What is LibQUAL+?
 Large-scale, web-based, user-centered assessment of
library service effectiveness across multiple institutions.
 Co-developed by ARL and Texas A&M University, 1999
 Responds to the increasing pressure for libraries to
develop more outcomes-based assessment efforts, instead
of relying merely on input or resource metrics.
 Supported initially by a 3-year, $498,000 FIPSE grant;
sustained by participant fees ($2,850/year)
What is LibQUAL+?
(The “Gap Theory” model and 4 dimensions of service quality)
Grounded in the “Gap Theory” of Service Quality;
addresses a set of three service dimensions:
1. Information Control—timely, convenient, and self-reliant access
to information resources: local & remote, print & electronic.
2. Affect of Service—knowledge, courtesy, and responsiveness of
employees; their ability to instill confidence; their willingness to help
customers and provide prompt service.
3. Library as Place—a library space that is quiet, comfortable, and
conducive to study and learning, for individuals as well as groups.
The goals of LibQUAL+
 Help libraries better understand user perceptions of
service quality
 Provide comparable assessment information from
peer institutions
 Identify best practices in library service
 Continuously improve library service quality
Who participated in Spring 2007?
(Groups & consortia)
Over 250 institutions, including:
 Members of Association of Research Libraries (35)
 Other college and university libraries (164)
 Community college libraries (18)
 A small number of governmental, public, school, and
special libraries
 A growing number of international participants in
Australia, Canada, France, Ireland, Sweden, and
the U.K.
Who participated in 2007?
(Peer institutions)
37 peer institutions from
Association of Research Libraries,
Greater Western Library Alliance,
and “Peer 11 Land-Grant,”
including…
Auburn University (A)
Baylor University Libraries (G)
Duke University Libraries (A)
Iowa State University Library (A,G, P)
Kansas State University Libraries (G)
McMaster University Libraries (A)
Ohio State University Libraries (A,P)
Queen's University (A)
Rice University (A,G)
SUNY Buffalo (A)
Texas A&M University, College Station (A,G, P)
Université de Montréal (A)
Université Laval (A)
University of Alabama (A)
University of Alberta Libraries (A)
University of Arizona Library (A,G,P)
University of British Columbia Library (A)
University of California, Los Angeles (A)
University of Chicago Library (A)
University of Cincinnati Libraries (A)
University of Guelph (A)
University of Houston Libraries (A,G)
University of Kentucky Libraries (A)
University of Manitoba (A)
University of Maryland Libraries (A)
University of Massachusetts Amherst (A)
University of Miami (A)
University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries (A,G)
University of New Mexico (A, G)
University of Saskatchewan Library (A)
University of South Carolina (A)
University of Southern California (A,G)
University of Toronto Libraries (A)
University of Waterloo (A)
University of Western Ontario (A)
Washington University in St. Louis (A,G)
York University Libraries (A)
Checklist of local activities
 Gather random sample (1,600 u-grads; 800 grads; 800 faculty)
 Prepare website to manage publicity, communication, etc.
 Send “pre-survey” message from Dean (March 21)
 Send email with imbedded URL for online survey (March 26)
 Send reminder from the Dean (March 29)
 Survey closes on April 6, 2007
 Announce incentive prize winners (May 1)
Who responded at ISU?
(Response rates for faculty, grads, undergrads)
280 of the 3,200 users surveyed (8.8%) responded to
the quantitative questions, including:
•
134 of the 800 faculty surveyed (16.8%)
•
69 of the 800 graduate students surveyed (8.6%)
•
77 of the 1,600 undergrad students surveyed (4.8%)
119 of these respondents also provided written comments
(i.e., qualitative data)
Who responded at ISU?
(By age & Sex)
Age
Sex
3.6%
21.2%
40.6%
31.1%
59.4%
24.4%
19.6%
18 - 22
23 - 30
31 - 45
46 - 65
Over 65
Male
Female
Respondents’ use of library / intranet
(By age & Sex)
I use the library
on premises…
I use the library
electronically…
I use Google , etc.
for information…
TM
<1%
7.7%
19.8%
23.4%
34.7%
36.2%
Daily
5.3%
9.7%
18.4%
18.8%
71.9%
46.1%
Weekly
Monthly
Quarterly
Never
Sample Survey
When it comes to…
My Minimum
Service level is
(low)
1 Employees who instill
confidence in users
2 Easy-to-use access tools
that allow me to find things
on my own
My Desired Service
level is
(high) (low)
My Perception of the
library's service
performance is
(high) (low)
(high)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 N/A
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 N/A
3 Print and/or electronic
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 N/A
journal collections I require
for my work
4 Readiness to respond to
users' questions
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 N/A
5 Quiet space for individual
activities
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 N/A
Dimension 1:
Information Control
Dimension 1: Information Control
IC-1
Making electronic resources available from my home or office
IC-2
A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own
IC-3
The printed library materials I need for my work
IC-4
The electronic information resources I need
IC-5
Modern equipment that lets me easily access needed information
IC-6
Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my own
IC-7
Making information easily accessible for independent use
IC-8
Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work
Dimension 2:
Affect of Service
Dimension 2: Affect of Service
AS-1
Employees who instill confidence in users
AS-2
Giving users individual attention
AS-3
Employees who are consistently courteous
AS-4
Readiness to respond to users questions
AS-5
Employees who have the knowledge to answer user questions
AS-6
Employees who deal with users in a caring fashion
AS-7
Employees who understand the needs of their users
AS-8
Willingness to help users
AS-9
Dependability in handling users' service problems
Dimension 3:
Library as Place
Dimension 3: Library as Place
LP-1
Library space that inspires study and learning
LP-2
Quiet space for individual activities
LP-3
A comfortable and inviting location
LP-4
A getaway for study, learning or research
LP-5
Community space for group learning and group study
Addendum:
General Satisfaction Questions
GS-1
In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am
treated at the library.
GS-2
In general, I am satisfied with library support for my
learning, research, and/or teaching needs.
GS-3
How would you rate the overall quality of the service
provided by the library?
Addendum:
General Satisfaction
Addendum:
Information Literacy Questions
IL-1
The library helps me stay abreast of developments
in my field(s) of interest.
IL-2
The library aids my advancement in my academic
discipline.
IL-3
The library enables me to be more efficient in my
academic pursuits.
IL-4
The library helps me distinguish between
trustworthy and untrustworthy information.
IL-5
The library provides me with the information skills I need
in my work or study.
Addendum:
Information Literacy Questions
Sample spider graph
= Minimum
= Perceived
= Desired
Question
1
1
9
8
7
6
Question 55
2Question
5
4
Adequacy Gap
Superiority Gap
4
Question 4
3
Question 3
2
Aggregate data (all peer universities, all users)
Affect of Service
M
P
D
Information Control
Library as Place
IC-8
Print and/or electronic journal
collections I require for my work (-0.03)
Text box
Perceived > Desired
Perceived < Desired
Perceived > Minimum
Perceived < Minimum
Comparison: All users (und., grad., faculty)
(Graph)
Peers
ISU
Affect of
Service
Affect of
Service
Coverup
Tex
t
box
Information
Control
Perceived > Desired
Coverup
Coverup
IC-8
Coverup
Library
as Place
Print and/or electronic journal
collections I require for my work
(-0.15)
Perceived < Desired
Coveru
p
Information
Control
Perceived > Minimum
Coverup
Coverup
Library
as Place
Print and/or electronic journal
collections I require for my work
(0.11)
Perceived < Minimum
Comparison: All users (und., grad., faculty) (1)
(Table)
Difference between perceived and minimal service:
Peer
Areas in which ISU stands out from peer libraries (by >0.5)…
ISU
Adequacy gap Adequacy gap
Difference
[ISU-ARL]
LP-1
Library space that inspires study and learning
0.23
1.20
0.97
LP-2
Quiet space for individual activities.
0.23
1.16
0.93
LP-3
A comfortable and inviting location
0.56
1.40
0.84
LP-4
A getaway for study, learning, or research
0.49
1.29
0.80
LP-5
Community space for group learning & group study
0.82
1.54
0.72
-0.03
0.11
0.14
Areas in which peer libraries and/or ISU fall below minimum…
IC-8
Print and/or e- journal collections I require for my work
Comparison: All users (und., grad., faculty) (2)
(Table)
Difference between perceived and desired service:
Peer
Areas in which ISU stands out from peer libraries (by >0.5)…
ISU
Superiority gap Superiority gap
Difference
[ISU-ARL]
LP-1
Library space that inspires study and learning
-1.37
-0.47
0.90
LP-2
Quiet space for individual activities.
-1.12
-0.32
0.80
LP-3
A comfortable and inviting location
-0.98
-0.29
0.69
LP-4
A getaway for study, learning, or research
-1.00
-0.38
0.62
LP-5
Community space for group learning & group study
-0.64
-0.02
0.62
Areas in which peer libraries and/or ISU exceed desired service levels
[none]
Comparison: Undergraduates
(Graph)
Peers
ISU
Affect of
Service
Affect of
Service
Coverup
Coverup
Library
as Place
Text
box
Information
Control
Perceived > Desired
Coverup
Coverup
Coverup
Text
box
Perceived < Desired
Information
Control
Perceived > Minimum
Coverup
Library
as Place
Perceived < Minimum
Comparison: Undergraduates (1)
(Table)
Difference between perceived and minimal service:
Peer
Areas in which ISU stands out from peer libraries (by >0.5)…
ISU
Adequacy Gap Adequacy Gap
Difference
[ISU-ARL]
LP-1
Library space that inspires study and learning
0.24
1.19
0.95
LP-2
Quiet space for individual activities
0.15
0.88
0.73
IC-8
Print and/or e-juornal collections I require for my work
0.31
0.96
0.65
IC-7
Making information easily accessible for independent use
0.51
1.15
0.64
LP-5
Community space for group learning & group study
0.63
1.26
0.63
AS-9
Dependability in handling users' service problems
0.56
1.13
0.57
Areas in which peer libraries and/or ISU fall below minimum…
[none]
Comparison: Undergraduates (2)
(Table)
Difference between perceived and desired service:
Peer
Areas in which ISU stands out from peer libraries (by >0.5)…
ISU
Superiority Gap Superiority Gap
Difference
[ISU-ARL]
LP-1
Library space that inspires study and learning
-1.45
-0.46
0.99
LP-2
Quiet space for individual activities
-1.27
-0.53
0.74
LP-4
A getaway for study, learning, or research
-1.02
-0.43
0.59
IC-8
Print and/or e-juornal collections I require for my work
-1.07
-0.57
0.50
Areas in which peers and/or ISU exceed desired service levels…
[none]
Comparison: Graduate Students
(Graph)
Peers
ISU
Coverup
Coverup
Affect of
Service
Affect of
Service
Coverup
Text
box
Information
Control
Perceived > Desired
Coverup
Library
as Place
IC-8
Print and/or electronic journal
collections I require for my work
(-0.19)
Perceived < Desired
Coverup
Information
Control
Perceived > Minimum
Coverup
Library
as Place
IC-8
Print and/or electronic journal
collections I require for my work
(-0.12)
Perceived < Minimum
Comparison: Graduate Students (1)
(Table)
Difference between perceived and minimal service:
Peer
Areas in which ISU stands out from peer libraries (by >0.5)…
ISU
Adequacy Gap Adequacy Gap
Difference
[ISU-ARL]
LP-1
Library space that inspires study and learning
0.14
1.22
1.08
LP-3
A comfortable and inviting location
0.49
1.39
0.90
LP-2
Quiet space for individual activities
0.15
1.00
0.85
LP-5
Community space for group learning & group study
0.95
1.68
0.73
LP-4
A getaway for study, learning, or research
0.40
1.12
0.72
AS-8
Willingness to help users
0.71
1.31
0.60
-0.18
-0.12
0.06
Areas in which peer libraries and/or ISU fall below minimum…
IC-8
Print and/or e-journal collections I require for my work
Comparison: Graduate Students (2)
(Table)
Difference between perceived and desired service:
Peer
Areas in which ISU stands out from peer libraries (by >0.5)…
ISU
Superiority Gap Superiority Gap
Difference
[ISU-ARL]
LP-1
Library space that inspires study and learning
-1.48
-0.69
0.79
LP-3
A comfortable and inviting location
-1.07
-0.52
0.55
Areas in which peers and/or ISU exceed desired service levels…
[none]
Comparison: Faculty
(Graph)
Peers
ISU
Coverup
Coverup
Affect of
Service
Affect of
Service
Remote
access
(-0.03)
IC-1
Remote
access
(-0.08)
IC-1
Website
(-0.28)
IC-2
LP-5
Print IC-3
resources
(-0.09)
IC-4
Community
space for group
learning (0.34)
IC-4
E-resources
(-0.1)
Coverup
E-resources
(-0.15)
Coverup
Access tools
IC-6
(-0.08)
Information
Control
Coverup
Library
as Place
IC-8
Information
Control
IC-8
Print and/or
e- journals
(-0.23)
Print and/or
e- journals
(-0.54)
Perceived > Desired
LP-3 Comfortable
location
Coverup
(0.01)
LP-2
Perceived < Desired
Perceived > Minimum
Quiet space for
individual
activities (0.13)
Library as Place
Perceived < Minimum
Comparison: Faculty (1)
(Table)
Difference between perceived and minimal service:
Peer
Areas in which ISU stands out from peer libraries (by >0.5)…
ISU
Adequacy Gap Adequacy Gap
Difference
[ISU-ARL]
LP-3
A comfortable and inviting location
0.60
1.58
0.98
LP-2
Quiet space for individual activities
0.58
1.41
0.83
LP-1
Library space that inspires study and learning
0.37
1.16
0.79
LP-4
A getaway for study, learning, or research
0.56
1.27
0.71
IC-3
The printed library materials I need for my work
-0.09
0.53
0.62
AS-9
Dependability in handling users' service problems
0.32
0.91
0.59
IC-5
Modern equipment that lets me easily access info
0.13
0.70
0.57
IC-7
Making info easily accessible for independent use
0.10
0.62
0.52
Areas in which peer libraries and/or ISU fall below minimum…
IC-1
Making e-resources accessible from my home or office
-0.08
-0.03
0.05
IC-2
A library website enabling me to locate info on my own
-0.28
0.02
0.30
IC-3
The printed library materials I need for my work
-0.09
0.53
0.62
IC-4
The electronic information resources I need
-0.15
-0.10
0.05
IC-6
Easy to use access tools […] to find things on my own
-0.08
0.27
0.35
IC-8
Print and/or e-journal collections I require for my work
-0.54
-0.23
0.31
Comparison: Faculty (2)
(Table)
Difference between perceived and desired service:
Peer
Areas in which ISU stands out from peer libraries (by >0.5)…
ISU
Superiority Gap Superiority Gap
Difference
[ISU-ARL]
LP-3
A comfortable and inviting location
-0.78
0.01
0.79
LP-2
Quiet space for individual activities
-0.61
0.12
0.73
LP-1
Library space that inspires study and learning
-1.01
-0.41
0.60
LP-4
A getaway for study, learning, or research
-0.77
-0.20
0.57
Areas in which peers and/or ISU exceed desired service levels…
LP-2
Quiet space for individual activities
-0.61
0.12
0.73
LP-3
A comfortable and inviting location
-0.78
0.01
0.79
LP-5
Community space for group learning & group study
0.01
0.34
0.33
Conclusions…
Conclusions: Areas of challenge
Areas of strength…
UNDERG
Adequacy
Gap
(P-M)
LP-5
Community space for group learning and group study
1.26
LP-1
Library space that inspires study and learning
1.19
AS-7
Employees who understand the needs of their users
1.17
IC-7
M aking info easily accessible for independent use
1.15
AS-9
Dependability in handling users' service problems
1.13
LP-3
A comfortable and inviting location
1.09
AS-4
Readiness to respond to users' questions
1.06
Conclusions…
Conclusions: Areas of challenge
Areas of strength…
UNDERG
GRAD
FACULTY
ALL
Adequacy
Gap
(P-M)
Adequacy
Gap
(P-M)
Adequacy
Gap
(P-M)
Adequacy
Gap
(P-M)
LP-5
Community space for group learning and group study
1.26
1.68
1.63
1.54
LP-1
Library space that inspires study and learning
1.19
1.22
1.16
1.20
AS-7
Employees who understand the needs of their users
1.17
0.77
0.73
0.85
IC-7
Making info easily accessible for independent use
1.15
0.57
0.62
0.75
AS-9
Dependability in handling users' service problems
1.13
0.37
0.91
0.85
LP-3
A comfortable and inviting location
1.09
1.39
1.58
1.40
AS-4
Readiness to respond to users' questions
1.06
1.10
0.94
1.01
Areas of strength lie in Library as Place (LP) and Affect of Service (AS).
Conclusions…
Conclusions: Areas of challenge
Areas of strength…
UNDERG
GRAD
FACULTY
ALL
Adequacy
Gap
(P-M)
Adequacy
Gap
(P-M)
Adequacy
Gap
(P-M)
Adequacy
Gap
(P-M)
LP-5
Community space for group learning and group study
1.26
1.68
1.63
1.54
LP-1
Library space that inspires study and learning
1.19
1.22
1.16
1.20
AS-7
Employees who understand the needs of their users
1.17
0.77
0.73
0.85
IC-7
Making info easily accessible for independent use
1.15
0.57
0.62
0.75
AS-9
Dependability in handling users' service problems
1.13
0.37
0.91
0.85
LP-3
A comfortable and inviting location
1.09
1.39
1.58
1.40
AS-4
Readiness to respond to users' questions
1.06
1.10
0.94
1.01
Areas of strength lie in Library as Place (LP) and Affect of Service (AS).
Areas of challenge…
IC-1
Making e- resources accessible from my home or office
0.74
0.29
0.02
0.27
IC-2
A library website enabling me to locate information…
0.60
0.26
-0.03
0.24
IC-4
The electronic information resources I need
0.86
0.21
-0.09
0.25
IC-8
Print and/or e- journal collections I require for my work
0.96
-0.12
-0.22
0.11
Areas of challenge lie in Information Control (IC).
Multi-year Comparison of Adequacy Gaps at ISU
and Peer Institutions (2001-2007)
Affect of Service
ISU
Peers
2001
2003
2005
2007
Multi-year Comparison of Adequacy Gaps at ISU
and Peer Institutions (2001-2007)
Affect of Service
ISU
Peers
Information Control
ISU
Peers
2001
2003
2005
2007
Multi-year Comparison of Adequacy Gaps at ISU
and Peer Institutions (2001-2007)
Library as Place
ISU
Peers
Affect of Service
ISU
Peers
Information Control
ISU
Peers
2001
2003
2005
2007
General Satisfaction Questions (1)
In general, I am satisfied with
the way in which I am treated
at the library.
ARL
ISU
Undergrad
Undergrad
Graduate
Graduate
Faculty
Faculty
General Satisfaction Questions (2)
In general, I am satisfied with
the way in which I am treated
at the library.
In general, I am satisfied with
library support for my
learning, research, and/or
teaching needs.
ARL
ISU
Undergrad
Undergrad
Graduate
Graduate
Faculty
Faculty
General Satisfaction Questions (3)
In general, I am satisfied with
the way in which I am treated
at the library.
In general, I am satisfied with
library support for my
learning, research, and/or
teaching needs.
ARL
ISU
Undergrad
Undergrad
Graduate
Graduate
Faculty
Faculty
How would you rate the
overall quality of the service
provided by the library?
Information Literacy Questions (1)
ARL
ISU text
Hidden text—Hidden
The library
helps me stay
abreast of
developments
in my field(s) of
interest.
Undergrad
Undergrad
Graduate
Graduate
Faculty
Faculty
Information Literacy Questions (2)
ARL
ISU text
Hidden text—Hidden
The library
helps me stay
abreast of
developments
in my field(s) of
interest.
The Library
aids my
advancement
in my academic
discipline.
Undergrad
Undergrad
Graduate
Graduate
Faculty
Faculty
Information Literacy Questions (3)
ARL
ISU text
Hidden text—Hidden
The library
helps me stay
abreast of
developments
in my field(s) of
interest.
The Library
aids my
advancement
in my academic
discipline.
The library
enables me to
be more
efficient in my
academic
pursuits.
Undergrad
Undergrad
Graduate
Graduate
Faculty
Faculty
Information Literacy Questions (4)
ARL
ISU text
Hidden text—Hidden
The library
helps me stay
abreast of
developments
in my field(s) of
interest.
The Library
aids my
advancement
in my academic
discipline.
The library
enables me to
be more
efficient in my
academic
pursuits.
Undergrad
Undergrad
Graduate
Graduate
Faculty
Faculty
The library
helps me
distinguish
trustworthy
/untrustworthy
information.
Information Literacy Questions (5)
ARL
ISU text
Hidden text—Hidden
The library
helps me stay
abreast of
developments
in my field(s) of
interest.
The Library
aids my
advancement
in my academic
discipline.
The library
enables me to
be more
efficient in my
academic
pursuits.
Undergrad
Undergrad
Graduate
Graduate
Faculty
Faculty
The library
helps me
distinguish
trustworthy
/untrustworthy
information.
The library
provides me with
the information
skills I need in
my work or
study.
Qualitative Data: Sample comments
Number: 61
Date: 11:31 PM 3/28/2007 (CST)
User Group: Undergraduate
Discipline: Agriculture
Library Branch: Parks Library
Age: 23-30
Sex: Female
KEYWORDS: HOURS; NOISE; CAFÉ; FOOD
Comment:
Call me a nerd, I would like the library to be open
earlier on sun. Also more labeled quiet zones would
be helpful. And more room to eat, drink, and
socialize by bookend. I think bookends is a great
addition to the library and has a great atmosphere,
it would just be nice if I could take purchases out
of bookend and into the rest of the library.
Qualitative Data (>50 user comments)
Topic
# of users
2007
(2005)
(2003)
Collections-related
65
72
114
e-Library
50
64
39
Staff attitudes, behavior, & customer service
26
39
57
Building, furnishings, etc.
22
36
43
Instruction & instructional support
16
13
18
Library funding
13
15
11
ILL/DD
12
18
18
Hours
11
15
22
LibQUAL & library surveys
9
29
14
Noise & the study environment
9
22
55
Branch facilities
7
7
n/a
Services (gen'l)
7
13
n/a
Circulation services & policies
6
19
32
Reference
6
5
5
5
20
15
4
4
n/a
4
n/a
n/a
Café & food in the library
Media
Subject librarians
Qualitative Data (>50 user comments)
Topic
# of users
2007
(2005)
(2003)
Collections-related
65
72
114
e-Library
50
64
39
Staff attitudes, behavior, & customer service
26
39
57
Building, furnishings, etc.
22
36
43
Instruction & instructional support
16
13
18
Library funding
13
15
11
ILL/DD
12
18
18
Hours
11
15
22
LibQUAL & library surveys
9
29
14
Noise & the study environment
9
22
55
Branch facilities
7
7
n/a
Services (gen'l)
7
13
n/a
Circulation services & policies
6
19
32
Reference
6
5
5
5
20
15
4
4
n/a
4
n/a
n/a
Café & food in the library
Media
Subject librarians
Qualitative Data (>50 user comments)
Topic
# of users
2007
(2005)
(2003)
Collections-related
65
72
114
e-Library
50
64
39
Staff attitudes, behavior, & customer service
26
39
57
Building, furnishings, etc.
22
36
43
Instruction & instructional support
16
13
18
Library funding
13
15
11
ILL/DD
12
18
18
Hours
11
15
22
LibQUAL & library surveys
9
29
14
Noise & the study environment
9
22
55
Branch facilities
7
7
n/a
Services (gen'l)
7
13
n/a
Circulation services & policies
6
19
32
Reference
6
5
5
5
20
15
4
4
n/a
4
n/a
n/a
Café & food in the library
Media
Subject librarians
Qualitative Data (>20 user comments)
Topic
# of users
2007
(2005)
(2003)
Collections-related
65
72
114
e-Library
50
64
39
Staff attitudes, behavior, & customer service
26
39
57
Building, furnishings, etc.
22
36
43
Instruction & instructional support
16
13
18
Library funding
13
15
11
ILL/DD
12
18
18
Hours
11
15
22
LibQUAL & library surveys
9
29
14
Noise & the study environment
9
22
55
Branch facilities
7
7
n/a
Services (gen'l)
7
13
n/a
Circulation services & policies
6
19
32
Reference
6
5
5
5
20
15
4
4
n/a
4
n/a
n/a
Café & food in the library
Media
Subject librarians
Qualitative Data (>10 user comments)
Topic
# of users
2007
(2005)
(2003)
Collections-related
65
72
114
e-Library
50
64
39
Staff attitudes, behavior, & customer service
26
39
57
Building, furnishings, etc.
22
36
43
Instruction & instructional support
16
13
18
Library funding
13
15
11
ILL/DD
12
18
18
Hours
11
15
22
LibQUAL & library surveys
9
29
14
Noise & the study environment
9
22
55
Branch facilities
7
7
n/a
Services (gen'l)
7
13
n/a
Circulation services & policies
6
19
32
Reference
6
5
5
5
20
15
4
4
n/a
4
n/a
n/a
Café & food in the library
Media
Subject librarians
Qualitative Data (>5 user comments)
Topic
# of users
2007
(2005)
(2003)
Collections-related
65
72
114
e-Library
50
64
39
Staff attitudes, behavior, & customer service
26
39
57
Building, furnishings, etc.
22
36
43
Instruction & instructional support
16
13
18
Library funding
13
15
11
ILL/DD
12
18
18
Hours
11
15
22
LibQUAL & library surveys
9
29
14
Noise & the study environment
9
22
55
Branch facilities
7
7
n/a
Services (gen'l)
7
13
n/a
Circulation services & policies
6
19
32
Reference
6
5
5
5
20
15
4
4
n/a
4
n/a
n/a
Café & food in the library
Media
Subject librarians
Qualitative Data: Recurring themes…
(Collections-related)
Collections-related
Buy more journals!! Avoid cancellations;
try to restore some journals that have
previously been cut.
More full-text journals, including
back files.
Improve remote access
to all e-resources, but
Many suggestions and
especially journals.
Improve access to books
requests to purchase
that are in high demand
specific titles or
(and “never available…”)
materials in specific
subject areas.
Repeated requests to add more
“seats” for SciFinder Scholar.
Qualitative Data: Recurring themes…
(e-Library, Catalog, Internet, etc.)
E-Library, Catalog, Internet, etc.
Make the e-Library website more user-friendly.
Improve the organization; make it less graphicsintensive.
Make searching easier!
Consider a search box on the
e-Library home page.
Simplify searching for
non-print media such as
videos, DVDs, books-ontape.
Simplify remote access.
Keep pursuing a “single
sign-on.”
Qualitative Data: Recurring themes…
(Staff-related)
Staff-related
Majority of respondents see
library staff as courteous,
patient, helpful, dedicated,
efficient.
Still, a few respondents describe
staff as “rude,” “not friendly,” or
“lacking in customer service.”
A few respondents comment on the
inconsistency of staff service: the mix of
professional & unprofessional behaviors.
Student workers can be “hit and miss…”
Qualitative Data: Recurring themes…
(Building, equipment, furniture)
Building, furnishings, etc.
Many comment explicitly on their
low use (or non-use) of the
physical library. “I only need the
Library’s website…”
Some areas in the Parks
Library have poor ventilation,
flickering fluorescent lights.
Several respondents like (and only
one respondent dislikes) the new
Bookends Café.
Qualitative Data: Recurring themes…
(Noise)
Noise and the study environment
Importance of the Parks Library
and branch facilities as places to
study.
Continue to control noise levels in the
Library, and to provide adequate,
separate, and well-designated spaces
for both “quiet” and group study.
Unlike previous years, not a single
comment about cell phones!
Qualitative Data: Recurring themes…
(Specific services)
Specific services
Circulation: Need continued
review of Circulation and
Collection Development policies
(loan periods, purchase of
multiple copies, etc.) to improve
book availability.
Interlibrary Loan: Numerous
respondents describe ILL as timely,
efficient, and extremely valuable—
lots of kudos to this service in 2007!
Branches: A few users appeared
to be unaware of the Vet Med
Express delivery service.
Instruction: Users need help in
evaluating electronic resources.
Distance learners need
specialized assistance.
Reproduction & reformatting:
Numerous requests for library Need more and better services &
seminars on specific topics.
equipment for copying, printing,
and scanning. Try to contain costs!
Qualitative Data: Recurring themes…
(Hours)
Hours; Funding
Several requests for expanded
hours, especially on weekends and
during holiday and break periods.
Expanded hours are especially
important to non-traditional
students.
12 users comment on library’s
budget constraints. Many
admonish us to “keep pushing for
funding…”
Next steps
• Share qualitative and quantitative data with
appropriate library units, for analysis.
• Implement and document changes based on findings.
• Explore opportunities to compare findings with
colleagues (GWLA, etc.)
• Repeat survey biennially (next in 2009) and watch
the trajectories.
• Consider focus groups to explore areas of concern.
Recommendations
• Continue to acquire more e-journals, including backfiles,
and make them accessible from both on and off campus.
• Review and act on respondents’ recommendations for
specific material purchases (including SciFinder Scholar seats).
• Complete an overhaul of the e-Library website, including:
 more intuitive organization
 a homepage search box
 easier access to journals and journal articles (both print & electronic)
 easier access to non-print media (videos, DVDs, etc.)
• Improve library support for distance learning (including
dedicated pages in the e-Library)
Recommendations (cont.)
• Review and act on respondents’ suggestions for specific instructional
seminars and workshops in the coming year.
• Create additional quiet zones within the Parks Library.
• Use respondents’ comments/complaints regarding customer service
to shape library staff development sessions in the coming year.
• Review and revise circulation and collection development policies
to improve availability of “high demand” books.
• Publicize the Vet Med Express delivery service.