Transcript Document

LibQUAL+™ 2004
Data Summary
An overview of the results of the
LibQUAL+™ 2004 survey with
comparisons to past surveys
LibQUAL +™ Goals



Overall objectives are the same as before
Biggest difference is the inclusion of the CES
libraries participating as a consortium
BYU expectations




How has BYU patrons’ rating of the Lee Library
changed over the last three surveys
How do the CES institutions measure up with each
other – what best practices can be learned/shared
Benchmark results against other institutions
Where to focus further improvements
2
General Facts

198 institutions participated in 2004


Included Hunter Law Library, BYU-Idaho, BYUHawaii, LDSBC, and Family History Library in SLC
Minimum sampling criteria the same as in 2001


BYU sampled 900 faculty/staff, 900 graduates,
1800 undergraduates



600 faculty/staff, 600 graduates, 900 undergraduates
Effective sample size reduced
Final sample size 3265
CES samples varied and were less
3
Response Summary

Nearly 113,000 completed surveys

Average validity rate nearly 95%



BYU Response



Over 2000 responded to the survey
1003 completed the entire survey
953 valid surveys (95.01% validity rate)



Surveys with more than 11 “n/a” deleted
Records containing more than 9 logical inconsistencies deleted
(Desired < Minimum)
BYU ranked 26th in NUMBER of valid surveys
Effective response rate of 29.2%
CES Response
4
LibQUAL+™ Responses
by Age
11%
12%
21%
Idaho
Provo
14%
0.94%
43%
12%
Under 18
18 - 22
23 - 30
31 - 45
46 - 65
Over 65
0%
0%
1%
16%
18%
31%
1%
0% 30%
33%
23%
53%
13%
10%
1%
57%
3%
10%
9%
1%
0%
32%
0%
0%
Hawaii
74%
LDSBC
49%
4%
12%
FHL
4%
Hunter
5
Survey Summary

22 core statements covering many areas of library
service






All identical to 2003, 15 identical to 2001 (7 comparable)
“When it comes to . . .”
Minimum, Desired, Perceived Level of Service
Responses on a 9 point Likert scale
Service Adequacy Gap
5 Bonus statements of local choosing


Determined after consultation w/CES partners
Making aware of resources/services, teaching how to
locate/evaluate/use info, efficient ILL/DD (2001/2003),
access to archive materials (esp. LDS), subject librarian
availability
6
Survey Summary

Core statements summarized into three
areas




A reduction from four for 2001 & 2003
Affect of Service – How the patron is
treated
Library as Place – The library facility &
environment
Information Control – Personal control of
and access to information
7
LibQUAL+™ Radar Charts
(2001 showing ONLY statements corresponding to 2003 & 2004)
BYU - 2001
AS-1
9
BON-03
AS-1
9
BON-03
AS-2
LP-5
AS-3
8
8
LP-4
LP-4
AS-4
LP-4
AS-4
AS-4
7
7
7
LP-3
AS-5
LP-3
AS-5
LP-3
AS-5
6
6
6
AS-6
5
LP-2
AS-6
5
LP-2
4
AS-7 LP-1
AS-7 LP-1
IC-8
AS-8
IC-7
AS-9
IC-6
IC-8
AS-8
IC-7
AS-9
IC-6
IC-1
IC-5
AS-6
5
4
4
LP-1
AS-2
LP-5
AS-3
8
IC-1
IC-5
IC-2
IC-4
AS-1
9
BON-03
AS-2
LP-5
AS-3
LP-2
BYU - 2004
BYU - 2003
IC-2
IC-4
IC-3
Legend:
IC-3
AS-7
IC-8
AS-8
IC-7
AS-9
IC-6
IC-1
IC-5
IC-2
IC-4
IC-3
Perceived > Desired = Green
Perceived < Minimum = Red
8
LibQUAL+™ 2004 Radar Chart - FHL
LP-5
AS-1
9
LP-5
AS-2
LP-4
LP-3
AS-4
AS-5
5
AS-6
5
LP-1
IC-7
AS-8
IC-6
IC-5
AS-7
IC-7
AS-8
IC-6
5
LP-1
AS-1
9
AS-1
9
AS-8
IC-6
IC-5
LP-5
AS-3
LP-3
AS-4
7
AS-5
6
5
AS-6
LP-2
7
AS-5
6
5
LP-1
LP-2
AS-6
LP-1
4
AS-7
AS-7
IC-8
IC-7
AS-8
IC-6
5
IC-5
IC-7
AS-8
IC-6
AS-9
IC-5
IC-1
IC-4
IC-1
IC-4
IC-2
IC-2
IC-3
IC-3
Legend:
AS-6
4
IC-8
AS-9
AS-5
6
4
IC-8
Lee
AS-2
8
AS-4
7
AS-1
9
LP-4
8
LP-3
AS-4
IC-1
IC-4 2004 Radar Chart
IC-2
LibQUAL+™
- Provo
IC-3
AS-3
8
AS-9
AS-2
LP-4
AS-3
LP-3
IC-7
IC-1
LP-5
AS-2
LP-4
AS-7
LibQUAL+™
2004 Radar Chart
- Idaho
IC-4
IC-2
IC-3
LibQUAL+™
- Hunter
IC-4 2004 Radar Chart
IC-2
IC-3
AS-6
IC-8
AS-9
IC-5
IC-1
AS-5
6
4
IC-8
AS-9
LP-1
AS-6
LP-2
4
AS-7
LP-2
AS-4
7
AS-5
6
4
IC-8
LP-5
AS-3
LP-3
AS-4
LP-2
AS-2
8
7
6
AS-1
9
LP-4
8
7
LP-1
LP-5
AS-2
AS-3
8
LP-2
AS-1
9
LP-4
AS-3
LP-3
LibQUAL+™ 2004 Radar Chart - Hawaii
LibQUAL+™ 2004 Radar Chart - LDSBC
Perceived > Desired = Green
Perceived < Minimum = Red
AS-7
IC-7
AS-8
IC-6
AS-9
IC-5
IC-1
IC-4
IC-2
IC-3
9
LibQUAL+™
Zone of Tolerance
BYU - 2001
BYU - 2003
BYU - 2004
9
9
9
9
9
8
8
88
8
7
7
77
7
6
6
5
5
Affect of Library as Personal Information
Service
Place
Control Access
Total
6
6
6
5
Affect of Library as Personal Information
Service
Place
Control Access
Total
5
5
Affect of
Service
Information
Control
Library as
Place
Total
10
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
5
5
Lee
5
Affect of Service Information Control
Library as Place
Overall
5
Affect of Service Information Control
Library as Place
Overall
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
Affect of Service Information Control
Library as Place
Overall
5
Affect of Service Information Control
Library as Place
Overall
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
Affect of Service Information Control
Library as Place
Overall
5
Affect of Service Information Control
Library as Place
Overall
11
Survey Summary

Other LibQUAL+™ questions

Three library use questions




Three satisfaction questions




Library resources on premises
Library resources via Web page
Yahoo™, Google™ and other non-library gateways
Overall satisfaction of service quality
Satisfaction with treatment in library
Satisfaction with library support
Five information literacy outcomes questions





Help stay abreast of developments in field of interest
Aids advancement in academic pursuits
Enables more efficiency in academic pursuits
Helps distinguish between trustworthy/non-trustworthy info
Provide info skills needed for work or study
12
Library Use Summary
70%
How often do you
use resources on
library premises?
60%
50%
How often do you
access library
resources via a
library web page?
40%
30%
How often do you
use Yahoo™,
Google™ or nonlibrary gateways
for info?
20%
10%
0%
Daily
Weekly
Monthly Quarterly
Never
2003 data in foreground in darker shade
13
How often do you use Yahoo™, Google™,
or non-library gateways for information?
70%
60%
50%
Undergrad
40%
Graduate
Faculty
30%
Lib Staff
Staff
20%
10%
0%
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
Quarterly
Never
14
Overall Service Quality
and Service Satisfaction
9.0
8.5
8.0
7.5
2001
2003
2004
7.0
6.5
6.0
Overall Quality
Treatment
Satisfaction
Support
Satisfaction
15
Overall Service Quality
and Service Satisfaction
Overall Service Quality and Satisfaction
Lee
9.00
8.00
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
Satisfied with the way in which I am treated at Satisfied with library support for my learning,
the library
research, and/or teaching needs
How would you rate overall quality of the
service provided by the library?
16
Information Literacy
Outcomes Questions
9
8
7
6
5
2003
2004
Library helps me stay
abreast of developments in
field of interest
Library aids my
advancement in academic
discipline
Library enables me to be
more efficient in academic
pursuits
Library helps me distinquish
between trustworthy and
untrustworthy info
Library provides me with
info skills needed in work or
study
17
LibQUAL+™ Comments

411 of 1003 respondents provided comments
at the end of the survey



571 distinct comments summarized into 7 groups
– Facilities, General, Library Personnel, Library
Policies, Library Resources, Online/electronic
resources, and Library Web Site
The five most common responses were the library
is excellent, the library is a great place to study,
the library has a great staff, there is a need for
more discipline specific resources, and survey
issues
General overtone of top comments more positive
than in 2003
18
LibQUAL+™ Comments
140
127
120
114
105
# of Comments
100
100
80
60
48
40
40
37
20
0
Library
Resources
General
Facilities
Library
Personnel
Online/Elec Library Web
Resources
Site
Library
Policies
19
LibQUAL+™ Comments
25%
Percent of Comments
20%
15%
2003
2004
10%
5%
0%
Library
Resources
General
Facilities
Library Online/Elec Library
Personnel Resources Web Site
Library
Policies
20
G
en
er
al
s
Pe
rs
on
ne
Li
br
l
ar
y
Po
Li
lic
br
ie
ar
s
y
R
es
ou
rc
Li
es
br
ar
y
O
W
nl
eb
in
e/
Si
El
te
ec
R
es
ou
rc
es
Li
br
ar
y
Fa
ci
lit
ie
Percent of Total
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
FHL
15%
LDSBC
Hawaii
10%
Idaho
5%
Hunter
0%
Lee
21
LibQUAL+™ Comments

Top comments for each comment group







Facilities – Great place to study; More computers, study
carrels, etc.; Quieter areas
General – Excellent; Survey issue
Library Personnel – Great staff; Staff impersonal/not helpful;
Staff courteous/helpful; Student employees impersonal/not
helpful
Library Policies – Cell phones; Food area; Improve
circulation policies
Library Resources – Great resources; More discipline
specific resources; ILL helpful; Need more/better help in
using resources
Library Web Site – Confusing/unfriendly; Search confusing
Online/electronic resources – More full-text; More resources
22
LibQUAL+™ Comments

Specific tendencies in comments




Comments came predominantly from the students
(80% in 2004 vs. 62% in 2003)
Interestingly, only one comment was made from
Library Staff (General – limited library experience)
Graduates were more vocal about the Library Web
Site and Online/electronic resources than any of
the others
Over 65% came from 5 of the 13 disciplines that
provided comments – Soc Sci/Psych, Sci/Math,
Humanities, Eng/Comp Sci, Business
23
LibQUAL+™ Comments

Specific tendencies in comments



Humanities tended to give the most positive
comments about the staff, they also tended to give
the most negative comments about the staff
The proportion of comments dealing with the need
for more resources was similar to that seen in
2003 with the bulk of the requests coming from
Sci/Math
Negative comments about the Library Web Site far
overshadowed any positive comments
24
LibQUAL+ BYU Summary

Areas of positive note





BYU patrons very positive about the Lee Library
Continued improvement in overall satisfaction
Library as place still exceeding patron expectations
Inspires study and learning
Potential areas for improvement




Library Web site
Easy-to-use access tools that allow more self-reliance
in finding information
Increase print/electronic journal collections
Improve relations with patrons
25
The Future of LibQUAL+

The next round of surveys will be
conducted Spring 2005



Ongoing, continuing effort sponsored by
ARL
At this point BYU does not plan to
participate in 2005
Will look to spring 2006 as the next
opportunity w/CES partners
26
27
LibQUAL+™ Responses
by Sample Group
20%
29%
37%
Faculty
Graduates
Lib Staff
Staff
Undergrads
42%
2001
1%
26%
2003
25%
15%
13%
3%
2%
49%
29%
2004
9%
1%
28
LibQUAL+™ Responses
by Sample Group
13%
17%
1%
BYU-Provo
49%
29%
2%
Faculty
Graduates
Lib Staff
Staff
Undergrads
8%
BYU-Idaho
73%
9%
1%
7% 1%
1%
4%
23%
4%
LDSBC
1%
4%
69%
BYU-Hawaii
87%
29
g/
En
B vS
u
c
C sin i
om es
m s
Ed /J
En u ou
g/ ca r
Co tio
m n
G pS
en c
St i
ud
H He
um al
an th
iti
es
La
Pe
w
O
rf
/F th
in er
e
A
So Sc rts
i/
c
Sc Ma
th
i
U /Ps
nd yc
ec h
id
ed
A
LibQUAL+™ Responses
by Discipline
20%
18%
16%
14%
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2001
2003
2004
Population
2%
0%
30
6%
0%
Great staff
Great resources
Survey issue
Great resources
Staff helpful
More full-text
Difficulty finding resources
Difficulty finding resources
Great staff
Staff impersonal/not helpful
Improve access to info
More computers, study carrels, etc.
Non-user of library resources
Survey issue
More resources
Staff impersonal/ not helpful
More discipline specific resources
4%
Great place to study
8%
Excellent
Excellent
LibQUAL+™ Comments
(Top Ten Top
Comments
– Year Comparisons)
Ten Comments - Year Comparisons
12%
10%
2003
2004
2%
31