Background on the SCONUL Lib. QUAL+ implementation Stephen Town, Cranfield University
Objectives • To give an overview of the SCONUL Lib. QUAL+ participation • To present the overall results of the 2004 SCONUL Cohort • To describe the feedback from participants and the lessons learnt
UK HE Libraries survey methods • General Satisfaction – Exit questionnaires – SCONUL Satisfaction Survey • Designed Surveys – Satisfaction vs Importance 1989– Priority Surveys 1993 - • Outcome measurement – ACPI project 2003 - • National Student Survey (1 Question)
Survey methods used in the UK West, 2004 A Survey of Surveys
1. SCONUL Lib. QUAL+ Participation
The UK approach • Coordinated on behalf of the Society of College, National & University Libraries (SCONUL) Advisory Committee on Performance Improvement (ACPI) • 20 UK Higher Education (HE) institutions participated in 2003 • 17 UK & Irish Higher Education (HE) institutions participated in 2004 • 17 UK & Irish Higher Education (HE) institutions participating in 2005 • 43 different institutions
Lib. QUAL+ Participants 2003 • University of Bath • Cranfield University • Royal Holloway & Bedford New College • University of Lancaster • University of Wales, Swansea • University of Edinburgh • University of Glasgow • University of Liverpool • University of London Library • University of Oxford • University College Northampton • University of Wales College Newport • University of Gloucestershire • De Montfort University • Leeds Metropolitan University • Liverpool John Moores University • Robert Gordon University • South Bank University • University of the West of England, Bristol • University of Wolverhampton
Lib. QUAL+ Participants 2004 • • Brunel University Loughborough University of Strathclyde University of York Glasgow University Sheffield University Trinity College, Dublin UMIST + University of Manchester • University of Liverpool • Anglia Polytechnic University • University of Westminster • London South Bank University • Napier University • Queen Margaret University College • University College Worcester • University of East London
Lib. QUAL+ Participants 2005 • • • University of Exeter University of Edinburgh University of Dundee University of Bath University of Ulster University College Northampton • University of Birmingham • Roehampton University • • University of Glasgow University of Surrey Royal Holloway Uo. L City University Cranfield University of Luton Dublin Institute of Technology • London South Bank University • Coventry University
CURL (9/28) • • University Library • University of of Edinburgh Glasgow Liverpool London of Oxford • Sheffield University • Trinity College, Dublin • University of Manchester • University of Birmingham
Pre-92 & 94 Group (5/13) • Cranfield University • Royal Holloway & Bedford New College • University of Wales, Swansea • Brunel University • Loughborough University • University of Strathclyde • • UMIST University University of of Dundee Ulster Bath Lancaster York Exeter Surrey
CMU+ ( 15/37) • University of Wales College Newport • De Montfort University • Leeds Metropolitan University • Liverpool John Moores University • Robert Gordon University • South Bank University • University of the West of England, Bristol • • • Anglia Polytechnic University of Westminster Napier University Queen Margaret University College University of East London Roehampton University of Luton Coventry University of Wolverhampton
Former Colleges+ • • University of Gloucestershire University College Northampton University College Worcester Dublin Institute of Technology
Potential UK Sample 2003 • • • Full variety of institutions 12% of institutions 19% of HE students (>300, 000) 18% of Libraries 18% of Library expenditure
Potential UK Sample 2004 • • • Full variety of institutions 10% of institutions 17% of HE students (>290, 000) 11% of Libraries 15% of Library expenditure
Overall Potential UK Sample to 2004 • • 20% 31% 26% 28% of of institutions HE students (>530, 000) Libraries Library expenditure
Time frame • • December – Registration January – UK Training February to May – Surveys run One month after survey closes – Results distributed • July – Dissemination • Plus second run in 2005 (Coventry)
2. Results from SCONUL
Respondents by Institution 2003 London South Bank University of London 276 70 Royal Holloway University 616 University of Wales, Swansea 161 UWE, Bristol 737 Uni of Wales College, Newport 368 University of Wolverhampton 175 University College Northampton 500 University of Bath 841 Glasgow University 502 University of Gloucestershire 713 University of Edinburgh 514 Lancaster University 883 Leeds Metropolitan University 814 University of Liverpool 398 De Montfort University 643 University of Oxford 1, 063 Cranfield University 579 Liverpool John Moores University 1, 261 Robert Gordon University 805
Respondents by Institution 2004 UMIST + University of Manchester 2, 333 Anglia Polytechnic University 688 Trinity College Library Dublin 1, 786 Napier University 611 Glasgow University 2, 178 University of Liverpool 552 Brunel University 1, 882 Queen Margaret University College 478 University of Sheffield 1, 541 University of York 460 University of Westminster 1, 241 University of East London 464 University of Strathclyde 1, 211 University College Worcester 268 Loughborough University Library 350 London South Bank University 568
Respondent Comparisons • Glasgow University – 2004 = 2, 178 – 2003 = 503 • Increase by 1, 675 • University of Liverpool – 2004 = 552 – 2003 = 398 • Increase by 154 • London South Bank University – 2004 = 568 – 2003 = 276 • Increase by 292
Response Comparisons • SCONUL 2004 – 16 institutions – 16, 611 respondents • SCONUL 2003 – 20 institutions – 11, 919 respondents • Increase by 4, 692 • Lib. QUAL+ 2004 – 202 institutions – 112, 551 respondents • Decrease by 16, 407 • Lib. QUAL+ 2003 – 308 institutions – 128, 958 respondents
Core Questions
Key to Radar Charts
Core Question Summary 2004
Affect of Service - Adequacy Means ID Question 2003 2004 Difference AS-1 Library staff who instill confidence in users 0. 76 0. 66 -0. 10 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 0. 75 0. 49 -0. 26 AS-3 Library staff who are consistently courteous 0. 65 0. 41 -0. 24 AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' enquiries 0. 54 0. 40 -0. 14 AS-5 Library staff who have the knowledge to answer user questions 0. 49 0. 44 -0. 05 AS-6 Library staff who deal with users in a caring fashion 0. 63 0. 51 -0. 12 AS-7 Library staff who understand the needs of their users 0. 45 0. 31 -0. 14 AS-8 Willingness to help users 0. 59 0. 40 -0. 19 AS-9 Dependability in handling users' service problems 0. 42 0. 28 -0. 14
Information Control - Adequacy Means ID Question 2003 2004 Difference IC-1 Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office 0. 04 0. 06 0. 02 IC-2 A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own 0. 57 0. 31 -0. 26 IC-3 The printed library materials I need for my work -0. 12 -0. 34 -0. 22 IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 0. 18 0. 06 -0. 12 IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily access needed information 0. 36 0. 08 -0. 28 IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my own 0. 32 0. 18 -0. 14 IC-7 Making information easily accessible for independent use 0. 35 0. 18 -0. 17 IC-8 Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work -0. 19 -0. 36 -0. 17
Library as Place - Adequacy Means ID Question 2003 2004 Difference LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning 0. 22 -0. 31 -0. 53 LP-2 Quiet space for individual work 0. 07 -0. 26 -0. 33 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 0. 89 0. 10 -0. 79 LP-4 A haven for study, learning, or research 0. 09 -0. 18 -0. 27 LP-5 Space for group learning and group study 0. 42 -0. 10 -0. 52
SCONUL Core Question Dimensions Summary 2004 Range of Minimum to Desired Range of Minimum to Perceived (“Adequacy Gap”) Affect of Service Information Control Library as Place Overall
ARL Core Question Dimensions Summary 2004 Range of Minimum to Desired Range of Minimum to Perceived (“Adequacy Gap”) Affect of Service Information Control Library as Place Overall
Undergraduates
Core Question Summary for Undergraduates 2004
Undergraduates Information Control Adequacy Means ID Question 2003 2004 Difference IC-1 Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office 0. 04 0. 18 0. 14 IC-2 A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own 0. 57 0. 46 -0. 11 IC-3 The printed library materials I need for my work -0. 12 -0. 31 -0. 19 IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 0. 18 0. 23 0. 05 IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily access needed information 0. 36 0. 15 -0. 21 IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my own 0. 32 0. 28 -0. 04 IC-7 Making information easily accessible for independent use 0. 35 0. 26 -0. 09 IC-8 Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work -0. 19 0. 00
Undergraduates Library as Place Adequacy Means ID Question 2003 2004 Difference LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning 0. 22 -0. 29 -0. 51 LP-2 Quiet space for individual work 0. 07 -0. 21 -0. 28 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 0. 89 0. 11 -0. 78 LP-4 A haven for study, learning, or research 0. 09 -0. 13 -0. 22 LP-5 Space for group learning and group study 0. 42 -0. 23 -0. 65
SCONUL Core Question Dimensions Summary - Undergraduates 2004 Range of Minimum to Desired Range of Minimum to Perceived (“Adequacy Gap”) Affect of Service Information Control Library as Place Overall
ARL Core Question Dimensions Summary Undergraduates 2004 Range of Minimum to Desired Range of Minimum to Perceived (“Adequacy Gap”) Affect of Service Information Control Library as Place Overall
Postgraduates
Core Question Summary for Postgraduates 2004
Postgraduates Information Control Adequacy Means ID Question 2003 2004 Difference IC-1 Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office 0. 04 -0. 05 -0. 09 IC-2 A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own 0. 57 0. 13 -0. 44 IC-3 The printed library materials I need for my work -0. 12 -0. 46 -0. 34 IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 0. 18 -0. 20 -0. 38 IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily access needed information 0. 36 -0. 01 -0. 37 IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my own 0. 32 0. 08 -0. 24 IC-7 Making information easily accessible for independent use 0. 35 0. 10 -0. 25 IC-8 Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work -0. 19 -0. 61 -0. 42
Postgraduates Library as Place Adequacy Means ID Question 2003 2004 Difference LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning 0. 22 -0. 46 -0. 68 LP-2 Quiet space for individual work 0. 07 -0. 48 -0. 55 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 0. 89 0. 05 -0. 84 LP-4 A haven for study, learning, or research 0. 09 -0. 34 -0. 43 LP-5 Space for group learning and group study 0. 42 0. 09 -0. 33
SCONUL Core Question Dimensions Summary - Postgraduates 2004 Range of Minimum to Desired Range of Minimum to Perceived (“Adequacy Gap”) Affect of Service Information Control Library as Place Overall
ARL Core Question Dimensions Summary - Graduates 2004 Range of Minimum to Desired Range of Minimum to Perceived (“Adequacy Gap”) Affect of Service Information Control Library as Place Overall
Academic Staff
Core Question Summary for Academic Staff 2004
Academic Staff Information Control Adequacy Means ID Question 2003 2004 Difference IC-1 Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office 0. 04 -0. 41 -0. 45 IC-2 A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own 0. 57 -0. 11 -0. 68 IC-3 The printed library materials I need for my work -0. 12 -0. 37 -0. 25 IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 0. 18 -0. 39 -0. 57 IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily access needed information 0. 36 -0. 12 -0. 48 IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my own 0. 32 -0. 10 -0. 42 IC-7 Making information easily accessible for independent use 0. 35 -0. 02 -0. 37 IC-8 Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work -0. 19 -0. 88 -0. 69
Academic Staff Library as Place Adequacy Means ID Question 2003 2004 Difference LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning 0. 22 -0. 26 -0. 48 LP-2 Quiet space for individual work 0. 07 -0. 20 -0. 27 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 0. 89 0. 15 -0. 74 LP-4 A haven for study, learning, or research 0. 09 -0. 19 -0. 28 LP-5 Space for group learning and group study 0. 42 0. 41 -0. 01
SCONUL Core Question Dimensions Summary - Academic Staff 2004 Range of Minimum to Desired Range of Minimum to Perceived (“Adequacy Gap”) Affect of Service Information Control Library as Place Overall
ARL Core Question Dimensions Summary - Faculty 2004 Range of Minimum to Desired Range of Minimum to Perceived (“Adequacy Gap”) Affect of Service Information Control Library as Place Overall
Comments
Free text comments received 2003 London South Bank University 428 Royal Holloway University 341 University of London 422 University of Wales, Swansea 340 UWE, Bristol 419 Uni of Wales College, Newport 339 University of Wolverhampton 413 University of Oxford 337 University of Bath 412 University College Northampton 332 University of Gloucestershire 407 Glasgow University 330 Lancaster University 396 University of Edinburgh 328 Robert Gordon University 395 Leeds Metropolitan University 327 University of Liverpool 378 DE Montfort University 326 Liverpool John Moores University 353 Cranfield University 170
Free text comments received 2004 UMIST + University of Manchester 1090 Anglia Polytechnic University 311 Trinity College Library Dublin Napier University 299 258 1032 Glasgow University 920 University of Liverpool Brunel University 906 Queen Margaret University College 251 University of Sheffield 786 University of York 239 University of Westminster 671 University of East London 239 University of Strathclyde 511 University College Worcester 170 London South Bank University 358 Loughborough University Library 120
Comments Comparisons • Total number of comments 2004 = 8, 161 • Total number of comments 2003 = 7, 342 • Increased by 819.
3. Feedback from participants and lessons learnt
Purpose for participating • • Benchmarking Analysis compiled by Lib. QUAL+ Trialling alternative survey methods More library focused than previous in-house method • Supporting Charter Mark application process
Feedback on the Lib. QUAL+ process • Overall it is seen as straightforward • Hard work subtracting / managing inbuilt US bias • Some issues in obtaining: – Email addresses – Demographic data
Feedback on results • Overall results were as expected by the institutions • Detailed questions highlighted new information, as Lib. QUAL+ goes into more depth than previous surveys • Surprisingly bad, especially compared with other surveys including a parallel one
How can Lib. QUAL+ be improved? • Summary and commentary on results • Ability to add own subject mix – for all UK participants • More flexibility on the content and language of the questionnaire • More interaction with other UK participating libraries • Provide results for full time and part time students • Simpler questionnaire design
Conclusions
Conclusions • Lib. QUAL+ Successfully applied to the UK academic sector • Provided first comparative data on academic library user satisfaction in the UK • At least half the participants would use Lib. QUAL+ again
Lessons learnt • The majority of participants would not sample the population in future surveys • The smaller the sample, the lower the response rate • Collecting demographics is time consuming and subject categories are not always fitting • Results are detailed and comprehensive, further analysis is complex
Acknowledgements • Colleen Cook, Dean Of Texas A&M University Libraries • Bruce Thompson, Professor and Distinguished Research Scholar, Texas A&M University • Fred Heath, Vice Provost and Director of the University of Texas Libraries, Austin • Martha Kyrillidou & ARL • Selena Lock, R&D Officer, Cranfield University • All SCONUL Lib. QUAL+ Participants
J. Stephen Town Director of Information Services Royal Military College of Science Deputy University Librarian Cranfield University j. s. town@cranfield. ac. uk
Скачать презентацию Background on the SCONUL Lib QUAL implementation Stephen
91a9037a30d871302a68e281f9f23510.ppt