ACRL College & Research Libraries News

Association of College & Research Libraries

Using the online catalog effectively

By Marcella Stark History and Afro-American Studies Librarian Syracuse University

The online public access catalog is becoming a reality in many institutions. Thus, instruction designed to show the capabilities of the online system is necessary, not only to overcome initial resistance to a new system, but also to ensure that the maximum capabilities of the system are apparent to users.

Librarians need to instruct faculty as well as students. Because they may find that faculty resist library instruction for themselves, librarians should seek reinforcements on the campus to aid in any instruction program. The following is a description of the Syracuse University Libraries cooperation with a respected campus institution to develop an instruction program for university faculty.

Syracuse University Libraries have had an online public access catalog, SULIRS (Syracuse University Libraries Information Retrieval System) since January 1981. Before the catalog was put in place, a slide-tape lecture, designed and presented by the director of libraries, prepared faculty for the change. There was publicity in the campus media. Users were provided with booklets that described basic searches.

At the outset the system provided author and title access only via OCLC derived search keys to a database of approximately 500,000. After five months, the search key approach was abandoned and SULIRS provided keyword searching via author, title, series title, call number, and subject. Free-text key word searching was possible across the title and subject fields. Initially, there were few HELP messages or system prompts imbedded in the SULIRS program; extensive HELP messages were added late in 1983. From the beginning, however, the Boolean AND was implied; the Boolean NOT being added later.¹

SULIRS was available only in the libraries until the summer of 1983, when it was made available from any terminal on campus. Individuals with a terminal and modem could access SULIRS via the telephone and the university computing center.

Since most of the terminals in the library were located near the reference desk, reference librarians initially provided training when requested. Since the spring of 1983, librarians have been stationed directly by the terminals during peak hours to provide individual assistance. Librarians observed, however, that while both faculty and students easily mastered the basics of searching, they used card catalog strategies instead of taking advantage of the dynamics of online searching. For example, someone searching for Patriotic Gore by Edmund Wilson might proceed by entering “Wilson, Edmund,” and SULIRS would respond with 71 items. The user would read through the list until Patriotic Gore appeared. In other words, searchers were not using the keyword capabilities of the system, combining the author’s name with a significant word in the title, say Patriotic, which would immediately retrieve 3 items, saving time and relieving the tedium of searching.

Some faculty SULIRS training was attempted during the previous two years at the annual campus-wide Seminar on Teaching. Sponsored by the University Senate Committee on Instruction, the Seminar brings experienced faulty with reputations as teachers together with newer faculty to share information about the resources at the university that support teaching. A librarian is a member of the Senate Committee and coordinated the library-related presentations at the Seminar.

While the presentation never seemed quite to fit into the Seminar, it received very positive evaluations from those who attended. The librarians involved developed a presentation directed at a faculty audience. As the Seminar became more widely attended, the committee often talked about developing smaller workshops based on a single topic of interest to faculty. The library presentation seemed ripe for such a separate program. The director of libraries, who attended the Seminar presentations, also suggested that the presentation be re-worked into a separate program to be sponsored by the Libraries and the Senate Committee.

Almost concurrently, the librarians at Syracuse realized that they themselves were not aware of the full capabilities of SULIRS. Two members of the Cataloging Department, which is responsible for the development and maintenance of the database, were asked to produce a workshop on SULIRS for librarians. These were held in December 1982 and January 1983.²

Late in the spring semester of 1983, the director of libraries appointed an ad hoc group to develop a presentation on SULIRS directed at the teaching faculty. It consisted of the librarians who developed the Seminar presentation and the catalog librarians responsible for the in-house workshops. Official sponsorship of the Senate Committee was sought and received. The presentation to be developed was called a “seminar,” using the name of other programs sponsored by that group.³

Originally the planning group thought in terms of a two-hour presentation. On faculty advice, however, they decided that more people would attend a program limited to one hour. From previous experience, they assumed that most participants knew the basic mechanics of searching SULIRS. The program would concentrate on searching techniques unique to an online catalog.

Because the university computing center had a classroom equipped with a projection system that displayed information from a computer terminal, the planning group decided to hold the Seminar there. The room had telephone jacks where additional terminals could be connected to provide hands-on experience and individual instruction. Not only could the room hold forty people comfortably, the librarians believed that holding the Seminar away from the library would demonstrate that the online catalog was available from every terminal on campus.

The Seminar was offered three times in October 1983, late in the afternoon on a Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday in succeeding weeks. The group planned a lecture/demonstration lasting approximately thirty-five minutes with the remainder of the hour devoted to questions and individual instruction. The lecture drew searching examples from all disciplines. One person spoke, a second typed the search. Previous experience with one person performing both functions indicated that a smoother performance would result if two people coordinated efforts. Rehearsals were held to make sure the presentation would be completed in the time allotted.

A letter, co-signed by all the sponsoring groups, was sent three weeks in advance of the Seminar. It described the goals and content of the presentation and requested participants to make a reservation.

Besides sending notices and preparing the lecture demonstration, the planning group thought other preparations necessary. Three handouts were prepared. Copies of the booklets describing basic searches were collected, and a description of the means of accessing SULIRS from outside the libraries was written. With the aid of a university specialist on evaluation, the planning group compiled a short evaluation form asking the participants to rate quality of presentation, to suggest improvements, and library topics for future seminars.

Of the seventy-six people who made reservations, sixty attended. Initial questioning revealed that the vocal members of the first group were relatively inexperienced SULIRS users. As the lecture was punctuated by questions, insufficient time remained for further demonstrations and hands-on experience. The second group matched expectations—they were SULIRS users and wanted to learn more. The lecture evolved into a discussion with the participants contributing searching examples, raising questions and posing problems that followed from the lecture. Attendees remained after the hour to continue searching. The last presentation had the smallest attendance; the lecture was accomplished in the time allotted, and the questions were few. The form and content of all three presentations received positive evaluations. Recause the second session became a seminar with the participants actively committed to the learning process, the evaluations were superlative.

Naivete and sophistication were apparent in all sessions. A participant wanted to know how to search foreign language materials. The answer was that the SULIRS used the same principle as the card catalog: titles are in the language of the item, subject headings are in English. A scientist pointed out that keyword searching made it considerably easier to locate conference papers: entering “5th nuclear physics,” one did not have to remember if the meeting was a congress or colloquium. Because searching by call number made the shelf list available, participants expressed great interest in learning how to manipulate call numbers. Attendees were interested to learn that they could search subjects using their “terminology” as well as the indexing vocabulary of SULIRS (Library of Congress Subject Headings). It was carefully pointed out that the latter should be used for more precision in searching, the example being the difference between “intensive care” nursing (Library of Congress) and “critical care” nursing (user’s term).

The comments and queries indicated that participants came from across the campus. In order to provide quick and knowledgeable responses, librarians with in-depth searching experience in both the sciences and humanities were present. It may be worth noting that while Seminar attendees were interested in online searching, none asked about the technical aspects of the computer system.

The Seminar was an experiment. It grew out of the Libraries’ involvement with the faculty developed Seminar on Teaching and the Universit; Senate. Co-sponsorship of the Libraries’ efforts by this respected group created additional good will for the Libraries’ instruction efforts. Concurrently, the librarians had undergone in-depth training and had had active experience in observing and assisting users with the online catalog. As a result of these factors, the Seminar participants were receptive and enthusiastic.

Notes

1. Gregory N. Bullard, “The Syracuse University Libraries Information Retrieval System,” Research Librariesin OCLC: A Quarterly, no. 7 (1982):1-2.
2. Elaine Coppola, “Who Trains the Trainer? Library Staff Are OPAC Users, Too,” Library Hi Tech 1 (Winter 1983): 36-38.
3. Group members are Donald C. Anthony (director of libraries), Marcella Stark (history and Afro-American studies librarian), Elaine Coppola, Caroline Long, Barbara Opar, Charles Tremper, and Mary Anne Waltz.