LM_NET: Library Media Networking
Well, the jury is in, and your collective opinion is firmly ... on the
fence! Just about as many folks thought I ought to switch as thought I
ought to stick.
I will stand pat with MAS FTSelect for one more year, and I thank Floyd
for the line that quelled my early fever: "less is less!"
For those who were particularly interested in the opac/index connection,
my catalog vendor is Winnebago. Their dos product will offer the option
of single or combined searches with UMI and FOF (via database licensing
and loading on a large hard drive) next Fall. I saw a demo in PA last
month, and was most impressed. (Hence my fever to switch....) The Mac
version will offer the same feature, but a year later.
We are a Mac school, network-wise, so I will use the intervening year for
info gathering and decision-making. Who knows, maybe EBSCO will license
through them also.
Others wondered about my situation vis a vis access to periodical
backfiles. In (very) brief, we have:
- good microform holdings but *no* printing ability
- hc holdings that go back about 5 years
for some 75 titles
- good student access to larger libraries
- miserable ILL for periodicals
And finally, the reason MAS subject headings make me nuts is that many
(or at least, enough to make the kiddos fuss) of them return a message
stating that there are no matching titles/articles. A result of supplying
a complete authority list with a subset of abstracts/articles, no doubt.
Here is the gist of my original query, followed by responses:
______________________
>
>I am pondering a switch from Magazine Article Summaries (Full Text
>Select, +/- 400 titles of indexing and abstracting, of which 60 are full
>text, $1799 for a quarterly subscription) to Proquest Resource One
(Select
>Full Text, 60 titles of indexing and abstracting, of which 50 are full
>text, $1200 for a 12-month subscription.)
>
>I have been comparing my holdings with the titles indexed, of course, and
>contemplating other things (like the fact that my opac will have an
>interface for the Proquest product in a year or so, enabling me to
license
>the db and load it on a hard drive for searches right through the catalog
>interface.) And I have to say that the MAS subject headings make me
>crazy. Still, we have been pretty darn happy with it, overall, making
>this the first real contender. (This paragraph could go on forever -
>there are a lot of factors to tot up on either side.)
>
>
>Right now I am wondering if you think students would rather have smaller
>hit lists, of which virtually everything is available online, or longer
>hit lists of which a much smaller percentage is available online.
>
>>From your experiences, is less really more?
>
>(Yes, I am also asking my own students!)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: "Sandra L. Parks" <sparks@vdoe386.vak12ed.edu>
I had a similar question, although not involving full text. I
polled a random number oftudents whether they would rather have
indexing for only what was in our library, or did they
appreciate having additional indexing regardles of where it is.
The overall answer was for the additional indexing, and they
could decide whether it was worth their while to go elsewhere.
We are within 2 blocks of the public library, and 1 block of a
large university that the students may use for periodicals, so
that may be a factor in their answers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: "Rita Kaikow (Oceanside High School)" <K12OCKZR@vaxc.hofstra.edu>
We are considering switching from Resource One [index/abstracts] only to
MAS.
We feel that students are more successful in the guided searches thru the
latter rather than the required boolean searching of the former.
What we also like about MAS is that the full text is on the same CD-ROM
disks
that student search. Whereas, I believe you have to switch disks to get
the
full text on Resource One.
We have a fairly extensive magazine and microform collection. Students
have
had little difficulty in dealing with the databases that have full text
and
those that require their using the microform or print copies. Of course,
they
like full text. [Recent anecdote: I overheard one student state that
she had
to use MAS because she didn't have money for the photocopier. (We charge
for
the latter but not for printouts on printers. Influx of more full text on
CD-ROM may make us take a closer look at this issue.)]
I also did a comparison of what is indexed on Resource One and what is
indexed
on MAS Elite. All but 4 titles of the former are indexed on the latter.
And
those are not vital.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: Don Farmer <dfarmer@eis.calstate.edu>
I would be interested in your conclusion. I use TOM Infotrac at
$1800+/year. I am seriously considering UMI also be: of price. They also
have a start up offer around $750-800 for first year--ask for it!!! I
have not decided yet--One thing holding me back is--UMI is on 2 Cd dics;
but if you want only really current items--the 2nd disc is 1991 forward
so maybe I would be better off just using teh 2nd disc only--still
cheaper than TOM I also find InfoAccess a funny compnay--they cannot
keep their records straight--we have constant problems with invoices. oh
well... I am glad to see someone else looking at UMI==I just got the
preview disc so aski me later.....
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: Thomas Tomporowski <tomporow@informns.k12.mn.us>
one of the reasons i like sirs on cd rom is that everything you see, you
can also print out. i wish ebsco had a periodical index the same way.
right now i get mas elite. other than frustrating equipment problems,
it's
ok. it would be very enticing for me to have a periodical index
interfacing with my on-line catalog, and i may probably go for it once the
bugs (inevitable) get worked out. (i have winnebago). tom tomporowski,
perham, mn. tomporow@informns.k12.mn.us
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: Carol McCarthy <mccarthy@brahms.udel.edu>
We have just changed our subscription from Wilson's Reader's Guide to
ProQuest Select
Full Text. We liked the selection of periodicals from UMI and also the
great intro price. We came to the conclusion that rapid and easy access
was enough of a benefit to outweigh the expected problems of incessant
printing with its costs. We intend to use the old monthly disks in
multiple stations, and told UMI we intended to do this, and were told not
to
worry about getting arrested. We will still offer online searching for
older students with more sophisticated needs. Also subscribe to Biology
Digest. Have found with middle school students the big hang-up is
getting from the citation to the article-in-hand, and hope Proquest helps.
By the way, would appreciate information on how you will be
interfacing Proquest with OPACs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: dclaussm@ednet1.osl.or.gov (Diane K. ClausSmith)
It depends upon your sources for periodicals. Do you own, or do
your students have access to a good bank of periodical holdings?
We use MAS quarterly (academic) and with the ability to access
our own medium-sized collection, the public library's bigger
one, and a university's huge one, our students like to have
the longer hit lists. I also like the statistical features
of MAS. Don't know if ProQuest has like features. This has
saved many subscriptions from the fatalcut of the budgeteers.
Another problem with depending upon full-text print outs (which
we have found through demo-examination copies), is terminal
time/student. Most of our busy kids need to print out
citations, peruse them, chose the best, then make their
requests. The big decision for you, and others fortunate
to have the opac potential will be connecting whichever
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: Lorraine Steinberg <steinber@raven.cis.net>
We have chosen ProQuest Magazine Express full view database. My
students use it, my graduates come back to use it, and my teachers doing
grad work come in at night to use it. We are a small, rural school and
the nearest small university library is two hours away. Believe me, the
attraction for all of us is the full text on line feature. Instantly we
get the articles we need. None are torn, missing, or damaged. I have
cut my magazine subscriptions in half since we took it on, saving about
half the cost of the subscription per year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: Danee Wilson <dwilson@umd5.umd.edu>
I have had ProQuest's Resource One, using abstracting and microfiche, for
the last three years. I am very pleased with the "hits" my students get
and the way things are arranged on the screen. My only concern is the
time the students would spend if they had full-test instead of abstracts
and microfiche. Also, there are a few titles that my kids use a lot that
are abstracted but not full text. Pro-Quest has been great, however, at
answering all of my questions quickly and fully. Three years ago I had
Ebsco, Wilson and UMI on three machines side-by-side for a trial. The
kids would go from one to the other to see what gave them the most
"hits". Pro-Quest obviously won.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: Floyd Pentlin <fpentlin@hobbs.leesummit.k12.mo.us>
What level are you? If you are high school, I would think that
more is more -- particularly if you have interlibrary loan capabilities.
Are you thinking of taking only magazines in the full-text editions rather
than any microfiche or hardcopies (probably hard copies because of
browsing) but how extensive will your other subscriptions be? I am a
11-12 school and have extensive holdings from the MAS index -- lots on
microfiche, some on hardcopy, and some ILL from other schools in the
district. The reason I subscribed to MAS in the first place was because
of the local notes capability which permitted me to enter the holdings of
the other LMCs in our district.
> I have been comparing my holdings with the titles indexed, of course,
and
> contemplating other things (like the fact that my opac will have an
> interface for the Proquest product in a year or so, enabling me to
license
> the db and load it on a hard drive for searches right through the
catalog
> interface.)
An interesting concept (searchaing from the HD) -- have you seen it done
and was it successful and did it make a difference in the number of
workstations that students had to have available?
And I have to say that the MAS subject headings make me
> crazy.
I've had no problem here.
Still, we have been pretty darn happy with it, overall, making
> this the first real contender. (This paragraph could go on forever -
> there are a lot of factors to tot up on either side.)
We have been VERY happy with the product. Your toting up the + and - for
the two products would be interesting to see.
> Right now I am wondering if you think students would rather have smaller
> hit lists, of which virtually everything is available online, or longer
> hit lists of which a much smaller percentage is available online.
>
> >From your experiences, is less really more?
Generally, students are not interested in the theoretical -- "you could
get this if we had the magazine" or "you can get this in a magazine at the
public/college library"
But then, I feel generally that less is less.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: Janet McElroy <jmcelro7@ua1ix.ua.edu>
I think that our students, mostly 14-16 year olds, would rather have full
text available even if that meant fewer titles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Shelley Lochhead, Librarian ____/| 603-746-4167 x230
Hopkinton High School \ o.O| S_Lochhead@mentor.unh.edu
297 Park Avenue =(_)= AppleLink: ALOT32
Contoocook, NH 03229 U Mentor: S_Lochhead
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
LM_NET
Archive Home