One size does not fit all: user surveys in academic libraries

1
One size does not fit alluser surveys in
academic libraries

• Claire Creaser
• BSc CStat

2
Introduction

• Context
• Analysis of LibQualTM surveys
• The SCONUL standard user survey template
• Response rates and sample sizes
• Issues for benchmarking

3
Context

• Evidence for management
• Client centred operations
• Range of instruments
• LibqualTM
• SCONUL template
• Libra
• Rodski
• In house designs
• Institution-wide surveys
• UK National Student Survey

4
LibQualTM analysis

• ARL analyses
• Overall results
• User categories
• No interpretation
• More can be done-
• Comparison of demographic groups
• Comparison of site libraries
• Benchmarking

5
User groups

• Undergraduates
• Postgraduates
• Academic staff
• Library staff
• Should they be included?
• Other staff

6
Students

• Undergraduates
• Less likely to reply
• More likely to use resources within the library
• Key priorities
• knowledgeable staff
• Texts and readings
• Postgraduates
• More likely to use electronic resources
• Key priorities
• Collections
• user friendly web site

7
Staff

• Academic staff
• over-represented in the sample
• Use resources within the library less
• Key priorities
• Similar to postgraduates
• Library staff
• Higher perceptions than their users
• Key priorities
• Library as place
• Other staff
• Few responses

8
Gender

• Women
• Are more likely to reply than men
• Use resources within the library more frequently
  than men
• Want more out of the library
• Men
• Use non-library gateways more frequently than
  women

9
Subject discipline

• Differential response rates
• Population data not always accurate

10
Subject discipline
11
Subject discipline

• Differential response rates
• Population data not always accurate
• Tied to campus in some institutions
• More investigation needed

12
SCONUL User Survey

• Standard template
• Can be adapted to local circumstances
• Paper or web
• Contextual data
• Activity monitoring
• Importance and satisfaction ratings

13
Contextual data

• Proportions of staff students
• Part-time vs full time
• Age
• Frequency of library use

14
Activities during current visit

• Five activities
• Success rated on a 5 point scale
• Option for did not do today

15
Looking for material on the shelves
16
Importance satisfaction

• Most important overall
• Range of books
• Course books and essential texts
• Least important
• Photocopying
• Study facilities (eg desks)

17
Importance satisfaction

• Greatest satisfaction with
• Staff competence
• Staff helpfulness
• Least satisfaction with
• Course books and essential texts
• Provision of computers

18
Response rates and sample sizes

• Validity of results
• Potential bias
• Accuracy of estimates
• Demographic breakdowns

19
LibQualTM UK 2003
20
Benchmarking between institutions

• Standard survey needed
• E.g. LibQual SCONUL Template
• Contextual information
• Headline resultsor more detailed sub-groups?

21
Benchmarking within institutions

• Over time
• Between campuses
• Subject specialism issues
• Between user groups
• Priorities may colour perceptions

22
Conclusion

• Purpose
• To improve service
• High overall satisfaction levels
• Good for headline publicity?
• Drill down into detail
• One size does not fit all
• Best provision may not be uniform

23
LISUResearch consultancy for performance
management Information, cultural academic
services