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.
LibQual Challenges &
Lessons Learned
at UW Oshkosh
WiLSWorld 2014
LibQual & UW Oshkosh
● “LibQUAL+”
○ “a rigorously tested Web-based survey.. that helps
libraries assess and improve librar...
Agenda
● A taste of LibQual
● 5 challenges encountered
○ solutions and/or or lessons learned
Time to take WiLSQual!
On a scale from 1 (worst) to 9 (best),
● Rate your perception of: "Yesterday's
WiLSWorld presenters...
Question 2
On a scale from 1 (worst) to 9 (best),
● Rate your perception of: "Presenters who
understand the needs of their...
Questions 3 - 22...
Help me evaluate the results!
9 questions about “Affect of Service”
● Employees who instill confidence in users
● Giving u...
Help me evaluate the results!!
8 questions about “Information Control”
● Making electronic resources accessible from
my ho...
Help me evaluate the results!!!!
5 questions about “Library as Place”
● Library space that inspires study and
learning
● Q...
Help! me! evaluate the results!!!!
● Up to 5 Local questions (from a pool)
● Custom questions
● 3 General Satisfaction que...
Help! me! evaluate! the! results!!!!
For each question:
● Perception score
● Desired expectation & superiority gap
● Minim...
Challenge #1: Avalanche of Data
● Raw perceptions / desired / minimum / gaps
● Longitudinal & peer comparisons
● Demograph...
Success: Team Approach
● 5 person team: chair, 2 ‘quants’, 2 ‘quals’.
○ Delegating analysis, including "significance".
● T...
Challenge #2: Really Long Survey
(22 core questions + 5 local) * 3 ratings
+ 17 more rating questions
+ 4 demographic ques...
Success: LibQUAL+ Lite
● X percentage of participants get a survey
with ~ half the questions
● We did a 50/50 split
Lite F...
Challenge #3: Broad Questions
● Great for longitudinal & peer analyses.
● But how do you get assessment of specific
servic...
Solution: Local Questions
● 132 available to choose from a pool
● Can ask the same questions over time
○ or the same withi...
Bonus Solution: Custom Question
● New! (Beta)
○ "Please indicate your preference: From the library I
want more … electroni...
Challenge #4: Recruitment
● Decided to request IRB approval
○ First time. So we could share the data externally.
○ Time: C...
Success: Student Recruiting
● Members of PRSSA on campus. Win/win.
● Candy!
● Very successful; 8-10 students/hour
(Mini-)Challenge #5: ARL
● Some complexities to the survey
configuration.
● Slow response times to some questions.
Solution: Consortium Approach
● 7 UWs doing the survey in one term.
● John Jax (UW La Crosse) coordinating with
ARL, got a...
Thanks to our team(s)!
Polk Library, UW Oshkosh
● Maccabee Levine (chair)
● Ted Mulvey &
Craig Thomas (quants)
● Josh Rang...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

LibQual Challenges & Lessons Learned at UW Oshkosh

1,052 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 process.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

LibQual Challenges & Lessons Learned at UW Oshkosh

  1. 1. LibQual Challenges & Lessons Learned at UW Oshkosh WiLSWorld 2014
  2. 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. 3. Agenda ● A taste of LibQual ● 5 challenges encountered ○ solutions and/or or lessons learned
  4. 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. 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. 6. Questions 3 - 22...
  7. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 20. Success: Student Recruiting ● Members of PRSSA on campus. Win/win. ● Candy! ● Very successful; 8-10 students/hour
  21. 21. (Mini-)Challenge #5: ARL ● Some complexities to the survey configuration. ● Slow response times to some questions.
  22. 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. 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)

×