Evaluation of an Academic Library’s Liquid Designed Website
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective – When the Harold B. Lee Library (HBLL) at Brigham Young University released a new website with same-look capabilities for computers, tablets, and smartphones, we undertook a summative assessment to review website features and to determine baseline measures of website access via device and patron group. Methods – The study used a mixed methods approach using three levels of assessment (focus groups, an online survey, and a usability test), with each level informing the subsequent level. Results – The website changes were well-received by the overwhelming majority of patrons. Device usage was associated with the type of task for which patrons were accessing the website. Computers were used primarily for research-related tasks (e.g., accessing journals, databases, and the main search bar). Smartphones were used primarily for on-the-go tasks (e.g., accessing personal accounts, finding library hours, and reserving group study rooms). Tablets fell between these two. Several website services were identified as being underused. Study results were moderated by time of release (i.e., only half of survey participants had viewed the new website) and access to device (i.e., many patrons did not have access to a tablet or a smartphone). Conclusions – The summative assessment of the HBLL’s new website was well-received and viewed as a positive change. While most patrons were initially unaware of the same-look feature across devices, this was considered to be a positive change. As devices become more accessible for patrons, it is believed that website access by device will change. A follow-up study is planned to assess any changes in use patterns or use of access devices.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".