Under New Management : Developing a Library

Assessment Program at a Small Public University

Library Assessment Conference: Building Effective, Sustainable, Practical

AssessmentSeattle, WA: Aug. 4-6, 2008

Karen JensenCollection Development Officer• karen.jensen@uaf.edu

Anne ChristieBioSciences Librarian• anne.christie@uaf.edu

Contents

• Overview of UAF• Planning an assessment program

– Why, what, who and how

• User surveys– Planning, marketing, implementing,

results

• Action items• Recommendations for user surveys

University of Alaska Fairbanks

UAF Librarieshttp://library.uaf.edu

• 65 library employees, including 13 librarians • $2,110,000 materials budget• Specialties: Alaska and Polar Regions

collections• Unique content products:

– Alaska Digital Archives – Alaska and Polar Periodical Index– Project Jukebox – Wenger Eskimo Database

• Library Science 101 required for all undergraduates

Planning a new assessment

program – why?• New library and university leadership• Change in library service methods • Need for fresh, relevant user and collection

data • Goal of aligning spending and staffing with

priorities • Timing

– Budget picture changing– New University of Alaska Fairbanks Strategic Plan– Last library-wide strategic plan: 2001– Last comprehensive patron survey: 1995– Need for new library plan and data to guide it

Planning a new assessment

program – what?•Data-centered decisions – exploring ways of gathering and using data•More measurable outcomes•Need for “performance measures” to satisfy funders

Library Assessment: Data-Centered Decision-Making

Collection Analysis

Circ Data Analyzed

By Subject

ILL Data

Journal Citation Reports

Gate Counts

Instruction

Reference

User Surveys

Electronic Resources

Use

PlanningMmgt

Resources

Building the assessment program:

who and how?• Library Assessment Task Force

Librarians from:– Collection development and patron

services– Library science instruction– Reference– Outreach

• Taskforce charge: gather user feedback– Method: meetings, tasks, library wiki

Building the assessment program:

who and how? (2)• Constraints

– Minimal funding for survey research

– No additional staffing for survey administration and analysis

Planning the survey

• Content– Campus-wide surveys of faculty and

students– Survey topics

• Logistics– Easy to distribute– Easy for users to respond – Easy to analyze – Easy to repeat– Timeline short

Choosing a survey

Choosing a survey instrument• University of Washington Libraries

Assessment: Field tested• Choosing a survey tool• Past success with online survey

response using incentives• “Survey Monkey”

Preparing the survey

• Timeline• Question adaptation• Question scoring• Testing• IRB• Budget

Getting the word out

• Encouraging participation- University administration, including Provost,

Deans, Directors- Faculty Senate- Graduate School- S tudent government association

• Advertising• Incentive prizes

Implementing the survey

• Email distribution via Computing Dept listservs

• Web page links• Response rates

– Faculty – 25% (243/943)– Grad students – 19% (143/750)– Undergrads – 8% (431/5086)

Compiling results - library

• Aggregate results posted to library web page and staff wiki

• Comments distributed to service areas: Interlibrary Loan, Circulation, Media, Reference

• Comments for collection managers, Library Science head, analyzed to create action items

• Detail results possible, need for patron privacy

Communicating results to campus

• Summary reports for specific administration and governance groups

• Research Working Group• Graduate School • Provost• Deans and Directors• Student Leadership • Faculty Governance Group- Faculty Senate

• Summaries posted to web site• Promotion for Fall, 2008 – Student

newspaper ads, staff newsletter, etc.

Analyzing results

• Analysis– Further analysis

needed– Follow-up with

non-participants needed

• Surprises• Key findings

Comparing satisfaction with collections with overall satisfaction

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%V

ery

satis

fied

Sat

isfie

d

Dis

satis

fied

Ver

ydi

ssat

isfie

d

N/A

Ver

ysa

tisfie

d

Sat

isfie

d

Dis

satis

fied

Ver

ydi

ssat

isfie

d

N/A

Collections Satisfaction Overall Satisfaction

Faculty

Grads

Undergrads

Selecting action items

• Number of responses• Time and effort• Library control

Taking action

• Collection development- Electronic content- Specific subjects

• Service-related issues• Library space• Strategic plan

- Reference review- LS101- Institutional repository

Looking to the future

• Revising survey• Refining distribution methods• Reassessing our marketing strategy• Analyzing results• Managing the surveys

Starting an assessment program:

recommendations• Consider purpose• Assess local funding, expertise, time• Research survey tools• Examine campus communication

options• Get buy-in and input from all library

staff• Plan, plan, plan

Thank you.Questions?