LibQual+ Spring 2008 results and recommendations Library Assessment Working Group 11/19/2008 Library Faculty Meeting

What is LibQual+ ? Measures levels of user satisfaction Asks not just “how are we doing?” but “what do you expect us to do?” Developed by ARL. In use since We previously did LibQual in 2001

Spring 2008 survey Administered during March 2008 All faculty and staff Sample of students (grad and undergrad) 740 responses Next time – LibQual Lite.

Respondent characteristics Physical and virtual library use What is our % return? (800s? How does this compare to ARL composite. Higher return to 2001.)

How full is the cup? What I’d likeWhat I’ll acceptWhat I perceive I’ve received

A negative adequacy gap is a hole in the bottom of the cup

Where are we superior? There is nowhere that we surpass use expectations. This is the case for the ARL aggregate population as well The places where we are doing the best*: –Group study space, individual study space –Staff who are ready and willing to help and provide individual attention –Deal with users in a caring manner *about half-way to desired level of service

Where are our adequacy gaps? Information Control: –Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my own (graduate students and faculty) –Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work (graduate students) –A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own (faculty) –All of Information Control is a negative gap for faculty (except for equipment), with the biggest concerns the library website and tools for finding information.

Information Control Information Control = Access to information, collections, website, equipment Expectations highest in this area for all respondents How much can we expect people to know? Undergraduates = highest satisfaction in this area. Represents different needs and different way of using information across user groups? Responses for availability of print and accessibility of electronic remotely were the same from faculty (-0.12)

Affect of Service Affect of Service = Public Service qualities Results very different across user groups, what is the biggest superiority (smallest adequacy mean) gap for some is the smallest for others. Employees who have the knowledge to answer user questions (faculty=biggest gap, graduate=smallest gap) Undergraduates’ desires were least met in the area of “Employees who are consistently courteous” Improved from 2001.

Library as Place Undergraduates are the most frequent users of the physical library Overall area of lowest minimums and lowest desired levels, but it is an important area with undergraduates, this is off-set by the comparatively low desires of faculty Variation may also be due to which libraries respondents are using?

Information Literacy Users relatively positive in agreement that the library helps them succeed and be efficient in their work. Lowest levels of agreement relate to the library assisting in information skill development and in helping distinguish trustworthy vs untrustworthy information. May need to increase efforts on critical thinking. (of librarians reporting library instruction, only 33% of sessions teach evaluation of information)

Please indicate the degree to which you agree with the following statements: (1 = Strongly Disagree; 9 = Strongly Agree) Responses MeanSD The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline or work The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits or work The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy information The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study LibQUAL+TM Faculty, Student, and Staff Survey (2008)

Library Staff Affect of service – “instill confidence in users” only negative in this area High expectations in Information Control –Library staff expected more from our collections and equipment –Particularly large gap with print resources –Greatest patron concerns: access Library as place a huge issue for our staff

How do we compare to other ARL libraries? Overall shape of our responses is the same – our users’ high expectations are in the same areas as other libraries The ARL aggregate for 2007 surveys contained no red and no green Our margins of satisfaction are smaller: closer to minimum expectations than to desired

Improvements from past surveys Library staff responses are more positive in most areas compared to 2001 Reliability (negative gap in 2001) Some facilities; a lot of variance in these responses

Recommendations Information Control: –Use recommendations and results from other surveys: website usability survey –Examine proliferation of tools, do we undermine cohesiveness, cause confusion? Affect of Service –Continue with staff training for improved service and knowledge –Increased need for training with NSM?

Recommendations Library as Place –More outlets and scanners –More easily comprehensible hours –Follow-up study to learn what users want from the space during longer hours General –Improvement requires wide participation –Need ways to measure progress