TM Project web site:Bruce Thompson Colleen Cook Martha Kyrillidou Glasgow January 19-20, 2004 Quantitative Grounding 22 Items and a Box Quantitative Grounding 22 Items and a Box : Score Integrity uReliability uValidity By Language ServiceInfo.Lib as Group n AffectControlPlaceTOTAL American (all)59, British (all) 6, French (all) alpha By Language By University Type ServiceInfo.Lib as Group n AffectControlPlaceTOTAL Comm Colleges 4, yr Not ARL36, yr, ARL14, Acad Health 3, alpha by University Type By Consortium ServiceInfo.Lib as Group n AffectControlPlaceTOTAL AAHSL 3, OhioLINK 7, Oberlin 2, Merlin NY3R Coll/Uni13, SCONUL 6, Alabama 1, alpha by Consortium n = 59,318; =.9593 "Corrected" Item alpha Totalif Item ItemCorrelationDeleted SA01APER SA04APER SA07APER SA10APER SA12APER SA15APER SA17APER SA20APER SA23APER n = 59,318; =.9593 "Corrected" Item alpha Totalif Item ItemCorrelationDeleted PC02APER PC11APER PC16APER PC21APER PC25APER IA03APER IA14APER IA18APER n = 59,318; =.9593 "Corrected" Item alpha Totalif Item ItemCorrelationDeleted LP05APER LP09APER LP13APER LP19APER LP24APER Service Affect (n = 71,170 English) SA20APER SA07APER SA17APER SA04APER SA15APER SA23APER SA01APER SA12APER SA10APER Service Affect Library as Place Library as Place (n = 71,170 English) LP13APER LP05APER LP09APER LP24APER LP19APER Information Control Information Control (n = 71,170 English) IA18APER PC11APER IA03APER PC25APER PC21APER PC02APER PC16APER IA14APER 2. Validity Correlations Validity Correlations Serv_AffInfo_ConLibPlaceTOTALper Serv_Aff Info_Con LibPlace TOTALper ESAT_TOT EOUT_TOT Mean Perceived Scores 2001/2002 Trend (n=34) The Challenge of Score Use u Securing information that contributes meaningfully to planning and improvement efforts at a local level u Providing analytical frameworks that institutional staff can apply without extensive training or assistance u Helping decision-makers understand success of investments u Finding useful inter-institutional comparisons Two Interpretation Frameworks uZone of Tolerance uScore Norms 1. Zone of Tolerance uThe distance between minimally acceptable and desired service quality ratings uPerception ratings ideally fall within the Zone of Tolerance Faculty Dimension Summary Note: LibQUAL+ Spring 2002 Survey Results - TAMU. (2002). Vol. 2, p. 42 Average Rating Access to Information Affect of Service Library as Place Personal Control Perceived Range of Minimum to Desired Range of Minimum to Perceived (Gap) 7 Institution Types 1.Community Colleges 2.Health Sciences 3.Military 4.Colleges/Universities 5.State/Publics 6.United Kingdom 7.French Canadian LibQUAL+ 2003 Summary Colleges or Universities LibQUAL+ 2003 Colleges or Universities Dimension Means LibQUAL+ 2003 Colleges or Universities Library Use LibQUAL+ 2003 Colleges or Universities Core Questions LibQUAL+ 2003 Summary Community Colleges LibQUAL+ 2003 Community Colleges Dimension Means LibQUAL+ 2003 Community Colleges Library Use LibQUAL+ 2003 Summary Academic Health Sciences LibQUAL+ 2003 Health Sciences Dimension Means LibQUAL+ 2003 Health Sciences Library Use LibQUAL+ 2003 Summary Military Institutions LibQUAL+ 2003 Military Institutions Dimension Means LibQUAL+ 2003 Military Institutions Library Use LibQUAL+ 2003 Summary State and Public Institutions LibQUAL+ 2003 State and Public Dimension Means LibQUAL+ 2003 State and Public Library Use LibQUAL+ 2003 Summary United Kingdom LibQUAL+ 2003 United Kingdom Dimension Means LibQUAL+ 2003 United Kingdom Library Use LibQUAL+ 2003 Summary French Canadian LibQUAL+ 2003 French Canadian Dimension Means LibQUAL+ 2003 French Canadian Library Use 2. Score Norms uNorm Conversion Tables facilitate the interpretation of observed scores using norms created for a large and representative sample. uLibQUAL+ norms have been created at both the individual and institutional level Institutional Norms for Perceived Means on 25 Core Questions Note: Thompson, B. LibQUAL+ Spring 2002 Selected Norms, (2002). Response Rates 1. Its representativesness that counts more than the response rate! Response Rates 2. We only know the lower bound (or minimum) estimate of the response rate, because we dont know the correct denominator. Response Rate Contexts 1. Response rates are higher for action-oriented surveys, which are not relevant or practical for total market surveys. Response Rate Contexts 2. Survey saturation is tending to lower typical response rates over time. 2005 and Beyond 1.Matrix Sampling / Short Forms 2.Software Used for Local/Consortial Assessments 3.Action Snapshots LibQUAL+ Related Documents LibQUAL+ LibQUAL+ Web SiteLibQUAL+ LibQUAL+ BibliographySurvey Participants Procedures Manual