Collections Placements Staff Survey
Overall Staff Response
A Collections Placement Survey was sent out to Collections staff from The Library and The Hunterian between Monday 09th and Wednesday
11th March 2015.
The survey received 38 responses from Collections staff, with the majority of respondents (84.2%) concluding that they would like to see a
formal sustainable Collections placement provision in place.
Over half of respondents (52.63%) had experience of student
placement provision, and had worked with the variety of
placements currently on offer: project-based, credit-bearing and
ad-hoc voluntary placements.
However preference was given to project-based placements.
Project-based placements were perceived to be of greater mutual
benefit to the Collections as and the student as they were aligned
with current priorities, which could assist with future planning, and
therefore staff were able to justify the time spent supervising.
Furthermore, placements with a fixed timescale and a specific
deadline were viewed as being more effective.
A comment in favour of credit-bearing placements was the
recognition that a placement may be recognised as a valuable
contribution to a degree.
The range of tasks undertaken by collections staff meant that some
considered all types of placement as valid for a given purpose.
1
Collections Placements Staff Survey
80% of respondents had encountered challenges during the
placements, which ranged from student responsibility and
supervision, lack of facilities (pcs, office space), restricted access to
resources that required staff supervision, and conflicting time
commitments.
Staff were equally aware of the benefits for students:
In spite of the challenges all staff were aware of the benefits of
providing student placements, which also included the promotion
of undiscovered collections:
2
Collections Placements Staff Survey
Workload and lack of support were the main reasons given for the
inability of current staff to offer continual work placements. Other
difficulties included finding a suitable project, and a general lack of
awareness among academic staff and students of the collections
and their potential impact, as well as a lack of physical space to
accommodate placement students.
The majority of respondents cited as the primary requirement to
enable them to offer a consistent and sustainable provision offer
was that of dedicated member of staff to facilitate provision,
followed by a dedicated physical space and facilities. Funding and
resources were followed by clear project priorities.
Other requirements included an increase in specialist staff, basic
training on volunteer/placement supervision, and that placement
supervision should be built into the annual P&DR.
3
Collections Placements Staff Survey
For those staff with no placement experience: Workload, finding a
suitable project/role for the student and the process were all cited
as preventing them from offering placement provision.
They would prefer to host project-based or credit-bearing
placements, noting that credit-bearing may motivate the student
more and also acknowledge the value of the work being done by
permanent staff. Ad-hoc voluntary placements were viewed as
being possibly exploitative and devaluing the work being done by
permanent staff.
4
Collections Placements Staff Survey
Clear project priorities were perceived to be the most important
requirement for placement provision among staff with no
experience. Dedicated members of staff and facilities followed with
factors such as the incorporation of placement provision in The
Library strategy along with increased funding.
Finally, there were staff concerns over sustainable placement provision, with 15.8% rejecting the proposal to implement a placement provision
service. Comments suggested the wider resource implications, which may impact on staff ability to deliver other services and outcomes; that
there was no clear benefit to the Collections; increased member of people would add an extra level of bureaucracy; and placements could
devalue the service and contribution of permanent staff.
5