Taxonomy of Dr-Ntu in Singapore
The acronyms must be rephrased, explained or removed from the original taxonomy. The ANTI student who studying in Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information is ONLY able to acquire one major’s exam paper. Access to other departments is restricted which immensely reduces the searching efficiency. By searching with a specific thesis, some departments are found without any submitted document. We are suggested to delete or hide it to avoid misunderstanding according to the searching result “Recent Submissions”.There is no statement about submission towards this department; also “Recent Submissions” is easily be deemed to have some uploaded document.
3. 3. Suggestions from external people: The homepage of digital repository seems to be hidebound as users’ opinion; some focal issues must be highlighted with the aim of catching the eyeballs. Awarded paper and most viewed thesis ought to be posted on the top of the user interface, or creates a board to list out most downloaded as well as suggested reading for the user.People outside of ANTI considered the classification of open access and restricted access as very inconvenient. Others mentioned than two types can be subdivided but not for searching the information. With more items retrieved, the easier way for user to identify what they are looking for.
4. Problems Encountered In the meanwhile, the users were sharing their ideas with us, we realized that the functioning taxonomy has been integrated into the user interface. There are difficulties for users who do not have the expertise to identify and separate with clarity the taxonomy from all the interface.Even though we have guided them back to the taxonomy, the users are still focusing on the function of user interface rather than taxonomy. In this vein we found many suggestions and ways to improve the portal but there are outside of the present work which is focus just on the taxonomy. In addition we compare with the taxonomy Of institutional repositories Of other universities like Victoria university of Wellington, we found very similar structures to the one of NUT. By the time that we are reconstructing the on-going taxonomy, problems about the selection of terms has arisen.
As it was mentioned, a huge amount of acronyms are used in the current taxonomy (e. G. EYE is the acronym of School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering). Some of the ANTI students are not able to recognize the internal academic hierarchy, not even the outsiders. People might not understand what the acronym stands for, more than that might causes ambiguity. We did not come to an agreement on choosing representative terms firstly, some of our group member insisted academic structure should be included into modified taxonomy.As a matter of fact, the embedded school list will only make the classification more tedious and giddy.
Nevertheless, there is another way to maintain the function by deleting the list is to transform and put it into search field. A reticular school can be located by advance search with an appropriate keyword. 5. Steps Taken for the Development of the Taxonomy Prototype The first step for the development of the taxonomy prototype was to understand the current taxonomy of DRY-NUT. In this Stage it was Very important to understand how the current taxonomy was developed.The current taxonomy of DRY-ANTI is based according with the internal academic units of .NET.
This approach takes into account the users, mostly ANTI users, and the administrative organization of the intellectual units of NUT. In this vein, the DRY-NUT is focus on the .NET community, this despite heir goal of serve to the global community. We consider that this must change if the repository has the purpose of being friendlier with people outside from .NET. The current taxonomy copy and adapt the LLC scheme and some thesaurus of specific areas.We consider that useful to classify and tagging the information but maybe for the taxonomy this must be reconsidered.
In the review of the current taxonomy and the construction of the new prototype we consult to users opinions of the current taxonomy and about their needs, we consider extremely important to take in account that the episiotomy will be used for not NUT users. According with this approach we consider more important the opinion of users that are not familiar with the academic and administrative organization of ANTI.Review and 5. 1. Selection of Appropriate Terms The current DRY-ANTI taxonomy adopted the Library of Congress Classification (LLC) as a framework. The adoption of this guideline helps to the librarians and users to the construction and navigation of the repository’ because the LLC is familiar to both. However, the DRY-.
NET is based on the LLC but is adapted to the specific needs to .NET. The changes are appropriate to fit the current research topics and centers Of the university with the aim Of being more user friendly.The DRY-ANTI has these main modifications: * More synthetic structure, its structure is based on the NUT research areas and the programmer of study. In our opinion, this is something that could be an obstacle for being user friendly if is focus on the global academic community. * The main categories are indexed in alphabetic order. Identification of Main Categories and Terms The categories and terms of the DRY-NUT pretend to be an intermediate point twine very particular and very general terms, allowing to users to navigate through main subject areas.
The terms are based on the LLC, this is helpful for the librarians and for the tagging of the documents but maybe is not flexible enough for the user needs. Following the LLC scheme the categories going from general to specific. In the DRY-NUT when the NUT community upload their documents they choose the terms and categories for their classification. Nonetheless, the library staffs of ANTI revised and edit the entries. The DRY-NUT take in account several thesaurus and taxonomies of specific fields.When we are dealing with the selection of the terms for the taxonomy, we must take in account that’ll the words chosen to the candidate terms should be meaningful, in another words, must contain certain meaning of a category or a group of things. In addition, the candidate terms should be efficient, which means they represent the common sense of that category accepted by general public.
In the specific research domain or academic association, candidate terms should be representative of connotation and extension for each subject. (Julie, G. In the case of our taxonomy one example is about the term Author. The word ‘Author’ is chosen to be candidate term, because user can differentiate works from the books or articles written by other people. 6. Main Differences The main difference between the original taxonomy and the prototype is that different communities categorize the original taxonomy while the hierarchy of our prototype is based on the different kinds of resources (Diagram 1). Diagram 1 This prototype of DRY-NUT taxonomy aims to improve the user experience providing a more convenient website to browse.
We made a user survey from the feedback users who are searching the resources in the digital repository he existing taxonomy is not very efficient. Once a student enters the digital repository, firstly he should choose the access (either open access or restricted access), then he has to choose the community where the resource lies in. As the matter of fact, there are hundreds of schools and institutes in ANTI (Diagram 2), it would take a lot of time to locate the information what he is looking for.Diagram 2 In our prototype we delete all sub-categories under the category of college to avoid the redundancy. That allows each category in our taxonomy maximum three levels in the hierarchy. The example is in Diagram 3. In order to be efficient and user friendly, we added tags to each article.
Tag of Communities, Titles, Authors, Date and Subjects would be added as attributes to all articles. In addition, we created a search function (Diagram 4), by which user can key in text or select the tags to search the information they want.Diagram 3 Diagram 4 The differences of terms using in our prototype will be discussed in this part. In our prototype, we gave explanations and definitions to some acronyms to avoid ambiguity. For example: Exam paper Schools College of Business (NBS) We modified the ERM of College of Business (NBS) as below: College of Business (Nanning Business School NBS) Among this taxonomy, it was interesting to notice that under the category of Research Centers and Institutes every sub-category has an acronym except NUT-PAD Categorical Research Centre.The N TU-PAD Categorical Research Centre was established in 1993 by Nanning Technological University (NUT) and the PAD Corporation. Hence, we created an acronym for it as GAR.
7. Conclusion The taxonomy of DRY-.NET is strongly based on a library classification (LLC) which is helpful for librarians but not for the public and users in general. In another hand, the structured based on the academic communities is inconvenient for those whom are not part of .NET community, and also for those who are part of N TU this structure is quite confusing.