Internet Librarian: Monday: Putting Evidence Based Practice to Work

First presentation attended today, since I wasn't quite able to get up for the Keynote and first presentation - shame, cause there was one that looked really good. Completely unrelated to Internets or Libraries is the fact that when I walked for my life-saving latte I noticed an adorable British store across the street. We will be going and tea will be bought and possibly biscuits depending on what sorts they have.

Putting Evidence Based Practice to Work
Speakers: Amanda Hollister, web services librarian & Frank Cervone, assistant university librarian for information technology

Using the evidence of what the users do to help support Web Design decisions.

Frank Cervone
Problems with Website Design:
Majority of librarians are not trained in Human Computer Interaction
Gaps in understanding the significant differences between the on-line and in-person experience
Once a site is done, people are not usually interested in changing it - but evaluation should be constant

Public relations has done a lot of work on web sites. Libraries are often in the same place as public relations since we count on our patrons so much. We need Dialogic web based.

Def: Evidence Based Practice
"...an approach to information practice that promotes the collection, interpretation, and integration of valid, important, and applicable user-reported, librarian-observed, and research-derived evidence" - Andrew Booth

Data provides the primary evidence for making decisions:

• Not anecdotal stories


• Not "common sense"


• Evaluation occurs early in the process

Currently, decisions are often made based on 'beliefs of what is needed', frequently, these beliefs are inherently biased. Assumptions, anecdotal evidence, and preferences - evaluation if it occurs, it happens afterwards which is too late.

Evidence-based practise comes from Medical School Libraries
Study the phenomenon
Contrast results to other studies of the same or related phenomena
Combine results to better understand the phenomenon a hand.

We're doing one usibility test and then we're looking at other people who have done the same usability test and looking at how that will effect our usability results.

Define problem, find evidence, evaluate, apply results, and evaluate change, then redefine the problem - it is an on-going process.

Defining the Problem with Five Points

1. Setting - Where is this being used; what is the context?


2. Population - Who are the (potential users?


3. Intervention - What is being done to/for them?


4. Comparison - What are the alternatives?


5. Evaluation - What does success mean? (With concrete data)

In librarianship we have more descriptive surveys, case studies, and so forth - not the ones at a rigorous level at the top.

Northwestern: First usability test was in 2001 to focused in on 'electronic resources'. While not entirely evidence based, this whetted the appetite for more information.
Summer of 2002, did research on the library catalog: Data mining techniques of search logs!!

Restructured the web development process
Created an active web group - making certain there was representation of all areas of the library on this list. To get into this group, there is a an induction process including a required reading list of works on human computer interaction, required in-library training and required participation in design and testing in cluding a usability test moderator, etc.

Statistics show that site usability has improved.

Debates are less rancorous about how to proceed.

Easier to develop a strategy for incremental improvements over time - we are no longer locked into a tight academic schedule. Site is constanatly being improved. If we can prove that it will make things better public services are less resistant to change in the middle of the term.

Issues still exist with Jargon and 'why' they should go to the library web site at all.

How do you go about finding problems?

Anecdotal Evidence may help find problems we need to investigate. However, this is not representative of everyone that uses the website.

Amanda Hollister
The Lowly Breadcrumb - Students often are uncertain of where to go.

Focus on Tool Based Organization. Find BARF. (Books, Articles, Reserves, and Facts)

Dynamic Page Based -Crumbs - NOT based on directory structure.
XML code collects pages visited, IP and page timestamp - does not collect off site pages or browser navigation.

Pick a page to analyze: User paths to get to this page. Put data into magic box and out comes user paths that end on that selected page.

Found that 50% of the paths are three-click paths. Four clicks and up were the 'less than ideal paths'.

Optimize the Find Books page, full-text database page, by making user information available - i.e., "Did you mean to look for articles?" link on the 'Find Books' page.

XML path data, includes a much greater N number, real-time usability testing, flexible, and no observer effect.

Implement, predictive track analysis - find out where users get lost and try to redirect them to the right location.

http://www.yasuremedia.com/Breadcrumb/Breadcrumb.htm