Upload
emilie-anson
View
228
Download
5
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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