LibQUAL+ in the UK & Ireland: five years experience J. Stephen Town and Selena Lock, Cranfield University
Summary The overall SCONUL experience Some detailed results and observations Some thoughts on the role of LibQUAL+ in the context of ‘national’ academic library measurement
The SCONUL Experience
Conclusions LibQUAL+ successfully applied to the UK & Irish academic library sector (and beyond) Provided first comparative data on academic library user satisfaction in the UK Twenty institutions have conducted repeat surveys Substantial impact of the results within institutions
Response Comparisons SCONUL 2003 –20 institutions –11,919 respondents SCONUL 2004 –16 institutions –16,611 respondents Increase by 4,692 SCONUL 2005 –16 institutions –17,355 respondents Increase by 744 SCONUL 2006 –20 institutions –19,108 respondents Increase by 1,753 LibQUAL –308 institutions –128,958 respondents LibQUAL –202 institutions –112,551 respondents Decrease by 16,407 LibQUAL –199 institutions –108,504 respondents Decrease by 4,047 LibQUAL –298 institutions –176,360 respondents Increase by 67,856
Overall Potential UK Sample to 2007 Full variety of institutions 49% of institutions* 53% of HE students (>850,000) 36% of Libraries 45% of Library expenditure *Based on Universities UK membership of 126
Detailed results and observations
Some questions? What is important to UK & Irish academic library users and non-users? What do the SCONUL cohort results over the past five years indicate about UK academic library performance and the influence of survey use? How does this compare to US results? What does all this mean in the broader context of library evaluation and quality development?
SCONUL Cohort priorities
Most Desired Aspects Question text Years appeared in top 5 desired Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office 5 Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work 4 A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own 5 The electronic information resources I need 4 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my own 3 Modern equipment that lets me easily access needed information4
Least Desired Aspects Question text Years appeared in bottom 5 desired A comfortable and inviting location5 Library staff who deal with users in a caring fashion 5 Library staff who instil confidence in users 4 Giving users individual attention5 Space for group learning and group study 5
Longitudinal Analysis Data from 2003 to 2007 (Session 1)
Dimensions of Quality Five-year analysis
Affect of Service Five-year analysis
Information Control Five-year analysis
Library as Place Five-year analysis
Overall Five-Year Analysis by User Group
Radar Charts
SCONUL Core Question Summary 2003
SCONUL Core Question Summary 2004
SCONUL Core Question Summary 2005
SCONUL Core Question Summary 2006
SCONUL Core Question Summary 2007 Session 1
SCONUL Undergraduate Results 2004
SCONUL Undergraduate Results 2005
SCONUL Undergraduate Results 2006
SCONUL Undergraduate Results 2007 Session 1
SCONUL Postgraduate Results 2004
SCONUL Postgraduate Results 2005
SCONUL Postgraduate Results 2006
SCONUL Postgraduate Results 2007 Session 1
SCONUL Academic Staff Results 2004
SCONUL Academic Staff Results 2005
SCONUL Academic Staff Results 2006
SCONUL Academic Staff Results 2007 Session 1
SCONUL Library Staff Results 2004
SCONUL Library Staff Results 2005
SCONUL Library Staff Results 2006
SCONUL Library Staff Results 2007 Session 1
ARL College or University Summary 2004
ARL College or University Summary 2005
ARL College or University Summary 2006
US & UK Desired Comparisons
Conclusions The ‘national’ role for LibQUAL+?
Discussion National standardised comparative user satisfaction & benchmarking ‘Globalisation’ and international comparisons The Quality Assurance role –The QA cycle The Impact & Value role
J. Stephen Town & Selena Lock Correspondence to: