Hazel Rothera
My feedback
-
49 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment An error occurred while saving the comment Hazel Rothera
commented
Even worse, we get lots of accidentally-nested sections where because of the lack of contrast, lecturers don't realise that they've made Week 7 a subsection of Week 6 which is a subsection of Week 5 etc... all the way back to Week 1! Takes *forever* to unpick!
Hazel Rothera
supported this idea
·
-
34 votes
With the changes to the list edit screens we are keen to review this and make it possible to undo some actions within the list.
An error occurred while saving the comment Hazel Rothera
commented
I think this would be particularly useful given the very limited colour contrast between sections and background in New List View/Edit (very subtle shades of grey) which means my academics are often not doing things to the level of the list that they think they are working in. It's very easy to fail to distinguish between deleting an item and deleting a whole section. An alternative would be to have different confirmation messages depending on what was being deleted, eg "Do you really want to delete this WHOLE SECTION and all the items within it from your list?"
-
19 votesHazel Rothera
supported this idea
·
-
32 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Hazel Rothera
commented
The argument I can see against this would be that on a very long list, in particular, just relying on seeing the NEW flag against an item might make it too difficult to spot which were new items (we only check new items in review generally, not the whole list, particularly at peak times). Would this need to be combined with a filter which made it possible to select only NEW items to show on the Review screen?
-
4 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Hazel Rothera
commented
Do you mean View Later Editions? If so, I can see what you mean but I have to be honest, we have largely stopped using this alert because it is so inaccurate. It goes off publication dates not edition statements, so picks up paperbacks, e-books, etc which are not new editions at all - the vast majority of the time when it says there's a newer edition there isn't, so we have pretty much given up on even checking it...
-
60 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Hazel Rothera
commented
Very much agree with Catherine's comment of 30th January about the wording of the Unpublished Changes banner for those who have Force Review on. I hadn't noticed that, as I have Acquisitions role myself so don't see the same wording! Should definitely be changed as Catherine suggests, to make it clearer that the list will NOT be reviewed until the academic hits Publish.
Hazel Rothera
shared this idea
·
-
19 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Hazel Rothera
commented
Yes, agree, for the same reasons as highlighted by Alice. Our library staff also find the in-built search problematic because it turns off the blue editing bar. Example scenario: an academic has made such a mess of a bookmark that rather than editing their bookmark, it's quicker to navigate to the item anew (eg journal article) and re-bookmark it. However, you then need to know where in the list the academic's original bookmark is, so you can drop your replacement one next to it and then delete the dud one. Once you've used Search to locate the dud bookmark, you then can't add your new one as the blue Edit bar is gone. So have to revert to the four-step process outlined by Alice.
Hazel Rothera
supported this idea
·
-
14 votes3 comments · Talis Aspire Reading Lists » Viewing Lists & Items · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →Hazel Rothera
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Hazel Rothera
commented
We've been told for years that the ability to set citation display styles in New List View was "coming" and our academics are desperate for it - would really like it bumped up the development queue!
-
36 votesHazel Rothera
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Hazel Rothera
commented
There are other reasons it would be useful to be able to include comments in the Review CSV. I've just finished reviewing a long list where I need to include feedback to the lecturer on nearly every item (eg "not in stock, insufficient funds currently to purchase this"), "more recent edition in Library", etc). If Review comments could be exported, I could have edited the CSV and used this as the basis of my feedback to her. As it is I shall have to do a lot of copying and pasting!
-
71 votesHazel Rothera
supported this idea
·
-
11 votes
We will be enabling this as part of the New List Edit so that you can perform the same View and Export options as you can without needing to switch to the student view.
Hazel Rothera
supported this idea
·
-
18 votesHazel Rothera
shared this idea
·
-
45 votes
We are investigating the possibilities of this and the priority within the Continuous Improvement work.
Hazel Rothera
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Hazel Rothera
commented
There's been no update on the comments below from myself and Rachel, dating back to last April. Could we have an update/clarification on a) whether Dashboard/Analytics in New List View does count clicks from "View Online" and b) if not, whether this can be prioritised?
We are starting to get questions, in the current financial climate, from University leaders about the value of Aspire and like Maria, we are really handicapped in demonstrating the value of it by the fact that a great deal of our users' likely engagement (by clicking on Online Resource/View Online blue buttons) isn't being measured by Dashboard/Analytics.
An error occurred while saving the comment Hazel Rothera
commented
I thought I had picked up from somewhere that in New List View, the Dashboard *is* going to count clicks through from "View Online" - have I got that wrong??
-
17 votesHazel Rothera
shared this idea
·
-
30 votesHazel Rothera
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Hazel Rothera
commented
Tend to agree with both of you: a) the exclamation mark is generally ignored, because so many different things trigger it; and b) agree with Rachel that the "New edition" function is so inaccurate as to be useless. It appears to go off publication dates rather than edition statements, so things like e-books, paperback reprints, etc appear to trigger it. It would be so helpful if the New Edition flag were actually meaningful and reliable!
-
12 votes1 comment · Talis Aspire Reading Lists » Viewing Lists & Items · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →Hazel Rothera
shared this idea
·
-
8 votes
This is not currently in our near term development focus so it has been moved to the longer term backlog. It will be merged with a similar existing idea.
Ideas may be graduated from the backlog as we get through the ones that are planned.
Hazel Rothera
supported this idea
·
-
7 votes1 comment · Talis Aspire Reading Lists » Viewing Lists & Items · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
This idea is under review.
Hazel Rothera
supported this idea
·
-
35 votes
We would like to consider this when we next review the acquisitions area of Talis Aspire.
Hazel Rothera
supported this idea
·
-
94 votesbacklog · 21 comments · Talis Aspire Reading Lists » Reviews · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →Hazel Rothera
supported this idea
·
Here's a typical example...