• Journal of the Korean Society for information Management
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.189-205
• /
• 2013

This research analyzed how the main requisites of faceted navigation as names of facets, subterms of facets, order of facets, too many results were user-centric. On the research method, this research analyzed the results of the three keywords retrieved in the 15 university libraries' catalogs and how was user's familiarity to the terms. Although domestic universities have serviced facet navigation, the names of the facet of publication date and series title in format and the terms under the facets as multimedia and nonbook material, media material are too difficult intuitively to understand and there were lots of formal terms used in cataloging rules and the terms librarians have usually used. Because of the terms, there is high possibility to deteriorate users' satisfaction and usability to library catalog in future. Even though they serviced facet navigation, there was also weakness as too many results and the university libraries need to use relevance ranking method to solve the weakness. This research has found the possibility of being used too many of levels of the facets and this may also badly affect the users' experience to library catalog.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science
• /
• v.42 no.2
• /
• pp.147-170
• /
• 2008

Evaluation of an academic library is a key to its success. Library and Information Policy Bureau of the President of the Republic of Korea conducted a trial evaluation on academic libraries with a university evaluation index developed by KERIS in 2005. The committee decided to review its feasibility based on the feedbacks from the academic libraries after the trial. This study aims to address the indexing issues appeared during the trial and suggest a new evaluation index tailored to academic libraries. First, the evaluation field is condensed from 7 to 6 as "financing" and "infrastructure" are integrated into "budget and infrastructure." Secondly, both "user charter" and "planning" are removed from the "library management" field category. and "library self-assessment" is added instead. In "information resource" field, "non-books and etc." is added. Third, evaluation categories for "budget and infrastructure" field are altered to budget-related items and library equipment. Forth, "collection turnover rate" category is incorporated into "collection usage" in "information usage" field, and "library use rate" in "information service" field is moved to "information resource" field and renamed as "use rate."