Day 14 at Otterbein

Hours: 6.5 Total Hours:105

I got in early on Friday, to get a bit of work done before my interview, so Jane was not in yet. I wrote up my own To Do list. Finish up the collection development report, check on the usability study rsvps, work on the script.

There was one more RSVP, a student, so I sent her out the schedule request. I had two responses from faculty, so I thanked them both. Jane had written her own version of the testing script, so I checked it against mine and found all points covered. She did an excellent job of integrating my test questions, as well, without being quite as redundant. Then, I was off to my interview.

Back around 11, I checked in with Jane, and we decided to print out the student Pre-Survey, to hand out at circulation, in the hopes of getting more volunteers. I created a human-friendly link and placed it in the intro text, and then wrote up quick instructions for the circulation students. I printed it out and Jane made copies and explained to the supervisor and students. I also asked Jane to check in with the faculty volunteers who might have been confused by an email from a non-Otterbein source. I emailed her my original letter and the list of those who had not yet replied.

Jane had also sent out the Digital Commons Use survey link to all faculty, staff, and administration. So, I got to start looking at those answers, too. I learned a bit more about SurveyMonkey when I noticed some of the Other fields had not been filled in, and fixed how one of them presented to make it more useful.

I begain looking at how it presented results as well. The various charts and tables, noting that because we split the survey along faculty/staff lines, that the “answered/skipped” numbers were more a function of which set of questions they were given, and not disinterest in the questions. This split also meant that responses to similar questions were seperated, and while an interesting look at what different members of the Otterbein community value, putting them back together could provide interesting insight as well.

The results analyzing functions of SurveyMonkey also do not provide the free-answer questions, so that is something I’ll need to pay attention to, and pull out myself. There were also three surveys where only the intial faculty/staff/admin question was answered, so those need pulled out, too, before results are calculated. I really enjoyed playing with the charts and stats, figuring out all the different reports I could create.

I spent a bit of time organizing my collection development for the week, and sent my current findings to Jane. I also pulled the four titles I specifically needed her to look at. I spent a bit of time HTML coding the Where to Find page for the Library website.

I checked in on the survey a few times throughout the day. One of the respondants commented repeatedly that he/she did not know HOW to deposit things in the DC, and had not received answers to queries. Unhelpfully, contact information was not left at the end of the survey. I emailed Jane, wondering if depositing can be done by faculty/staff or if it must go through a librarian. She let me know that depositing has to go through a librarian. Which I can understand for quality control reasons. This did, however, spur me to create a Step-by-Step document titled How to Deposit Materials in the Digital Commons at Otterbein. I also went through, and created needed metadata lists for the various types of materials in the DC. In doing so, I also noted that the Clay Symposium I helped with at the very beginning of my internship was now up in the DC.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.