Metadata Collection the HLSI Way

1
Metadata Collection the HLSI Way

• Kieran OFarrell
• HLSI Software Developer

2
Utilisation of metadata collection application

• The metadata application sits within e-cat.
• e-cat is used to create IMS compliant content
  packages from within Word
• Metadata can be added to the manifest, item and
  file elements of the IMS content package

3
Utilisation of metadata collection application

• It is also used in the Update Metadata
  application which modifies/corrects metadata
  records directly from within the repository

4
Benefits of metadata

• Good metadata allows users to retrieve materials
  quickly and easily from a repository.
• Poor metadata means that the resource is
  invisible and remains unused.

5
Initial experience with HLSI metadata

• A single metadata record was duplicated, for many
  or all components of a package
• The terminology used by the metadata authors was
  not consistent
• Descriptions of the objects characteristics not
  the content.
• Frequent spelling mistakes
• Inappropriate use of default values

6
Where we believe we went wrong

• Assumed ownership by resource author would bring
  responsibility for metadata quality
• Authors lacked the time
• Failed to understand purpose of metadata fields
  or appreciate its value.

7
Where it all began

• June 2003
• Group of librarians from South Yorkshire colleges
  meet to look at existing metadata entry
  application
• Feedback from this group
• Focus group emerged

8
The Process

• Monthly meetings involving software developer
  advising and amending
• 2 librarians
• 1 tutor
• 1 software developer
• Super users and experts invited to feed back

9
What we did

• Forms dissected to ascertain what was
  appropriate for tutors and what should be left to
  experts
• Motivation not to bog down tutors who were
  being creative
• Identified need for authority file

10
Subject areas

• Manufacturing (S. Yorkshire)
• Engineering (W. Yorkshire)
• Agriculture (Humber)
• Food Processing (Humber)
• No off the shelf solution
• Harvest thesauri of college catalogues

11
Rationale for involvement of experts

• Time constraints
• Importance of staff having quality experience
  when searching
• Existing search facility not aligned to curriculum

12
Classification system

• Refinements emerging led to decision to use JACS
• Joint Academic Coding System
• Complete Classification
• Used within JORUM project and increasingly used
  for coding purposes

13
Software development strategy

• Implemented specifications
• Based on LOM Core with extensions
• Extensively tested with users for feedback
• Developed interfaces to hide specifications
• Used technology to satisfy user requirements for
  ease of data entry

14
Human aspects of development emphasised by the
group

• Communicate metadata issues in understandable
  terms
• Technology and specifications important, but not
  to the end user
• Real, busy people who need a solution that fits
• Metadata collection must become an everyday
  activity

15
Recommendations for metadata application

• Make the application less threatening by
  simplifying the entry form
• Reduce number of tabs on the entry form
• Use vocabularies that are relevant to the UK FE
  sector
• Divide metadata creation process into a two part
  collaborative process.

16
Two part process

• The roles
• Subject specialist - basic
• Metadata specialist / Information scientist
  advanced
• Not a strict demarcation

17
Basic Metadata

• The subject specialists enters
• Title
• Description
• Keywords
• Educational attributes
• Any relevant technical information
• Provide wizard to assist entry of basic metadata

18
Advanced metadata

• Metadata specialist
• Reviews and validates basic metadata
• Adds JACS classification for the resource
• Checks and validates keywords against authority
  file
• Completes where possible contributor information
  and meta-metadata contributor
• Enters where possible accessibility information

19
Use of metadata templates

• Metadata templates used by subject specialists
• Templates used to eliminate the need to
  repetitively add similar information
• Metadata validator details are stored and can be
  easily entered

20
May 2004

• Regional meeting of librarians to test interface
• Guidelines required for standardising metadata gt
  quality
• South Yorkshire focus group reconvenes to
• Disseminate
• Establish standards

21
Next step Summer 2004

• Another regional event to disseminate guidelines
• Mentoring by expert from South Yorkshire
• Creation of discussion area through JISC to
  metadata practitioners for support/suggests
• Working with developers to update authority file