Columbia University in the City of New York Association of Research Libraries / Texas A&M University www.libqual.org Language: Institution Type: Consortium: User Group: American English College or University None All Language: Institution Type: Consortium: User Group: American English College or University None All
100
Embed
Columbia University in the City of New York · Columbia University in the City of New York Association of Research Libraries / Texas A&M University Contributors Colleen Cook MaShana
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
Columbia University in the City of New
York
Association of Research Libraries / Texas A&M University
www.libqual.org
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All
Columbia University in the City of New
York
Association of Research Libraries / Texas A&M University
www.libqual.org
Contributors
Colleen Cook MaShana DavisTexas A&M University Association of Research Libraries
Fred Heath Martha KyrillidouUniversity of Texas Association of Research Libraries
Bruce Thompson 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., Colleen C. Cook, and Kyrillidou, M. (2005). Concurrent validity of LibQUAL+® scores: What do
LibQUAL+® scores measure? Journal of Academic Librarianship, 31: 517-22.
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.
Thompson, B., Colleen C. Cook, and Martha Kyrillidou. “On-premises Library versus Google™-Like Information
Gateway Usage Patterns: A LibQUAL+® Study.” portal: Libraries and the Academy 7 (4) (Oct 2007a):
463-480.
Thompson, B., Colleen C. Cook, and Martha Kyrillidou. “User library service expectations in health science vs.
other settings: a LibQUAL+® Study.” Health Information and Libraries Journal 24 (8) Supplement 1,
(Dec 2007b): 38-45.
Thompson, B., Colleen C. Cook, and Martha Kyrillidou. “Library Users Service Desires: a LibQUAL+® Study.”
Library Quarterly 78 (1) (Jan 2008): 1-18.
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
College or University
None
All
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All
Page 20 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
1.7 Library Statistics for CUL
The statistical data below were provided by the participating institution in the online Representativeness* section. Definitions for these items can be found in the ARL Statistics: <http://www.arl.org/stats/>.
Note: Participating institutions were not required to complete the Representativeness section. When statistical data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided.
10,296,816
547,346
133,831
328
246
Volumes held June 30, 2007:
Volumes added during year - Gross:
Total number of current serials received:
Total library expenditures (in USD):
Personnel - professional staff, FTE:
Personnel - support staff, FTE:
$61,949,877
1.8 Contact Information for CUL
The person below served as the institution's primary LibQUAL+® liaison during this survey implementation.
The chart and table below show a breakdown of survey respondents by sub-group (e.g. First year, Masters, Professor), based on user responses to the demographic questions at the end of the survey instrument and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section*.
The chart maps the 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 the general population (N) and for 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.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
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
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff, Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff, Staff)
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 23 of 95
Respondents
nUser Sub-Group
Respondents
%
Population
N
Population
% %N - %n
255 7.36% 1,445 6.29%First year (Undergraduate) -1.06%
289 8.34% 1,580 6.88%Second year (Undergraduate) -1.46%
387 11.17% 1,907 8.31%Third year (Undergraduate) -2.86%
367 10.59% 1,977 8.61%Fourth year (Undergraduate) -1.98%
39 1.13% 483 2.10%Fifth year and above (Undergraduate) 0.98%
69 1.99% 2,033 8.85%Non-degree or Undecided (Graduate) 6.86%
40 1.15% 581 2.53%Adjunct Faculty (Faculty) 1.38%
31 0.89% 250 1.09%Assistant Professor (Faculty) 0.19%
35 1.01% 209 0.91%Associate Professor (Faculty) -0.10%
39 1.13% 331 1.44%Lecturer (Faculty) 0.32%
55 1.59% 598 2.60%Professor (Faculty) 1.02%
35 1.01% 879 3.83%Other Academic Status (Faculty) 2.82%
Total: 100.00% 22,960 3,466 100.00% 0.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff, Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff, Staff)
Page 24 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
The chart and table below show a breakdown of survey respondents by discipline, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section*.
This section shows survey respondents broken down based on the LibQUAL+® standard discipline categories. 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 the general population (N) and for 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.
2.3 Population and Respondents by Standard Discipline
Performing & Fine Arts 201 5.80% 1,357 7.34% 1.54%
Science / Math 412 11.89% 1,786 9.66% -2.23%
Social Sciences / Psychology 890 25.68% 4,470 24.18% -1.50%
Undecided 95 2.74% 0 0.00% -2.74%
Total: 100.00% 18,486 3,466 100.00% 0.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff, Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff, Staff)
Page 26 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
2.4 Population and Respondents by Customized Discipline
The chart and table below show a breakdown of survey respondents by discipline, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section*.
This section shows survey respondents broken down based on the customized discipline categories supplied by the participating library. 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 the general population (N) and for 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.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Architecture
Business
Computer Science
Education
Engineering
Fine Arts
General Studies
Health Sciences
History
Humanities
International & Public Affairs
Journalism
Law
Math
Other
Performing Arts
Psychology
Public Health
Sciences
Social Sciences
Social Work
Theology
Undecided
D
isc
ipli
ne
Percentage
Population Profile by Discipline
Respondent Profile by Discipline
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff, Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff, Staff)
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 27 of 95
Respondents
nDiscipline
Respondents
%
Population
N
Population
% %N - %n
Architecture 138 3.98% 879 4.75% 0.77%
Business 264 7.62% 2,320 12.55% 4.93%
Computer Science 61 1.76% 455 2.46% 0.70%
Education 13 0.38% 0 0.00% -0.38%
Engineering 415 11.97% 2,811 15.21% 3.23%
Fine Arts 160 4.62% 754 4.08% -0.54%
General Studies 71 2.05% 1,387 7.50% 5.45%
Health Sciences 52 1.50% 0 0.00% -1.50%
History 186 5.37% 449 2.43% -2.94%
Humanities 403 11.63% 1,749 9.46% -2.17%
International & Public Affairs 262 7.56% 1,441 7.80% 0.24%
Journalism 42 1.21% 498 2.69% 1.48%
Law 13 0.38% 0 0.00% -0.38%
Math 73 2.11% 256 1.38% -0.72%
Other 168 4.85% 0 0.00% -4.85%
Performing Arts 41 1.18% 603 3.26% 2.08%
Psychology 70 2.02% 236 1.28% -0.74%
Public Health 11 0.32% 0 0.00% -0.32%
Sciences 339 9.78% 1,530 8.28% -1.50%
Social Sciences 360 10.39% 1,780 9.63% -0.76%
Social Work 198 5.71% 1,013 5.48% -0.23%
Theology 31 0.89% 325 1.76% 0.86%
Undecided 95 2.74% 0 0.00% -2.74%
Total: 100.00% 18,486 3,466 100.00% 0.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff, Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff, Staff)
Page 28 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
2.5 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 4 0.11%
18 - 22 1,180 33.02%
23 - 30 1,624 45.44%
31 - 45 570 15.95%
46 - 65 159 4.45%
Over 65 37 1.04%
Total: 100.00% 3,574
2.6 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 1,807 50.56%53.50% 12,561
Female 1,767 49.44%46.50% 10,917
Total: 100.00% 3,574100.00% 23,478
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff)
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 29 of 95
This radar chart shows the 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, Information Control, and Library as Place.
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 or service superiority) are shaded in blue, yellow, green, and red.
The following two 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.)
3.1 Core Questions Summary
3 Survey Item Summary for CUL
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
None
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Page 30 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion TextID
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Affect of Service
Employees who instill confidence in users 5.36 7.34 6.15 0.79AS-1 3,330-1.19
Employees who are consistently courteousAS-3 3,491 1.83 1.98 2.17 1.82 1.41
Readiness to respond to users' questionsAS-4 3,316 1.71 1.65 1.82 1.61 1.40
Employees who have the knowledge to answer
user questions
AS-5 3,339 1.72 1.65 1.85 1.60 1.38
Employees who deal with users in a caring
fashion
AS-6 3,318 1.85 1.89 2.04 1.73 1.54
Employees who understand the needs of their
users
AS-7 3,249 1.72 1.68 1.87 1.61 1.43
Willingness to help usersAS-8 3,310 1.78 1.70 1.88 1.63 1.45
Dependability in handling users' service problemsAS-9 2,781 1.78 1.79 1.93 1.65 1.50
Information Control
Making electronic resources accessible from my
home or office
IC-1 3,527 1.76 1.75 1.93 1.67 1.20
A library Web site enabling me to locate
information on my own
IC-2 3,523 1.66 1.67 1.89 1.61 1.25
The printed library materials I need for my workIC-3 3,270 1.77 1.75 1.95 1.59 1.45
The electronic information resources I needIC-4 3,487 1.65 1.54 1.82 1.50 1.21
Modern equipment that lets me easily access
needed information
IC-5 3,472 1.65 1.67 1.90 1.56 1.24
Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find
things on my own
IC-6 3,469 1.63 1.66 1.92 1.54 1.21
Making information easily accessible for
independent use
IC-7 3,415 1.64 1.58 1.82 1.50 1.26
Print and/or electronic journal collections I
require for my work
IC-8 3,346 1.68 1.66 1.95 1.60 1.24
Library as Place
Library space that inspires study and learningLP-1 3,514 1.83 2.14 2.36 1.88 1.41
Quiet space for individual activitiesLP-2 3,448 1.87 2.22 2.37 1.93 1.49
A comfortable and inviting locationLP-3 3,508 1.79 2.08 2.29 1.84 1.40
A getaway for study, learning, or researchLP-4 3,406 1.85 1.93 2.15 1.72 1.47
Community space for group learning and group
study
LP-5 3,153 2.10 2.52 2.57 1.96 1.92
3,575Overall: 1.31 1.20 1.41 1.18 0.96
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Page 32 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
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.
3.2 Core Question Dimensions Summary
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
None
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff)
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 33 of 95
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 5.99 7.59 6.55 0.56 3,558-1.04
Information Control 6.69 8.18 6.93 0.24 3,574-1.25
Library as Place 6.19 7.87 6.35 0.16 3,558-1.52
6.31 7.89 6.65 0.34 3,575-1.24Overall:
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDDimension
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Affect of Service 3,558 1.47 1.40 1.54 1.37 1.19
Information Control 3,574 1.35 1.22 1.46 1.20 0.96
Library as Place 3,558 1.54 1.72 1.89 1.51 1.21
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.
3,575Overall: 1.31 1.20 1.41 1.18 0.96
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Page 34 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
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.)
3.3 Local Questions Summary
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion Text
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Providing help when and where I need it 6.09 7.75 6.66 0.57 3,441-1.09
Making me aware of library services 5.58 7.26 6.02 0.44 3,429-1.24
Availability of subject specialist assistance 5.73 7.33 6.26 0.53 2,766-1.07
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.75 8.24 6.77 0.02 3,506-1.48
Access to archives, special collections 5.75 7.40 6.64 0.89 2,631-0.76
This table displays the standard deviations for each of the local questions added by the individual library or consortium, where n is the number of respondents for each question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDQuestion Text
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Providing help when and where I need it 3,441 1.69 1.68 1.80 1.57 1.41
Making me aware of library services 3,429 1.90 2.08 2.15 1.77 1.68
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 3,506 1.65 1.78 2.03 1.65 1.16
Access to archives, special collections 2,631 2.06 1.98 2.12 1.67 1.81
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff)
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 35 of 95
This table displays the 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 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.
3.4 General Satisfaction Questions Summary
MeanSatisfaction Question nSD
In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library. 6.86 3,574 1.75
In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research, and/or
teaching needs.
6.78 3,575 1.67
How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 6.94 3,575 1.44
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 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".
3.5 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary
MeanInformation Literacy Outcomes Questions nSD
The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 5.82 3,575 1.96
The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline or work. 6.86 3,575 1.69
The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits or work. 6.91 3,575 1.72
The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy
information.
5.70 3,575 1.96
The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 6.14 3,575 1.87
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Page 36 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
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.
3.6 Library Use Summary
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?
909
25.43%
1,551
43.38%
696
19.47%
343
9.59%
76
2.13%
3,575
100.00%
How often do you access library resources
through a library Web page?
1,095
30.63%
1,579
44.17%
605
16.92%
211
5.90%
85
2.38%
3,575
100.00%
How often do you use Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or non-library gateways for
information?
3,003
84.00%
368
10.29%
101
2.83%
33
0.92%
70
1.96%
3,575
100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excluding Library Staff)
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 37 of 95
4 Undergraduate Summary
4.1 Demographic Summary for Undergraduate
4.1.1 Population and Respondent Profiles for Undergraduate by Standard Discipline
The chart and table below show a breakdown of survey respondents by discipline, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section.
This section shows survey respondents broken down based on the LibQUAL+® standard discipline categories. 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 the general population (N) and for survey
Social Sciences / Psychology 287 20.69% 1,008 22.05% 1.36%
Undecided 94 6.78% 0 0.00% -6.78%
Total: 100.00% 4,572 1,387 100.00% 0.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 39 of 95
4.1.2 Population and Respondent Profiles for Undergraduate by Customized Discipline
The chart and table below show a breakdown of survey respondents by discipline, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section.
This section shows survey respondents broken down based on the customized discipline categories supplied by the participating library. 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 the general population (N) and for survey respondents (n).
0
4
8
12
16
20
24
28
32
Architecture
Business
Computer Science
Education
Engineering
Fine Arts
General Studies
Health Sciences
History
Humanities
International & Public Affairs
Journalism
Law
Math
Other
Performing Arts
Psychology
Public Health
Sciences
Social Sciences
Social Work
Theology
Undecided
D
isc
ipli
ne
Percentage
Population Profile by Discipline
Respondent Profile by Discipline
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
Page 40 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
Respondents
nDiscipline
Respondents
%
Population
N
Population
% %N - %n
Architecture 21 1.51% 6 0.13% -1.38%
Business 29 2.09% 0 0.00% -2.09%
Computer Science 25 1.80% 123 2.69% 0.89%
Education 3 0.22% 0 0.00% -0.22%
Engineering 241 17.38% 1,333 29.16% 11.78%
Fine Arts 41 2.96% 146 3.19% 0.24%
General Studies 57 4.11% 818 17.89% 13.78%
Health Sciences 28 2.02% 0 0.00% -2.02%
History 98 7.07% 236 5.16% -1.90%
Humanities 163 11.75% 483 10.56% -1.19%
International & Public Affairs 27 1.95% 0 0.00% -1.95%
Journalism 3 0.22% 0 0.00% -0.22%
Law 3 0.22% 0 0.00% -0.22%
Math 37 2.67% 70 1.53% -1.14%
Other 75 5.41% 0 0.00% -5.41%
Performing Arts 14 1.01% 18 0.39% -0.62%
Psychology 58 4.18% 156 3.41% -0.77%
Public Health 1 0.07% 0 0.00% -0.07%
Sciences 164 11.82% 331 7.24% -4.58%
Social Sciences 201 14.49% 852 18.64% 4.14%
Social Work 1 0.07% 0 0.00% -0.07%
Theology 3 0.22% 0 0.00% -0.22%
Undecided 94 6.78% 0 0.00% -6.78%
Total: 100.00% 4,572 1,387 100.00% 0.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 41 of 95
4.1.3 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 4 0.29%
18 - 22 1,103 79.52%
23 - 30 197 14.20%
31 - 45 61 4.40%
46 - 65 18 1.30%
Over 65 4 0.29%
Total: 100.00% 1,387
4.1.4 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 707 50.97%51.44% 3,816
Female 680 49.03%48.56% 3,602
Total: 100.00% 1,387 7,418 100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
Page 42 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
4.2 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 or 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
None
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 43 of 95
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion TextID
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Affect of Service
Employees who instill confidence in users 5.13 7.23 6.03 0.90AS-1 1,275-1.19
Employees who are consistently courteousAS-3 1,349 1.84 1.83 2.04 1.69 1.44
Readiness to respond to users' questionsAS-4 1,272 1.72 1.70 1.86 1.63 1.46
Employees who have the knowledge to answer
user questions
AS-5 1,281 1.71 1.70 1.83 1.60 1.40
Employees who deal with users in a caring
fashion
AS-6 1,273 1.84 1.81 1.96 1.65 1.57
Employees who understand the needs of their
users
AS-7 1,248 1.74 1.66 1.86 1.56 1.44
Willingness to help usersAS-8 1,279 1.78 1.65 1.81 1.57 1.48
Dependability in handling users' service problemsAS-9 1,072 1.79 1.90 1.96 1.68 1.60
Information Control
Making electronic resources accessible from my
home or office
IC-1 1,364 1.78 1.80 1.96 1.66 1.29
A library Web site enabling me to locate
information on my own
IC-2 1,364 1.68 1.67 1.89 1.60 1.30
The printed library materials I need for my workIC-3 1,273 1.75 1.77 1.99 1.60 1.42
The electronic information resources I needIC-4 1,339 1.69 1.60 1.86 1.53 1.31
Modern equipment that lets me easily access
needed information
IC-5 1,351 1.67 1.66 1.89 1.52 1.26
Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find
things on my own
IC-6 1,336 1.66 1.73 1.95 1.55 1.26
Making information easily accessible for
independent use
IC-7 1,324 1.66 1.63 1.84 1.50 1.32
Print and/or electronic journal collections I
require for my work
IC-8 1,274 1.76 1.68 1.99 1.60 1.34
Library as Place
Library space that inspires study and learningLP-1 1,380 1.82 1.99 2.24 1.75 1.39
Quiet space for individual activitiesLP-2 1,359 1.83 2.04 2.24 1.79 1.34
A comfortable and inviting locationLP-3 1,371 1.79 1.88 2.16 1.70 1.30
A getaway for study, learning, or researchLP-4 1,348 1.83 1.88 2.12 1.67 1.44
Community space for group learning and group
study
LP-5 1,288 1.98 2.51 2.55 1.95 1.74
1,387Overall: 1.31 1.22 1.41 1.16 1.00
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 45 of 95
4.3 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
None
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
Page 46 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
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 5.80 7.52 6.48 0.67 1,378-1.04
Information Control 6.47 8.10 6.85 0.38 1,386-1.25
Library as Place 6.19 7.96 6.47 0.28 1,386-1.49
6.15 7.85 6.62 0.47 1,387-1.23Overall:
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDDimension
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Affect of Service 1,378 1.45 1.36 1.47 1.31 1.22
Information Control 1,386 1.37 1.26 1.48 1.21 1.03
Library as Place 1,386 1.49 1.60 1.79 1.41 1.13
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.
1,387Overall: 1.31 1.22 1.41 1.16 1.00
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 47 of 95
4.4 Local Questions Summary for Undergraduate
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion Text
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Providing help when and where I need it 5.92 7.71 6.61 0.69 1,336-1.10
Making me aware of library services 5.41 7.24 5.88 0.46 1,329-1.36
Availability of subject specialist assistance 5.55 7.26 6.10 0.55 1,045-1.16
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.56 8.18 6.67 0.11 1,352-1.51
Access to archives, special collections 5.55 7.29 6.56 1.01 1,047-0.73
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.)
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDQuestion Text
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Providing help when and where I need it 1,336 1.68 1.68 1.75 1.55 1.45
Making me aware of library services 1,329 1.92 2.14 2.19 1.82 1.72
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1,352 1.70 1.85 2.09 1.66 1.23
Access to archives, special collections 1,047 2.06 2.05 2.14 1.73 1.86
This table displays the standard deviations 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
None
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
Page 48 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
4.5 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. 6.90 1.66 1,387
In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research,
and/or teaching needs. 6.74 1.64 1,387
How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 6.94 1.36 1,387
This table displays the 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 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.
4.6 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary for Undergraduate
MeanInformation Literacy Outcomes Questions nSD
The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline or work. 6.65 1.70 1,387
The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits or work. 6.80 1.74 1,387
The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy
information. 5.79 1.93 1,387
The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 5.55 1.93 1,387
The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 6.08 1.83 1,387
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 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
None
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 49 of 95
4.7 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?
298
21.49%
628
45.28%
278
20.04%
154
11.10%
29
2.09%
1,387
100.00%
How often do you access library resources
through a library Web page?
253
18.24%
638
46.00%
317
22.86%
133
9.59%
46
3.32%
1,387
100.00%
How often do you use Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or non-library gateways for
information?
1,172
84.50%
141
10.17%
32
2.31%
18
1.30%
24
1.73%
1,387
100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
Page 50 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
5 Graduate Summary
5.1 Demographic Summary for Graduate
5.1.1 Population and Respondent Profiles for Graduate by Standard Discipline
The chart and table below show a breakdown of survey respondents by discipline, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section.
This section shows survey respondents broken down based on the LibQUAL+® standard discipline categories. 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 the general population (N) and for survey
Performing & Fine Arts 134 7.27% 1,006 9.11% 1.85%
Science / Math 182 9.87% 699 6.33% -3.54%
Social Sciences / Psychology 545 29.56% 2,934 26.58% -2.97%
Undecided 1 0.05% 0 0.00% -0.05%
Total: 100.00% 11,038 1,844 100.00% 0.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
Page 52 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
5.1.2 Population and Respondent Profiles for Graduate by Customized Discipline
The chart and table below show a breakdown of survey respondents by discipline, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section.
This section shows survey respondents broken down based on the customized discipline categories supplied by the participating library. 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 the general population (N) and for survey respondents (n).
0
4
8
12
16
20
Architecture
Business
Computer Science
Education
Engineering
Fine Arts
General Studies
Health Sciences
History
Humanities
International & Public Affairs
Journalism
Law
Math
Other
Performing Arts
Psychology
Public Health
Sciences
Social Sciences
Social Work
Theology
Undecided
D
isc
ipli
ne
Percentage
Population Profile by Discipline
Respondent Profile by Discipline
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 53 of 95
Respondents
nDiscipline
Respondents
%
Population
N
Population
% %N - %n
Architecture 109 5.91% 742 6.72% 0.81%
Business 228 12.36% 2,128 19.28% 6.91%
Computer Science 34 1.84% 281 2.55% 0.70%
Education 5 0.27% 0 0.00% -0.27%
Engineering 161 8.73% 1,154 10.45% 1.72%
Fine Arts 110 5.97% 510 4.62% -1.34%
General Studies 14 0.76% 508 4.60% 3.84%
Health Sciences 22 1.19% 0 0.00% -1.19%
History 66 3.58% 160 1.45% -2.13%
Humanities 180 9.76% 775 7.02% -2.74%
International & Public Affairs 223 12.09% 1,286 11.65% -0.44%
Journalism 35 1.90% 383 3.47% 1.57%
Law 9 0.49% 0 0.00% -0.49%
Math 34 1.84% 142 1.29% -0.56%
Other 84 4.56% 0 0.00% -4.56%
Performing Arts 24 1.30% 496 4.49% 3.19%
Psychology 9 0.49% 43 0.39% -0.10%
Public Health 10 0.54% 0 0.00% -0.54%
Sciences 148 8.03% 557 5.05% -2.98%
Social Sciences 129 7.00% 715 6.48% -0.52%
Social Work 184 9.98% 890 8.06% -1.92%
Theology 25 1.36% 268 2.43% 1.07%
Undecided 1 0.05% 0 0.00% -0.05%
Total: 100.00% 11,038 1,844 100.00% 0.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
Page 54 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
5.1.3 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
Under 18 0 0.00%
18 - 22 75 4.07%
23 - 30 1,374 74.55%
31 - 45 350 18.99%
46 - 65 39 2.12%
Over 65 5 0.27%
Total: 100.00% 1,843
5.1.4 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 912 49.48%52.22% 6,847
Female 931 50.52%47.78% 6,264
Total: 100.00% 1,843 13,111 100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 55 of 95
5.2 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 or 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
None
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
Page 56 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion TextID
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Affect of Service
Employees who instill confidence in users 5.42 7.36 6.14 0.71AS-1 1,735-1.23
Employees who are consistently courteousAS-3 1,812 1.80 2.10 2.26 1.92 1.39
Readiness to respond to users' questionsAS-4 1,715 1.68 1.62 1.80 1.59 1.36
Employees who have the knowledge to answer
user questions
AS-5 1,730 1.71 1.65 1.90 1.62 1.38
Employees who deal with users in a caring
fashion
AS-6 1,733 1.85 1.96 2.11 1.80 1.51
Employees who understand the needs of their
users
AS-7 1,682 1.72 1.72 1.90 1.66 1.44
Willingness to help usersAS-8 1,711 1.77 1.76 1.92 1.67 1.45
Dependability in handling users' service problemsAS-9 1,426 1.78 1.73 1.91 1.63 1.46
Information Control
Making electronic resources accessible from my
home or office
IC-1 1,823 1.73 1.74 1.92 1.68 1.17
A library Web site enabling me to locate
information on my own
IC-2 1,820 1.64 1.67 1.87 1.61 1.25
The printed library materials I need for my workIC-3 1,676 1.79 1.76 1.93 1.62 1.49
The electronic information resources I needIC-4 1,810 1.60 1.51 1.82 1.49 1.17
Modern equipment that lets me easily access
needed information
IC-5 1,794 1.64 1.69 1.92 1.61 1.23
Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find
things on my own
IC-6 1,792 1.62 1.62 1.91 1.56 1.21
Making information easily accessible for
independent use
IC-7 1,760 1.64 1.56 1.83 1.52 1.24
Print and/or electronic journal collections I
require for my work
IC-8 1,740 1.63 1.66 1.92 1.63 1.22
Library as Place
Library space that inspires study and learningLP-1 1,820 1.81 2.23 2.44 1.98 1.37
Quiet space for individual activitiesLP-2 1,794 1.84 2.33 2.46 2.04 1.48
A comfortable and inviting locationLP-3 1,823 1.75 2.20 2.39 1.95 1.40
A getaway for study, learning, or researchLP-4 1,761 1.83 1.96 2.19 1.77 1.43
Community space for group learning and group
study
LP-5 1,653 2.14 2.51 2.60 1.99 1.95
1,844Overall: 1.29 1.21 1.43 1.21 0.95
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
Page 58 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
5.3 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
None
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 59 of 95
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 6.03 7.59 6.53 0.50 1,837-1.06
Information Control 6.74 8.19 6.94 0.20 1,844-1.25
Library as Place 6.23 7.88 6.22 -0.01 1,836-1.66
6.35 7.90 6.61 0.26 1,844-1.28Overall:
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDDimension
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Affect of Service 1,837 1.46 1.44 1.59 1.41 1.17
Information Control 1,844 1.32 1.20 1.45 1.22 0.95
Library as Place 1,836 1.53 1.78 1.98 1.59 1.18
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.
1,844Overall: 1.29 1.21 1.43 1.21 0.95
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
Page 60 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
5.4 Local Questions Summary for Graduate
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion Text
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Providing help when and where I need it 6.13 7.74 6.65 0.52 1,778-1.09
Making me aware of library services 5.62 7.25 6.09 0.48 1,780-1.16
Availability of subject specialist assistance 5.76 7.34 6.29 0.53 1,454-1.05
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.79 8.25 6.81 0.02 1,814-1.44
Access to archives, special collections 5.80 7.44 6.64 0.83 1,326-0.80
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.)
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDQuestion Text
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Providing help when and where I need it 1,778 1.67 1.70 1.85 1.59 1.40
Making me aware of library services 1,780 1.91 2.04 2.15 1.74 1.68
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1,814 1.62 1.77 2.02 1.65 1.14
Access to archives, special collections 1,326 2.05 1.92 2.13 1.64 1.76
This table displays the standard deviations 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
None
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 61 of 95
5.5 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. 6.75 1.85 1,844
In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research,
and/or teaching needs. 6.74 1.69 1,844
How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 6.86 1.51 1,844
This table displays the 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 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 Graduate
MeanInformation Literacy Outcomes Questions nSD
The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline or work. 6.92 1.66 1,844
The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits or work. 6.88 1.71 1,844
The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy
information. 5.67 1.97 1,844
The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 5.88 1.94 1,844
The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 6.16 1.87 1,844
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 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
None
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
Page 62 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
5.7 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?
576
31.24%
778
42.19%
333
18.06%
128
6.94%
29
1.57%
1,844
100.00%
How often do you access library resources
through a library Web page?
648
35.14%
840
45.55%
251
13.61%
67
3.63%
38
2.06%
1,844
100.00%
How often do you use Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or non-library gateways for
information?
1,546
83.84%
187
10.14%
58
3.15%
12
0.65%
41
2.22%
1,844
100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 63 of 95
6 Faculty Summary
6.1 Demographic Summary for Faculty
6.1.1 Population and Respondent Profiles for Faculty by Standard Discipline
The chart and table below show a breakdown of survey respondents by discipline, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section.
This section shows survey respondents broken down based on the LibQUAL+® standard discipline categories. 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 the general population (N) and for survey
Social Sciences / Psychology 58 24.68% 528 18.36% -6.32%
Undecided 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00%
Total: 100.00% 2,876 235 100.00% 0.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 65 of 95
6.1.2 Population and Respondent Profiles for Faculty by Customized Discipline
The chart and table below show a breakdown of survey respondents by discipline, based on user responses to the demographic questions and the demographic data provided by institutions in the online Representativeness section.
This section shows survey respondents broken down based on the customized discipline categories supplied by the participating library. 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 the general population (N) and for survey respondents (n).
0
4
8
12
16
20
24
28
Architecture
Business
Computer Science
Education
Engineering
Fine Arts
General Studies
Health Sciences
History
Humanities
International & Public Affairs
Journalism
Law
Math
Other
Performing Arts
Psychology
Public Health
Sciences
Social Sciences
Social Work
Theology
Undecided
D
isc
ipli
ne
Percentage
Population Profile by Discipline
Respondent Profile by Discipline
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
Page 66 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
Respondents
nDiscipline
Respondents
%
Population
N
Population
% %N - %n
Architecture 8 3.40% 131 4.55% 1.15%
Business 7 2.98% 192 6.68% 3.70%
Computer Science 2 0.85% 51 1.77% 0.92%
Education 5 2.13% 0 0.00% -2.13%
Engineering 13 5.53% 324 11.27% 5.73%
Fine Arts 9 3.83% 98 3.41% -0.42%
General Studies 0 0.00% 61 2.12% 2.12%
Health Sciences 2 0.85% 0 0.00% -0.85%
History 22 9.36% 53 1.84% -7.52%
Humanities 60 25.53% 491 17.07% -8.46%
International & Public Affairs 12 5.11% 155 5.39% 0.28%
Journalism 4 1.70% 115 4.00% 2.30%
Law 1 0.43% 0 0.00% -0.43%
Math 2 0.85% 44 1.53% 0.68%
Other 9 3.83% 0 0.00% -3.83%
Performing Arts 3 1.28% 89 3.09% 1.82%
Psychology 3 1.28% 37 1.29% 0.01%
Public Health 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00%
Sciences 27 11.49% 642 22.32% 10.83%
Social Sciences 30 12.77% 213 7.41% -5.36%
Social Work 13 5.53% 123 4.28% -1.26%
Theology 3 1.28% 57 1.98% 0.71%
Undecided 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00%
Total: 100.00% 2,876 235 100.00% 0.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 67 of 95
6.1.3 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 0 0.00%
18 - 22 0 0.00%
23 - 30 18 7.66%
31 - 45 110 46.81%
46 - 65 83 35.32%
Over 65 24 10.21%
Total: 100.00% 235
6.1.4 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 138 58.72%64.36% 1,898
Female 97 41.28%35.64% 1,051
Total: 100.00% 235 2,949 100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
Page 68 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
6.2 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 or 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
None
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 69 of 95
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion TextID
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Affect of Service
Employees who instill confidence in users 6.08 7.68 6.69 0.62AS-1 216-0.99
Employees who are consistently courteousAS-3 224 1.92 1.91 2.13 1.76 1.42
Readiness to respond to users' questionsAS-4 223 1.63 1.54 1.80 1.58 1.29
Employees who have the knowledge to answer
user questions
AS-5 224 1.63 1.43 1.52 1.55 1.36
Employees who deal with users in a caring
fashion
AS-6 212 1.91 1.72 1.88 1.69 1.57
Employees who understand the needs of their
users
AS-7 216 1.68 1.64 1.76 1.56 1.40
Willingness to help usersAS-8 215 1.74 1.62 1.93 1.59 1.35
Dependability in handling users' service problemsAS-9 191 1.48 1.65 1.74 1.63 1.20
Information Control
Making electronic resources accessible from my
home or office
IC-1 231 1.51 1.58 1.86 1.47 0.86
A library Web site enabling me to locate
information on my own
IC-2 230 1.47 1.63 1.95 1.58 0.80
The printed library materials I need for my workIC-3 219 1.58 1.62 1.76 1.41 1.25
The electronic information resources I needIC-4 230 1.37 1.35 1.60 1.25 0.79
Modern equipment that lets me easily access
needed information
IC-5 223 1.58 1.67 1.81 1.42 1.24
Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find
things on my own
IC-6 232 1.43 1.47 1.67 1.39 0.99
Making information easily accessible for
independent use
IC-7 225 1.48 1.37 1.65 1.32 1.11
Print and/or electronic journal collections I
require for my work
IC-8 229 1.32 1.46 1.80 1.41 0.79
Library as Place
Library space that inspires study and learningLP-1 211 2.06 2.19 2.28 1.75 1.73
Quiet space for individual activitiesLP-2 195 2.25 2.32 2.42 1.83 2.04
A comfortable and inviting locationLP-3 209 2.01 2.11 2.16 1.85 1.82
A getaway for study, learning, or researchLP-4 198 2.12 1.94 2.11 1.55 1.82
Community space for group learning and group
study
LP-5 135 2.33 2.54 2.32 1.74 2.44
235Overall: 1.23 1.09 1.26 1.07 0.87
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 71 of 95
6.3 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
None
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
Page 72 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
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 6.58 7.86 6.93 0.36 234-0.92
Information Control 7.38 8.46 7.23 -0.15 235-1.23
Library as Place 5.94 7.33 6.44 0.50 228-0.89
6.78 7.99 6.96 0.18 235-1.03Overall:
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDDimension
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Affect of Service 234 1.48 1.30 1.46 1.37 1.12
Information Control 235 1.12 1.11 1.34 1.06 0.67
Library as Place 228 1.80 1.80 1.81 1.47 1.65
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.
235Overall: 1.23 1.09 1.26 1.07 0.87
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 73 of 95
6.4 Local Questions Summary for Faculty
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion Text
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Providing help when and where I need it 6.58 7.92 6.92 0.34 224-1.00
Making me aware of library services 6.11 7.33 6.27 0.17 216-1.06
Availability of subject specialist assistance 6.55 7.61 6.89 0.34 183-0.73
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 7.41 8.52 7.02 -0.39 231-1.50
Access to archives, special collections 6.42 7.67 7.05 0.63 177-0.63
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.)
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDQuestion Text
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Providing help when and where I need it 224 1.72 1.55 1.69 1.49 1.30
Making me aware of library services 216 1.71 1.93 1.90 1.67 1.49
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 231 1.44 1.60 1.79 1.49 0.80
Access to archives, special collections 177 2.00 1.99 1.98 1.56 1.88
This table displays the standard deviations 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
None
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
Page 74 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
6.5 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. 7.26 1.62 235
In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research,
and/or teaching needs. 7.20 1.67 235
How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 7.35 1.36 235
This table displays the 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 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 Faculty
MeanInformation Literacy Outcomes Questions nSD
The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline or work. 7.48 1.72 235
The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits or work. 7.62 1.50 235
The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy
information. 5.47 2.01 235
The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 6.63 2.02 235
The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 6.30 2.00 235
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 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
None
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 75 of 95
6.7 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?
25
10.64%
106
45.11%
57
24.26%
32
13.62%
15
6.38%
235
100.00%
How often do you access library resources
through a library Web page?
146
62.13%
68
28.94%
17
7.23%
3
1.28%
1
0.43%
235
100.00%
How often do you use Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or non-library gateways for
information?
191
81.28%
29
12.34%
8
3.40%
2
0.85%
5
2.13%
235
100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
Page 76 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
7 Library Staff Summary
7.1 Demographic Summary for Library Staff
7.1.1 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
Under 18 0 0.00%
18 - 22 0 0.00%
23 - 30 12 15.19%
31 - 45 26 32.91%
46 - 65 39 49.37%
Over 65 2 2.53%
Total: 100.00% 79
7.1.2 Respondent Profile 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
nSex
Male 34 43.04%
Female 45 56.96%
Total: 100.00% 79
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Library Staff
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 77 of 95
7.2 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 or 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
None
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Library Staff
Page 78 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion TextID
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Affect of Service
Employees who instill confidence in users 6.36 7.92 6.81 0.44AS-1 77-1.12
Employees who are consistently courteousAS-3 78 1.77 1.77 2.02 1.64 1.61
Readiness to respond to users' questionsAS-4 71 1.64 1.32 1.59 1.43 1.52
Employees who have the knowledge to answer
user questions
AS-5 76 1.60 1.81 2.10 1.49 1.31
Employees who deal with users in a caring
fashion
AS-6 75 1.85 1.66 1.89 1.56 1.76
Employees who understand the needs of their
users
AS-7 75 1.47 1.82 2.07 1.44 1.29
Willingness to help usersAS-8 73 1.38 2.03 2.13 1.51 1.29
Dependability in handling users' service problemsAS-9 71 1.32 1.47 1.72 1.28 0.92
Information Control
Making electronic resources accessible from my
home or office
IC-1 78 1.69 1.76 2.05 1.80 1.47
A library Web site enabling me to locate
information on my own
IC-2 79 1.42 2.08 2.36 1.89 0.68
The printed library materials I need for my workIC-3 74 1.53 1.79 2.23 1.65 1.16
The electronic information resources I needIC-4 79 1.53 1.30 1.65 1.10 1.04
Modern equipment that lets me easily access
needed information
IC-5 77 1.60 2.14 2.50 1.69 1.20
Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find
things on my own
IC-6 79 1.39 1.77 2.06 1.55 0.99
Making information easily accessible for
independent use
IC-7 76 1.52 1.71 2.23 1.43 1.00
Print and/or electronic journal collections I
require for my work
IC-8 69 1.56 1.60 1.80 1.24 1.33
Library as Place
Library space that inspires study and learningLP-1 74 1.62 2.33 2.36 1.86 1.31
Quiet space for individual activitiesLP-2 67 1.78 2.16 2.45 2.05 1.54
A comfortable and inviting locationLP-3 73 1.93 1.84 2.12 1.90 1.59
A getaway for study, learning, or researchLP-4 69 1.74 2.04 2.39 1.78 1.69
Community space for group learning and group
study
LP-5 55 2.40 2.83 2.87 1.98 2.34
79Overall: 1.14 1.11 1.45 1.00 0.81
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Library Staff
Page 80 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
7.3 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
None
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Library Staff
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 81 of 95
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 6.70 8.00 7.01 0.31 79-0.99
Information Control 6.93 8.24 6.94 0.01 79-1.30
Library as Place 6.17 7.65 6.33 0.15 76-1.32
6.69 8.03 6.84 0.15 79-1.19Overall:
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDDimension
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Affect of Service 79 1.31 1.34 1.50 1.13 1.15
Information Control 79 1.08 1.21 1.55 1.01 0.70
Library as Place 76 1.42 1.42 1.82 1.45 1.08
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.
79Overall: 1.14 1.11 1.45 1.00 0.81
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Library Staff
Page 82 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
7.4 Local Questions Summary for Library Staff
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion Text
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Providing help when and where I need it 6.18 7.71 6.46 0.28 76-1.25
Making me aware of library services 6.10 7.25 6.08 -0.03 77-1.17
Availability of subject specialist assistance 6.74 7.80 7.11 0.37 65-0.69
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 7.03 8.45 6.36 -0.67 78-2.09
Access to archives, special collections 6.27 7.44 6.76 0.48 62-0.68
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.)
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDQuestion Text
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Providing help when and where I need it 76 1.74 1.74 1.96 1.65 1.34
Making me aware of library services 77 1.88 2.25 2.24 1.89 1.86
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 78 1.54 1.91 2.35 1.73 0.83
Access to archives, special collections 62 1.58 1.46 1.50 1.31 1.54
This table displays the standard deviations 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
None
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Library Staff
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 83 of 95
7.5 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. 7.23 1.44 79
In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research,
and/or teaching needs. 7.05 1.53 79
How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 7.39 0.99 79
This table displays the 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 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 Library Staff
MeanInformation Literacy Outcomes Questions nSD
The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline or work. 6.90 1.61 79
The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits or work. 6.96 1.45 79
The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy
information. 6.30 1.65 79
The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 6.37 1.43 79
The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 6.54 1.48 79
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 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
None
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Library Staff
Page 84 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
7.7 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?
46
58.23%
22
27.85%
7
8.86%
4
5.06%
0
0.00%
79
100.00%
How often do you access library resources
through a library Web page?
52
65.82%
21
26.58%
5
6.33%
1
1.27%
0
0.00%
79
100.00%
How often do you use Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or non-library gateways for
information?
69
87.34%
6
7.59%
3
3.80%
0
0.00%
1
1.27%
79
100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Library Staff
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 85 of 95
8 Staff Summary
8.1 Demographic Summary for Staff
8.1.1 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
Under 18 0 0.00%
18 - 22 2 1.83%
23 - 30 35 32.11%
31 - 45 49 44.95%
46 - 65 19 17.43%
Over 65 4 3.67%
Total: 100.00% 109
8.1.2 Respondent Profile 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
nSex
Male 50 45.87%
Female 59 54.13%
Total: 100.00% 109
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Staff
Page 86 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
8.2 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 or 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
None
Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Staff
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 87 of 95
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion TextID
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Affect of Service
Employees who instill confidence in users 5.75 7.76 6.67 0.92AS-1 104-1.09
Employees who are consistently courteousAS-3 106 1.85 1.71 2.04 1.55 1.12
Readiness to respond to users' questionsAS-4 106 1.82 1.55 1.71 1.51 1.24
Employees who have the knowledge to answer
user questions
AS-5 104 1.77 1.67 1.94 1.54 1.16
Employees who deal with users in a caring
fashion
AS-6 100 1.86 1.83 1.96 1.54 1.49
Employees who understand the needs of their
users
AS-7 103 1.55 1.47 1.66 1.42 1.33
Willingness to help usersAS-8 105 1.79 1.59 1.92 1.58 1.29
Dependability in handling users' service problemsAS-9 92 1.75 1.70 2.07 1.61 1.33
Information Control
Making electronic resources accessible from my
home or office
IC-1 109 1.51 1.76 1.77 1.70 0.93
A library Web site enabling me to locate
information on my own
IC-2 109 1.70 1.57 1.92 1.58 1.11
The printed library materials I need for my workIC-3 102 1.83 1.60 1.82 1.37 1.51
The electronic information resources I needIC-4 108 1.40 1.61 1.69 1.54 0.90
Modern equipment that lets me easily access
needed information
IC-5 104 1.67 1.56 1.87 1.47 1.07
Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find
things on my own
IC-6 109 1.44 1.65 1.94 1.46 1.09
Making information easily accessible for
independent use
IC-7 106 1.49 1.46 1.62 1.28 1.06
Print and/or electronic journal collections I
require for my work
IC-8 103 1.46 1.62 1.85 1.48 0.87
Library as Place
Library space that inspires study and learningLP-1 103 1.92 1.97 2.01 1.56 1.40
Quiet space for individual activitiesLP-2 100 2.14 1.81 1.79 1.65 1.85
A comfortable and inviting locationLP-3 105 1.90 1.93 2.09 1.60 1.45
A getaway for study, learning, or researchLP-4 99 2.06 1.82 1.95 1.56 1.57
Community space for group learning and group
study
LP-5 77 2.22 2.13 2.05 1.67 2.11
109Overall: 1.30 1.13 1.28 1.07 0.88
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Staff
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 89 of 95
8.3 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
None
Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Staff
Page 90 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
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 6.36 7.90 6.97 0.60 109-0.93
Information Control 6.99 8.32 7.12 0.12 109-1.20
Library as Place 6.04 7.61 6.78 0.74 108-0.83
6.55 8.01 6.99 0.44 109-1.02Overall:
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDDimension
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Affect of Service 109 1.51 1.32 1.53 1.24 1.08
Information Control 109 1.24 1.16 1.39 1.12 0.75
Library as Place 108 1.81 1.49 1.55 1.29 1.39
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.
109Overall: 1.30 1.13 1.28 1.07 0.88
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Staff
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 91 of 95
8.4 Local Questions Summary for Staff
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion Text
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Providing help when and where I need it 6.50 7.91 6.86 0.37 103-1.05
Making me aware of library services 5.88 7.57 6.07 0.18 104-1.50
Availability of subject specialist assistance 5.81 7.50 6.48 0.67 84-1.02
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.99 8.33 6.72 -0.28 109-1.61
Access to archives, special collections 6.19 7.43 6.88 0.69 81-0.56
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.)
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDQuestion Text
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Providing help when and where I need it 103 1.71 1.71 1.82 1.57 1.26
Making me aware of library services 104 1.80 2.05 2.11 1.69 1.52
Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 109 1.42 1.65 1.80 1.60 0.97
Access to archives, special collections 81 1.89 1.77 1.82 1.39 1.90
This table displays the standard deviations 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
None
Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Staff
Page 92 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
8.5 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. 7.28 1.37 109
In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research,
and/or teaching needs. 7.22 1.34 109
How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 7.31 1.21 109
This table displays the 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 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 Staff
MeanInformation Literacy Outcomes Questions nSD
The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline or work. 7.19 1.73 109
The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits or work. 7.32 1.68 109
The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy
information. 5.62 2.15 109
The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 6.48 1.96 109
The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 6.22 1.95 109
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 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
None
Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Staff
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 93 of 95
8.7 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?
10
9.17%
39
35.78%
28
25.69%
29
26.61%
3
2.75%
109
100.00%
How often do you access library resources
through a library Web page?
48
44.04%
33
30.28%
20
18.35%
8
7.34%
0
0.00%
109
100.00%
How often do you use Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or non-library gateways for
information?
94
86.24%
11
10.09%
3
2.75%
1
0.92%
0
0.00%
109
100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Staff
Page 94 of 95 LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL
9 Appendix A: LibQUAL+® Dimensions
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 - Present Dimensions
After the 2003 survey was completed, factor and reliability analyses on the resulting data revealed that two of the
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 2009 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.)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All
LibQUAL+® 2009 Survey Results - CUL Page 95 of 95
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