From Google Scholar to Library Search via Koha

From Google Scholar to “Library Search” via Koha: A different journey to discovery Services? David Peacock, Information Collections & Services Manager University of Hertfordshire https: //library. herts. ac. uk/

Outline of presentation: • Background to the University of Hertfordshire (UH) • Library Search Project: What we wanted to achieve. • Why an open source LMS? Why work with a third party developer? • Why a Discovery service? Why not just use Google Scholar? Why did we completely replace our Library OPAC with a discovery service? • How implemented the system – why did we use Business Analysts? • Outcomes – Have we achieved what we wanted to achieve? • Initial feedback / usage statistics – Has use of our resources increased?

University of Hertfordshire (UH) • 2 LRCs, open 24/7, provide the University with; 3, 000 study places; 1, 200 computer workstations; over 40, 000 current online and print journal; and over 875, 000 books (incl. 375, 000 online ebooks). • Voyager LMS since 1999 • Relied on Google Scholar as our Discovery platform and Voyager OPAC – integrated within our in-house VLE

The old search interface:

The New search interface:

The New search interface:

What we wanted to achieve (1) • Improve student experience/satisfaction by providing easier, consistent search discovery of library resources in a single “google” like search box. • Continue to embed library discovery search within the Universities Online learning Environment. • Replace the outdated Voyager Library Management System (LMS) with a modern integrated low cost, hosted, free and open-source software (FOSS) solution for remaining LMS functions.

What we wanted to achieve (2) • Increase use of UH library collections /resources increasing Value for Money (VFM) in existing substantial investment • Provision of additional search functionality and access / delivery of resources • Provision of search functionality tailored to particular groups of students via module pages. • Significantly lower annual revenue cost than the current Voyager annual support agreement • Increased workflow efficiencies in back end library processes, with maximum integration with Reading list management & digitisation Software and the VLE at a later stage, at minimal additional cost. • Improve management information, business intelligence for better decision making / VFM.

Why an open source LMS? • Lower costs • Avoiding vendor lock-in • Open Standards – – Increased adaption, customisation and innovation – fast development environment (UH rather unique service -Unmediated ILLs) – Easier integration and interoperability with other University and Library Systems. Pace – “today interoperability in library automation is more myth than reality” • Opportunity for more Agile developments – adopt a more “start-up” culture. • Excellent third party support – no need for a high level of IT support. • Being part of a wider worldwide community

LMS Integration needed Student finance / WPM Online Payments VLE Learning Analytics Student / Staff System LMS IDM / SSO / ADFS VLE Online Library Discovery Layer/ Reading lists

Role of the Supplier in FOSS terms: • Commitments on; Functionality; Cost; Timescale; Service Levels • Hosting (Saa. S) • Installation and configuration of LMS • Data conversion and loading into LM • Training & on-going support • Software development • Custom / integration work • Bug fixes and upgrades

Why a Discovery Service? Why not continue to use Google Scholar? (1) Issues with Google Scholar: • No University control over Google. – “Google thought they were being searched by a robot and showed our users a captcha” • Lack of transparency and control over indexing coverage. • Inability to highlight and/or increase relevancy of UH resources. • Google Scholar cannot be tailored to local circumstances • Print books and many –ebooks resources remain excluded. • Problems interfacing and linking to UH resources.

Why a Discovery Service? Why not continue to use Google Scholar? (2) Benefits of a Resource Discovery System: • • • Potential access to everything found. Single search box for all resources including print. High quality transparent metadata/indexing. Full text searching of UH ebooks. Very easy to use Increased use of subscription resources Increased level of refinement and improved functionality Easy integration with VLE / module resources Greater choice of outputs.

Why a Discovery Service? Why not continue to use Google Scholar? (3) • Optimised for smart phone /mobile device usage • Potential replacement of the Library OPAC. • Easier Management of Demand Driven Acquisition (DDA) Resources. • Improving information literacy training • Greater Personalisation.

But we still encourage use of Google Scholar Aaron Tay : “ 5 things Google Scholar does better than your library discovery service” • Google Scholar updates much quicker • Covers scholarly material not on usual "Scholarly" sources • Greater and more reliable coverage of Open Access and free sources • Better Relevancy due to technology and the need to just support article searching • Nice consistent features

Implementation • • Get buy-in of all interested parties Listen to stakeholders – collective decision-making Project manage the process Communicate !!! Weekly briefings, Staff sessions. Training geared to the different type of staff Communication plan for end users Map existing processes – identify any current issues. Use Business Analysts if you can!

–Have we achieved what we wanted to achieve? Outcomes: Have we achieved what we set out to achieve? • ü ü ü ü • • Improved Student experience / satisfaction (? ) Single “google” like search box Embedded within the VLE Replace Voyager with an Open source VLE Increase usage /Vf. M (? ) Provide additional functionality Search functionality tailored to module pages Significantly lower annual revenue costs Increased workflow efficiencies in back-end library processes Improved Management Statistics (? ) Better integration with University and Library systems (? )

Initial usage statistics…. . Comparison of: Aug 2014– April 2015 and Aug 2015 - April 2016 • 33 Journal and database publishers – saw an overall increase so far of 18% on the same period (August – April ) in the previous year. (JR 1 Counter reports or equivalents). Highlights include: – – • • Emerald – up 30% Project Muse – up 133% Ebsco. Host titles – up 51% Taylor and Francis – up 40% E-book usage (BR 1 Counter reports or equivalents): – Overall usage up by 8% – EBL – up 30% Inter Library Loans (Aug-April ): - 37% Decrease in the number of ILLS requests submitted Print books - Issues – up 5% (reversing years of declining issues) UH Research Archive: – 30% increase in hits

In conclusion: • Resource Discovery Services give substantial benefits over Google Scholar. But Google Scholar still has its uses! • RDS seem to increase usage of UH subscribed resources • FOSS is a viable, cost effective, mainstream option when you work with an experienced commercial third party support company • Use the implementation of an LMS to review processes and realise further benefits • Use the opportunities of the open Standards within FOSS for fast development and integration at minimal risk

Thank you! David Peacock d. m. peacock@herts. ac. uk Information Collections and Services Team Library and Computing Services University of Hertfordshire