Charting Library Service Quality

2. Charting Library Service Quality Sheri Downer Auburn University Libraries

3. Background of Need for LibQUAL+ • Library had undergone extensive changes in services • Librarian and Staff responsibilities had changed • Utilization of physical spaces had changed

4. Major Changes Affecting Public Services • Four reference desks on different floors were incorporated into one central information commons • Reference desk • 35 public access computers • 2 consultation workstations • Reference collection

5. Major Changes Affecting Public Services • Service desks were added on first and second floors • Science and technology journals were placed on fourth floor • Nearer to related subject areas • Other journals housed on second floor near reference desk • Overdue fines were eliminated

6. Questions We Were Concerned About • Did we need to add service desks on third and fourth floors? • Some faculty felt these changes diminished our ability to serve them well • What other services needed improving? • Were the library hours reflective of the times the library needed to be open?

7. Questions We Were Concerned About • Where did we need to focus our expenditures? • Journal backfiles • Digital projects • Training • Library hours • Public services staffing

8. Assessment Became a Reality • In April, 2003, SACS was scheduled to visit Auburn University • Under new SACS guidelines assessment is a priority • Each campus unit required to develop assessment plans • LibQUAL+ was perfect assessment tool • Visit date changed to October, 2003

9. Assessment Became a Reality • April 8, 2002, sample population invited to take part in LibQUAL+ project • 800 faculty members • 1,200 undergraduates • 800 graduate students • Had a return rate of nearly 60%

10. Results of Data • Data indicated that many faculty and students perceive strength in the Library’s physical facility and environment.

11. Results of Data • Areas that were rated as exceeding minimum requirements: • 1. A contemplative environment • 2. A place for reflection and creativity • 3. A comfortable and inviting location • 4. A haven for quiet and solitude • 5. Willingness to help users

12. Results of Data • Areas rated as a level closest to the minimum acceptable level: • 1. Complete run of journals • 2. Convenient business hours • 3. Employees who have the knowledge to answer user questions • 4. Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my own • 5. Convenient access to library collections

13. Library Assessment Committee • Library committee assigned to assess and analyze the LibQUAL+ survey results • Identify steps to bring library services and programs closer to faculty and student expectations • Will use several different approaches for assessing weaknesses

14. Assessment Objectives • Complete runs of journals: • Library journal holdings will meet research needs of Auburn faculty • A survey of faculty will be administered • Will identify gaps in journal holdings • Library will design a program to acquire 100% of high priority titles identified

15. Assessment Objectives • Library Business Hours: • Library business hours will be expanded according to student and faculty needs • A survey of faculty and students will be conducted to identify library hours that best serve user needs • Library hours will be modified to meet identified needs

16. Assessment Objectives • Employees who have the knowledge to answer user questions: • Public service desks will be staffed with personnel who have the knowledge to answer user questions • Or staff will refer the questions to appropriate subject specialists

17. Assessment Objectives • Employees who have the knowledge to answer user questions: • Focus groups of faculty and students will be conducted • Will identify service points perceived as deficient • A plan to remedy all identified deficiencies will be completed by the end of this review cycle

18. What Has Been Done • In spring semester the libraries expanded hours as a pilot project • Need established reason to also extend summer hours • Architecture library now to extend hours during fall semester • The positive response has been tremendous!

19. What Has Been Done • Faculty were sent an email requesting response to identify gaps in journal runs • We received good feedback and are now checking requests against actual holdings • Other information added such as requests for new titles • Also wanted online titles added to collections of paper titles

20. What Has Been Done • Proposal requested from center for governmental studies to conduct focus meetings • Will study concern that emerged about public service desks and knowledge of people staffing those desks • Was concern because we had eliminated multiple reference desks or actual lack of knowledge? • Four focus meetings: 2 faculty groups, 1 graduate group, 1 undergraduate group

21. What Has Been Done • Librarians and staff are designing roundtable discussions with library users • 1. Will be situational discussions of their opinions on specific services • 2. Will have personnel available who are experts on the topics being discussed to answer questions