Mining eresource Data to reveal hidden assets how one school dug deeper into its MINES results to assess the research value of eresources.

Transcription

1 Mining eresource Data to reveal hidden assets how one school dug deeper into its MINES results to assess the research value of eresources. C a t h e r i n e D a v i d s o n a n d A a r o n L u p t o n Y o r k U n i v e r s i t y L i b r a r i e s

2 Overview What is MINES for Libraries? Consortial context: Ontario Council of University Libraries & Scholars Portal York context: faculty/research results What eresources are they using, from where and why? Use of consortial products vs locally-licensed products Platform preference? Scholars Portal or Native publisher? Concluding observations & What next? 2

3 MINES for Libraries 3

4 MINES for Libraries.. Is a short web-based survey that intercepts a user as they attempt to access an electronic resource and asks the following: Patron status: Affiliation: Location: Purpose of use: Why they chose: faculty, grad, undergrad department in library, on campus, off campus funded/non-funded research, teaching, coursework important resource, recommended, reading list 4

5 Ontario Council of University Libraries 5

6 Ontario Scholars Portal 6

7 Ejournals locally loaded on Scholars Portal Academic Press American Psychological Association American Chemical Society Berkeley Electronic Press Blackwell Publishing Cambridge University Press Emerald Publishing Elsevier Science (Elsevier Science, Harcourt Health Sciences) IEEE Publication Kluwer Oxford University Press Project MUSE Sage Publications Springer-Verlag Taylor and Francis John Wiley & Sons 7

8 Dual Access: Native Publisher Platform or Hosted on Scholars Portal 8

9 SFX as delivery mechanism 9

10 SFX Knowledge Base Content Types Being Measured e-journals ** abstracts and indexes e-books dissertations library catalogues reference materials institutional repositories other services (e.g. interlibrary loan, Ulrichs, JCR Journal Citation Reports, Refworks) ** ejournals comprised bulk of what was being measured

11 York s Licensed E-resources Locally licensed Consortially licensed National - Canadian Research Knowledge Network Provincial OCUL & Knowledge Ontario 11

12 York results: Resource Type 1% 7% 4% 0% Database ebooks ejournals ILL Library catalogue 85% 12

13 York Results : What was MINES measuring Consortial vs Local Local, n=754, 33% Consortial, n=1409, 62% CRKN, n=1017, 45% OCUL, n=253, 11% Knowledge Ontario, n=140, 6% Free/Open Access, n=105, 5% 13

14 Digging Deeper Zeroing in on Faculty and Research 14

15 York Results: Faculty and Location 8% In the Library 66% 27% On-campus but not in the library Off-campus 15

16 York Results: Faculty and the reason they chose 5% 25% Reference/citation from another source Course reading list 69% 1% Important resource in my field Recommended by a professor/colleague 16

17 York Results: Breakdown of important resource in my field Johns Hopkins U Press 2% Elsevier Elsevier Google 15% 2% Wiley Blackwell Oxford U Press ProQuest 2% Springer Informa 3% Sage Kluwer Academic York University 3% Gale Wiley Blackwell Ebsco JSTOR 11% 4% Ovid Ovid 4% JSTOR 4% Gale 7% York University 7% Sage 8% Informa 10% ProQuest 11% Ebsco Kluwer Academic Springer Oxford University Press (OUP) Google Johns Hopkins University Press William S. Hein & Co Scholars Portal Swets Metapress Cambridge University Press Emerald American Medical Association (AMA) University of Chicago Press, The 17

18 York Results: Faculty and Purpose 25% 6% 5% 27% Sponsored (Funded) Research Other (Non-funded) Research Teaching Coursework/Assignment 37% Other Activities including General Interest 18

19 York Results: Resources Used for Research Emerald, 2% Scholars Portal, 2% Johns Hopkins U Press, 2% Swets, 2% Ovid, 2% Ebsco, 2% Springer, 3% JSTOR, 4% York University, 4% Kluwer Academic, 4% Sage, 6% Wiley Blackwell, 7% Elsevier, 14% Gale, 9% Informa, 10% ProQuest, 9% Elsevier Informa ProQuest Gale Wiley Blackwell Sage Kluwer Academic York University JSTOR Springer Ebsco Ovid Swets Johns Hopkins University Press Scholars Portal Emerald Oxford University Press (OUP) Cambridge University Press Google Nature Publishing Group William S. Hein & Co University of Chicago Press, The Annual Reviews Duke Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Metapress National Research Council 19

20 Dual Access: Native Publisher Platform or Hosted on Scholars Portal 20

21 Research (funded and non-funded)uses: Scholars Portal vs. Native platform SP Native 0 21

22 Strategic Research Plan 22

23 Concluding Observations MINES data provides concrete evidence that: affirms the Libraries role in supporting the institution s research agenda demonstrates Big Deal ejournal bundles are indeed being used for research shows value of specific ejournal packages sheds light on platform preference (an important factor in the OCUL context.) 23

24 What Next? Are there other lenses with which to examine (future) MINES data? How can we apply similar measures on formats such as e-books? 24

25 Thank You. Aknowledgements. Dana Thomas at Ryerson University Alan Darnell and his team at Scholars Portal Martha Kyrillidou, Gary Roebuck at ARL Terry Plum at Simmons College 25