Transcript Guerrilla Assessment: A practical approach to Library Impact and Value Zsuzsa Koltay Cornell University Library Director of Assessment and Communication.

Guerrilla Assessment:
A practical approach to Library Impact and Value
Zsuzsa Koltay
Cornell University Library
Director of Assessment and Communication
low cost
unconventional
big impact
low cost:
senior survey
“To what extent have Cornell library resources and
services contributed to…
…your ability to evaluate the quality of the
information you find?
…your ability to conduct research?
…your efficiency?
…your academic success?
Rating scale: not at all; very little; some; quite a bit; very much
2010
Academic success
4.9
13.1
33.3
29.4
19.3
not at all
very little
some
quite a bit
very much
Efficiency
7.3
Ability to conduct research
5.7
Evaluate quality of information
9
0%
12.3
30.7
9.3
29.1
27.6
14.9
20%
20.6
30.8
35.5
40%
26.5
27.1
60%
13.5
80%
100%
Ability to conduct research
not at all
Female
very little
some
quite a bit
very much
Male
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Ability to conduct research
Intl
Multi
not at all
very little
some
URM
quite a bit
very much
Asian
White
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Ability to conduct research
ILR
Hum Ec
Hotel
not at all
very little
Engineering
some
quite a bit
Arts
very much
AAP
ALS
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
unconventional:
value calculations
Transaction count X value expressed
in $$$
08/09 Cornell example
• for the use of physical volumes: $15,135,782
• for articles accessed online and through
interlibrary services: $61,265,783
• for answering questions to build research skills and
contribute to Cornell research results: $1,176,615
• for in-depth consultations that contribute to Cornell
research results: $126,900
• for Cornell’s use of preprints from arXiv.org: $740,250
• for distributing Cornell-created content to
the world through eCommons: $12,001,290
• for laptops borrowed: $202,165
• for library instruction: $xxx
___________________________
Roughly 1:2 cost to value
so what?
• Great context or bogus numbers?
• How do our cost and value to users relate to
each other?
• Very varied reactions – not used, not updated
big impact:
benchmarking
The big irony:
resources and rankings rule!
1.090
1.525
1.049
1.268
1.065
1.360
1.030
1.135
1.063
1.333
1.064
1.361
1.004
1.017
1.075
1.418
1.045
1.227
1.031
1.150
1.034
1.157
1.013
1.030
1.048
1.263
1.035
1.181
1.050
1.203
1.029
1.151
1.061
1.336
1.070
1.397
1.057
1.315
1.044
1.235
1.033
1.178
1.002
1.011
1.034
1.174
1.099
1.595
1.133
1.606
1.060
1.312
1.049
1.265
1.066
1.352
1.043
1.179
1.007
0.997
median
1.049
1.249
avg
1.049
1.258
+1.7% in 5 years
+25.8% in 5 years
5 yr cumulcative change in materials expenditures
CHICAGO
COLUMBIA
CORNELL
DUKE
EMORY
HARVARD
ILLINOIS, URBANA
INDIANA
IOWA
JOHNS HOPKINS
MCGILL
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
NEW YORK
NORTH CAROLINA
OKLAHOMA
PENNSYLVANIA
PENNSYLVANIA STATE
PITTSBURGH
PRINCETON
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
TEXAS
TEXAS A&M
TORONTO
WASHINGTON
YALE
1.595 1.606
1.418
1.333
1.397
1.361
1.336
1.263
1.227
1.181 1.203
1.150 1.157
1.017
1.030
1.315
1.312
1.235
1.151
1.178
1.174
1.011
1.352
1.265
1.179
0.997
The Petition
We, the (undersigned) faculty of Cornell
University, affirm the critical importance of the
library system to all aspects of Cornell’s mission.
[…]
We call on the central administration […] to meet
the first objective of the Cornell University Library
Strategic Plan (2011-2015), to "Return the Library
to its position among the top ten academic
institutions in the Association of Research
Libraries in terms of collection support".
Signature #554
The two most important ingredients
of a great university are an excellent
faculty and an excellent library. If
need be, cut back on other things
(athletic programs, faculty salary
pool, ...) to rebuild the funding
strength for Cornell's library system
Professor X, Neurobiology And Behavior
Discussion
•
•
•
•
Is there merit in lightweight approaches?
Are they reliable?
Do you have examples?
What evidence
resonates on your
campus?