Top Banner
Griffith University Talis Aspire pilot Q4 2013 – Feb 2014 Presenters: Philip Testa, Susan Tegg, Camille Furniss
9
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Griffith Talis Aspire User Group

Griffith University Talis Aspire pilot Q4 2013 – Feb 2014

Presenters: Philip Testa, Susan Tegg, Camille Furniss

Page 2: Griffith Talis Aspire User Group

Sample screen shot, displaying web branding

Page 3: Griffith Talis Aspire User Group

Pilot overview

§ Why we decided to trial Talis Aspire» Standardise and improve access to course reading lists» To improve copyright compliance and reporting» Create efficiencies and align Library functions» Scale up the digitisation service

§ Griffith has unique requirements:

» Single Sign On» Web encryption (SSL via HTTPS)

Page 4: Griffith Talis Aspire User Group
Page 5: Griffith Talis Aspire User Group

Digitised Content (TADC) module

§ Griffith one of two testing partners in Australia§ Current operational processes vs TADC processes§ Findings so far:

+ Easy to use interface+ time savings with automated metadata collection, when linkedwith Reading Lists+ Automated copyright compliance and CAL reporting+ Cloud hosted digitisation repository- Some functionality doesn’t operate as we expected- Published Reading Lists may require adjusting- Email notifications lack detail

Page 6: Griffith Talis Aspire User Group
Page 7: Griffith Talis Aspire User Group

Reading Lists module

§ The findings: + Better for students + Ease of use + Integrated with Library catalogue + Good support from Talis, but time zone difficulties + Site metadata collection works on pre-requested sites - Inconsistencies with current operational workflows - Academic reluctance – they don’t want “more work” - Student numbers – often not known; uneditable - Lack of dedicated mobile device user interface - Blackboard VLE integration – room for improvements

Page 8: Griffith Talis Aspire User Group

Griffith’s unique requirements

§ Single Sign On – achieved and delivered

» To uphold Griffith’s enterprise SSO for its web systems» Based on SAML2 shared protocol

§ HTTPS web encryption – not yet delivered» Based on Griffith’s web standards, privacy and ensuring

Single Sign On security

Page 9: Griffith Talis Aspire User Group

Where to from here?

§ Pilot concludes end of February; appraisal § Griffith to reconsider our approach, and question:

» “who owns, creates and maintains reading lists?”» “what does Griffith want the readings lists to do?”

§ A key challenge faced

» obtaining user (academic) buy-in when the project has beendriven by the Library

§ Questions?