Upload
vudiep
View
217
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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
Science and Engineering
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
Science and Engineering
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
Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree Not sure
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
Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree Not sure
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 %
Arts & Humanities .......................... 53 Arts & Humanities ................................ 37
Sciences & Engineering ................... 44 Sciences & Engineering ......................... 41
Social Sciences .............................. 39 Social Sciences .................................... 51
Having reference questions
answered in-person %
Having reference questions answered online via chat, e-mail, etc %
Arts & Humanities .......................... 51 Arts & Humanities ................................ 36
Sciences & Engineering ................... 43 Sciences & Engineering ......................... 39
Social Sciences .............................. 45 Social Sciences .................................... 43
In-person library workshops % Online tutorials and instruction guides %
Arts & Humanities .......................... 29 Arts & Humanities ................................ 48
Sciences & Engineering ................... 16 Sciences & Engineering ......................... 59
Social Sciences .............................. 23 Social Sciences .................................... 57
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
Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree Not sure
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 high-quality collections 46
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 high-quality collections 85
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 %
“Full-Service Libraries” model 45 34 39
“Hub-and-Cluster Libraries” model 55 66 61
Likewise, faculty members consistently are divided across academic subgroups.
Faculty Members
Arts &
Humanities %
Sciences &
Engineering %
Social
Sciences %
“Full-Service Libraries” model 52 45 52
“Hub-and-Cluster Libraries” model 48 55 48
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
Arts and Humanities 6.8 29 37
Sciences & Engineering 7.2 30 39
Social Sciences 7.0 27 35
C: The UC Berkeley Library can provide excellent services even with reduced staffing
Arts and Humanities 5.0 10 27
Sciences & Engineering 6.0 14 34
Social Sciences 5.7 15 27
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].