Attitudes Toward Re-Envisioning The UC Berkeley Library

Attitudes Toward

Re-Envisioning The UC Berkeley

Library

An Online Survey Of The UC Campus Community

Conducted By Hart Research Associates

July 2012

Hart Research Associates

1724 Connecticut Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20009

1

Methods

On behalf of the UC Berkeley Library, Hart Research Associates conducted an online survey

from May 1 to 31, 2012 of the Berkeley campus community. UC Berkeley Librarian Tom

Leonard invited community members to participate via e-mail. To increase participation

among undergraduates, that population completed a shorter version of the survey. The

4,012 responses comprise the following populations:

• 1,567 undergraduates (39%)

• 1,174 graduate students (29%)

• 440 faculty members (11%)

• 177 library staff (5%)

• 94 other academic appointments (2%)

• 445 campus staff (11%)

• 115 other affiliations (3%)

The sample also is categorized by the following major academic unit subgroups:

• 606 respondents from Arts and Humanities (15%)

• 1,671 respondents from Science and Engineering (42%)

• 1,166 respondents from the Social Sciences (29%)

Executive Summary

1. The Library is central to the University’s mission. Nearly seven in 10 users say

they rely on the Library a great deal or fair amount to help accomplish their academic,

professional, and/or intellectual goals.

2. User populations differ significantly in how they use, rely on, and view UC

Berkeley’s Libraries. For the most part, there is no single campus community when it

comes to libraries.

3. There is, however, widespread agreement that high-quality library collections are

essential for users’ research. This sentiment is evident across academic disciplines,

whether the users are from Arts and Humanities, Science and Engineering or the Social

Sciences.

4. Maintaining high-quality collections is the number-one priority among key user

populations, including graduate students, faculty members, library staff, and

undergraduates who rely heavily on the Library. These same user groups oppose

spending substantially less money on collections to maintain all current

locations and existing services.

5. Undergraduates who rely less on the Library, however, rate maintaining the

current number of locations and service points as a higher priority.

6. Librarians are highly valued for the important roles they play, especially as

“Selectors,” “Cataloging and Archiving,” “Reference,” and “Instruction.” Users from the

Arts and Humanities are especially likely to ascribe importance to librarians.

7. “Hub and Cluster” is the preferred service model among undergraduates and grad

students, but faculty members are divided 50/50 between “Hub and Cluster” and

“Full-Service Libraries” model. Library staff prefer the “Full-Service Libraries” model.

8. Users largely accept the premise that budget cuts and staffing reductions have had

consequences all over campus, and that in the long run a new library service model

will benefit the campus.

2

9. Many Library users prefer self-sufficiency, but most want the option to receive

personalized service when needed.

10. Accessing library resources and services digitally is popular, with about one in

four users preferring to always go the digital route.

11. The call for at least five-day/24-hour access to library space is clearly evident,

with more than one in four undergraduates preferring to access the library in-person

between midnight and 6:00 am Monday through Thursday.

I: Sample Overview

A. User Categories

Nearly seven in 10 campus community members responding to the survey are students,

including 39% undergraduates and 29% graduate students. Twenty-two percent (22%) of

the sample is a combination of faculty members (11%) and campus staff (11%), with

library staff (5%), other academic appointments (2%), and “other” (3%) making up the

remainder of the sample.

29%

5%

11%

3%

11%

39%2%

Undergraduate

students

Graduate

students

Faculty

Other academic appointment

Librarian/library staff

Campus staff

Other

B. Years On Campus

The undergraduate and graduate student sample is representative of the overall student

population in terms of time spent at the University. For example, the majority of

undergraduates (60%) and graduate students (54%) have been on campus for two years or

less, while the proportion of students who have been on campus for four years or more is

greater among graduate students (30%) than among undergraduates (18%).

3

The majority of faculty members and library staff are long-term members of the UC Berkeley

community, with 69% of faculty members and 53% of library staff having been on campus for

more than 10 years. Nearly half (48%) of faculty members have been on campus more than

20 years.

16%

15% 48%

21%

23%

24%

33%

20%

69%

31%

47%

53%

Faculty Library Staff

Years at Berkeley: Five/less Six to 10 11 to 20 More than 20

60%

40%

54%

46%

31%

29%

18%

22%

31%

23%

30%

16%

Undergraduates Graduate Students

Years at Berkeley: One/less Two Three Four/more

4

C. Academic Departments And Campus Units

All survey respondents—with the exception of library staff—assigned themselves to one of 25

academic departments or campus units, or “other.” The following table breaks down these

departmental and unit assignments into three major academic subgroups: 1) Science and

Engineering (42% of the total sample), 2) Social Sciences (29%), and 3) Arts and Humanities

(15%); and the table also indicates the composition of each academic subgroup. For

example, Arts and Humanities respondents housed within the College of Letters & Science

make up 78% of the Arts and Humanities academic subgroup, with another 22% of the

academic subgroup coming from Environmental Design.1

Assignments To Academic Subgroups

All

Users*

%

Sciences/

Engineering

%

Social

Sciences

%

Arts/

Humanities

%

Engineering 13 31 - -

Letters & Science–Biological Sciences 9 20 - -

Letters & Science–Mathematical & Physical Sciences 8 18 - -

Natural Resources 5 12 - -

Chemistry 4 9 - -

Public Health 3 7 - -

Optometry 1 3 - -

Letters & Science–Social Sciences 16 - 54 -

Business 5 - 16 -

Law 4 - 12 -

Education 2 - 5 -

Social Welfare 2 - 5 -

Information 1 - 3 -

Journalism 1 - 2 -

Public Policy 1 - 3 -

Letters & Science–Arts & Humanities 12 - - 78

Environmental Design 3 - - 22

Other 4 - - -

Administration 3 - - -

Letters & Science–Other 1 - - -

Museums 1 - - -

Organized Research Units 1 - - -

National Laboratories - - - -

Area Studies Centers - - - -

Extension, UC Berkeley - - - -

* This question was not asked of Library staff respondents.

1 Considerable discussion was devoted to the question of where to assign Environmental Design respondents, given that the department possesses elements of all three academic subgroups. The ultimate decision to assign Environmental Design to the Arts and Humanities academic subgroup.

5

Nearly half of both undergraduates and graduate student respondents belong to Science

and Engineering (49% and 48% respectively), and about a third of each group is in the

Social Sciences (30% and 37% respectively).

49%

30%

17%4%

Arts and

Humanities

Science and Engineering

Other

Undergraduates

Social Science

48%

37%

14%1%

Arts and Humanities


Other

Graduate Students

Social Science

6

Faculty member respondents are distributed more evenly across the three academic

subgroups, with 26% coming from Arts and Humanities.

39%

33%

26%

2% Arts and Humanities


Other

Faculty

Social Science

II: Using The Library

A. Relying On Libraries

Nearly seven in 10 users overall say they rely on the Library a great deal (45%) or fair

amount (24%) to help accomplish their academic, professional, and/or intellectual goals,

and with 27% saying they rely on the Library just some (16%) or very little (11%).

These results vary considerably among undergraduates, graduate students, and faculty

members. Just over one in four (27%) undergraduates relies on the Library a great deal to

accomplish their goals, while 63% of graduate students and 78% of faculty members say

the same.

7

27%

29%

4%

16%

24% 63%

21%

5%

10%

78%

14%

5%

Undergraduates Graduate Students

Rely on Library’s collections and services:

A great deal A fair amount Just some Not at allVery little

Faculty

56%

44%

84%

16%

92%

8%

Undergraduates’ reliance on the Library rises considerably as they spend more time on

campus. For example, 20% of first-year undergraduates say they rely on the Library a

great deal, a figure that increases to 25% among second- and third-year undergraduates.

A significant jump occurs in the later years, with fully 45% of undergraduates who have

been on campus four years or more saying they rely on the Library a great deal.

Arts and Humanities students and faculty are significantly more likely than those in Science

and Engineering or the Social Sciences to say they rely on the Library. Sixty percent (60%)

of Arts and Humanities users say they rely on the Library a great deal, compared with 44%

among Science and Engineering and Social Sciences respondents.

60%

23%

1%6%

10%

44%

23%

4%

11%

18% 44%

26%

3%

11%

16%

Arts and Humanities Science and Engineering

Rely on Library’s collections and services:

A great deal A fair amount Just some Not at allVery little

Social Sciences

83%

17%

67%

33%

70%

30%

8

The results among campus staff and those with other academic appointments—two

categories that have been combined into one group for analysis—indicate that they too rely

significantly on the Library to help accomplish their academic, professional, and/or

intellectual goals. Half (51%) say they rely on the Library a great deal (27%) or a fair

amount (24%), compared with 30% who say they rely on the Library very little (18%) or

not at all (12%).

How much do you rely on the Library’s print and

digital collections and in-person and online

services to help accomplish your academic, professional, and/or intellectual goals?

Campus Staff And Other Academic Appointments

%

Rely on a great deal 27

Rely on a fair amount 24

Rely on just some 19

Rely on very little 18

Not at all 12

B. Libraries Used

The Doe Library & Main Stacks are most heavily relied upon across the academic disciplines

(see the results in the table below, which allow for multiple responses). Moffitt Library

comes in second among all users, but is relied upon more heavily by those in the Arts and

Humanities and Social Sciences than those in Science and Engineering. Science and

Engineering users are more likely to divide their time across multiple libraries, with just

about half (51%) relying heavily on Doe & Main Stacks and approximately a third relying on

Moffitt, Bioscience and Natural Resources, or Engineering.

The results also indicate that some other libraries are popular across disciplines, with the

C.V. Starr East Asian Library and Music Libraries being prime examples. The latter may

benefit from its location near the south edge of campus, which corresponds with heavier

reported use by undergraduates than by graduate students or faculty members.

9

Which of the following libraries do you rely on the most?

All

Users*

%

Arts &

Humanities

%

Sciences &

Engineering

%

Social

Sciences

%

Doe & Main Stacks 64 82 51 73

Moffitt 43 59 35 50

Bioscience & Natural Resources 20 7 34 8

Engineering 19 4 38 4

Bancroft 16 26 8 18

Anthropology 12 23 4 19

Business 12 5 6 26

Mathematics Statistics 11 2 21 5

Music 12 18 11 11

Chemistry & Chemical Engineering 10 1 20 1

C.V. Starr East Asian 10 12 10 10

Environmental Design 10 29 6 8

Doe Graduate Services 10 22 5 12

Education Psychology 9 7 4 18

Media Resources Center 9 19 4 9

Morrison 9 14 7 8

Art History/Classics 7 25 1 5

Physics-Astronomy 7 1 14 1

Public Health 7 2 10 6

Earth Sciences & Map 6 6 8 4

Newspaper & Microforms 6 10 2 8

Social Welfare 5 2 3 10

South/Southeast Asia 4 6 3 5

Data Lab 3 1 3 5

Optometry 2 - 4 1

None 2 - 2 2

* This question was not asked of Library staff respondents.

10

C. Preferred Access Times

The survey asked campus community members to choose up to eight of the following time

slots that they most would prefer to be able to access Berkeley’s libraries in-person. The

slots were grouped by days of the week and include an overnight option (midnight to 6

a.m.).

Which of the following time slots would you MOST prefer to be able to access

Berkeley’s libraries in-person?

Monday To Thursday

Friday

Saturday

Sunday

6 a.m. to noon � � � �

Noon to 6 p.m. � � � �

6 p.m. to midnight � � � �

Midnight to 6 a.m. � � � �

The following chart below shows undergraduates’ and graduate students’ preferred access

times, with the purple line indicating the results for Monday through Thursday, the orange

line for Friday, green line of Saturday, and blue line for Sunday. As shown in the yellow

shaded area, undergraduates and graduate students alike prefer to access between noon

and midnight. Looking at the purple line (Monday to Thursday), however, we see that more

undergraduates (77%) prefer access between 6 p.m. and midnight than do graduate

students (67%).

67%

28%

77%

10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

6 a.m. to

noon

Noon to 6

p.m.

6 p.m. to

midnight

Midnight to

6 a.m.

6 a.m. to

noon

Noon to 6

p.m.

6 p.m. to

midnight

Midnight to

6 a.m.

Monday thru Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday

U ndergraduates Graduate students

Undergraduates also are more likely than graduate students to prefer 6 p.m.-to-midnight

access on Friday (orange line), Saturday (green line), and Sunday (blue line). And

undergraduates are far more likely to prefer overnight (midnight to 6am) access, with

nearly 30% desiring that capability Monday to Thursday (red line), compared with 10% of

graduate students.

11

Faculty members’ preferences largely mirror those of graduate students, with most faculty

members preferring daytime access (6 a.m. to 6 p.m.) Monday to Friday. Looking at the

purple line for example, 88% of faculty members prefer the noon-to-6-p.m. time slot on

Monday to Thursday, while 81% prefer the same time slot on Fridays (orange line).

88%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

6 a.m. to noon Noon to 6 p.m. 6 p.m. to midnight Midnight to 6 a.m.

Monday thru Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday

Faculty members

12

D. Digital Preferences

When it comes to preferences about digital collections, users see journals and books in very

different lights. Regarding journals, undergraduates, graduate students and faculty

members generally agree on their preference for digital collections over print collections.

The results below show that 72% of undergraduates agree on a digital journal preference

(41% strongly). Rates of agreement are higher among graduate students (93% overall;

78% strongly) and faculty members (85% overall; 60% strongly). By contrast, users are

much more likely to disagree with a digital preference when it comes to books, with faculty

members in particular preferring a non-digital format.

19% 21% 20% 36% 4%

22% 24% 28% 22% 4%

18% 24% 28% 22% 8%

60% 25% 9% 5%

78% 15% 4%1%

41% 31% 14% 6% 8%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Undergraduates

Graduate students

Faculty

Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree Not sure

I prefer digital collections to print collections for journals

Undergraduates

Graduate students

Faculty

I prefer digital collections to print collections for books

Users generally reject the idea that the Library should use collections funds to digitize print

materials, if it means buying less materials, as fully 54% disagree with the concept

(including 22% who strongly disagree), compared with 37% who agree.

13

Faculty members are even more likely to disagree with this idea, with nearly two-thirds

(65%) disagreeing compared with 29% agreeing. It is particularly important to note that

among faculty members who feel strongly one way or the other, those who strongly

disagree (39%) outweigh those who strongly agree (11%) by more than three to one.

11% 18% 26% 39% 6%

12% 27% 35% 18% 8%

12% 29% 30% 17% 12%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Undergraduates

Graduate students

Faculty


The Library should use collections funds to digitize print materials, even if it means buying less materials

Especially noteworthy, 83% of Arts and Humanities faculty members disagree (54%

strongly).

14

E. Willingness To Wait For Off-Site Resources

Users offer tepid reactions to the idea of borrowing materials from other libraries if

materials are not held locally, with about half of undergraduates (47%), graduate students

(52%), and faculty members (54%) agreeing that they would not have a problem with the

idea. Importantly, results differ little between users who rely on the library a great deal

versus those who rely less on the library.

21% 33% 23% 20% 3%

19% 33% 25% 16% 7%

16% 31% 25% 16% 12%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Undergraduates

Graduate students

Faculty


I have no problem borrowing materials from other libraries if materials are not locally held

15

F. Preferences For In-Person Or Internet-Based Services

As with digitized versions of journals, the large majority of users would prefer to access

digitized course reserves online rather than checking out printed versions at a library. Four

in five (79%) graduate students prefer the online method, as do 66% of undergraduates

and 68% of faculty members.

68%

79%

66%

I prefer checking out PRINTED course reserves at a library

I prefer accessing DIGITALcourse reserves online

Undergraduates

Graduate students

Faculty

11%

11%

22%

By contrast, users are divided on the service models related to checking out printed

materials. A plurality of graduate students and faculty members (48% each) indicated a

preference for being able to request printed materials from campus libraries be delivered to

a library location of their choice for them to pick-up and checkout. An equal proportion of

undergraduates indicated a preference for the current model where printed collections are

available for checkout only by visiting each owning library.

48%

48%

39%

I prefer CHECKING OUT printed collections at a LIBRARY

I prefer REQUESTING print collections ONLINE and HAVING THEM DELIVERED to a location near me

Undergraduates

Graduate students

Faculty

38%

41%

48%

16

When it comes to having reference questions answered in-person or online, undergraduates

are more likely to prefer the in-person option (50%) than having reference questions

answered online via chat, e-mail, etc. (39%). This somewhat surprising result is in contrast

to graduate students and faculty members, each of whom are divided on their preferences.

42%

44%

36%

I prefer having reference questions answered IN PERSON

I prefer having reference questions answered ONLINE via chat, e-mail, etc

Undergraduates

Graduate students

Faculty

41%

40%

50%

When it comes to instruction, users largely prefer online tutorials and instruction guides to

in-person library workshops. This is especially the case among undergraduates (60% online

to 20% in-person) and graduate students (56% to 20%), and to a lesser degree for faculty

(47% to 25%). It should be noted, however, that more than one in five users did not

express an opinion one way or another or felt the service did not apply to their

circumstance.

47%

56%

60%

I prefer IN-PERSONlibrary workshops

I prefer ONLINE tutorialsand instruction guides

Undergraduates

Graduate students

Faculty

25%

20%

20%

17

Looking at the same services by academic subgroup, the results indicate that Arts and

Humanities users are somewhat more likely to prefer in-person services, compared with

users in Science and Engineering or the Social Sciences.

Preferences For In-person Or Virtually-Provided Library Services

Checking out printed course reserves at a library %

Accessing digitized course reserves online %

Arts & Humanities .......................... 21 Arts & Humanities ................................ 64

Sciences & Engineering ................... 15 Sciences & Engineering ......................... 70

Social Sciences .............................. 15 Social Sciences .................................... 72

Checking out print collections at a library %

Requesting print collections online and

having them delivered to a location near you %




Having reference questions

answered in-person %

Having reference questions answered online via chat, e-mail, etc %




In-person library workshops % Online tutorials and instruction guides %




F. Digital Preferences, More Generally

Two “digital preference” groups emerge when responses on multiple question items are

combined. The first group, which accounts for about a third (32%) of all users, comprises

users who prefer a digital option when accessing collections. Specifically, these are the

users who:

• Prefer digital collections to print collections for journals

• Prefer digital collections to print collections for books

• Prefer accessing digitized course reserves online

The second group, which accounts for about a quarter (27%) of all users, prefers a digital

option when it comes to receiving personalized service. Specifically, these users do the

following:

• Prefer having reference questions answered online via chat, e-mail, etc to having

reference questions answered in-person

• Prefer online tutorials and instruction guides to in-person library workshops

18

While there is a fair amount of overlap between these two groups, they are not identical.

For example, 58% of the digital service group prefer digital collections to print collections

for books, but 38% do not. Likewise, while 57% of digital access users prefer having

reference questions answered online via chat, e-mail, etc, 33% of these users prefer having

reference questions answered in-person.

G. Self-Sufficiency

When it comes to getting the most out of Berkeley’s libraries, many users prefer to be self-

sufficient. This does not necessarily mean, however, that they always would prefer to go it

alone. Rather, many users prefer to have some combination of self-sufficiency and more

personalized service. This is the case for a plurality of undergraduates (47%), and a

majority of faculty members (51%) and library staff (66%). A majority of graduate

students prefer to be self-sufficient, but two in five (40%) nevertheless want the option for

more personalized service.

When it comes to getting the most out of Berkeley’s libraries, do you prefer to be

self-sufficient or do you prefer more personalized assistance?

All %

Undergraduates %

Graduate

Students %

Faculty %

Library

Staff %

Prefer to be self-sufficient 44 44 53 42 25

Prefer more personalized assistance 6 6 4 5 8

A combination of both 47 47 40 51 66

Not sure 3 3 3 2 1

Across academic subgroups, Science and Engineering users are more likely to prefer being

self-sufficient, compared with users in Arts and Humanities and the Social Sciences, with

majorities of the latter subgroups preferring some combination of both self-sufficiency and

more personalized service.

Arts &

Humanities %

Sciences &

Engineering %

Social

Sciences %

Prefer to be self-sufficient 35 54 41

Prefer more personalized assistance 6 4 6

A combination of both 57 38 51

Not sure 2 4 2

III: Perceptions Of The Library

A. Attributes Of A Truly Great Library

When asked to choose which library attributes make a library truly great, three items

emerge as top-tier attributes: high-quality collections (selected by 66% of all respondents),

hours that accommodate users’ schedules (64%), and a location that provides comfortable

and sufficient places to read and study (60%). A second tier of important attributes

includes a nearby and accessible location (48%), and librarians who can efficiently connect

users with the resources they need (45%).

19

Which three or four of the following do you think contribute most

to making a library truly great?

All

%

High-quality print and digital collections—e.g., books, maps, and journals 66

Hours that accommodate my schedule 64

A location that provides comfortable and sufficient places to read and study 60

A location that is close by and easily accessible 48

Librarians who can efficiently connect me with the resources I need 45

A librarian that is directly associated and knowledgeable about my academic department or

major 28

Librarians with subject and/or language expertise selecting materials for the collection 23

Librarians who provide instruction on how to use library collections and services 20

Other 6

The results for undergraduates differ considerably from those for graduate students and

faculty members, with the former far more likely to choose library attributes associated with

convenience. As the following chart indicates, fewer than half (48%) of undergraduates

select high-quality collections, while large majorities select accommodating hours (85%),

sufficient space (84%), and a convenient location (60%).

38%

45%

60%

18%

59%

84%

33%

66%

85%

89%

76%

48%

Undergraduates Graduate students Faculty

Which three/four of these contribute most to making a library truly great?

High-quality print and digital collections

Hours that accommodate my

schedule

Provides places to read and study

Close by and easily accessible

Top four choices overall:

We should note, however, undergraduates who say they rely on the Library a great deal

value collections more. Two thirds (66%) of these undergraduates choose high-quality

collections as an attribute that makes a library truly great, compared with 54% of

undergraduates who say they rely on the library a fair amount and 33% of undergraduates

who say they rely on the library to a lesser degree.

20

Library staff are more likely to see librarian-related attributes as critical, but they share with

other user populations a belief that high-quality collections are a central element of a great

library.

Which three or four of the following do you think contribute most to making a

library truly great?

Library Staff

%

High-quality print and digital collections—e.g., books, maps, and journals 79

Librarians who can efficiently connect me with the resources I need 62

Librarians with subject and/or language expertise selecting materials for the

collection 59

A location that provides comfortable and sufficient places to read and study 41

A librarian that is directly associated and knowledgeable about my academic

department or major 38

Librarians who provide instruction on how to use library collections and services 32

Hours that accommodate my schedule 24

A location that is close by and easily accessible 18

Other 9

High-quality collections remain a top-tier attribute across academic subgroups, but to a

somewhat lesser degree for Science and Engineering and Social Sciences respondents

(among whom ample space to read/study and a convenient location rise in importance).

Arts &

Humanities

%

Sciences &

Engineering

%

Social

Sciences

%

High-quality print and digital collections—e.g.,

books, maps, and journals 72 64 64

Hours that accommodate my schedule 66 68 68

A location that provides comfortable and sufficient

places to read and study 53 64 66

A location that is close by and easily accessible 41 55 47

Librarians who can efficiently connect me with the

resources I need 46 40 46

A librarian that is directly associated and

knowledgeable about my academic department or

major 36 21 33

Librarians with subject and/or language expertise

selecting materials for the collection 38 15 19

Librarians who provide instruction on how to use

library collections and services 22 16 21

Other 6 7 6

21

B. The Importance Of High-Quality Collections

Additional results further confirm the importance of high-quality collections. For example,

overwhelming majorities of undergraduates (77%), graduate students (90%), and faculty

members (95%) agree that high-quality library collections are essential for their research.

59% 25% 7% 6%

68% 24% 4%2%

44% 38% 9% 2% 7%

86% 9% 2%2%

71% 19% 5% 2%

45% 32% 9% 2% 12%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Undergraduates

Graduate students

Faculty

Undergraduates

Graduate students

Faculty


High-quality library collections are essential for my research

High-quality library collections are essential to my having a successful educational experience

High-quality library collections are essential to my ability to teach effectively

Note that among graduate students and faculty members, large proportions strongly agree

that high-quality library collections are essential for their research. The chart also shows

near-unanimous agreement among undergraduates and graduate students that high-quality

library collections are essential to their having a successful educational experience.

Likewise, similarly large proportions of faculty members agree that high-quality library

collections are essential to their ability to teach effectively.

C. Prioritizing High-Quality Collections In The Re-Envisioning Process

We should not be surprised then, that respondents put high-quality collections front and

center when asked to weigh in on the Library’s future plans. For example, respondents read

the following text and then were asked to choose their first and second spending priorities

out of three possible options:

UC Berkeley has embarked upon a process to re-envision library services to meet the

current and future needs of research and teaching at Berkeley. Part of this process

will require deciding where to spend limited library resources.

As the previous results would predict, respondents’ top priority is maintaining high-quality

collections (54% among all users), followed by maintaining the current number of locations

22

and service points (30%) and maintaining a well-qualified staff with subject and language

expertise (16%).

Which one of the following do you think should be the highest

spending priority, recognizing that all three may be very

important?

All %

Maintaining high-quality collections 54

Maintaining the current number of locations and service

points 30

Maintaining a well-qualified staff with subject and language

expertise 16

As with the previous results, the top priority varies by user population, with graduate

students and faculty members being more likely to prioritize maintaining collections and

undergraduates maintaining locations (see chart below). Maintaining high-quality collections

is the top priority for 80% of faculty members and 66% of graduate students, compared

with 34% of undergraduates. As before, however, undergraduates who say they rely on the

Library a great deal resemble graduate students and faculty members, with more

prioritizing collections (48%) than locations (36%).

13%

14%

12%

7%

20%

54%

80%

66%

34%

Should be highest priority for spending to improve library service:

Maintaining high-quality collections

Undergraduates

Graduate students

Faculty

Maintaining current locations and service points

Undergraduates

Graduate students

Faculty

Maintaining well-qualified staff with subject and language expertise

Undergraduates

Graduate students

Faculty

23

For their part, library staff members are divided, with 46% saying their top priority is

maintaining high-quality collections and 46% selecting maintaining a well-qualified staff

with subject and language expertise.

Which one of the following do you think should be the highest spending

priority, recognizing that all three may be very important?

Library

Staff %


Maintaining the current number of locations and service points 8

Maintaining a well-qualified staff with subject and language expertise 46

A review of the results by academic subgroup shows fairly consistent top priorities, with at

least the plurality, if not majority, of each subgroup emphasizing the need to maintain high-

quality collections.

Which one of the following do you think should be the highest spending

priority, recognizing that all three may be very important?

All

%

Arts &

Humanities %

Sciences &

Engineering %

Social

Sciences %

Maintaining high-quality collections 54 57 56 49

Maintaining the current number of

locations and service points 30 23 34 35

Maintaining a well-qualified staff

with subject and language expertise 16 20 10 16

We can also look at combined first and second place votes. For example, in the table below

we see that 85% of respondents selected maintain high-quality collections as either their

first or second place vote.

COMBINED Top/Second Priorities

All %


Maintaining the current number of locations and service points 56

Maintaining a well-qualified staff with subject and language expertise 59

When we look at first and second priorities combined, the proportion of users prioritizing

library staff increases considerably and even surpasses maintaining locations among all

users. The combined results also demonstrate the importance that faculty members assign

to maintaining a well-qualified staff. Whereas just 13% of faculty members select

maintaining staff as their first priority, that figure increases to 78% when the second-place

votes are added. By contrast, maintaining locations only increases from 7% first priority to

25% when faculty’s first and second priorities are combined.

24

78%

58%

44%

25%

52%

79%

97%

90%

77%

Should be highest or second-highest priority for spending to improve library service:

Maintaining high-quality collections

Undergraduates

Graduate students

Faculty

Maintaining current locations and service points

Undergraduates

Graduate students

Faculty

Maintaining well-qualified staff with subject and language expertise

Undergraduates

Graduate students

Faculty

D. The Importance Of Librarians

UC Berkeley’s professional Library staff play myriad vital roles on campus. For the most

part, however, the wider campus community has a poor understanding of the important

services they provide. As such, the survey provided the following detailed descriptions of

some of these roles and asked campus community members to indicate how important it is

for Berkeley to emphasize each of these roles in the future.

“Selectors” build UC Berkeley’s library research collection, which spans all

disciplines, all time periods, many formats, and nearly 400 languages. In

partnership with acquisitions and licensing librarians, Selectors identify materials to

purchase and/or digitize based on their relevance to Berkeley’s curriculum, faculty

interests, and anticipated research value. Timely selection of materials is important

to collect items before they are out of print or no longer online. The UC Berkeley

Library has more than 11 million items in its collections.

“Cataloging and archiving” professionals help library users discover newly

acquired materials by adding records for these materials into our catalogs—OskiCat,

Melvyl, etc. Catalogers process and create records for library materials in all formats

and languages. Archivists focus on access and preservation for special collections

(such as manuscripts). The accuracy, reliability, and depth of description provided

by these staff make it possible for researchers to locate the resources they need in

print and online. The UC Berkeley Library added more than 200,000 records to the

library catalog last year.

“Reference” librarians help individual faculty, students, and visiting researchers get

started with their research or locate hard-to-find information. Reference services are

provided for all subject areas both in-person (by appointment and on a drop-in

basis) and online (via e-mail and chat). The UC Berkeley Library answered 83,000

reference questions last year.

25

“Instruction” librarians teach undergraduate and graduate students about UC

Berkeley’s library resources and discipline-based research methods. Instruction

librarians offer orientations to new students and new faculty, teach customized

sessions for in-person and online courses, create Web-based research guides and

tutorials, and support instructors in creating research-based assignments using

library resources. The UC Berkeley Library taught 1,350 group sessions to 24,000

people last year.

“Liaison” librarians are assigned to every academic department (such as Political

Science) and many academic support units (such as New Student Services). Liaisons

give library tours to potential students and faculty recruits, meet with the

department and donors, highlight library services and collections relevant to those

groups, serve as an expert resource on issues (e.g., scholarly communications,

digital collections, “fair use” of materials), and respond to evolving priorities of

faculty, students, and other campus community members. The UC Berkeley Library

has liaisons assigned to 62 academic departments and 22 academic support units.

The ranked results are quite consistent across user categories. Graduate students, faculty

members, and library staff all agree that “selectors” are the most important role for

Berkeley to emphasize in the future, followed by “cataloging and archiving,” “reference,”

“instruction,” and “liaison.” Note that undergraduates were not asked this question to

shorten their survey experience.

The results also indicate that faculty members and library staff are more likely than are

graduate students to attach high importance to each role. For example, 57% and 58% of

faculty members and library staff say it is extremely important to emphasize the role of

“Selectors,” compared to 44% among graduate students.

59%

45%

39%

66%

57%

43%

84%

71%

64%

80%

80%

75%

85%

84%

78%

Extremely/very important role for Berkeley librarians in the future

Selectors

Catalogingand archiving

Reference

Instruction

Liaison

Graduate students Faculty Library staff

26

Looking at the results by academic subgroup, Arts and Humanities respondents typically are

more likely to attach importance to these roles, compared with those in Science and

Engineering or the Social Sciences.

IV: Assessing New Service Models

A. Collections Over Locations

The Library currently is proposing two potential options to replace the current service

model. A primary goal of the survey was to obtain user reactions to the two options,

determine if they prefer one or the other, and help inform the design of the new service

model (which may be a hybrid of the two).

To provide the necessary context for that discussion, respondents were provided with the

following information:

UC Berkeley’s existing library service model consists of many independent libraries of

varying sizes. Currently, Berkeley strives to offer a full range of services in all locations

regardless of size, staffing, or level of use. But that service model has become

unsustainable due to the following reasons:

• Budget cuts that have reduced library staff by 20% over the past four years

• Digital content that has transformed how information is accessed for many

academic disciplines

• Changing user behaviors that call for longer and later hours, group work space,

and virtual services

It has been determined that the only way to maintain all current locations and existing

services would be to spend substantially less money on collections.

46%

30%

56%

57%

38%

64%

77%

57%

80%

78%

71%

89%

80%

74%

92%

Extremely/very important role for Berkeley librarians in the future

Selectors

Catalogingand archiving

Reference

Instruction

Liaison

Arts and Humanities Science and Engineering Social Sciences

27

Following these passages, campus community members were asked whether they would

support or oppose spending substantially less money on collections to maintain all current

locations and existing services. The results are clear: a majority of key user populations

oppose such an approach, including faculty members (87% opposed), graduate students

(71%), library staff (73%) and undergraduates who say they rely on the library a great deal

(51%). Opposition is particularly pronounced among faculty members, with 56% saying

they are strongly opposed. The one exception is undergraduates who are less reliant on

libraries.

Opposition remains consistent across academic subgroups: 67% of Arts and Humanities

respondents are opposed, along with 58% of both Science and Engineering and Social

Sciences respondents.

Would you support or oppose spending substantially less money on

collections to maintain all current locations and existing services?

Arts &

Humanities

%

Sciences &

Engineering

%

Social

Sciences

%

Strongly support 7 11 11

Somewhat support 26 31 31

Somewhat oppose 34 31 31

Strongly oppose 33 27 27

12%21% 18%

8% 7%

36%

2%

56%

10%

44%

49%

64%

29%27%

Undergraduates

Support for spending substantially less money on collections to maintain all current Library locations and existing services:

Strongly support Somewhat support Somewhat oppose Strongly oppose

Graduatestudents

Faculty Librarystaff

Rely on libraries fair amount/less

Rely on libraries great deal

51%

36%

71%

13%

87%

73%

28

B. Introducing The Proposed Service Models

Respondents read the following additional context before they read the proposed service

models:

If collections funds are not tapped to maintain all current locations and existing

services, a new service model will be required. To prepare for that possibility, a

team of Berkeley Library staff has proposed two alternative models. Both models

address the staffing shortfall without relying on collections funds while still providing

excellent service. Each alternative model would reduce the current number of

locations and service points, but offer different advantages and disadvantages.

Please note that these models are preliminary. Once the Library has the

benefit of campus input, a new service model will be selected and existing

libraries will be mapped onto the chosen model.

Please review these two proposed service models and then answer the questions on

the following pages:2

“Full-Service Libraries” model

This model would rely solely on large Full-service libraries, with each offering long

hours, large collections integrating similar disciplines, a full range of librarian

services, and a variety of individual and group study spaces. This model would mean

fewer total locations (9) compared with the alternative model (15), but all 9 locations

would be full-service libraries. This model would require 16 closures and

consolidations across the current 25 service locations.

“Hub-and-Cluster Libraries” model

This model would rely on several large “Hub” libraries, each associated with a cluster

of smaller “circulation-only” libraries. Each Hub library would offer long hours, large

collections integrating similar disciplines, a full range of librarian services, and a

variety of individual and group study spaces. Circulation-only libraries would have

reduced hours, smaller collections and limited services. This model would mean

more total locations (15) compared with the alternative model (9), but only 6 of the

locations would be Hubs/full-service libraries while the remaining 9 would be limited

circulation-only libraries. This model would require 10 closures and consolidations

across the current 25 service locations.

C. Perceived Advantages And Disadvantage Of The Full-Service

Model

Among students, the biggest perceived advantage of the full-service model is longer full-

service hours in more locations. A majority (62%) of undergraduates, and a strong plurality

(48%) of graduate students select this advantage. Faculty members are divided, with

nearly identical proportions perceiving three advantages as the biggest: 1) Longer full-

service hours in more locations (25%); 2) more full-service locations with collections

covering a broader range of similar disciplines (24%); and 3) deeper and broader on-hand

librarian expertise. Library staff also are divided, with slightly more seeing the biggest

advantages as being more full-service locations with collections covering a broader range of

similar disciplines and longer full-service hours in more locations.

2 The survey was programmed so that half of the respondents read and answered questions about the “Full-Service Libraries” model first, while the other half read and answered questions about the “Hub and Cluster Libraries” model first.

29

Which ONE of the following do you think is the biggest advantage of the

“Full-Service Libraries” model?

Undergraduates

%

Graduate Students

%

Faculty %

Library Staff

%

Longer full-service hours in more

locations 62 48 25 24

More full-service locations with

collections covering a broader range of

similar disciplines 14 17 24 29

Familiar and consistent services across

all libraries 11 9 12 19

Deeper and broader on-hand librarian

expertise 6 10 24 19

Fewer libraries to visit when borrowing

materials for interdisciplinary research 7 16 15 9

In terms of disadvantages, undergraduates are most concerned about the potential for the

full-service model to reduce the amount of seating available for study space—a strong

plurality (48%) select this disadvantage. Twenty-eight percent of graduate students also

see this as a major disadvantage, but 22% share the primary concern of faculty members:

less shelf space for print collections, increasing the need to request print collections from

storage. Library staff are again split on which disadvantage would be the biggest, but a

slight plurality (31%) are most concerned that the full-service model may diminish contact

and relationships with some academic departments.

Which ONE of the following do you think is the biggest disadvantage of the “Full-

Service Libraries” model?

Undergraduates

%

Graduate Students %

Faculty %

Library Staff %

Less seating available for study space 49 28 8 15

May require the most changes to existing

infrastructure 16 17 20 27

Less shelf space for print collections,

increasing the need to request print

collections from storage 8 22 32 20

May diminish contact and relationships

with some academic departments 14 19 24 31

Fewer total locations mean some people

have to travel farther to check out

materials 13 14 16 7

30

D. Perceived Advantages And Disadvantage Of Hub-And-Cluster

Model

For nearly two-thirds (64%) of undergraduates, the hub-and-cluster model’s biggest

perceived advantage is more seating available in more locations for study space. The

majority (54%) of faculty members, by contrast, are attracted to the idea that the hub-and-

cluster model would provide more campus shelf space for print collections, reducing the

need to request print collections from storage. Graduate students and library staff generally

split their selections between those two items.

Which ONE of the following do you think is the biggest advantage of the “Hub-

and-Cluster Libraries” model?

Undergraduates

%

Graduate Students %

Faculty %

Library Staff %

More seating available in more locations

for study space 64 37 17 37

More campus shelf space for print

collections, reducing the need to request

print collections from storage 18 36 54 41

More total locations means some people

do not have to travel as far to check out

material 18 27 29 22

The general consensus among undergraduates, graduate students, and faculty members is

that the biggest disadvantage of the hub-and-cluster model would be fewer locations

offering long hours, larger collections, and full-service.

By contrast, library staff are most concerned that it would be more difficult for people to

understand what services to expect at each location, and that students would staff

circulation-only libraries, meaning that many user questions would need to be referred to a

Hub library.

Which ONE of the following do you think is the biggest disadvantage of the

“Hub-and-Cluster Libraries” model?

Undergraduates

%

Graduate Students %

Faculty %

Library Staff %

Fewer locations offering long hours, larger

collections, and full-service 58 53 43 21

Harder for people to understand what

services to expect at each location 27 28 27 39

Circulation-only libraries would be staffed

by students, meaning many user questions

would need to be referred to a Hub library 15 19 30 40

31

E. Choosing Between Service Models

So which of the two models do users think would be best for the campus in supporting the

long-term teaching and research mission of the university? The results are mixed. Strong

majorities of undergraduates (67%) and graduate students (63%) favor the hub-and-

cluster model, while a similarly strong majority (66%) of library staff prefer the full-service

model. Meanwhile, faculty members are divided right down the middle, with half favoring

full-service and the other half hub-and-cluster.

Which do you think would be best for the campus in supporting the long-term

teaching and research mission of the university?

Undergraduates

%

Graduate Students %

Faculty %

Library Staff %

“Full-Service Libraries” model 33 37 50 66

“Hub-and-Cluster Libraries” model 67 63 50 34

These results generally are consistent within each user population. For example,

undergraduates and graduate students across academic subgroups prefer the hub-and-

cluster service model.

Undergraduates

Arts &

Humanities Sciences & Engineering

Social Sciences

“Full-Service Libraries” model 38 31 33

“Hub-and-Cluster Libraries” model 62 69 67

Graduate Students

Arts &

Humanities %

Sciences &

Engineering %

Social

Sciences %



Likewise, faculty members consistently are divided across academic subgroups.

Faculty Members

Arts &

Humanities %

Sciences &

Engineering %

Social

Sciences %



32

F. In Their Own Words: What Is Most Important?

An open-ended question allowed campus community members to list the most important

things Berkeley library staff should keep in mind as they consider a new model for library

locations and services. More than 2,000 respondents took the time to provide input, and

their responses (categorized below) are consistent with the responses seen elsewhere. For

example, the comments of graduate students, faculty members, and library staff reiterate

the need to maintain high-quality collections. Undergraduates also emphasize the

importance of collections, but even more highlight the need for study space and longer

hours. The need to maintain knowledgeable, qualified librarians also is mentioned

frequently, especially among faculty members and library staff.

From your perspective, what are the most important things Berkeley library staff

should keep in mind as they consider a new model for library locations and

services?

Under-graduates

%

Graduate Students %

Faculty %

Library Staff %

Imperative to maintain collection, broad collection, best

collection, can’t be compromised, need to be protected 13% 23% 37% 21%

Study space is critical, needed, accessibility to study

spaces, private, quiet spaces 34 19 6 7

Longer hours, extended hours, open 24 hours 36 16 4 1

Important to maintain knowledgeable, qualified librarians, librarians are needed, irreplaceable 10 15 20 26

Digitize, improve interface, continue expansion of

digital access, change to digital media 4 15 16 4

Convenience, make everything accessible, access is

important 7 9 11 7

More seating, more space, always crowded 14 7 1 1

Online access to data, journals, documents, books 3 9 12 3

Downgrading libraries will hurt reputation, libraries are

the best, main reason why students come to UC Berkeley 3 5 4 6

V: Making The Case For Re-Envisioning The Library

A major objective of the survey was to determine how to communicate with key audiences

about the re-envisioning process. To that end, users read the three messages below, with

each message providing a distinct argument about why replacing the Library’s current

service model is important. They then rated each message on a zero-to-10 scale, on which

a 10 means the message is extremely convincing and zero means that the message is not

convincing at all.

A. In the long run, a new library service model will benefit the campus. The Library has

not changed its service model in over 30 years. Rethinking the model will allow the

Library to be responsive to changing needs of academic disciplines and provide more

flexibility to develop enhanced services such as:

• Providing longer hours that better match user needs

• Collecting and supporting new formats (e.g., geospatial, new media, scientific data)

• Curating and preserving digital collections

• Providing more spaces for quiet and group study space

• Increased digitization of selected print materials

33

B. Budget cuts and staffing reductions have had consequences all over campus. The UC

Berkeley Library has 20% fewer staff than it did only a few years ago. Yet, the Library

maintains the same number of library locations and services as before. This approach

has taken a toll – the Library staff must now cover multiple jobs and are therefore

unable to consistently provide excellent service. Many locations are struggling to

maintain current hours and to find time to select, acquire, and catalog new collections,

train and supervise student employees, assist users with reference questions, review

library collections, support new services, or handle special requests. It has become

untenable to provide all services by continuing to stretch a reduced library workforce.

Something must change.

C. The UC Berkeley Library can provide excellent services even with reduced staffing. The

key is to consolidate into fewer locations, each with a critical mass of staff, which will

allow for increased collaboration, cross training, and coverage. Consolidation will mean

change. Some change will be for the better—the remaining locations can have longer

hours than many of our current libraries. Many of the less desirable changes can be

partially mitigated—having fewer print materials on campus can be helped by having

faster delivery of materials from storage locations.

The results, shown in the following chart, indicate that graduate students and faculty

members find messages A and B to be the most successful at articulating the situation and

options related to a new service model (undergraduates were not asked this question to

shorten their survey experience). In both cases, a strong majority of graduate students and

faculty members find the messages fairly or very convincing. Faculty members appear

somewhat more persuaded that budget cuts have had consequences—likely the result of

higher knowledge about the budget situation and how it has affected their own personal

situation. For their part, graduate students appear somewhat more optimistic that a new

service model will benefit the campus. Neither audience, however, is especially persuaded

by the idea that the Library can provide excellent service even with reduced staff—an

argument that may have appeared counterintuitive given the severe impact of staffing

reductions occurring all over campus.

18% 26% 21% 32% 3%

13% 29% 25% 29% 4%

38% 33% 13% 13% 3%

24% 40% 19% 14% 3%

29% 31% 18% 18% 4%

33% 40% 16% 9% 2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Graduate students

Faculty

In the long run, a new library service model will benefit the campus.

Very convincing (9-10 ratings*)

Can’t rate

Fairly convincing (7-8 ratings*)

Less convincing (5-6 ratings*)

Not convincing (0-4 ratings*)

* ratings on zero-to-ten scale, 10 = extremely convincing argument for replacing Library’s current service model

Graduate students

Faculty

Graduate students

Faculty

Meanrating*

7.4

6.6

6.9

7.2

5.7

5.6

Budget cuts and staffing reductions have had consequences all over campus.

The UC Berkeley Library can provide excellent services even withreduced staff.

34

The results by academic subgroup are similar to those above, with a majority of users

across disciplines finding the first two statements fairly or very convincing. Among Arts and

Humanities and Social Sciences users, the more persuasive of the two is the message

focused on budget cuts and staffing reductions. Science and Engineering users by contrast

find the message about the long-term benefits of a new service model to be the most

convincing. Note that compared with their fellow users from Science and Engineering and

the Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities users are somewhat less convinced by the

messages overall.

Statements For Why Replacing The Library’s Current Service Model Is Important

Very Convincing

Fairly Convincing

Mean

#

9-10

%

7-8

%

A: In the long run, a new library service model will benefit the campus

Arts and Humanities 6.1 19 35

Sciences & Engineering 7.6 34 43

Social Sciences 7.3 37 34

B: Budget cuts and staffing reductions have had consequences all over campus




C: The UC Berkeley Library can provide excellent services even with reduced staffing




VI: Additional Information

This survey analysis is being provided by Peter D. Hart Research Associates to the UC

Berkeley Library for use in its Re-envisioning the UC Berkeley Library Initiative. More

information about the Initiative can be found at:

http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/AboutLibrary/re_envision.html.

Questions or comments should be directed to: [email protected].

Documents

Attitudes Toward Re-Envisioning The UC Berkeley Library