Menu Close

iDiscover UX: project update

Since the last post here about this project things have moved along significantly, so it seemed like a good time for a quick update on the progress. Over the last six weeks or so, the research has amassed an enormous amount of data which has given us some real insights and opportunities to improve the iDiscover user experience.

As always, the project has taught us much more than just how the platform itself is used. We’ve learnt a lot about the lives of students and staff at the University, including (but by no means limited to) their approach to and use of digital and physical ‘library’ spaces.

iDiscover is undeniably an important tool, which has a significant role to play in the work that members of the University are conducting every day. It is, however, one of many tools that people use. A large focus of the project has been working towards finding out exactly where iDiscover fits in the approaches people have to searching for and interacting with sources of information and data. This knowledge is invaluable as it gives us an opportunity to focus efforts and resources on improving the aspects of the system that people value the most, to hone in on and prioritise what is (forgive the management speak) its USP, or Ps.

Futurelib HQ

[Analysis work (colourful as always) in progress at Futurelib HQ]

To the eagle-eyed amongst you: peeking out from the corner of the photo above are the four personas arrived at based on the project research data. More information about personas can be found at the link below, but to give a brief explanation of how they work: personas are fictional characters who represent people who use a product or service. Created based on evidence gained through work with real users, personas provide an opportunity to focus design and development. They are a constant reminder of who a website or other service is being developed for.

https://www.usability.gov/how-to-and-tools/methods/personas.html

In addition to uncovering these wider insights about our users, a great deal of time has been spent concentrating on the ‘nitty gritty’, i.e. recording in detail which aspects of the iDiscover interface are used, how and when people are using them in their search processes and the extent to which they are, or are not, intuitively understood. Icons and buttons, terminology and links: finding out what does and doesn’t make sense to the people using iDiscover has been a fascinating experience in and of itself. This is the stuff that has the potential to have an influence on the evaluation and re-configuration of the platform; we have the opportunity to tailor aspects of the interface to better suit the preferences and behaviours of our users.

Natalie observation

[Above: Natalie Kent conducts an observation session with a PhD student using iDiscover]

Alongside the Futurelib project, there has been a large amount of effort, by the Digital Services team in the University Library, dedicated to improving the overall iDiscover user experience. The interface is an important part of this, but a lot of what the platform relies on to be successful is the way in which it interacts with and relates to the underlying metadata and its (complicated) retrieval mechanics and algorithms. Serious, concentrated work is being done in these areas and without giving too much away, if you’re working in a Cambridge library you should see real changes to iDiscover in the coming weeks and months, which we hope will result in significant improvements for your users.

Back on the Futurelib side of things, there is still work to do on analysing the data gathered during the project, with the aim of producing a number of outputs:

  • Recommendations to inform re-configuration and development of the iDiscover user interface.
  • Documentation to send to Ex Libris (the supplier of the discovery system Primo, branded iDiscover in the Cambridge instance), i.e. an evidence-based account of current experiences of the underlying Primo platform in Cambridge.
  • Educational tools which can be used when communicating with users of the iDiscover platform.
  • A full public-facing project report, outlining the research methodology and narrative, the analysis process (including the personas mentioned above) and the outcomes and outputs.

Watch this space!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Intraloan: Examining access to printed library resources in Cambridge

Between December 2016 and May 2017 the Futurelib Programme conducted an in-depth user research study looking into current experiences at the University of Cambridge, specifically related to accessing printed, physical library content.

The project started with an initial scoping phase: interviews, workshops with students and short email questionnaires circulated to Cambridge academics provided a qualitative, attitudinal dataset which informed the following stages of the project, as well as the resulting findings and suggestions for service design. Experiences and opinions were varied, but the key realisation at this point was the high level of importance that members of the University at all levels placed on their ability to access printed books and journals.

Picture1

[Above: A brainstorming session with students during the scoping phase of the project]

This work had given us a lot of data and provided us with some real insights, but it was necessary that this was supplemented with behavioural evidence. This was achieved primarily by piloting services in order to measure their use and value. One service trialled meant that users of three Cambridge libraries could order books from the main University Library (UL) for collection at the issue point of their ‘home’ library. Another pilot service which provided invaluable data for the project was a book drop box on the Sidgwick Site, allowing members of many libraries on the site to return books to one central point.

Although we all understand that the future of libraries in the higher education sector is changing rapidly, this project provided us with a valuable opportunity to focus on an aspect of our services which is still hugely important to a large proportion of our users, namely, how they get hold of their books!

The full project report below covers the research methodologies and narrative, analysis, the project findings and suggestions for service design.

Download the Intraloan project final report

Download the Intraloan project executive summary

iDiscover UX project underway!

Over the last two years the Futurelib Programme has been involved in a number of intensive research projects, many of which have focused on the design of physical library spaces and other related aspects of library services. It seems natural to be returning to the digital side of things, this time round not focusing on designing a new website, but on evaluating and improving an existing platform, ‘iDiscover’, the University of Cambridge’s user interface for the Ex Libris Primo Discovery and Delivery service. iDiscover has now been in use in Cambridge for around a year and this project provides a real opportunity to conduct an in-depth exploration of how people are using the service.

The Futurelib Programme, with the help of a project team made up of library staff from across the University, will be conducting a series of in-depth interview and observation sessions with people using iDiscover. We will be finding out more about who our users are, what they expect from the platform and how they approach and navigate the user interface. This will provide valuable information to inform local design, to feed in to continued user education and to report back to Ex Libris.

Screen Shot 2017-06-30 at 08.34.56

[Above: Beth Sherwood from the English Faculty Library conducting an observation with an academic using iDiscover]

The methodology for the project will be centred around observation and interviews. We will also be conducting workshops with students and gathering feedback in other ways, such as through the use of short questionnaires and comment cards. One thing which is key to the success of the project is working with members of the University at all levels and in both STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Medicine) and AHSS (Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences) disciplines. To this end, the project team includes representatives from 3 STEM libraries, 2 AHSS libraries, 2 college libraries and 1 member of staff from the main University Library (UL).

So far observation sessions and interviews have been conducted in various University buildings and departments. A conscious effort has been made to work with users in and outside of library spaces, in order to build as complete as possible a picture of how people are using the iDiscover platform in different situations and to complete different tasks. It is early days for the project but some interesting themes are already emerging; commonalities across users of the platform in terms of approach and interpretation suggest that there may be some real opportunities to improve the overall user experience.

In other news, the project report for the recent Intraloan project (examining current experiences related to the use of printed library resources in Cambridge) will be available soon. I’m also very proud to share that Futurelib was included in the documentation submitted by the University of Cambridge as part of the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) assessment process. It’s fantastic to get this recognition for the work we continue to do to improve the experience of Cambridge libraries for students and other library users. If interested, the submission itself can be read here, with Futurelib featuring in the section on Cambridge libraries at page 7:

http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/reporter/2016-17/weekly/6471/Cambridge-TEF-submission-2017.pdf

So all in all, exciting things afoot!

David

 

Re-imagining library spaces at the University of Cambridge

Starting in September 2016, Futurelib embarked on an intensive period of research into the use of library spaces at the University of Cambridge, with the intention of finding out what might be needed to support current and future user needs and behaviours. This work supplemented the Protolib project (November 2015 to April 2016), which had taught us about different types of library space required by our users and how these could be designed effectively. During our more recent research there were two main goals: to find out what ratios and networks of these spaces might be needed in different areas of the University, and to investigate how to assist users once inside those spaces. Methods included an extensive digital diary study, in-depth interviews, observations conducted in library spaces and digital eyetracking research with users.

Analysis of the data gathered during this research led to fascinating insights about current library user behaviour in Cambridge. The observations and findings from the first Protolib project were an integral part of this and were considered and incorporated throughout the process.

On reflection it became clear that this work consisted of two distinct avenues of research and design, which is demonstrated by the project documentation. Two full reports can be found below; the Protolib II project document focuses on macro-level space design and site level planning, while the Tracker project document concentrates on micro-level issues, specifically the user-centred research and design of signage and other navigational tools.

Download the Protolib II project final report

Download the Tracker project final report

Download the Protolib II project executive summary

Download the Tracker project executive summary

Intraloan project: The story so far…

It seems a long time ago now that we met with Cambridge library staff at Wolfson College to talk about this project, putting heads together to come up with a (incredibly useful) SWOT analysis and discussing what would happen next. Since then we have:

  • Heard from over 50 academics around the University about their experiences of library services related to print material
  • Conducted interviews and workshops with students at Homerton, Girton, Lucy Cavendish and Murray Edwards colleges
  • Witnessed the rise to fame of the Sidgwick book drop (dubbed ‘Sidgbox’ and now with well over 100 followers on Twitter!), collecting usage statistics and feedback and interviewing people about their use of [it/her/him?]
  • Conducted a 4 week pilot book delivery service from the main University Library to the Education and AMES faculty libraries and Pembroke College Library, delivering over 200 volumes and finding out a huge amount about our users in the process
  • Worked with staff from the libraries involved in the pilot, starting to analyse the large amount of data that has been gathered
  • Spent time thinking and talking about which University members might benefit most from any more fully implemented services and also about how these services might operate

20170320_144611

[Above: Analysing pilot book delivery service with staff from participating libraries]

So (I hear you asking…) what’s next?

Some very interesting findings have already emerged. We’ve learnt a lot about how print material is currently used at Cambridge; where, when, how and by whom. We’ve also come to realise more and more that there are currently a number of issues around access to this material; this has identified many opportunities for us to better support the needs of our users. In short, it’s a much more complicated picture than the question of  simply whether an item can be delivered to someone or not.

We’re now looking at opportunities for further piloting and scaling up the services which have been successful.

The Sidgwick book drop has been very useful; giving students and other library users new options in terms of when and how they return books. The qualitative and quantitative data gathered is starting to suggest that it may be helping both librarians and library users (win – win!) by helping people to avoid fines and helping material back into circulation more quickly. Very few problems have been encountered along the way. Consideration is being given to whether installing more book drop-off points around the University might be valuable.

sidgbox tweet2

The book delivery pilot service saw very good levels of traffic and raised a lot of important considerations. The service model used for the pilot was labour-intensive and demanded a lot of time from library staff; it is clear that a more fully implemented service offered across more libraries in Cambridge would require a lot of thought in terms of which service aspects could be automated and streamlined. This, however, would have to be weighed up against the value brought by the involvement of professional library staff in the process, in terms of opportunities for collection development and for increased communication and engagement with library users. Other questions were raised around which members of the University would benefit from this type of service the most, with individuals’ existing schedules and commitments playing a large part in how, when, where and to what extent they are currently able to access print resources.

It really has been a fascinating few months! I look forward to keeping you updated with any more developments as they happen.

David Marshall

Futurelib Programme

 

Header Image: ‘Deliveries’ by Sean T Evans, via Flickr CC – https://flic.kr/p/8a2EGS

 

 

 

Intra-library loans pilot service starts today!

The Futurelib programme is currently involved in an exciting new project, ‘Intraloan’, which is looking into the current use of circulating library material at the University of Cambridge. The project is investigating various aspects of the use of printed material, focusing on what is used when, where and by who, and how related library services fit into and affect the wider lives of our users.

So far the project has had a largely attitudinal emphasis and has employed a number of different research methods:

  • Email and face-to-face conversations with Cambridge University academics, leading to a large and varied amount of feedback
  • Activity based workshops conducted with students, at colleges both in and outside of the city centre
  • Interviews with library users about their current use of printed books and journals., and their experiences of related library services
  • Conversations with representatives of other academic institutions, focusing on existing services related to the movement of circulating library material
  • Examination of existing services at the University of Cambridge

As always with Futurelib research it is important that we do not stop at the feedback gathering stage. Although we must always talk to our users about their views on our services and their suggestions for improvement, it is also crucial to gain an understanding of what they actually do, and how library services fit into their working lives. With that in mind we have now started to gather behavioural data to complement the invaluable insights we have gained during the initial stages of the project. This has again involved a number of methods:

  • Capturing data from the trial book drop box on the Sidgwick site (read more here)
  • Increasing the promotion of existing services in order to measure any changes in usage (an example is a service where users of the Engineering Department Library can order material from the Betty and Gordon Moore Library to the Engineering Library, and vice versa)
  • A digital diary study with students from across the University, focusing on their use of services relating to print material and how this fits into their schedules
  • A trial intra-library loans pilot service, which offers members of the Education Faculty and the Faculty of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, along with academics of Pembroke College the opportunity to order borrowable items from the main University Library to their faculty or College library

This trial, conducted over four weeks during full Lent Term, will hopefully provide some important information about whether similar services may be feasible at the University in the future. We will find out who uses the service, what material they request, when they use the service the most, and so on. Importantly we are not just interested in the numbers, we are also keen to talk to users at every step of the way about their experiences of the pilot service, and how (if at all) it changes their approach to their work or studies.

This is a fascinating project which could have very positive implications in terms of what we can uncover about library user behaviour and need in Cambridge, and also in terms of increased collaboration across Cambridge libraries. I look forward to keeping you updated with how it progresses.

David Marshall

Futurelib Programme

Header image: Jonas Tana – ‘Delivery’ (cropped). Flickr CC – https://flic.kr/p/qRfgcA

Through the eyes of our users

Student: “What? So I wear these glasses and just do what I’d usually do?”
Me: “Yes. And remember this is not a test of you but a test of the library you’re in.”
Student: “I think you should have chosen someone else, I’m rubbish at libraries!”

So started the majority of the eyetracking experiments, which took place across Cambridge last week as part of our new ‘Tracker’ project. Interestingly, when library signage or layouts failed them, with very few exceptions most students proceeded to identify themselves as the weak link in the chain, often citing an absence of secret and vital library knowledge.

screen-shot-2016-11-07-at-11-07-37

Languages student James White looking for a book while wearing the eyetrackers. This image sums up the experience of many confused and lost library users.

A selection of representative responses from students:

  • “I don’t understand it. It should be here. Right here!”
  • “Either the book is out, somebody’s using it, or I’m a moron!”
  • “Perhaps if I had a scrap of prior knowledge…”
  • “I should be good at this, my father’s a librarian.”

The libraries we were testing were not ‘bad’ by any stretch of the imagination, it was simply that we had underestimated just how complicated students found them to be. This was especially true when they were looking for books: we now have strong evidence which proves that classmarks baffle students hugely and are a very real barrier to locating books. One student memorably stated loudly, once he’d retrieved a classmark from the catalogue, “Well that means jack all to me!”  

The catalogue itself – Ex Libris’s Primo (going under the nom de plume of iDiscover in Cambridge), also presented problems; we had to remind ourselves that we were not conducting a usability test on that platform at this time. However the biggest problem with the catalogue was not the interface nor its functionality, but the fact that in some libraries people were just too scared to use it and had to be coaxed into trying it out. When they did, the experience was far less painful than they had feared.

screen-shot-2016-11-07-at-11-06-41

James White finding books in the MML Library using iDiscover. MML students were actually very au fait with the library catalogue and it was their first port of call. Elsewhere students first instinct was to browse the shelves by subject.

At the labyrinthine University Library we were surprised to discover that the layout of the building itself was not actually a problem for users. Although the size of the Library was definitely offputting and we noted more users working in pairs in order to successfully traverse it, in most instances they found their way to the correct rooms without much difficulty. Finding the actual books in said rooms however, was another matter entirely. Here a whole new world of complexity was laid out before them: books shelved by size with letter codes, periodicals located next to books, and parts of classmarks that even I didn’t understand until we had completed the first round of eyetracking.

screen-shot-2016-11-07-at-11-04-50

English student Lucy McGeachin succeeds in finding a book in the University Library. Many of the students who took part in the experiment obviously felt a great sense of achievement when they found the books they were looking for.

At this stage in the process we have not analysed the eyetracking data in detail. Instead we are currently focusing on preliminary findings derived from observing the behaviour and actions of the students at close range while they were wearing the glasses. Already we feel we have learnt a great deal. The next step is to return to the libraries in question, to see if the physical interventions we have designed will make a difference to the search tasks.

screen-shot-2016-11-07-at-11-22-09

Frederik Laurson explains his search process in the UL to Modern Human researcher Jenny Willatt.

The process has been utterly fascinating, especially as it promises to take our observation of user behaviour to a whole new level. Through this project we will not only be observing our users, but actually seeing what they see, where their eyes rest, their means of navigation, and how they make sense of the library environments they use.

Andy

The Tracker project is part of Cambridge University Library’s Futurelib Innovation Programme and is run by Andy Priestner. Tracker is a collaboration with design consultancy Modern Human.

Photos: Thanks to Frederik Laurson, Lucy McGeachin and James White for giving permission to use the above photos taken by Andy Priestner

Snapshot: a window into Cambridge research lives

This is Futurelib reporting back after a fascinating journey into the worlds of chemical computer coding, animal foraging activity and jazz improvisation. Let me explain…

This summer we conducted a cultural probe study with postdoc researchers and PhD students at the University, all of whom were engaged in cutting-edge research in disparate and fascinating areas. However interesting this research was (and it was!) our objective was to uncover as much as possible about their different information and research behaviours.

teja-pic“Snapshot”, the name we gave to our cultural probe, involved participants engaging with a variety of interactive and creative tasks over a two week period including completing a daily research diary, a photo study and a cognitive mapping exercise. The result of the inclusion of these exercises (as well as the actual data gathered from each) was that our participants fully immersed themselves and opened up to us about all aspects their lives conducting research at Cambridge. Similarly, a non-library specific focus meant we were able to learn a great deal about issues such as the importance of inter-disciplinary communication and peer support. We were very pleased to have had participants from many disciplines, which led to fascinating and informative insights into their research landscapes.

Cultural probes were initially used by commercial design companies (find out more in our report), but we are now absolutely convinced that they can be invaluable when used to conduct explorative ethnographic research with library users.

The full report is linked below, including a fully documented account of our methodology and the Snapshot ‘story’, the findings of the project, along with in-person and digital service design suggestions that arose as a direct result of these. We intentionally followed an analogue approach: all the research diaries were written by hand by the Futurelib team, and we met with participants in person before and after the study, keeping email contact throughout.  This relationship-building resulted in a large and varied dataset, primarily gained through in-depth interviews with participants exploring their experience of the study.

The full report can be downloaded here: http://bit.ly/thesnapshotreport

Enjoy!

David and Andy

Futurelib Programme

http://www.lib.cam.ac.uk/futurelib

@futurelib

Embedded Librarians: exploring roles and contexts

Exploring how embedded librarianship might work in Cambridge was never going to be a simple task – see our previous post for the background on this new Futurelib project. Many definitions of what being embedded means have previously been explored, ranging from supporting teaching through a presence in an online VLE, to intentionally working within a faculty building, rather than behind a circulation desk or in a library office. More recently librarians have been working as members of research groups, whilst for a long time now clinical librarians have been providing information services to physicians at the point of care.

After conducting a literature review we met with librarians from across the University of Cambridge to discuss how we wanted to explore these various definitions, along with what embedded librarianship might mean and how it might work in Cambridge. Some of these professionals were already embedded to an extent as part of their role, others would soon be embarking on embedded roles within their faculty or department, or had previous experience of working in this way.

During discussions leading up to the meeting we had talked about potential outcomes of the project. One of these was the idea of an embedded librarian ‘tool kit’ which would outline characteristics, knowledge, experience and training (among other things) required of an information professional working in an embedded role. As ever with Futurelib workshops we wanted to make things engaging and collaborative, which resulted in…

The Embedded Librarian Tool Kit!

temp1

Populating the tool kit followed an idea generation session where we agreed on what we thought were key character attributes needed in an embedded librarian, along with the most valuable services that an individual working in this role could offer. We then discussed what would be necessary in terms of an embedded librarian marketing and promoting their services, what training may be required, and so on.

Initially it had seemed as though the different contexts in which librarians would be embedded, along with the nature and extent of their embeddedness, would mean that it would be difficult to reach a consensus as to what might be required. Interestingly however there was a strong level of agreement in terms of key character attributes, services that could be offered and essential information skills needed.

img_0780

The workshop was both enlightening and encouraging. We left with an increased confidence in what our endeavour could potentially teach us about embedded librarianship at Cambridge, albeit with an awareness that the exact scope and nature of the project will need to take shape slowly over time.

We are very aware that many librarians across the University are already embedded with their users in various ways and feel that an established ‘community of practice’ beyond those present at this meeting would be invaluable in informing the project, as well as embedded librarianship in Cambridge going forward. Further down the line we will want to hear about your experiences. We hope to have a suitable platform in place to facilitate this and to build connections between all library staff conducting this type of work at the University.

David and Andy

Futurelib Programme

http://www.lib.cam.ac.uk/futurelib

Embedded librarianship under the microscope

We are excited to confirm that we will soon be embarking on a new project exploring the fascinating area of embedded librarianship. We will be working with librarians across the University in order to gain a better understanding of some of the key responsibilities, knowledge, tools and personality traits required of an embedded librarian in today’s research and information landscape.

There have been various definitions of embedded librarianship over the years and we hope to explore these in detail, with the aim of finding out what embedded librarianship could mean at Cambridge. Some librarians are embedded in a very physical sense (sitting within research groups for example), while others perform their roles primarily in a virtual way (by offering continuous and expert remote support to researchers, or by being present on a VLE). An area in which librarians are already working in a truly embedded fashion is that of clinical librarianship, where information professionals (sometimes known in this context as ‘informationists’) work side-by-side with clinical practitioners, offering immediate expert searching services and providing information to inform decisions made at the point of care. We hope that what we learn from these varying roles and approaches will be invaluable in helping to better inform how embedded librarians could operate in the University going forward.

As with all Futurelib projects we will be taking a user-centred, ethnographic approach to our research. There will be a focus on observing users and how they interact with their embedded librarian in the wider context of their research lives, including placing significant emphasis on their goals and values.

A number of embedded librarians will be keeping their own research diaries, reflecting on the research behaviours and practices of their ‘users’ (in some senses ‘colleagues’ may be a better word) as well as their experiences of working in this way. The project is set to run from August 2016 to April 2017. Keeping a truly ethnographic mindset means that we would not wish to commit to what the outcomes of the project might be, but we are guaranteed to surface more robust information on what embedded librarianship looks like and what it can hope to achieve.

David and Andy

http://www.lib.cam.ac.uk/futurelib

@futurelib

Header image: York College of PA – ‘Academics’ – https://flic.kr/p/axK6ro

 

Older Posts