Transcript Where is the “point of need”? How users access streaming

The Libraries’ Role in Attracting and
Retaining Graduate Students
to meet the relevant goals of Flagship 2030
Libraries Assessment Committee
October 15th, 2008
Overview
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Assessment Committee
Assessment Cycle
Why graduate students?
Prefatory notes
Data
Results
“Recommendations”
What’s next?
Libraries Assessment
Committee
The Committee will undertake and/or coordinate
measurements of the quality of services and collections and
the needs and expectations of the Libraries' clientele to
support strategic planning, facilities planning, budget or
performance review cycles, vendor contract renewals, or
technology/systems conversions. It will endeavor to conduct
library assessment in relation to institutional goals and
outcomes. The Committee will recommend to
Library Council and/or other committees
actions based on the results of measurement
and assessment.
Assessment Cycle
Why graduate students?
Graduates
ARL
Satisfaction Percentage
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
UCB
22.9%
27.7%
28.5%
27.0%
21.2%
17.8%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
2002
2004
LibQUAL+ Survey Year
2006
Prefatory Notes
• Data communicated to
Learning Commons team
and consultant
• Full report shared with
Council
• Living document—we
need your input
Data
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
2005 PBA survey (n > 1000)
2006 LibQUAL+ (n = 225)
interviews (n = 8)
circulation and ILL data
electronic database login
tabulations
budgetary data dating from 19962006
departmental enrollment data
several informal polls
a comprehensive literature review
Results
• Use
• Perceptions
– Collections
– Facilities
– Services
• Beyond the perceptions
Results: Use
• Three of the top four campus services
utilized by graduate students are
provided by the Libraries.
• 62% use Libraries facilities daily or
weekly and 85% use Libraries websites
daily or weekly.
• While they use the Libraries websites
frequently, they appear to use it
primarily to locate known items, using
commercial search engines such as
Google Scholar to discover new
items.
Results: Perceptions
• On two measures, libraries
services rate higher than
collections or facilities
• Very high expectations for
electronic collections
Results: Collections
• Scientists -> electronic
(80pts below ARL)
• Humanists -> print (40pts
below ARL)
• Social Scientists fall in the
middle
Results: Facilities
Satisfaction Percentage*
30.0%
24.2%
23.9%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
13.9%
10.0%
3.3%
5.0%
0.0%
UCB
ARL
Norlin
Branches
What about Norlin?
•
•
•
•
•
overall ambiance
individual study space
expert help provided
hours
how conducive the
building is to studying
Beyond the perceptions
• Collections
• Facilities
• Services
Collections
Comparison of ARL and UCB library expenditures as a percentage
of campus expenditures
4.00%
3.50%
3.00%
2.50%
2.00%
1.50%
ARL
CUB
Collections
Collections
• Interviews reveal Google
Scholar is the index of
choice for grad students
• They use Chinook to locate
known items
• There is a significant
correlation between
website usage and positive
perception of e-resources
Collections
Spring 2008 circulation/interlibrary loan sampling
Transactions per
student
Scientists
Social
Scientists
Humanists
Prospector
0.059
0.191
0.375
Interlibrary loan
0.282
1.085
1.966
Circulation
3.019
4.819
30.552
Collections
Database sessions per graduate student
Collections
Collections summary
• UCB is well funded for
collections
• Serials cut impacted
perceptions and
underlying reality
• There are some differences
in disciplinary use of format
• We can’t solve this
problem by (merely)
throwing more money at it
Facilities
• Norlin dedicates more
assignable space to book
stacks
• Branches dedicate more
to study and computing
space
Facilities
Multi-channel services
• “[there] is the need for customers to have a consistent
experience across all of the channels that they use in
communicating with the supplier. Indeed, such is the
importance of ‘consistency of experience’ that
determining how it can be achieved must become a
priority for multi-channel marketers . . . [we] need to
build bridges between channel silos.”
--Madaleno, R., Wilson, H., & Palmer, R. (2007). Determinants of customer satisfaction
in a multi-channel B2B environment. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence,
18(8), 915-925.
Facilities
Annual change in Libraries budget allocations
Staffing
Association of Reserach Libraries
FTE Student per FTE Professional Staff
2005 - 2006
Harvard, 38
Yale, 43
271 (Median)
Colorado, 583
Waterloo, 662
Virginia Tech, 687
0
200
400
600
800
Putting it all together
• We do need to improve
collections (we dropped
from 68th to 94th in serials,
back up to 86th)
• Improving facilities and
staffing could help
• Diversifying Libraries
investment is best strategy
What we’ve already done
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Business Library
The purchase of several large electronic collections in
the humanities
The purchase of several large electronic indexes,
electronic books, and back-files in the sciences
The implementation of an ‘open-URL resolver’
A redesign of Chinook
The inclusion of enhanced records in Chinook,
The cataloging of special collections and government
publications materials;
The construction of a subject guides database
The unveiling of CU-Digital Library
The negotiation of consortia subscriptions.
The recruiting of an Electronic Collections Assessment
Librarian that can assist and provide leadership for
continuous assessment of collections and their use;
Begun desktop delivery of journal articles from
PASCAL;
OTHERS????
What we’re doing
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Learning Commons, Research Floor, Study
Space
Moving to a streamlined acquisitions process
Cancelling print subscriptions
An assessment of how monographic funds are
allocated to various disciplines.
Construction of a second off-site holding
facility, PASCAL II.
The investigation of “second-generation”
catalog
The investigation of further access to electronic
book collections;
The completion of a draft statement on
scholarly communications
The continued design of an institutional
repository
Others??
What We Still Have to Do
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Complete all phases of the Norlin Library Renaissance
Plan
Investigate federated search technologies
Expand Collection Development’s monograph
reallocation project to include serials
Begin a grassroots campaign to increase graduate
student awareness of the crisis in scholarly
communications;
Create an emerging technologies group
Create a graduate student advisory group
Seek a one-time “facilities renewal budget
Reassess the use of PASCAL with respect to
monographs and serials, paying attention to
disciplines;
Expand desktop-delivery services;
Work with the campus to increase operations and
personnel budgets to help diversify its investment in the
Libraries;
OTHERS????
Full report
• Draft available:
http://ucblibraries.colorado.edu/internal/assessment/Libra
ries_and_Graduate_Students_Oct2008.pdf