Library Assessment in North America Stephanie Wright, University of Washington Lynda S. White,...
-
Upload
jerome-bradford -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
2
Transcript of Library Assessment in North America Stephanie Wright, University of Washington Lynda S. White,...
Library Assessment in North America
Stephanie Wright, University of WashingtonLynda S. White, University of Virginia
American Library Association Mid-Winter Conference
January 11, 2008
Association of Research Libraries Sessions
Background
May-June 2007 74 respondents (60%) 85% from US academic libraries 12% from Canadian academic
libraries 3% from public libraries
In the beginning…
17
18
11
4
9
2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
<1980 1980-84 1985-89 1990-94 1995-99 2000>
Impetus for Assessment
Desire to know more about your customers 91.3%
Investigation of possible new library services or resources
71.0%
Desire to know more about your processes 65.2%
Desire to identify library performance objectives 62.3%
Need to reallocate library resources 55.1%
Accountability requirements from your parent institution 37.7%
Institutional or programmatic accreditation process 29.0%
Other (please specify) 23.2%
Proposal from staff member with assessment knowledge
17.4%
Assessment Methods
% Used Currently
% Used Previously
Statistics gathering (e.g., e-resource usage, gate counts, ARL statistics, etc.) 98.6% 1.4%
Suggestion Box 82.2% 8.2%
Web usability testing 80.8% 12.3%
User interface usability 78.1% 12.3%
Surveys developed elsewhere (e.g., CSEQ, LibQUAL+®) 75.3% 20.5%
Focus Groups 69.9% 21.9%
Data mining and analysis 58.9% 8.2%
Facilities use studies 56.2% 30.1%
Statistics inventory 54.8% 12.3%
Student learning outcomes evaluations 54.8% 15.1%
Interviews 52.1% 30.1%
Online user feedback (pop-up windows, etc.) 52.1% 24.7%
Observation 50.7% 30.1%
Benchmarking 50.7% 15.1%
Locally designed user satisfaction survey 49.3% 42.5%
Areas Assessed: >80%
Website 100.0%
Electronic Resources 98.4%
User Instruction 97.6%
Collections 97.6%
Reference 96.0%
Online Catalog 94.6%
Facilities 94.0%
Circulation/Reserve 93.8%
Interlibrary Loan 93.4%
Branch Libraries 88.5%
Digital Initiatives 85.7%
Shelving 84.8%
Acquisitions 84.5%
Selectors/Subject Liaisons 81.8%
Cataloging 80.5%
Areas Assessed: <80%
Staff Training/Development 79.8%
Special Collections 77.9%
IT Systems 76.7%
Preservation 74.0%
Work Climate 69.3%
Other 57.1%
Administration 56.3%
Financial/Business Services 52.9%
Development/Fundraising 45.5%
Human Resources 43.1%
Publicity/Marketing 37.3%
Responsibility for Assessment
30.00%
18.57%17.14%
15.71%
12.86%
5.71%
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
Other Part-timeCoordinator
StandingCommittee
Full-timeCoordinator
Department Ad hocCommittee
Growth of Assessment
4
1
12
1
10
9
1
4
7
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1980s 1990s 2000s
Nu
mb
er o
f p
rog
ram
s
Ad Hoc Committee (4)
Part-time Coordinator (13)
Full-time Coordinator (11)
Department (9)
Standing Committee (12)
Importance of Assessment
Reporting Levels
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
1 Level 2 Levels 3 Levels
Full-time
Part-time
Dept Head
Assessment Tasks
Analyzes, interprets, and reports on data collected in assessment activities
95.9%
Consults with staff on assessment methods and needs 93.9%
Performs assessment activities 87.8%
Monitors/coordinates assessment projects throughout the library
77.6%
Coordinates collection of data across the library 75.5%
Submits external surveys (ARL, ALS, NATC, American Library Directory, etc.)
69.4%
Coordinates the reporting/archiving of the library’s statistical data
67.3%
Fills requests for library data 67.3%
Provides training on assessment topics 55.1%
Other (please specify) 26.5%
Approves assessment projects throughout the library 24.5%
Distribution of Results
LibraryStaff
ParentInstitution
GeneralPublic
Web site 81% 58% 57%
Library newsletter articles 65% 51% 39%
Print reports (e.g., annual report)
71% 57% 26%
Presentations 84% 46% 16%
E-mail announcements 84% 23% 6%
Campus newsletter articles 23% 45% 20%
Other 6% 0% 0%
Assessment Website Content
answer optionsStaff-onlyWebsite
Publicly Accessible
Website N
General library statistics 69% 53% 71
Analysis of assessment activity results
62% 47% 63
Assessment data 55% 28% 48
Presentations 52% 31% 48
Publications 34% 43% 45
Online assessment tools (e.g., surveys)
45% 21% 38
Links to other library assessment sites or information
38% 22% 35
Coordination with Other Units
Full-time Part-time DepartmentStanding
CommitteeAd hoc
Committee
Yes 72.73% 8 69.23% 9 88.89% 8 41.67% 5 75.00% 3
No 27.27% 3 30.77% 4 11.11% 1 58.33% 7 25.00% 1
Training for Assessment
answer options % N
Yes, support is given for training provided outside of our institution
61.8% 42
Yes, support is given for training provided by our parent institution
32.4% 22
No, there is no particular training provided
29.4% 20
Yes, training is provided by the library
27.9% 19
Training Programs
answer options % N
Assessment methods 58.33% 14
Basic statistics 45.83% 11
Survey construction 45.83% 11
Value of assessment 41.67% 10
Data analysis 37.50% 9
Other (please specify) 29.17% 7
Data presentation 29.17% 7
Sampling techniques 25.00% 6
Report writing 12.50% 3
Assessment Networking
% Who Have Attended
% Who Recommend
Venue
ARL assessment-related meetings 83.6% 100.0%
Library Assessment Conference (e.g., Charlottesville 2006) 58.2% 100.0%
Other 20.9% 100.0%
ALA/LAMA sessions/discussion groups on assessment 52.2% 97.1%
ALA/ACRL sessions/discussion groups on assessment 59.7% 92.5%
Northumbria International Conferences on Performance Measurement in Libraries 16.4% 90.0%
Evidenced-Based Library and Information Practice Conference 16.4% 81.8%
Culture of Assessment
% Agreeing at 4 or 5 (1-5 scale)
Library administrators are committed to supporting assessment 79.4%
Assessment results are used to improve my library 76.5%
Assessment is evident in our library planning documents such as the strategic plan 73.5%
My library evaluates its operations and programs for service quality 72.1%
Assessment is a library priority 67.6%
My library has local assessment resources and experts 50.0%
There is support and/or rewards for staff who engage in assessment activities 42.6%
Staff accepts responsibility for assessment activities 30.9%
Staff have the necessary assessment expertise and skills 19.1%
Staff development in assessment is adequate 16.2%
Assessment Plans
% N
No, the library has no assessment plan 53.7% 36
Yes, the library has a library-wide assessment plan 29.9% 20
Yes, the library has an assessment plan for some departments/units 19.4% 13
Yes, the library has an assessment plan for every department/unit 4.5% 3
Outcomes
Website 31 49%
Facilities 23 37%
Collection Development 19 30%
Services 17 27%
Access Services 14 22%
Hours 14 22%
Web
Redesign Usability Content Online catalog (29%)
Methods LibQUAL / surveys (26%) Usability studies (16%) Focus groups / interviews (10%)
Facilities
Changing spaces Expanding / renovating old spaces Creating new spaces Repurposing Branch closures / consolidations
Methods LibQUAL / surveys (35%) Focus groups / interviews (17%)
Services
Getting out there Going virtual Liaisons Quality of service
Methods Surveys Reference stats Focus groups / interviews
Collection Development
Focusing the collection Going “e” Cancellations/subscriptions Subject areas
Methods Usage stats (26%) Surveys Focus groups / interviews
Everything Else
Hours Extended – during interims/finals LibQUAL/surveys, focus groups & gate
counts Access Services
Processes – circ & shelving ILL / document delivery Off-site storage Surveys, stats
Everything Else
Organizational Development (16%) Equipment (13%)
Computers Photocopy / print
Training (14%) Instruction (6%) Marketing (5%)
ARL SPEC Kit 303
Stephanie Wright University of [email protected]
Lynda S. WhiteUniversity of [email protected]