Matariki Network of UniversitiesLibrary Benchmarking Project

The Matariki opportunity

Limited library benchmarking that allows reliable international comparisons.

Matariki members are leading places of learning. Each focuses on a rounded education which is research-led.

Matariki members encourage an inter-disciplinary approach and support a full subject base across the sciences, social sciences and humanities, and each has a mix of postgraduate and undergraduate students.

 

Benchmarking

“Benchmarking is the process of identifying best practices and learning from others. It has been found that actual improvements following benchmarking arise from considering and looking at processes, tools and techniques rather than simply comparing and reviewing measurements of activity. Benchmarking activities extend networking, build collaborative relationships and mutual understanding between participants, enable better understanding of practice, process or performance and provides insights into how improvements might be made.”

Jackson, Norman (2001) "Benchmarking in UK HE: an overview", Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 9 Iss: 4, pp.218 - 235

Library benchmarking project

The partnership provides the platform for an international group of university libraries to collaborate on the development of a process of identifying best practices and learning from each other.

This will initially include considering processes, programs and techniques that support a small part of what we do.

Project aim

Collaborative comparisons of a selected number of services and activities representative of library service provision.

To provide a shared response to the question:

If we [the university library] enable and support the academic endeavour how do we measure our effectiveness?

Project areas

The project considers benchmarking activities in three identifiable areas of support for our intuitions:

support for research,

support for learning and teaching,

the role of the library as a place within the student experience

Project scope

The initial scope covers support for learning and teaching, specifically activities and practice for learning and teaching programmes that support the transition of first year students to University life.

How new undergraduates transition into University in general is an area of interest with policy makers and university administration as they consider tertiary education retention rates and increased social inclusion.

Project timeframe

A logistical challenge in the coordination of the project has been the differing academic year each partner follows. Timetabling for the project has been constructed to allow for vacation periods and periods when other priorities must take precedence.

Communication strategy

face to face meetings - to develop a shared understanding across the

network

discussion documents - to develop a collaborative approach to the

project

newsletter - to keep stakeholders informed on progress

Online collaborative workspace

A secure service for sharing information across a range of formats.

discussion space terms and definitions shared resources and links survey area

Selecting a cohort to report on

Each partner is at a different stage of working with certain groups of students across the disciplinary range for which there is an identified need or institutional/funding body priority.

Dartmouth: All Tübingen: Law, Education, Medicine

Durham: Classics Uppsala: Physiotherapy

Otago: Locals Western Australia: Medicine

Queens: Disability

Initial survey

A series of 9 questions passed to partners to review from 20th December 2011 – 10th February 2012

Questions confirmed on 20th February 2012 and responses requested by 30th March 2012

Most responses received by May 2012

Survey report released 5th October 2012

Survey questions

1. Describe the cohort.-Include details on size, specific characteristics, and identified learning needs.

 2. Explain how the library works with the cohort.

-Briefly outline the history of this relationship-Include details of the other groups in the University who work with this cohort.

-Highlight the way the library and these other groups work together.

Survey questions

3. Indicate the current status of the programme that is provided for the cohort.-Include details on the progress of the specific programme as it relates to the wider library teaching

and learning programme.-Highlight any trends of interest, opportunities, and challenges in this area.

 4. Outline the policy framework that supports the specific programme that is

provided for the cohort.-Include details on the organisational structure, the library setting, the wider institutional priorities,

and government influences.-Indicate how important these are in determining library activities and service

What have we learnt?

there is a diverse array of activities and practices that demonstrate a clear commitment to clients needs

there is a range of formal and informal assessment processes

sustainability is a common challenge across all libraries

two libraries report direct engagement with the University executive

What have we learnt?

What do the Library liaison team at Otago do well?

starting to actively work with other student support groups well positioned to provide clients with access to a range of

learning support resources is mindful of engaging in sustainable activities.

What have we learnt?

What more could the Library liaison team at Otago do?

refine consultation service booking process promote the benefits of students documenting their ‘approach’ to

undertaking a literature search within the course assessment develop an evaluation framework for liaison activity

What have we learnt?

it is important to provide time for each partner to contribute

taking time to develop a shared understanding has paid off

this could lead to developing a library quality assessment maturity model

Initial

Repeatable

Defined

Quantitatively managed

Continuous improvement

Quality / Assessment Maturity Model

5

4

3

2

1

optimized

measured

confirmed

documented

ad hoc

Roadmap for measuring effectiveness?

a structure and processes that work

sharing in developing common set of assessment tools

discussion document 2, the next phase of the project

The Durham context‘shaped by the past: creating the future’

3rd oldest English University, founded 1832

a Collegiate University, 16 Colleges

16,000 students, high proportion of international students, 3000 postgrads

highly rated research University, a ‘top 10’ UK League Table,

80th in world rankings

occupies world’s oldest University building (1087)

Benchmarking: the Durham Context

achieving benefits from MNU

an extension of UK intra-national benchmarking

positive focus on transition to First Year plus work being done on Library induction

University strategic imperative and Library contribution to recruitment, retention, progression and achievement

Benchmarking: the Durham Experience

active and innovative engagement with cohort of 90 1st Year Classics students, team teaching scholarly skills programme

a tangible, transferrable, scalable model of induction and information

skills

demonstrating benefits of transnational benchmarking

demonstrating the value of MNU membership

What worked well?

Otago University Library facilitation

guiding principles of the project

collaboration, communication, consultation

working collaboratively with academics

institutional recognition – Education Committee / Pro VC

assessment a key component of module

Challenges?

small scale of the Classics pilot limited by staff resources

getting senior Library colleagues interested

‘selling’ the benefits of MNU involvement

terminology

scalability / sustainability

maturity models

Next Steps (for Durham!)

developing other projects and sharing ownership/management of these

face to face meeting critical to review, plan, disseminate & develop collaboration

further development of survey instrument

maintain academic rigour of research

development of a MNU survey instrument?

greater Durham engagement

questions ?

Library benchmarking project