Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
LibQual Challenges & Lessons Learned at UW Oshkosh
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

LibQual Challenges & Lessons Learned at UW Oshkosh

461
views

Published on

Maccabee Levine discusses how UW Oshkosh conducted its recent LibQUAL+ survey, from participant recruiting through results analysis, including some changes from previous years that helped or hurt the …

Maccabee Levine discusses how UW Oshkosh conducted its recent LibQUAL+ survey, from participant recruiting through results analysis, including some changes from previous years that helped or hurt the process.

Published in: Education

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
461
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. LibQual Challenges & Lessons Learned at UW Oshkosh WiLSWorld 2014
  • 2. LibQual & UW Oshkosh ● “LibQUAL+” ○ “a rigorously tested Web-based survey.. that helps libraries assess and improve library services, change organizational culture, and market the library.” ● UW Oshkosh: 2004, 2008, February 2014.
  • 3. Agenda ● A taste of LibQual ● 5 challenges encountered ○ solutions and/or or lessons learned
  • 4. Time to take WiLSQual! On a scale from 1 (worst) to 9 (best), ● Rate your perception of: "Yesterday's WiLSWorld presenters had the knowledge to answer audience questions." ● Rate your desired level of expectation. ● Rate your minimum level of expectation.
  • 5. Question 2 On a scale from 1 (worst) to 9 (best), ● Rate your perception of: "Presenters who understand the needs of their audience." ● Rate your desired level of expectation. ● Rate your minimum level of expectation.
  • 6. Questions 3 - 22...
  • 7. Help me evaluate the results! 9 questions about “Affect of Service” ● Employees who instill confidence in users ● Giving users individual attention ● Employees who are consistently courteous ● Readiness to respond to users' questions ● ...
  • 8. Help me evaluate the results!! 8 questions about “Information Control” ● Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office ● A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own ● The electronic information resources I need ● Modern equipment that lets me easily access needed information
  • 9. Help me evaluate the results!!!! 5 questions about “Library as Place” ● Library space that inspires study and learning ● Quiet space for individual activities ● A comfortable and inviting location ● A getaway for study, learning, or research ● ...
  • 10. Help! me! evaluate the results!!!! ● Up to 5 Local questions (from a pool) ● Custom questions ● 3 General Satisfaction questions ● 5 Information Literacy Outcome questions ● 3 Library Use (frequency) questions ● The one free-text “tell us anything” question
  • 11. Help! me! evaluate! the! results!!!! For each question: ● Perception score ● Desired expectation & superiority gap ● Minimum expectation & adequacy gap ● Longitudinal comparison with prior years ● Peer comparison ● Demographic breakdowns ○ role (faculty / student), discipline, age, sex
  • 12. Challenge #1: Avalanche of Data ● Raw perceptions / desired / minimum / gaps ● Longitudinal & peer comparisons ● Demographic breakdowns ● Comparison with qualitative comments ● Great insights, after a lot of analysis!
  • 13. Success: Team Approach ● 5 person team: chair, 2 ‘quants’, 2 ‘quals’. ○ Delegating analysis, including "significance". ● Tools ○ Quant side: SPSS ○ Qual side: QDA Miner Lite, Brown U. taxonomy ● Chinese wall during initial analysis, then combining the two into a single report
  • 14. Challenge #2: Really Long Survey (22 core questions + 5 local) * 3 ratings + 17 more rating questions + 4 demographic questions = 102 numeric responses + one text response
  • 15. Success: LibQUAL+ Lite ● X percentage of participants get a survey with ~ half the questions ● We did a 50/50 split Lite Full Valid Responses 55% 49% Median Survey Time 4:32 7:31 Average Survey Time 7:20 31:02
  • 16. Challenge #3: Broad Questions ● Great for longitudinal & peer analyses. ● But how do you get assessment of specific services or other areas of concern?
  • 17. Solution: Local Questions ● 132 available to choose from a pool ● Can ask the same questions over time ○ or the same within the consortium ○ or not! ● Be careful: choice requires another process ○ Different functional areas / services ○ What will you do with the answer?! ○ Follow-up survey opportunities?
  • 18. Bonus Solution: Custom Question ● New! (Beta) ○ "Please indicate your preference: From the library I want more … electronic or print books". ○ 1 (e-books) to 5 (print books). ○ to help with consortium-wide purchasing ● Different type of answer, not good/bad ● Note: delayed our survey
  • 19. Challenge #4: Recruitment ● Decided to request IRB approval ○ First time. So we could share the data externally. ○ Time: CITI Certification training, write-up, revisions. ● Publicity challenges: inducement. ● Should have given ourselves more flexibility in emailing & other marketing.
  • 20. Success: Student Recruiting ● Members of PRSSA on campus. Win/win. ● Candy! ● Very successful; 8-10 students/hour
  • 21. (Mini-)Challenge #5: ARL ● Some complexities to the survey configuration. ● Slow response times to some questions.
  • 22. Solution: Consortium Approach ● 7 UWs doing the survey in one term. ● John Jax (UW La Crosse) coordinating with ARL, got answers much more efficiently! ● UWS conference calls, sharing challenges & solutions ● Ad-hoc consortia? WiLS opportunity?
  • 23. Thanks to our team(s)! Polk Library, UW Oshkosh ● Maccabee Levine (chair) ● Ted Mulvey & Craig Thomas (quants) ● Josh Ranger & Sara Stichert (quals) ● Pat Wilkinson (director) ● Anca Miron (IRB chair) UW System ● John Jax (LX, UWS LibQual chair) ● Susan Mitchell (UWS) ● James Hibbard (Platt) ● Laura Jacobs (Superior) ● Linda Kopecky (MKE) ● Mitchell Scott (GB) ● Maureen Olle-LaJoie (RF)