[Web4lib] Alternatives to "Best Bets", etc. ?

[Linda Chenoweth]

John:
We decided to prioritize our subject guides for databases to give students a
single starting place, so we've listed one as "start here", then "more
choices" and "still more choices". Here's a sample:
http://www.wtamu.edu/library/research/masscomm.shtml

We haven't done any formal studies, but the anecdotal evidence I have
working at the reference desk is that it makes sense to our students.


Linda

Linda Chenoweth
Reference librarian, West Texas A&M University
Canyon TX
lchenoweth at wtamu.edu

On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 10:46 PM, John Kupersmith <jkup at jkup.net> wrote:

> Web4Lib & Usability4Lib folks
> (with apologies for cross-posting) --
>
> At MPOW we have been having a terminology conversation I expect you'll
> recognize:  In a subject list of article databases, how to indicate which
> ones our librarians have designated as especially useful?
>
> Our discussions so far have been inconclusive.  There's not much published
> data on this question (though a University of Washington study in 2004
> found
> that "Users are more likely to use 'Best Bets' than 'Core Resources'":
> http://www.lib.washington.edu/Usability/by-subj/).
>
> We're preparing an online survey to see if users have a clear preference.
>  The draft survey question offers these alternatives:
>
> ~~~
>   Best Bet
>   Core
>   Recommended
>   Staff Pick
>   other: ___________________
> ~~~
>
> Based on your experience, are there other alternatives we should include?
>  Any relevant usability test data?
>
> If this survey turns up anything useful, I'll share it with y'all.
>
> --jk
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>  John Kupersmith
>  Reference Librarian, Doe/Moffitt Libraries
>  University of California, Berkeley
>  jkup at jkup.net
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>
>


-- 
Linda Chenoweth