Effervescent Librarian's Blog

Thinking about the user experience

Archive for May, 2011

“Last night I dreamt I went to Manderley again”

Posted by effervescentlibrarian on May 26, 2011

Well, I dreamt of finding the book Rebecca Rebecca on my high school library shelf- and Candide, and Watership Down, and The Moonstone, and Asimov. It was a reality dream–a trip back to my small bright library, with two levels. Nonfiction was on the ground level, and there were three or four steps that took you up to the fiction. A nice area, with side railing, that allowed you to look back to the nonfiction. There was a librarian there, with a small office by the circulation desk, but I don’t remember ever having much interaction with her. Of course, I had no idea that the reason I found those wonderful books was because she had selected them, and put them there.
Reference was off to the side on the ground level. I remember the bright red writing on Masterplots,masterplots and would have never gotten through senior English without it! I worked 40 hours a week my senior year, long story, so having a little synopsis of the things I was supposed to have read was a godsend that kept me going to class.
The nonfiction found me too – I read of the horrors of sugar,and travels to foreign lands.
Recently Texas schools have been laying off  school librarians. Margaret Atwood had a brilliant quote a couple of days ago:  “The librarian is the key person you don’t want to remove from a school.” She said being able to surf online isn’t a substitute for having a librarian who can handpick and recommend books for students in their early years of reading.”

I agree- Literacy is the key to everything, and a school librarian holds that key close to their heart. We need more school librarians, and libraries around the world.

Posted in general librarianship, world literacy | Leave a Comment »

Data Literacy

Posted by effervescentlibrarian on May 25, 2011

It has been almost a year since the great IATUL conference on Data, probably one of the best conferences I have ever attended. I was thinking about DiRT today, and remembered that the brilliant Lisa Johnston had done a write-up of E-Science tools for Research in the column that she writes for SLA’s SciTech News.

One of my favorite science librarians, Michael Fosmire, has given some talks about the importance of information fluency in an e-science context. These are some of the competencies he identifies as required of e-scientists:

  • Discovery and application of data in repositories, and the ability to import and convert it to a suitable format for further processing,
  • Data management and organization: understanding the life cycle of data and creation of standard operating procedures for processing it,
  • Understanding metadata and the structure and purpose of ontologies to facilitate better sharing,
  • Data curation and re-use: recognizing that data may have purposes other than the original one for which it was intended and understanding that data curation is a complex and often costly process,
  • Cultures of practice:  recognition of the practices, values, and norms of one’s chosen field as well as relevant data standards,
  • Data preservation:  recognition of the benefits and costs,
  • Data analysis:  becomes familiar with the basic analysis tools of the discipline,
  • Data visualization:  understanding the advantages of different types of visualizations, and
  • Ethics:  develops an understanding of intellectual property, privacy, and confidentiality issues and appropriately acknowledges external sources.

A recent paper, Carlson, Jacob, Michael Fosmire, C.C. Miller, and Megan Sapp Nelson. “Determining Data Information Literacy Needs: A Study of Students and Research Faculty.” 2011 points out the need to use ethnographic research to inform decisions based around data literacy. Great stuff!

Posted in dataliteracy | Leave a Comment »

Wibbly Wobbly Timey Wimey Web2.0

Posted by effervescentlibrarian on May 24, 2011

I have been on a Dr. Who kick recently, thank you Netflix! So, when a medical librarian friend sent me the link to a talk entitled, “Wibbly Wobbly Timey Wimey Stuff“   I was delighted. Phil Bradley,  a British Librarian turned Internet Consultant in the UK, does a great job. It is a bit long, but watch the beginning, and skip some of the early doctors if you must.

Of course, the classic phrase, wibbly wobbly timey wimey stuff, comes from David Tennent’s Dr. Who: http://youtu.be/vY_Ry8J_jdw

I love the idea of teaching library stuff in the context of Dr. Who. Brilliant. And, I am thinking IT Crowd or Glee wouldn’t be a shabby hook either!

image from the BBC

“Doctor Who: You want weapons? We’re in a library. Books are the best weapon in the world. This room’s the greatest arsenal we could have. Arm yourself! (from Silence in the Library episodes 8/Season 4)”
Russell T. Davies

Posted in Training | 1 Comment »

Student-led research

Posted by effervescentlibrarian on May 19, 2011

A friend just directed me to this article: G. Hunter and D. Ward, “Students research the library: Using student-led ethnographic research to examine the changing role of campus libraries” College & Research Libraries News, vol. 72, May. 2011, pp. 264 -268.
http://crln.acrl.org/content/72/5/264.full

Great article! Great project. To follow-up on my blog entry yesterday, I wanted to add that the co-PI is an anthropology graduate student, Marcel LaFlamme. The cool thing is, he used to be a librarian, but has now gone back to graduate school for anthropology. While his research focus is not on libraries, he is a great asset to have on our projects! So, yes, include students in ethnographic research on both sides!

Posted in ethnographicstudy, ux | Leave a Comment »

Bootstrap UX

Posted by effervescentlibrarian on May 18, 2011

I am a Texan, so the concept of bootstrapping is a way of life. Recently, I have been using it to describe the type of ethnography I am doing at my library. The very thorough Andrew Asher, ERIAL Lead Research Anthropologist, and Susan Miller, the Resident Anthropologist, ERIAL Chicago Libraries, describe in “So You Want to Do Anthropology in Your Library or A Practical Guide to Ethnographic Research in Academic Libraries?” a sample One-Year Timeline.

However, our library is considering the purchase of a discovery tool(DT) this summer, and we really wanted to include a small-scale ethnographic study in the process. So, what do you do?  You pull up your boots, and get to work! Even if you don’t have a year!

The team worked under very tight time constraints: the research instrument was approved on April 5, 2011, the interviews were scheduled from April 18-28, transcription and coding took place from May 2-13, and the final report was submitted to the Discovery Tools Working Group on May 18.

So that is basically, two weeks for interviews, and two weeks for transcription and coding! And, less than a week for the actual writing. Whew! But, I have to say, I think it was a great effort. All done in six weeks! We kind of lost one week, because I was gone from April 11-15th for the Texas Library Association conference. It was time well spent! Andrew Asher was there, and the Common Craft folks, and I saw Aaron Schmidt’s talk on user experience. Andrew’s insight into coding transcriptions was especially useful!

Our four person project team was able to do interviews with three faculty members, four members of a nondepartmental academic program, one postdoc, and five researchers. An additional person helped with transcription needs. I think four was the perfect number–I could not have done this with only two, and more than four would have gotten cumbersome in the coding process.

Yesterday, the main day of writing was a blast! At one point, there were three of us working real-time in GoogleDocs, with one of us out of state. We were able to use the chat function in Googledocs to ask questions, and clarify. Amazing! And fun! Ok, maybe I am a rare breed that thinks it is fun to work to deadline, but I was a school newspaper editor long ago, so it must be in my blood.

Throughout the whole process we kept the interview schedule in GoogleDocs, and then used Dropbox to keep the mp3′s while we were working on them. This cloud access assured easy access to project materials for all of the project members. At the final step, for the coded transcripts, and the final paper, I created a workspace in our university coursework system, so that it would be more secure, and longer lasting.

Now, there were a few things that I would do differently:

Important learning lessons from the DT study:

1) A good thing to capture would have been age/years of teaching/research. We will always ask this in future studies.

2) In a study we did last summer, we interviewed the subject bibliographer for biology, which provided some useful insight into the study. For the DT study, an informal meeting with the subject bibliographer was held, but it was not recorded. Once again, this yielded some interesting insights. It is highly recommended to include subject bibliographers in your study to inform the study.

3) On the DT study we did not specifically ask any question about what/how faculty taught or observed student research. It might be interesting to do this–to ask what professors see students doing in their research, what questions students have asked to clarify research assignments, and what the faculty member teaches the student about the research process.

4) Timing. Because we did the DT study so late in the semester, it was almost impossible to include students. Summer will be almost the same way. We will think of innovative ways that we could capture undergraduate students in the summer study. There are postdocs, and graduate students around luckily! I had just done some usability testing for our new website, so we were able to pull in some of that data into this study.

5) More time lets you roll in more techniques. It would have been great to do sessions capturing the users with screen capture software, or do a design project where users could design the perfect user interface for discovery.

But, all in all, the takeaway is: never let time constraints steer you away from incorporating user research in your decision making process! And we now have thirteen voices, in a four page report to guide our way.

Posted in ethnology, Libraries, ux | 2 Comments »

Single-stream problem-solving

Posted by effervescentlibrarian on May 11, 2011

My university recently started single-stream recycling. I think this is a brilliant thing for users–what it means is that you can put  mixed recyclables in the same bin. This means no more separating paper from plastic or soda cans from juice boxes.

Well, what if libraries could do all of  our problem-solving in a single-stream? The user puts their problem in the bin, and then tada, we solve the problem. It is up to the ticket administrators to sort out exactly who can solve the user’s question.

It is not up to the user to find where on our website to get help to answer a particular issue.

Now, I have been thinking about this for a while, and the IT ticketing system at my university is available; we just have to customize it to be used by the library for customer service issues. I think we are going to try it this summer.

And, for those green folks that thought out single-stream recycling…brilliant! Thanks alot!

Posted in ux | Leave a Comment »

The importance of a doorstop

Posted by effervescentlibrarian on May 10, 2011

For a year, we have propped up a door to a computer lab with a relatively unsightly trashcan.

So, today, I got an email from the ever brilliant Kerry Keck, saying, Enough! And she brought in a new doorstop for the lab.  This is a tiny thing, but this morning, when I was rushing to teach a class in this room, and didn’t have to bang to make sure the trashcan was keeping the door open, wow. This is the essence of user experience. And, how easy it is to ignore that broken thing for so long, to make do, to innovate to do something else, when really, sometimes, all we need is a new doorstop. Thanks Kerry! 

Posted in ux | Leave a Comment »

Choosing a UX Tool-Web projects

Posted by effervescentlibrarian on May 9, 2011

Choosing the right UX method or tool can be confusing. I recently attended a UPA webinar on doing this, and found the information pretty useful. The speaker,Bill Albert of Bentley University  was really good, and easy to follow. He is the author of Measuring the User Experience. Thought  I would share what I learned.
Bill pointed out from the beginning: Because most of us only have time to focus on a limited number of research and evaluation methods, it is important to choose the right methods for results from the start of a project. UX methods are dynamic, and therefore difficult to categorize and strictly define.

The main choice to make:

1) Do we need a Qualitative or Quantitative technique?
Qualitative focuses on “why”-and relies on observation, description, and insight.
Quantitative answers the “what” question- it should happen when you are almost done with your project, and utilizes a larger sample size.

2) Decide if you are going to focus on Behavior or Preferences.
Behavior- focuses on actual behavior. How learnable is the product? If you choose this, use usability lab studies, card sorting, or competive benchmarking.
Preferences-what do users like and dislike? This is highly subjective. What features/functions do they care most about? If you are using this method, use an advisory board, focus group, or in-depth interviews.

Best Qualitative methods:

1)Usability lab testing:  single best method for improving the usability of a design during the design process

  • Easy to administer- in a lab,or a remote test, moderated or unmoderated
  • Observation is highly impactful
  • Difficult to prioritize issues
  • Not ecologically valid
  • Great for Problem detection

2) Expert evaluation

  • Going through at interaction level, looking at best practices, quick and cheap
  • No participants
  • Experienced evaluator can reliably identify a significant number of usability issues
  • You have to be able to play the role of the user
  • Biases can creep in
  • Temptation to evaluate from a requirements perspective-

3) Field research

  • Observing product in field
  • May use surveys
  • Most ecologically valid
  • Tremendous source for innovation
  • Tap into different set of users
  • Different population than those that are willing to come to lab
  • Not well suited to evaluate a specific set of tasks
  • What do they actually use the product for?

4) Focus groups
Structured discussion

  • Focuses on customer attitudes, preferences, and opinions about a product
  • Short amount of time
  • Allows for free flow exchange of information
  • Cannot access how product design will actuality be used
  • Can be dominated by a single participant
  • Strong bias to what others want to hear, especially the moderator (social desirability bias)

 Common quantitative methods:

1) Eye-tracking

  • Technology that captures eye movements
  • Can be used in the lab or field
  • Best when noticeability of key feature is critical ie: are people seeing x
  • Easy to set up
  • Analysis may be tedious with video
  • Most people can be calibrated

2) Online surveys-you can get into trouble here! Easy to jump to conclusions with a poor survey design!

  • Easy to set up and administer
  • Low cost
  • Technology is advancing
  • Focused on opinions only
  • 10% of participants are fraudulent

3) Unmoderated usability testing

  • Participants use a web application that guides them through a usability study
  • Loop11
  • Large sample size
  • Heavily focused on metrics
  • Collect reliable metrics on all facets of usability
  • Data collection is quick, easy
  • Cannot use if you are n0t ready to send out prototype

4) Card sort-most ignored, but valuable!

  • Use a web application that allows them to categorize cards into groups
  • Tools: WebSort Note: I recently used this as a user with an Educause survey, where I was asked to sort the different parts of the Educause website into meaningful categories. Cool!
  • Need 30 people to get reliable data
  • Validates information architecture
  • Complicated statistics are easily managed and interpreted through compelling visualizations
  • Does not work with multiple levels
  • Difficult to understand mental motivations

So what if you have no time!?
Use a Usabilty test discount method– just grab some people in your  organization! This is a valid expert review, and requires no budget!

I have to say, having just finished a web usability project, I did only usability testing, without any tracking software, and a survey. I REALLY want to do a cardsort and eye-tracking for the next time! I am still looking for a cloud ux software that will allow a user to log in, and do our usability test from anywhere, on any computer. That might work with Loop11, and I will be trying it this week.

Most of all, I love when a speaker understands that sometimes you do not have a lot of time or money to do a project. It is great to be able to spend a semester, or even a year, working on something, but sometimes you only have two weeks, or no money. I believe UX always matters, and you can still put your UX hat on and pull up your UX bootstraps and get to work even if you have no time or money!

Posted in ux | Leave a Comment »

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.