what are the implications for information literacy
TRANSCRIPT
WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR INFORMATION LITERACY TRAINING IN HIGHER EDUCATION WITH THE INTRODUCTION
OF FEDERATED SEARCH TOOLS?
A study submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts in Librarianship
at
THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD
by
LUCY MCCASKIE
September 2004
Abstract
This dissertation investigates the implications for information literacy
training in higher education with the introduction of federated search tools, tools
which cross-search a number of databases simultaneously. The Information
Literacy Unit at the Open University suggested the research area since the
university is currently implementing this kind of tool. The focus of the
dissertation is on librarians’ experiences and opinions in this area and the
research looks at the search behaviour of users, the nature of the tool, changes
to information literacy training as a result of a federated search tool and any
other perceived benefits and disadvantages of using this kind of tool in relation
to the development of information literate students.
A qualitative research approach was used to fulfill the research objectives
and a number of methods of investigation were used to explore the research
area. The research begins with a review of the literature about information
literacy, the search behaviour of students and federated search tools. The Open
University was used as a case study to explore an institution currently
implementing a federated search tool and issues were raised in this study that
helped focus the rest of the research. The opinions and experiences of
librarians at universities currently using a federated search tool were obtained in
two different ways. Interviews were used for those universities within traveling
distance and those further afield were included in an e-mail survey.
The research found that universities had varying experiences of federated
search tools but that some common themes were: an increased use of
databases, concerns about the quality of results produced from searches and a
need for information literacy training for users. The research concludes that
federated search tools cannot prevent users from becoming information literate
but by using information literacy skills users can make better use of these tools.
Finally recommendations are made to the Open University for actions that may
assist users becoming information literate whilst using a federated search tool.
2
Contents Chapter 1: Introduction .................................................................................... 4
1.1 Research Origins....................................................................................... 4 1.2 Aims and Objectives of Research ............................................................. 4 1.3 Definitions.................................................................................................. 5 1.4 Research Context...................................................................................... 7
Chapter 2: Literature Review ........................................................................... 9 2.1 Information Literacy................................................................................... 9 2.2 Searching Behaviour of Higher Education Students................................ 17 2.3 Federated Search Tools .......................................................................... 19
Chapter 3: Methodology................................................................................. 24 3.1 Research Approach................................................................................. 24 3.2 Methods of Investigation.......................................................................... 25 3.3 Results Analysis ...................................................................................... 31 3.4 Further Methodological Considerations................................................... 32
Chapter 4: Open University Case Study ....................................................... 34 4.1 Aims of Open University Case Study ...................................................... 34 4.2 Case Study Evidence .............................................................................. 34 4.3 Open University Background................................................................... 35 4.4 Information Literacy at the Open University............................................. 35 4.5 Implementing the Federated Search Tool, ENCompass ......................... 38 4.6 Issues Arising from the Open University Case Study .............................. 41
Chapter 5: Results of University Interviews ................................................. 42 5.1 Metalib..................................................................................................... 42 5.2 Objective 1 .............................................................................................. 43 5.3 Objective 2 .............................................................................................. 45 5.4 Objective 3 .............................................................................................. 48 5.5 Objective 4 .............................................................................................. 50 5.6 Objective 5 .............................................................................................. 51 5.7 Objective 6 .............................................................................................. 55
Chapter 6: Results of E-mail Survey ............................................................. 58 6.1 Changes in Information Literacy Training ................................................ 58 6.2 Changes in Users’ Search Behaviour...................................................... 60 6.3 Possible Changes to Library Services and Training in the Future ........... 61
Chapter 7: Discussion of Results.................................................................. 63 7.1 Raising Awareness of Resources............................................................ 63 7.2 The Need For Information Literacy Training ............................................ 64 7.3 Recommended Use of Federated Search Tools ..................................... 65
Chapter 8: Conclusions, Recommendations and Areas for Further Research.......................................................................................................... 66
8.1 Conclusions............................................................................................. 66 8.2 Recommendations for the Open University ............................................. 67 8.3 Areas for Further Research ..................................................................... 69
Bibliography.................................................................................................... 71 Appendices...................................................................................................... 80
3
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Research Origins
The research area for this dissertation came from a suggestion made by
the Information Literacy Unit at the Open University (OU). The OU has a
commitment to developing the information literacy skills of its students and has
developed a number of different ways to teach students who are distance
learners and who for the most part are unable to visit the campus for training.
The OU has recently purchased a federated search tool and members of the
implementation team have been preparing the tool for an expected launch date
in the autumn of 2004. The federated search tool called ENCompass will
provide integrated access to electronic information resources in order to make it
easier for students and academics to find quality sources of information. The
Information Literacy Unit was interested in how the introduction of the tool will
have an effect on the way that students search for information and how
information literacy training will need to be altered with the introduction of such a
tool. This dissertation presented the opportunity to investigate universities
currently using federated search tools and to bring together experiences and
opinions of library and information staff at those universities. The information
found could potentially be used to inform future information literacy practices at
the OU and at other universities who choose to implement federated search
tools.
1.2 Aims and Objectives of Research
The main aim of the dissertation was to investigate the implications for
information literacy training in higher education with the introduction of federated
search tools. The research was particularly focused on the balance between
using tools and promoting information literacy.
4
The objectives of the research were to investigate the following areas:
1. Whether the tool has or is perceived to have had an effect on the way
that users search for information and the resources that they use.
2. What the opinions of librarians are regarding the way that the tool should
be used and the role that they think it should play in users' research.
3. The relationship that the tool has to other library services such as web
pages, the OPAC (Online Public Access Catalogue) and Virtual Learning
Environments.
4. How easy the tool is to use and whether training is seen as necessary for
those who use it.
5. How information literacy training is provided in the libraries and whether it
has changed with the introduction of the tool.
6. If there are other perceived benefits and disadvantages of using such a
tool, especially with regard to the development of information literacy
skills in students.
1.3 Definitions
Information Literacy
Information literacy can also be referred to as information skills, although it
has been argued that information skills are part of a wider concept that is
information literacy (Bruce, 1997). There is no universal definition for
information literacy but one of the more concise and widely used definitions
comes from the American Library Association (ALA):
5
“To be information literate, a person must be able to recognize when
information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use
effectively the needed information” (ALA, 1989).
A number of different definitions and models are in use to describe information
literacy and these are discussed further in Chapter 2. For the purposes of this
dissertation it is assumed that information literacy refers to a set of
competencies or approaches to dealing with information. These competencies
include knowing when information is needed and where to look for it, to have
strategies for locating information and to be able to critically evaluate the
information that is found. Information also needs to be used effectively for a
purpose and to be communicated in an appropriate form.
Federated Search Tools
Various terms are used to refer to these tools in the literature including:
metasearchers, cross-searchers, cross-database searchers, portals, broadcast
searchers or parallel searchers. The term metasearcher is particularly
prominent and is the term adopted by the United States National Information
Standards Organization (NISO), which has developed a Metasearch Initiative
(NISO, 2003). However as Fryer (2004) explains, the term metasearcher can
cause confusion due to its association with web metasearch engines such as
Metacrawler which function in a different way to federated search tools. The
term federated searching is therefore chosen in this dissertation to describe the
function of search tools, which search a number of databases, particularly
subscription databases, simultaneously with one interface. The content
searched by federated search tools is content that could not normally be
searched via a web search engine.
6
1.4 Research Context
The research area was suggested by the OU, but the relationship and
balance between federated search tools and information literacy is one that is
likely to become more important in the next few years and will be relevant to
many universities and other institutions. Federated search tools are relatively
new with the first tools being made available at the beginning of this century
(Rogers, 2001). Recent purchases of these tools are often stated in Advanced
Technology Libraries (2004) and examining the numerous articles shows that
these tools are fairly widespread in the US and Australia and have been
introduced in the UK in a small number of libraries, including some in the higher
education sector. Libraries in New Zealand and in various European countries
have also purchased these tools.
The discussion of issues surrounding federated search tools and
information literacy has been surprisingly absent from the range of literature
about federated search tools that has started to appear in the professional and
popular journals for information professionals. Discussions about federated
search tools have primarily revolved around technical issues and the potential
that these tools have for making resources easier for users to find. Frost raised
the debate about the effect of these tools on development of information literacy
skills earlier this year in his article “Do we want or need metasearching?” (2004).
The issue was further discussed and in more depth by John Terrell (2004) in his
recent address at the Lifelong Learning Conference in Yeppoon, Queensland.
Terrell's article in particular raises some issues that are relevant to the scope of
this dissertation. This dissertation is the first to look at issues and tensions
surrounding information literacy and federated search tools. Federated search
tools themselves are becoming the subject of research and particularly of
Masters dissertations. There are currently postgraduate students in the
Department of Information Studies, Loughborough University studying search
7
strategies employed in the use of a federated search tool and a student in the
Graduate School of Education, University of Bristol is investigating the impact of
a federated search tool in providing information for members of the NHS.
Whilst federated search tools are a relatively new area for research,
information literacy has been the subject of a great deal of writing and research.
Research has tended to remain largely in the domain of librarians and
information professionals but awareness of the concept is becoming more
widespread, particularly in education and some workplaces (Booker, 1998).
Research and information literacy discussion has focused on three main areas:
definitions of information literacy (Doyle, 1994; Bruce, 1997), the need for
information literacy (Ray & Day, 1998) and methods for teaching information
literacy (Webber & Johnston, 2000; Brown, Murphy & Nanny, 2003; Big Blue,
2004). Information literacy development has also been considered in the
context of electronic resources (Wood et al., 1996). Whilst no research and
limited discussion has taken place about the impact of federated search tools on
information literacy, the research about information literacy is used as the
context for the research in this dissertation.
This dissertation will examine the topic of federated search tools and the
implications that they have for information literacy training in higher education by
first reviewing the literature related to information literacy and federated search
tools. The methodology for research will then be described, followed by a
presentation and discussion of the results before a series of recommendations
for universities choosing to implement a federated search tool are made in the
conclusion.
8
Chapter 2: Literature Review
This chapter explores the literature regarding information literacy and
federated search tools in order to provide a context for the research and to
illuminate the current issues and developments in these areas. The searching
behaviour of students is also examined as an issue that impacts upon both the
information literacy development of students and the need for federated search
tools.
2.1 Information Literacy
2.1.1 Information Literacy: an Introduction
Paul Zurkowski first used the term information literacy in 1974 in a report to
the National Commission on Libraries and Information Science about
establishing a national programme in the US to achieve universal information
literacy (Doyle, 1994; Bruce, 1997). The first advocates of information literacy
were mainly school librarians in the US but in the 1980s use of the term and the
concept became more widespread. Significant events in the lifespan of the
concept include the establishment of the American Library Association's (ALA)
Presidential Committee on Information Literacy in 1987 and its subsequent
report produced in 1989 (ALA, 1989). This report made a statement about the
importance of information literacy and connected it with the goals of lifelong
learning and effective citizenship. In the US, the National Forum on Information
Literacy was established in 1989 as a response to this statement and forms a
coalition of national organisations, which aims to aid information literacy
promotion and development within these organisations (NFIL, 2004). In the UK
there is no such consortium or forum, although the Charted Institute of Library
and Information Professionals (CILIP) is currently preparing a definition of
information literacy and is planning to become involved in future advocacy
(Corrall, 2004). Information literacy in the UK has been championed in the
9
higher education sector by the Society of College, National and University
Libraries (SCONUL) but despite the two conferences focusing on information
literacy held in the UK (Webber & Johnston, 2003a) developments are still
behind those in the US and Australia which has held five national information
literacy conferences and has a dedicated Australian and New Zealand Institute
for Information Literacy (ANZIIL).
2.1.2 Information Literacy: Definitions and Descriptions
There has been discussion about information literacy and whether it is a
new concept or a natural progression from the library instruction that has been
taking place since the 1960s (Grassian & Kaplowitz, 2001). Whether
information literacy is viewed as a new concept or not depends upon its
definition and individuals' understanding of the concept. There have been
numerous definitions and models of information literacy, four of which are
illustrated in table 2.1.2. These models are chosen as examples of those that
are used in a higher education context. The first is from the Association of
College and Research Libraries (ACRL, 2000), a group within the ALA. This
model is endorsed by the ALA and forms a set of standards which students
should be able to demonstrate. The table indicates only the standards but for
each there are a number of performance indicators and outcomes that can be
used to assess whether an individual has achieved that standard of information
literacy. The breadth of standards such as the ACRL model were criticised by
Owusu-Ansah (2003) who complains that the standards try to be all
encompassing, making it difficult for practical steps to be given for developing
information literate students. Owusu-Ansah also believes that the ACRL model
is beyond the boundaries of what librarians can realistically be expected to
teach.
The second model is from the Australian and New Zealand Institute for
Information Literacy (ANZIIL) a group established in 2000 which promotes
information literacy in higher education (ANZIIL, 2003). The model given
10
Table 2.1.2: A comparison of information literacy models showing attributes of the information literate individual. ACRL (ACRL, 2000) ANZIIL (Bundy, 2004) BIG6 (Big6 Associates, 2003) SCONUL (SCONUL, 1999) 1. Determines the nature and extent of the information needed.
1. Recognises the need for information and determines the nature and extent of the information needed.
1. Task definition. 2. Information seeking strategies.
1. The ability to recognise a need for information. 2. The ability to distinguish ways in which the information ‘gap’ may be addressed. 3. The ability to construct strategies for locating information.
2. Accesses information effectively and efficiently.
2. Finds needed information effectively and efficiently.
3. Location and access. 4. The ability to locate and access information.
3. Evaluates information and its sources critically and incorporates selected information into his or her knowledge base and value system.
3. Critically evaluates information and the information seeking process.
5. The ability to compare and evaluate information obtained from different sources.
4. Individually or as a member of a group, uses information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose.
4. Manages information collected or generated.
4. Use of information. 6. The ability to organise, apply and communicate information to others in ways appropriate to the situation.
5. Applies prior and new information to construct new concepts or create new understandings.
5. Synthesis. 7. The ability to synthesise and build upon existing information, contributing to the creation of new knowledge.
5. Understands many of the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of information and accesses and uses information ethically and legally.
6. Uses information with understanding and acknowledges cultural, ethical, economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of information.
6. Evaluation.
11
(Bundy, 2004) is the second edition of the Australian and New Zealand
Information Literacy Framework, derived from the ACRL Information Literacy
Standards. Both the ACRL and ANZIIL models include information literacy
competencies at lower and higher levels. Bundy describes these attributes
as a continuum of capacities and students at higher levels would be expected
to demonstrate the standards in conjunction with one another.
Michael Eisenberg and Robert Berkowitz developed the Big6 Skills for
Information Problem-solving model in the 1980s originally for use within
secondary schools but it is now applied to all levels of education (Spitzer,
Eisenberg & Lowe, 1998; Big6 Associates, 2003). The final model from table
2.1.2 was developed by SCONUL in 1999 by a task force established to
make a statement about information skills in higher education in the UK
(SCONUL, 1999). In the UK use of the term information literacy has not
been as widespread as information skills. Webber and Johnston (2003a)
point out that the term information skills is sometimes preferred as it avoids
negative associations with literacy and illiteracy.
The SCONUL model is similar to those of the ACRL and ANZIIL in that
it shows a progression from lower level to higher-level skills. All four models
have similarities in that they describe the attributes of an information literate
person and these attributes are often comparable. Webber and Johnston
(2000) note how different definitions of information literacy tend to focus on
similar areas such as need recognition, search formulation, source selection
and interrogation, information evaluation, information synthesis and use.
There are certainly similarities between these models and Owusu-Ansah
(2003) observes how the main writers on information literacy tend to agree
more than they disagree.
Other important writers about information literacy include Doyle (Doyle,
1994) who described the attributes of an information literate person and
Bruce (1997) who examined higher educator's conceptions of information
literacy in order to understand the phenomenon and how it is experienced.
Bruce's conceptions of information literacy begin with the information
technology conception and the relationship between IT skills and information
12
literacy is one that has been discussed in the literature (Kwasnik, 1990;
SCONUL, 1999; ACRL, 2000). Generally it is agreed that some IT skills are
a necessary part of information literacy but that information literacy is a much
broader concept and the SCONUL model includes basic IT skills as a
building block upon which information skills can be constructed.
2.1.3 The Need for Information Literacy
The association between information literacy and IT skills can be
attributed to the need for information literacy that has arisen out of the
changing information and IT environments. The Internet in particular has
enhanced the need for information literacy. Users have access to large
quantities of unfiltered information with varying degrees of reliability and
usefulness, which the user needs to distinguish for his or herself (Basili,
2003). The amount of information available can lead to information overload
so users need strategies for handling information (Haban, 1990). Although
library users have always needed some information skills, in the past the
library collection would have been selected to include only those sources
considered reputable (Grassian & Kaplowitz, 2001). Now libraries often
focus on access to information rather than the holding of specific resources
so there is more pressure on the user to select appropriate materials.
The ALA report (1989) described how information use is necessary for
both personal and business needs and the need for information literacy has
also been associated with democracy and lifelong learning (Bundy, 2004).
Citizens need access to information in order to make informed decisions and
the changing economy in countries like the US, UK and Australia has placed
more emphasis on knowledge and information industries. Webber and
Johnston (2003a) describe the situation in the UK where more information
literate employees are required. The Dearing Report in the UK also
highlights the problem of the lifelong career becoming less common and
indicates the need for individuals to learn throughout their lives and to
develop new skills and knowledge (NCIHE, 1997). This report states “many
jobs require sophisticated information handling skills” and explains that this is
13
more than simply using a computer (section 4.44) but disappointing fails to
acknowledge information literacy as one of the key skills that undergraduates
should obtain at university.
Students at university need to become information literate not only for
their future careers and to participate in a democratic society but also to
study successfully. Ward (2003) points out that whilst students may come to
university with IT experience, their experience may be in using IT for
recreational purposes only. Ray and Day's (1998) examination of the use of
electronic information sources by students found that one of the barriers to
using these sources was a lack of effective information retrieval skills and
that students may avoid using these materials because they do not have the
skills necessary to use them. With more emphasis in higher education on
students learning through problem-based learning, which includes
researching individual problems and topics (Webber & Johnston, 2003a), it is
essential that students gain the skills necessary to find, evaluate and use the
information they need for their studies.
2.1.4 Information Literacy Teaching in Higher Education
In the UK, higher education has been the main area in which
information literacy movements have been taking place. The Big Blue
Project was conducted by the University of Leeds and Manchester
Metropolitan University for the Joint Information Services Committee (JISC)
in 2001-2002. The project investigated the extent of information skills
teaching in HE and post-16 education and undertook a number of case
studies of information skills programmes (Big Blue, 2004). The project found
that:
“despite the fact there is no formal coherent strategy for information
skills development and training within the higher education sector there
is a great deal of work taking place in this area.”
It also produced an Information Skills Toolkit identifying nine features of a
successful information skills programme. The project also identified some
14
issues that have been widely discussed in the literature including whether
information skills should be integrated into the curriculum, the collaboration
that is needed between library, computing and academic staff for successful
information literacy programmes and the need for assessment of the skills
obtained.
Whether information literacy should be incorporated into the curriculum
or not is an area of some disagreement. The main problem with voluntary
information literacy programmes is acknowledged by Haycock who explains
that students are busy and if they do not see any immediate need to, will not
attend these sessions. A second problem is that students may not believe
that they lack these skills and so do not see the need for this kind of training
(Brown, Murphy & Nanny, 2003). The ACRL (2000) advocates integrating
information literacy into the curriculum in order to provide opportunities for
problem-based learning, evidence-based learning and inquiry learning.
Some writers suggest that the way students are taught needs to be changed
in order to provide opportunities for them to develop information literacy skills
(ALA, 1989; Bruce, 1997; Bundy, 2004). Bundy explains how students need
a chance to engage with information sources and that there is a danger with
some educational experiences that students will develop only a surface-
learning approach. Ramsden (1992) describes the difference between deep
and surface-learning approaches and how students will use different
approaches according to the particular task that they are undertaking. For
Ramsden,
“learning in educational institutions should be about changing the ways
in which learners understand, or experience, or conceptualise the world
around them” (1992:4).
The challenge for educators is to create learning experiences that allow
students to use deep-learning approaches. This is particularly problematic
for library staff teaching information literacy because time is needed for
students to change the way they think and often time is in short supply for
these kind of programmes (Webber & Johnston, 2003b). Webber and
Johnston (2000, 2003a) are concerned about the integration of information
15
literacy into the curriculum because if it is taught in relation to other subjects,
there is a danger students may use only a surface-learning approach and
may fail to gain a coherent understanding of the concept of information
literacy and what it means to them. Webber and Johnston's experience of
teaching a credit-bearing information literacy class was an example of how
students can change their conceptions of information literacy but required
time and resources that are rarely made available to libraries. The authors
are both academics so it is possible they may have had more influence on
students than library staff. The importance of collaboration and of academics
supporting information literacy is a theme in the literature (Spitzer, Eisenberg
& Lowe, 1998; ACRL, 2000). Ward (2003) points out other important factors
in the success of information literacy programmes, such as explaining why
the training is important, teaching at the point of need and providing materials
that students can return to when needed.
Assessing whether students have developed information literacy is
another problematic area. Viewing information literacy as an area of
knowledge (Town, 2003) rather than a set of discrete skills means that
assessing information literacy is a complex task. For Doyle (1994),
measuring information literacy cannot be separated from the measurement of
the critical thinking skills and problem solving skills with which it is related.
Assessment is essential in indicating the importance and credibility of a
subject to students and Webber and Johnston (2003b) believe that
assessment should take a number of forms and should include diagnosis of a
student's knowledge, feedback on strengths and weaknesses and monitoring
of progression. This is a more complex approach than is demonstrated by
libraries who use simple multiple-choice questionnaires to assess whether a
student has acquired certain skills. It is logical to suppose that information
literacy education would have an effect on the enquiries that are received in
libraries. Parker and Waller (2002) visited Australian academic libraries
where information literacy instruction has reduced the number of enquiries or
that queries have been answered more quickly. The libraries also found that
students have become interested in using more resources but based on
anecdotal evidence, it is difficult to measure the real impact of information
literacy education and this is an area for more research.
16
2.2 Searching Behaviour of Higher Education Students
The association between information literacy and the ability of students
to use electronic resources has already been mentioned. Students' use of
electronic resources and their search behaviour has been the subject of a
number of studies and the issue is influential in the development of library
services to improve access to information. One of the reasons that students
may be unwilling to undertake information literacy education is that they are
unaware that they lack these abilities. Wood et al. (1996) conducted a study
of over a hundred students from different faculties to see how they searched
for information in particular databases. One of the findings of the study was
that:
“many students were unable to construct an adequate search query,
devise an effective search strategy or achieve an adequate search
result” (p.90).
The authors of the study related search strategies to students' sense of
satisfaction and they suggest that students may be satisfied with results that
would be unsatisfactory to an information professional. Students may have
low expectations, which are met with inadequate search strategies, so they
see no need to improve their techniques. Ray and Day (1998) also
acknowledged the problem of satisfaction in their study of the use of
electronic information sources across three universities. Ray and Day found
that whilst many respondents used electronic information sources, they
tended to use only a limited number. Barriers to use included lacking the
skills necessary to use them but interestingly the authors note that students
will learn these skills if they think the skills are transferable and if encouraged
to use sources by academic staff.
The JUSTEIS project (JISC User Surveys: Trends in Electronic
Information Sources) took place at the University of Wales and also
examined use of electronic information sources (Armstrong et al., 2001).
This study looked at a far greater number of students than the two already
mentioned but had similar findings: that students lacked coherent search
17
strategies and that some electronic information sources received minimum
usage. This study also found that students were motivated to use these
sources if they thought they would obtain better assessment grades. The
JUSTEIS project also produced some very significant statistics when
students were asked to describe how they found information. Usage of
search engines was more than double that of the library OPAC) and was the
main use of electronic resources for first-year undergraduates. Student
reliance on search engines was also found in the EDNER project (2002)
where students completed set tasks using electronic information sources. In
this study 45% of students turned to Google first with only 10% using the
library OPAC. The reasons suggested for student reliance on search
engines are that they are familiar, have produced successful results in the
past and that the time and effort required to search may be more important to
students than the relevance of the items that they retrieve. Lack of
awareness of other resources could also be a problem. Brown, Murphy and
Nanny (2003) looked at teacher training students in the US and found that
accuracy and speed were important to the students when they searched and
that they were willing to learn about library resources if they thought search
time and effort could be reduced and accuracy and relevance maximised.
The searching behaviour of students that has been demonstrated in
these studies is significant for developers of electronic information sources
and for librarians. Students do not appear to share the same values of
information professionals and are very much focused on doing what they
need to pass assessments within the minimum effort. This is not surprising
given the demands that the modern student may have upon his or her time.
Griffiths and Brophy (2002) suggest that information sources can be
improved by limited the choices that users need to make as this limits the
opportunity of mistakes being made. Koh (2003) also believes that
databases should be simplified and argues that:
“Ideally, users should not have to complete a tutorial to access
information through a database effectively; they should be able to find
the results they are looking for without having to understand the
database's underlying structure”.
18
Koh goes on to describe and promote the AARLIN (Australian Academic and
Research Library Network) project, which uses a federated search tool
designed so that students can access a range of resources through an
interface that is as easy to use as an search engine.
2.3 Federated Search Tools
2.3.1 Portals and Federated Search Tools
In the electronic information environment one of the responses to the
problem of bringing large amounts of information together has been for
libraries to introduce portals. A portal is a gateway, or a point where users
can start their search for information on the web (Miller, 2001). There are a
number of different types of portals, for example universities have been
introducing institutional portals, which can be described as “a layer which aggregates, integrates, personalises and presents
information, transactions and applications to the user according to their
role and preferences” (Dolphin, Miller & Sherratt, 2002).
A second type of portal is a subject portal and the JISC have produced
subject hubs bringing together resources in certain subject areas (Awre,
2003). A third type of portal is a federated search tool which brings together
the resources a library subscribes to and allows cross-searching of these
resources. Library management system suppliers such as Endeavor
(ENCompass), Ex Libris (Metalib), Fretwell-Downing Informatics (Zportal)
and MuseGlobal (MuseSearch) are all introducing these tools. These tools
can be seen as a progression from the cross-file searching that is available in
Dialog (Webster, 2004). They work using the Z39.50 protocol that is used by
database suppliers to enable communication between computers (Miller,
1999). This protocol is not always effective because database suppliers
have not always adopted it consistently so other protocols are also used such
as HTML, XML and SQL (Lewis, 2002). Since these tools access resources
that the library pays for, some type of authentication is required to ensure
19
only registered users of the library can use the tool. Rather than the user
needing to remember a large number of passwords, the authentication can
be matched against the LDAP (lightweight directory access protocol) of a
university so students can use their existing network usernames and
passwords (Ramsden, 2003). This technology also allows for personalisation
features such as remembering users, their favourite resources and the
previous searches they have performed. The way that results are displayed
varies between suppliers, either producing a single list with duplications
removed, or results arranged by individual resources. Luther (2003) explains
the way that results are returned in batches with those from the fastest
servers coming back first but questions the order in which results should
appear. Other features of federated search tools include allowing users to
link to the full-text of items when bibliographic databases are searched and a
level of customisation for institutions implementing these tools (Ramsden,
2003; Lewis 2003).
2.3.2 The Need for Federated Search Tools
The development of federated search tools can be seen as a response
to the needs and expectations of library users, particularly students using
academic libraries. The growth of different types of databases, produced by
different suppliers, with numerous interfaces and logins means that library
users can find it confusing when attempting to access information (Ramsden,
2003; Fryer, 2004). Commentators seem to agree that Google has changed
the expectations of library users (Luther, 2003; Miller 2004) who want quick,
easy access to information, possibly at the expense of recalling all relevant
materials and that they expect to be able to access the full-text of items
immediately (Ward, 2003). Roy Tennant explained that “only librarians like to
search; everyone else like to find” (Miller, 2004:32). Library OPACs and
web-pages have been alienating users with their use of library terminology
and by including long lists of databases that users find it difficult to select
from (Luther, 2003). The library OPAC is also better for users who are
looking for a known item, rather than those who want to research a new area
(Lewis, 2003). Webster (2004) believes that the idea of a one-stop shop is
20
not a new idea, and that libraries have traditionally been performing this role
by bringing materials together. It is now Google that is performing the role of
a one-stop shop for many users and libraries introducing federated search
tools are hoping that the tool can supplant Google (Frost, 2004; Fryer, 2004)
and return the library to the centre of students' studies.
2.3.3 Issues Arising From Federated Search Tools
There are a number of issues that have arisen due to the introduction of
federated search tools and which have been discussed in professional and
popular journals for information professionals. One of the most prominent
issues is about the effectiveness of searching with these tools and the way
that results are organised. Authors are keen to point out that these tools
cannot search any more effectively than the native interface of a database
since they are limited to using the search facility of the database itself (Lewis,
2002; Hane 2003) and that these tools are most useful for resource
discovery. Fryer (2004) thinks that whilst federated search tools are a good
point to start a sophisticated search, the user will need to search further.
Resource providers are not always happy for their databases being searched
through a federated search tool, since they do not want the native interface
they have invested in to be bypassed (Lewis, 2003). JSTOR (2004) released
a statement about these tools that gives an alternative viewpoint from the
resource provider. JSTOR is unhappy with the method it is currently
searched, involving the screen-scraping of HTML from the web-page, since
this is not very effective. The displaying of results is another area of
contention because databases have different ways of ranking results, such
as by date or relevancy and it is also impossible to completely remove all
duplications from the results set since the results are returned at different
times according to the speed of the individual servers (Hane, 2003).
Other issues that have been discussed with regard to federated search
tools include the risk of information overload for the user (Luther, 2003; Cox,
2003) and whether it is the right way to address the problems that
researchers encounter. Cox (2003) questions whether it may be more
constructive to invest more in training users to exploit the existing interfaces
21
rather than creating a tool for less skilled searching. Webster (2004) thinks
the tools are a limited solution and do not address the underlying problems of
lack of interoperability and non-standardisation of search tools. He suggests
that the separation of content from search tools so that each database could
search the whole e-content of a library, although he acknowledges that there
would be commercial barriers to doing this.
2.3.4 Federated Search Tools and Information Literacy
The discussion about federated search tools in relation to information
literacy may have been limited in the literature but some interesting points
have been raised. Luther (2003) acknowledges the concern some librarians
have that users will not know which databases they are searching with such
a tool and that the interface has been made overly simplistic but she
reiterates the belief that these tools are not for expert users. Frost (2004) is
more direct in his criticism of these tools, believing that they are “a way of
avoiding the learning process” and that part of the education process
involves students learning to improve the tools that they use. He seems to
think that using these tools prevent students from becoming information
literate and that the library should not promote 'good enough' searching. His
article did highlight the need for more investigation into the area of federated
search tools and their effect on information literacy.
Terrell (2004) produced a more in-depth paper at this year's Lifelong
Learning Conference in Queensland, as he examined the process of
federated searching in light of the ANZIIL Information Literacy Framework
(Bundy, 2004). The main concerns that Terrell raised were about the quality
of the information retrieved with these tools and whether students would fail
to demonstrate competence in standards one and two. The first standard,
'recognising the information need and determining the nature and extent of
the information needed' may be compromised if students are unaware of
which databases they are actually searching. The second standard, 'finding
the information effectively and efficiently' may not be obtained if students do
not need to think about their search strategies when using these tools.
Terrell believes that libraries which introduce federated search tools still need
22
to devote time to user instruction and documentation in order to support their
use. This seems to reflect the experience of La Trobe University in Australia
where a federated search tool was introduced as part of the AARLIN project.
One of the comments received during the pilot study at La Trobe was that
“learning how to use AARLIN was time consuming and labour intensive”
(Burke et al., 2003). The fear that these tools may be seen by some as a
way of reducing the need for information literacy training was an issue raised
in the discussion following Terrell's paper (Webber, 2004).
The issues raised by Frost and Terrell are interesting but more work is
needed to see whether the experience of those universities actually using
these tools reflects their thoughts. Two institutions that have produced
accounts of their experiences of implementing federated search tools are
Boston College, US (Tallent, 2004) and Loughborough University, which
undertook a report commissioned by the JISC (Hamblin & Stubbings, 2003).
At Boston College a small study was executed to see how students used the
tool and found that users were not interested in advanced search features,
did not want to know about the differences between databases and electronic
journals and tended not to use help screens and instructions. This
experience seems to suggest that given the choice the students were not
interested in becoming more information literate whilst using these tools. The
study at Loughborough was more positive with the amount of databases
consulted rising dramatically with the introduction of the tool and enquiries
becoming easier to answer at the enquiry desk. This experience seems to
suggest that federated search tools could be a way to promote the resources
that a library makes available to students but the authors of the report noted
that they thought there was still a need for some training.
An examination of the literature has raised a number of issues, which
have been used to focus the research area and aid the design of the
research methodology. Although a number of universities are using
federated search tools, there are limited accounts of their experiences in the
literature so the research of this dissertation can be used to build a more
comprehensive picture of the effect of federated search tools on information
literacy training.
23
Chapter 3: Methodology
This chapter describes the research approach that was chosen in order
to fulfill the dissertation objectives. The different methods of investigation are
also described together with the methods used to analyse the information
obtained. Finally other research considerations are explored including the
limitations of the research.
3.1 Research Approach
The aim of the dissertation was to investigate the implications for
information literacy training in higher education with the introduction of
federated search tools. The focus on higher education was chosen because
it is the main sector where these tools have been introduced and training in
information literacy or information skills is normally part of the service that an
academic library provides. The research approach chosen to fulfill this aim
was qualitative and was chosen for a number of reasons. Since federated
search tools are relatively new, particularly in this country, access to
quantitative data would be limited as would opportunities for gathering
quantitative data, especially during the summer when contacting and
observing students is difficult. Gathering data about the number of libraries
using these tools and the number of searches performed was unlikely to
further understanding of the implications these tools may have for information
literacy training. Focusing on librarians' and information professionals'
experience of the implementation of the tools and the concerns and issues
that they raised could provide more understanding of the effect of the tools
and hopefully inform other libraries who were planning to implement a
federated search tool.
Raising issues and concerns that may be applicable to other libraries
implementing federated search tools was a potential outcome of the research
but creating generalisable results was not a primary aim. The focus was
more on understanding issues within their context. Mellon (1990) describes
qualitative studies, or naturalistic studies, as those that view experiences
24
from the perspectives of the people involved and try to understand a situation
in-depth. The type of qualitative research undertaken was descriptive
(Gorman & Clayton, 1997) as it was involved with examining and describing
the phenomenon encountered in terms of behaviours, beliefs and attitudes
related to searching for information and information literacy. The research
was inductive because it did not start with a predefined theory but examined
specific cases and allowed conclusions to be drawn from them.
3.2 Methods of Investigation
3.2.1 Literature Review
The first phase of the research began with a review of literature about
federated search tools, information literacy and information-seeking
behaviour. Yin (1984) states that the literature review can be used to help
pose insightful questions on the topic and in this case, initial readings
informed the dissertation objectives. The literature review began in the early
stages of the dissertation but continued throughout the research process to
ensure that new articles, especially those regarding federated search tools
were included. The items for the literature review were found in a number of
different ways: from the university library, databases such as LISA and
Internet searches. Items were also recommended by those involved in the
dissertation and references from useful sources were followed up. The
search terms that proved useful during the literature search included:
metasearch, federated search, the names of federated search tools,
information literacy and information skills. The literature review was not only
useful in defining the research objectives, but also provided a context for the
research and enhanced understanding of the research findings.
3.2.2 Open University Case Study
The Information Literacy Unit at the OU suggested the area for research
and the OU itself was included as a case study in the second phase of
research because it presented an opportunity to explore the concerns and
issues raised by staff at a university currently implementing a federated
25
search tool. Yin (1984) explains that one rationale for a single case study “is
where the case represents an extreme or unique case” (p.43) and this was
the reason for choosing the OU. A case study draws on different types of
evidence in order to create a comprehensive picture of the phenomenon and
its context. In this case the sources of evidence used were interviews,
documents and a demonstration of the tool. Yin (1984) recommends
demonstrations of new technology as invaluable in furthering understanding
when the technology is the subject of research.
The staff members interviewed at the OU were recommended by a key
informant at the university. Five members of staff were interviewed, three
concerned with information literacy and two involved with the implementation
of the federated search tool, ENCompass. The interviews were unstructured
and areas for discussion were e-mailed to the interviewees before the
interviews so they were prepared. During the interviews other, unexpected
areas of interest were highlighted and these were pursued. The
implementation project was at an earlier stage than anticipated, so the areas
for discussion were altered as a result. The tool had not reached the piloting
stage so views could not be obtained about how users would search the tool.
Instead the focus of this case study was on the information literacy strategies
in place and the concerns that members of staff had about the effect that
introducing ENCompass might have upon these. Information about the
nature of the tool itself was also gathered and documents were supplied that
aided understanding of federated search tool.
The interviews took place in groups and in the workplace, so there is the
possibility that the interviewees may have felt inhibited in expressing
personal points of view but they did not appear uncomfortable with the
interview approach. The interviews were not recorded but notes were made
throughout and when the case study was completed the interviewees
checked the report to ensure that no mistakes had been made. Yin (1984)
recommends this approach to case studies to ensure construct validity. The
interviews were conducted in June and the information obtained from the OU
case study was used in conjunction with the literature review to help
formulate the research objectives.
26
3.2.3 Interviews at UK Universities
The third phase of the research focused on universities currently using
a federated search tool and two methods of data collection were used to
survey these universities. Staff at universities in the UK, which were within
traveling distance, were interviewed and an e-mail survey was send to
universities in other countries or those in the UK where interviews could not
take place. Both methods of investigation took place in July. These two
different samples will be treated separately.
The sample for universities in the UK using a federated search tool was
a purposeful sample because there are so few universities in this position.
Both Patton (2002) and Silverman (2000) explain the benefits of choosing a
purposeful sample and Patton states that:
“Cases for study... are selected because they are 'information rich' and
illuminative, that is, they offer useful manifestations of the phenomenon
of interest” (p.40).
The universities chosen in the sample were selected in a number of ways.
Interviewees at the OU suggested universities that were currently using a
federated search tool and the literature search and Internet searching
highlighted other cases. Universities that had purchased a federated search
tool but were had not made it available to students were excluded from the
sample. Individuals at the universities were contacted by e-mail in the hope
that the response rate would be higher with personal e-mails. These
individuals were chosen because the literature or Internet search showed
that they had been involved with the implementation of the federated search
tool or were responsible for information literacy. In some cases more than
one individual at each university was contacted and for those where only one
name was known, the e-mail suggested that others be included in the
interviews. Five universities were contacted and four responded, with one
response from each university. Including more individuals from each
university may have enriched the research but the demands on staff time or
27
lack of interest may have been responsible for the limited sample. Those
who did response were interested in the research area and were in a position
to offer opinions and relate relevant experiences.
Interviews were chosen as the best way to obtain data from the UK
sample because these would provide an opportunity to explore the area in
more depth than a questionnaire. There are other benefits associated with
interviewing as a method for data collection, which are listed by Gorman and
Clayton (1997) and include the immediacy of response, the opportunity for
mutual exploration, investigation of causation and personal contact. Since
the research focused on library and information professionals' own
experiences and opinions, interviews were a more personal method of data
collection and it was hoped interviewees would be more forthcoming in
interviews than questionnaires. Face-to-face interviews were chosen rather
than telephone interviews with the expectation that there would be a greater
opportunity to build rapport.
One of the weaknesses of interviews is the risk of bias and since the
researcher becomes the research tool, remaining objective is essential. The
opinions of the researcher may have an influence on the information that the
interviewee provides. In order to avoid this, the researcher expressed no
opinions during the interviews. Interviewees may have attempted to discern
the researcher's point of view from the type of questions asked, which
highlighted some weaknesses in the interview schedule. It was also clear
that information literacy was important to the researcher because it was the
subject of the research but the interviewees all had some responsibility for
information literacy or information skills instruction so were likely to share this
view.
The interviewees were all interviewed alone either in quiet offices or
study rooms where no one else could overhear, which may have allowed the
interviewees to express themselves freely without the fear that colleagues
would hear their opinions. The interviews were all recorded with the
interviewees' agreement so that quotes could be recorded accurately and
information would not be missed. Notes were also made during the
28
interviews to highlight the most important points and whilst the researcher
made notes, quiet spaces were given where interviewees could add more to
a question if they wanted. The knowledge that interviewees were being tape-
recorded may have affected the ideas and opinions that they chose to
express but to encourage more freedom of expression, all were guaranteed
anonymity and agreed to their job titles only being stated in the dissertation.
The interviews were semi-structured to ensure all important areas were
covered but to allow new, unanticipated issues to be raised. An interview
schedule was prepared but questions were sometimes rephrased and asked
in a different order according to the experiences that interviewees were
relating and so the questions remained relevant to each university. The
interview schedule was composed of four sections:
A: Search techniques and usage for the federated search tool;
B: Relationship between tool and other library services;
C: Databases and training;
D: Information literacy.
The sections were included to cover the dissertation objectives in the
following ways:
A: Objectives 1, 2, 4, 6
B: Objectives 3, 6
C: Objectives 5, 6
D: Objectives 5, 6
The questions included in the interview schedule were composed taking into
account the issues and concerns raised during the Open University case
study and the literature review. A number of questions were asked about the
type of training provided at the university so that the context for the federated
search tool and its effect on training could be understood. There were some
weaknesses with the interview schedule including question 20 about Google,
which was a confusing question and needed more clarification and
discussion before it could be answered. Sections C and D also had a
29
tendency to overlap and may have been more successful if combined into
one section with more open-ended questions. The schedule would have
benefited from a pilot but one was not conducted due to the small number of
universities with a federated search tool and unwillingness on the part of the
researcher to risk excluding useful material.
3.2.4 E-mail Survey
An e-mail survey was used to contact those universities with a
federated search tool that were located outside the UK or were too far to
travel to. Interviews may have provided more depth of material but were
impractical in these cases. It was important to include universities outside of
the UK because experiences with a number of federated search tools could
be included, whereas all the universities interviewed were using Metalib, the
dominant tool in this country. It was also useful to hear the issues and
concerns of universities in countries with different information literacy
agendas. An e-mail survey was chosen rather than a postal survey because
responses could be received faster and there were no postal costs. One
problem with e-mail surveys is that they are impersonal, so each was e-
mailed to an individual in the university who had been identified through the
literature or Internet search as having some responsibility for information
literacy education.
The survey included three questions and a request for hyper-links to
other information that was considered relevant. The number of questions
was limited to make the survey quick to answer and to encourage a high
response rate. The survey was developed after the initial university
interviews and the issues raised during these interviews informed the design.
The questions were also designed after considering the problems that had
arisen with the interview schedule, so were constructed to avoid confusion
and were open-ended to allow respondents to add as much detail as they felt
necessary. The questions were checked by the dissertation supervisor and
altered with her advice so they were more focused on key issues. Seventeen
universities currently using a federated search tool were contacted and of
these, seven responded.
30
3.3 Results Analysis
3.3.1 Open University Case Study
The three sets of results were analysed separately and analysis took
place during July and August. For the Open University case study the notes
were transcribed into a report in the days following the interviews and were
arranged by themes that had been apparent during the interviews. Since
some selection of material for recording had taken place during the
interviews this process of analysis was less complex than for the other
methods of investigation. The members of staff interviewed at the OU
checked the report and some small adjustments were made to the
ENCompass section to ensure accuracy.
3.3.2 Interviews at UK Universities
The four interviews at universities in the UK had been taped and these
tapes were transcribed and checked for errors. The researcher undertook
the transcription and the tapes were listened to several times to ensure
familiarity with the material. Silverman recommends researchers prepare
their own transcripts and listen to tapes repeatedly in order to help data
analysis (Silverman, 2000). The transcripts were then coded with colours
representing the different objectives that were being addressed in a pertinent
section. The findings for each objective were sectioned into themes before
the final results were written. The research objectives were chosen as the
organising principle for the interview results because a great deal of data had
been collected and there was a risk that the focus of the material would not
be maintained.
3.3.3 E-mail Survey
The results from the e-mail survey were gathered and each question in
turn was analysed. The questions had been focused to aid easy analysis
and since the response was small, analysis was relatively straightforward.
31
One of the responses was excluded because the university had only been
using the federated search tool for a short period of time but this respondent
had recommended some relevant articles that were included in the literature
review.
3.4 Further Methodological Considerations
3.4.1 Ethical Issues
The research in this dissertation focused on the opinions and thoughts
of individuals and so it was necessary to consider related ethical issues. All
participants in the case study, interviews and e-mail survey consented to
their responses being used for the purposes of the dissertation and were
informed of the way in which the information would be used. The information
obtained was stored privately and appears anonymously in the dissertation.
This was important because the respondents may have expressed opinions
that were sensitive or not shared by others at their university.
3.4.2 Research Limitations
There were a number of limitations with the research. The Open
University case study was a more limited study than had originally been
anticipated because the implementation of ENCompass was at an earlier
stage than expected. If the federated search tool had been in the piloting
phase then users, academics and subject librarians from the piloted
departments could have been interviewed. The interviews at universities in
the UK were limited because all the universities were using the same
federated search tool. The results obtained may therefore reflect the
implications for information literacy training with the introduction of a
particular type of federated search tool rather than any tool. This limitation
was mainly due to one tool being dominant in the country but it would have
advantageous to have found institutions using other tools and have included
them in the study. The time and travel constraints of the dissertation also
32
prohibited traveling to universities in other countries or undertaking more than
a limited number of interviews. Including an e-mail survey to universities in
other countries was one way of trying to draw upon a wider range of
experience. Interviewing more individuals at those universities that were
included in the research may also have enhanced the study. Other library
and information services staff could have been interviewed, or the research
could have been expanded to include the issues and concerns expressed by
academic staff or students. During the interviews it became clear that a
study of the search techniques of students would have been very useful but
was not possible due to the research for the dissertation occurring during the
summer vacation.
The methods of investigation that were used could have been improved
in several ways. The interview schedule for the university interviews had a
couple of problematic questions that may have been spotted during an
interview pilot. These questions were re-phrased in later interviews in an
attempt to avoid leading or confusing questions. The schedule also covered
a large number of topics and may have benefited from focusing more on the
issues relating directly to information literacy and federated search tools.
Instead this focusing occurred during the data analysis but more in-depth
discussions may have taken place with a shorter, more focused interview
schedule.
The e-mail survey would have benefited from a larger response rate.
The response may have been larger if those universities that failed to
respond were contacted again or if more individuals were contacted at each
university. Using the information from the survey together with the interviews
helped to broaden the scope of the research and was an attempt to minimize
the limitations of each method of investigation.
33
Chapter 4: Open University Case Study
4.1 Aims of Open University Case Study
1. Investigate the current and future information literacy strategies so
these can be considered in light of the introduction of ENCompass.
2. Examine the current state of the federated search tool, ENCompass
and find out about the implementation procedure and any issues that
have arisen during implementation.
3. Highlight any concerns staff may have about the implementation of
ENCompass and the effect it may have upon students and their
information literacy development.
4.2 Case Study Evidence
Interviews
Interviews were conducted with five members of staff, three associated
with information literacy and two with the implementation of ENCompass.
The interviews took place in the work environment of the interviewees.
Documents presented during the interviews
Library and Learning Resources Centre, OU. Encompass Overview.
Ramsden, A. (2004) Federated Searching and Encompass.
(Presentation slides handout for Oxford trainee librarians visit)
Other documents consulted
Open University (2004). Step Forward [Online]. Milton Keynes: OU.
http://www3.open.ac.uk/stepforward [Accessed 10 June 2004].
Parker, J. (2003). “Putting the Pieces Together: Information Literacy at
the Open University”. Library Management [Online], 24 (4/5).
http://www.emeraldlibrary.com [Accessed 10 June 2004].
34
Demonstrations
Demonstrations of ENCompass and MyOpenLibrary were given during
the interviews. An example of search data from searches performed on
ENCompass was also shown, but since the tool is not available for general
use, this data cannot be used to understand the kind of searches users
perform.
4.3 Open University Background
The Open University is a unique university in the UK with over 210,000
students studying over 450 courses by distance learning. Students are
taught either online or through printed course packs and have the support of
a personal tutor. There are 13 regional centres and also study centres within
the regions. Students receive most of the materials that they need but have
access to electronic resources through the OU library website and
arrangements are made so students can use local libraries. Library staff are
responsible for certain faculties and provide services for them.
4.4 Information Literacy at the Open University
The OU established an Information Literacy Unit in 2002, which
provides support and training in a variety of different ways. Different
methods are used in an attempt to reach as large an audience as possible,
including students and academics. Since the students are not on campus, it
is difficult to ensure that they obtain information literacy skills and knowledge
but the unit makes use of printed and online materials, with some training in
the regional centres.
35
4.4.1 Printed guides
Before 1996 there was limited support for students and the only printed
information available was in the form of printed guides for certain subjects.
The problem with these guides was that they became out of date very
quickly.
4.4.2 SAFARI: Skills in Accessing, Finding and Reviewing Information
SAFARI is a web-based, generic information literacy package that was
launched at the end of 2001 to staff and in 2002 to students. SAFARI can be
recommended in courses or actually embedded into them and it is hoped that
more courses will have SAFARI embedded. The course can be worked
through at a student's own pace and in the order they choose. The
information literacy unit is currently making SAFARI into learning objects in
an attempt to overcome technical problems and so it can be used in other
materials more easily. The unit is also currently working on an electronic
evaluation form for SAFARI.
4.4.3 MOSAIC: Making Sense of Information in the Connected Age
MOSAIC is a level 1, credit-bearing module hosted by the Faculty of
Education and Language Studies and authored by staff at the Information
Literacy Unit in conjunction with academics. The course is a mixture of print
and web-based materials and the student helpdesk, the library’s learner
support service and study advisers provide support for the module. The
module is assessed by a portfolio designed to test the process of learning
information literacy. The unit has received positive feedback from students
who have completed the course, but staff admit that students who choose the
course have paid to do so and have actively decided to develop these skills.
The unit has recently undertaken a tutor evaluation of MOSAIC.
36
4.4.4 Training for academics
Face-to-face training has been provided for academics since 1996 but
in the past two years there has been a focus on training academics as part of
a human resources project. One aspect of this has been the creation of
resource banks available on the website with links to relevant sections of
SAFARI. A second includes PowerPoint presentations with scripts to
download and bite size chunks of learning that academics can use. These
PowerPoint presentations have been taken from normal training sessions.
The staff are also working on a toolkit for academics about using the library,
including basic, introductory information. The toolkit will include materials
and information about how these can be used by tutors. It is designed to
'help tutors cope' since they may not have time to develop their own skills
and the toolkit will give them material ready to present to students.
4.4.5 Regional Training
Training is also provided in the regional centres in the form of generic
courses. These courses are for staff and students and are provided by
learner support staff.
4.4.6 Future Projects
The Information Literacy Unit is working on a number of projects
including designing a diagnostic test of information literacy knowledge. This
test will use a mixture of self-assessment and proper testing and will be
available on the web. The test will indicate to students where their
weaknesses lie, then direct them to materials to help them improve their
skills. Future projects may include developing training materials for
ENCompass that can be accessed when users perform searches. The staff
do not know how ENCompass may affect the training they already provide.
The other projects that the unit is working on are focused on personal
knowledge management.
37
4.5 Implementing the Federated Search Tool, ENCompass
4.5.1 Motivation for introducing ENCompass
The main reason the OU decided to implement the federated search
tool, ENCompass is that the library subscribed to a large number of
databases, which were being under-used. The process of using databases
needed to be made simpler for students by introducing a single search of
multiple databases and full-text resources. This will lead users to combined
results on their topic and greater use of resources. Subject librarians had
created lists of databases but each database would need to be searched
individually by the student and authentication was also a problem, as some
databases required use of a university password and some required Athens
passwords. Other reasons for choosing ENCompass included the simpler
search interface and the ability for users to link to full-text from a citation
produced by a bibliographic database. Endeavor provides an Open-URL
resolver called LinkFinderPlus for this purpose. Within the tool there is also
support for personalisation and customisation, allowing users to save search
results, view their search history and select their favourite databases for
searching. One of the reasons for selecting ENCompass rather than another
federated search tool was that it is supplied by Endeavor, who provide the
OU's library management system, Voyager. ENCompass also has an extra
module which can handle local digital collections.
4.5.2 Intended Audience
One of the issues that has arisen during the implementation of
ENCompass is deciding who the target audience of the tool should be. The
subject librarians are not sure whether the tool will be better suited to staff or
students. The tool may be useful for staff since they could identify materials
that can then be integrated into their courses. Some subject specialists think
that researchers would prefer to search in the original interfaces of databases
and there is a view that ENCompass is not really designed for complex
38
searches. Whether the tool will more useful for students or staff has yet to be
proved, but the plan is to make the tool available to staff and researchers first
and this should take place in October 2004. This will be followed by a soft
launch for students.
4.5.3 Technical Issues
There are some technical issues associated with the implementation of
ENCompass. Encompass searches databases which use the Z39.50
networked retrieval protocol (e.g. Academic Search Premier, Art Abstracts),
an XML gateway (LexisNexis, Science Direct), or Endeavor develop ‘http
connectors’ for specified databases. Unfortunately, not all databases can be
cross-searched and other ways will need to be found to promote these.
Since Endeavor is an US company, those databases that are cross-
searchable tend to have a US focus. It is hoped that using ENCompass to
promote usage of databases in general will help raise awareness other
resources. In June 2004, 42 of the 130 databases the OU subscribes to
were cross-searchable but this figure should rise to 70 by the end of the year.
Another technical problem is with those databases that are searched via the
http protocol or screen-scraping. The interfaces of databases may change,
in which case the connectors from ENCompass will not work until
adjustments have been made. Finally, it is unclear whether the results
produced with an ENCompass search will be the most relevant since the
protocols used do not control this. Currently the search facility has been set
so that a maximum of 100 results can be obtained from any database but
these may not be the most relevant results.
4.5.4 Relation to Other Services
MyOpenLibrary is a tool that highlights relevant resources chosen by
course designers for certain subjects and allows users to save a list of their
favourite resources. It is a personalised interface and the plan is to make
39
ENCompass part of MyOpenLibrary so the tool will appear as one of the
resources available. The relationship between ENCompass and the library
website was an area of discussion. The decision was made to make
ENCompass part of the website, with an OU header and links to other parts
of the website. Whether the need for subject web pages will be eliminated
with the introduction of ENCompass has not been decided.
4.5.5 Planned training
At this stage in the implementation process, the project team has
devised a quick guide to using ENCompass, which is based on a federated
search tool guide from another university. Endeavor actually produces a web
manual but this has not been seen as helpful for users. Training has been
provided for library staff but other training has not been planned and the
issue of whether training should be necessary at all was raised during the
interviews, since these tools are supposed to be easy to use.
4.5.6 Concerns About Information Literacy and Federated Search Tools
A number of concerns and issues were raised during the interviews that
relate to information literacy and the effect of federated search tools:
The way that users work will change with the use of tools such as
ENCompass and so the way that information literacy is taught will
need to change as a result. One possible change is that the teaching
role will be more of a 'guide on the side' rather than a 'sage on the
stage'.
Teaching in the future will be more about understanding the principles
than the process.
Will users care about how the federated search tool works?
40
There is an issue about teaching users to understand the difference
between a 'quick and dirty' search and one that is more in-depth.
There is an issue about the level of teaching that students have, is the
aim to produce mini-librarians?
There is a challenge in explaining to users the difference between a
websearch engine and what ENCompass can do.
Having heard experiences from other universities, it is expected that
usage of databases will increase.
4.6 Issues Arising from the Open University Case Study
The Open University has developed a number of ways of helping
students and academics to become information literate individuals. If
ENCompass has an impact on the way that individuals search for information
and users’ expectations, then the impact on information literacy strategies
could be significant. The issues raised during the interviews seem to centre
on the complexity of searching performed and whether ENCompass is
suitable for more complex searches and in-depth research. Also, the thought
that users apply to their searches seems to be important: ensuring that they
understand what they are searching, the limitations that this kind of tool may
have and where use of it is appropriate. If indeed the tool requires no guide
and is instinctive to use, will users search without planning a search strategy
and could they miss out on useful information as a result? The staff
interviewed at the OU appeared to have mixed expectations of ENCompass
and the effect it could have. If the tool encouraged more use of databases
then it would be deemed to have a positive effect but it could also cause
other non-cross-searchable resources to be neglected. There seems to be a
question about the balance between raising awareness of resources and
limiting the learning experience through simple searching. This case study
raised a number of issues to be explored in interviews with staff at
universities already using federated search tools.
41
Chapter 5: Results of University Interviews
This chapter explores the issues and concerns regarding information
literacy and the introduction of federated search tools that were raised during
interviews with librarians at universities in the UK currently using such a tool.
It begins by describing briefly the tool that is the subject of the interviews
before addressing the issues in relation to the dissertation objectives. The
ideas expressed are personal and belong to the librarians interviewed. Four
universities were included in the study and the job title of each interviewee
has been included in an attempt to understand some differences in
perspective.
University A: Academic Services Manager
University B: Liaison Librarian
University C: Electronic Resources Librarian
University D: Subject Librarian.
5.1 Metalib
The four universities where interviews took place have all implemented
and been using the federated search tool, Metalib for some time. Metalib is
supplied Ex Libris, a company which also supplies library management
systems and it can be used to search across a number of subscription
databases simultaneously or alternatively to connect to the native interface of
these databases. This software can also be used in conjunction with SFX,
an OpenURL-compliant link server that allows users to connect directly with
the full-text of articles when the citation is found from a citation database.
Users of Metalib normally login to a homepage that can take a number of
forms depending on the version in use and the customisation that has taken
place locally. This home page normally offers different searching options
(quick search, advanced search) and can provide links to personalised
features such as saved results and a list of favourite databases.
42
5.2 Objective 1
Whether the tool has or is perceived to have had an effect on
the way that users search for information and the resources
that they use.
5.2.1 Increased Interest and Usage of Databases
The interviewees were all asked about the reasons that a federated
search tool had been implemented at their university. One (University A)
spoke explicitly about the under-use of databases and the need to make
them easier to search, rather than users needing to learn different interfaces.
The other three all described the need to alter the way that resources were
organised and/or accessed in order to make it easier for users to find what
was needed. One of the main motivations for introducing a federated search
tool in these cases was the need to make resources easier to access, so
users would take more advantage of them, “basically, we were trying to take
away barriers” (University A).
One way to measure the success of these tools is to evaluate whether
or not they have had an effect on the usage of databases. All four
universities have experienced an increase in the use of databases since the
introduction of the federated search tool, with usage statistics from database
suppliers indicating this increase. At University A, this increase has been
hundreds of percent for some databases and one as much as 6000%. The
interviewee at University C admits that it is difficult to know how much the
increase is due to the changing information environment and users becoming
more familiar with electronic resources.
The interviewees were also asked about the kind of enquiries that are
received in the library and these also indicate users' interest in using the
federated search tool, Metalib. At University A the interviewee believes that
more questions are asked about Metalib than were asked about individual
databases in the past but explains that this could be partly due to the library
43
staff being better at recognising queries about Metalib than they did about
individual databases. The interviewee does describe often seeing users
using Metalib in the library and thinks, “we get more queries because they
are doing more searching”. At University C, there appears to be more
interest in using electronic resources with enquiries about Metalib and more
users attending information skills drop-in sessions. These sessions were
running before the introduction of Metalib now but have a Metalib element.
5.2.2 Search Techniques
Of the four universities examined, only University A has data about the
way that users are searching Metalib. The data shows that the quality of
searching varies, with some searches showing use of information skills such
as combining keywords and choosing the appropriate databases for a search
topic, whereas “other bits just make your heart sink because you realise that
they have really just typed in the whole of their essay title”. One of the
benefits of a federated search tool is that it aids the selection of appropriate
databases and the interviewee at University A believes that the long A-Z lists
of databases that were used previously may have discouraged users from
searching. With Metalib the users can perform a federated search on several
databases simultaneously in order to find which is the most pertinent
database for a particular search. Users are still searching the native
interfaces of databases, but it may be that some are conducting a Metalib
search first to see which databases to search.
Although University D has not conducted a formal survey into the
searching techniques of users, the interviewee described experiences of
assisting students in searching, “I do know that whenever I say to students,
you type it in, they type in all the 'ofs' and 'ands' ... so I don't think they do
search particularly well”. This interviewee also found that students who come
for help have not thought of alternative search terms. Since the interviewee
only sees the students when they are learning to search or when they need
assistance, it is impossible to know how the majority searches after they
have had some instruction.
44
5.2.3 Use of Materials
The increase in database use has been highlighted but the interviewees
were also asked about the effect of the federated search tool on use of print
materials. None of the interviewees knew if general print use at their
universities had altered as a result and at University B vast amounts of books
and journals are still circulating. At University D, the interviewee had noticed
a change in material use in that users are requesting more items that are not
held in the library. The interviewee also thinks that users are making more
use of electronic indexing and abstracting services with printed indexes and
abstracts receiving little or no use. Whether the use of different resources
and materials has had an effect on the work that students produce is an area
that the interviewee at University A plans to investigate in the future.
5.3 Objective 2
What the opinions of librarians are regarding the way that the
tool should be used and the role that they think it should play
in users' research
5.3.1 Search Techniques
The interviewees were asked their views about searching and using the
federated search tool, Metalib. At University A, the interviewee does not
believe there is a right or wrong way to search Metalib, as long as users
manage to find a percentage of what they need. The techniques that users
are taught to search Metalib are the same as for any database and Metalib
has the ability to run searches using Boolean logic, truncation and wildcards,
although phrase-searching is harder. The interviewee at University B
responded similarly explaining that the same ideas and strategies are taught
for searching Metalib as for other databases and library staff encourage
users to think about abbreviations, synonyms, delimiters and generally
planning a search strategy. The interviewee at University D highlighted some
of the limitations in searching using Metalib since the search mechanism is
45
not as refined in the individual databases and there are no descriptors or
thesaurus terms. At University D, the interviewee explained that author
searches are difficult because different databases have different standards
for presenting names. The nature and limitations of a federated search tool
such as Metalib have led librarians to consider the role that it should play in
users' research and the different ways in which it can be used. Some of
these were described by the interviewees and will be examined in turn.
5.3.2 Resource Discovery
One of the reasons for implementing a federated search tool is that it
can organise resources by subject and each individual institution has control
over the subject groupings that are set up when the tool is configured. The
tool can therefore be used to find the relevant resources for a particular
subject. This type of resource discovery was seen as a benefit by all the
interviewees. Whether Metalib should be used for more than resource
discovery by more advanced users such as academics and postgraduates is
an issue that arose during some of the interviews. At University A, the
interviewee explained how at first some of the academic librarians thought
that Metalib was really a tool for undergraduates and were worried when the
tool became popular with academics, “because they feel academics and
researchers shouldn't be using Metalib apart from as a discovery tool”. The
interviewee at University D thinks that Metalib is useful for highlighting
resources to all users but would expect postgraduates to click straight
through to native database in order to search. Federated search tools can
enhance resource discovery in a way that subject lists of resources on web-
pages cannot because users can perform a federated search across a
number of databases in order to find the most relevant for a particular search.
This search can then be followed by a more comprehensive search in the
native interface. This kind of use was recommended by the interviewees at
Universities A, C and D.
46
5.3.3 Federated Searching
The interviewee at University C described another use for the federated
searching function that has become popular at the university. This is the use
of Metalib to clarify partial references when users have been given only
limited details about an item. Several databases can be searched
simultaneously in the expectation that one will have a complete reference.
This has been particularly useful for enquiry desk staff dealing with queries.
This interviewee had thought when Metalib was introduced that some groups
of users would be sceptical about federated searching, but was surprised to
find that they liked it. This interviewee thinks that federated searching is
popular because
“it's a way of very quickly trying to find some information and actually people
don't or aren't often looking for absolutely everything, they're looking for some
relevant information that are going to back up the work that they are
doing”(University C).
This interviewee does not recommend Metalib for systematic reviews
however, due to the searching limitations.
5.3.4 Levels of Engagement
At University C, the interviewee also sees Metalib as functioning on
different levels, with users engaging at a level appropriate to them and their
needs. Metalib includes advanced functions such as saving and repeating
searches and at University C these have been popular amongst
postgraduate research students. The interviewee at University A also
expressed the idea that the tool is useful to everybody but this interviewee
thought the tool’s level of usefulness depends upon the individual searches
performed by users. At University C, the group of users who the interviewee
sees as benefiting least from Metalib are first and second year
undergraduates because they have less need to search databases. This
interviewee thinks that the best way to reach this group of users may be by
47
linking reading-lists to Metalib. Finally, this interviewee implies librarians
should be cautious about the way that they promote this kind of tool and goes
on to say, “I think it's been slightly over-hyped and I think if you sell it right,
and you say why the specific reasons are for using it, it's a very, very useful
tool”.
5.4 Objective 3
The relationship that the tool has to other library services
such as web-pages, the OPAC and Virtual Learning
Environments
5.4.1 Library Web-pages All four interviewees described changes that had occurred to the library
web-pages as a result of the introduction of Metalib. The library web-pages
at each university had included subject listings and A-Z listings of databases.
All have removed the subject listings and only University A has retained the
A-Z list due to the request of some academics. In these cases, the federated
search tool has removed the need for these web-pages and has made it
easier to organise resources by subject. One area that Metalib has failed to
address adequately for Universities A and D is subject access to electronic
journals. University A has therefore retained its subject list of electronic
journals on its library web page and at University D the electronic journals are
in the library OPAC where they can be subject searched. The new version of
Metalib should address this problem.
5.4.2 OPAC: Online Public Access Catalogue
The library catalogue can be included as one of the resources listed and
searchable within a federated search tool. All four universities have included
the OPAC in Metalib although both the interviewees at universities A and B
think it is better to search the OPAC directly because Metalib fails to provide
the class mark (University A) and the OPAC is easier for undergraduates to
use (University B). The interviewee at University D thinks users do not
48
access the OPAC much through Metalib but go to it directly. The benefit of
including the OPAC for this interviewee was that it could be grouped together
with other library catalogues in the area.
5.4.3 Other Library Services
The interviewees described various ways in which integration is planned
or had been achieved between Metalib and other services that the library
provides. At University A, bibliographic management software was
introduced at a similar time to Metalib and Metalib can send records to this
software once searches have been performed. This has been very popular
with users, some of whom may not realise the distinction between the two
services. At University D the student portal can be used to access Metalib
and it is hoped that in the future the portal will include an expert wizard that
can guide students to the library service that they require by assessing their
needs with a series of questions. This interviewee described how there was
a need to make services more user-focused although this was not a
response to the introduction of Metalib.
At University C there are a number of areas in which the interviewee
hoped there would be future integration with Metalib. The first is integration
with electronic reading lists, particularly with SFX so that items can be linked
to directly even if the URL is altered. The reading list would link to SFX
rather than deep-linking to the item itself. This interviewee hopes that in the
future it may be possible to integrate Metalib into Blackboard, the virtual
learning environment so that users could perform Metalib searches when
they are within Blackboard. Finally, University C is planning to introduce a
managed learning environment encompassing teaching, information, the
OPAC and student records and the interviewee thinks that Metalib would be
a part of this. This interviewee believes that integration will affect the way
that users access Metalib in next few years and that “going in via Metalib's
front-end is not necessarily going to be the most likely way they'll get in”.
49
5.5 Objective 4
How easy the tool is to use and whether training is seen as
necessary for those who use it
The interviewees were all asked about Metalib and how easy it is to
use. All four agreed that there were some problems with the interface in the
version they were using at the time. The interviewee at University D
described how the screen was too cluttered, and at University B the
interviewee thought that there were too may places to search. In the version
in use in July 2004, the interface offers a search option where the user can
search for a particular resource. At University A, the search reports showed
that a small percentage of users were entering their actual search topic in
this search box rather than the name of a resource and the interviewee's
reaction was “it means that it is not as easy to use as we thought it was,
which has been slightly disappointing”. Some of these usability issues
should be resolved with the new version of Metalib, version 3 which had been
installed at two of the universities in August 2004. The interviewees at both
Universities A and C thought that if users spent some time orientating
themselves with the tool and experimenting with it, most would be able to
search and at University A the interviewee believes that if a user can use a
database, they can use Metalib.
At all the universities enquiry desk staff are receiving queries about
Metalib which shows both that users are attempting to make use of it and
also that some need guidance. At University B the interviewee thinks these
queries are more frequently about how to access an article once a search
has been performed rather than how to make the initial search. All the
universities provide some form of training or guidance in how to use Metalib
and at University D this is used as an opportunity to explain the workings of
each section of the screen in an attempt to address the confusion of the
interface. This interviewee notes that for users accessing the tool from off-
campus there can be further confusion because some of the resources can
only be accessed on-campus. From the interviews it was clear that for some
users, training in using Metalib is necessary.
50
5.6 Objective 5
How information literacy training is provided in the libraries
and whether it has changed with the introduction of the tool
5.6.1 University A
Information literacy training, or information skills as it is called locally,
takes a number of forms at University A. Firstly, academic librarians provide
customised training for undergraduates and masters students, which is
embedded into modules at the request of academic staff. The content of the
training will be negotiated with lecturers and the sessions will normally last
one or two hours. At University A the staff are constructing competency
levels for students in different years and training is staggered so students
learn what they need for the year in which they are studying. The content of
the training focuses around the Big 6 Skills model and staff try to relate the
content to the curriculum. Some of the students will have assessment
related to the training, for example constructing a bibliography. There is a
separate programme for PHD students and academics can attend sessions
over the summer. Not all departments will ask for customised training and the
library also runs drop-in sessions that are either on generic topics or for
specific subjects. These sessions are mainly aimed at researchers and there
are sessions about particular databases. The interviewee at University A
believes that students should be taught what they need at the time of need
and sees online training as a way to do this. There are a number of online
tutorials for databases, Metalib and other library services.
When Metalib was introduced, University A ran a number of sessions
about the new tool aimed at academic staff, researchers and undergraduate
students in their second and third years. Since then Metalib has been
integrated into other sessions and is used as a way to access the databases.
The online training for individual databases explains the different ways that
databases can be accessed, including through Metalib. In customised
training or drop-in sessions users will be shown how to search Metalib and if
appropriate they will also be shown how to search the native interface of the
51
database. Users are taught the same search techniques as they were before
the introduction of Metalib and they still learn about evaluation and choosing
the right results, which the interviewee explained is even more important with
Metalib since users are finding more results. The tool has altered sessions in
that less time is devoted to explaining how to select the right database and
instead time is spent discussing the different number of hits that will come
back from each database during a federated search and the reasons for this.
The interviewee felt this made it easier for users to understand the different
content that databases contain.
5.6.2 University B
At University B there is also a system of departmental training that will
vary in each department and drop-in sessions on a range of topics. There is
also an information retrieval module offered to all students as part of a basic
IT course, which is currently being revised. Since its introduction, Metalib
has been included in all these forms of training and the interviewee thinks
that it has been helpful since users only need to be directed to one place.
Also, much of the training takes place at the beginning of term when students
have other commitments and the interviewee feels “it's nice to have them
doing something quite easy that they understand”. Before the introduction of
Metalib, users were trained in the use of databases and they are still shown
relevant databases for their subject. The only difference is that now Metalib
is used as a way to access the databases and users are given the option to
link to and search the native interface or perform a federated search.
Metalib has not removed the need to teach search strategies and
training for undergraduates explains how to find different items on a reading
list along with strategies for topic searching using databases. The training for
postgraduate students is also being changed and a graduate research skills
programme will be introduced in the new academic year, including a section
on information retrieval. The interviewee thinks that Metalib is likely to be a
big feature in the programme and that the opportunity will be used to show
postgraduates the extra functionality that the tool possesses.
52
5.6.3 University C
At University C, all the undergraduates will have some kind of library
induction which will cover how to use the library catalogue and now also how
to use Metalib. Most of the students, mainly second, third years and
postgraduates will have a information skills session with a subject librarian as
part of their course where the librarian will try to integrate the content into the
curriculum. These sessions may take the form of a lecture, or also include a
practical session. The sessions will vary according to the librarian who is
teaching but the interviewee's sessions would cover core databases relevant
for the subject, search strategies for databases, refining searches and
actually accessing the material. These sessions will not address critical
thinking skills since it is assumed these are included in the curriculum. Also
not all the librarians will teach the constructing of a bibliography due to time
limitations. Reference librarians also offer optional drop-in sessions
throughout the year, which are available for all users. There are three
sessions currently covering an introduction the library, finding journals and a
Metalib session, although the latter two may merge in the future. There is
some online material that can be used as a quick guide to aid reference staff
but these guides are not as comprehensive as the actual training sessions.
When Metalib was introduced at University C it was not possible to
provide special training for all users, so sessions were provided for academic
staff and research postgraduates to experiment with the new tool. There are
two sessions, an introduction and a more advanced session that are run
weekly throughout the year. The more advanced session has started to
include information about integrating Metalib and SFX into Blackboard sites
and web-pages. Before the introduction of Metalib there were sessions for
academic staff and postgraduates but they would have been about specific
databases. To promote Metalib to other users, e-mails and leaflets were
used and Metalib is now included in the subject training. The interviewee
thinks that Metalib has helped information skills training because materials
are more visible and staff can easily point users to the relevant databases for
their subject area. For this interviewee, the introduction of Metalib has not
removed the need for information skills training but teaching is less about
53
specific databases and focuses more on generic skills, “I think increasingly
students need the skills that are more generic” so that users can use any
database. At University C there are also staff working on an information
skills course on Blackboard. There is currently a course to support the
Metalib training for academic staff and research postgraduates but the new
course will be for undergraduates and is influenced by some of the
information skills websites available at other universities.
5.6.4 University D
Information skills training at University D primarily takes place by
subject librarians within departments. There have been drop-in sessions
about specific databases, electronic journals and the library OPAC but these
have not been very well attended. Drop-in sessions in the new academic
year will continue but will most likely demonstrate Metalib and a range of
resources. Currently there are no purely Metalib sessions but Metalib is
explored during the information skills training in the departments. At
University D Metalib has been configured so that when a user logs-in he or
she is shown key resources that are relevant for their subject area. This is to
encourage the users to start working with resources straight away and users
are shown how they can add to this personalised list. The training is also
used as an opportunity to explain to users the difference between the
different types of databases, which cannot be indicated in the interface.
During information skills sessions, users will learn about search
strategies, writing up and citing references and will explore Metalib together
with the library OPAC and Internet searching. The focus of training has
changed since the introduction of Metalib as previously a couple of
contrasting databases would have been demonstrated and now time is
devoted to demonstrating Metalib. Less time is spent talking and more time
demonstrating which the interviewee feels is necessary, “I think you need the
demonstrations because of the complexity of it”. It is also possible to connect
to the full-text of articles with SFX. Academics will sometimes have training
in the departments but will normally contact the library for assistance. For all
54
users there is a Metalib tutorial on the library website which is mentioned
briefly during training sessions and there are also printed guides in the
library.
5.7 Objective 6
If there are other perceived benefits and disadvantages of
using such a tool, especially with regard to the development
of information literacy skills in students
5.7.1 Enquiries
One of the benefits of the introducing the federated search tool Metalib
for some of the interviewees was that they believed it had become easier for
library staff to deal with the enquiries that they received. Users can be
directed to one place when they need to find information on a topic and
library staff “only have to show them the Metalib interface, whereas prior to
that they often had to know lots of different interfaces and they'd struggle”
(University A). The interviewee at University B explained that before staff
could use Metalib, it could be difficult to navigate to a specific database but
now it is much quicker and easy to find resources for users.
5.7.2 Promotion and Raising Awareness
Another perceived benefit of introducing a federated search tool and
one of the main motivations for universities that do so, is that it can help to
raise awareness of the electronic resources that a library possesses. At
University B the interviewee feels that “one of the key things at the moment is
taking that step of making thing a lot more accessible”. At University C the
interviewee also spoke about the simplified process for accessing and using
databases, which encourages users to do so. In this interviewee’s opinion it
is important that users exploit resources, “I think I'd rather than they were
engaging at least shallowly with some of the databases we've spent money
on, than going straight to Google and ignoring us altogether”.
55
Encouraging academics to use Metalib was perceived to have benefits
because they would promote the tool to their students. At University A,
library staff have had more people approach them to ask about resources
because academics had recommended to the tool to them. At University C it
was hoped that by running sessions for academics and research
postgraduate students about Metalib, not only would these users benefit but
they would also recommend the tool to others. Although the interviewees
described positive reactions to Metalib and the role it could play in users
studies and work there has also been some resistance. At University B the
interviewee admitted that some academics feel that the library is constantly
changing and it is difficult for them to keep up with these changes. The
interviewee felt that this was a difficult issue because the library wants to
improve the services that it offers but that it may be causing some resistance
as it does so.
5.7.3 Databases
One of the problems with Metalib that was mentioned during two of the
interviews was that it does not indicate the different types of databases that
can be cross-searched. The databases that are included could be library
OPACs, citation indexes or electronic gateways and the interviewee at
University D explained how different search techniques would be needed to
search them effectively. At University C the interviewee believed that this
problem could potentially cause users to ignore certain databases because
they do not produce the desired results. A federated search of a library
OPAC and a citation index may produce very small results for the OPAC,
which could dissuade users from making full use of the OPAC. To this
interviewee, federated searching is appropriate when the same types of
databases are being searched. This interview also believes that “user
education is really important and you need to help people to understand the
difference between different types of databases” (University C).
56
5.7.4 Google
The creation of federated search tools has been seen by some as a
response to Google and the central role that it now plays in many users
information seeking (Luther, 2003; Miller, 2004; Fryer, 2004). One of the
interviewees admitted that by introducing Metalib, the university was hoping
to compete with Google, which is where students tend to go first to search for
information. Google has changed the way that users search and some of the
interviewees mentioned how this had affected the way students search
databases by expecting that results would be produced if a whole essay title
was entered into the search box (Universities A, D). Whether federated
search tools are an attractive alternative to Google was an issue raised in the
interviews. The interviewees at both Universities A and C explained that
Google is getting better at selecting more relevant materials. At University A,
the interviewee promotes Metalib by explaining to students that they may find
quality material through Google but that they know the material produced
through the databases has quality. Training users to understand the
difference between searching the Internet and a tool such as Metalib seems
to be necessary but this still may not be enough to convince users to choose
academic resources rather than Google. One of the interviewees felt,
“that we have not grasped as librarians the pace of the change and people like
Google are ahead of us and we're still on the whole on the back foot of really
embracing this technology and what's happening out there”.
This interviewee goes on to say that whilst Metalib is helping, there is still a
risk that Google will remain dominant and that “we need to think very
carefully about what we're presenting and making sure it's as appealing as
what's there with Google”.
This chapter has described the results of the university interviews in
relation to the dissertation objectives. The results of the e-mail survey will be
examined in the next chapter before a summary and discussion of all the
results obtained through the various methods of investigation.
57
Chapter 6: Results of E-mail Survey
An e-mail survey was sent a member of library staff responsible for
information literacy at seventeen universities worldwide, each of which is
using one of a number of different federated search tools. Seven of these
universities responded, four from the US, two from Australia and one from
the UK. The responses that were received were from universities using one
of four different federated search tools: Zportal, Metalib, ENCompass and
MuseGlobal. The survey asked three questions and this chapter examines
the answers to each question in turn before a wider discussion of the issues
raised from all the results in the following chapter.
6.1 Changes in Information Literacy Training
Seven responses were received to the e-mail survey but one of these
universities (Response 6) was at an early stage in the launch of their
federated search tool, Metalib and was not in a position to gauge how the
tool's implementation may affect the university's information literacy
programme. Of the six other responses, three thought that the information
literacy training provided had not changed since the introduction of their
federated search tool. Two of these universities are using Zportal and both
explained that the tool was not working well enough to be promoted to users:
“Zportal is not reliable enough to produce accurate and full
search results from every single database every single time.”
(Response 1)
“Most librarians think it is not functional because of the way it
returns results and because we do not have good open URL
linking in place yet.” (Response 4)
One of these universities (Response 4) does not publicise the tool and the
respondent thought that librarians were not instructing users in how to use it.
At the other university (Response 1) librarians may make students aware of
58
the tool, informing them of the strengths and limitations but it is not
recommended as a reliable research tool. Instead librarians promote the
original databases, which may be included in Zportal but will not produce the
same results if searched using the federated search tool. Response 7 came
from another university where information literacy training had not changed
for similar reasons. This university is using MuseSearch, a tool that
produces and displays results in a way the respondent considers inadequate.
At this university library staff continue to teach users how to use the original
databases and the library OPAC. This respondent described another reason
for not teaching users about this tool:
“I also think that librarians (myself included) are hesitant to tell students
to use something that searches across resources because we are also
trying to make the students information literate and to help them learn
how to distinguish one type of resource from another.” (Response 7)
The respondent goes on to say that he or she felt librarians did not know how
to teach this competency using a federated search tool.
Of the three responses that indicated a change in information literacy
training due to the introduction of a federated search tool, two of these
described the change as teaching users they can choose to search the
federated search tool or the native interface of databases and the training
explains how to do both (Responses 2, 3). Response 2 came from a
university using ENCompass and the respondent felt that the version of the
tool in use was not robust enough, so whilst users are taught about the tool,
the focus is still on the native interfaces of databases.
Response 5 came from a university that had introduced a programme of
training for their federated search tool, Metalib. This training programme had
been evaluated after a year and then altered to address the issues raised
from student feedback. The original training had been composed of two
types of hands-on training sessions: a generic session introducing the tool to
users and subject specific sessions. The desired outcome of the generic
session in terms of information literacy competencies was that users would
59
be able to find information using a variety of resources through the tool. The
subject specific sessions had aims including users being able to find
information using the tool and being able to identify specific subject
resources. These sessions were reviewed and student feedback received.
Some of the issues that arose were that: students did not have an awareness
and knowledge of information resources, the tool was less useful for some
subject areas (including law and medicine), worked examples needed to be
prepared for training sessions because the tool may not always work
effectively and the complexity and power of the tool had not been fully
realised. This university altered its training so that in the next academic year,
new sessions were introduced and these new sessions took place before the
users attended the Metalib sessions. These new sessions were composed
of an introductory session about search strategies and some information
resources training which highlighted appropriate databases. The respondent
claimed the new strategy has been more successful but that students were
still confused with the amount of information and resources available and feel
that they may not be making the most effective use of the tool. This
university has also developed an online tutorial, which explains how to
conduct both quick and advanced searches. It also includes a guide to using
the more advanced, personalised features of Metalib.
6.2 Changes in Users’ Search Behaviour
The responses to the e-mail survey varied as to whether the librarians
thought their university's federated search tool had altered the way that users
searched. Responses 1 and 7 both suggested that the tools had not had an
impact. Response 1 explains that this is probably because the tool is not
being used extensively and this respondent thinks that it is web search
engines that have really impacted upon search behaviour and the research
tools that users choose. This respondent believes that federated search
tools are
” a response to web search engines and an attempt to make library
database information and research content available in a similarly
instantaneous and seamless manner”. (Response 1)
60
Response 7 came from a librarian who thought that users are still searching
in the same way and describes how users “want to find results in the quickest
possible manner and some will take whatever result they get first”. This
respondent observes that users are impatient at having to wait for results,
especially as searching more than one database takes longer and that they
complain when a poor search string fails to retrieve relevant results.
Two of the responses indicated that search behaviour has been altered
by the introduction of a federated search tool. One (Response 4) found that
there was an increase in the number of searches conducted across
databases due to the federated searching facility. The other (Response 2), is
of the opinion that students on lower-level courses use federated searching
to locate several articles they can cite in their work without having to
undertake in-depth research. The experience of this respondent is that
academics and postgraduate students prefer to search the native interfaces
of the databases but admits this opinion is based upon anecdotal evidence.
One respondent (Response 5) is aware that users are searching using the
tool due to web-page statistics and comments from students but does not
know how they are using it or how relevant their results are. This university
is planning to conduct focus groups to find out about students' searching
habits and observe their search behaviour. This respondent also thinks that
students from different disciplines will use the tool differently.
6.3 Possible Changes to Library Services and Training in the
Future
There were a range of ideas from librarians using federated search tools
as to how they think these tools will affect the way libraries provide services
and training in the future. One response (Response 2) was that the tools
would not affect services and training, only create more good will in users
who find it easier to search. One library (Response 4) has plans to make the
tool the homepage for the library, although the respondent thought this would
be some time away. This respondent believes that a more immediate need
61
is for more training to show users how to use the tool effectively. Another
response (Response 7) came from a librarian who felt that librarians at his or
her university have resisted promoting federated search tools and that they
will only begin to change if forced to do so. If change does occur, it likely to
be in the form of short sessions introduced about how to search the tool, with
the individual databases no longer being taught. This respondent also noted
the lack of professional discussion about teaching users how to use
federated search tools.
Those respondents who described the possible changes to training in
the future included one (Response 1) who thought that there would be less
need to make distinctions between different types of databases and less
need to know the specific research tools for a particular discipline. This
respondent thinks this change will only occur when the tools became more
reliable. Response 3 came from a librarian, who suggested,
“A possible change is a clearer split between simple searching using
the Metalib cross-search and detailed searches using the native
interfaces.”
The response from one university (Response 5) indicated a number of
potential changes to library services and training in the future with both
becoming more individualised and targeted at specific disciplines. Training
would also have short, sharp learning strategies and outcomes and will be
delivered anytime and at the point of need. This respondent also believes
there will be greater integration between the federated search tool and the
campus online learning platforms.
Although there was a limited response to the e-mail survey, a number of
issues and concerns were raised in the responses that have possible
implications for information literacy training after the introduction of a
federated search tool. This chapter has presented these ideas and the
following chapter will discuss all the results obtained from the different
methods of investigation.
62
Chapter 7: Discussion of Results
This chapter discusses some of the main themes that were produced
during the research in an attempt to indicate the implications for information
literacy training in higher education with the introduction of federated search
tools.
7.1 Raising Awareness of Resources
One of the main themes to surface from the university interviews and to
a lesser extent from the e-mail survey is that those universities that have
implemented federated search tools have found that users make more use of
the databases the library subscribes to. As the interviewee at University C
pointed out, it is difficult to determine exactly how much the increase in use of
databases is due to the federated search tool and how much electronic
resources would have been exploited more due to the changing electronic
information environment. However, with such large increases it is
reasonable to assume that the tools are having some impact. The increased
use of resources has implications for information literacy training since there
are likely to be more users who need assistance with searching but there is
also a greater awareness of the kind of resources that the library provides
access to. For those librarians that were interviewed, raising awareness of
resources is very important and this is not surprising given the findings of the
JUSTEIS Project which found that for undergraduates, “many students
remain unaware of the resources available, and uncertain how best to use to
(sic) them” (Armstrong et al., 2001:255). With students turning to Google first
to conduct their searches, the opportunity to encourage them to make use of
library resources is very attractive to librarians.
Terrell expressed concern that although federated search tools have
the potential to increase the range of sources used, there is a risk that “by
bundling the sources together it tends to inhibit the person’s ability to
distinguish between these sources and to recognise their unique
characteristics” (Terrell, 2004). This risk was confirmed in one of the e-mail
responses (Response 5) where the respondent had found that after the initial
63
introduction of a federated search tool, students were found to be lacking an
awareness and knowledge of information resources. This risk does not
necessarily warrant the abandonment of such powerful tools but proves the
importance of information literacy training. The same university found its
information literacy programme was more successful when sessions focusing
on resources for certain subject areas were introduced before training in the
federated search tool. At one of the other universities included in the study
(University A), the librarian interviewed found that the tool could be used as
an aid to information literacy training and helped librarians to explain the
difference between types of databases and the results that they had obtained
from a federated search. Terrell himself recommends a teaching approach
where a cross search is used to retrieve results and “the ensuing discussion
could then focus on the differences between them” (2004).
7.2 The Need For Information Literacy Training
The need for information literacy training is another theme that emerged
from the interviews and surveys. Federated search tools are designed to be
instinctive to use but this is not always the case and the four interviewees all
found that there were some problems with the interface of the current version
of Metalib. The interface can and will be changed but users’ search
techniques are equally as important and do not appear to change with the
introduction of a new interface. Tallent (2004) described the search
behaviour of students at Boston College, USA where some would enter
complete essay titles into the search box. The interviewees at Universities A
and D also described this search technique, as does the e-mail Response 7.
In order to get the best results from a tool as complex as a federated search
tool, users need to know how to construct a search strategy and how to
execute an appropriate search for the resources being searched. This kind
of training is still very much a part of the training provided at the Universities
where interviews were conducted. The challenge for those responsible for
teaching information literacy with the introduction of federated search tools is
to focus on more generic skills and knowledge, which can be applied to
different information resources.
64
The problem that became apparent from the librarians that were
interviewed was that although information literacy or information skills training
takes place at each of the universities, the time made available for such
training is often limited or varies according to the perceived needs and
desires of departments. With only an hour or two for training each year, it
would be difficult for library staff to encourage the development of knowledge
and skills required to handle different information resources. Federated
search tools can aid this training because only one interface needs to be
shown, but since the tools have the potential to produce large numbers of
results, there is more need for the critical thinking and selection skills that
take time to develop
7.3 Recommended Use of Federated Search Tools
Fryer (2004) recommended that users start researching a topic with the
help of a federated search tool but then continue to search in the native
interfaces of the databases. This was a theme apparent throughout the
interviews and the e-mail survey. Whilst librarians encourage the use of the
native interfaces of databases as more accurate search tools, Terrell (2004)
was concerned that users were unlikely to continue to use these. At
University A, users are clearly still searching the native interfaces because
even those databases that cannot be cross-searched have seen an increase
in usage. However, whether users continue to use the native interfaces is
difficult to predict and monitor especially given that database providers
cannot distinguish between the number of searches received from the native
interface and those from the federated search (JSTOR, 2004). Another use
that was recommended for these tools is to check partial references
(University C). Although the librarians expressed different views about which
users the federated search tool is most suitable for, it seems that these tools
have different levels of complexity that would be suitable for different groups
of users. The popularity of the more successful tools also suggests that
whatever librarians’ views about the suitability of the tool, once it has been
provided the users will choose whether they want to use it and how they will
do so.
65
Chapter 8: Conclusions, Recommendations and Areas for Further Research
8.1 Conclusions
This dissertation aimed to explore the implications for information
literacy training in higher education with the introduction of federated search
tools. Whilst it has succeeded in raising a number of issues, providing
examples of universities using these tools and highlighting their current
practices, it is still difficult to gauge the extent of change that may occur in the
next few years. The tool itself does not make a user more or less information
literate; it is the way it is used. The interviews and e-mail survey showed that
users will continue to use their normal search strategies when faced with a
new tool. Students often gain their searching experience through web search
engines such as Google and although Google has altered expectations and
allows inadequate search strategies, it cannot be held responsible for the
lack of information literacy skills in students. Expert users can use a tool
such as Google to produce good results just as students with information
literacy skills can make good use of a federated search tool. The search
facility on a federated search tool may not be as refined as the original
database but most can still be used to find relevant information on a topic.
Users need information literacy training to ensure that they make the best of
use of these tools and so they understand and can select from the results
that they produce.
Federated search tools have the potential to make students aware of
the resources that are available to assist their learning and development. If
these tools can encourage users to start searching, then information literacy
training can be used to ensure that this searching yields useful results.
Some of these tools are in need of more development and it is likely that they
will do so as technology and users’ expectations change. For those that
have already captured users’ attentions, they have the potential to
significantly alter the way that users search for information.
66
8.2 Recommendations for the Open University
It is important that users can compare the number of hits that are
returned from each database so they can discover which are the most
pertinent databases for a particular topic. The current ENCompass
interface at the OU, which is currently unavailable to users, indicates
the number of hits for each database. This screen can be
incorporated into the training in MOSAIC, SAFARI and on-campus
sessions in order to explain the reasons for the different number of
results and how it can be used to find relevant resources.
The ENCompass search interface should allow users to connect to the
native interface of a database so they can either connect straight
through, using it as a tool for organizing resources or connect after
they have found a particularly useful database. The interface under
construction does not appear to offer this facility but it would be
extremely useful.
Users would benefit from a quick, visual online guide that can be
accessed from the login screen or the ENCompass homepage. A
number of universities in the study had this kind of guide that could be
used to help orientate users when they first use the tool.
The OU has already planned to introduce the federated search tool to
academics first and from the experience of other universities this
would appear to be advantageous. The Information Literacy Unit or
relevant library staff could present sessions to the academic staff and
researches on campus, and in training sessions at the regional offices.
The experience of other universities has shown that if academics find
the tool helpful, they will promote it to their students.
Federated search tools can function on different levels and users can
engage with the tool and its functionality to varying amounts. It would
be sensible to have guides to ENCompass that are aimed at different
levels of users, or different depths of engagement. For example, there
67
could be guides for simple searches, advanced searches and for using
personalised features. The personalised features could be marketed
to researchers and academics primarily.
Whilst universities have found it useful to have online guides for their
federated search tools, it would also be advantageous to integrate
ENCompass training into the information literacy training that already
exists in the form of SAFARI and MOSAIC. Users could explore a
federated search on ENCompass and compare it to the same search
performed in the native interface of a database. The tutorials can be
used to explain how users conduct searches using ENCompass and
how this is different to searching the native interface. It would also be
useful to incorporate a discussion or examination of different types of
databases and the distinctions between them.
Another comparison that could be drawn in the information literacy
tutorials is between an ENCompass search and a Google, or other
Web-search engine search. The different types of results produced
could be compared and reasons given for the differences. A
comparison between ENCompass and a metasearch engine such as
Metacrawler may help users to understand the concept of federated
searching but would be most useful for those users who already have
techniques for internet searching.
With the introduction of ENCompass the ability for users to think
critically and select relevant items from long results sets is likely to
become more important. Information literacy training could include
examples of ENCompass searches and the results obtained together
with strategies for refining results and selecting the most relevant
material.
The introduction of ENCompass is likely to users performing more
searches of databases. The experience of other universities has
shown that the OU may well receive more queries. The staff who
normally respond to student queries will need to be prepared to
68
recognise and respond to ENCompass queries. It may be useful to
have a list of (expected) frequently asked questions which users can
access themselves or library staff can refer to and direct users to
when they receive queries.
8.3 Areas for Further Research
One area for further research could be the examination of the Open
University in the future to see how the successful the piloting of
ENCompass was and to evaluate the use that users are making of the
tool. This study could be of the use of ENCompass by academics and
researchers or by students. Since the OU students do have different
vacation periods, it may be possible for a Masters student to assess
the opinions of users through a survey and/or interviews and monitor
their use of the tool in relation to the decisions they make when
searching for information.
Further research could examine the use of federated search tools in
other sectors, such as law libraries or national libraries to assess the
impact that these tools are having on the way that users search for
information.
Another area for study would be the effect of federated search tools on
changes to the work that librarians and information professionals
perform. This study could look at the work needed to implement and
maintain these tools and the skills and knowledge that are required of
librarians and information professionals to do so.
This study has focused predominately on the use of two federated
search tools, Metalib and ENCompass. Although other tools were
examined briefly, further research could examine the experience of
libraries using other tools in more depth. An area that may be
particularly interesting would be the changes made to subject portals
so they can perform federated searches and the use that libraries
make of these tools.
69
A final area for further research would be to examine the effect that
federated search tools have on the work that students produce and
whether it encourages them to use more materials in their work. It
would be interesting to examine whether the use of such tools can
contribute to learning outcomes and improving students’ grades.
70
Bibliography
ACRL: Association of College and Research Libraries. (2000). Information
Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education [Online]. Chicago : The
Association of College and Research Libraries.
http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlstandards/standards.pdf [Accessed 18 May
2004].
Advanced Technology Libraries. (2004). Advanced Technology Libraries
[Online]. http://site.ebrary.com/pub/atl/Top?layout=home [Accessed 13 July
2004].
ALA: American Library Association. (1989). Presidential Committee on
Information Literacy. Final Report [Online]. Chicago: American Library
Association. http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlpubs/whitepapers/presidential.htm
[Accessed 31 May 2004].
ANZIIL: Australian and New Zealand Institute for Information Literacy. (2003).
ANZIIL- Australian and New Zealand Institute for Information Literacy
[Online]. http://www.anziil.org/ [Accessed 20 May 2004].
Armstrong, C. et al. (2001). “A study of the use of electronic information
systems by higher education students in the UK”. Program [Online], 33 (3).
http://www.aslib.com [Accessed 7 July 2004].
Awre, C. (2003). “Portals: enabling discovery for all in higher and further
education”. VINE: The Journal of Information and Knowledge Management
Systems [Online], 33 (1), 5-10. http://www.emeraldinsight.com [Accessed 7
July 2004].
Basili, C. (ed.) (2003). Information Literacy in Europe: a First Insight into the
State of the Art of Information Literacy in the European Union. Roma:
Consiglio Nazionale Delle Ricerche.
71
Big6 Associates. (2003). Big6: An Information Problem-Solving Process
[Online]. Fayetteville, New York: Big6 Associates. http://www.big6.com
[Accessed 20 July 2004].
Big Blue (2004). The Big Blue Project [Online]. Manchester: Manchester
Metropolitan University Library.
http://www.library.mmu.ac.uk/bigblue/bigblue.html [Accessed 7 July 2004].
Booker, D. (ed.) (1998). Information Literacy: The Professional Issue.
Proceedings of the Third National Information Literacy Conference. 8-9
December, 1997, Adelaide, Australia. Adelaide: University of South Australia.
Booker, D. (ed.) (2002). Information Literacy: The Social Action Agenda. How
is Information Obtained, Interpreted and Used for Social Action? Proceedings
of the Fifth National Information Literacy Conference Conducted by the
University of South Australia Library and the Australian Library and
Information Association Information Literacy Forum, 30 November-1
December, 2001, Adelaide, Australia. Adelaide: University of South Australia
Library.
Brown, C., Murphy, T.J. & Nanny, M. (2003). “Turning techno-savvy into info-
savvy: authentically integrating information literacy into the college
curriculum”. The Journal of Academic Librarianship [Online], 29 (6), 386-398.
http://www.sciencedirect.com [Accessed 7 July 2004].
Bruce, C. (1997). The Seven Faces of Information Literacy. Adelaide:
AUSLIB.
Bundy, A. (ed.) (2004). Australian and New Zealand Information Literacy
Framework: Principles, Standards and Practice. 2nd ed [Online]. Adelaide:
Australian and New Zealand Institute for Information Literacy.
http://www.anziil.org/resources [Accessed 20 May 2004].
72
Burke, L. et al. (2004). “Implementing AARLIN at La Trobe University with a
focus on end user reception”. In: Breaking Boundaries: Integration and
Interoperability [Online]. VALA 2004. 3-5 February 2004, Melbourne,
Australia. Victoria, Australia: La Trobe University.
http://vala.org.au/vala2004/2004pdfs/25BSFV.PDF [Accessed 21 July 2004].
Corrall, S. (2004). “CILIP information literacy initiative”. In: Webber, S.
Information Literacy Weblog [Online], 7 July. Sheffield: University of
Sheffield. http://www.ciquest.shef.ac.uk [Accessed 21 July 2004].
Cox, A. (2003). “Choosing a library portal system”. VINE: The Journal of
Information and Knowledge Management Systems [Online], 33 (1), 37-41.
http://www.emeraldinsight.com [Accessed 7 July 2004].
Dolphin, I., Miller, P. & Sherratt, R. (2002). “Portals, PORTALs everywhere”.
Ariadne [Online], (33). http://www.ariadne.acuk/issue33/portals/ [Accessed 7
July 2004].
Doyle, C.S. (1994). Information Literacy in an Information Society: A Concept
for the Information Age. Syracuse, New York: ERIC Clearinghouse of
Information & Technology.
EDNER: Formative Evaluation of the Distributed National Electronic
Resource Project. (2002). How Students Search: Information Seeking and
Electronic Resource Use [Online]. Issues Paper 8.
http://www.cerlim.ac.uk/edner/ip/ip08.rtf [Accessed 26 July 2004].
Frost, W.J. (2004). “Do we want or need metasearching?”. Library Journal
[Online], 1 April. http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA405394 [Accessed
20th July 2004].
Fryer, D. (2004). “Federated Search Engines”. Online [Online], 28 (2).
http://www.onlinemag.net [Accessed 13 May 2004].
73
Gorman, G.E. & Clayton, P. (1997). Qualitative Research for the Information
Professional: a Practical Handbook. London: Library Association.
Grassian, E.S. & Kaplowitz, J.R. (2001). Information Literacy Instruction:
Theory and Practice. New York: Neal-Schuman.
Griffiths, J.R. & Brophy, P. (2002). “Student searching behaviour in the JISC
Information Environment”. Ariadne [Online], (33).
http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue33/edner/intro.html [Accessed 7 July 2004].
Haban, M.F. (1990). “Information filtering”. In: Blake, V.L.P. & Tjoumas, R.
(eds.), Information Literacies for the Twenty-First Century, pp. 103-110.
Boston, Mass.: G.K. Hall.
Hamblin, Y. & Stubbings, R. (2003). The Implementation of Metalib and SFX
at Loughborough University Library [Online]. Loughborough: Loughborough
University Library & Statistics Unit.
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/project_portal_casestudies.html [Accessed 27 June
2004].
Hane, P.J. (2003). “The truth about federated searching”. Information Today
[Online], 20 (10). http://www.infotoday.com/it/Oct03/hane1.shtml [Accessed
26 April 2004].
Haycock, K. (2000). “What all librarians can learn from teacher librarians:
information literacy a key connector for libraries”. In: Booker, D. (ed.)
Concept, Challenge, Conundrum: From Library Skills to Information Literacy,
pp.25-24. Proceedings of the Fourth National Information Literacy
Conference. 3-5 December, 1999, Adelaide, Australia. Adelaide: University of
South Australia.
JSTOR. (2004). “Metasearching JSTOR”. JSTOR News [Online], 8 (1).
http://www.jstor.org/news/2004.02/metasearch.html [Accessed 7 July 2004].
74
Koh, C. (2003). “Reconsidering services for the postmodern student”.
Australian Academic and Research Libraries [Online], 34 (3).
http://www.alia.org.au/publishing/aarl/34.3/full.text/koh.html [Accessed 3 June
2004].
Kwasnik, B.H. (1990). “Information literacy: concepts of literacy in a computer
age”. In: Blake, V.L.P. & Tjoumas, R. (eds.), Information Literacies for the
Twenty-First Century, pp. 127-143. Boston, Mass.: G.K. Hall.
Lewis, N. (2002). “Talking about a revolution? First impressions of Ex Libris's
Metalib”. Ariadne [Online], (32). http://www.ariadne.ac.uk [Accessed 12 May
2004].
Lewis, N. (2003). “I want it all and I want it now!”. Managing expectations with
MetaLib and SFX at the University of East Anglia”. Serials, 16 (1), 89-95.
Loertscher, D.V. & Woolls, B. (2002). Information Literacy: a Review of the
Research. A Guide for Practitioners and Researchers. 2nd ed. San Jose,
Calif.: H. Willow.
Luther, J. (2003). “Trumping Google? Metasearching's promise”. Library
Journal [Online], (16). http://www.libraryjournal.com [Accessed 26 April
2004].
Mellon, C.A. (1990). Naturalistic Inquiry for Library Science: Methods and
Applications for Research, Evaluation, and Teaching. New York: Greenwood
Press.
Miller, P. (1999). “Z39.50 for all”. Ariadne [Online], (21).
http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue21/z3950/ [Accessed 7 July 2004].
Miller, P. (2001). “The concept of the portal”. Ariadne [Online], (30).
http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue30/portal/intro.html [Accessed 7 July 2004].
75
Miller, T. (2004). “Federated searching: put in its place”. Library Journal:
Netconnect [Online], Spring. Wilson Education Abstracts. [Accessed 13 May
2004].
NCIHE: The National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education. (1997).
Higher Education in the Learning Society [The Dearing Report]. London:
HMSO.
NFIL: National Forum on Information Literacy (2004). About the Forum
[Online]. San Jose, California: National Forum on Information Literacy.
http://www.infolit.org/about/index.html [Accessed 1 August 2004].
NISO: National Information Standards Organization. (2003). Metasearch
Initiative [Online]. Bethesda, Maryland: National Information Standards
Organization. http://www.niso.org/committees/MS_initiative.html [Accessed
24 July 2004].
Open University (2004). Step Forward [Online]. Milton Keynes: Open
University. http://www3.open.ac.uk/stepforward [Accessed 10 June 2004].
Oyston, E. (ed.) (2003). Centred on Learning: Academic Case Studies on
Learning Centre Development. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Owusu-Ansah, E.K. (2003). “Information literacy and the academic library: a
critical look at a concept and the controversies surrounding it”. The Journal of
Academic Librarianship [Online], 29 (4), 219-230.
http://www.sciencedirect.com [Accessed 7 July 2004].
Parker, J. & Waller, L. (2002). “Australia leads two sets to one – information
literacy 'down under'”. SCONUL Newsletter, 26, 23-26.
Parker, J. (2003). “Putting the Pieces Together: Information Literacy at the
Open University”. Library Management [Online], 24 (4/5).
http://www.emeraldlibrary.com [Accessed 10 June 2004].
76
Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. 3rd ed.
Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE.
Ramsden, A. (2003). “The library portal marketplace”. VINE: The Journal of
Information and Knowledge Management Systems [Online], 33 (1), 17-24.
http://www.emeraldinsight.com [Accessed 7 July 2004].
Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to Teach in Higher Education. London:
Routledge.
Ray, K. & Day, J. (1998). “Student attitudes towards electronic information
resources”. Information Research [Online], 4 (2). http://informationr.net/ir/4-
2/paper54.html [Accessed 1 August 2004].
Rogers, M. (2001). “WebFeat offers simultaneous search of
OPAC/databases”. Library Journal [Online], 126 (6). Wilson Education
Abstracts. [Accessed 13 May 2004].
SCONUL: Society of College, National & University Libraries. (1999).
Information Skills in Higher Education: A SCONUL Position Paper [Online].
London: Society of College, National & University Libraries.
http://www.sconul.ac.uk/pubs_stats/pubs/99104Rev1.doc [Accessed 20 May
2004].
Silverman, D. (2000). Doing Qualitative Research: a Practical Handbook.
London: SAGE.
Spitzer, K.L., Eisenberg, M.B. & Lowe, C.A. (1998). Information Literacy:
Essential Skills for the Information Age. Syracuse, New York: ERIC
Clearinghouse on Information & Technology.
Tallent, E. (2004). “Metasearching in Boston College Libraries: a case study
of user reactions”. New Library World [Online], 105 (1/2), 69-75.
http://www.emeraldinsight.com [Accessed 20th July 2004].
77
Terrell, J. (2004). “Cross database searching: information literacy for the 'real
world'?”. In: Lifelong Learning: Whose Responsibility and What is Your
Contribution [Online]. Lifelong Learning Conference 2004. 13-16 June 2004,
Yeppoon, Australia. Yeppoon: Central Queensland University.
http://lifelonglearning.cqu.edu.au/papers/terrell-133-paper.pdf [Accessed 19
July 2004].
Town, J.S. (2003). “Information literacy: definition, measurement, impact”. In:
Martin, A. & Rader, H. (eds.) Information and IT Literacy: Enabling Learning
in the 21st Century, pp.53-65. London: Facet.
Ward, A. (ed.) (2003). “The student experience”. In: Oyston, E. (ed.) Centred
on Learning: Academic Case Studies on Learning Centre Development, pp.
Aldershot: Ashgate.
Webber, S. & Johnson, B. (2000). “Conceptions of information literacy: new
perspectives and implications”. Journal of Information Science [Online], 26
(6), 381-397. http://www.ingenta.com/isis [Accessed 7 July 2004].
Webber, S. & Johnston, B. (2003a). “Information literacy in the United
Kingdom: a critical review”. In: Basili, C. (ed.) Information Literacy in Europe:
a First Insight into the State of the Art of Information Literacy in the European
Union, pp.258-283. Roma: Consiglio Nazionale Delle Ricerche.
Webber, S. & Johnson, B. (2003b). “Assessment for information literacy:
vision and reality”. In: Martin, A. & Rader, H. (eds) (2003). Information and IT
Literacy: Enabling Learning in the 21st Century. London: Facet.
Webber, S. (2004). “Federated Searching”. Information Literacy Weblog
[Online], 20 July. Sheffield: University of Sheffield. http://ciquest.shef.ac.uk
[Accessed 21 July 2004].
Webster, P. (2004). “Metasearching in an academic environment”. Online, 28 (2), 20-33.
78
Wood, F., Ford, N., Miller, D., Sobczyk, G. & Duffin, R. (1996). “Information
skills, searching behaviour and cognitive styles for student-centred learning:
a computer-assisted learning approach”. Journal of Information Science, 22
(2), 79-92.
Yin, R.K. (1984). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Beverly Hills,
California: SAGE.
79
Appendices
Appendix A: Areas for Discussion at the Open University
Appendix B: Interview Schedule for UK Universities
Appendix C: E-mail Survey
80
Appendix A: Areas for Discussion at the Open University
A: Information literacy at the OU and possible issues arising from the implementation of ENCompass
B: Piloting of ENCompass
How it is taking place
The relationship to MyOpenLibrary
How much the interface will be tailored to local needs
How is the tool going to be integrated with other library services (such
as the library web-site)?
What kind of issues and problems/benefits are arising from the search
tool?
Whether usage is being logged or there is any feedback from users
What kinds of instructions are available for those using the tool?
How will the tool develop after the piloting stage?
81
Appendix B: Interview Schedule for UK Universities
A. Search Techniques and Usage
1. Why did your institution decide to get the tool?
2. Do you think users like using the tool?
3. Do you think users find it easy to use?
4. Search techniques of users. Have they changed? Have you conducted
surveys/analysed data about the words that are used to search?
5. Is it likely that users think critically about the searches that they
perform?
6. What do you and/or your colleagues think are the most appropriate
ways to search the tool?
7. Have you found that there is any particular group of users who make
the most use of the tool? Why do you think this is?
8. Do you think that the tool is more suited to any particular group of
users?
9. Are there still users who don't/won't use the search tool? Why do you
think this is?
10. Do academics in general promote use of the tool?
B. Federated Search Tool and Other Library Services
11. How does the tool fit in with other library services, such as the OPAC
and the web-page? Has it replaced any of the services that you offer?
12. Do you think users make better use of the OPAC and printed items
since the introduction of the tool?
C. Databases and Training
13. What kind of training do you offer to use the databases included in the
tool?
82
14. Is this training new or was it offered before the introduction of the tool?
15. Has there been more demand for these sessions since the
introduction of the tool?
16. Have enquiry desk staff noticed a difference in the kind of questions
that users ask since the introduction of these tools?
17. Did users ask about online databases before the introduction of this
tool?
D. Information Literacy/Information Skills Training Offered
18. Can you tell me about the information literacy or information skills
training that takes place here?
19. Which aspects of information literacy are covered? What kind of
concepts about searching are explained to users?
20. Do you think users understand that the material they find through the
databases is likely to be of a higher quality than the material that they
would retrieve on Google?
21. How is the tool used?
22. Are information literacy skills also embedded into the curriculum?
23. Are information literacy skills assessed in anyway?
24. What do you think are the most important things that users gain from
their information skills or information literacy training?
25. What do you think is the biggest barrier to students developing
information literacy skills?
Do you have any questions you would like to ask, or is there anything not
already covered that you feel is important?
83
84
Appendix C: E-mail Survey
Dear [Name],
I am student at the University of Sheffield, UK studying for my Masters in
Librarianship. I am currently working on my dissertation which is investigating
the implications for information literacy training in higher education with the
introduction of federated search tools, also known as metasearchers, cross-
searchers and portals. I am interested to hear about the experiences of
libraries that have purchased these tools and I believe that your institution is
currently using [Tool Name]. If you have the time to answer the following
questions your help would be much appreciated:
1. Has the information literacy training you provide changed since the
introduction of a federated search tool and if so, in what ways?
2. Do you think users' search behaviour has altered as a result of the
federated search tool and if so, in what ways?
3. Do you have any thoughts about how federated search tools will affect
the way libraries provide services and training in the future?
4. If you have any online material about your information literacy training
that you think may be useful, would you please include the relevant
web address(es).
Any information that you have supplied will be kept confidential and will not
be associated with you or your institution but may be associated with your
country and tool supplier. The dissertation will be available in the University
of Sheffield library and on the university intranet. It is possible that the
research may be made more widely available.
Please reply by Friday 30th July and do not hesitate to contact me if you have
any questions about my research.
Thank you for your help,
Ms Lucy McCaskie