1 / 19

Turning Results into Action: Using Assessment Information to Improve Library Performance OR WHAT DID YOU DO WITH THE DA

Turning Results into Action: Using Assessment Information to Improve Library Performance OR WHAT DID YOU DO WITH THE DATA?. Steve Hiller Stephanie Wright University of Washington Libraries. Library Assessment ARL SPEC Kit 303 (Dec. 2007) Survey sent to ARL Libraries May-June 2007

brandy
Download Presentation

Turning Results into Action: Using Assessment Information to Improve Library Performance OR WHAT DID YOU DO WITH THE DA

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Turning Results into Action: Using Assessment Information to Improve Library PerformanceOR WHAT DID YOU DO WITH THE DATA? Steve Hiller Stephanie Wright University of Washington Libraries

  2. Library Assessment ARL SPEC Kit 303 (Dec. 2007) Survey sent to ARL Libraries May-June 2007 73 respondents (60%), nearly all academic Self-reported information ARL Consultation Service Making Library Assessment Work/Effective, Sustainable and Practical Library Assessment 35 Libraries visited 2005-08 (32 North A., 28 ARL) Observed and confirmed information Data Sources For This Study

  3. Library Assessment SPEC Kit SurveyQuestions • Impetus for assessment • Assessment methods used • Organizational structure for assessment • Distribution/presentation of assessment results • Using assessment information (up to 3 actions) • Professional development needs in assessment

  4. SPEC Survey: Impetus for Assessment

  5. Building Assessment Capability in Libraries through Consultation Services • Association of Research Libraries (ARL) project began in 2005 as “Making Library Assessment Work” (MLAW) Assess the state of assessment efforts in individual research libraries, identify barriers and facilitators of assessment, and devise pragmatic approaches to assessment that can flourish in different local environments” • Funded by participating libraries • Conducted by Steve Hiller and Jim Self under the aegis of Martha Kyrillidou of ARL • In 2007 name changed to “Effective, Sustainable and Practical Library Assessment” (ESP) and opened up to all libraries

  6. MLAW/ESP:Data Collection Methods Pre-Visit • Survey on assessment activities, needs etc. • Telephone follow-up • Mining library and institutional web pages Visit(1.5 days) • Presentation on effective assessment • Group meetings and observation/verification Follow-up and report • Pursue leads and additional information

  7. ESP Self-Identified Assessment Needs(31 NA Libraries)

  8. Data Caveats • Different methodological techniques used • Information gathered at different times • ESP confirmed on “ground”; SPEC self-reported • Libraries are different (21 of 73 SPEC survey respondents also participated in MLAW/ESP) • Some bias in libraries self-selecting to participate in ESP and respond to SPEC survey (likely that more is done in these libraries)

  9. Assessment Methods Used

  10. ACTION SCOREBOARDS(Data will be in paper)

  11. Action Scoreboard: Websites

  12. Action Scoreboard: Facilities

  13. Action Scoreboard: Services

  14. Action Scoreboard: Collection Development and Management

  15. Action Scoreboard: Organization

  16. Overall Action Scoreboard

  17. Using Assessment Data: Actions • Lots of data collected but actions generally limited to either “low hanging fruit” or one-time changes: • Website improvements (Usability) • Hours (Comments, observation) • Collection development/management decisions • Facilities (Observation, qualitative methods) • More actions taking place than reported (both to SPEC and MLAW/ESP) • Little evidence of action in: • Instruction/Learning outcomes • Organizational changes

  18. Organizational Factors That Impede Turning Data into Actions • Lack tradition of using data for improvement • No assessment advocate within organization • Library staff lack research methodology abilities • Weak analysis and presentation of data • Inability to identify actionable data • Library “culture” is skeptical of data • Leadership does not view as priority/provide resources • Library organizational structure is “silo-based” • Staff do not have sufficient time

  19. Sustainable Assessment and Actions • Leadership believes and supports • Formal assessment program established • Institutional research agenda tied to strategic priorities • Staff training in research/assessment methodology • Staff have time and resources to follow-up • Research balanced with timely decision-making • Assessment results presented, understood and acted upon • Results reported back to the customer community • Library demonstrates value provided community

More Related