SPEC Kit 346: Scholarly Output Assessment Activities · 23
None of these services are widely marketed but are offered on an as-requested basis.
Our librarians in the health and natural sciences offer scholarly output assessment services while our librarians in the
social sciences and humanities do not. We see a higher demand for scholarly output assessment services among our
health and natural sciences researchers.
Our services are informal and as needed.
Scholarly output assessment will be a priority as it develops in areas of our new organizational structure.
Services are given by patron request mostly.
Services are not currently coordinated across the library system but are handled by the individual liaison and/or
department, depending on the researchers served.
Services are provided informally, usually through direct request to subject specialists, or at a service point. No distinction
made among groups of users except as noted directly above (also see comment above, re Law).
The above answers generally refer to the fact that we respond to questions about these topics. We don’t currently
provide a “service” related to bibliometrics, reports, etc.
We are interested in developing additional services (like those listed above) to be determined in consultation with
faculty about their interests and needs.
We have had collaborations or requests from many different types of groups: editors of undergraduate student journals
published through our institutional repository; Communication/Public Affairs; Institutional Planning Office; Research
Office; various individual faculty members; departments; faculties; and research groups. We’ve also collaborated with
graduate students in statistics and actuarial sciences for their expertise in conducting performance measurement work.
While we can and do offer assessment, there is no systematic provision or large scales requests for such information.
SCHOLARLY OUTPUT ASSESSMENT SOFTWARE/RESOURCES
6. Please indicate which of the following scholarly output assessment software/resources are used
by library staff and/or are recommended to library user groups. Also indicate if your library is
considering acquiring or using any of these tools that aren’t currently available. Please make one
selection per row. N=75
Software/Resources Library recommends
to users
For library staff
internal use only
Library is considering
acquiring or using
N
Web of Science 71 1 1 73
Google Scholar 70 0 0 70
Journal Citation Reports 68 2 0 70
Scopus 45 0 4 49
Altmetric.com 29 1 18 48
ImpactStory 34 2 8 44
SCImago 31 0 2 33
Book Citation Index 25 0 6 31
Plum Analytics 7 0 22 29