Changing physical library spacePlanning and design of new academic

library

•Leena Toivonen & Maarit Laskujärvi •Tampere University Library, Tampere, Finland

11th European Conference of Medical and Health Libraries 23rd - 28th of June 2008, Helsinki, Finland

Tampere

The third largest city in Finland.

Population: 206 368

Founded: 1779

To Helsinki: 173 km

Two universities:

The University of Tampere

Tampere University of Technology

Change

• Historically, library buildings have been built primarily to housing library collections and to accommodate study and research.

• Libraries are faced with the paradigm shift in their understanding about the form and function of library facilities.

Cause 1

• Technology has changed the functions of libraries and the services libraries provide.

• Electronic resources and new digital services affect the planning of the library, because the demand for space is decreasing in many libraries.

Cause 2

• Pedagogical shift in higher education: learning is seen more as a collaborative process (instead of exams and papers there is more group projects). This has had an impact on academic libraries and library space planning

• Library building is now often conceived as a facility supporting an increased role in instruction and learning with classrooms, meeting rooms and computer labs

Evidence

• Shill and Tanner: Survey of physical changes of 177 academic libraries in 1995-2002

• One major change was the addition of collaborative study spaces

– conference rooms (41,1 %)– computer labs (34,1 %)– seminar rooms (31,8 %)

(Shill, Harold and Tanner, Shawn. Creating a better place: Physical Improvements in Academic Libraries 1995-2002. College and Research Libraries. 2003, November: 431–66)

When planning new library premises we have to ask:

• What services to provide?

• Which space to allocate?

Department of Health Sciences

• the library has moved to the present premises in May 2004 and at that time the library moved a little further away from the Medical School which is responsible for teaching

• in 2009 the library will move to new premises closer to the Medical School and the Faculty of Medicine

Department of Health Sciences

COLLECTION

• about 20 000 monographs •1400 printed journals • large collections of electronic books• about 5000 e-journals in the field of medicine (total number of electronic journals in the library is 15 000)

PRESENT PREMISES

• the learning centre with microcomputers, open 24/7• the reading room, open 24/7• work group rooms• computer lab

Main clients

MEDICAL SCHOOL

• Students of biochemistry: 123• Students of medicine: 689• Students of public health care: 388• Doctoral students: 538 • Those studying for a speciality: 740 (in 48 programs)• Teaching and research personnel: 140

Planning of the new library buildingfor 2009

• is based on the views of the customers of the existing library about the services and the space

Data was colleted with:

1) Service quality survey performed in the Library of the University of Tampere in 2005

2) Student inquiry in the Department of Health Sciences in 2007

Service quality survey 2005

• 40 questions - 4 questions related to the premises • importance scale: from 2 (extremely important) to -2

(not at all important)• satisfaction scale: from 2 (extremely satisfied) to -2

(extremely dissatisfied) • user group (student, teacher/scientists, postgraduate,

other)• the library mainly used (Main Library or branch

libraries)

Service Quality survey 2005

• 849 answers were obtained• 77,1 % from students • 8,0 % teachers and researchers• 5,5 % postgraduates

General findings

• Other than just borrowing of books customers need the library for network connections, for studying, for teamwork and information service

• The premises of the library do not rise in the customers’ evaluations as high as the collections and the customer service. This has been manifested also in other studies.(see: Thompson, Bruce, Kyrillidou, Martha and Cook, Colleen. User library service expectations in health science vs. other settings: a LibQUAL+® Study. Health Information and Libraries Journal. 2007; 24 (Supplement 1): 38–45)

Be quiet!

• Nearly 90 per cent estimated the quietness of studying premises important

• All the user groups evaluated the quietness considerably more important than the cosyness.

The quietness of studying premises according to the user groups and various positions

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

Importance

Satisfaction

Separation

-0,2

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

Importance

Satisfaction

Separation

The cosyness of studying premises according to the user groups and various positions

Reading desks vs. group work rooms

• Nearly 70 per cent evaluated the reading desks as extremely important service

• The importance of the group work premises was lower

The number of reading places according to the user groups and various positions

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

User/Premises Importance

User/Premises Satisfaction

User/Premises Separation

Satisfaction of the group work premises according to the user groups and various positions

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

1,2

1,4

1,6

Importance

Satisfaction

Separation

Explanation?

• Group work rooms are a relatively new service in the spectrum of the library services.

• At the moment, the group work premises have been reserved for groups in which there are at least three people. The minimum size of the group is worth reconsidering because in the questionnaire there were wishes that the rooms could also be used for pair working.

The student inquiry in 2007 in Department of Health Sciences

Purpose:

1) the use of the learning centre and reading room

2) opinions and development ideas

The student inquiry in 2007

• January-February 2007

• 145 answers • 74 % students of medicine • 14 % students of nursing science• 9 % students of public health science • Only 12 % of the students of the Medical School

answered

Location

• More than half (61 %) of the students disagreed with the present location of the library. 36 % of the students agreed with the present location.

Satisfaction of the location of library premises

12

24

3

37

24

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

totally same mind nearly same mind not the same norseparate mind

rather seperatemind

totally separatemind

%

Usage

• Learning Centre with computers was used more often than the reading room.

• The premises of the learning centre were used shorter time at a time.

Learning Centre

23

58

17

2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

under 1/2 hour 1/2-1 hours 2-3 hours 4 hours or more

%

6

66

24

4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

under 1 hour 1-2 hours 3-4 hours 5 hours or more

%

Reading room

Implications

• There could be fewer computers when the using time is short.

• The number of the quiet reading desks has to be evaluated again because the reading desks were used a longer period of time and valued high by students.

Learning Centre

Usage patterns of the Learning Centre showed that students used it mostly for

• communication (using email 86 %)• finding information (using databases 71 % or finding

information in the net 63 %). • the use patterns seem to be exactly what the space

was planned for

24/7

• The majority of the students used premises during the office hours of the library (the learning centre 90 %, reading room 82 %) despite around the clock availability.

• Location hinders the use?

Next?

Department of Health Sciences will continue the planning and the design of the new premises which will locate nearer the departments.

According to the study the location is important to our customers. Hopefully we can report increasing user statistics when the library is more integral part of the Medical School and the Faculty of Medicine

The new building

19th June 2008

19th June 2008

Thank you!