Library Assessment in North America
Stephanie Wright, University of WashingtonLynda S. White, University of Virginia
American Library Association Mid-Winter Conference
January 11, 2008
Association of Research Libraries Sessions
Background
May-June 2007 74 respondents (60%) 85% from US academic libraries 12% from Canadian academic
libraries 3% from public libraries
In the beginning…
17
18
11
4
9
2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
<1980 1980-84 1985-89 1990-94 1995-99 2000>
Impetus for Assessment
Desire to know more about your customers 91.3%
Investigation of possible new library services or resources
71.0%
Desire to know more about your processes 65.2%
Desire to identify library performance objectives 62.3%
Need to reallocate library resources 55.1%
Accountability requirements from your parent institution 37.7%
Institutional or programmatic accreditation process 29.0%
Other (please specify) 23.2%
Proposal from staff member with assessment knowledge
17.4%
Assessment Methods
% Used Currently
% Used Previously
Statistics gathering (e.g., e-resource usage, gate counts, ARL statistics, etc.) 98.6% 1.4%
Suggestion Box 82.2% 8.2%
Web usability testing 80.8% 12.3%
User interface usability 78.1% 12.3%
Surveys developed elsewhere (e.g., CSEQ, LibQUAL+®) 75.3% 20.5%
Focus Groups 69.9% 21.9%
Data mining and analysis 58.9% 8.2%
Facilities use studies 56.2% 30.1%
Statistics inventory 54.8% 12.3%
Student learning outcomes evaluations 54.8% 15.1%
Interviews 52.1% 30.1%
Online user feedback (pop-up windows, etc.) 52.1% 24.7%
Observation 50.7% 30.1%
Benchmarking 50.7% 15.1%
Locally designed user satisfaction survey 49.3% 42.5%
Areas Assessed: >80%
Website 100.0%
Electronic Resources 98.4%
User Instruction 97.6%
Collections 97.6%
Reference 96.0%
Online Catalog 94.6%
Facilities 94.0%
Circulation/Reserve 93.8%
Interlibrary Loan 93.4%
Branch Libraries 88.5%
Digital Initiatives 85.7%
Shelving 84.8%
Acquisitions 84.5%
Selectors/Subject Liaisons 81.8%
Cataloging 80.5%
Areas Assessed: <80%
Staff Training/Development 79.8%
Special Collections 77.9%
IT Systems 76.7%
Preservation 74.0%
Work Climate 69.3%
Other 57.1%
Administration 56.3%
Financial/Business Services 52.9%
Development/Fundraising 45.5%
Human Resources 43.1%
Publicity/Marketing 37.3%
Responsibility for Assessment
30.00%
18.57%17.14%
15.71%
12.86%
5.71%
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
Other Part-timeCoordinator
StandingCommittee
Full-timeCoordinator
Department Ad hocCommittee
Growth of Assessment
4
1
12
1
10
9
1
4
7
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1980s 1990s 2000s
Nu
mb
er o
f p
rog
ram
s
Ad Hoc Committee (4)
Part-time Coordinator (13)
Full-time Coordinator (11)
Department (9)
Standing Committee (12)
Importance of Assessment
Reporting Levels
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
1 Level 2 Levels 3 Levels
Full-time
Part-time
Dept Head
Assessment Tasks
Analyzes, interprets, and reports on data collected in assessment activities
95.9%
Consults with staff on assessment methods and needs 93.9%
Performs assessment activities 87.8%
Monitors/coordinates assessment projects throughout the library
77.6%
Coordinates collection of data across the library 75.5%
Submits external surveys (ARL, ALS, NATC, American Library Directory, etc.)
69.4%
Coordinates the reporting/archiving of the library’s statistical data
67.3%
Fills requests for library data 67.3%
Provides training on assessment topics 55.1%
Other (please specify) 26.5%
Approves assessment projects throughout the library 24.5%
Distribution of Results
LibraryStaff
ParentInstitution
GeneralPublic
Web site 81% 58% 57%
Library newsletter articles 65% 51% 39%
Print reports (e.g., annual report)
71% 57% 26%
Presentations 84% 46% 16%
E-mail announcements 84% 23% 6%
Campus newsletter articles 23% 45% 20%
Other 6% 0% 0%
Assessment Website Content
answer optionsStaff-onlyWebsite
Publicly Accessible
Website N
General library statistics 69% 53% 71
Analysis of assessment activity results
62% 47% 63
Assessment data 55% 28% 48
Presentations 52% 31% 48
Publications 34% 43% 45
Online assessment tools (e.g., surveys)
45% 21% 38
Links to other library assessment sites or information
38% 22% 35
Coordination with Other Units
Full-time Part-time DepartmentStanding
CommitteeAd hoc
Committee
Yes 72.73% 8 69.23% 9 88.89% 8 41.67% 5 75.00% 3
No 27.27% 3 30.77% 4 11.11% 1 58.33% 7 25.00% 1
Training for Assessment
answer options % N
Yes, support is given for training provided outside of our institution
61.8% 42
Yes, support is given for training provided by our parent institution
32.4% 22
No, there is no particular training provided
29.4% 20
Yes, training is provided by the library
27.9% 19
Training Programs
answer options % N
Assessment methods 58.33% 14
Basic statistics 45.83% 11
Survey construction 45.83% 11
Value of assessment 41.67% 10
Data analysis 37.50% 9
Other (please specify) 29.17% 7
Data presentation 29.17% 7
Sampling techniques 25.00% 6
Report writing 12.50% 3
Assessment Networking
% Who Have Attended
% Who Recommend
Venue
ARL assessment-related meetings 83.6% 100.0%
Library Assessment Conference (e.g., Charlottesville 2006) 58.2% 100.0%
Other 20.9% 100.0%
ALA/LAMA sessions/discussion groups on assessment 52.2% 97.1%
ALA/ACRL sessions/discussion groups on assessment 59.7% 92.5%
Northumbria International Conferences on Performance Measurement in Libraries 16.4% 90.0%
Evidenced-Based Library and Information Practice Conference 16.4% 81.8%
Culture of Assessment
% Agreeing at 4 or 5 (1-5 scale)
Library administrators are committed to supporting assessment 79.4%
Assessment results are used to improve my library 76.5%
Assessment is evident in our library planning documents such as the strategic plan 73.5%
My library evaluates its operations and programs for service quality 72.1%
Assessment is a library priority 67.6%
My library has local assessment resources and experts 50.0%
There is support and/or rewards for staff who engage in assessment activities 42.6%
Staff accepts responsibility for assessment activities 30.9%
Staff have the necessary assessment expertise and skills 19.1%
Staff development in assessment is adequate 16.2%
Assessment Plans
% N
No, the library has no assessment plan 53.7% 36
Yes, the library has a library-wide assessment plan 29.9% 20
Yes, the library has an assessment plan for some departments/units 19.4% 13
Yes, the library has an assessment plan for every department/unit 4.5% 3
Outcomes
Website 31 49%
Facilities 23 37%
Collection Development 19 30%
Services 17 27%
Access Services 14 22%
Hours 14 22%
Web
Redesign Usability Content Online catalog (29%)
Methods LibQUAL / surveys (26%) Usability studies (16%) Focus groups / interviews (10%)
Facilities
Changing spaces Expanding / renovating old spaces Creating new spaces Repurposing Branch closures / consolidations
Methods LibQUAL / surveys (35%) Focus groups / interviews (17%)
Services
Getting out there Going virtual Liaisons Quality of service
Methods Surveys Reference stats Focus groups / interviews
Collection Development
Focusing the collection Going “e” Cancellations/subscriptions Subject areas
Methods Usage stats (26%) Surveys Focus groups / interviews
Everything Else
Hours Extended – during interims/finals LibQUAL/surveys, focus groups & gate
counts Access Services
Processes – circ & shelving ILL / document delivery Off-site storage Surveys, stats
Everything Else
Organizational Development (16%) Equipment (13%)
Computers Photocopy / print
Training (14%) Instruction (6%) Marketing (5%)
ARL SPEC Kit 303
Stephanie Wright University of [email protected]
Lynda S. WhiteUniversity of [email protected]