Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

E:\Lirg Agm Presentations July 2010\P3 Rankin


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

E:\Lirg Agm Presentations July 2010\P3 Rankin

  1. 1. A unique combination of benefits: using Generic Social Outcomes to evidence the social value of the public library service Carolynn Rankin School of Applied Global Ethics, Leeds Metropolitan University Presentation to LIRG Annual Conference 9 July 2010, University of East London
  2. 2. Objectives for this session <ul><li>Introduce the MLA Generic Social Outcomes (GSO) as a tool </li></ul><ul><li>Outline the use of GSO framework in an evaluation project on the NYR </li></ul><ul><li>Reflect on future development and potential use of the GSO framework </li></ul><ul><li>Raise some issues for discussion </li></ul>
  3. 3. A unique combination of benefits… <ul><li>Not only do libraries make a valuable contribution to our society, they stand for important values in our society including intellectual freedom, equality of opportunity, engaged citizenship, informed democracy, and a society in which people have the chance to achieve their potential . ( CILIP, 2010) </li></ul>
  4. 4. Reflections on the LIRG Scan 2010 <ul><li>Challenges and opportunities </li></ul><ul><li>Mind the gap… what else? </li></ul>
  5. 5. The demand for evidence ‘so what…?’ <ul><li>Capturing the Impact of Libraries final report </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Predominance of one-off evaluations of time limited programmes and pilot schemes over research on core services </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lack of baselines against which to measure change </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lack of qualitative in-depth research that analyses the specific nature of interactions that take place in libraries </li></ul></ul><ul><li>(DCMS/BOP Consulting, 2009: 2) </li></ul>
  6. 6. Generic social outcomes framework <ul><li>Developed by the MLA to help museums, libraries and archives to </li></ul><ul><li>deliver against key agendas and maximise their contribution to communities </li></ul><ul><li>evidence their contribution to outcomes. </li></ul>GSOs seen as an important tool because of the increased emphasis of outcomes as well as outputs
  7. 7. GSO origins <ul><li>Generic Learning Outcomes (GLO) developed as part of the Inspiring Learning for All framework </li></ul><ul><li>GSO framework developed and piloted by Burns Owens Partnership (BOP) in 2005 </li></ul><ul><li>GSOs outline ways in which museums, libraries and archives impact on social and community themes: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Stronger and Safer Communities </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Strengthening Public Life </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Health and Well Being (BOP) </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Stronger and Safer Communities <ul><li>Improving group and inter-group dialogue and understanding </li></ul><ul><li>Supporting cultural diversity and identity </li></ul><ul><li>Encouraging familial ties and relationships </li></ul><ul><li>Tackling the fear of crime and anti-social behaviour </li></ul><ul><li>Contributing to crime prevention and reduction </li></ul>
  9. 9. Health and Well-Being <ul><li>Encouraging healthy lifestyles and contributing to mental and physical well-being </li></ul><ul><li>Supporting care and recovery </li></ul><ul><li>Supporting older people to live independent lives </li></ul><ul><li>Helping children and young people to enjoy life and make a positive contribution </li></ul>
  10. 10. Strengthening Public Life <ul><li>Encouraging and supporting awareness & participation in local decision making & wider civic and political engagement </li></ul><ul><li>Building the capacity of community and voluntary groups </li></ul><ul><li>Providing safe, inclusive and trusted public places </li></ul><ul><li>Enabling community empowerment through the awareness of rights, benefits and external services </li></ul><ul><li>Improving the responsiveness of services to the needs of the local community, including other stakeholders </li></ul>
  11. 11. Table showing social outcome themes from tiers one and two
  12. 12. Use of GSOs in an evaluation project – NYR in Yorkshire <ul><li>Why can’t every year be a National Year of Reading? </li></ul><ul><li>An evaluation of the social impact of the NYR in Yorkshire </li></ul><ul><li>Researchers used GSO framework as this was specified in the MLA brief. </li></ul><ul><li>(Rankin and Brock, 2008 and Rankin et al 2009) </li></ul>
  13. 13. Evaluation – issues… <ul><li>Markless and Streatfield remind us about the dangers of getting side tracked and looking at what you do (activities and processes) when trying to evaluate impact - rather than concentrating on what difference you make… (2006:81) </li></ul>
  14. 15. Background to the NYR study <ul><li>MLA funding for Yorkshire based research project </li></ul><ul><li>Phase one evaluation undertaken between September - December 2008 </li></ul><ul><li>Phase two currently underway and due to report in November 2010 </li></ul><ul><li>Selection of 2 contrasting case study library authorities Calderdale and North Lincolnshire </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Initially no other evaluation - ERS commissioned to undertake an evaluation of the impact of local authority activity. </li></ul></ul>
  15. 16. Project aim - of longitudinal research <ul><li>to investigate the efficacy of the NYR programme in Yorkshire as it relates to the place shaping and social inclusion targets of the NYR. </li></ul><ul><li>The overall objectives are to investigate the impact of the NYR in two sample local authorities in relation to </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Target beneficiaries </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Partnership and cross departmental working </li></ul></ul>
  16. 17. Methodology – data collection strategies <ul><li>A variety of research methods used to gather the data. </li></ul><ul><li>Qualitative data was gathered via individual interviews with key library staff and group discussions </li></ul><ul><li>Phase 1 data was collected through focus group interviews with NYR steering group partners and by written responses to key questions </li></ul><ul><li>Information was also gathered from documentation and publicity materials provided by each case study authority. </li></ul>
  17. 18. Data analysis <ul><li>The MAXQDA Computer-Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software (CAQDAS) package used to code and validate the data as required by MLA (Yorkshire) by using the </li></ul><ul><li>Generic Social Outcomes framework </li></ul><ul><li>PSA National Outcome and Indicator Set </li></ul><ul><li>and a third level of coding developed to identify issues raised by the interviewees. </li></ul>
  18. 19. GSO outcomes… <ul><li>The phase one evaluation has found considerable evidence of NYR related activities in supporting the three first tier social outcomes ‘Stronger and Safer Communities’, ‘Health and Well-Being’ and ‘Strengthening Public Life’. </li></ul>
  19. 20. Findings from interviewees issues <ul><li>The voice of the practitioner was considered an important aspect of the qualitative research in this evaluation project </li></ul><ul><li>We suddenly got access to everyone else’s knowledge and could piggy back on other people’s events. The NYR was a way of reaching other staff. People don’t always respond to emails – meeting people makes such a difference. </li></ul><ul><li>For any evaluation of library services to be effective it is important to elicit the voices of those engaged in the management and delivery of the services and the development of new initiatives. </li></ul>
  20. 21. GSO Stronger and Safer Communities <ul><li>‘ Supporting cultural diversity and identity’ </li></ul><ul><li>The Manga event brought all sorts of people in to the library who have never been before. I want to go one step further and consult those people about using our services </li></ul>
  21. 22. <ul><li>We are doing a lot of great stuff, including breakthrough initiatives for some groups e.g. making materials for homeless people. We have never done that before. </li></ul><ul><li>Some projects focussed on activities aimed at hard to reach groups, some added value to original users while others were new ideas inspired by the opportunities of the NYR partnerships. </li></ul>
  22. 23. GSO Strengthening Public Life <ul><li>Theme improving services: </li></ul><ul><li>The NYR has pushed towards a service located outside the library. Were it not for the NYR we would have contented ourselves with providing stock within the library and the outreach might not have happened. </li></ul>
  23. 24. ‘ Safe, inclusive and trusted public spaces’ and ‘Building the capacity of community and voluntary groups’. <ul><li>We are taking out of this year a commitment to changing the pattern of city and local libraries, where most things happen. </li></ul><ul><li>In terms of redevelopment, a place becomes a hub if it becomes a place where the community gets used to expecting exciting and valuable reading events, workshops, festivals on a regular basis. I hope that will emerge from the NYR. </li></ul>
  24. 25. GSO Health and Well-being <ul><li>We are reaching the homeless, new immigrants, people with mental health problems – the potential is much more than we are doing. I hope that we will maintain the commitment to be creative. </li></ul>
  25. 26. Libraries need to add examples of evidence
  26. 27. Results & Implications - 6 key themes from phase 1 <ul><li>Improving services and sharpening the focus of what is on offer. </li></ul><ul><li>Working in partnership and strengthening partnerships </li></ul><ul><li>Dealing with challenges </li></ul><ul><li>The importance of activities and events </li></ul><ul><li>Stronger communities – with a particular emphasis on improving group and inter-group dialogue and understanding and supporting cultural diversity and identity </li></ul><ul><li>Legacy of the NYR </li></ul>
  27. 28. So what else… <ul><li>The first phase of the NYR evaluation in Yorkshire has developed a framework for analysing future data and provides a means of tracking progress. </li></ul><ul><li>The evaluation research will provide material that local library authorities can use for advocacy with a range of audiences including local and central government. </li></ul>
  28. 29. Future development and potential use of the GSO framework <ul><li>Indicator Bank being developed to </li></ul><ul><li>create a tool and to build on and extend the themes </li></ul><ul><li>provide practical guidance to practitioners - very focussed on museum sector </li></ul><ul><li>MLA encouraging practitioners to use the GSO framework </li></ul>
  29. 30. But - what about making the ‘capital’ stock connections to the ‘unique benefits’? <ul><li>Social capital </li></ul><ul><li>Physical capital </li></ul><ul><li>Cultural capital </li></ul><ul><li>Intellectual capital </li></ul><ul><li>Identity capital </li></ul><ul><li>What about </li></ul><ul><li>Capabilities - capacity and freedom that allow individuals to achieve well-being and make choices. </li></ul>
  30. 31. Issues/challenges <ul><li>I may be talking to the converted! </li></ul><ul><li>Is this just another way of trying to show we are worth it? </li></ul><ul><li>What is missing from the GSO framework – what about the librarian’s perspective? </li></ul><ul><li>Ethical issues associated with this type of data gathering and analysis </li></ul>
  31. 32. The ‘unique combination of benefits’ - connecting across the chasm <ul><li>Measuring social value is more like an isolated art form than widespread science </li></ul><ul><li>Our ability to produce social value is considered by some to be one of our greatest commodities </li></ul><ul><li>Rooney-Browne (2010) </li></ul>
  32. 33. Thank you for listening. Any questions/comments please? <ul><li>Carolynn Rankin </li></ul><ul><li>School of Applied Global Ethics </li></ul><ul><li>Leeds Metropolitan University </li></ul><ul><li>Bronte Hall, Headingley Campus </li></ul><ul><li>Leeds LS6 3QW </li></ul><ul><li>Tel 0331 8123366 </li></ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul>
  33. 34. References <ul><li>BOP Burns Owens Partnership (n.d.) MLA: Social outcomes for museums, libraries and archives. Prototype social outcomes framework . URL: [accessed 25.09.08] </li></ul><ul><li>CILIP (2010) Libraries and Librarians: making a unique contribution to our society. Available: URL [Accessed 7 July 2010] </li></ul><ul><li>DCMS (2009) Capturing the impact of Libraries. Prepared on behalf of DCMS by BOP Consulting. Report [online]. Available: URL [Accessed June 2009] </li></ul><ul><li>Markless, Sharon & Streatfield, David (2006) Evaluating the impact of your library . Facet. </li></ul><ul><li>Rankin, Carolynn and Brock, Avril, (2008) National Year of Reading Evaluation – Yorkshire. An interim report on the case study authorities of Calderdale and North Lincolnshire . A report commissioned by MLA Yorkshire, Renaissance Yorkshire and Arts Council England, Yorkshire, December 2008 </li></ul><ul><li>Rankin, Carolynn, Brock, Avril and Matthews, Jackie (2009) Why can’t every year be a National Year of Reading? An evaluation of the social impact of the National Year of Reading in Yorkshire. Library and Information Research Vol 33, No 104 (2009) pg 11-25 </li></ul><ul><li>Rooney-Browne, Christine (2010) Methods for demonstrating the value of public libraries in the UK. A literature review for the CILIP Library and Information Research Group Scan Award 2010 </li></ul>