First thoughts on: Anuradha and Usha, Use of e-books in an academic and research environment: A case study from the Indian Institute of Science.

Program 40.1 (2006): p 48-62. doi: 10.1108/00330330610646807 (University of Illinois Access)

A quick note: I'm sorry that this doesn't quite follow my normal review style. I actually dredged this up from notes I took over two years ago on this article. I wanted to post them, though, because an article I'm reviewing right this moment (and am about to post a review for :) mentions this article and indicates that their own research is at odds with Anuradha and Usha's- an assertion I don't agree with. Rather than trying to just take a few excerpts from these notes and post them in the other review, I decided to just go ahead and post all my notes for this article. By the way, if you ever are wondering if I have notes on a publication regarding e-books (in particular academic e-books) on hand- well, I probably do. Just fire off an email or blog comment and I'll dig through my older notes for you.

Why should you read this: This is definitely a must-read for anyone interested in e-book use in academic libraries.

In Brief: Analysis of a 27 question e-mailed user survey of patrons of the Indian Institute of Science's 2,200+ active researchers (students and faculty) to which 101 responded in 2004 about their use of and feelings about e-books in general and several library trials from the publisher/vendors ebrary, Kluwer and Engineering Village. Starts with a good introduction to what e-books have been defined as in the past (50-51).

Key Quotes & My Thoughts:

Anuradha and Usha found, in their 27 question e-mailed user survey of patrons of the Indian Institute of Science's 2,200+ active researchers use of ebrary, Kluwer and Engineering Village that, "like all internet-based resource, e-books break down geographic barriers" (Anuradha and Usha, 49) which is true, in so much as too people at two different locations can access an e-book equally well, provided, of course, that they both can access the internet where they are. If they are not, then it is unlikely they will be able to use the e-book as easily as a traditional paper book. Although getting access initially to the book is enhanced, in cases where e-books can't be used offline, the print book, once initially obtained from the library, provides more consistently reliable continual access than most e-books, do to the unnecessary restrictions most e-book providers place on the ability to save or print e-books contents for offline viewing, even in those places without internet access. Anuradha and Usha summarize their own research and list the many real and potential advantages e-books have offered for several years now to both librarians and patrons but immediately acknowledge that "In spite of these advantages, e-books are still not very popular." Among the possible reasons they list for this are "limited availability of titles… difficulty in accessing computers or the internet… problems with printing and downloading" (Anuradha and Usha, 51).

Of the respondents (101) 60 had used e-books. Of these 60, 52 indicated that they would want to use/read e-books from the Library (54). This is not surprising, given then computer science, technology and other STM electronic publications generate more use than other subjects in most of the literature. What is surprising is that although 87 percent of the respondents who had used e-books at some point wanted to use e-books from the library, but that of the 55 respondents who gave an answer to the question "Overall how satisfied are you with eBooks?" none said they where extremely satisfied, while 37% said they here very satisfied, but 55% stated they where only somewhat satisfied while 8% where unsatisfied (Anuradha and Usha, 55). That means that although on the one hand this study indicates that 87% of the surveyed population wants to use library e-books, of those that have used them, fully 63% aren't satisfied with the e-books they have used. This, despite the fact that 70% would definitely recommend, and another 17% probably recommend, e-books to others. These seemingly incongruous findings might be accounted for when you consider the reasons they commonly gave for using e-books, and about what features of e-books that impressed respondents, the clear consensus of useful features were: search tools to locate words or quotes (72%) and instant access to content (63) followed by mobility (50%) (Anuradha and Usha, 56), so there are clearly features that are unique to the e-book as a location independent access as compared to the print book. However, mobility is a more difficult concept to define. Mobility as it pertains to e-books is usually tied to the DRM methods employed to protect the publishers content rights management and distribution interest. In all of the publishers listed in this study, there is no possibility for downloading e-books to a device that could later be used at a location that does not have access to the internet.

Among the respondents reasons for not using e-books, at the top of the lists where the fact that they where "hard to read/browse" at 22%, "lack of familiarity with products" at 19%, "used to reading print books and no wish to change" at 18% and cost at 17%. Another interesting reason, considering that all of these researchers have a high reported access and use of computer, with 100 having used a computer for over a year, and 80 percent having used computers for more than five years is that 11 percent reported difficulty in accessing computers/internet. This would seem to indicate that although they can access a computer and the internet periodically, it is not ubiquitous enough for them that they can always easily access they e-books under the format and conditions they where being provided by the publishers investigated in this survey… all publishers who subscribe to the "online or internet based" as opposed to "offline" (50).

"The main features of e-books that were disliked were the incompatibility between different suppliers,, lack of user friendliness of interfaces, the problems associated with usernames and passwords, and the variety of devices available in the market" (58).

"Thus, by carrying out user education, publicity, raising awareness about the software/hardware used for e-books, increasing bandwidth and making e-book reader devices available along with e-books through the libraries, the use of e-books can be increased" (59).

Web Accessibility for Online Learning

Web Accessibility for Online Learning, written by Hadi Rangin, Web Design and Accessibility Specialist for the Illinois Center for Information Technology and Web Accessibility, Disability Resources and Educational Services (DRES) (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) is a must read for anyone creating online course materials. You can meet Hadi in person at the upcoming Illinois Web Accessibility Conference and Expo on September 29th at the Alice Campbell Alumni Center in Urbana, Illinois.

New Apple iPod products out, but where's my 32/64 gig nano?

Ah Apple, how you wound me. So often you give me what I need (let's see, I own, or have owned, six- maybe seven - iPod variants over the years). And what I need now is a small, flash based MP3 player. I just love my 16 gig nano, but it's out of room. I had waited with bated breath for today's iPod rollout, expecting to see a new 32 gig (and maybe even a 64 gig) nano. And instead you just cram new features into the same old shell. A (video) camera, a larger screen, fm support (and recording) are all neat, but you could have just left those areas for the Touch (which is the bells and whistles model anyway). What I need is a single purpose device (mp3 player) that is super small, with enough flash based storage for all my content and a reasonable battery life. 32 gigs will do for my music, but now that I'm using Audible (after they finally upped their audio quality to the "enhanced" – which for me means tolerable – audio format) I need 64. I'll keep an eye out for the rest of the day. Maybe more models are yet to be announced? Hope, hope, hope…

Upcoming Event at the University of Illinois: Illinois Web Accessibility Conference and Expo

The Illinois Web Accessibility Conference and Expo is an all day event Tuesday, September 29th at the Alice Campbell Alumni Center at the University of Illinois. $50 (early registration, $75 after Sept. 22. Metered parking available $0,75/hour or get an all day parking pass for $9.00 from the Campus Parking Department)

Keynote Speaker: Victor Tsaran, Senior Accessibility Program Manager at Yahoo.

This will be the best bang for the buck as far as a accessibility conferences go (the price includes a boxed lunch)! And, if you're interested, I'll be part of one of the panel discussions (the Content Management Systems II: Illinois Efforts panel), so stop by and heckle me. :)

First thoughts on: Soules, The shifting landscape of e-books

New Library World 110.1/2 (2009): p7-21. doi: 10.1108/03074800910928559 (University of Illinois Access)

Why should you read this: This is a pretty good summary and comparison of the most salient and striking findings of the ebrary surveys. I also enjoyed the author's own insights gained from on-the-ground interactions with users, librarians, and library staff. If you haven't read the ebrary surveys yourself (and don't feeling like wading through them) this article serves as a pretty good surrogate. It's also well written and a generally pleasurable read.

In Brief: Review of the some findings in the 2007-2008 ebrary e-book survey of libraries, librarians, and users about their perceptions and use of e-books, with added information provided from the author's own experiences.

My thoughts:

I understand the author's desire to see the teaching of the advanced features of e-book not supported (or at least certainly frowned upon :) in the print world- like annotating and highlighting text, or the automatic creation of citations, or any cool, useful feature that would, once taught, drive students to use e-books. However, at this point in the evolution and adoption of the e-book, that just doesn't seem practical. Every vendor/publisher platform offers different variations of "advanced features," and e-books as content are very transitory at this point (see the author's mention of a chapter of one e-book being revoked, or e-books moving between platforms from year to year). On the other hand, if we do come to a point where there is a standard file format for e-books that users can download and permanently archive (similar to a PDF, but based on something more flexible and non-proprietary, like the open .epub standard as a delivery format and not, as it seems more likely to become, an industry storage/exchange format that gets converted to a proprietary format for delivery to end users) then at that point we can start to teach advanced ways to interact with e-books (like highlighting and annotating). Once those features can easily be overlaid onto e-books, independent of the platform they were hosted on/delivered through, in a completely publisher/vendor agnostic way (think of the various open standards that dictate how web content is authored, and how any number of web browser and other application can easily manipulate this content in any way), then, at that point, we should rush out and start teaching users how these advanced approaches can make their digital consumption easier and richer (at the same time :) than print consumption. Once we get to that point (_sigh_, I mean if) then librarians and instructors can begin to offer lessons on the advanced manipulation of texts, knowing that the tool they are teaching (say the Zotero of e-book markup and manipulation) will remain available to their students for use indefinitely (okay, I know that's never going to happen, where talking about file formats and electronic devices after all) or at least for a reasonably long period of time, then we teach them how.

Interesting quote: "Fundamentally important is the need to broaden the concept of an e-book" p.10

Interesting quote: "Ability for more than one student to use an e-book at the same time… When students reach the [license based access] limit, they do not know why… They do not connect e-books with the concept of circulation. They are used to entering databases without a user limit." P. 13

Interesting quote: "The students… basically want to cut and paste into their research papers, print for easier reading or reading when online is not practical (on public transit, for example), or download to use later… One [barrier to this use] is clearly copyright and publisher concerns." p.13

Interesting quote: "There are a couple of other drivers that will influence how soon students become fully used to e-books. One of these is the textbook market." p.14

Interesting quote: "Thus, the tide appears to be shifting generally in science, humanities, and social sciences, with e-books undergoing a slow evolution rather than a dramatic revolution." p.15

Interesting quote: "Faculty does think that there are too many technical restrictions on e-books, citing printing, number of users, etc." p.16

Interesting quote: "e-books currently tend to be more expensive than print books." P.17

Interesting quote: "Despite the issues and despite slower-than-expected evolution, e-books prevail" p.19

Warning- nitpicking and good-natured ribbing follows. I have a slight issue with the word choice here. I don't feel that e-books, at this point, have really lived up to the hype to the point where I'd see them as deserving of the term prevail, as in
"effectual or efficacious; successful." If we consider the generally obsolete use of the term, "to become very strong; to gain vigour or force; to increase in strength," well, that I'll give the academic e-book market. They have been gaining force/popularity/prominence, just not at the rate we'd like (and keep getting promised).

I do concur with the authors conclusion that the ascendency of the e-book in general (and academic use/prominence in academic libraries in particular) is happening now, and will displace print books eventually, although the exact format of and method of delivery/access may change dramatically before we get to that point. The author, wisely (unlike many pervious e-books proselytizers) is not lured into making predictions on just when this might happen.

First thoughts on: Abdullah & Gibb, Students' attitudes towards e-books in a Scottish higher education institution: part 3

Library Review 58.1 (2009): p17-27. doi: 10.1108/00242530910928906 (University of Illinois Access)

Why should you read this: Well written and concise. I personally found it very thought provoking (although I'm betting there are many, many articles and blog posts out there that suggest largely the same things I do…) Although this article generated some interesting ideas for me (see My Initial Thoughts) I found the study too limited to be of practical, generalized applicability (see In Brief) when considering the performance of TOC versus BOB indexes versus full-text searching.

In Brief: 45 users (Masters students in the department of Computer and Information Science) were studied as they attempted to perform tasks related to locating relevant content (quick look-up reference style consultation, not in-depth reading, related to quick factual items in the books, or drawing conclusions through analysis of small portions of the e-book) in PDF format e-books (non-fiction, Computer Science, with TOCs and indexes), contrasting the effectiveness (defined by authors as how efficient/fast the task was completed, how effective/successful the task was performed, and how useful the user perceived each feature to be) of full-text-searching, Table of Contents, and the Index to locate the necessary information. The study finds that the use of the Index was more efficient (faster) that using the TOC of FTS, but not necessarily more effective (correct answer located) than using either the Table of Contents or full-text searching.

My initial thoughts: Limiting the type of e-book studied to PDFs was probably overly restrictive, and the biggest weakness of this study. It makes this more an evaluation of Adobe Acrobat Reader Search within PDF documents versus more traditional (print media) tools for finding information (TOC and index), than an actual evaluation of the comparative usefulness of full-text searching over the use of TOCs and indexes. In other e-book platforms, full-text searching is not necessarily so brute force (find this word/phrase, then keep clicking through each occurrence, in a linear fashion, until you find the most relevant section) and often does (or could) employ more advanced relevancy ranking techniques (even those based on additional text mark-up practices) than the search functionality in PDF documents. Thus, I don't think I find the author's evaluation that indexes are generally more efficient for finding information that full-text searching to be very persuasive. Even the PDF search tool could (if Adobe chose to do so) be vastly improve to offer a more relevancy ranked set of results to full-text searching rather than just marching linearly through all matching keywords in the document (so long as additional metadata was available for that particular PDF document). The very back of book indexes the authors find so useful could easily, in an electronic format, be used to weight full-text keyword searchers more highly, using the existing data already provided in the BOB index and TOC. In that scenario, if a user searchers for a keyword at it appears in the index or TOC, or especially in both, then the search results would offer the pages reference in the TOC and index with those matching keywords first, and only offer the rest of the linear results second), marrying the convenience of automated full-text searching with the added value of human created indexes.

However, I agree wholeheartedly with the researcher's assertion that (basically) TOC and BOB indexes (indexes in particular) are generally really good things. When the age of the e-book finally arrives, we'll still need actual humans to continue to create and apply meta-data of all types to books (and many other types of information), particularly in the areas of creating indexes.

The authors' argument that including TOC and BOB index information as searchable content in library catalogs does seem like a good one. I'd even go so far as to say that TOC and index terms should probably be given a heavier weight in ranking results than term in the subject/descriptor fields, especially for narrowly defined tasks like finding a small particularly relevant bit of information in a book, versus wanting to find and read an entire book about a topic. But, I think that would only be a small, baby-step towards the inevitable type of information interfaces users want (or will want) – to be able to run a single, full text search across all the relevant content within their domain (or related domains). This means a we need a single search tool that provides full-text searching across books, journals, web sites, basically anything the librarians choose to include in the, for lack of a better word, catalog. Of course, pulling this overwhelming amount of content together and returning the results in a well sorted, relevancy ranked way for the end user will require that we do more than simple TFIDF style rankings. We'll need to leverage that incredibly useful additional human-generated metadata, like that contained in indexes (and in the future, through additional mark-up applied directly to the texts, internally, rather than as separate entities like most indexes currently are). I know I would much rather use that mythical catalog for searching, and have it return not only the metadata about the book (title, subjects, etc) but show me the keywords in context of the most relevant page that contains my keywords, based on that ever so useful information contained in the TOS, index (and someday) internal text-markup. Imagine a day when the indexing of books will not simply point to the page, in a serialized linear way that have a significant use of the word/term/concept, but where each entry in the index is individually weighted. In that case, we might find that a search determines that the use of the term the user entered occurs on page 37 of the book, and is ranked the #1 most important use of the term in the book, even though the term appears 17 times in the book before that point, so it lists page 37 first, rather than the preceding pages that contain the term. Combine this with multiple word searches (or for truly advanced users, nested Boolean searches) and we can suddenly get very fancy with the ranking algorithms. A user searches for [term1 AND term2]. The search/ranking algorithm finds that (along with all the other occurrence of the term) that these terms only appear on the same page/close to each other a few times- term 1 appears on page 17, rank #3, and page 33 rank #2, and page 56 rank#50; term 2 appears on page 17 rank #15, page 33 rank #48 and page 56 rank # 11. We can calculate that page 17, even though it isn't ranked #1 for either term, may very well be the "best" result to offer to the user first, with the same logic applied to sort and organize all the rest of the term matches.

404 Tech Support to the Rescue – netbook touchpad annoyances

Jason overheard me grumbling with a friend about an annoying problem we both had with our netbooks- that the touchpad on them, even at the lowest sensitivity setting, picks up accidental brushes of our palms when typing (especially when typing in a hurry). The result was the cursor jumps to somewhere unexpected, and (worst case scenario) highlights a huge section of the document for overtyping. Ack. He had already tracked down a solution, and sent it my way. I felt like I should share. :)

404 Tech Support: A Week of Google Code, Day 1: touchfreeze