...
首页> 外文期刊>Evidence Based Library and Information Practice >Usage Volume and Trends Indicate Academic Library Online Learning Objects and Tutorials Are Being Used
【24h】

Usage Volume and Trends Indicate Academic Library Online Learning Objects and Tutorials Are Being Used

机译:使用量和趋势表明大学图书馆正在使用在线学习对象和教程

获取原文
           

摘要

A Review of: Hess, A. N., & Hristova, M. (2016). To search or to browse: How users navigate a new interface for online library tutorials. College & Undergraduate Libraries, 23(2), 168-183. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10691316.2014.963274 Abstract Objective – To discover how users interact with a new online interface for learning objects, user preferences for types of access when given both browsing and searching options, and user needs for tutorial subject matter. Design – Mixed methods, with quantitative analysis of web traffic and qualitative analysis of recorded search terms through grounded textual theory. Setting – An academic library in the Western United States of America. Subjects – Users of the Libraries’ online tutorials and learning objects. Methods – The researchers collected web traffic statistics and organically occurring searches from the Libraries’ tutorial access interface. They defined the collection period as the 2013/2014 academic year, with collection beginning in September 2013 and ending in April 2014. Web traffic for organic searches, facilitated searches (search results accessed through clicking on particular words in a tag cloud), and categorical browsing was collected via Google Analytics. They categorized other interaction types (accessing featured content, leaving the page, etc.) under an umbrella term of “other.” Their analysis of web traffic was limited to unique page views, with unique page views defined as views registered to different browser sessions. Unique page views were analyzed to determine which types of interface interaction occurred most frequently, both on-campus and off-campus, and whether there were differences in types of interaction preferred over time or by users with different points of origin. Individual organic search keywords and phrases, and the dates and times of those searches, were separately collected and recorded. One of the researchers coded the recorded organic search terms using grounded textual theory analysis, and the researcher formed generalized categories. They sent these categories and a random sample of 10% of the recorded search terms to librarians unaffiliated with the study, and used their categorizations of the search term samples to validate the initial researcher’s textual analysis. Main Results – After analyzing the 5,638 unique page views recorded, researchers found that categorical browsing was used more frequently than facilitated searching throughout the year, and more frequently than organic searching for 6 of the 8 recorded months. Organic searching was used more frequently than facilitated searching during most months, while both organic and facilitated searching were less likely to be engaged in by users working on Saturday or Sunday. They found that interactions in the “other” category were quite high, and the researchers attributed this to featured videos on the interface homepage being required for a number of classes. The researchers discovered that patterns in interface use were similar between on-campus and off-campus users, and that most traffic to the interface was through referral from other websites (such as the library homepage). Direct traffic (from URLs manually typed in or in documents) was the second most frequent point of access, while users arriving at the interface from a search engine interaction was a distant third. Grounded textual theory analysis of the 14,428 collected organic searches achieved a 92% consensus in coding, and showed a user focus in searching for specific resources, tasks, and knowledge, rather than broader conceptual searches. Additionally, researchers noticed that a significant number of users performed organic searches for videos that were featured on the front page, possibly indicating that certain users engage with search functions before viewing page content. Conclusions – The researchers concluded that despite the limitations of the study, the usage volume and trends identified indicate that the Libraries’ online learning objects and tutorials are being used. They also concluded that the categorization and labelling of these learning objects has been successful because the categorical browsing function is used more than the other search functionalities. The researchers determined that they should consider the non-user in the future, and examine the barriers that students, faculty, and staff encounter when attempting to use online learning content. They affirm a need to develop, via further studies, a more thorough understanding of the motivations behind user interactions.
机译:评论:Hess,A。N.和Hristova,M。(2016)。搜索或浏览:用户如何浏览在线图书馆教程的新界面。高校图书馆与大学图书馆,23(2),168-183。 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10691316.2014.963274摘要目标–探索用户如何与新的在线学习对象交互界面,用户在获得浏览和搜索选项的同时对访问类型的偏好以及用户的需求教程主题。设计–混合方法,通过扎实的文本理论对网站流量进行定量分析,并对记录的搜索词进行定性分析。设置–美国西部的大学图书馆。主题–图书馆在线教程和学习对象的用户。方法–研究人员从图书馆的教程访问界面中收集了网络流量统计信息和自然搜索。他们将收集期定义为2013/2014学年,收集期从2013年9月开始,到2014年4月结束。自然搜索的网络流量,便利的搜索(通过单击标签云中的特定单词访问搜索结果)以及分类浏览是通过Google Analytics(分析)收集的。他们将其他交互类型(访问特色内容,离开页面等)归类为“其他”。他们对网络流量的分析仅限于唯一的页面视图,唯一的页面视图定义为注册到不同浏览器会话的视图。分析了独特的页面浏览量,以确定在校园内和校园外哪种界面交互类型最频繁发生,以及随着时间的推移,或者不同来源的用户所偏好的交互类型是否存在差异。分别收集并记录了各个自然搜索关键字和短语以及这些搜索的日期和时间。一位研究人员使用扎根的文本理论分析对记录的有机搜索词进行了编码,研究人员形成了广义类别。他们向与该研究无关的图书馆员发送了这些类别和10%记录的搜索词的随机样本,并使用他们对搜索词样本的分类来验证初始研究者的文本分析。主要结果–在分析了记录的5638次唯一页面浏览量之后,研究人员发现,在整个8个月中的6个月中,分类浏览的使用频率高于便利搜索,并且比有机搜索更为频繁。在大多数月份中,有机搜索的使用要比便利搜索更为频繁,而在星期六或星期日工作的用户不太可能进行自然搜索和便利搜索。他们发现“其他”类别中的互动非常频繁,研究人员将此归因于许多课程都需要界面首页上的精选视频。研究人员发现,校园内和校园外用户之间的界面使用模式是相似的,并且界面的大部分访问都是通过其他网站(例如图书馆主页)的引荐而实现的。第二大访问点是直接访问量(来自手动输入或输入文档的URL),而来自搜索引擎交互的用户则排在第三位。对14428种自然搜索的扎实的文本理论分析在编码方面达成了92%的共识,并显示出用户侧重于搜索特定的资源,任务和知识,而不是更广泛的概念搜索。此外,研究人员注意到,大量用户对首页上的视频进行了自然搜索,这可能表明某些用户在查看页面内容之前已经使用了搜索功能。结论–研究人员得出结论,尽管研究存在局限性,但所确定的使用量和趋势表明图书馆正在使用在线学习对象和教程。他们还得出结论,这些学习对象的分类和标记是成功的,因为分类浏览功能比其他搜索功能得到更多使用。研究人员确定,他们应该在将来考虑非用户,并检查学生,教职员工在尝试使用在线学习内容时遇到的障碍。他们认为需要通过进一步的研究来发展对用户交互背后动机的更彻底的理解。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号