LibQUAL+™ Spring 2003 Survey Institution Results University of Victoria Libraries 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
82
Embed
LibQUAL+ Spring 2003 Survey - uvic.ca€¦ · LibQUAL+™ Spring 2003 Survey Institution Results University of Victoria Libraries Association of Research Libraries / Texas A&M University
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
LibQUAL+™ Spring 2003 Survey
Institution Results
University of Victoria Libraries
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
LibQUAL+™ Spring 2003 Survey
Institution Results
University of Victoria Libraries
Association of Research Libraries / Texas A&M University
www.libqual.org
Contributors
Colleen Cook Consuella AskewTexas A&M University Association of Research Libraries
Fred Heath Amy HosethTexas A&M University Association of Research Libraries
BruceThompson Martha KyrillidouTexas A&M University Association of Research Libraries
Jonathan D. SousaAssociation of Research Libraries
Page 14 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
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 15 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
2 Demographic Summary for University of Victoria Libraries
2.1 Respondents by User Group
User Group
Respondent
n
Respondent
%
Undergraduate
34 4.53%First year
58 7.73%Second year
60 8.00%Third year
78 10.40%Fourth year
33 4.40%Fifth year and above
4 0.53%Non-degree
Sub Total: 35.60% 267
Graduate
185 24.67%Masters
43 5.73%Doctoral
5 0.67%Non-degree or Undecided
Sub Total: 31.07% 233
Faculty
0 0.00%Adjunct Faculty
45 6.00%Assistant Professor
75 10.00%Associate Professor
2 0.27%Lecturer
82 10.93%Professor
20 2.67%Other Academic Status
Sub Total: 29.87% 224
Library Staff
1 0.13%Administrator
4 0.53%Manager, Head of Unit
8 1.07%Public Services
1 0.13%Systems
3 0.40%Technical Services
7 0.93%Other
Sub Total: 3.20% 24
Staff
1 0.13%Research Staff
1 0.13%Other staff positions
Sub Total: 0.27% 2
Total: 750 100.00%
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 16 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
2.2 Population and Respondent Profiles by User Sub-Group
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 through the online Demographics Questionnaire*.
The chart maps percentage of respondents for each user subgroup in red. Population percentages for each user subgroup are mapped in blue. The table shows the number and percentage for each user sub-group for the general population (N) and for survey respondents (n).
*Note: Participating institutions were not required to complete the Demographics Questionnaire. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided to ARL.
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28
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 (Excludes Staff & Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excludes Staff & Library Staff)
Page 17 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
Respondents
nUser Sub-Group
Respondents
%
Population
N
Population
% %N - %n
34 4.70% 2,450 13.13%First year (Undergraduate) 8.44%
58 8.01% 3,206 17.19%Second year (Undergraduate) 9.18%
60 8.29% 3,839 20.58%Third year (Undergraduate) 12.29%
78 10.77% 4,236 22.71%Fourth year (Undergraduate) 11.93%
33 4.56% 715 3.83%Fifth year and above (Undergraduate) -0.73%
5 0.69% 28 0.15%Non-degree or Undecided (Graduate) -0.54%
0 0.00% 0 0.00%Adjunct Faculty (Faculty) 0.00%
45 6.22% 119 0.64%Assistant Professor (Faculty) -5.58%
75 10.36% 203 1.09%Associate Professor (Faculty) -9.27%
2 0.28% 0 0.00%Lecturer (Faculty) -0.28%
82 11.33% 266 1.43%Professor (Faculty) -9.90%
20 2.76% 27 0.14%Other Academic Status (Faculty) -2.62%
Total: 100.00% 18,654 724 100.00% 0.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excludes Staff & Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excludes Staff & Library Staff)
Page 18 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
The chart and table below show a breakdown of survey respondents by discipline, based on user responses to the demographic questions at the end of the survey instrument and the demographic data provided by institutions through the online Demographics Questionnaire*.
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 Demographics Questionnaire. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided to ARL.
2.3 Population and Respondent Profiles by Discipline
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
Agriculture / Environmental Studies
Architecture
Business
Communications / Journalism
Education
Engineering / Computer Science
General Studies
Health Sciences
Humanities
Law
Military / Naval Science
Performing & Fine Arts
Science / Math
Social Sciences / Psychology
Undecided
Other
Dis
cip
lin
e
Percentage
Population Profile by Discipline
Respondent Profile by Discipline
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excludes Staff & Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excludes Staff & Library Staff)
Page 19 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
Social Sciences / Psychology 162 22.38% 4,351 23.28% 0.91%
Undecided 6 0.83% 0 0.00% -0.83%
Other 43 5.94% 2,111 11.30% 5.36%
Total: 100.00% 18,688 724 100.00% 0.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excludes Staff & Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excludes Staff & Library Staff)
Page 20 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
2.4 Respondent Profile by Age
This table shows a breakdown of survey respondents by age; both the number of respondents (n) and the percentage of the total number of respondents represented by each age group are displayed. Ages are grouped into six categories: Under 18, 18-22, 23-30, 31-45, 46-65, and Over 65.
Age
Respondents
%
Respondents
n
Under 18 2 0.28%
18 - 22 144 19.83%
23 - 30 202 27.82%
31 - 45 198 27.27%
46 - 65 179 24.66%
Over 65 1 0.14%
Total: 100.00% 726
2.5 Population and Respondent Profiles by Sex
The table below shows a breakdown of survey respondents by sex, based on user responses to the demographic questions at the end of the survey instrument and the demographic data provided by institutions through the online Demographics Questionnaire*. 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 Demographics Questionnaire. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided to ARL.
Sex
Respondents
%
Respondents
n
Population
N
Population
%
Male 322 44.41%41.15% 7,690
Female 403 55.59%58.85% 10,998
Total: 100.00% 725100.00% 18,688
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excludes Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excludes Library Staff)
Page 21 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
This radar chart shows aggregate results for the 25 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, here they are grouped in quadrants: Affect of Service, Access to Information, Library as Place, and Personal 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.)
3.1 Core Questions Summary
3 Survey Item Summary for University of Victoria Libraries
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
AI-1
AI-2
AI-3
AI-4
AI-5
AS-1AS-2AS-3
AS-4
AS-5
AS-6
AS-7
AS-8
AS-9
LP-1
LP-2
LP-3
LP-4LP-5 PC-1
PC-2
PC-3
PC-4
PC-5
PC-6
Access to Information
Affect of Service
Library as Place
Personal Control
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 (Excludes Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excludes Library Staff)
Page 22 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion TextID
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Access to Information
Print and/or electronic journal collections I
require for my work
6.64 8.25 6.16 -0.49AI-1 689-2.09
Convenient service hours 6.63 8.05 7.08 0.44AI-2 712-0.97
The printed library materials I need for my work 6.63 8.09 6.20 -0.43AI-3 690-1.88
The electronic information resources I need 6.84 8.22 6.84 0.01AI-4 710-1.38
Page 24 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
On the chart below, scores for each dimension of library service quality have been plotted graphically. The blue bars represent the range of minimum to desired scores for each dimension. The interior red bars represent the range of minimum to perceived scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimension of library service quality.
3.2 Core Question Dimensions Summary
4
5
6
7
8
9
Affect of
Service
Access to
Information
Library as Place Personal
Control
Range of Minimum to Perceived ("Adequacy Gap")
Range of Minimum to Desired
Mea
n
Dimension
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excludes Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excludes Library Staff)
Page 25 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
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 B.
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanDimension
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Access to Information 6.73 8.19 6.68 -0.03 726-1.50
Affect of Service 6.40 7.80 7.18 0.77 726-0.64
Library as Place 5.63 7.06 6.25 0.65 726-0.83
Personal Control 6.79 8.31 7.01 0.23 726-1.36
6.41 7.87 6.86 0.45 726-1.01Overall:
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDDimension
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Access to Information 726 1.28 1.40 1.60 1.19 0.92
Affect of Service 726 1.46 1.27 1.46 1.25 1.08
Library as Place 726 1.92 1.75 1.85 1.70 1.90
Personal Control 726 1.28 1.30 1.52 1.18 0.81
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 B.
726Overall: 1.24 1.10 1.33 1.04 0.84
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excludes Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excludes Library Staff)
Page 26 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
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 particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the general satisfaction questions on the LibQUAL+™ survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9.
3.3 General Satisfaction Questions Summary
MeanSatisfaction Question nSD
In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library. 7.36 726 1.46
In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research, and/or
teaching needs.
6.52 726 1.76
How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 6.90 726 1.35
This table displays the mean score and standard deviation for each of the information literacy outcomes questions, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the information literacy outcomes questions on the LibQUAL+™ survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9 with 1 being "strongly disagree" and 9 representing "strongly agree".
3.4 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary
MeanInformation Literacy Outcomes Questions nSD
The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 5.87 726 1.77
The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline. 6.42 726 1.76
The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits. 6.44 726 1.76
The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy
information.
5.31 726 1.95
The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 5.78 726 1.80
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excludes Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excludes Library Staff)
Page 27 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
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 graphic displays the number and percentage of respondents who selected each option.
3.5 Library Use Summary
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never
How often do you useresources on librarypremises?
How often do youaccess library resourcesthrough a library Webpage?
How often do you useYahoo(TM),Google(TM), ornon-library gateways forinformation?
Frequency
Pe
rce
nta
ge
Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never n / %
How often do you use resources on library
premises?
70
9.64%
358
49.31%
197
27.13%
83
11.43%
18
2.48%
726
100.00%
How often do you access library resources
through a library Web page?
164
22.59%
346
47.66%
146
20.11%
50
6.89%
20
2.75%
726
100.00%
How often do you use Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or non-library gateways for
information?
454
62.53%
175
24.10%
51
7.02%
16
2.20%
30
4.13%
726
100.00%
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excludes Library Staff)
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
All (Excludes Library Staff)
Page 28 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
4 Undergraduate Summary
4.1 Demographic Summary for Undergraduate
4.1.1 Population and Respondent Profiles for Undergraduate by Discipline
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28
Agriculture / Environmental Studies
Architecture
Business
Communications / Journalism
Education
Engineering / Computer Science
General Studies
Health Sciences
Humanities
Law
Military / Naval Science
Performing & Fine Arts
Science / Math
Social Sciences / Psychology
Undecided
Other
Dis
cip
lin
e
Percentage
Population Profile by Discipline
Respondent Profile by Discipline
The chart and table below show a breakdown of survey respondents by discipline, based on user responses to the demographic questions at the end of the survey instrument and the demographic data provided by institutions through the online Demographics Questionnaire.
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).
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 29 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
Social Sciences / Psychology 62 23.22% 3,987 25.34% 2.12%
Undecided 6 2.25% 0 0.00% -2.25%
Other 11 4.12% 1,659 10.55% 6.43%
Total: 100.00% 15,731 267 100.00% 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
Page 30 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
4.1.2 Respondent Profile for Undergraduate by Age
This table shows a breakdown of survey respondents by age; both the number of respondents (n) and the percentage of the total number of respondents represented by each age group are displayed. Ages are grouped into six categories: Under 18, 18-22, 23-30, 31-45, 46-65, and Over 65.
Respondents
%
Respondents
nAge
Under 18 1 0.37%
18 - 22 142 53.18%
23 - 30 94 35.21%
31 - 45 26 9.74%
46 - 65 4 1.50%
Over 65 0 0.00%
Total: 100.00% 267
4.1.3 Population and Respondent Profiles for Undergraduate by Sex
The table below shows a breakdown of survey respondents by sex, based on user responses to the demographic questions at the end of the survey instrument and the demographic data provided by institutions through the online Demographics Questionnaire*. 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 Demographics Questionnaire. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided to ARL.
Respondents
%
Respondents
n
Population
%
Population
NSex
Male 91 34.08%40.21% 6,326
Female 176 65.92%59.79% 9,405
Total: 100.00% 267 15,731 100.00%
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 31 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
4.2 Core Questions Summary for Undergraduate
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
AI-1
AI-2
AI-3
AI-4
AI-5
AS-1AS-2AS-3
AS-4
AS-5
AS-6
AS-7
AS-8
AS-9
LP-1
LP-2
LP-3
LP-4LP-5 PC-1
PC-2
PC-3
PC-4
PC-5
PC-6
Access to Information
Affect of Service
Library as Place
Personal Control
Perceived Less Than Minimum
Perceived Greater Than Minimum
Perceived Less Than Desired
Perceived Greater Than Desired
This radar chart shows aggregate results for the 25 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, here they are grouped in quadrants: Affect of Service, Access to Information, Library as Place, and Personal 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.)
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 32 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion TextID
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Access to Information
Print and/or electronic journal collections I
require for my work
6.18 7.97 6.28 0.11AI-1 244-1.69
Convenient service hours 6.62 8.14 7.24 0.62AI-2 265-0.90
The printed library materials I need for my work 6.35 7.98 6.62 0.27AI-3 253-1.36
The electronic information resources I need 6.55 8.06 6.94 0.39AI-4 258-1.12
Page 34 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
4.3 Core Question Dimensions Summary for Undergraduate
4
5
6
7
8
9
Affect of
Service
Access to
Information
Library as Place Personal
Control
Range of Minimum to Perceived ("Adequacy Gap")
Range of Minimum to Desired
Me
an
Dimension
On the chart below, scores for each dimension of library service quality have been plotted graphically. The blue bars represent the range of minimum to desired scores for each dimension. The interior red bars represent the range of minimum to perceived scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimension of library service quality.
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 35 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
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 B.
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanDimension
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Access to Information 6.43 8.06 6.81 0.39 267-1.27
Affect of Service 6.21 7.68 6.94 0.76 267-0.75
Library as Place 5.82 7.54 6.51 0.66 267-1.06
Personal Control 6.48 8.18 6.96 0.45 267-1.27
6.23 7.84 6.83 0.60 267-1.02Overall:
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDDimension
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Access to Information 267 1.33 1.52 1.63 1.21 1.01
Affect of Service 267 1.45 1.36 1.54 1.21 1.10
Library as Place 267 1.73 1.63 1.82 1.54 1.47
Personal Control 267 1.31 1.42 1.58 1.21 0.90
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 B.
267Overall: 1.25 1.23 1.41 1.06 0.86
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 36 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
4.4 General Satisfaction Questions Summary for Undergraduate
MeanSatisfaction Question nSD
In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library. 7.08 267 1.53
In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research, and/or
teaching needs.
6.63 267 1.60
How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 6.87 267 1.27
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 particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the general satisfaction questions on the LibQUAL+™ survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9.
4.5 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary for Undergraduate
MeanInformation Literacy Outcomes Questions nSD
The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 5.65 267 1.53
The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline. 6.28 267 1.79
The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits. 6.36 267 1.77
The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy
information.
5.37 267 1.90
The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 5.80 267 1.71
This table displays the mean score and standard deviation for each of the information literacy outcomes questions, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the information literacy outcomes questions on the LibQUAL+™ survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9 with 1 being "strongly disagree" and 9 representing "strongly agree".
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Undergraduate
Page 37 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
4.6 Library Use Summary for Undergraduate
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never
How often do you useresources on librarypremises?
How often do youaccess library resourcesthrough a library Webpage?
How often do you useYahoo(TM),Google(TM), ornon-library gateways forinformation?
Frequency
Pe
rce
nta
ge
Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never n / %
How often do you use resources on library
premises?
34
12.73%
140
52.43%
67
25.09%
21
7.87%
5
1.87%
267
100.00%
How often do you access library resources
through a library Web page?
25
9.36%
134
50.19%
68
25.47%
32
11.99%
8
3.00%
267
100.00%
How often do you use Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or non-library gateways for
information?
164
61.42%
69
25.84%
24
8.99%
3
1.12%
7
2.62%
267
100.00%
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 graphic displays the number and percentage of respondents who selected each option.
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 38 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
5 Graduate Summary
5.1 Demographic Summary for Graduate
5.1.1 Population and Respondent Profiles for Graduate by Discipline
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Agriculture / Environmental Studies
Architecture
Business
Communications / Journalism
Education
Engineering / Computer Science
General Studies
Health Sciences
Humanities
Law
Military / Naval Science
Performing & Fine Arts
Science / Math
Social Sciences / Psychology
Undecided
Other
Dis
cip
lin
e
Percentage
Population Profile by Discipline
Respondent Profile by Discipline
The chart and table below show a breakdown of survey respondents by discipline, based on user responses to the demographic questions at the end of the survey instrument and the demographic data provided by institutions through the online Demographics Questionnaire.
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).
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 39 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
Social Sciences / Psychology 54 23.18% 263 11.27% -11.91%
Undecided 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00%
Other 21 9.01% 385 16.50% 7.48%
Total: 100.00% 2,334 233 100.00% 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 40 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
5.1.2 Respondent Profile for Graduate by Age
This table shows a breakdown of survey respondents by age; both the number of respondents (n) and the percentage of the total number of respondents represented by each age group are displayed. Ages are grouped into six categories: Under 18, 18-22, 23-30, 31-45, 46-65, and Over 65.
Respondents
%
Respondents
nAge
Under 18 1 0.43%
18 - 22 2 0.86%
23 - 30 105 45.06%
31 - 45 98 42.06%
46 - 65 27 11.59%
Over 65 0 0.00%
Total: 100.00% 233
5.1.3 Population and Respondent Profiles for Graduate by Sex
The table below shows a breakdown of survey respondents by sex, based on user responses to the demographic questions at the end of the survey instrument and the demographic data provided by institutions through the online Demographics Questionnaire*. 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 Demographics Questionnaire. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided to ARL.
Respondents
%
Respondents
n
Population
%
Population
NSex
Male 88 37.93%41.17% 961
Female 144 62.07%58.83% 1,373
Total: 100.00% 232 2,334 100.00%
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
Page 41 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
5.2 Core Questions Summary for Graduate
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
AI-1
AI-2
AI-3
AI-4
AI-5
AS-1AS-2AS-3
AS-4
AS-5
AS-6
AS-7
AS-8
AS-9
LP-1
LP-2
LP-3
LP-4LP-5 PC-1
PC-2
PC-3
PC-4
PC-5
PC-6
Access to Information
Affect of Service
Library as Place
Personal Control
Perceived Less Than Minimum
Perceived Greater Than Minimum
Perceived Less Than Desired
Perceived Greater Than Desired
This radar chart shows aggregate results for the 25 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, here they are grouped in quadrants: Affect of Service, Access to Information, Library as Place, and Personal 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.)
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 42 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion TextID
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Access to Information
Print and/or electronic journal collections I
require for my work
6.84 8.39 6.15 -0.69AI-1 229-2.24
Convenient service hours 6.84 8.14 7.03 0.19AI-2 230-1.10
The printed library materials I need for my work 6.95 8.19 6.17 -0.77AI-3 220-2.02
The electronic information resources I need 7.09 8.35 6.79 -0.29AI-4 231-1.55
Page 44 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
5.3 Core Question Dimensions Summary for Graduate
4
5
6
7
8
9
Affect of
Service
Access to
Information
Library as Place Personal
Control
Range of Minimum to Perceived ("Adequacy Gap")
Range of Minimum to Desired
Me
an
Dimension
On the chart below, scores for each dimension of library service quality have been plotted graphically. The blue bars represent the range of minimum to desired scores for each dimension. The interior red bars represent the range of minimum to perceived scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimension of library service quality.
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 45 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
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 B.
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanDimension
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Access to Information 6.98 8.28 6.67 -0.31 233-1.62
Affect of Service 6.46 7.82 7.27 0.79 233-0.58
Library as Place 5.87 7.13 6.25 0.48 233-0.84
Personal Control 7.01 8.38 7.09 0.11 233-1.36
6.57 7.92 6.91 0.34 233-1.02Overall:
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDDimension
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Access to Information 233 1.20 1.32 1.50 1.19 0.84
Affect of Service 233 1.45 1.26 1.43 1.30 1.11
Library as Place 233 1.86 1.70 1.91 1.71 1.77
Personal Control 233 1.22 1.25 1.48 1.17 0.76
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 B.
233Overall: 1.21 0.99 1.26 1.01 0.80
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 46 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
5.4 General Satisfaction Questions Summary for Graduate
MeanSatisfaction Question nSD
In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library. 7.48 233 1.46
In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research, and/or
teaching needs.
6.58 233 1.75
How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 6.93 233 1.43
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 particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the general satisfaction questions on the LibQUAL+™ survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9.
5.5 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary for Graduate
MeanInformation Literacy Outcomes Questions nSD
The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 5.95 233 1.87
The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline. 6.61 233 1.62
The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits. 6.56 233 1.71
The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy
information.
5.47 233 1.86
The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 5.98 233 1.78
This table displays the mean score and standard deviation for each of the information literacy outcomes questions, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the information literacy outcomes questions on the LibQUAL+™ survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9 with 1 being "strongly disagree" and 9 representing "strongly agree".
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Graduate
Page 47 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
5.6 Library Use Summary for Graduate
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never
How often do you useresources on librarypremises?
How often do youaccess library resourcesthrough a library Webpage?
How often do you useYahoo(TM),Google(TM), ornon-library gateways forinformation?
Frequency
Pe
rce
nta
ge
Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never n / %
How often do you use resources on library
premises?
20
8.58%
111
47.64%
64
27.47%
31
13.30%
7
3.00%
233
100.00%
How often do you access library resources
through a library Web page?
63
27.04%
113
48.50%
38
16.31%
11
4.72%
8
3.43%
233
100.00%
How often do you use Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or non-library gateways for
information?
153
65.67%
44
18.88%
15
6.44%
7
3.00%
14
6.01%
233
100.00%
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 graphic displays the number and percentage of respondents who selected each option.
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 48 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
6 Faculty Summary
6.1 Demographic Summary for Faculty
6.1.1 Population and Respondent Profiles for Faculty by Discipline
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
Agriculture / Environmental Studies
Architecture
Business
Communications / Journalism
Education
Engineering / Computer Science
General Studies
Health Sciences
Humanities
Law
Military / Naval Science
Performing & Fine Arts
Science / Math
Social Sciences / Psychology
Undecided
Other
Dis
cip
lin
e
Percentage
Population Profile by Discipline
Respondent Profile by Discipline
The chart and table below show a breakdown of survey respondents by discipline, based on user responses to the demographic questions at the end of the survey instrument and the demographic data provided by institutions through the online Demographics Questionnaire.
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).
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 49 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
Social Sciences / Psychology 46 20.54% 101 16.21% -4.32%
Undecided 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00%
Other 11 4.91% 67 10.75% 5.84%
Total: 100.00% 623 224 100.00% 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
Page 50 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
6.1.2 Respondent Profile for Faculty by Age
This table shows a breakdown of survey respondents by age; both the number of respondents (n) and the percentage of the total number of respondents represented by each age group are displayed. Ages are grouped into six categories: Under 18, 18-22, 23-30, 31-45, 46-65, and Over 65.
Respondents
%
Respondents
nAge
Under 18 0 0.00%
18 - 22 0 0.00%
23 - 30 2 0.89%
31 - 45 74 33.04%
46 - 65 147 65.63%
Over 65 1 0.45%
Total: 100.00% 224
6.1.3 Population and Respondent Profiles for Faculty by Sex
The table below shows a breakdown of survey respondents by sex, based on user responses to the demographic questions at the end of the survey instrument and the demographic data provided by institutions through the online Demographics Questionnaire*. 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 Demographics Questionnaire. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided to ARL.
Respondents
%
Respondents
n
Population
%
Population
NSex
Male 143 63.84%64.69% 403
Female 81 36.16%35.31% 220
Total: 100.00% 224 623 100.00%
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 51 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
6.2 Core Questions Summary for Faculty
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
AI-1
AI-2
AI-3
AI-4
AI-5
AS-1AS-2AS-3
AS-4
AS-5
AS-6
AS-7
AS-8
AS-9
LP-1
LP-2
LP-3
LP-4LP-5 PC-1
PC-2
PC-3
PC-4
PC-5
PC-6
Access to Information
Affect of Service
Library as Place
Personal Control
Perceived Less Than Minimum
Perceived Greater Than Minimum
Perceived Less Than Desired
Perceived Greater Than Desired
This radar chart shows aggregate results for the 25 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, here they are grouped in quadrants: Affect of Service, Access to Information, Library as Place, and Personal 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.)
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 52 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion TextID
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Access to Information
Print and/or electronic journal collections I
require for my work
6.98 8.43 6.03 -0.95AI-1 214-2.41
Convenient service hours 6.42 7.83 6.92 0.50AI-2 215-0.91
The printed library materials I need for my work 6.65 8.13 5.76 -0.89AI-3 215-2.36
The electronic information resources I need 6.92 8.29 6.78 -0.14AI-4 219-1.51
Page 54 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
6.3 Core Question Dimensions Summary for Faculty
4
5
6
7
8
9
Affect of
Service
Access to
Information
Library as Place Personal
Control
Range of Minimum to Perceived ("Adequacy Gap")
Range of Minimum to Desired
Me
an
Dimension
On the chart below, scores for each dimension of library service quality have been plotted graphically. The blue bars represent the range of minimum to desired scores for each dimension. The interior red bars represent the range of minimum to perceived scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimension of library service quality.
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 55 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
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 B.
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanDimension
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Access to Information 6.83 8.26 6.55 -0.25 224-1.66
Affect of Service 6.56 7.94 7.38 0.75 224-0.59
Library as Place 5.14 6.44 5.95 0.81 224-0.54
Personal Control 6.92 8.39 6.99 0.08 224-1.45
6.46 7.85 6.85 0.38 224-1.00Overall:
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDDimension
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Access to Information 224 1.21 1.29 1.56 1.16 0.82
Affect of Service 224 1.45 1.19 1.38 1.20 1.02
Library as Place 224 2.10 1.91 1.84 1.83 2.28
Personal Control 224 1.25 1.22 1.48 1.17 0.74
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 B.
224Overall: 1.22 1.04 1.28 1.03 0.85
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 56 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
6.4 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. 7.58 224 1.31
In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research, and/or
teaching needs.
6.31 224 1.94
How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 6.91 224 1.38
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 particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the general satisfaction questions on the LibQUAL+™ survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9.
6.5 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary for Faculty
MeanInformation Literacy Outcomes Questions nSD
The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 6.05 224 1.92
The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline. 6.39 224 1.85
The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits. 6.40 224 1.81
The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy
information.
5.07 224 2.10
The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 5.54 224 1.91
This table displays the mean score and standard deviation for each of the information literacy outcomes questions, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the information literacy outcomes questions on the LibQUAL+™ survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9 with 1 being "strongly disagree" and 9 representing "strongly agree".
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Faculty
Page 57 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
6.6 Library Use Summary for Faculty
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never
How often do you useresources on librarypremises?
How often do youaccess library resourcesthrough a library Webpage?
How often do you useYahoo(TM),Google(TM), ornon-library gateways forinformation?
Frequency
Pe
rce
nta
ge
Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never n / %
How often do you use resources on library
premises?
16
7.14%
105
46.88%
66
29.46%
31
13.84%
6
2.68%
224
100.00%
How often do you access library resources
through a library Web page?
75
33.48%
98
43.75%
40
17.86%
7
3.13%
4
1.79%
224
100.00%
How often do you use Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or non-library gateways for
information?
135
60.27%
62
27.68%
12
5.36%
6
2.68%
9
4.02%
224
100.00%
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 graphic displays the number and percentage of respondents who selected each option.
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 58 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
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. Ages are grouped into six categories: Under 18, 18-22, 23-30, 31-45, 46-65, and Over 65.
Respondents
%
Respondents
nAge
Under 18 0 0.00%
18 - 22 0 0.00%
23 - 30 2 8.33%
31 - 45 9 37.50%
46 - 65 13 54.17%
Over 65 0 0.00%
Total: 100.00% 24
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 at the end of the survey instrument and the demographic data provided by institutions through the online Demographics Questionnaire*. 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 Demographics Questionnaire. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided to ARL.
Respondents
%
Respondents
nSex
Male 4 16.67%
Female 20 83.33%
Total: 100.00% 24
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 59 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
7.2 Core Questions Summary for Library Staff
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
AI-1
AI-2
AI-3
AI-4
AI-5
AS-1AS-2AS-3
AS-4
AS-5
AS-6
AS-7
AS-8
AS-9
LP-1
LP-2
LP-3
LP-4LP-5 PC-1
PC-2
PC-3
PC-4
PC-5
PC-6
Access to Information
Affect of Service
Library as Place
Personal Control
Perceived Less Than Minimum
Perceived Greater Than Minimum
Perceived Less Than Desired
Perceived Greater Than Desired
This radar chart shows aggregate results for the 25 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, here they are grouped in quadrants: Affect of Service, Access to Information, Library as Place, and Personal 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.)
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 60 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanQuestion TextID
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Access to Information
Print and/or electronic journal collections I
require for my work
6.85 7.80 6.55 -0.30AI-1 20-1.25
Convenient service hours 7.17 8.00 7.61 0.43AI-2 23-0.39
The printed library materials I need for my work 7.55 8.25 6.25 -1.30AI-3 20-2.00
The electronic information resources I need 7.32 8.32 6.82 -0.50AI-4 22-1.50
Page 62 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
7.3 Core Question Dimensions Summary for Library Staff
4
5
6
7
8
9
Affect of
Service
Access to
Information
Library as Place Personal
Control
Range of Minimum to Perceived ("Adequacy Gap")
Range of Minimum to Desired
Me
an
Dimension
On the chart below, scores for each dimension of library service quality have been plotted graphically. The blue bars represent the range of minimum to desired scores for each dimension. The interior red bars represent the range of minimum to perceived scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimension of library service quality.
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 63 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
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 B.
Adequacy
Mean
Perceived
Mean
Desired
MeanDimension
Minimum
Mean n
Superiority
Mean
Access to Information 6.88 7.75 6.63 -0.17 24-1.13
Affect of Service 7.46 8.42 7.54 0.00 24-1.00
Library as Place 6.50 7.58 5.88 -0.63 24-1.96
Personal Control 7.21 8.17 6.92 -0.25 24-1.29
7.12 8.11 6.89 -0.23 24-1.22Overall:
Adequacy
SD
Perceived
SD
Desired
SDDimension
Minimum
SD n
Superiority
SD
Access to Information 24 1.73 1.15 1.40 1.71 1.78
Affect of Service 24 1.06 0.88 1.18 0.78 0.83
Library as Place 24 1.18 1.88 2.04 1.48 0.97
Personal Control 24 0.83 0.86 1.36 0.83 0.56
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 B.
24Overall: 0.87 0.81 1.11 0.68 0.57
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 64 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
7.4 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. 7.46 24 1.06
In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research, and/or
teaching needs.
6.67 24 1.37
How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 7.17 24 1.01
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 particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the general satisfaction questions on the LibQUAL+™ survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9.
7.5 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary for Library Staff
MeanInformation Literacy Outcomes Questions nSD
The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 5.92 24 1.50
The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline. 6.38 24 1.71
The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits. 6.54 24 1.50
The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy
information.
6.38 24 1.76
The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 6.33 24 1.76
This table displays the mean score and standard deviation for each of the information literacy outcomes questions, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the information literacy outcomes questions on the LibQUAL+™ survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9 with 1 being "strongly disagree" and 9 representing "strongly agree".
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Library Staff
Language:
Institution Type:
Consortium:
User Group:
American English
College or University
None
Library Staff
Page 65 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
7.6 Library Use Summary for Library Staff
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never
How often do you useresources on librarypremises?
How often do youaccess library resourcesthrough a library Webpage?
How often do you useYahoo(TM),Google(TM), ornon-library gateways forinformation?
Frequency
Pe
rce
nta
ge
Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never n / %
How often do you use resources on library
premises?
14
58.33%
5
20.83%
4
16.67%
0
0.00%
1
4.17%
24
100.00%
How often do you access library resources
through a library Web page?
15
62.50%
6
25.00%
2
8.33%
1
4.17%
0
0.00%
24
100.00%
How often do you use Yahoo(TM),
Google(TM), or non-library gateways for
information?
14
58.33%
10
41.67%
0
0.00%
0
0.00%
0
0.00%
24
100.00%
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 graphic displays the number and percentage of respondents who selected each option.
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 66 of 75 LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
8 Appendix A: Print Version of the Survey
Welcome!
We are committed to improving your library services. Better understanding your
expectations will help us tailor those services to your needs.
We are conducting this survey to measure library service quality and identify
best practices through the Association of Research Libraries' LibQUAL+TM
program. Partial funding for this project is provided by the U.S. Department of
Education's Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE).
Please answer all items. The survey will take about 10 minutes to complete.
Thank you for your participation!
Survey Print Version - American English - College or University Libraries - Page 1
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 67 of 75LibQUAL+™ 2003 Survey Results - University of Victoria Libraries
Survey Print Version - American English - College or University Libraries - Page 2
Library Service Quality Survey
Important instructions:
Please rate the following statements (1 is lowest, 9 is highest) by indicating:
Minimum -- the number that represents the minimum level of service that you
would find acceptable.
Desired -- the number that represents the level of service that you personally
want.
Perceived -- the number that represents the level of service that you believe our
library currently provides.
You must EITHER rate all three columns OR identify the item as N/A (not