Advertisement

An Evaluation System for Digital Libraries

  • Alexander Nussbaumer
  • Eva-Catherine Hillemann
  • Christina M. Steiner
  • Dietrich Albert
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7489)

Abstract

Evaluation is an important task for digital libraries, because it reveals relevant information about their quality. This paper presents a conceptual and technical approach to support the systematic evaluation of digital libraries in three ways and a system is presented that assists during the entire evaluation process. First, it allows for formally modelling the evaluation goals and designing the evaluation process. Second, it allows for data collection in a continuous and non-continuous, invasive and non-invasive way. Third, it automatically creates reports based on the defined evaluation models. On the basis of an example evaluation it is outlined how the evaluation process can be designed and supported with this system.

Keywords

evaluation evaluation system digital libraries continuous data collection evaluation report 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Reeves, T.C., Apedoe, X., Woo, Y.: Evaluating digital libraries: a user-friendly guide. National Science Digital Library (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Khoo, M., MacDonald, C.: An Organizational Model for Digital Library Evaluation. In: Gradmann, S., Borri, F., Meghini, C., Schuldt, H. (eds.) TPDL 2011. LNCS, vol. 6966, pp. 329–340. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fuhr, N., Tsakonas, G., Aalberg, T., Agosti, M., Hansen, P., Kapidakis, S., Klas, C.P., Kovcs, L., Landoni, M., Micsik, A., Papatheodorou, C., Peters, C., Solvberg, I.: Evaluation of digital libraries. International Journal on Digital Libraries 8, 21–38 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Patton, M.: Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1990)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cook, J.: Evaluating learning technology ressources (2002), http://www.alt.ac.uk/docs/eln014.pdf
  6. 6.
    Schmitz, H.C., Scheffel, M., Friedrich, M., Jahn, M., Niemann, K., Wolpers, M.: CAMera for PLE. In: Cress, U., Dimitrova, V., Specht, M. (eds.) EC-TEL 2009. LNCS, vol. 5794, pp. 507–520. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brooke, J.: Sus: a ”quick and dirty” usability scale. In: Jordan, P., Thomas, B., Weerdmeester, B., McClelland, A.L. (eds.) SUS: a”quick and dirty” usability scale. Taylor and Francis, LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Thong, J., Hong, W., Tam, K.: Understanding user acceptance of digital libraries: what are the roles of interface characteristics, organizational context, and individual differences. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 57, 215–242 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexander Nussbaumer
    • 1
  • Eva-Catherine Hillemann
    • 1
  • Christina M. Steiner
    • 1
  • Dietrich Albert
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Knowledge Management InstituteGraz University of TechnologyAustria
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of GrazAustria

Personalised recommendations