More than Metadata: Where the Rubber Meets the Road in DLS Migration

This panel presentation provided several use cases that detail the complexity of large-scale digital library system (DLS) migration from the perspective of three university libraries and a statewide academic library services consortium. Each described the methodologies developed at the beginning of their migration process, the unique challenges that arose along the way, how issues were managed, and the outcomes of their work. Florida Atlantic University, Florida International University, and the University of Central Florida are members of the state's academic library services consortium, the Florida Virtual Campus (FLVC). In 2011, the Digital Services Committee members began exploring alternatives to DigiTool, their shared FLVC hosted DLS. After completing a review of functional requirements and existing systems, the universities and FLVC began the implementation process of their chosen platforms. Migrations began in 2013 with limited sets of materials. As functionalities were enhanced to support additional categories of materials from the legacy system, migration paths were created for the remaining materials. Some of the challenges experienced with the institutional and statewide collaborative legacy collections were due to gradual changes in standards, technology, policies, and personnel. This was manifested in the quality of original digital files and metadata, as well as collection and record structures. Additionally, the complexities involved with multiple institutions collaborating and compromising throughout the migration process, as well as the move from a consortial support structure with a vendor solution to open source systems (both locally and consortially supported), presented their own sets of unique challenges. Following the presentation, the speakers discussed commonalities in their migration experience, including learning opportunities for future migrations.

An examination of Lotka's law in the field of Library and Information Studies

The purpose of this study was to test Lotka’s law of scientific publication productivity using the methodology outlined by Pao (1985), in the field of Library and Information Studies (LIS). Lotka’s law has been sporadically tested in the field over the past 30+ years, but the results of these studies are inconclusive due to the varying methods employed by the researchers. ^ A data set of 1,856 citations that were found using the ISI Web of Knowledge databases were studied. The values of n and c were calculated to be 2.1 and 0.6418 (64.18%) respectively. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) one sample goodness-of-fit test was conducted at the 0.10 level of significance. The Dmax value is 0.022758 and the calculated critical value is 0.026562. It was determined that the null hypothesis stating that there is no difference in the observed distribution of publications and the distribution obtained using Lotka’s and Pao’s procedure could not be rejected. ^ This study finds that literature in the field of Library and Information Studies does conform to Lotka’s law with reliable results. As result, Lotka’s law can be used in LIS as a standardized means of measuring author publication productivity which will lead to findings that are comparable on many levels (e.g., department, institution, national). Lotka’s law can be employed as an empirically proven analytical tool to establish publication productivity benchmarks for faculty and faculty librarians. Recommendations for further study include (a) exploring the characteristics of the high and low producers; (b) finding a way to successfully account for collaborative contributions in the formula; and, (c) a detailed study of institutional policies concerning publication productivity and its impact on the appointment, tenure and promotion process of academic librarians. ^

An Examination of Lotka’s law in the Field of Library and Information Studies

The purpose of this study was to test Lotka’s law of scientific publication productivity using the methodology outlined by Pao (1985), in the field of Library and Information Studies (LIS). Lotka’s law has been sporadically tested in the field over the past 30+ years, but the results of these studies are inconclusive due to the varying methods employed by the researchers. A data set of 1,856 citations that were found using the ISI Web of Knowledge databases were studied. The values of n and c were calculated to be 2.1 and 0.6418 (64.18%) respectively. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) one sample goodness-of-fit test was conducted at the 0.10 level of significance. The Dmax value is 0.022758 and the calculated critical value is 0.026562. It was determined that the null hypothesis stating that there is no difference in the observed distribution of publications and the distribution obtained using Lotka’s and Pao’s procedure could not be rejected. This study finds that literature in the field of library and Information Studies does conform to Lotka’s law with reliable results. As result, Lotka’s law can be used in LIS as a standardized means of measuring author publication productivity which will lead to findings that are comparable on many levels (e.g., department, institution, national). Lotka’s law can be employed as an empirically proven analytical tool to establish publication productivity benchmarks for faculty and faculty librarians. Recommendations for further study include (a) exploring the characteristics of the high and low producers; (b) finding a way to successfully account for collaborative contributions in the formula; and, (c) a detailed study of institutional policies concerning publication productivity and its impact on the appointment, tenure and promotion process of academic librarians.