Evaluation of the DOCBIBLAS Workshop
1. Setup of the evaluation
The evaluation was based on a written questionnaire, distributed after some explanation about the nature of the questions by the workshop lecturer at the very end of the workshop (Friday 27th afternoon) for filling in by the participants during the last (extended) coffee-break.
The following sections are covered in the questionnaire :
- basic data of the participant : ICT or library background, knowledge of ISIS and status of library automation
- time spent to each topic
- quality of the contents of each topic
- practical organisation of the workshop
- assessments re quality/relevance of the software.
For a detailed overview we attach the questionnaire itself (2 printed pages).
The results were input into a spreadsheet for a first quick analysis and imported into an IDAMS dataset for further statistical analysis.
2. Main results
All (except the 3 first) criteria were scored from 1-5, with a higher score indicating a more positive evaluation or assessment.
2.1 Profile of the participants :
- 5 have a library&information science background, 9 have an ICT-background, 6 another background
- 13 have a fully, 3 a partially and 3 a not at all automated library.
- 2 didn’t know ISIS at all, 11 knew a bit of it and 7 knew ISIS well.
Important to note here is that the participants were NOT selected based on their interest in ISIS or even to use ABCD as a software. They represent the typical VLIR/UOS university partner’s libraries !
2.2 Best aspects
The highest scores were obtained for the following criteria :
- practical organisation of the workshop (resp. communication, travel arrangements and venue scores : 4.64, 4.39 and 4,58)
- importance of ABCD in the library automation scene : 4,55
- will recommend use of ABCD : 4,42
- more training is needed : 4,55.
The best appreciated topics as for their contents were the ISIS and ABCD-introductions (4.10 and 4.05).
2.3 Worst aspects
Least appreciated as for the quality of the contents (which still doesn’t mean ‘bad’ as the score is still above the mid-score of 3 out of 5 !) were the principles of library automation (3.38), conversion techniques (3.5), CISIS (3.42) and bibliographic formats (3.43).
Relatively low scores. i.e. below the middle-point of 3 out of 5, were obtained for the following criteria :
- the feeling of being ready to use ABCD (2.58)
- time spent on bibliographic formats (2.42)
2.4 Overall appreciation
As one of the most important results we want to mention the fact that 3 resp. 8 respondents agree resp. ‘strongly’ agree to use ABCD in the future, 5 have no opinion and only 2 strongly disagree (probably because they have an expensive commercial software running already). So out of a ‘random’ sample (as far as ISIS use is concerned) more than 50 % were more or less convinced by the workshop that ABCD will become a reality for them !
Only 1 resp. 4 participants were ‘very happy’ that the training was over, indicating that the participants appreciated the workshop generally (as 5 disagreed strongly and 7 disagreed with the statement ‘happy the workshop is over’).
2.5 Some free comments
- thank you, very nice, very necessary for my library
- please train librarians on the programming software/language of ABCD so that when somehting goes wrong they will no longer queue in line for the IT department. Thank you so much for the opportunity given to learn from lecturers who are experts, internationally reknown and yet udnerstanding and sympathising to our situation.
- Add full text indexing for attached digital files to ABCD, create a discussion portal for experience sharing
- Change the attitude of the lecturers, try to handle the observations more kindly
- Add text to icons on the toolbar (upon pointing)
- More practical sessions should be rather than the theoretical ones.
- Keep the good work
- Thanks for everything and try to support our libraries with more trainings and releases of the software
- Good, thanks for caring
- Create an ABCD team with representatives from different countries
- ABCD software is okey; I hope more training or assistance will be given and the available modules should be used by the libraries ready to use it.
3. Recommendations by the participants
During a specific session participants were requested to first individually, then by small groups formulate their top-3 priority recommendations.
At the end of the session the following inventory of recommendations was made :
Group 1
- Make it more user friendly, icons larger in toolbar and worksheets
- English version completed
- Separated training for librarians and IT people
- More practice with the software, more hands-on
- More training in MARC 21
- More awareness to other universities
Group 2
- Split training in basic and advanced: using it and management
- More practical sessions
- New workshop when it is complete
- More time for training
- Include empweb as full integrated part of the software
Group 3
- Divide the training in technical and applications
- Advanced training in Isis and display format before of the workshop
- Listserver / abcd group
- Intensive promotion should be done
- Follow up training on sites
Group 4
- Finish the software as it is, not adding new features, but more user friendly
- Clean-up the language version (spanglish)
- Produce good manuals
- Organize support in forums or trainings or wikis also in management
4. Conclusions
Generally we can consider the evaluation to be very positive. In spite of the fact that the participants were not selected for their link with ISIS software, and the fact that a majority did not use ISIS for their library automation, the software was highly appreciated and more than half would consider using it in the near future very seriously.
One recommendation shared by more participants is to split the training for – on the one hand – librarians and – on the other hand – IT-people, but this foregoes the reality that in many target libraries for ABCD there are hardly any separate functions for library- and IT-management. Within the university-context of VLIR/UOS reality however this recommendation can be respected.
The workshop is felt – by the organizers and lecturers – to be quite encouraging for further actions to complete the software development and focus on the promotion.
