Upload
kornelija-petr
View
61
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Quality measurement of Croatian public and academic libraries: methodology
Kornelija Petr, Osijek University, [email protected]
2
Project
project Evaluation of library and information
services: academic and public libraries funded and approved by Croatian
Ministry of Education, Science and Sport (www.mzos.hr)
PI: Kornelija Petr builds on:
K. Petr’s doctoral thesis on Croatian academic library quality
3
Project’s objectives
look into the views and ability of Croatian public and academic library staff;
single out dimensions of their effectiveness;
identify measures of quality for public and academic libraries
4
Hypothesis
Croatian libraries do not give enough attention to processes of quality measurement;
librarians unprepared to conduct any sort of evaluation at their library;
insufficient awareness of library service quality affects all library processes.
5
Project outcomes
collection of statistical data on state-of-the-art in libraries;
defined dimensions of effectiveness (academic vs public libraries);
demonstrate the evidence of differences in views between library management and staff;
encourage more positive attitude of library staff toward evaluation activities.
6
Library scene in Croatia*
Public libraries (2004) 256 staff: 1062
Academic (+ national and university) libraries HE – 131, national – 1, university – 2 staff: HE – 239, national – 193,
university – 53 (TOTAL: 485)
*Statistical yearbook of the Republic of Croatia, 2006
7
Geographic distribution of libraries
8
Methodology
Questionnaire
Interviews
Analysis of library documentation
9
Questionnaire 1/1
based on questionnaire created by McDonald-Micikas (1994)
two versions: public libraries academic libraries
subversions library staff library directors
10
Questionnaire 1/2
Topics: general information on a library, elements important for library
environment, library in general, library vs faculty/University
management/founder, library and new managerialism, library vs users
11
Questionnaire 1/3
additional topics for library directors: related to education, CPD, attitudes
toward work and quality issues of director’s co-workers
anonimous – no feed back mail
12
Questionnaire 1/4
1547 questionnaires response rate:
50% - 774 question. (Van House, Weil, McClure)
(expected) 1100-1200 question. (between 70%-80%)
13
Interviews 1/1
semi-structured 20-30 interviews
20 – public library directors 10 – academic, national and university
library directors 256 public, 131 academic, 1 national, 2
university libraries =390 libraries 66% - public libraries
14
Interviews 1/2
tentative topics: satisfaction with library services, 'strong' and 'weak' sides of the library, the feeling of being privileged to work
in a particular library, familiarization with user perspective of
library and librarians, user expectations, competition,
15
Interviews 1/3
… relationship with (faculty, University)
management or founder (local community),
satisfaction with a status (only academic libraries),
monitoring of user expectations and opinions, monitoring of performance quality,
dedication to continuous quality improvement, etc.
16
Library documentation
collection of statistical and annual reports
analysis
17
Time table 1/1
Months 1-7: literature review, defining the sample, designin and
testing of the questionnaire, designing the interview questions
Months 8-9: copying and mailing of the questionnaire, contacting
the interviewees and making arrangements for the interviews
Months 10-12: distribution of the questionnaire, collecting of filled-
in questionnaires, reminding letters to libraries that failed to return the questionnaires, collection of library documentation
18
Time table 1/2
Months 13-18: interviews, collection of library
documentation Months 19-20:
input and data processing (data collected through questionnaires), interpretation of results
Months 21-24: transcribing of interviews
19
Time table 1/3
Months 25-27: semantic analysis of the interviews,
intepretation of results Months 28-29:
analysis of library documentation, interpretation of results
Months 30-31: defining of dimensions of effectiveness
for academic and public libraries
20
Time table 1/4
Months 32-34: benchmarking of the results with other
relevant similar research projects in the world
Months 35-37: taxonomy of views and opinions of
Croatian librarians