1,720,969 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
The Evolution and Impact of Library Data
Get PDFAs long as there have been libraries, there has been library statistics. As far back as the 18th century the Bodleian Library was collecting reader statistics; and 100 years ago, the forerunner of the SCONUL statistics commenced. This paper provides an overview of our approaches to data collection and discusses some of the impacts our measurement has had on libraries, alongside case studies from the author. Focussed primarily on the UK academic library context, the data collection practices are presented in four key themes:
• 1990s: Performance Indicators
• 2000s: Benchmarking
• 2010s: Value and Impact
• 2020s: Data Intelligence
Following a literature review of library performance measurement over the past thirty years, coupled with the authors experiences, the paper present observations and hypothesis around library measurement.
The performance indicators era of the 1990s focused heavily on input and output measures. As our focus in data collection moved from input measures (e.g. size of collections and budgets) to efficiency measures, a number of performance indicators were developed. As metric drive behaviour, we saw libraries change their collection management strategies to appear efficient, sometime to the detriment of the library customer.
With the development of wide-spread internet use in the 2000s and the ease of data collection and sharing, benchmarking performance became commonplace. Using COUNTER compliant reports, we benchmarked our journal packages against one another; focussing on the cost-per-download as a proxy for quality. We also benchmarked customer satisfaction, with the development of LibQUAL+ and the National Student Survey in the UK.
In the Value and Impact Era of 2010s we started to see data break out of their siloes, linking student attainment with library data sets. Positive correlations between library use and student success were found, and studies were replicated in many libraries. The ethical issues surrounding this research has been a consistent question, and the value of this research when considering diversity of our students must be considered.
Looking ahead, as we enter an Era of Data Intelligence, we have more data available to us than ever before. How can we use these successfully, while still being mindful of the unknowns and unknowable impacts our data practices have?
Library data provides us with a powerful tool. Though reflecting in this paper, we will attempt to learn from our history, and try not to replicate the mistakes we have made in the past. We need to ensure we are mindful of our data biases, ensuring we strive to improve our performance, and not just prove
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Recommended from our members
What do they want now? Qualitative regrounding of the LibQUAL+® survey
No full textPurpose: LibQUAL+® has provided libraries with a customer satisfaction benchmarking tool which is easy to administer and cost effective. The questionnaire was initially developed following a series of interviews conducted in late 1999 - early 2000 with academic library customers on what constitutes a quality library service. In order to remain current, LibQUAL+® must review the questions asked of the library customers to ensure that it remains relevant as user expectations alter over time (McKnight, 2008). Do the needs of the academic library customer still align to the views held over a decade ago? The purpose of this paper is to present the findings of a Cranfield University research project into the current needs of its academic library customers, and to gauge if the LibQUAL+® questions are still assessing these needs.
Methodology: A series of focus groups were held at Cranfield University during 2011 capturing what academic library customers expect from their library service. Separate focus groups were conducted consisting of customers from four key stakeholder groups; full-time taught postgraduate students, part-time taught postgraduate students, doctoral research students and academic teaching staff. The semi-structured discussions covered the needs of the customers in four main areas; information provision, access to information resources, support from library staff and the physical library environment. The focus groups were transcribed then coded using Atlas.TI to identify common themes of service provision requirements across all user types. These common themes were then compared to the core LibQUAL+® questions to identify the differences and similarities between the two data sets.
Findings: The findings at Cranfield University show that LibQUAL+® is still addressing the issues that matter the most to our customers. As it stands, LibQUAL+® still provides Cranfield University with a cost effective and easy to administer survey tool which measures the areas of service provision that our customers expect from their academic library.
Research limitations and implications: Whist the discussions aimed to be as broad as possible, at this stage the research is restricted to Cranfield University customers only. Views from undergraduate students were not captured during this research project as Cranfield University is the UK’s only wholly postgraduate university. For these reasons implications for the overall qualitative regrounding of LibQUAL+® are limited. Wide research into the qualitative regrounding of the LibQUAL+® survey should be considered.
Originality and value of the proposal: Customer Value Discovery research conducted by McKnight (2008) in a UK academic library in 2005 concluded that the LibQUAL+® core questions met most of the customer needs. Outside of the UK, the reforming and regrounding of the LibQUAL+® survey within the digital library environment has been developed through the DigiQUAL+ project based on qualitative research conducted in 2003 (Kyrillidou, et al, 2009a). No recent studies into the qualitative regrounded of LibQUAL+® have been identified
Recommended from our members
The Evolving Role of Library Data
Get PDFAs Reader statistics dating back to 18th century at the Bodleian Libraries at the University of Oxford will testify, librarians like to count things. How many people use our libraries? How many books and journals do we have? How often are they borrowed or accessed electronically? All of these questions have been answered by librarians over the years to develop an insight into the service we provide. As our ability to capture data within our libraries has grown, so has our appetite to know and understand more about our service. In this session, I will discuss the evolving role of Library data, from collective data sets and early COUNTER statistics, thought to customer interaction metrics and library learning analytics
But what about us? Developing an inclusive approach to library insight.
Get PDFThe Open University (OU) is the UK’s largest academic institution dedicated to distance learning, with over 120,000 students. The Library, based in Milton Keynes, was established alongside the University in 1969 to provide academic staff with access to the latest research in their field. The print library was designed to meet the needs of campus-based staff. The design of the teaching materials posted to students meant that they did not require access to an academic library service. At the turn of the millennium, as electronic publishing and home internet access grew, we commenced offering services to students and sought to establish a library that met their needs.
We have a strong culture in performance measurement and assessment, which helps to ensure that strategy and service improvement is underpinned by evidence. Since 2012, this effort has been helped significantly by our Student Library Research Panel, a dedicated community of students who work with us in partnership as co-creators (Dick and Killick, 2016). A rolling recruitment effort attracts 500 students annually who agree to work with us for a year to contribute to our programme of continual improvement. Although there is a natural self-selection bias to panel membership, many students who join have had limited or no experience of the library when they agree to become part of the community due to the nature of distant learning. This inclusive approach to our student insight research ensures that our service development takes into consideration both user and nonuser needs.
As our assessment culture has grown, one concern about our approach has continued to surface: the panel membership has been restricted to distance learning undergraduate and taught postgraduate students but these are not the only user groups that the library serves. When we developed the panel in 2012, a key objective was to ensure that we captured the views and experiences of these members of our community. They are the largest community we serve, and by their very nature difficult to gain feedback from. While some user experience research was conducted with the predominantly campus-based research students, insight from academic staff was provided only through anecdotal feedback. Feedback from our 9,000 associate lecturers, who teach our students directly and who are predominantly employed on a part-time distance basis, was even scarcer. We were concerned that we were planning service improvements based on student needs alone and not seeing a fuller picture.
In February 2018 we started a Library Needs project, seeking to gain a more detailed understanding of current and future needs and expectations of the Library service from the whole OU community by undertaking focussed qualitative research with:
• Academic staff based on campus and in other parts of the UK
• Associate lecturers
• Research students on campus and in other parts of the UK
• Students (undergraduate and taught postgraduate)
A total of 33 interviews were conducted as part of the project, using a directed storytelling approach to gain rich insights into the needs of our community. The conversations were recorded and transcribed before conducting Conversation Analysis (CA) and Thematic Analysis (TA) to draw out the themes in our very rich data. The findings were used by the library’s extended leadership team, coupled with their professional expertise, to develop the departmental operational plan and objectives for the forthcoming academic year.
While the insights gained from the students (and, to some extent, from the research students) corresponded with the research previously undertaken with the student panel, some wider insights from the other community groups surprised us. Positively, we are seen as a prized resource that is central to the work of the University. Participants spoke about the value of the Library in their work, research, and study. In line with our continual improvement culture, however, one area was singled out as in need of improvement: the physical library. Since commencing offering services for student the Library placed a strong focus on electronic resources and we moved increasingly towards a virtual presence. Understandably, this suits our largest community, the distant learning students, but in the process the Library lost some relationship capital with campus-based academic staff and research students.
In response to these findings, the Library has partnered with the Estates department to develop a new vision and strategy for the physical library. In line with our assessment culture this has been based on insight. Through observation studies, love letters and break up letters, and guerrilla interviews with both users and nonusers of the building we have identified the needs and expectations of the physical library. This insight, combined with our professional expertise has resulted in the new vision and strategy which we are now working to deliver.
The wider learning from this process, however, is the importance of capturing the views of our whole community, including the users and nonusers, from all user groups. To take this forward we are in the process of extending and enhancing the Library Student Research Panel which has served us so well, to become the Library Research Panel, to ensure we continue to gather insight from our whole community.
References
Dick, S. and Killick, S. (2016) ‘Delighting Our Customers : Building Services Collaboratively with Learners at a Distance’, in Baughman, S., Hiller, S., Monroe, K., and Pappalardo, A. (eds) 2016 Library Assessment Conference. Arlington, VA: Association of Research Libraries, pp. 543–548. Available at: http://oro.open.ac.uk/id/eprint/57807
Recommended from our members
Exploiting customer relationship management analytics to improve the student experience.
No full textRecommended from our members
Putting a Library Assessment Culture into Practice
No full textWe have a strong library assessment culture which informs everything we do. This paper explores how we integrate insight into our strategic planning processes, instilling our culture of Library Assessment. There are three key facets to our methodology; insight, strategy and expertise.
This paper provides a practical example of how a library assessment culture has been used to inform library strategic planning. It is one key facet of three within the methodology we apply. Our approach can be applied in a variety of service department contexts, ensuring the insight we gain from our users is at the heart of everything we do
Variations on the Author
Get PDF“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Get PDFWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
- …
