ARL - LibQUAL · Association of Research Libraries, we are appreciative of the past contributions of Consuella Askew, Richard Groves, Amy Hoseth, Mary Jackson, Jonathan Sousa, and
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
www.libqual.org
Association of Research Libraries / Texas A&M University
ARL
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
All
ARL
All
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
All
ARL
All
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
All
ARL
All
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
All
ARL
All
www.libqual.org
Association of Research Libraries / Texas A&M University
ARL
Contributors
Colleen Cook MaShana DavisTexas A&M University Association of Research Libraries
Fred Heath Martha KyrillidouUniversity of Texas Association of Research Libraries
BruceThompson Gary RoebuckTexas A&M University Association of Research Libraries
Thompson, B., Colleen C. Cook, and Russell L. Thompson. Reliability and Structure of LibQUAL+™ Scores:
Measuring Perceived Library Service Quality. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 2 (2002): 3-12.
Thompson, B., Cook, C., & Kyrillidou, M. (2005). Concurrent validity of LibQUAL+® scores: What do
LibQUAL+® scores measure? Journal of Academic Librarianship, 31: 517-22.
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
All
ARL
All
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
All
ARL
All
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 17 of 104
Thompson, B., Colleen C. Cook, and Kyrillidou, M. “Using Localized Survey Items to Augment Standardized
Benchmarking Measures: A LibQUAL+® Study. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 6(2) (2006): 219-30.
Thompson, B., Colleen C. Cook, and Martha Kyrillidou. “Stability of Library Service Quality Benchmarking Norms
Across Time and Cohorts: A LibQUAL+® Study.” Paper presented at the Asia-Pacific Conference of
Library and Information Education and Practice (A-LIEP), Singapore, April 3-4 2006.
Thompson, B., Colleen C. Cook, and Martha Kyrillidou. “How Can You Evaluate the Integrity of Your Library
Assessment Data: Intercontinental LibQUAL+® Analysis Used as Concrete Heuristic Examples.” Paper
presented at the Library Assessment Conference: Building Effective, Sustainable, and Practical Assessment,
Charlottesville, VA, August 4-6, 2006.
Zeithaml, Valerie, A. Parasuraman, and Leonard L. Berry. Delivering Quality Service: Balancing Customer
Perceptions and Expectations. New York: Free Press, 1990.
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
All
ARL
All
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
All
ARL
All
Page 18 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
2 Respondents by Institution for ARL
Respondents
%Institution
Respondents
n
Academic Law
Howard W. Hunter Law Library 198 0.95%1)
198 0.95%Sub Total:
College or University
Brigham Young University 1,631 7.83%2)
Brown University Library 1,595 7.66%3)
Case Western Reserve University 561 2.69%4)
Dartmouth College Library 303 1.46%5)
Harvard Divinity School 122 0.59%6)
McGill University Library 1,085 5.21%7)
Ohio State University Libraries 469 2.25%8)
Oklahoma State University 2,611 12.54%9)
Penn State University Libraries 2,414 11.59%10)
Purdue University 1,302 6.25%11)
Texas A&M University, College Station 935 4.49%12)
Texas A&M University, Galveston 170 0.82%13)
University of Alberta Libraries 150 0.72%14)
University of Alberta Libraries - French 63 0.30%15)
University of Arizona Library 484 2.32%16)
University of California Riverside 1,370 6.58%17)
University of Connecticut Libraries 2,781 13.36%18)
University of Houston Libraries 205 0.98%19)
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 739 3.55%20)
University of Southern California 856 4.11%21)
University of Texas at Austin 777 3.73%22)
20,623 99.05%Sub Total:
20,821Grand Total: 100.00%
Below is a listing of all the ARL institutions that participated in the 2008 LibQUAL+® survey. Where applicable, they have been separated out by library type (e.g. Academic Health Sciences, Academic Law, College or University). The number of respondents from each institution and the percentage of the total number of ARL respondents that they represent are provided.
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
All
ARL
All
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
All
ARL
All
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 19 of 104
3 College or University Libraries Demographic Summary for ARL
3.1 Respondents by User Group
User Group
Respondent
n
Respondent
%
Undergraduate
2,463 11.94%First year
2,391 11.59%Second year
2,375 11.52%Third year
2,318 11.24%Fourth year
678 3.29%Fifth year and above
61 0.30%Non-degree
Sub Total: 49.88% 10,286
Graduate
2,640 12.80%Masters
3,275 15.88%Doctoral
99 0.48%Non-degree or Undecided
Sub Total: 29.16% 6,014
Faculty
228 1.11%Adjunct Faculty
692 3.36%Assistant Professor
663 3.21%Associate Professor
233 1.13%Lecturer
877 4.25%Professor
246 1.19%Other Academic Status
Sub Total: 14.25% 2,939
Library Staff
20 0.10%Administrator
46 0.22%Manager, Head of Unit
126 0.61%Public Services
10 0.05%Systems
75 0.36%Technical Services
89 0.43%Other
Sub Total: 1.77% 366
Staff
315 1.53%Research Staff
703 3.41%Other staff positions
Sub Total: 4.94% 1,018
Total: 20,623 100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All
Page 20 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
3.2 Population and Respondent Profiles by User Sub-Group
0
4
8
12
16
20
First year (Undergraduate)
Second year (Undergraduate)
Third year (Undergraduate)
Fourth year (Undergraduate)
Fifth year and above (Undergraduate)
Non-degree (Undergraduate)
Masters (Graduate)
Doctoral (Graduate)
Non-degree or Undecided (Graduate)
Adjunct Faculty (Faculty)
Assistant Professor (Faculty)
Associate Professor (Faculty)
Lecturer (Faculty)
Professor (Faculty)
Other Academic Status (Faculty)
Percentage
Population Profile by User Sub-Group
Respondent Profile by User Sub-Group
Us
er
Su
b-G
rou
p
The chart and table below show a breakdown of survey respondents by sub-group, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section*.
The chart maps percentage of respondents for each user subgroup in red. Population percentages for each user subgroup are mapped in blue. The table shows the number and percentage for each user sub-group, for both the general population (N) and survey respondents (n).
*Note: Participating institutions were not required to complete the Representativeness section. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided.
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff, Staff, Other Patrons)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff, Staff, Other Patrons)
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 21 of 104
Respondents
nUser Sub-Group
Respondents
%
Population
N
Population
% %N - %n
2,463 12.80% 103,656 17.40%First year (Undergraduate) 4.60%
2,391 12.43% 99,380 16.69%Second year (Undergraduate) 4.26%
2,375 12.34% 100,103 16.81%Third year (Undergraduate) 4.46%
2,318 12.05% 114,691 19.26%Fourth year (Undergraduate) 7.21%
678 3.52% 8,604 1.44%Fifth year and above (Undergraduate) -2.08%
692 3.60% 8,059 1.35%Assistant Professor (Faculty) -2.24%
663 3.45% 8,355 1.40%Associate Professor (Faculty) -2.04%
233 1.21% 3,210 0.54%Lecturer (Faculty) -0.67%
877 4.56% 11,001 1.85%Professor (Faculty) -2.71%
246 1.28% 8,207 1.38%Other Academic Status (Faculty) 0.10%
Total: 100.00% 595,599 19,239 100.00% 0.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff, Staff, Other Patrons)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff, Staff, Other Patrons)
Page 22 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
3.3 Population and Respondent Profiles by Standard Discipline
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Agriculture / Environmental Studies
Architecture
Business
Communications / Journalism
Education
Engineering / Computer Science
General Studies
Health Sciences
Humanities
Law
Military / Naval Science
Performing & Fine Arts
Science / Math
Social Sciences / Psychology
Undecided
Other
D
isc
ipli
ne
Percentage
Population Profile by Discipline
Respondent Profile by Discipline
The chart and table below show a breakdown of survey respondents by standard discipline, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section*.
The chart maps percentage of respondents for each discipline in red. Population percentages for each discipline are mapped in blue. The table shows the number and percentage for each discipline, for both the general population (N) and survey respondents (n).
*Note: Participating institutions were not required to complete the Representativeness section. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided.
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff, Staff, Other Patrons)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff, Staff, Other Patrons)
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 23 of 104
Military / Naval Science 23 0.12% 205 0.04% -0.08%
Performing & Fine Arts 577 3.00% 16,225 3.23% 0.22%
Science / Math 2,560 13.31% 57,925 11.51% -1.80%
Social Sciences / Psychology 2,457 12.78% 58,215 11.57% -1.21%
Undecided 375 1.95% 20,754 4.13% 2.18%
Other 642 3.34% 22,238 4.42% 1.08%
Total: 100.00% 503,088 19,229 100.00% 0.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff, Staff, Other Patrons)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff, Staff, Other Patrons)
Page 24 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
3.4 Respondent Profile by Age:
This table shows a breakdown of survey respondents by age; both the number of respondents (n) and the percentage of the total number of respondents represented by each age group are displayed.
Age:
Respondents
%
Respondents
n
Under 18 51 0.25%
18 - 22 8,897 43.93%
23 - 30 5,361 26.47%
31 - 45 3,203 15.82%
46 - 65 2,473 12.21%
Over 65 267 1.32%
Total: 100.00% 20,252
3.5 Population and Respondent Profiles by Sex:
The table below shows a breakdown of survey respondents by sex, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section*. The number and percentage for each sex are given for the general population and for survey respondents.
*Note: Participating institutions were not required to complete the Representativeness section. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided.
Sex:
Respondents
%
Respondents
n
Population
N
Population
%
Male 9,158 45.23%51.94% 321,440
Female 11,088 54.77%48.06% 297,422
Total: 100.00% 20,246100.00% 618,862
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 25 of 104
4.1 Core Questions Summary
4 College or University Libraries Survey Item Summary for ARL
This radar chart shows aggregate results for the core survey questions. Each axis represents one question. A code to identify each question is displayed at the outer point of each axis. While questions for each dimension of library service quality are scattered randomly throughout the survey, on this chart they are grouped into sections: Affect of Service , Library as Place, and Information Control.
On each axis, respondents' minimum, desired, and perceived levels of service quality are plotted, and the resulting "gaps" between the three levels (representing service adequacy and service superiority) are shaded in blue, yellow, green, and red.
The two following tables show mean scores and standard deviations for each question, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
AS-1
AS-2
AS-3
AS-4
AS-5AS-6
AS-7
AS-8
AS-9
IC-1
IC-2
IC-3
IC-4
IC-5
IC-6
IC-7IC-8
LP-1
LP-2
LP-3
LP-4
LP-5
Affect of Service
Information Control
Library as Place
Perceived Less Than Minimum
Perceived Greater Than Minimum
Perceived Less Than Desired
Perceived Greater Than Desired
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Page 26 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion TextID
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Affect of Service
Employees who instill confidence in users 5.62 7.46 6.62 0.99AS-1 19,065-0.84
Employees who are consistently courteousAS-3 19,792 1.83 1.63 1.94 1.55 1.33
Readiness to respond to users' questionsAS-4 19,202 1.72 1.49 1.76 1.47 1.33
Employees who have the knowledge to answer
user questions
AS-5 19,108 1.73 1.55 1.79 1.48 1.30
Employees who deal with users in a caring
fashion
AS-6 19,169 1.85 1.58 1.84 1.52 1.43
Employees who understand the needs of their
users
AS-7 18,957 1.78 1.55 1.79 1.49 1.37
Willingness to help usersAS-8 19,191 1.79 1.51 1.78 1.48 1.38
Dependability in handling users' service problemsAS-9 17,227 1.74 1.55 1.79 1.49 1.35
Information Control
Making electronic resources accessible from my
home or office
IC-1 19,795 1.79 1.74 2.01 1.64 1.20
A library Web site enabling me to locate
information on my own
IC-2 20,012 1.71 1.72 1.98 1.60 1.19
The printed library materials I need for my workIC-3 18,497 1.80 1.72 1.96 1.57 1.46
The electronic information resources I needIC-4 19,770 1.68 1.57 1.85 1.44 1.22
Modern equipment that lets me easily access
needed information
IC-5 19,644 1.67 1.49 1.79 1.42 1.18
Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find
things on my own
IC-6 19,786 1.66 1.59 1.86 1.47 1.17
Making information easily accessible for
independent use
IC-7 19,572 1.65 1.51 1.81 1.41 1.17
Print and/or electronic journal collections I
require for my work
IC-8 18,891 1.73 1.70 2.02 1.56 1.22
Library as Place
Library space that inspires study and learningLP-1 19,407 1.91 2.14 2.26 1.81 1.57
Quiet space for individual activitiesLP-2 18,922 1.96 2.11 2.31 1.77 1.62
A comfortable and inviting locationLP-3 19,578 1.85 1.89 2.12 1.67 1.43
A getaway for study, learning, or researchLP-4 18,933 1.93 1.87 2.09 1.63 1.54
Community space for group learning and group
study
LP-5 17,383 2.10 2.18 2.31 1.77 1.88
20,257Overall: 1.38 1.14 1.40 1.12 0.94
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Page 28 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
4.2 Core Question Dimensions Summary
On the chart below, scores for each dimension of library service quality have been plotted graphically. The exterior bars represent the range of minimum to desired mean scores for each dimension. The interior bars represent the range of minimum to perceived mean scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimension of library service quality.
4
5
6
7
8
9
Information
Control
Affect of
Service
Library as
Place
Range of Minimum to Perceived ("Adequacy Gap")
Range of Minimum to Desired
Me
an
Dimension
Overall
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 29 of 104
The following table displays mean scores for each dimension of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+™ survey, where n is the number of respondents for each particular dimension. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.) A complete listing of the survey questions and their dimensions can be found in Appendix A.
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanDimension
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Affect of Service 6.34 7.77 7.14 0.79 20,212-0.63
Information Control 6.79 8.18 7.20 0.41 20,256-0.98
Library as Place 6.24 7.76 6.89 0.65 20,013-0.86
6.49 7.92 7.11 0.61 20,257-0.82Overall:
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDDimension
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Affect of Service 20,212 1.86 1.59 1.83 1.58 1.46
Information Control 20,256 1.71 1.64 1.91 1.52 1.23
Library as Place 20,013 1.96 2.04 2.22 1.74 1.62
The following table displays standard deviation for each dimension of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+® survey, where n is the number of respondents for each particular dimension. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.) A complete listing of the survey questions and their dimensions can be found in Appendix A.
20,257Overall: 1.38 1.14 1.40 1.12 0.94
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Page 30 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
4.3 Local Questions Summary
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion Text
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Convenience of borrowing books from other colleges 6.05 7.89 7.10 1.05 1,528-0.79
Availability of online help when using my library's
electronic resources
6.01 7.52 6.61 0.60 2,425-0.91
An environment that facilitates group study and
problem solving
5.21 6.77 6.06 0.85 181-0.72
Ease of use of electronic resources 6.39 8.10 7.10 0.70 4,791-1.00
Providing help when and where I need it 6.36 7.83 7.05 0.69 929-0.78
Providing information that answers my questions 6.57 7.98 7.29 0.72 2,554-0.69
Access to rare and historical materials, particularly
those of LDS origin.
4.93 6.71 7.26 2.33 1,251 0.55
Convenient service hours 6.77 8.10 7.40 0.63 2,580-0.70
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.91 8.27 7.01 0.10 5,359-1.26
A center for intellectual stimulation 6.23 7.60 6.48 0.24 379-1.12
Access to archives, special collections 5.98 7.35 6.83 0.85 540-0.52
Browsing library materials in the stacks 5.89 7.32 6.86 0.97 2,517-0.46
Convenient business hours 6.76 8.31 7.41 0.65 1,550-0.90
Employees who appear to enjoy what they do 5.57 7.04 5.96 0.39 161-1.08
Enabling me to find information myself 24 hours a day 7.08 8.33 7.59 0.51 476-0.74
This table shows mean scores for each of the local questions added by the individual library or consortium, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 31 of 104
Access to rare and historical materials, particularly
those of LDS origin.
1,251 2.29 2.27 2.40 1.57 2.21
Convenient service hours 2,580 1.76 1.73 2.02 1.55 1.31
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 5,359 1.68 1.81 2.03 1.66 1.14
A center for intellectual stimulation 379 1.95 1.95 1.95 1.86 1.67
Access to archives, special collections 540 2.13 2.20 2.39 1.69 1.76
Browsing library materials in the stacks 2,517 1.99 1.84 1.99 1.63 1.74
Convenient business hours 1,550 1.71 1.61 1.99 1.49 1.13
Employees who appear to enjoy what they do 161 2.06 2.24 2.36 2.04 1.89
Enabling me to find information myself 24 hours a day 476 1.67 1.47 1.77 1.39 1.08
This table displays the standard deviation for each of the local questions added by the individual library or consortium , where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 33 of 104
Personalization features in the electronic library 357 2.19 1.94 1.89 1.95 2.09
Space for students to study and work in groups 3,092 2.00 1.89 2.12 1.60 1.69
Adequate hours of service 6,759 1.76 1.73 2.04 1.55 1.28
Librarians working with teams or individuals to fulfill
specialized knowledge requirements
313 2.02 1.71 1.89 1.70 1.80
Library staff providing help that assists in finding
information needed now while improving my research
skills
776 1.78 1.36 1.69 1.42 1.46
Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other
libraries
1,932 1.81 1.61 1.92 1.59 1.32
An online catalog that is user-friendly for finding
materials
3,784 1.68 1.74 2.01 1.57 1.20
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Page 34 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
4.4 General Satisfaction Questions Summary
MeanSatisfaction Question nSD
In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library. 7.53 20,254 1.48
In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research, and/or
teaching needs.
7.20 20,255 1.58
How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 7.36 20,257 1.32
This table displays mean score and standard deviation for each of the general satisfaction questions: Satisfaction with Treatment, Satisfaction with Support, and Satisfaction with Overall Quality of Service, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the general satisfaction questions on the LibQUAL+® survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9.
4.5 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary
MeanInformation Literacy Outcomes Questions nSD
The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 6.24 20,256 1.87
The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline or work. 7.04 20,254 1.64
The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits or work. 7.16 20,256 1.64
The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy
information.
6.11 20,251 1.97
The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 6.52 20,254 1.81
This table displays the mean score and standard deviation for each of the information literacy outcomes questions, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the information literacy outcomes questions on the LibQUAL+® survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9 with 1 being "strongly disagree" and 9 representing "strongly agree".
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 35 of 104
4.6 Library Use Summary
This chart shows a graphic representation of library use (both on the premises and electronically), as well as use of non-library information gateways such as Yahoo™ and Google™. Bars represent the frequency with which respondents report using these resources: Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, or Never. The table below the chart displays the number and percentage of respondents who selected each option.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
Quarterly
Never
How often do you use
resources on library
premises?
How often do you
access library resources
through a library Web
page?
How often do you use
Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or
non-library gateways for
information?
Frequency
P
erc
en
tag
e
Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never n / %
How often do you use resources on library
premises?
3,373
16.65%
7,820
38.60%
5,136
25.35%
3,156
15.58%
772
3.81%
20,257
100.00%
How often do you access library resources
through a library Web page?
4,870
24.04%
8,359
41.27%
4,290
21.18%
1,898
9.37%
839
4.14%
20,256
100.00%
How often do you use Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or non-library gateways for
information?
15,014
74.12%
3,783
18.68%
747
3.69%
335
1.65%
376
1.86%
20,255
100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Page 36 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
5 College or University Libraries Undergraduate Summary for ARL
5.1 Demographic Summary for Undergraduate
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Agriculture / Environmental Studies
Architecture
Business
Communications / Journalism
Education
Engineering / Computer Science
General Studies
Health Sciences
Humanities
Law
Military / Naval Science
Performing & Fine Arts
Science / Math
Social Sciences / Psychology
Undecided
Other
D
isc
ipli
ne
Percentage
Population Profile by Discipline
Respondent Profile by Discipline
5.1.1 Population and Respondent Profiles for Undergraduate by Discipline
The chart and table below show a breakdown of survey respondents by standard discipline, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section.
The chart maps percentage of respondents for each discipline in red. Population percentages for each discipline are mapped in blue. The table shows the number and percentage for each discipline, for both the general population (N) and survey respondents (n).
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 37 of 104
Military / Naval Science 20 0.19% 167 0.05% -0.15%
Performing & Fine Arts 284 2.76% 10,105 2.82% 0.06%
Science / Math 1,277 12.42% 41,467 11.56% -0.86%
Social Sciences / Psychology 1,410 13.71% 45,707 12.74% -0.97%
Undecided 343 3.33% 20,451 5.70% 2.37%
Other 348 3.38% 17,400 4.85% 1.47%
Total: 100.00% 358,738 10,285 100.00% 0.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
Page 38 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
5.1.2 Respondent Profile for Undergraduate by Age:
This table shows a breakdown of survey respondents by age; both the number of respondents (n) and the percentage of the total number of respondents represented by each age group are displayed.
Respondents
%
Respondents
nAge:
Under 18 48 0.47%
18 - 22 8,525 82.88%
23 - 30 1,213 11.79%
31 - 45 343 3.33%
46 - 65 148 1.44%
Over 65 9 0.09%
Total: 100.00% 10,286
5.1.3 Population and Respondent Profiles for Undergraduate by Sex:
The table below shows a breakdown of survey respondents by sex, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section*. The number and percentage for each sex are given for the general population and for survey respondents.
*Note: Participating institutions were not required to complete the Representativeness section. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided.
Respondents
%
Respondents
n
Population
%
Population
NSex:
Male 4,205 40.88%51.94% 321,440
Female 6,081 59.12%48.06% 297,422
Total: 100.00% 10,286 618,862 100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 39 of 104
5.2 Core Questions Summary for Undergraduate
This radar chart shows aggregate results for the core survey questions. Each axis represents one question. A code to identify each question is displayed at the outer point of each axis. While questions for each dimension of library service quality are scattered randomly throughout the survey, on this chart they are grouped into sections: Affect of Service , Library as Place, and Information Control.
On each axis, respondents' minimum, desired, and perceived levels of service quality are plotted, and the resulting "gaps" between the three levels (representing service adequacy and service superiority) are shaded in blue, yellow, green, and red.
The two following tables show mean scores and standard deviations for each question, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
AS-1
AS-2
AS-3
AS-4
AS-5AS-6
AS-7
AS-8
AS-9
IC-1
IC-2
IC-3
IC-4
IC-5
IC-6
IC-7IC-8
LP-1
LP-2
LP-3
LP-4
LP-5
Affect of Service
Information Control
Library as Place
Perceived Less Than Minimum
Perceived Greater Than Minimum
Perceived Less Than Desired
Perceived Greater Than Desired
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
Page 40 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion TextID
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Affect of Service
Employees who instill confidence in users 5.34 7.28 6.44 1.09AS-1 9,714-0.84
Employees who are consistently courteousAS-3 10,077 1.88 1.65 1.97 1.59 1.38
Readiness to respond to users' questionsAS-4 9,676 1.76 1.52 1.78 1.49 1.41
Employees who have the knowledge to answer
user questions
AS-5 9,693 1.78 1.54 1.80 1.48 1.35
Employees who deal with users in a caring
fashion
AS-6 9,755 1.88 1.58 1.86 1.52 1.43
Employees who understand the needs of their
users
AS-7 9,640 1.82 1.54 1.80 1.50 1.42
Willingness to help usersAS-8 9,748 1.84 1.53 1.81 1.51 1.43
Dependability in handling users' service problemsAS-9 8,798 1.78 1.53 1.77 1.48 1.40
Information Control
Making electronic resources accessible from my
home or office
IC-1 10,003 1.82 1.77 2.02 1.65 1.32
A library Web site enabling me to locate
information on my own
IC-2 10,138 1.78 1.71 1.95 1.59 1.31
The printed library materials I need for my workIC-3 9,430 1.84 1.60 1.89 1.51 1.47
The electronic information resources I needIC-4 9,962 1.73 1.54 1.82 1.44 1.33
Modern equipment that lets me easily access
needed information
IC-5 10,095 1.73 1.46 1.79 1.40 1.23
Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find
things on my own
IC-6 10,038 1.74 1.59 1.87 1.48 1.26
Making information easily accessible for
independent use
IC-7 9,983 1.72 1.50 1.82 1.42 1.25
Print and/or electronic journal collections I
require for my work
IC-8 9,417 1.81 1.64 1.96 1.53 1.34
Library as Place
Library space that inspires study and learningLP-1 10,184 1.84 1.99 2.18 1.74 1.39
Quiet space for individual activitiesLP-2 10,128 1.88 1.98 2.27 1.73 1.41
A comfortable and inviting locationLP-3 10,183 1.84 1.75 2.06 1.61 1.31
A getaway for study, learning, or researchLP-4 10,028 1.88 1.73 2.04 1.56 1.36
Community space for group learning and group
study
LP-5 9,796 1.96 2.04 2.29 1.72 1.56
10,286Overall: 1.41 1.12 1.41 1.11 0.98
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
Page 42 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
5.3 Core Question Dimensions Summary for Undergraduate
On the chart below, scores for each dimension of library service quality have been plotted graphically. The exterior bars represent the range of minimum to desired mean scores for each dimension. The interior bars represent the range of minimum to perceived mean scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimension of library service quality.
4
5
6
7
8
9
Information
Control
Affect of
Service
Library as
Place
Range of Minimum to Perceived ("Adequacy Gap")
Range of Minimum to Desired
Me
an
Dimension
Overall
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 43 of 104
The following table displays mean scores for each dimension of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+® survey, where n is the number of respondents for each particular dimension. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.) A complete listing of the survey questions and their dimensions can be found in Appendix A.
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanDimension
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Affect of Service 6.13 7.65 7.01 0.88 10,261-0.64
Information Control 6.53 8.03 7.19 0.66 10,286-0.84
Library as Place 6.35 7.96 7.04 0.69 10,272-0.92
6.33 7.86 7.08 0.75 10,286-0.78Overall:
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDDimension
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Affect of Service 10,261 1.90 1.60 1.84 1.60 1.52
Information Control 10,286 1.78 1.61 1.89 1.51 1.32
Library as Place 10,272 1.89 1.91 2.17 1.68 1.41
The following table displays standard deviation for each dimension of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+® survey, where n is the number of respondents for each particular dimension. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.) A complete listing of the survey questions and their dimensions can be found in Appendix A.
10,286Overall: 1.41 1.12 1.41 1.11 0.98
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
Page 44 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
5.4 Local Questions Summary for Undergraduate
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion Text
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Convenience of borrowing books from other colleges 5.73 7.73 6.93 1.20 881-0.81
Availability of online help when using my library's
electronic resources
5.62 7.40 6.55 0.93 792-0.85
An environment that facilitates group study and
problem solving
5.50 7.65 6.08 0.58 40-1.58
Ease of use of electronic resources 6.11 8.00 7.06 0.95 2,469-0.94
Providing help when and where I need it 6.11 7.79 6.99 0.88 379-0.79
Providing information that answers my questions 6.34 7.93 7.24 0.90 1,423-0.69
Access to rare and historical materials, particularly
those of LDS origin.
4.98 6.96 7.31 2.32 726 0.34
Convenient service hours 6.59 8.14 7.48 0.89 833-0.66
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.72 8.14 7.07 0.36 2,659-1.06
A center for intellectual stimulation 6.33 7.81 6.71 0.38 113-1.10
Access to archives, special collections 5.55 7.05 6.59 1.05 44-0.45
Browsing library materials in the stacks 5.77 7.23 6.84 1.07 1,694-0.39
Convenient business hours 6.76 8.35 7.48 0.72 923-0.87
Employees who appear to enjoy what they do 5.51 7.00 5.85 0.35 144-1.15
This table shows mean scores for each of the local questions added by the individual library or consortium, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 45 of 104
Enabling me to find information myself 24 hours a day 6.73 8.24 7.51 0.78 132-0.73
Access to rare and historical materials, particularly
those of LDS origin.
726 2.21 2.08 2.28 1.55 2.00
Convenient service hours 833 1.83 1.65 2.05 1.55 1.21
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 2,659 1.76 1.77 1.99 1.66 1.23
A center for intellectual stimulation 113 2.02 1.63 1.97 1.66 1.54
Access to archives, special collections 44 2.42 2.46 2.74 1.91 2.18
Browsing library materials in the stacks 1,694 2.01 1.80 1.99 1.63 1.75
Convenient business hours 923 1.67 1.52 1.98 1.43 1.08
Employees who appear to enjoy what they do 144 2.03 2.26 2.44 2.03 1.88
Enabling me to find information myself 24 hours a day 132 1.69 1.28 1.73 1.40 1.01
This table displays the standard deviation for each of the local questions added by the individual library or consortium , where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 47 of 104
Personalization features in the electronic library 111 2.23 1.92 1.83 1.93 2.04
Space for students to study and work in groups 1,744 1.88 1.82 2.15 1.60 1.44
Adequate hours of service 4,081 1.83 1.67 2.05 1.53 1.29
Librarians working with teams or individuals to fulfill
specialized knowledge requirements
89 1.94 1.76 1.95 1.61 1.73
Library staff providing help that assists in finding
information needed now while improving my research
skills
383 1.82 1.43 1.70 1.44 1.42
Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other
libraries
1,107 1.91 1.67 1.98 1.67 1.46
An online catalog that is user-friendly for finding
materials
2,250 1.74 1.72 2.00 1.55 1.33
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
Page 48 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
5.5 General Satisfaction Questions Summary for Undergraduate
MeanSatisfaction Question nSD
In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library. 7.49 10,286 1.48
In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research, and/or
teaching needs.
7.21 10,286 1.52
How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 7.35 10,286 1.28
This table displays mean score and standard deviation for each of the general satisfaction questions: Satisfaction with Treatment, Satisfaction with Support, and Satisfaction with Overall Quality of Service, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the general satisfaction questions on the LibQUAL+® survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9.
5.6 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary for Undergraduate
MeanInformation Literacy Outcomes Questions nSD
The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 6.06 10,286 1.77
The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline or work. 6.89 10,286 1.61
The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits or work. 7.08 10,286 1.61
The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy
information.
6.34 10,286 1.88
The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 6.60 10,286 1.73
This table displays the mean score and standard deviation for each of the information literacy outcomes questions, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the information literacy outcomes questions on the LibQUAL+® survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9 with 1 being "strongly disagree" and 9 representing "strongly agree".
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 49 of 104
5.7 Library Use Summary for Undergraduate
This chart shows a graphic representation of library use (both on the premises and electronically), as well as use of non-library information gateways such as Yahoo™ and Google™. Bars represent the frequency with which respondents report using these resources: Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, or Never. The table below the chart displays the number and percentage of respondents who selected each option.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
Quarterly
Never
How often do you use
resources on library
premises?
How often do you
access library resources
through a library Web
page?
How often do you use
Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or
non-library gateways for
information?
Frequency
P
erc
en
tag
e
Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never n / %
How often do you use resources on library
premises?
2,022
19.66%
4,391
42.69%
2,409
23.42%
1,213
11.79%
251
2.44%
10,286
100.00%
How often do you access library resources
through a library Web page?
1,111
10.80%
4,187
40.71%
3,066
29.81%
1,328
12.91%
594
5.77%
10,286
100.00%
How often do you use Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or non-library gateways for
information?
7,604
73.93%
1,984
19.29%
392
3.81%
145
1.41%
161
1.57%
10,286
100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Undergraduate
Page 50 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
6 College or University Libraries Graduate Summary for ARL
6.1 Demographic Summary for Graduate
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Agriculture / Environmental Studies
Architecture
Business
Communications / Journalism
Education
Engineering / Computer Science
General Studies
Health Sciences
Humanities
Law
Military / Naval Science
Performing & Fine Arts
Science / Math
Social Sciences / Psychology
Undecided
Other
D
isc
ipli
ne
Percentage
Population Profile by Discipline
Respondent Profile by Discipline
6.1.1 Population and Respondent Profiles for Graduate by Discipline
The chart and table below show a breakdown of survey respondents by standard discipline, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section.
The chart maps percentage of respondents for each discipline in red. Population percentages for each discipline are mapped in blue. The table shows the number and percentage for each discipline, for both the general population (N) and survey respondents (n).
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 51 of 104
Performing & Fine Arts 155 2.58% 4,877 4.45% 1.87%
Science / Math 840 13.98% 12,154 11.10% -2.88%
Social Sciences / Psychology 630 10.48% 9,877 9.02% -1.46%
Undecided 22 0.37% 251 0.23% -0.14%
Other 176 2.93% 3,031 2.77% -0.16%
Total: 100.00% 109,507 6,010 100.00% 0.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
Page 52 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
6.1.2 Respondent Profile for Graduate by Age:
This table shows a breakdown of survey respondents by age; both the number of respondents (n) and the percentage of the total number of respondents represented by each age group are displayed.
Respondents
%
Respondents
nAge:
18 - 22 357 5.94%
23 - 30 3,812 63.42%
31 - 45 1,423 23.67%
46 - 65 408 6.79%
Over 65 11 0.18%
Total: 100.00% 6,011
6.1.3 Population and Respondent Profiles for Graduate by Sex:
The table below shows a breakdown of survey respondents by sex, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section*. The number and percentage for each sex are given for the general population and for survey respondents.
*Note: Participating institutions were not required to complete the Representativeness section. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided.
Respondents
%
Respondents
n
Population
%
Population
NSex:
Male 2,797 46.55%51.94% 321,440
Female 3,212 53.45%48.06% 297,422
Total: 100.00% 6,009 618,862 100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 53 of 104
6.2 Core Questions Summary for Graduate
This radar chart shows aggregate results for the core survey questions. Each axis represents one question. A code to identify each question is displayed at the outer point of each axis. While questions for each dimension of library service quality are scattered randomly throughout the survey, on this chart they are grouped into sections: Affect of Service , Library as Place, and Information Control.
On each axis, respondents' minimum, desired, and perceived levels of service quality are plotted, and the resulting "gaps" between the three levels (representing service adequacy and service superiority) are shaded in blue, yellow, green, and red.
The two following tables show mean scores and standard deviations for each question, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
AS-1
AS-2
AS-3
AS-4
AS-5AS-6
AS-7
AS-8
AS-9
IC-1
IC-2
IC-3
IC-4
IC-5
IC-6
IC-7IC-8
LP-1
LP-2
LP-3
LP-4
LP-5
Affect of Service
Information Control
Library as Place
Perceived Less Than Minimum
Perceived Greater Than Minimum
Perceived Less Than Desired
Perceived Greater Than Desired
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
Page 54 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion TextID
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Affect of Service
Employees who instill confidence in users 5.72 7.54 6.70 0.97AS-1 5,621-0.84
Employees who are consistently courteousAS-3 5,846 1.79 1.64 1.93 1.52 1.27
Readiness to respond to users' questionsAS-4 5,700 1.64 1.47 1.75 1.42 1.23
Employees who have the knowledge to answer
user questions
AS-5 5,640 1.66 1.55 1.77 1.47 1.25
Employees who deal with users in a caring
fashion
AS-6 5,669 1.82 1.60 1.85 1.52 1.41
Employees who understand the needs of their
users
AS-7 5,580 1.72 1.54 1.75 1.45 1.32
Willingness to help usersAS-8 5,674 1.73 1.50 1.78 1.43 1.33
Dependability in handling users' service problemsAS-9 5,016 1.69 1.56 1.79 1.49 1.28
Information Control
Making electronic resources accessible from my
home or office
IC-1 5,934 1.68 1.71 2.00 1.60 1.02
A library Web site enabling me to locate
information on my own
IC-2 5,972 1.60 1.68 1.96 1.58 1.06
The printed library materials I need for my workIC-3 5,504 1.74 1.77 1.96 1.59 1.40
The electronic information resources I needIC-4 5,935 1.56 1.56 1.85 1.43 1.03
Modern equipment that lets me easily access
needed information
IC-5 5,817 1.58 1.52 1.76 1.42 1.09
Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find
things on my own
IC-6 5,882 1.58 1.52 1.80 1.42 1.08
Making information easily accessible for
independent use
IC-7 5,808 1.57 1.47 1.77 1.37 1.07
Print and/or electronic journal collections I
require for my work
IC-8 5,802 1.58 1.70 2.01 1.55 1.03
Library as Place
Library space that inspires study and learningLP-1 5,765 1.94 2.22 2.31 1.86 1.60
Quiet space for individual activitiesLP-2 5,608 1.95 2.22 2.41 1.81 1.62
A comfortable and inviting locationLP-3 5,785 1.84 1.95 2.16 1.70 1.41
A getaway for study, learning, or researchLP-4 5,626 1.91 1.93 2.08 1.64 1.55
Community space for group learning and group
study
LP-5 5,030 2.16 2.28 2.34 1.78 1.99
6,014Overall: 1.32 1.14 1.39 1.11 0.88
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
Page 56 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
6.3 Core Question Dimensions Summary for Graduate
On the chart below, scores for each dimension of library service quality have been plotted graphically. The exterior bars represent the range of minimum to desired mean scores for each dimension. The interior bars represent the range of minimum to perceived mean scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimension of library service quality.
4
5
6
7
8
9
Information
Control
Affect of
Service
Library as
Place
Range of Minimum to Perceived ("Adequacy Gap")
Range of Minimum to Desired
Me
an
Dimension
Overall
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 57 of 104
The following table displays mean scores for each dimension of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+® survey, where n is the number of respondents for each particular dimension. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.) A complete listing of the survey questions and their dimensions can be found in Appendix A.
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanDimension
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Affect of Service 6.42 7.83 7.19 0.77 5,997-0.64
Information Control 6.98 8.33 7.24 0.26 6,014-1.09
Library as Place 6.20 7.69 6.76 0.57 5,943-0.93
6.58 7.99 7.11 0.53 6,014-0.88Overall:
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDDimension
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Affect of Service 5,997 1.80 1.59 1.82 1.54 1.40
Information Control 6,014 1.62 1.62 1.90 1.50 1.11
Library as Place 5,943 1.97 2.14 2.27 1.77 1.66
The following table displays standard deviation for each dimension of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+® survey, where n is the number of respondents for each particular dimension. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.) A complete listing of the survey questions and their dimensions can be found in Appendix A.
6,014Overall: 1.32 1.14 1.39 1.11 0.88
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
Page 58 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
6.4 Local Questions Summary for Graduate
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion Text
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Convenience of borrowing books from other colleges 6.20 8.05 7.14 0.94 406-0.91
Availability of online help when using my library's
electronic resources
6.11 7.65 6.80 0.69 721-0.84
An environment that facilitates group study and
problem solving
5.28 7.03 6.08 0.80 75-0.95
Ease of use of electronic resources 6.65 8.20 7.16 0.51 1,782-1.04
Providing help when and where I need it 6.47 7.81 7.12 0.66 288-0.68
Providing information that answers my questions 6.86 8.04 7.35 0.49 1,115-0.69
Access to rare and historical materials, particularly
those of LDS origin.
4.59 6.34 7.26 2.67 276 0.92
Convenient service hours 6.98 8.23 7.43 0.46 771-0.80
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 7.02 8.38 6.97 -0.05 1,645-1.41
A center for intellectual stimulation 6.36 7.58 6.34 -0.02 109-1.24
Access to archives, special collections 6.10 7.68 6.89 0.79 62-0.79
Browsing library materials in the stacks 6.13 7.57 6.91 0.78 583-0.66
Convenient business hours 6.76 8.32 7.16 0.40 441-1.16
Employees who appear to enjoy what they do 6.00 6.50 7.00 1.00 2 0.50
This table shows mean scores for each of the local questions added by the individual library or consortium, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 59 of 104
Enabling me to find information myself 24 hours a day 7.10 8.46 7.62 0.51 183-0.84
Access to rare and historical materials, particularly
those of LDS origin.
276 2.31 2.43 2.44 1.52 2.35
Convenient service hours 771 1.71 1.74 1.96 1.55 1.27
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1,645 1.59 1.79 2.00 1.63 1.06
A center for intellectual stimulation 109 1.70 1.97 2.02 1.84 1.54
Access to archives, special collections 62 2.34 2.39 2.44 1.86 1.82
Browsing library materials in the stacks 583 1.91 1.78 1.94 1.59 1.62
Convenient business hours 441 1.73 1.82 2.12 1.65 1.09
Employees who appear to enjoy what they do 2 1.41 0.71 1.41 0.00 0.71
Enabling me to find information myself 24 hours a day 183 1.68 1.58 1.88 1.44 0.94
This table displays the standard deviation for each of the local questions added by the individual library or consortium , where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 61 of 104
Personalization features in the electronic library 133 2.05 1.93 1.99 1.95 1.87
Space for students to study and work in groups 1,246 2.10 1.95 2.10 1.60 1.90
Adequate hours of service 2,015 1.64 1.79 2.02 1.57 1.20
Librarians working with teams or individuals to fulfill
specialized knowledge requirements
87 2.03 1.79 2.08 1.58 1.77
Library staff providing help that assists in finding
information needed now while improving my research
skills
246 1.78 1.29 1.76 1.40 1.55
Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other
libraries
448 1.66 1.59 1.92 1.41 1.07
An online catalog that is user-friendly for finding
materials
1,124 1.53 1.70 1.94 1.59 0.93
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
Page 62 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
6.5 General Satisfaction Questions Summary for Graduate
MeanSatisfaction Question nSD
In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library. 7.52 6,012 1.49
In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research, and/or
teaching needs.
7.21 6,014 1.59
How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 7.34 6,014 1.33
This table displays mean score and standard deviation for each of the general satisfaction questions: Satisfaction with Treatment, Satisfaction with Support, and Satisfaction with Overall Quality of Service, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the general satisfaction questions on the LibQUAL+® survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9.
6.6 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary for Graduate
MeanInformation Literacy Outcomes Questions nSD
The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 6.38 6,014 1.90
The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline or work. 7.27 6,013 1.56
The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits or work. 7.24 6,014 1.62
The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy
information.
5.92 6,014 1.98
The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 6.53 6,014 1.81
This table displays the mean score and standard deviation for each of the information literacy outcomes questions, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the information literacy outcomes questions on the LibQUAL+® survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9 with 1 being "strongly disagree" and 9 representing "strongly agree".
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 63 of 104
6.7 Library Use Summary for Graduate
This chart shows a graphic representation of library use (both on the premises and electronically), as well as use of non-library information gateways such as Yahoo™ and Google™. Bars represent the frequency with which respondents report using these resources: Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, or Never. The table below the chart displays the number and percentage of respondents who selected each option.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
Quarterly
Never
How often do you use
resources on library
premises?
How often do you
access library resources
through a library Web
page?
How often do you use
Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or
non-library gateways for
information?
Frequency
P
erc
en
tag
e
Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never n / %
How often do you use resources on library
premises?
1,065
17.71%
2,326
38.68%
1,499
24.93%
895
14.88%
229
3.81%
6,014
100.00%
How often do you access library resources
through a library Web page?
2,228
37.05%
2,734
45.47%
747
12.42%
222
3.69%
82
1.36%
6,013
100.00%
How often do you use Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or non-library gateways for
information?
4,468
74.31%
1,080
17.96%
231
3.84%
116
1.93%
118
1.96%
6,013
100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Graduate
Page 64 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
7 College or University Libraries Faculty Summary for ARL
7.1 Demographic Summary for Faculty
0
4
8
12
16
20
24
28
Agriculture / Environmental Studies
Architecture
Business
Communications / Journalism
Education
Engineering / Computer Science
General Studies
Health Sciences
Humanities
Law
Military / Naval Science
Performing & Fine Arts
Science / Math
Social Sciences / Psychology
Undecided
Other
D
isc
ipli
ne
Percentage
Population Profile by Discipline
Respondent Profile by Discipline
7.1.1 Population and Respondent Profiles for Faculty by Discipline
The chart and table below show a breakdown of survey respondents by standard discipline, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section.
The chart maps percentage of respondents for each discipline in red. Population percentages for each discipline are mapped in blue. The table shows the number and percentage for each discipline, for both the general population (N) and survey respondents (n).
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 65 of 104
Performing & Fine Arts 138 4.70% 1,243 3.57% -1.14%
Science / Math 443 15.10% 4,304 12.35% -2.75%
Social Sciences / Psychology 417 14.21% 2,631 7.55% -6.66%
Undecided 10 0.34% 52 0.15% -0.19%
Other 118 4.02% 1,807 5.19% 1.16%
Total: 100.00% 34,843 2,934 100.00% 0.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
Page 66 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
7.1.2 Respondent Profile for Faculty by Age:
This table shows a breakdown of survey respondents by age; both the number of respondents (n) and the percentage of the total number of respondents represented by each age group are displayed.
Respondents
%
Respondents
nAge:
Under 18 3 0.10%
18 - 22 2 0.07%
23 - 30 130 4.42%
31 - 45 1,062 36.15%
46 - 65 1,505 51.23%
Over 65 236 8.03%
Total: 100.00% 2,938
7.1.3 Population and Respondent Profiles for Faculty by Sex:
The table below shows a breakdown of survey respondents by sex, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section*. The number and percentage for each sex are given for the general population and for survey respondents.
*Note: Participating institutions were not required to complete the Representativeness section. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided.
Respondents
%
Respondents
n
Population
%
Population
NSex:
Male 1,748 59.58%51.94% 321,440
Female 1,186 40.42%48.06% 297,422
Total: 100.00% 2,934 618,862 100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 67 of 104
7.2 Core Questions Summary for Faculty
This radar chart shows aggregate results for the core survey questions. Each axis represents one question. A code to identify each question is displayed at the outer point of each axis. While questions for each dimension of library service quality are scattered randomly throughout the survey, on this chart they are grouped into sections: Affect of Service , Library as Place, and Information Control.
On each axis, respondents' minimum, desired, and perceived levels of service quality are plotted, and the resulting "gaps" between the three levels (representing service adequacy and service superiority) are shaded in blue, yellow, green, and red.
The two following tables show mean scores and standard deviations for each question, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
AS-1
AS-2
AS-3
AS-4
AS-5AS-6
AS-7
AS-8
AS-9
IC-1
IC-2
IC-3
IC-4
IC-5
IC-6
IC-7IC-8
LP-1
LP-2
LP-3
LP-4
LP-5
Affect of Service
Information Control
Library as Place
Perceived Less Than Minimum
Perceived Greater Than Minimum
Perceived Less Than Desired
Perceived Greater Than Desired
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
Page 68 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion TextID
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Affect of Service
Employees who instill confidence in users 6.19 7.82 7.03 0.84AS-1 2,773-0.79
Employees who are consistently courteousAS-3 2,877 1.76 1.54 1.85 1.42 1.29
Readiness to respond to users' questionsAS-4 2,859 1.63 1.46 1.70 1.43 1.22
Employees who have the knowledge to answer
user questions
AS-5 2,802 1.60 1.61 1.79 1.50 1.19
Employees who deal with users in a caring
fashion
AS-6 2,773 1.83 1.57 1.78 1.48 1.50
Employees who understand the needs of their
users
AS-7 2,771 1.68 1.64 1.83 1.58 1.28
Willingness to help usersAS-8 2,799 1.71 1.49 1.74 1.43 1.31
Dependability in handling users' service problemsAS-9 2,540 1.63 1.60 1.82 1.53 1.24
Information Control
Making electronic resources accessible from my
home or office
IC-1 2,885 1.57 1.68 1.93 1.61 0.99
A library Web site enabling me to locate
information on my own
IC-2 2,906 1.51 1.73 1.98 1.66 0.95
The printed library materials I need for my workIC-3 2,718 1.79 1.99 2.16 1.72 1.49
The electronic information resources I needIC-4 2,895 1.47 1.62 1.85 1.49 1.01
Modern equipment that lets me easily access
needed information
IC-5 2,777 1.59 1.54 1.79 1.46 1.13
Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find
things on my own
IC-6 2,871 1.47 1.66 1.88 1.51 0.99
Making information easily accessible for
independent use
IC-7 2,804 1.49 1.56 1.80 1.45 1.01
Print and/or electronic journal collections I
require for my work
IC-8 2,848 1.48 1.79 2.05 1.68 0.94
Library as Place
Library space that inspires study and learningLP-1 2,570 2.08 2.46 2.48 1.92 1.92
Quiet space for individual activitiesLP-2 2,357 2.23 2.34 2.36 1.83 2.13
A comfortable and inviting locationLP-3 2,674 1.93 2.21 2.27 1.82 1.73
A getaway for study, learning, or researchLP-4 2,437 2.14 2.28 2.33 1.79 1.96
Community space for group learning and group
study
LP-5 1,909 2.32 2.51 2.41 1.90 2.37
2,939Overall: 1.29 1.20 1.41 1.16 0.90
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
Page 70 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
7.3 Core Question Dimensions Summary for Faculty
On the chart below, scores for each dimension of library service quality have been plotted graphically. The exterior bars represent the range of minimum to desired mean scores for each dimension. The interior bars represent the range of minimum to perceived mean scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimension of library service quality.
4
5
6
7
8
9
Information
Control
Affect of
Service
Library as
Place
Range of Minimum to Perceived ("Adequacy Gap")
Range of Minimum to Desired
Me
an
Dimension
Overall
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 71 of 104
The following table displays mean scores for each dimension of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+® survey, where n is the number of respondents for each particular dimension. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.) A complete listing of the survey questions and their dimensions can be found in Appendix A.
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanDimension
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Affect of Service 6.77 8.00 7.42 0.65 2,938-0.58
Information Control 7.25 8.40 7.18 -0.08 2,939-1.23
Library as Place 5.84 7.15 6.60 0.76 2,826-0.55
6.78 7.99 7.17 0.39 2,939-0.83Overall:
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDDimension
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Affect of Service 2,938 1.76 1.60 1.81 1.53 1.37
Information Control 2,939 1.56 1.71 1.94 1.58 1.09
Library as Place 2,826 2.16 2.37 2.38 1.86 2.05
The following table displays standard deviation for each dimension of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+® survey, where n is the number of respondents for each particular dimension. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.) A complete listing of the survey questions and their dimensions can be found in Appendix A.
2,939Overall: 1.29 1.20 1.41 1.16 0.90
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
Page 72 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
7.4 Local Questions Summary for Faculty
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion Text
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Convenience of borrowing books from other colleges 7.00 8.19 7.73 0.73 218-0.46
Availability of online help when using my library's
electronic resources
6.15 7.51 6.39 0.24 519-1.12
An environment that facilitates group study and
problem solving
4.83 5.79 6.11 1.28 53 0.32
Ease of use of electronic resources 6.79 8.24 7.01 0.22 466-1.23
Providing help when and where I need it 6.60 7.93 7.07 0.47 137-0.86
Providing information that answers my questions 7.75 8.75 8.50 0.75 4-0.25
Access to rare and historical materials, particularly
those of LDS origin.
5.12 6.37 7.10 1.98 246 0.73
Convenient service hours 6.68 7.93 7.23 0.56 627-0.70
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 7.26 8.45 6.88 -0.38 918-1.57
A center for intellectual stimulation 5.96 7.24 5.93 -0.04 80-1.31
Access to archives, special collections 5.97 7.32 6.54 0.57 196-0.78
Browsing library materials in the stacks 6.20 7.37 6.95 0.75 225-0.42
Convenient business hours 6.81 8.08 7.66 0.86 167-0.41
Employees who appear to enjoy what they do 6.33 7.22 7.11 0.78 9-0.11
This table shows mean scores for each of the local questions added by the individual library or consortium, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 73 of 104
Enabling me to find information myself 24 hours a day 7.29 8.26 7.73 0.43 99-0.54
Access to rare and historical materials, particularly
those of LDS origin.
246 2.46 2.54 2.61 1.71 2.54
Convenient service hours 627 1.79 1.84 2.10 1.56 1.43
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 918 1.51 1.89 2.14 1.70 0.98
A center for intellectual stimulation 80 2.12 2.35 1.75 2.23 1.94
Access to archives, special collections 196 2.18 2.46 2.66 1.78 1.84
Browsing library materials in the stacks 225 2.01 2.19 2.10 1.71 1.84
Convenient business hours 167 1.87 1.41 1.65 1.36 1.41
Employees who appear to enjoy what they do 9 2.55 2.26 1.92 2.09 2.59
Enabling me to find information myself 24 hours a day 99 1.63 1.55 1.60 1.31 1.31
This table displays the standard deviation for each of the local questions added by the individual library or consortium , where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 75 of 104
Personalization features in the electronic library 69 2.43 1.99 1.86 2.10 2.47
Space for students to study and work in groups 86 2.26 2.07 2.08 1.75 2.08
Adequate hours of service 446 1.60 1.99 2.11 1.62 1.37
Librarians working with teams or individuals to fulfill
specialized knowledge requirements
70 1.99 1.55 1.71 2.06 1.99
Library staff providing help that assists in finding
information needed now while improving my research
skills
104 1.72 1.19 1.47 1.29 1.48
Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other
libraries
351 1.60 1.47 1.78 1.48 0.99
An online catalog that is user-friendly for finding
materials
390 1.40 1.82 2.06 1.62 0.85
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
Page 76 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
7.5 General Satisfaction Questions Summary for Faculty
MeanSatisfaction Question nSD
In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library. 7.71 2,939 1.48
In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research, and/or
teaching needs.
7.21 2,939 1.76
How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 7.44 2,939 1.45
This table displays mean score and standard deviation for each of the general satisfaction questions: Satisfaction with Treatment, Satisfaction with Support, and Satisfaction with Overall Quality of Service, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the general satisfaction questions on the LibQUAL+® survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9.
7.6 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary for Faculty
MeanInformation Literacy Outcomes Questions nSD
The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 6.57 2,939 2.04
The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline or work. 7.22 2,938 1.78
The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits or work. 7.34 2,939 1.71
The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy
information.
5.68 2,934 2.20
The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 6.25 2,937 2.04
This table displays the mean score and standard deviation for each of the information literacy outcomes questions, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the information literacy outcomes questions on the LibQUAL+® survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9 with 1 being "strongly disagree" and 9 representing "strongly agree".
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 77 of 104
7.7 Library Use Summary for Faculty
This chart shows a graphic representation of library use (both on the premises and electronically), as well as use of non-library information gateways such as Yahoo™ and Google™. Bars represent the frequency with which respondents report using these resources: Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, or Never. The table below the chart displays the number and percentage of respondents who selected each option.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
Quarterly
Never
How often do you use
resources on library
premises?
How often do you
access library resources
through a library Web
page?
How often do you use
Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or
non-library gateways for
information?
Frequency
P
erc
en
tag
e
Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never n / %
How often do you use resources on library
premises?
240
8.17%
939
31.95%
935
31.81%
664
22.59%
161
5.48%
2,939
100.00%
How often do you access library resources
through a library Web page?
1,355
46.10%
1,114
37.90%
265
9.02%
135
4.59%
70
2.38%
2,939
100.00%
How often do you use Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or non-library gateways for
information?
2,202
74.95%
543
18.48%
82
2.79%
52
1.77%
59
2.01%
2,938
100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Faculty
Page 78 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
8 College or University Libraries Library Staff Summary for ARL
8.1 Demographic Summary for Library Staff
8.1.1 Respondent Profile for Library Staff by Age:
This table shows a breakdown of survey respondents by age; both the number of respondents (n) and the percentage of the total number of respondents represented by each age group are displayed.
Respondents
%
Respondents
nAge:
18 - 22 9 2.47%
23 - 30 42 11.51%
31 - 45 105 28.77%
46 - 65 204 55.89%
Over 65 5 1.37%
Total: 100.00% 365
8.1.2 Population and Respondent Profiles for Library Staff by Sex:
The table below shows a breakdown of survey respondents by sex, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section*. The number and percentage for each sex are given for the general population and for survey respondents.
*Note: Participating institutions were not required to complete the Representativeness section. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided.
Respondents
%
Respondents
n
Population
%
Population
NSex:
Male 116 31.78%51.94% 321,440
Female 249 68.22%48.06% 297,422
Total: 100.00% 365 618,862 100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 79 of 104
8.2 Core Questions Summary for Library Staff
This radar chart shows aggregate results for the core survey questions. Each axis represents one question. A code to identify each question is displayed at the outer point of each axis. While questions for each dimension of library service quality are scattered randomly throughout the survey, on this chart they are grouped into sections: Affect of Service , Library as Place, and Information Control.
On each axis, respondents' minimum, desired, and perceived levels of service quality are plotted, and the resulting "gaps" between the three levels (representing service adequacy and service superiority) are shaded in blue, yellow, green, and red.
The two following tables show mean scores and standard deviations for each question, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
AS-1
AS-2
AS-3
AS-4
AS-5AS-6
AS-7
AS-8
AS-9
IC-1
IC-2
IC-3
IC-4
IC-5
IC-6
IC-7IC-8
LP-1
LP-2
LP-3
LP-4
LP-5
Affect of Service
Information Control
Library as Place
Perceived Less Than Minimum
Perceived Greater Than Minimum
Perceived Less Than Desired
Perceived Greater Than Desired
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
Page 80 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion TextID
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Affect of Service
Employees who instill confidence in users 6.67 8.18 6.95 0.28AS-1 354-1.23
Employees who are consistently courteousAS-3 365 1.54 1.51 1.75 1.42 0.98
Readiness to respond to users' questionsAS-4 353 1.39 1.50 1.66 1.43 0.95
Employees who have the knowledge to answer
user questions
AS-5 355 1.40 1.56 1.76 1.45 0.93
Employees who deal with users in a caring
fashion
AS-6 360 1.59 1.54 1.78 1.46 1.14
Employees who understand the needs of their
users
AS-7 358 1.49 1.54 1.86 1.41 1.04
Willingness to help usersAS-8 358 1.45 1.42 1.68 1.35 0.99
Dependability in handling users' service problemsAS-9 336 1.53 1.61 1.75 1.44 1.06
Information Control
Making electronic resources accessible from my
home or office
IC-1 351 1.77 1.69 1.84 1.39 1.47
A library Web site enabling me to locate
information on my own
IC-2 363 1.46 1.92 2.05 1.72 1.08
The printed library materials I need for my workIC-3 342 1.55 1.53 1.80 1.37 1.19
The electronic information resources I needIC-4 349 1.49 1.51 1.60 1.23 1.25
Modern equipment that lets me easily access
needed information
IC-5 360 1.39 1.57 1.75 1.50 0.97
Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find
things on my own
IC-6 359 1.49 1.69 1.90 1.49 1.12
Making information easily accessible for
independent use
IC-7 359 1.40 1.62 1.71 1.40 1.14
Print and/or electronic journal collections I
require for my work
IC-8 329 1.47 1.54 1.63 1.40 1.23
Library as Place
Library space that inspires study and learningLP-1 351 1.70 2.08 2.23 1.81 1.26
Quiet space for individual activitiesLP-2 346 1.66 2.06 2.11 1.76 1.37
A comfortable and inviting locationLP-3 357 1.67 2.02 2.23 1.78 1.24
A getaway for study, learning, or researchLP-4 339 1.70 1.75 1.95 1.58 1.33
Community space for group learning and group
study
LP-5 299 1.96 2.38 2.35 1.83 1.91
366Overall: 1.20 1.14 1.33 1.08 0.80
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
Page 82 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
8.3 Core Question Dimensions Summary for Library Staff
On the chart below, scores for each dimension of library service quality have been plotted graphically. The exterior bars represent the range of minimum to desired mean scores for each dimension. The interior bars represent the range of minimum to perceived mean scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimension of library service quality.
4
5
6
7
8
9
Information
Control
Affect of
Service
Library as
Place
Range of Minimum to Perceived ("Adequacy Gap")
Range of Minimum to Desired
Me
an
Dimension
Overall
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 83 of 104
The following table displays mean scores for each dimension of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+® survey, where n is the number of respondents for each particular dimension. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.) A complete listing of the survey questions and their dimensions can be found in Appendix A.
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanDimension
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Affect of Service 7.08 8.25 7.30 0.22 366-0.95
Information Control 6.99 8.15 7.16 0.17 366-0.99
Library as Place 6.47 7.79 6.67 0.20 364-1.12
6.92 8.11 7.12 0.20 366-0.99Overall:
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDDimension
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Affect of Service 366 1.54 1.53 1.76 1.44 1.05
Information Control 366 1.51 1.67 1.81 1.46 1.19
Library as Place 364 1.76 2.08 2.19 1.76 1.46
The following table displays standard deviation for each dimension of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+® survey, where n is the number of respondents for each particular dimension. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.) A complete listing of the survey questions and their dimensions can be found in Appendix A.
366Overall: 1.20 1.14 1.33 1.08 0.80
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
Page 84 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
8.4 Local Questions Summary for Library Staff
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion Text
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Convenience of borrowing books from other colleges 5.50 7.75 7.50 2.00 4-0.25
Availability of online help when using my library's
electronic resources
6.20 7.80 6.57 0.37 35-1.23
An environment that facilitates group study and
problem solving
5.79 7.02 6.37 0.58 43-0.65
Ease of use of electronic resources 6.56 8.22 6.56 0.00 9-1.67
Providing help when and where I need it 6.43 7.73 6.84 0.41 37-0.89
Space for students to study and work in groups 5.80 6.84 6.80 1.00 44-0.05
Adequate hours of service 7.00 8.05 7.74 0.74 39-0.31
This table shows mean scores for each of the local questions added by the individual library or consortium, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 85 of 104
Librarians working with teams or individuals to fulfill
specialized knowledge requirements
6.52 8.04 6.81 0.30 27-1.22
Library staff providing help that assists in finding
information needed now while improving my research
skills
5.67 8.00 6.67 1.00 6-1.33
Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other
libraries
6.78 8.22 7.62 0.84 89-0.61
An online catalog that is user-friendly for finding
materials
7.00 9.00 7.00 0.00 1-2.00
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
Page 86 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDQuestion Text
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Convenience of borrowing books from other colleges 4 1.29 1.50 1.41 0.58 1.26
Availability of online help when using my library's
electronic resources
35 2.04 1.99 1.59 1.79 1.68
An environment that facilitates group study and
problem solving
43 1.86 1.66 1.93 1.54 1.65
Ease of use of electronic resources 9 1.13 1.80 2.40 1.51 1.09
Providing help when and where I need it 37 1.34 1.13 1.21 1.30 1.28
Space for students to study and work in groups 44 1.98 2.26 2.24 1.46 2.16
Adequate hours of service 39 1.85 1.47 1.96 1.48 1.23
This table displays the standard deviation for each of the local questions added by the individual library or consortium , where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 87 of 104
Librarians working with teams or individuals to fulfill
specialized knowledge requirements
27 1.37 1.45 1.59 1.27 1.02
Library staff providing help that assists in finding
information needed now while improving my research
skills
6 2.07 2.88 3.16 2.42 1.26
Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other
libraries
89 1.56 1.28 1.64 1.29 0.91
An online catalog that is user-friendly for finding
materials
1
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
Page 88 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
8.5 General Satisfaction Questions Summary for Library Staff
MeanSatisfaction Question nSD
In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library. 7.44 365 1.58
In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research, and/or
teaching needs.
7.30 365 1.60
How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 7.44 365 1.31
This table displays mean score and standard deviation for each of the general satisfaction questions: Satisfaction with Treatment, Satisfaction with Support, and Satisfaction with Overall Quality of Service, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the general satisfaction questions on the LibQUAL+® survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9.
8.6 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary for Library Staff
MeanInformation Literacy Outcomes Questions nSD
The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 6.71 365 1.69
The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline or work. 7.04 364 1.57
The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits or work. 7.12 364 1.51
The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy
information.
6.62 365 1.83
The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 6.88 365 1.61
This table displays the mean score and standard deviation for each of the information literacy outcomes questions, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the information literacy outcomes questions on the LibQUAL+® survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9 with 1 being "strongly disagree" and 9 representing "strongly agree".
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 89 of 104
8.7 Library Use Summary for Library Staff
This chart shows a graphic representation of library use (both on the premises and electronically), as well as use of non-library information gateways such as Yahoo™ and Google™. Bars represent the frequency with which respondents report using these resources: Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, or Never. The table below the chart displays the number and percentage of respondents who selected each option.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
Quarterly
Never
How often do you use
resources on library
premises?
How often do you
access library resources
through a library Web
page?
How often do you use
Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or
non-library gateways for
information?
Frequency
P
erc
en
tag
e
Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never n / %
How often do you use resources on library
premises?
240
65.75%
73
20.00%
37
10.14%
11
3.01%
4
1.10%
365
100.00%
How often do you access library resources
through a library Web page?
260
71.23%
80
21.92%
12
3.29%
7
1.92%
6
1.64%
365
100.00%
How often do you use Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or non-library gateways for
information?
296
81.10%
51
13.97%
9
2.47%
5
1.37%
4
1.10%
365
100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Library Staff
Page 90 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
9 College or University Libraries Staff Summary for ARL
9.1 Demographic Summary for Staff
9.1.1 Respondent Profile for Staff by Age:
This table shows a breakdown of survey respondents by age; both the number of respondents (n) and the percentage of the total number of respondents represented by each age group are displayed.
Respondents
%
Respondents
nAge:
18 - 22 13 1.28%
23 - 30 206 20.26%
31 - 45 375 36.87%
46 - 65 412 40.51%
Over 65 11 1.08%
Total: 100.00% 1,017
9.1.2 Population and Respondent Profiles for Staff by Sex:
The table below shows a breakdown of survey respondents by sex, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section*. The number and percentage for each sex are given for the general population and for survey respondents.
*Note: Participating institutions were not required to complete the Representativeness section. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided.
Respondents
%
Respondents
n
Population
%
Population
NSex:
Male 408 40.12%51.94% 321,440
Female 609 59.88%48.06% 297,422
Total: 100.00% 1,017 618,862 100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 91 of 104
9.2 Core Questions Summary for Staff
This radar chart shows aggregate results for the core survey questions. Each axis represents one question. A code to identify each question is displayed at the outer point of each axis. While questions for each dimension of library service quality are scattered randomly throughout the survey, on this chart they are grouped into sections: Affect of Service , Library as Place, and Information Control.
On each axis, respondents' minimum, desired, and perceived levels of service quality are plotted, and the resulting "gaps" between the three levels (representing service adequacy and service superiority) are shaded in blue, yellow, green, and red.
The two following tables show mean scores and standard deviations for each question, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
AS-1
AS-2
AS-3
AS-4
AS-5AS-6
AS-7
AS-8
AS-9
IC-1
IC-2
IC-3
IC-4
IC-5
IC-6
IC-7IC-8
LP-1
LP-2
LP-3
LP-4
LP-5
Affect of Service
Information Control
Library as Place
Perceived Less Than Minimum
Perceived Greater Than Minimum
Perceived Less Than Desired
Perceived Greater Than Desired
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
Page 92 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion TextID
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Affect of Service
Employees who instill confidence in users 6.24 7.69 6.81 0.57AS-1 957-0.88
Employees who are consistently courteousAS-3 992 1.59 1.49 1.76 1.45 1.16
Readiness to respond to users' questionsAS-4 967 1.57 1.42 1.61 1.44 1.21
Employees who have the knowledge to answer
user questions
AS-5 973 1.57 1.41 1.64 1.40 1.17
Employees who deal with users in a caring
fashion
AS-6 972 1.64 1.45 1.68 1.47 1.31
Employees who understand the needs of their
users
AS-7 966 1.61 1.48 1.68 1.45 1.23
Willingness to help usersAS-8 970 1.58 1.40 1.66 1.44 1.20
Dependability in handling users' service problemsAS-9 873 1.60 1.54 1.68 1.48 1.32
Information Control
Making electronic resources accessible from my
home or office
IC-1 973 1.70 1.71 1.85 1.68 1.27
A library Web site enabling me to locate
information on my own
IC-2 996 1.55 1.76 1.89 1.65 1.09
The printed library materials I need for my workIC-3 845 1.74 1.62 1.76 1.54 1.55
The electronic information resources I needIC-4 978 1.53 1.53 1.66 1.39 1.23
Modern equipment that lets me easily access
needed information
IC-5 955 1.59 1.40 1.61 1.40 1.23
Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find
things on my own
IC-6 995 1.46 1.59 1.77 1.50 1.13
Making information easily accessible for
independent use
IC-7 977 1.50 1.53 1.70 1.46 1.16
Print and/or electronic journal collections I
require for my work
IC-8 824 1.66 1.64 1.78 1.51 1.37
Library as Place
Library space that inspires study and learningLP-1 888 1.96 2.07 2.13 1.78 1.78
Quiet space for individual activitiesLP-2 829 2.01 1.93 2.02 1.67 1.74
A comfortable and inviting locationLP-3 936 1.78 1.82 1.97 1.65 1.48
A getaway for study, learning, or researchLP-4 842 1.91 1.76 1.91 1.62 1.68
Community space for group learning and group
study
LP-5 648 2.19 1.94 2.09 1.78 2.11
1,018Overall: 1.30 1.12 1.30 1.15 0.93
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
Page 94 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
9.3 Core Question Dimensions Summary for Staff
On the chart below, scores for each dimension of library service quality have been plotted graphically. The exterior bars represent the range of minimum to desired mean scores for each dimension. The interior bars represent the range of minimum to perceived mean scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimension of library service quality.
4
5
6
7
8
9
Information
Control
Affect of
Service
Library as
Place
Range of Minimum to Perceived ("Adequacy Gap")
Range of Minimum to Desired
Me
an
Dimension
Overall
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 95 of 104
The following table displays mean scores for each dimension of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+® survey, where n is the number of respondents for each particular dimension. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.) A complete listing of the survey questions and their dimensions can be found in Appendix A.
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanDimension
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Affect of Service 6.83 7.93 7.27 0.44 1,016-0.66
Information Control 7.04 8.17 7.18 0.14 1,017-0.99
Library as Place 6.32 7.49 6.86 0.54 972-0.62
6.82 7.94 7.17 0.34 1,018-0.77Overall:
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDDimension
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Affect of Service 1,016 1.67 1.50 1.69 1.51 1.32
Information Control 1,017 1.60 1.61 1.76 1.52 1.26
Library as Place 972 1.98 1.91 2.03 1.71 1.77
The following table displays standard deviation for each dimension of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+® survey, where n is the number of respondents for each particular dimension. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.) A complete listing of the survey questions and their dimensions can be found in Appendix A.
1,018Overall: 1.30 1.12 1.30 1.15 0.93
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
Page 96 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
9.4 Local Questions Summary for Staff
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion Text
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Convenience of borrowing books from other colleges 6.65 8.17 7.22 0.57 23-0.96
Availability of online help when using my library's
electronic resources
6.42 7.56 6.67 0.26 393-0.89
An environment that facilitates group study and
problem solving
5.46 6.62 5.62 0.15 13-1.00
Ease of use of electronic resources 7.15 8.20 7.32 0.18 74-0.88
Providing help when and where I need it 6.60 7.90 7.02 0.42 125-0.87
Providing information that answers my questions 7.25 8.33 7.42 0.17 12-0.92
Access to rare and historical materials, particularly
those of LDS origin.
7.67 8.00 7.67 0.00 3-0.33
Convenient service hours 6.93 7.98 7.42 0.48 349-0.56
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.99 8.33 7.01 0.02 137-1.32
A center for intellectual stimulation 6.21 7.71 6.91 0.70 77-0.81
Access to archives, special collections 6.03 7.34 7.09 1.06 238-0.25
Browsing library materials in the stacks 6.40 7.60 6.80 0.40 15-0.80
Convenient business hours 6.53 7.95 7.58 1.05 19-0.37
Employees who appear to enjoy what they do 5.83 7.83 6.33 0.50 6-1.50
This table shows mean scores for each of the local questions added by the individual library or consortium, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 97 of 104
Enabling me to find information myself 24 hours a day 7.42 8.26 7.47 0.05 62-0.79
Access to rare and historical materials, particularly
those of LDS origin.
3 1.53 0.58 0.00 1.53 1.00
Convenient service hours 349 1.59 1.66 1.88 1.53 1.36
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 137 1.62 1.59 1.77 1.52 1.04
A center for intellectual stimulation 77 2.02 1.90 1.97 1.61 1.70
Access to archives, special collections 238 1.98 1.81 2.04 1.48 1.58
Browsing library materials in the stacks 15 2.32 2.37 1.45 2.04 1.80
Convenient business hours 19 1.74 1.16 1.31 1.12 1.31
Employees who appear to enjoy what they do 6 2.32 1.52 0.84 2.34 1.17
Enabling me to find information myself 24 hours a day 62 1.54 1.34 1.68 1.36 1.19
This table displays the standard deviation for each of the local questions added by the individual library or consortium , where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 99 of 104
Personalization features in the electronic library 44 2.09 1.86 1.73 1.83 2.16
Space for students to study and work in groups 16 1.82 1.50 1.54 1.29 1.78
Adequate hours of service 217 1.67 1.66 1.81 1.56 1.47
Librarians working with teams or individuals to fulfill
specialized knowledge requirements
67 2.11 1.71 1.77 1.46 1.69
Library staff providing help that assists in finding
information needed now while improving my research
skills
43 1.53 1.48 1.83 1.55 1.30
Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other
libraries
26 1.58 1.29 1.25 1.57 1.48
An online catalog that is user-friendly for finding
materials
20 1.73 1.69 1.37 1.32 1.35
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
Page 100 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
9.5 General Satisfaction Questions Summary for Staff
MeanSatisfaction Question nSD
In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library. 7.48 1,017 1.45
In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research, and/or
teaching needs.
7.14 1,016 1.58
How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 7.36 1,018 1.30
This table displays mean score and standard deviation for each of the general satisfaction questions: Satisfaction with Treatment, Satisfaction with Support, and Satisfaction with Overall Quality of Service, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the general satisfaction questions on the LibQUAL+® survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9.
9.6 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary for Staff
MeanInformation Literacy Outcomes Questions nSD
The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 6.36 1,017 1.87
The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline or work. 6.80 1,017 1.78
The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits or work. 6.89 1,017 1.74
The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy
information.
6.14 1,017 1.87
The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 6.45 1,017 1.83
This table displays the mean score and standard deviation for each of the information literacy outcomes questions, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the information literacy outcomes questions on the LibQUAL+® survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9 with 1 being "strongly disagree" and 9 representing "strongly agree".
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 101 of 104
9.7 Library Use Summary for Staff
This chart shows a graphic representation of library use (both on the premises and electronically), as well as use of non-library information gateways such as Yahoo™ and Google™. Bars represent the frequency with which respondents report using these resources: Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, or Never. The table below the chart displays the number and percentage of respondents who selected each option.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
Quarterly
Never
How often do you use
resources on library
premises?
How often do you
access library resources
through a library Web
page?
How often do you use
Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or
non-library gateways for
information?
Frequency
P
erc
en
tag
e
Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never n / %
How often do you use resources on library
premises?
46
4.52%
164
16.11%
293
28.78%
384
37.72%
131
12.87%
1,018
100.00%
How often do you access library resources
through a library Web page?
176
17.29%
324
31.83%
212
20.83%
213
20.92%
93
9.14%
1,018
100.00%
How often do you use Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or non-library gateways for
information?
740
72.69%
176
17.29%
42
4.13%
22
2.16%
38
3.73%
1,018
100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
ARL
Staff
Page 102 of 104 LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL
10 Appendix A: LibQUAL+® Dimensions
LibQUAL+® measures dimensions of perceived library quality---that is, each survey question is part of a broader
category (a dimension), and scores within those categories are analyzed in order to derive more general information
about library users' perceptions of service. These dimensions were first based on the original SERVQUAL survey
instrument (the framework for the LibQUAL+® survey tool; for more information on the origins of LibQUAL+®, go
to <http://www.libqual.org/Publications/>). The LibQUAL+® survey dimensions have evolved with each iteration,
becoming more refined and focused for application to the library context. Dimensions for each iteration of the
LibQUAL+® survey are outlined below.
LibQUAL+® 2000 Dimensions
The 2000 iteration of the LibQUAL+® survey, which had 41 questions, measured eight separate dimensions:
· Assurance (the knowledge and courtesy of employees, and their ability to convey trust and confidence)
· Empathy (caring, individual attention)
· Library as Place (library as a sanctuary/haven or site for learning and contemplation)
· Reliability (ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately)
· Responsiveness (willingness to help customers and provide prompt service)
· Tangibles (appearance of physical facilities, equipment, personnel and communications materials)
· Instructions/Custom Items
· Self-Reliance
LibQUAL+® 2001 Dimensions
After careful analysis of the results from the 2000 survey, the dimensions were further refined to re-ground the
SERVQUAL items in the library context. Four sub-dimensions resulted for the 2001 iteration:
· Service Affect (nine items, such as “willingness to help users”)
· Library as Place (five items, such as “a haven for quiet and solitude”)
· Personal Control (six items, such as “website enabling me to locate information on my own”), and
· Information Access (five items, such as “comprehensive print collections” and “convenient business hours”)
LibQUAL+® 2002 and 2003 Dimensions
For the 2002 iteration of the LibQUAL+® survey, the dimensions were once again refined based on analysis of the
previous year's results. While the four dimensions were retained, their titles were changed slightly to more clearly
represent the questions and data. The same four dimensions were also used on the 2003 survey:
· Access to Information
· Affect of Service
· Library as Place
· Personal Control
LibQUAL+® 2004 - 2008 Dimensions
After the 2003 survey was completed, factor and reliability analyses on the resulting data revealed that two of the
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
All
ARL
All
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
All
ARL
All
LibQUAL+® 2008 Survey Results - ARL Page 103 of 104
dimensions measured by the survey-Access to Information and Personal Control-had collapsed into one. The
following three dimensions have been measured since then: Affect of Service, Information Control, and Library as
Place. In addition, three core items were eliminated from the 2003 version of the survey, leaving 22 core items on the
final survey instrument.
The list below displays the dimensions used to present the results in the 2008 notebooks, along with the questions
that relate to each dimension. (Note: The questions below are those used in the College and University
implementation of the survey, American English version.)
Affect of Service
[AS-1] Employees who instill confidence in users
[AS-2] Giving users individual attention
[AS-3] Employees who are consistently courteous
[AS-4] Readiness to respond to users’ questions
[AS-5] Employees who have the knowledge to answer user questions
[AS-6] Employees who deal with users in a caring fashion
[AS-7] Employees who understand the needs of their users
[AS-8] Willingness to help users
[AS-9] Dependability in handling users’ service problems
Information Control
[IC-1] Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office
[IC-2] A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own
[IC-3] The printed library materials I need for my work
[IC-4] The electronic information resources I need
[IC-5] Modern equipment that lets me easily access needed information
[IC-6] Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my own
[IC-7] Making information easily accessible for independent use
[IC-8] Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work
Library as Place
[LP-1] Library space that inspires study and learning
[LP-2] Quiet space for individual activities
[LP-3] A comfortable and inviting location
[LP-4] A getaway for study, learning or research
[LP-5] Community space for group learning and group study