View
213
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
Under New Management : Developing a Library
Assessment Program at a Small Public University
Library Assessment Conference: Building Effective, Sustainable, Practical
AssessmentSeattle, WA: Aug. 4-6, 2008
Karen JensenCollection Development Officer• karen.jensen@uaf.edu
Anne ChristieBioSciences Librarian• anne.christie@uaf.edu
Contents
• Overview of UAF• Planning an assessment program
– Why, what, who and how
• User surveys– Planning, marketing, implementing,
results
• Action items• Recommendations for user surveys
University of Alaska Fairbanks
UAF Librarieshttp://library.uaf.edu
• 65 library employees, including 13 librarians • $2,110,000 materials budget• Specialties: Alaska and Polar Regions
collections• Unique content products:
– Alaska Digital Archives – Alaska and Polar Periodical Index– Project Jukebox – Wenger Eskimo Database
• Library Science 101 required for all undergraduates
Planning a new assessment
program – why?• New library and university leadership• Change in library service methods • Need for fresh, relevant user and collection
data • Goal of aligning spending and staffing with
priorities • Timing
– Budget picture changing– New University of Alaska Fairbanks Strategic Plan– Last library-wide strategic plan: 2001– Last comprehensive patron survey: 1995– Need for new library plan and data to guide it
Planning a new assessment
program – what?•Data-centered decisions – exploring ways of gathering and using data•More measurable outcomes•Need for “performance measures” to satisfy funders
Library Assessment: Data-Centered Decision-Making
Collection Analysis
Circ Data Analyzed
By Subject
ILL Data
Journal Citation Reports
Gate Counts
Instruction
Reference
User Surveys
Electronic Resources
Use
PlanningMmgt
Resources
Building the assessment program:
who and how?• Library Assessment Task Force
Librarians from:– Collection development and patron
services– Library science instruction– Reference– Outreach
• Taskforce charge: gather user feedback– Method: meetings, tasks, library wiki
Building the assessment program:
who and how? (2)• Constraints
– Minimal funding for survey research
– No additional staffing for survey administration and analysis
Planning the survey
• Content– Campus-wide surveys of faculty and
students– Survey topics
• Logistics– Easy to distribute– Easy for users to respond – Easy to analyze – Easy to repeat– Timeline short
Choosing a survey
Choosing a survey instrument• University of Washington Libraries
Assessment: Field tested• Choosing a survey tool• Past success with online survey
response using incentives• “Survey Monkey”
Preparing the survey
• Timeline• Question adaptation• Question scoring• Testing• IRB• Budget
Getting the word out
• Encouraging participation- University administration, including Provost,
Deans, Directors- Faculty Senate- Graduate School- S tudent government association
• Advertising• Incentive prizes
Implementing the survey
• Email distribution via Computing Dept listservs
• Web page links• Response rates
– Faculty – 25% (243/943)– Grad students – 19% (143/750)– Undergrads – 8% (431/5086)
Compiling results - library
• Aggregate results posted to library web page and staff wiki
• Comments distributed to service areas: Interlibrary Loan, Circulation, Media, Reference
• Comments for collection managers, Library Science head, analyzed to create action items
• Detail results possible, need for patron privacy
Communicating results to campus
• Summary reports for specific administration and governance groups
• Research Working Group• Graduate School • Provost• Deans and Directors• Student Leadership • Faculty Governance Group- Faculty Senate
• Summaries posted to web site• Promotion for Fall, 2008 – Student
newspaper ads, staff newsletter, etc.
Analyzing results
• Analysis– Further analysis
needed– Follow-up with
non-participants needed
• Surprises• Key findings
Comparing satisfaction with collections with overall satisfaction
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%V
ery
satis
fied
Sat
isfie
d
Dis
satis
fied
Ver
ydi
ssat
isfie
d
N/A
Ver
ysa
tisfie
d
Sat
isfie
d
Dis
satis
fied
Ver
ydi
ssat
isfie
d
N/A
Collections Satisfaction Overall Satisfaction
Faculty
Grads
Undergrads
Selecting action items
• Number of responses• Time and effort• Library control
Taking action
• Collection development- Electronic content- Specific subjects
• Service-related issues• Library space• Strategic plan
- Reference review- LS101- Institutional repository
Looking to the future
• Revising survey• Refining distribution methods• Reassessing our marketing strategy• Analyzing results• Managing the surveys
Starting an assessment program:
recommendations• Consider purpose• Assess local funding, expertise, time• Research survey tools• Examine campus communication
options• Get buy-in and input from all library
staff• Plan, plan, plan
Thank you.Questions?
Recommended