Professor, Centre for Library and Information, Management Studies Tata Institute of Social Sciences
Aug 28, 2018 Keywords metrics scholarly communication info literacy
Read Full Article
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 
 

In this webinar librarians will illustrate how they are helping to develop research ecosystems and services, and apply tools and training for open science.

Discover lessons learned from an Open Educational Resources (OER) pilot project and the development of an open access journals program at a university. Find out how another library introduced a culture of open science as they outline best practices around the development of their university’s research support and open science services. Lastly explore open science in terms of cross-sector collaboration from persistent identifiers to standard file formats and vocabularies.

Open science: from empowering people to employing platforms

 

Thursday, October 11, 2018

11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. North American EDT (16:00 - 17:00 BST, 17:00 - 18:00 CEST) 

REGISTER

 

Tip: If you have forgotten your BrightTALK password, please use the following link to reset: https://www.brighttalk.com/forgot-password

TOPICS

  • Introduction of research support and open science services at one of the largest universities in Finland

  • Main steps of management and leadership processes in building up open science services

  • Overview of an Open Educational Resources (OER) pilot project at a private university 

  • Developing and publishing two open access journals on the Digital Commons platform, one with student editors and one with an international team of faculty

  • Standards, initiatives and practices that make existing research artifacts — methods, code, data, discussions, comments, annotations and more — discoverable and interoperable

REGISTER



PRESENTERS

Helena Silvennoinen-Kuikka, Head of Learning and Information Services, University of Eastern Finland Library

Michele Gibney, Digital Repository Coordinator, University of the Pacific

Corey Harper, Technology Research Director, Elsevier Labs

Michael Lauruhn, Technology Research Director, Elsevier Labs

Aug 28, 2018 Keywords open science webinar
Read Full Article
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 
Library Connect by Libraryconnect@elsevier.com (elsevi.. - 9M ago
By Leo Appleton, Goldsmiths, University of London

I was recently asked to draft a staff development policy for my university’s Library Services Department. The library staff are very proactive in seeking out and taking part in training and continual professional development (CPD), and at any one time we have awareness-raising and training sessions scheduled, staff lined up to attend professional conferences, and colleagues undertaking academic or accredited training programs. In addition, team members train each other in essential skills for using systems or software, and new employees are involved in induction training. This all makes for a wide variety of CPD activity, which is why the library management team thought it appropriate to develop a policy: so that we could have a strategic oversight over the training and development activities available to staff and ensure parity in accessing these opportunities.

I am in a very fortunate position, in that the driver for creating a staff development policy is an appetite for professional development. However, I am aware that others’ experiences of enabling and engaging staff in training and development is quite the opposite and that ambivalence, lack of enthusiasm and institutional culture can hinder a proactive training and development environment. Therefore, I think it is useful to start a staff development policy by questioning the need for CPD at all. Asking and answering “Why bother in the first place?” then allows discussion around the “How?” and “What?” of a policy.

Why bother? What’s the point of staff training and development?

For an organization to be effective and able to deliver its intended outcomes, its workforce needs to be skilled, competent and confident. In addition, the nature of libraries, across all sectors, means that they are subject to continual change, especially in today’s digital information environment. Similarly, the political and economic environments in which libraries operate mean that we need to be flexible, agile and continually evolving. In order for a library to embrace change, its workforce must continually develop its professional and technical skills. It could be argued that the ability for a library to sustain through strategically aligning itself with its parent institution is reason enough to bother with training and development, but there are many other reasons for library and information professionals to engage in CPD and for library managers to invest in it, including:

  • Motivation and morale: Library managers should always strive to have a motivated workforce. This is fundamental to successfully delivering excellent services. Equipping staff with the essential skills they need to perform and fulfil their roles can contribute to this. This might seem obvious, but I’ve encountered many library staff who don’t feel they have the skills to do what is expected of them. We need to respond to the ever-changing digital information environment, whether that takes the form of supporting new software or systems, providing IT support to library users, or just remaining aware of the range of digital resources available to library users. If library managers don’t invest in training and development to meet users’ changing demands, they will be left with demotivated and demoralized staff who lack the competencies and confidence to do their job through no fault of their own.

  • Reward and recognition: Because of budget concerns or other reasons, not many library managers can reward staff financially for great work or going the extra mile. However, CPD opportunities are another way to recognize achievements and reward staff for extraordinary work. For example, you might have a team member who is demonstrating management or leadership skills, even though their role might not require them. To recognize these skills (and the attitudes and behaviors that accompany them), you might invite this individual to participate in a leadership program. Or you might encourage a library staff member who has demonstrated some innovative or creative practice to respond to a call for papers for a conference and provide the opportunity and support for them to attend. While the member of staff benefits from presenting (which is also good PR for your library), they will also learn and develop through their conference attendance.

  • Career development and advancement: There are many roles and positions available in library, information and knowledge work, which means there are many opportunities for library professionals to have a diverse and rich career. In order for individual staff to realize their potential and gain new career experiences, they often need guidance, encouragement and support from their managers. Library leaders should try to manage the talent and aspirations within their teams through strategic staff development. An obvious example is encouraging potential managers and leaders to apply for the “next” level position within the management structure. But also remember that for library and information professionals who don’t want to be managers or leaders, enabling a variety of experiences and working environments can be equally important. CPD is a great way to accomplish this.

  • Team development: While it is easy to recognize the needs of an individual, pay attention to team dynamics as well. “Change” often happens to a team as a whole, so by developing the whole team (or even the whole department) together, members of that team face the challenges and opportunities together. Or you may want a team to bond and get used to working together. “Away days” or team events can be used to enable this. Team development is particularly effective for new teams or when management and leadership teams undertake leadership development together.

But how do we find out what CPD our library staff require?

Library staff and library managers need to identify not only where training and development is appropriate, but also what kind development could be used. The provision of CPD within any library organization should be strategically informed and should enable the library to achieve its strategic goals. A well-informed staff development policy can be helpful in clarifying appropriate channels for identifying and commissioning staff training and CPD requirements. For many, the annual employee appraisal is a great opportunity to discuss individual performance and, more importantly, to set objectives for the coming year or planning cycle. In doing so, individuals should be able to discuss the type of development that would help fulfil individual and team objectives. It is important to take these discussions seriously and to act upon them, so that the review process is not seen as checking a box but as a fundamental part of service provision and strategic planning.

CPD should be continually discussed and considered — not just at review time — and having platforms for such discussion is good practice. Some library organizations might have a staff development committee that gathers staff training needs, organizes training programs, or scans mailing lists to ensure that staff are aware of external CPD opportunities. Similarly, library management teams can have “Training and CPD” as a standing item on their agenda to make sure that they can respond as and when training needs are identified.

But how do we actually do this CPD stuff?

So now that we have identified “why” we should bother with training and development and “how” we identify staff requirements, we can move on to “what” staff development actually looks like and how to make opportunities available. People often think only of conferences as soon as you mention CPD, but there are many forms of training for library professionals, including:

  • Conferences: One of the most stable and reliable CPD platforms is the tried and tested conference. In the academic library and scholarly publishing sectors, there are an abundance of professional conferences with many innovative learning opportunities. Conferences are effective on a number of levels. They allow you to discover emerging trends within your area of work or sector; share best practices or seek reassurance in how you are working with current trends; meet vendors and suppliers and discover new products and solutions; give something back to the profession through presentations; engage with inspirational practitioners; and network with library and information professionals from other organizations and sectors (Appleton, 2017).

  • Internal training programs: If the library is part of a bigger organization (such as a local authority, university, or hospital) the human resources or staff development departments may have internal training programs for IT and software training, customer service training, or overall awareness of institutional activities and functions. These are useful baseline CPD activities and might even present other opportunities such as introductory management or supervision skills training. In addition, your library could complement an internal program with its own staff development events. Such events enable a responsive approach to staff development and ensure that staff training needs are continually being considered. Internal programs are also a very cost-effective way of delivering a critical mass of CPD.

  • External training programs: External library groups can range from local consortia to regional branches of your professional associations, such as the American Library Association (ALA) or the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP). While many organizations have a program of events throughout the year (excluding conferences), they also provide excellent opportunities to attend specialist library and information-oriented events. Regional or sector wide groups — such as the Society of College, National and University Libraries (SCONUL), the M25 Consortium of Academic Libraries (M25) or North West Academic Libraries (NoWAL) — provide similar programs. They are all opportunities to receive practitioner-led training, share experiences and network externally.

  • Academic programs, vocational qualifications and professional accreditation: Some staff members may need a more formal study program. This could be an academic program (for example, many academic librarians undertake teaching qualifications to develop their teaching practice). But a vocational qualification in library and information work, IT, media, or customer service might also be appropriate. In many instances, library staff can be encouraged to pursue professional recognition and accreditation by seeking chartership or fellowship of their professional associations.

  • Job shadowing: Job shadowing is another cost-effective way of enabling quality staff development, especially when someone needs to broaden their library and information experience. Job shadowing can be easily arranged internally, but it works best when the individuals involved have specific goals rather than just following each other around.

  • Coaching: For staff who are new to a position or facing specific challenges in their role, coaching can be a valuable source of CPD. It can be particularly useful for library staff who are in leadership or management positions for the first time or are working within a specific “change” program and need to discuss and resolve challenges. Your library may have the expertise within its own workforce to offer coaching opportunities, or a local consortium or network may offer coaching, both of which offer another cost-effective way of providing CPD (Hodges, 2017).

  • Mentoring: Some libraries have internal mentoring programs in which staff members are “mentored” for a period of time by another staff member who has the experience and expertise to develop the mentee in their role. This can be very useful for library staff who gain new positions within the organizations and need some support to adjust to their new role. Mentoring can also be used as an effective CPD tool for all new members of staff (Hussey & Campbell-Meier, 2017; Hodges, 2017).

  • Reading groups: Reading groups can be encouraged among library staff and allow for reflective time to read and discuss relevant professional literature. Individual teams may have common interests (such as information literacy or critical librarianship) and can use a reading group to develop their understanding of the issues. As well as enabling reflection, critical thinking and discussion, reading groups are a great way of supporting teamwork and team development.

  • Scholarship: Many librarians are involved in very creative and innovative practice, and we all have a natural instinct to share our experiences and our good practice. Conferences are a great platform for this, as is writing for scholarly publication. Library and information sectors all over the world have active conference scenes and a wealth of academic and professional journal titles, all of which encourage contributions from practitioners. Encouraging and supporting library staff to become involved in library and information scholarship can be another great source of CPD, and a very motivational one for staff (Morris, 2017).

Closing reflections

This has been a very brief overview of the why, how and what of training and CPD within a library and information context. It is by no means comprehensive, and there are many more reasons for pursuing CPD and many more avenues for doing so. I hope my reflections have been useful and that they form a basis for discussion and consideration of why we “bother” with training and development. It has certainly allowed me to reflect on what is important to include in a staff development policy and has affirmed why CPD is so strategically important in leading and managing library services.

One other thing that CPD enables is reflection, and I am conscious that have not made enough mention of this. Time and space for reflection, for thinking critically about what we do in our day-to-day work and in planning our future work (or future role or career), is essential good practice, and all the CPD platforms that I have mentioned above allow for this. In our busy working environments, time for reflection can often feel like it is out of reach, but it is only through reflection that we can step back and look at what makes us effective. Time to reflect on our practice, on our skills and on our future is time well spent. And that is essentially why we need to “bother” with training and development.

References

Appleton, L. (2017) “Library Conferences: Why Bother?” UKSG eNews, issue 408, https://www.uksg.org/sites/uksg.org/files/Editorial408.pdf

Hodges, S (2017) Leading Libraries: A Briefing Paper on Coaching and Mentoring, SCONUL https://www.sconul.ac.uk/sites/default/files/documents/LL%20Briefing%20paper%20on%20coaching%20and%20mentoring.pdf

Hussey, L. and J. Campbell-Meier (2017) “Is Their a Mentoring Culture Within the LIS Profession?” Journal of Library Administration, Vol. 57, issue 5 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01930826.2017.1326723

Morris, W. (2017) “Superhero Librarians are Coming: Get Your Capes On!” SCONUL Focus, issue 70, https://www.sconul.ac.uk/sites/default/files/documents/77.Superhero%20librarians%20are%20coming.pdf

Leo Appleton Aug 21, 2018 Keywords librarianship career development
Read Full Article
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 
Library Connect by Libraryconnect@elsevier.com (elsevi.. - 9M ago
By Melissa Bowles-Terry, University of Nevada, Las Vegas Libraries

UNLV Library. Photo Credit: Josh Hawkins/UNLV Photo Services

 

This article is based on the author’s presentation in a recent Library Connect webinar titled “Library value: student success, research outcomes & collection impact.” The recorded webinar and slides are available here.

The Greater Western Library Alliance (GWLA) is a consortium of 38 research libraries located across the United States. In 2012 GWLA charged a student-learning task force to look at instructional interventions at member libraries and identify best practices that should be shared and built upon in order to maximize library impact on student learning and success. The task force gathered information from members and organized an event for GWLA members in 2013, where featured library programs shared their work on student-success projects. One of the outcomes of that meeting was an agreement to replicate a University of Wyoming study correlating library instruction with student success and retention, and GWLA members thought it would be particularly powerful to do a multi-institutional study to look at correlations between library instruction interventions and student-success measures including GPA, credit hours earned, and retention.

Correlation Between Library Instruction and Student Success

A group convened to begin the research project, led by Melissa Bowles-Terry of University of Nevada, Las Vegas. The research questions that guided design of the project were:

  1. What effect does library instruction have on the retention of college students?
  2. What effect does library instruction have on the academic success of college students?
  3. What is the impact of specific library instruction methods on the retention and academic success of college students?

In 2014-2015, the first year of data collection, 12 institutions each submitted two sets of data for analysis. The participating institutions were:

  1. Arizona State University
  2. Baylor University
  3. Brigham Young University
  4. Kansas State University
  5. University of Missouri
  6. Southern Methodist University
  7. University of Houston
  8. University of Nevada, Las Vegas
  9. University of New Mexico
  10. University of Southern California
  11. Utah State University
  12. Washington State University

The data was cleaned, coded and merged. Results for the first year of analysis (2014-2015) were published in a 2017 white paper.

Highlights from 2014-2015

The GWLA Student Learning Outcomes task force analyzed the data from more than 42,000 first-time, first-year students and more than 1,700 distinct courses from 12 research institutions to determine the impact(s) of information literacy instruction integrated into course curriculum on several measures of student success.

Key findings include:

  • Student retention rates are higher for students whose courses include an information literacy instruction component.
  • On average, the first-year GPAs of students whose courses included information literacy instruction was higher than the GPAs of students whose courses did not include it.
  • Students exposed to library instruction interactions successfully completed 1.8 more credit hours per year than their counterparts who did not participate in courses containing information literacy instruction.

Future Years of Study

This is the first year of a six-year longitudinal analysis to determine if these gains are sustained and built upon with additional information literacy instruction in higher-level courses, and the impact this might have on graduation rates. Future years will also examine which teaching methods consistently show the highest student gains, so institutions can tailor their instruction programs to maximize the success of their students. The task force is now working with 2014-2017 data and will soon release a midpoint report.

Contact Melissa Bowles-Terry with questions: melissa.bowles-terry@unlv.edu.

Melissa Bowles-Terry Jul 16, 2018 Keywords student learning research outcomes Data Set Contents

1. Course-level variables from library instruction interactions

  • Pedagogy
    • Active learning
    • Directed practice
    • Flipped instruction
    • Lecture
    • Other
  • Session Level
    • Co-designed assignment
    • Library tour
    • Time/frequency of library instruction
    • Online tutorial or digital learning object
    • Research guide used

2. Student-level variables from registrar or office of institutional research

  • Grades
  • Credit hours earned
  • Retention
    • Semester
    • Year
    • Graduation
  • Demographics
    • Gender
    • Ethnicity
    • ESL
    • Admissions data
Read Full Article
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 
Library Connect by Libraryconnect@elsevier.com (elsevi.. - 11M ago
By Melissa Bowles-Terry, University of Nevada, Las Vegas Libraries

UNLV Library. Photo Credit: Josh Hawkins/UNLV Photo Services

 

This article is based on the author’s presentation in a recent Library Connect webinar titled “Library value: student success, research outcomes & collection impact.” The recorded webinar and slides are available here.

The Greater Western Library Alliance (GWLA) is a consortium of 38 research libraries located across the United States. In 2012 GWLA charged a student-learning task force to look at instructional interventions at member libraries and identify best practices that should be shared and built upon in order to maximize library impact on student learning and success. The task force gathered information from members and organized an event for GWLA members in 2013, where featured library programs shared their work on student-success projects. One of the outcomes of that meeting was an agreement to replicate a University of Wyoming study correlating library instruction with student success and retention, and GWLA members thought it would be particularly powerful to do a multi-institutional study to look at correlations between library instruction interventions and student-success measures including GPA, credit hours earned, and retention.

Correlation Between Library Instruction and Student Success

A group convened to begin the research project, led by Melissa Bowles-Terry of University of Nevada, Las Vegas. The research questions that guided design of the project were:

  1. What effect does library instruction have on the retention of college students?
  2. What effect does library instruction have on the academic success of college students?
  3. What is the impact of specific library instruction methods on the retention and academic success of college students?

In 2014-2015, the first year of data collection, 12 institutions each submitted two sets of data for analysis. The participating institutions were:

  1. Arizona State University
  2. Baylor University
  3. Brigham Young University
  4. Kansas State University
  5. University of Missouri
  6. Southern Methodist University
  7. University of Houston
  8. University of Nevada, Las Vegas
  9. University of New Mexico
  10. University of Southern California
  11. Utah State University
  12. Washington State University

The data was cleaned, coded and merged. Results for the first year of analysis (2014-2015) were published in a 2017 white paper.

Highlights from 2014-2015

The GWLA Student Learning Outcomes task force analyzed the data from more than 42,000 first-time, first-year students and more than 1,700 distinct courses from 12 research institutions to determine the impact(s) of information literacy instruction integrated into course curriculum on several measures of student success.

Key findings include:

  • Student retention rates are higher for students whose courses include an information literacy instruction component.
  • On average, the first-year GPAs of students whose courses included information literacy instruction was higher than the GPAs of students whose courses did not include it.
  • Students exposed to library instruction interactions successfully completed 1.8 more credit hours per year than their counterparts who did not participate in courses containing information literacy instruction.

Future Years of Study

This is the first year of a six-year longitudinal analysis to determine if these gains are sustained and built upon with additional information literacy instruction in higher-level courses, and the impact this might have on graduation rates. Future years will also examine which teaching methods consistently show the highest student gains, so institutions can tailor their instruction programs to maximize the success of their students. The task force is now working with 2014-2017 data and will soon release a midpoint report.

Contact Melissa Bowles-Terry with questions: melissa.bowles-terry@unlv.edu.

Melissa Bowles-Terry Jul 16, 2018 Keywords student learning research outcomes Data Set Contents

1. Course-level variables from library instruction interactions

  • Pedagogy
    • Active learning
    • Directed practice
    • Flipped instruction
    • Lecture
    • Other
  • Session Level
    • Co-designed assignment
    • Library tour
    • Time/frequency of library instruction
    • Online tutorial or digital learning object
    • Research guide used

2. Student-level variables from registrar or office of institutional research

  • Grades
  • Credit hours earned
  • Retention
    • Semester
    • Year
    • Graduation
  • Demographics
    • Gender
    • Ethnicity
    • ESL
    • Admissions data
Read Full Article
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 
By Katy Kavanagh Webb, East Carolina University

Duke University, The Edge Common Area

This article is the fourth in a series about creative spaces in libraries. For a definition of library creative spaces, read the first article in the series.

SAS, SPSS, GIS, NVivo, R: The names may sound like alphabet soup, but these data visualization software suites have helped libraries provide a new kind of creative space and a slate of services.

Data visualization is simply the representation of information—usually including a visual design element—so that other researchers can make sense of it. David McCandless, a data visualization expert and the author of two books about infographics, has said, “Personally, I find visualizations great for helping me understand the world and for sifting the huge amounts of information that deluge me every day.” (See examples of data visualization created by McCandless at https://informationisbeautiful.net.)

Data visualization services assist students and faculty in effectively displaying their statistical and research findings. Simple examples of data visualization might include an Excel graph that shows annual giving levels for a non-profit organization, or a map created using ArcGIS software and census data that displays average household income levels for a certain geographic area.

An academic library’s data services can range from a single librarian with these skills to a highly funded, technology-rich space. In libraries with a large data visualization lab, the space is usually staffed by librarians, IT staff and data scientists. They will offer one-on-one consultations, which may lead to multiple meetings with researchers who have additional data needs. The staff may also offer workshops for particular tools or types of analysis. The focus of the space should be on helping researchers learn a new tool or assisting them in their work, but not doing the data analysis or visualization work for them.

The University of Rochester’s VISTA Collaboratory is a well-funded data visualization space in the Science & Engineering Library of the school’s River Campus. The lab is part of the university’s Health Sciences Center for Computational Innovation (HSCCI), which is funded by the university, the state of New York, and IBM. Together, they have invested $30 million in this initiative. It includes a visualization wall that consists of an array of 24 monitors, is 20 feet wide and 8 feet tall, and has a resolution (50 megapixels) approaching that of IMAX theaters. The visualization lab has a direct high-speed fiber-optic connection to the university’s data center. (Office of Andrew M. Cuomo, 2014) Although not all data visualization labs boast such incredible hardware, most dedicated spaces will include a large screen to display the possibilities for the visualization of data. The hardware might include touch-screen capability or the ability to show video in a near-360-degree immersive studio experience.

My book, Development of Creative Spaces in Academic Libraries: A Decision Maker’s Guide (2018) from the Chandos Information Professional Series, includes a literature review and case studies of some innovators of the data visualization lab model in the library field, including Duke University, Penn State University and Georgia State University. The CURVE at Georgia State is a hybrid model that also incorporates many elements of a digital humanities lab.

We are pleased to offer our Library Connect readers an exclusive look at the book by providing a PDF of Chapter 20, Case Study: Duke University, The Ruppert Commons for Research, Technology and Collaboration (Also Known as ‘The Edge’).

References

Office of Governor Andrew M. Cuomo. (2014, June 23). News release: Governor Cuomo announces preview of University of Rochester’s new data visualization lab. Accessed at: http://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-announces-preview-university-rochesters-new-data-visualization-lab#

Webb, K.R. (2018). Development of creative spaces in academic libraries: A decision maker’s guide. London, U.K.: Chandos Information Professional Series.

Katy Kavanagh Webb Jul 11, 2018 Keywords Data visualization makerlab library space Topics Research Library
Read Full Article
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 

 

REGISTER 

Having hosted two webinars on assessing the quality of a journal and the importance of Scopus data and bibliometric indicators for international university rankings, we are happy to announce the last Scopus Bootcamp session of this summer!

This time, two speakers - Günther Hansen and Eva Podgorsek will acquaint you with the new “Open Access” filtering criterion that became available on Scopus and will update you on the improvements made in the integration of search results and the presentation of research datasets when viewing articles. The webinar will offer an overview of the “open access share” feature of the articles published by your institution, which facilitates the content visibility and allows researchers to quickly access the freely available content.

Overall, the session will provide you with the basic knowledge on how the criterion works and how it can be used directly in your research activities.

Join us on the 23rd of July, from 10:00 to 10:50 AM CET, to learn more about Scopus and get answers to your questions and concerns from our expert speakers. We are looking forward to your participation! 

REGISTER 

For any additional information, please contact:

Tanja Giessner 
Customer Marketing Manager
t + 31 20 485 2366
m + 31 6 53252523

May 1, 2018 Keywords Scopus webinar Germany German language
Read Full Article
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 
Library Connect by Libraryconnect@elsevier.com (elsevi.. - 11M ago
By Zoe Pettway Unno, Ph.D., University of Southern California

Hosting a library workshop can be exhilarating, especially when an engaged crowd is spilling out of your conference room. But it can be a bit discouraging when the instructors outnumber the attendees. This article offers a few tips from my years of hosting and presenting library workshops that will better your chances of having a winning topic and an enthusiastic audience.

Hop on hot topics

Last year I noticed a steady increase in coverage of predatory journals — in both scholarly publications and the mainstream media. I also received a few emails from faculty who had been invited to submit to journals and had questions about whether they were valid or predatory journals. Lastly, I presented a paper at a conference and subsequently started receiving spam emails from a publication inviting me to submit to its journal. This trifecta added up to a call to action on my part to develop a workshop on predatory journals.

Questions from faculty and students are always a good indicator of a needed workshop. For Graduate students, frequently ask about citation management tools so we know that’s a constant need. However, there are different ways to present this information, and it’s worth thinking about what is most helpful for your audience.

Act on observations

We previously presented individual workshops for various citation management tools, and noticed several students showing up for all the workshops. I we decided to do a combination session, where we would present all the tools, spending about 15 minutes on each one. Our participant numbers increased dramatically. We decided to team-teach so that the best-trained person could present each tool. For example, I took on the Mendeley portion since I had received specialized training on Mendeley.

Offer online options

To meet the needs of our university’s distance learners, we held an online version of the citation management workshop. Students could attend the live event online or view a recorded version.

Sometimes it’s the instructor who can’t be there in person. I recently recorded some brief videos — you can think of them as micro-workshops — to accompany an introductory chemistry course. I normally do these in the classroom, but my schedule didn’t match the instructor’s availability.

Partner for peak visibility

Faculty members will always be a key source of inspiration on workshop topics and a partner for publicizing them, but I also work with several other campus groups and departments. For example, I chair the scholarly communication interest group, which takes a lead on programming during Open Access Week in October. I participate in a data interest group, which lead to presenting workshops on research data management with a colleague in coordination with the Office of Excellence in Research. And I have worked with the Office of Excellence in Research to give provide training on increasing researcher impact through their mentoring workshop series for new faculty.

The Office of Graduate Studies is another key relationship, given that its students are heavy attendees of library workshops. This office partnered with us on the citation manager workshops, and we have presented other topics such as crafting your literature search. These groups help to uncover new workshop topics and get the word out to their students and faculty.

Don’t forget that vendors can be helpful too. For example, at a recent workshop focused on a chemistry tool, the vendor gave a demonstration, provided tips on grant writing and funding, and even created an event flyer.

Promote in public

Whether we create a flyer or a vendor does, we ensure it’s posted on bulletin boards in the relevant departments’ instructional buildings and faculty offices. I ask the Science and Engineering Library’s staff to post the information on the monitor near the library’s entrance, so it’s one of the first things that visitors see. I send it to relevant listservs and to department coordinators or my personal contacts among the faculty so they can circulate it.

Leave them wanting more

One piece of feedback from our two-hour workshops was that they were too long. Sometimes I give more information than is necessary because there’s so much I know about a certain topic, and I want to share it all. But that can be overwhelming for attendees. I have learned that if a workshop meets the key learning objectives, it gives the attendees some confidence in a topic and sparks their interest. If they want or need more, I make sure they know how to get in touch with me. Realistically, an hour is the amount of time most attendees are willing to commit unless it’s a deep dive into their discipline.

I hope you have found a few of these tips useful and urge you to share your own insights in the comments section below.

Zoe Pettway Unno Jun 25, 2018 Keywords professional development ALA conferences
Read Full Article
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 
Library Connect by Libraryconnect@elsevier.com (elsevi.. - 11M ago
Drew White, Elsevier

Research information management (RIM) is an emerging library service area that involves the collection and curation of metadata on campus research activity. Although the term is still being fully defined, research information management generally includes data from the entire life cycle of a research project, from grant application metadata  to impact metrics for the research output.

The easiest way to maintain a comprehensive RIM program is with a research information management system (RIMS).  A RIMS is an enterprise software solution that makes it easier for an institution to manage researcher  profiles, showcase research assets, build reports, and encourage research collaboration and networking.  Many of these systems can be integrated with other databases — such as HR and finance systems, institutional repositories and  third-party citation solutions — so that all researcher-related information is on a single platform. 

A well-maintained RIMS makes reporting much easier, as all data is centrally located and interrelated, eliminating the need to spend large amounts of time searching and cleaning information for each individual report. This streamlined reporting makes monitoring policy compliance, such as whether open access requirements are met, significantly easier and more effective. It also makes the process for national assessments much less cumbersome.

Who benefits from a RIMS?

Unlike some other types of software, a RIMS isn’t used in only one way or by only one department.  It is designed to be used by anyone engaged in reporting or showcasing the research outputs of a research institution. The library, the research office, academic departments and the grant office can all benefit from a comprehensive research output database.  For example, the library can easily find out how many papers were published open access, while the office of the president can identify emerging research stars based on both grant success rates and altmetrics. 

Names around the world: RIMS, CRIS and FAR

Because the research information management field has emerged simultaniously in several world regions, there is no standard term for this type of system or even a single expectation about what such a system should do.  While RIMS is the most common term, such systems may be called a current research information system (CRIS) in Europe.  Systems for faculty activity reporting (FAR) are more common in the US and focus on professor activities, including teaching activity and research output.

RIMS: Enter data once and use it across campus

Another benefit of a RIMS is improved data stewardship. This can save time for departments across the institution by allowing data to be entered into the system once and then made reusable across campus in multiple ways.  Because this information is curated, usually by the library, it means that the entire institution is using the same validated information for reporting and decision support. 

RIMS and the library: From acquisition to data curation and maintenance

Typically, librarians would first become involved with the RIMS as stakeholders in the acquisition process, where they would help evaluate options (both commercial systems such as Pure as well as home-grown systems) vs. institutional needs.  In some cases, a RIM acquisition is completely handled by the library, but it is more common for the system to be purchased by a coalition that includes the research office, the president’s office and the IT department, with the library playing a leading role.

Once a contract for a RIMS is signed, librarians play a key role in system maintenance and management. Specifically, they can validate data in the system as well as encourage researcher buy-in and the effective use of the system across campus.  

The library as an administration information partner

RIM has also expanded the role of libraries and given librarians the opportunity to act as partners to senior administrators. “By using Pure, we can pull data together in one place much more easily and give our librarians a way to help their departments in a different way.  At the same time, it’s giving us relationships to help other campus units, not just the academic departments, but other units on campus like our Office of Institutional Research or our partners in implementing Pure, the Office of Vice President for Research,” explains Jan Fransen, Service Lead for Research Information Management and Discovery Systems for University of Minnesota Libraries.  With a RIMS, librarians don’t just manage a collection of primary sources; they develop reports and metrics by curating metadata from all departments, making the library not only the go-to spot for information on campus, but also the go-to spot for information about the campus.  

Pure, Elsevier’s RIMS

Pure is the world’s leading RIMS, with over 250 customers worldwide. Pure is supported by a robust user community that includes nine active user groups and an annual international conference. A highly versatile centralized system, Pure enables an organization to build reports, carry out performance assessments, manage researcher profiles, enable research networking and expertise discovery, and more, all while reducing administrative burden for researchers, faculty and staff.

Nils Thideman, Centre Director at Aalborg University Library, says, “Pure puts me in a position to play a central role in research infrastructure when it comes to analysis, research communication, and providing management information to all levels of management in the institution.”  

This article was written by Drew White, an intern with Research Intelligence at Elsevier. For more information about Pure, you can contact Rachel Brennesholtz.

Drew White May 1, 2018 Keywords RIM Pure research information system Topics Institutional and Data Repositories
Read Full Article
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 
By Andy M. Herzog

Student graffiti wall at University of Texas at Arlington Libraries entrance

At University of Texas at Arlington Libraries, we have developed a consultation service to help faculty understand their research metrics and expand their “resonance” — a term we use to mean both their digital identity and the dissemination of their research.  While some components of this service will be familiar to librarians, the combination of research metrics and resonance strategies has proven to be a successful new model.     

Before discussing the service in detail, it is important to explain why we are developing it. It is due to a combination of factors, some unique to the University of Texas at Arlington and others common to many universities.  UT Arlington has seen a vast amount of growth both in student population and in research productivity.  In 2016, UT Arlington reached the “R-1: Doctoral Universities – Highest Research Activity” category in the Carnegie Classification, yet our reputation has not increased as quickly as our growth.  Because of this, our university’s strategic plan emphasizes the promotion of faculty and their work.  At the same time, universities, governments, and grants are placing greater emphasis on research productivity and impact.  Many faculty are not aware of the various metrics, nor do they have time to retrieve them.  As one faculty member told me, they are spending their winter breaks trying to figure out what an h-index is. 

University of Texas at Arlington Libraries entrance 

      

   

Our service model consists of a consultation and a customized metrics report.  Influenced by the Becker Model for Assessment, the consultation involves a series of open-ended questions that touch upon an individual faculty member’s needs, research metrics, and impacts beyond academia.  At some point during the consultation, we discuss author-level metrics, journal-level metrics, and item-level metrics.  The most important question we ask is how they want to tell the story of their impact. This question goes beyond their interest in certain metrics and gets to a larger goal: what they want to say about themselves and their research. For example, one faculty member wanted to show their increased productivity at different stages of their career.  Another wanted to demonstrate the interdisciplinary nature of their work.

The discussion around metrics and their impact provides a great segue to discuss what faculty can do to increase their resonance. We will discuss Google Scholar profiles, ORCID, how to archive in our institutional repository, author’s rights, social media, open access, open education, and services such as SlideShare.  And because getting post-print and pre-print versions of articles from faculty can be difficult, we have found that collecting them during the consultation is a more successful strategy than requesting them after the fact.

After the consultation, we compile a customized report of the faculty member’s metrics. (See a short sample report.)  While faculty generally consider citations and journal impact factors the most important metrics, they are often also interested in usage metrics, captures, and sometimes even social media metrics.  The main tools we use are Plum Analytics, Publish or Perish, Journal Citation Reports, and SCIMago Journal and Country Rank.  Besides the standard usage metrics pulled in by Plum, we also have Plum integrated as a widget in our institutional repository to gather data there. See an example of the institutional repository widget above.

We strongly encourage the use of a Google Scholar profile, which makes the publish-or-perish pursuit less time-consuming.  While UTA Libraries subscribes to Plum, Plum does have a more limited free tool, as does Altmetric. For Plum, you add the DOI to end of this URL  https://plu.mx/a/?doi=. Our university is in the process of implementing Digital Measures, a type of faculty activity reporting software. When it is complete, we will have Plum data integrated into our faculty profile system, making it more widely available and findable. We also have a LibGuide, created by my colleagues Brooke Troutmen and Carol Byrne, for those who don't want a full consultation and report. (We do require the consultation in order to generate a report.)     

Throughout two years of offering this consultation service, we have had a positive response from faculty, both in satisfaction and in usage of the data we provided.  A key reason for the service’s success is how we structured it around faculty needs.  When UTA Libraries first explored Plum Analytics, I brought up the topic of altmetrics in passing conversation with a faculty member. Their initial confusion turned into annoyance as they wondered why we would introduce another tool to “judge” their productivity. However, this same faculty member’s perceptions changed when they encountered our marketing, which emphasized how the tool could support faculty promotion and the tenure approval process.  They reached out to us for a consultation and ended up including both usage metrics and social media metrics in their promotion and tenure application packet.

Andy Herzog is Department Head of Faculty Services and Online Engagement, University of Texas Arlington Libraries. You can contact him via email at amherzog@uta.edu or follow him on Twitter https://twitter.com/zoglib

Andy Herzog Jun 18, 2018 Keywords institutional repositories IR metrics Topics Institutional and Data Repositories
Read Full Article

Read for later

Articles marked as Favorite are saved for later viewing.
close
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 

Separate tags by commas
To access this feature, please upgrade your account.
Start your free month
Free Preview