managing opacs approaches to the process of opac change and development in ecu n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Managing OPACs: approaches to the process of OPAC change and development in ECU PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Managing OPACs: approaches to the process of OPAC change and development in ECU

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 19

Managing OPACs: approaches to the process of OPAC change and development in ECU - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 105 Views
  • Uploaded on

Managing OPACs: approaches to the process of OPAC change and development in ECU. Lisa Billingham Innopac Systems Librarian ECU. Summary. Frequency of reviews Timing during the year Procedure followed Results (what went well, what we learnt). Frequency of reviews. Annual

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Managing OPACs: approaches to the process of OPAC change and development in ECU' - netis


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
managing opacs approaches to the process of opac change and development in ecu

Managing OPACs: approaches to the process of OPAC change and development in ECU

Lisa Billingham

Innopac Systems Librarian

ECU

summary
Summary
  • Frequency of reviews
  • Timing during the year
  • Procedure followed
  • Results (what went well, what we learnt)
frequency of reviews
Frequency of reviews
  • Annual
  • Minor changes between reviews agreed with Senior Librarians
  • Corrections added immediately we become aware of a problem
timing of 2005 review
Timing (of 2005 review)
  • 1st meeting – February 2005 - before upgrade to Silver / 2005LE
  • 2nd meeting – March 2005 – post-upgrade
  • Meetings held monthly until July
  • 1st site revision – late April 2005
  • 2nd site revision – late May 2005
  • 3rd site revision – late June 2005
  • Launch end of Semester 2, 2005
procedure followed
Procedure followed
  • committee structure
  • responsibilities
  • topics included
  • research
  • communication plan
  • testing procedures
  • feedback gathering procedures
committee structure
Committee structure
  • Facilitator / Project Manager
  • Representative from each section:-
    • Library Collections and Access
    • Reference
    • Loans
    • Faculty
responsibilities
Responsibilities
  • All
    • Research of other sites / webOPACs
    • Testing
    • Promotion of project
  • Facilitator
    • Web redesign
    • Project management
  • Other team members
    • Liaison with relevant staff
topics included
Topics included
  • Review layout of web pages
  • Review content of web pages
  • Consider 2005LE standard webpage design, and features in new release
  • Consider activation of optional features (e.g. My Millennium)
  • Consider relevant new products (e.g. WebBridge, Metafind, AirPAC, Advanced Searching) and recommend any purchases.
  • Consider accessibility factors
research
Research
  • New features in next Millennium release
  • Functions in current release not yet activated
  • New products available from III
  • Other Innovative library webOPACs (http://www.libdex.com/vendor/Innovative_Interfaces,_Inc.html)
  • Other library catalogues
communication plan
Communication plan
  • Group members communicate with their respective groups of staff before and after each group meeting
  • Project Manager sends out e-mails to all library staff prior to project start, at beginning of project, when each version of webOPAC is available on staging port, and at conclusion of project
  • Notices placed on webOPAC main page immediately prior to, and after change
testing procedures
Testing procedures
  • Testing conducted on staging port
    • HTML changes
    • Activation of new functions
    • Activation of new products
  • Tested by Project Manager and also by project team members, then all staff invited to test and comment
  • Test plans used (adapted from those used after upgrades)
feedback gathering
Feedback gathering
  • Gathered from staff via their representatives – fed back at team meetings or between meetings if urgent
  • Also sent direct to Project Manager
results what worked well
Results – what worked well
  • Research of various design options
  • Testing
  • Web redesign
  • Some proposals led to other projects
  • Promotion of overall project and major stages
results what we would do differently
Results – what we would do differently
  • Liaison with relevant staff
  • Separate Reference Group
  • Issues
    • How to deal with no response
    • How to deal with no consensus