Based on six (partially) completed questionnaires.
The College Art Participants did not have
great familiarity with the AMICO database prior to coming to the Focus group
meeting. They reported an average of 3 on a scale of 1-5 (I've explored
The AMICO Library myself before coming here), but some commented that this
experience consisted of as little as ten minutes.
As a consequence of having little experience
with the Library, and probably also of having less experience with on-line
systems in general, they had little to say about the RLG application appearance
or functionality. Where they did rank features, there was little consensus.
Perhaps the single issue that attracted attention was the perceived need
for an improved Notebook function (ranked 2.25 on a scale of 1-high to 3-low
and commented on elsewhere under saving previous search sets.
- Where: Somewhat surprisingly,
CAA participants ranked the Library as first in places AMICO would be
used by themselves and their students, followed by the visual resources
collection, home and office. The classroom was checked by only one CAA
participant, and as relevant only to students!
- Linkages: CAA participants saw
links to ART History texts, Course web sites and local slide libraries
as valuable. Links to encyclopedias, on-line library catalogs, personal
databases were ranked lower.
When asked to indicate percentages of The AMICO Library of particular genres, sources, cultures, or historical periods,
CAA participants were unable to suggest targets, but in general they expressed
the view that breadth was preferable, and that under-represented and hard
to get works and collections should be featured. Perhaps surprisingly, they
agreed that works that we would not expect from known collections, and works
from relatively unknown collections, were preferred. Also, modern and contemporary
work was seen as a positive. They were interested in being able to provide
suggestions about content to AMICO, but in a more general fashion rather
than requesting specific works.
CAA participants would like to see works
included in The AMICO Library even if full rights are not available - in
general with rights enumerated at the item level. They would be interested
in having links to where other rights can be obtained and possibly links
to agreements offered by rights holders, but do not feel this should be
incorporated at an extra cost.
- In general, the CAA participants felt
it was desirable for almost anyone to be a user; they agree that it was
essential to include Distance Education students.
- Currently allowed uses: CAA participants
were adamant that viewing, use on course web sites, and research uses
be permitted but were willing to give up (or probably to sometimes not
have) copying to CD or slides, overlaying images, manipulating them, or
incorporating them into one's own art work.
- Currently prohibited uses: Not surprisingly
CAA participants were interested in having the right to publish in academic
journals and in retaining for educational use after the license term.
When asked for the value of such a post-use copy, however, they felt it
was less that $5 (our lowest number) - possibly only $1 per image. All
thought that faculty being able to retain copies for research was an important
extension of the existing rights.
- By and large, CAA participants were not
willing to report on use, though two felt that reporting on copying would