Top Banner
OARS: Toward Automating the Ongoing Subs ription Re ie Ongoing Subscription Review Geoffrey P. Timms Mercer University i d Jonathan H. Harwell Georgia Southern University jh ll i h d ti[email protected]du jharwell@georgiasouthern.edu
25

OARS: Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review

Jul 05, 2015

Download

Technology

Thorough assessments of subscriptions are unwieldy and time- consuming to perform every year. A metric has been developed for standardizing the process, with a Web-based platform being constructed to recommend renewals and
cancellations. This session will describe the metric and demonstrate the functionality of the platform, engaging the audience in making refinements. Coded in PHP and utilizing a MySQL database on the backend, the completed product will be an open-source Ongoing Automated Review System (OARS) for subscription reviews.
OARS will automate the selection of titles and data for review, which will result in a semi-automated process for annual renewal decisions. OARS will utilize multiple, customized variables, as well as an adjustable cumulative weighted scale of all variables which the system will use to recommend a renewal decision. OARS will use automated processes as much as possible, and will also provide data entry forms and uploads from files for easy input. There will also be an interface for stakeholders to view the data and respond to the review.
All of the variables and the draft requirements for OARS will be shared during the session. The variables include faculty ratings, cost, usage, Eigenfactor, and entanglements (such as consortial agreements, bundled packages, or cooperative collection development commitments).
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: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review

OARS: Toward Automating the Ongoing Subs ription Re ieOngoing Subscription Review

Geoffrey P. TimmsMercer University

i d

Jonathan H. HarwellGeorgia Southern University

jh ll i h d [email protected]@georgiasouthern.edu

Page 2: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review

Context

Georgia Southern University

Doctoral-Research University

FY09: $300 000 collection budget cutFY09: $300,000 collection budget cut

FY10: $470,000 collection budget cut, g

FY11: $1.2 million total budget

C&RS: 4 librarians & 12 ½ support staff

Page 3: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review

Needs

Balance the budgetg

Rapid assessment

Maximum input from stakeholders

St li th f l tStreamline the process for long-term use

Control the data vs. data controlling usControl the data vs. data controlling us

Page 4: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review
Page 5: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review

What is OARS?

Ongoing Automated Review System

Automate the selection of titles and data for review, which will result in a ,semi-automated process for annual renewal decisionsrenewal decisions

Phase 1 & Phase 2

Two development guidelines: SimpleSimpleOpen source

Page 6: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review

Variables/Data Tracked

TitleU i C t l #

EntanglementN tUnique Control #

ISSNNotesCurrent Cost

EISSNLC Call Number

Usage DataFaculty Rating

YearPublisher

y gEigenfactor Percentile

u i e

Page 7: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review

“Discarded” VariableslAlternative coverage

Frequency/cost per issue/useq y pFaculty format preferencePeer reviewPeer reviewPrint costOnline only costPrint plus online costpUsage Year 2Librarian ratingLibrarian ratingILL borrowing (will be in Phase 2)

Page 8: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review

Structure

L.A.M.P environment

MySQL database on backend

PEAR MDB2 Abstraction LayerPEAR MDB2 Abstraction Layer

Coded in PHP & JavaScriptJ p

Input via .csv upload or forms

Data export in .csv format

Page 9: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review

OARS Recommendation Metric

Faculty RatingEssential = 100 %Essential = 100 %Desirable = 50 %Not Needed = 0 %

Eigenfactor™ Article Influence PercentilePercentile = % scoreE g 44 80 = 44 8%E.g. 44.80 = 44.8%

Page 10: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review

OARS Recommendation Metric

Relative CostCost as % of average cost 80

100

120

o r

e

Calculation of Cost Score

Cost as % of average cost(-0.5 x Cost as % of av. cost) + 100Score range limited to 0-100

0

20

40

60

80

C o

s t

S

c

gCovers Cost at 0-200% of av.cost

0

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Cost as % of average cost

Relative UsageU % f 80

100

120

o r

e

Calculation of Usage Score

Use as % of average use(0.5 x Use as % of av. use)Score range limited to 0-100

0

20

40

60

80

U s

a g

e

S c

gCovers 0-200% of av. use

0

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Use as % of average use

Page 11: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review

OARS Recommendation Metric

Weighted Metric% weighting applied to each of the four variables% weighting applied to each of the four variablesTotal weighting = 100%

Even weightingCost Score Usage Score Rating Eigenfactor TOTAL

44 65 50 85.944 65 50 85.9Weight 25% 25% 25% 25% 100%Net Score 11 16.25 12.5 21.48 61.23

Usage/Eigenfactor preferredCost Score Usage Score Rating Eigenfactor TOTAL

44 65 50 85 944 65 50 85.9Weight 10% 35% 10% 45% 100%Net Score 4.4 22.75 5 38.66 70.81

Page 12: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review

The OARS Interface to-date

Page 13: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review
Page 14: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review
Page 15: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review
Page 16: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review
Page 17: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review
Page 18: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review
Page 19: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review
Page 20: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review
Page 21: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review
Page 22: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review
Page 23: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review

ChallengesHow to treat titles where usage data unavailable

Divide the usage data proportion of weightingamong the other data pointsamong the other data points

Library of Congress Call Numbersy gMySQL Boolean Searching – spaces and periodsSortingRequired normalizationRequired normalizationComplex Regex (Cheers to Bill Dueber)Reverse normalization

MySQL Natural Language SearchMinimum is four-character stringMinimum is four character stringACM, ACS, etc. cannot be searchedMySQL can be locally re-configured

Page 24: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review

Discussion

OARS Recommendation MetricOARS Recommendation MetricData/variables trackedOARS ReportOtherOther

Page 25: OARS:  Toward Automating the Ongoing Subscription Review

h kTh k !Thank you!Thank you!yyJonathan H. Harwell

[email protected]

Geoffrey P. Timmstimms [email protected]

image from http://www.blogcdn.com/www.gadling.com/media/2008/05/oars.jpg

[email protected]