Selecting a User Survey Instrument and
Adapting to Institutional Needs
Boston University Libraries
Assessment Committee members:
Dan Benedetti, Mugar Memorial Library
Kate Bronstad, Alumni Medical Library
David Fristrom, Science & Engineering Library
Dan Piekarski, Pardee Management Library
Linda Plunket, Educational Resources Library
Jim Skypeck, Theology Library
Alex Solodkaya, Educational Resources Library
Sarah Struble, Mugar Memorial Library
BU’s Assessment Committee thanks UW’s Assessment Committee for their openness
and support
Factors Influencing Choice
Possible Survey Tools
LibQUAL+
MISO
UW’s User Survey
Homegrown
Validity of questions
& reliability of survey
established
established
developing
none
Number of
institutions
1000+, variety
of libraries,
mostly
academic
38, mostly
colleges
2-3
none
Needed resources
some staff time
and expertise,
limited costs
some staff time
and expertise,
limited costs
more staff time
and expertise, no
costs
significant staff
time and
expertise, no
costs
Responsibility for
initial analysis
centralized
centralized
local library’s
local library’s
Alignment with BU’s
institutional culture
high
medium
high
low
Projected usefulness
of results
medium
medium
very high
low
Objectives for Conducting User Surveys
• Better serve users
• Anticipate user needs in changing
environments
• Data driven resource allocation
• Align strategy and assessment
Reasons to Adapt UW’s User Survey
•
•
•
•
•
Ease of interpretation of results
Ease of communicating results
Triennial model
Adaptable for local needs
Support from UW’s Libraries
Local Adaptations
• Tailored questions to local situation
• Requested IRB approval
• Only web-based format and
distribution
• Used Survey Monkey
Process of Adapting UW’s User Survey
Objective
Key Players
Resolution
Broach idea to University
Administration
UL & Provost
Garnered support of University
Administration
Concept stabilization
Assessment Committee
Articulated data needed, target
populations, analysis plan
Draft questions & methodology
Assessment Committee
First draft
Compare draft to UW’s survey
Assessment Committee
Balanced local needs with ability to
compare results
Reality check
UW Libraries’ Director of Assessment
and Planning
Recommendations on next steps and
realization that survey would not be
conducted until Fall, 2010
Expert review
BU Faculty knowledgeable about
survey design; BU library staff
Considered and incorporated some
suggestions
Test the survey
BU faculty (convenience sampling)
Completed pilot & incorporated changes
Seek IRB approval
IRB Director and staff
Received IRB approval
HR program analyst
Sent IS&T appropriate email list of faculty
for Provost to use to invite faculty to take
the survey
Generate appropriate email list
BU Faculty Library Survey 2010
UW Faculty Library Survey 2010
UW Faculty Library Survey 2010
BU Faculty Library Survey 2010