1 / 28

Measuring the Value of Academic Libraries

Measuring the Value of Academic Libraries. Carol Tenopir University of Tennessee ctenopir@utk.edu. Michigan Library Association May 2010. Usage Citations Focus groups Return on Investment Perceptions. Experiments Critical incident Contingent valuation

charles-burke
Download Presentation

Measuring the Value of Academic Libraries

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. Measuring the Value of Academic Libraries Carol TenopirUniversity of Tennesseectenopir@utk.edu Michigan Library Association May 2010

  2. Usage Citations Focus groups Return on Investment Perceptions Experiments Critical incident Contingent valuation Observations Conjoint measurement Interviews Methods for measuring value

  3. Implicit value (i.e., usage, downloads) Explicit value (i.e., Interviews) Derived values (i.e., ROI) Value of libraries can be measured in many ways:

  4. Average Number of Article Readings per Year and Average Minutes per Reading by University Faculty in the US (percent change)

  5. Purpose Outcomes Return on Investment (ROI) And help make decisions for the future Going beyond implied value to show…

  6. Series of Studies • Surveys by Tenopir & King, 1977-Present using critical incident of last article reading • ROI in grants, Phase 1: case study at University of Illinois, completed 2008 • Phase 2: expanded to 8 countries (report coming soon) • Value and ROI for grants/research, teaching, student engagement (2010-2012) (LibValue)

  7. Critical Incident “The following questions in this section refer to the SCHOLARLY ARTICLE YOU READ MOST RECENTLY, even if you had read the article previously. Note that this last reading may not be typical, but will help us establish the range of patterns in reading.”

  8. Principal Purpose of Reading(Faculty in U.S. and Australia, 2004-2006, n=1433) Research 9% Teaching 11% Current 9% 51% Awareness Proposals 20% Other

  9. Source of reading by purpose of reading by faculty(Faculty in U.S. and Australia, 2004-2005, n=1412) Research Teaching Current Awareness

  10. Proportion of readings that contain information that is rated as absolutely essential to the principal purpose

  11. Proportion of readings that contain information that is rated as absolutely essential to the principal purpose

  12. Readings for Research • More likely to be rated “absolutely essential” • More likely to be found by searching • More likely to be from e-sources • More likely to be from the library

  13. Outcomes of Reading in Order of Frequency of Responses(n=880) Inspired new thinking (55%) Improved results (40%) Changed focus (27%) Resolved technical problems (12%) Saved time (12%) Faster completion (7%) Collaboration (6%) Wasted my time (<1% of readings)

  14. E-Collections improve efficiency, writing, and research “I could not do the kind of research or teaching I do without these resources.” “E-access is essential for scientific writing” “[e-access] saves me a lot of time which can be used for more extensive reading.”

  15. Derived measures Return on Investment (ROI) is a quantitative measure expressed as a ratio of the value returned to the institution for each monetary unit invested in the library. For every $/€/£ spent on the library,the university received ‘X’ $/€/£ in return. Demonstrate that library collections contribute to income-generating activities

  16. ROI Phases 1 and 2Faculty Grant Research Cycle ConductResearch WriteArticles LIBRARY WriteReports &Proposals ObtainGrants

  17. ROI for University of Illinois Grants (Phase 1) $4.38 grant income for each $1.00 invested in library (% of faculty who rated citations in proposals from library as important to the proposal x % of proposals funded)

  18. Phase 2: Grants only8 institutions in 8 countries

  19. Phase 2: ROI Findings Research and Teaching • Under 1:1 Research and Teaching STM/Hum/SS • 1.3:1 to 3.4:1

  20. Administration Values: Measuring Up • 1) Attract outstanding faculty • Faculty with more publications and citations obtain more grants.* • Faculty who publish more read more • Faculty who receive awards read more • 2) Retain outstanding faculty • - “I would leave this university in a microsecond if the library deteriorated” - U.S. University • *Ali & Bhattacharyya, “Research Grant and Faculty Productivity Nexus: Heterogeneity among Dissimilar Institutions.” Academic Analytics

  21. Administration Values: Measuring Up 3) Foster innovative research • “I am now able to explore and trace back topics and check the developments that arose along the topic history making connections that were only dreams a few years ago.” -Western European Research Institute • For every article cited, 27-40 more are read • 4) Build research reputation of institution • In 1 university, over 10 years a 1% increase in library budget correlates with a 1.07% increase in grant funding • In another, over 10 years a 1% increase in library budget correlates with a 1.21% increase in grant funding

  22. Administration Values: Measuring Up 5) Promote seamless integration of the library with institutional research activities - “With the current workload, I could not continue with research without the convenience of access from my own computer” – South African University - A doubling in article downloads, from 1 to 2 million, is statistically associated with dramatic increases in research productivity** **Research Information Network. 2009. E-journals: their use, value and impact. Report prepared by Research Information Network.

  23. LibValue: Broaden focus

  24. And anticipate change..New Scholarly Endeavors That Cut Across the Library’s Functional Areas Teaching / Learning Research Social / Professional e-science Collaborative Scholarship Scholarly Endeavors Institutional Repositories Functional Areas

  25. What we can show so far… E-articles are read for many purposes Academic library e-collections help faculty be productive and successful Libraries help generate grants income E-collections are valued by faculty ROI for grants varies by mission and location of institution Value can be measured in many ways

  26. Some Final Thoughts on Measuring Value Tie what you measure to the mission of the university Measure outcomes, not inputs Quantitative data can show ROI and trends Qualitative data tell a story No one method stands alone Need to develop was to measure value of all library services

  27. For further information: ctenopir@utk.eduTenopir, C. (2009). University Investment in the Library, Phase II: An International Study of the Library’s Value to the Grants Process. Report prepared for Elsevier LibraryConnect.

  28. Tenopir, C., King, D. W., Edwards, S., Wu, L. (2008). Electronic journals and changes in scholarly article seeking and reading patterns. Aslib Proceedings, 61 (1), 5-32. Tenopir, C., King, D. W., Spencer, J., Wu, L. (2009). Variations in article seeking and reading patterns of academics: What makes a difference?. Library & Information Science Research, doi 10.1016.

More Related