View
215
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
Guerrilla Assessment: A practical approach to Library Impact and Value
Zsuzsa KoltayCornell 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
Evaluate quality of information
Ability to conduct research
Efficiency
Academic success
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
9
5.7
7.3
4.9
14.9
9.3
12.3
13.1
35.5
27.6
30.7
33.3
27.1
30.8
29.1
29.4
13.5
26.5
20.6
19.3
not at all
very little
some
quite a bit
very much
2010
Male
Female
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Ability to conduct research
not at allvery littlesomequite a bitvery much
White
Asian
URM
Multi
Intl
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Ability to conduct research
not at allvery littlesomequite a bitvery much
ALS
AAP
Arts
Engineering
Hotel
Hum Ec
ILR
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Ability to conduct research
not at allvery littlesomequite a bitvery much
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!
avg annual change cum change
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
1
1.3331.361
1.017
1.418
1.2271.1501.157
1.030
1.263
1.1811.2031.151
1.3361.397
1.315
1.2351.178
1.011
1.174
1.5951.606
1.3121.265
1.352
1.179
0.997
5 yr cumulcative change in materials expendituresCHICAGO COLUMBIA CORNELL DUKEEMORY HARVARD ILLINOIS, URBANA INDIANAIOWA JOHNS HOPKINS MCGILL MICHIGANMINNESOTA NEW YORK NORTH CAROLINA OKLAHOMAPENNSYLVANIA PENNSYLVANIA STATE PITTSBURGH PRINCETONSOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TEXAS TEXAS A&M TORONTOWASHINGTON YALE
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".
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
Signature #554
Discussion
• Is there merit in lightweight approaches?• Are they reliable?• Do you have examples?• What evidence resonates on your campus?
Recommended