libqual canada - library.queensu.ca · revised 9/17/07 3 libqual canada contributors colleen cook...

Revised 9/17/07

1

LibQUAL Canada Revised 9/17/07 __________________________________________________________ Association of Research Libraries / Texas A&M University www.libqual.org

Revised 9/17/07

2

Revised 9/17/07

3

LibQUAL Canada Contributors Colleen Cook MaShana Davis Texas A&M University Association of Research Libraries Fred Heath Martha Kyrillidou University of Texas Association of Research Libraries BruceThompson Duane Webster Texas A&M University Association of Research Libraries

Revised 9/17/07

4

Association of Research Libraries 21 Dupont Circle NW Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 Phone 202-296-2296 Fax 202-872-0884 http://www.libqual.org Copyright © 2007 Association of Research Libraries 59407-772-X (paperback) ISBN 1-59407-773-8 (PDF)

Revised 9/17/07

5

Table of Contents 1 Introduction..............................................................................................................................................................8

1.1 Acknowledgements .........................................................................................................................................8 1.2 LibQUAL+®: a Project from StatsQUAL™......................................................................................................9 1.3 LibQUAL+®: Defining and Promoting Library Service Quality......................................................................11 1.4 Web Access to Data......................................................................................................................................12 1.5 A Few Words about LibQUAL+® 2007 .........................................................................................................14

2 Respondents by Institution for LibQUAL Canada..............................................................................................23 3 Canadian Government Results for LibQual Canada..........................................................................................25

3.1 Demographics Summary...............................................................................................................................25 3.1.1 Population and Respondent Profiles by Standard Discipline....................................................................25 3.1.2 Respondent Profile by Age .......................................................................................................................26 3.1.3 Population and Respondent Profiles by Sex ............................................................................................26 3.1.4 Population and Respondent Profiles by Employment Status ...................................................................27 3.1.5 Respondent Profile by Level of Education................................................................................................28 3.1.6 Population and Respondent Profiles by Profession..................................................................................28 3.1.7 Population and Respondent Profiles by Internal Network ........................................................................29 3.1.8 Population and Respondent Profiles by Primary Access Method ............................................................30

3.2 Survey Item Summary...................................................................................................................................31 3.2.1 Core Question Summary ..........................................................................................................................31 3.2.2 Core Question Dimension Summary ........................................................................................................37 3.2.3 Local Questions Summary........................................................................................................................40 3.2.4 General Satisfaction Questions Summary................................................................................................42 3.2.5 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary ...............................................................................43 3.2.6 Library Use Summary ...............................................................................................................................44

4 College or University Libraries Results for LibQual Canada............................................................................47 4.1 College or University Libraries - All ...............................................................................................................47

4.1.1 Respondents by User Group ....................................................................................................................47 4.1.2 Population and Respondent Profiles by User Sub-Group ........................................................................50 4.1.3 Population and Respondent Profiles by Standard Discipline....................................................................53 4.1.4 Respondent Profile by Age .......................................................................................................................56 4.1.5 Population and Respondent Profile by Sex ..............................................................................................57 4.1.6 Core Question Summary ..........................................................................................................................58 4.1.7 Core Question Dimension Summary ........................................................................................................65 4.1.8 Local Questions Summary........................................................................................................................69 4.1.9 General Satisfaction Questions Summary................................................................................................75 4.1.10 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary ...............................................................................76 4.1.11 Library Use Summary ...............................................................................................................................77

4.2 College or University Libraries - Undergraduate ...........................................................................................80 4.2.1 Population and Respondent Profiles by Standard Discipline....................................................................80 4.2.2 Respondent Profile by Age .......................................................................................................................83 4.2.3 Population and Respondent Profile by Sex ..............................................................................................84 4.2.4 Core Question Summary ..........................................................................................................................85 4.2.5 Core Question Dimension Summary ........................................................................................................92 4.2.6 Local Questions Summary........................................................................................................................95 4.2.7 General Satisfaction Questions Summary..............................................................................................102 4.2.8 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary .............................................................................102 4.2.9 Library Use Summary .............................................................................................................................104

4.3 College or University Libraries - Graduate ..................................................................................................107 4.3.1 Population and Respondent Profiles by Standard Discipline..................................................................107 4.3.2 Respondent Profile by Age .....................................................................................................................110 4.3.3 Population and Respondent Profile by Sex ............................................................................................111 4.3.4 Core Question Summary ........................................................................................................................112 4.3.5 Core Question Dimension Summary ......................................................................................................118 4.3.6 Local Questions Summary......................................................................................................................121 4.3.7 General Satisfaction Questions Summary..............................................................................................127 4.3.8 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary .............................................................................128

Revised 9/17/07

6

4.3.9 Library Use Summary .............................................................................................................................129 4.4 College or University Libraries - Faculty .....................................................................................................132

4.4.1 Population and Respondent Profiles by Standard Discipline..................................................................132 4.4.2 Respondent Profile by Age .....................................................................................................................135 4.4.3 Population and Respondent Profile by Sex ............................................................................................136 4.4.4 Core Question Summary ........................................................................................................................137 4.4.5 Core Question Dimension Summary ......................................................................................................143 4.4.6 Local Questions Summary......................................................................................................................147 4.4.7 General Satisfaction Questions Summary..............................................................................................153 4.4.8 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary .............................................................................154 4.4.9 Library Use Summary .............................................................................................................................155

4.5 College or University Libraries - Library Staff..............................................................................................158 4.5.1 Respondent Profile by Age .....................................................................................................................158 4.5.2 Population and Respondent Profile by Sex ............................................................................................159 4.5.3 Core Question Summary ........................................................................................................................160 4.5.4 Core Question Dimension Summary ......................................................................................................166 4.5.5 Local Questions Summary......................................................................................................................169 4.5.6 General Satisfaction Questions Summary..............................................................................................175 4.5.7 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary .............................................................................176 4.5.8 Library Use Summary .............................................................................................................................177

4.6 College or University Libraries - Staff..........................................................................................................180 4.6.1 Respondent Profile by Age .....................................................................................................................180 4.6.2 Population and Respondent Profile by Sex ............................................................................................181 4.6.3 Core Question Summary ........................................................................................................................182 4.6.4 Core Question Dimension Summary ......................................................................................................188 4.6.5 Local Questions Summary......................................................................................................................192 4.6.6 General Satisfaction Questions Summary..............................................................................................198 4.6.7 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary .............................................................................199 4.6.8 Library Use Summary .............................................................................................................................200

5 Community College Libraries Results for LibQual Canada............................................................................203 5.1 Community College Libraries - All ...............................................................................................................203

5.1.1 Respondents by User Group ..................................................................................................................203 5.1.2 Population and Respondent Profiles by User Sub-Group ......................................................................204 5.1.3 Population and Respondent Profiles by Standard Discipline..................................................................206 5.1.4 Respondent Profile by Age .....................................................................................................................207 5.1.5 Population and Respondent Profile by Sex ............................................................................................208 5.1.6 Core Question Summary ........................................................................................................................208 5.1.7 Core Question Dimension Summary ......................................................................................................211 5.1.8 Local Questions Summary......................................................................................................................213 5.1.9 General Satisfaction Questions Summary..............................................................................................214 5.1.10 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary .............................................................................214 5.1.11 Library Use Summary .............................................................................................................................215

5.2 Community College Libraries – Student......................................................................................................216 5.2.1 Population and Respondent Profiles by Standard Discipline..................................................................216 5.2.2 Respondent Profile by Age .....................................................................................................................217 5.2.3 Population and Respondent Profile by Sex ............................................................................................217 5.2.4 Core Question Summary ........................................................................................................................218 5.2.5 Core Question Dimension Summary ......................................................................................................221 5.2.6 Local Questions Summary......................................................................................................................222 5.2.7 General Satisfaction Questions Summary..............................................................................................223 5.2.8 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary .............................................................................224 5.2.9 Library Use Summary .............................................................................................................................225

5.3 Community College Libraries – Faculty ......................................................................................................226 5.3.1 Population and Respondent Profiles by Standard Discipline..................................................................226 5.3.2 Respondent Profile by Age .....................................................................................................................227 5.3.3 Population and Respondent Profile by Sex ............................................................................................228 5.3.4 Core Question Summary ........................................................................................................................229

Revised 9/17/07

7

5.3.5 Core Question Dimension Summary ......................................................................................................231 5.3.6 Local Questions Summary......................................................................................................................233 5.3.7 General Satisfaction Questions Summary..............................................................................................234 5.3.8 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary .............................................................................234 5.3.9 Library Use Summary .............................................................................................................................234

5.4 Community College Libraries – Library Staff...............................................................................................236 5.4.1 Respondent Profile by Age .....................................................................................................................236 5.4.2 Population and Respondent Profile by Sex ............................................................................................236 5.4.3 Core Question Summary ........................................................................................................................236 5.4.4 Core Question Dimension Summary ......................................................................................................239 5.4.5 Local Questions Summary......................................................................................................................241 5.4.6 General Satisfaction Questions Summary..............................................................................................242 5.4.7 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary .............................................................................242 5.4.8 Library Use Summary .............................................................................................................................242

5.5 Community College Libraries – Staff...........................................................................................................244 5.5.1 Respondent Profile by Age .....................................................................................................................244 5.5.2 Population and Respondent Profile by Sex ............................................................................................244 5.5.3 Core Question Summary ........................................................................................................................244 5.5.4 Core Question Dimension Summary ......................................................................................................247 5.5.5 Local Questions Summary......................................................................................................................249 5.5.6 General Satisfaction Questions Summary..............................................................................................250 5.5.7 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary .............................................................................250 5.5.8 Library Use Summary .............................................................................................................................250

6 Appendix A: LibQUAL+® Dimensions ..............................................................................................................252

Revised 9/17/07

8

1 Introduction

1.1 Acknowledgements This notebook contains information from the 2007 administration of the LibQUAL+® protocol. The material on the following pages is drawn from the analysis of responses from the participating institutions collected in 2007.

The LibQUAL+® project requires the skills of a dedicated group. We would like to thank several members of the LibQUAL+® team for their key roles in the development of this service. From Texas A&M University, the qualitative leadership of Yvonna Lincoln has been key to the project's integrity. The behind-the-scenes roles of Bill Chollet and others from the library Systems and Training units were also formative in the early years. From the Association of Research Libraries, we are appreciative of the past contributions of Consuella Askew, Richard Groves, Amy Hoseth, Mary Jackson, Jonathan Sousa, and Benny Yu.

A New Measures initiative of this scope is possible only as the collaborative effort of many libraries. To the directors and liaisons at all participating libraries goes the largest measure of gratitude. Without your commitment, the development of LibQUAL+® would not have been possible. We would like to extend a special thank you to all administrators at the participating consortia and libraries that are making this project happen effectively across various institutions.

We would like to acknowledge the role of the Fund for the Improvement of Post-secondary Education (FIPSE), U.S. Department of Education, which provided grant funds of $498,368 over a three-year period (2001-03). We would also like to acknowledge the support of the National Science Foundation (NSF) for its grant of $245,737 over a three-year period (2002-04) to adapt the LibQUAL+® instrument for use in the science, math, engineering, and technology education digital library community, an assessment tool in development now called DigiQUAL. We would like to express our thanks for the financial support that has enabled the researchers engaged in this project to exceed all of our expectations in stated goals and objectives and deliver a remarkable assessment tool to the library community.

Colleen Cook MaShana Davis Texas A&M University Association of Research Libraries Fred Heath Martha Kyrillidou University of Texas Association of Research Libraries Bruce Thompson Duane Webster Texas A&M University Association of Research Libraries

Revised 9/17/07

9

1.2 LibQUAL+®: a Project from StatsQUAL™

I would personally like to say a word about the development of LibQUAL+® over the last few years and to thank the people that have been involved in this effort. LibQUAL+® would not have been possible without the many people who have offered their time and constructive feedback over the years for the cause of improving library services. In a sense, LibQUAL+® has built three kinds of partnerships: one between ARL and Texas A&M University, a second one among the participating libraries and their staff, and a third one comprising the thousands of users who have provided their valuable survey responses over the years. LibQUAL+® was initiated in 2000 as an experimental project for benchmarking perceptions of library service quality across 13 ARL libraries under the leadership of Fred Heath and Colleen Cook, then both at Texas A&M University Libraries. It matured quickly into a standard assessment tool that has been applied at more than 1,000 libraries, collecting information on more than half a million library users. Each year since 2003, we have had more than 200 libraries conduct LibQUAL+®, more than 100,000 users respond, and annually more than 50,000 users provide rich comments about the ways they use their libraries. There have been numerous advancements over the years. In 2005, libraries were able to conduct LibQUAL+® over a two session period (Session I: January to May and Session II: July to December). The LibQUAL+® servers were moved from Texas A&M University to an external hosting facility under the ARL brand known as StatsQUAL™. Through the StatsQUAL™ gateway we will continue to provide innovative tools for libraries to assess and manage their environments in the coming years. In 2006, we added the LibQUAL+® Analytics (for more information, see Section 1.6). LibQUAL+® findings have engaged thousands of librarians in discussions with colleagues and ARL on what these findings mean for local libraries, for their regions, and for the future of libraries across the globe. Consortia have supported their members’ participation in LibQUAL+® in order to offer an informed understanding of the changes occurring in their shared environment. Summary highlights have been published on an annual basis showcasing the rich array of information available through LibQUAL+®: LibQUAL+® 2006 Survey Highlights <http://www.libqual.org/documents/admin/LibQUALHighlights2006.pdf> LibQUAL+® 2005 Survey Highlights <http://www.libqual.org/documents/admin/LibQUALHighlights20051.pdf> LibQUAL+® 2004 Survey Highlights <http://www.libqual.org/documents/admin/ExecSummary%201.3.pdf> LibQUAL+® 2003 Survey Highlights <http://www.libqual.org/documents/admin/ExecSummary1.1_locked.pdf> Summary published reports have also been made available: <http://www.arl.org/pubscat/libqualpubs.html> The socio-economic and technological changes that are taking place around us are affecting the ways users interact with libraries. We used to think that libraries could provide reliable and reasonably complete access to published and

Revised 9/17/07

10

scholarly output, yet we now know from LibQUAL+® that users have an insatiable appetite for content. No library can ever have sufficient information content that would come close to satisfying this appetite. The team at ARL and beyond has worked hard to nurture the community that has been built around LibQUAL+®. We believe that closer collaboration and sharing of resources will bring libraries nearer to meeting the ever changing needs of their demanding users. It is this spirit of collaboration and a willingness to view the world of libraries as an organic, integrated, and cohesive environment that can bring forth major innovations and break new ground. Innovation and aggressive marketing of the role of libraries in benefiting their communities strengthen libraries. In an example of collaboration, LibQUAL+® participants are sharing their results within the LibQUAL+® community with an openness that nevertheless respects the confidentiality of each institution and its users. LibQUAL+® participants are actively shaping our Share Fair gatherings, our in-person events, and our understanding of how the collected data can be used. LibQUAL+® offers a rich resource that can be viewed using many lenses, should be interpreted in multiple ways, and is a powerful tool libraries can use to understand their environment. LibQUAL+® is a community mechanism for improving libraries and I hope we see an increasing number of libraries utilizing it successfully in the years to come. I look forward to your continuing active involvement in helping us understand the many ways we can improve library services. With warm regards, Martha Kyrillidou Director, ARL Statistics and Service Quality Programs

Revised 9/17/07

11

1.3 LibQUAL+®: Defining and Promoting Library Service Quality What is LibQUAL+®?

LibQUAL+® is a suite of services that libraries use to solicit, track, understand, and act upon users’ opinions of service quality. These services are offered to the library community by the Association of Research Libraries (ARL). The program’s centerpiece is a rigorously tested Web-based survey bundled with training that helps libraries assess and improve library services, change organizational culture, and market the library. The goals of LibQUAL+® are to:

• Foster a culture of excellence in providing library service • Help libraries better understand user perceptions of library service quality • Collect and interpret library user feedback systematically over time • Provide libraries with comparable assessment information from peer institutions • Identify best practices in library service • Enhance library staff members’ analytical skills for interpreting and acting on data

As of spring 2007, more than 1,000 libraries have participated in the LibQUAL+® survey, including Canadian government libraries, colleges and universities, community colleges, health sciences and hospital/medical libraries, law libraries, public libraries, and secondary school libraries---some through various consortia, others as independent participants. LibQUAL+® has expanded internationally, with participating institutions in Canada, the U.K. and other European countries as well as Australia and South Africa. It has been translated into a number of languages, including Afrikaans, Chinese (Traditional), Danish, Dutch, Finnish, French, German, Norwegian, and Swedish. The growing LibQUAL+® community of participants and its extensive dataset are rich resources for improving library services. How will LibQUAL+® benefit your library?

Library administrators have successfully used LibQUAL+® survey data to identify best practices, analyze deficits, and effectively allocate resources. Benefits to participating institutions include:

• Institutional data and reports that enable you to assess whether your library services are meeting user expectations

• Aggregate data and reports that allow you to compare your library’s performance with that of peer institutions • Workshops designed for participants • Access to an online library of LibQUAL+® research articles • The opportunity to become part of a community interested in developing excellence in library services

LibQUAL+® gives your library users a chance to tell you where your services need improvement so you can respond to and better manage their expectations. You can develop services that better meet your users’ expectations by comparing your library’s data with that of peer institutions and examining the practices of those libraries that are evaluated highly by their users. How is the LibQUAL+® survey conducted?

Conducting the LibQUAL+® survey requires little technical expertise on your part. You invite your users to take the survey by distributing the URL for your library’s Web form via e-mail. Respondents complete the survey form and their

Revised 9/17/07

12

answers are sent to a central database. The data are analyzed and presented to you in reports describing your users’ desired, perceived, and minimum expectations of service.

What are the origins of the LibQUAL+® survey?

The LibQUAL+® survey evolved from a conceptual model based on the SERVQUAL instrument, a popular tool for assessing service quality in the private sector. The Texas A&M University Libraries and other libraries used modified SERVQUAL instruments for several years; those applications revealed the need for a newly adapted tool that would serve the particular requirements of libraries. ARL, representing the largest research libraries in North America, partnered with Texas A&M University Libraries to develop, test, and refine LibQUAL+®. This effort was supported in part by a three-year grant from the U.S. Department of Education’s Fund for the Improvement of Post-Secondary Education (FIPSE).

1.4 Web Access to Data A working knowledge of how to read and derive relevant information from the tables and charts used in your LibQUAL+® results notebook is essential. In addition to the explanatory text below, you can find a self-paced tutorial on the project web site at:

<http://www.libqual.org/Information/Tools/index.cfm>

Both the online tutorial and the text below are designed to help you understand your survey results and present and explain those results to others at your library. Radar Charts

Radar charts are commonly used throughout the following pages to display both aggregate results and results from individual institutions. Basic information about radar charts is outlined below, and additional descriptive information is included throughout this notebook. What is a radar chart? Radar charts are useful when you want to look at several different factors all related to one item. Sometimes called “spider charts” or “polar charts”, radar charts feature multiple axes or “spokes” along which data can be plotted. Variations in the data are shown by distance from the center of the chart. Lines connect the data points for each series, forming a spiral around the center. In the case of the LibQUAL+® survey results, each axis represents a different survey question. Questions are identified by a code at the end of each axis. The three dimensions measured by the survey are grouped together on the radar charts, and each dimension is labeled: Affect of Service (AS), Information Control (IC), and Library as Place (LP). Radar charts are used in this notebook to present the item summaries (the results from the 22 core survey questions). How to read a radar chart Radar charts are an effective way to show strengths and weaknesses graphically by enabling you to observe symmetry or uniformity of data. Points close to the center indicate a low value, while points near the edge indicate a high value. When interpreting a radar chart, it is important to check each individual axis as well as the chart’s overall shape in order to gain a complete understanding of its meaning. You can see how much data fluctuates by observing whether the spiral is smooth or has spikes of variability.

Revised 9/17/07

13

Respondents’ minimum, desired, and perceived levels of service quality are plotted on each axis of your LibQUAL+® radar charts. The resulting “gaps” between the three levels are shaded in blue, yellow, green, and red. Generally, a radar graph shaded blue and yellow indicates that users’ perceptions of service fall within the “zone of tolerance”; the distance between minimum expectations and perceptions of service quality is shaded in blue, and the distance between their desired and perceived levels of service quality is shown in yellow. When users’ perceptions fall outside the “zone of tolerance,” the graph will include areas of red and green shading. If the distance between users’ minimum expectations and perceptions of service delivery is represented in red, that indicates a negative service adequacy gap score. If the distance between the desired level of service and perceptions of service delivery is represented in green, that indicates a positive service superiority gap score. Means

The mean of a collection of numbers is their arithmetic average, computed by adding them up and dividing by their total number. In this notebook, means are provided for users’ minimum, desired, and perceived levels of service quality for each item on the LibQUAL+® survey. Means are also provided for the general satisfaction and information literacy outcomes questions. Standard Deviation

Standard deviation is a measure of the spread of data around their mean. The standard deviation (SD) depends on calculating the average distance of each score from the mean. In this notebook, standard deviations are provided for every mean presented in the tables. Service Adequacy

The service adequacy gap score is calculated by subtracting the minimum score from the perceived score on any given question, for each user. Both means and standard deviations are provided for service adequacy gap scores on each item of the survey, as well as for each of the three dimensions of library service quality. In general, service adequacy is an indicator of the extent to which you are meeting the minimum expectations of your users. A negative service adequacy gap score indicates that your users’ perceived level of service quality is below their minimum level of service quality and is printed in red.

Service Superiority

The service superiority gap score is calculated by subtracting the desired score from the perceived score on any given question, for each user. Both means and standard deviations are provided for service superiority gap scores on each item of the survey, as well as for each of the three dimensions of library service quality. In general, service superiority is an indicator of the extent to which you are exceeding the desired expectations of your users. A positive service superiority gap score indicates that your users’ perceived level of service quality is above their desired level of service quality and is printed in green.

Sections with charts and tables are omitted from the following pages when there are three or fewer individuals in a specific group.

Revised 9/17/07

14

In consortia notebooks, institution type summaries are not shown if there is only one library for an institution type. Individual library notebooks are produced separately for each participant.

1.5 A Few Words about LibQUAL+® 2007 Libraries today confront escalating pressure to demonstrate impact. As Cullen (2001) has noted,

Academic libraries are currently facing their greatest challenge since the explosion in tertiary education and academic publishing which began after World War II... [T]he emergence of the virtual university, supported by the virtual library, calls into question many of our basic assumptions about the role of the academic library, and the security of its future. Retaining and growing their customer base, and focusing more energy on meeting their customers' expectations is the only way for academic libraries to survive in this volatile environment. (pp. 662-663)

Today, "A measure of library quality based solely on collections has become obsolete" (Nitecki, 1996, p. 181). These considerations have prompted the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) to sponsor a number of "New Measures" initiatives. The New Measures efforts represent a collective determination on the part of the ARL membership to augment the collection-count and fiscal input measures that comprise the ARL Index and ARL Statistics, to date the most consistently collected statistics for research libraries, with outcome measures such as assessments of service quality and satisfaction. One New Measures Initiative is the LibQUAL+® service (Cook, Heath & B. Thompson, 2002, 2003; Heath, Cook, Kyrillidou & Thompson, 2002; Thompson, Cook & Heath, 2003; Thompson, Cook & Thompson, 2002). Within a service-quality assessment model, "only customers judge quality; all other judgments are essentially irrelevant" (Zeithaml, Parasuraman, Berry, 1990, p. 16). LibQUAL+® was modeled on the 22-item SERVQUAL tool developed by Parasuraman, Berry and Zeithaml (Parasuraman, Berry & Zeithaml, 1991). However, SERVQUAL has been shown to measure some issues not particularly relevant in libraries, and to not measure some issues of considerable interest to library users. The final 22 LibQUAL+® items were developed through several iterations of studies involving a larger pool of 56 items. The selection of items employed in the LibQUAL+® survey has been grounded in the users' perspective as revealed in a series of qualitative studies involving a larger pool of items. The items were identified following qualitative research interviews with student and faculty library users at several different universities (Cook, 2002a; Cook & Heath, 2001). LibQUAL+® is not just a list of 22 standardized items. First, LibQUAL+® offers libraries the ability to select five optional local service quality assessment items. Second, the survey includes a comments box soliciting open-ended user views. Almost half of the people responding to the LibQUAL+® survey provide valuable feedback through the comments box. These open-ended comments are helpful for not only (a) understanding why users provide certain ratings, but also (b) understanding what policy changes users suggest, because many users feel the obligation to be constructive. Participating libraries are finding the real-time access to user comments one of the most useful devices in challenging library administrators to think outside of the box and develop innovative ways for improving library services. LibQUAL+® is one of 11 ways of listening to users, called a total market survey. As Berry (1995) explained,

Revised 9/17/07

15

When well designed and executed, total market surveys provide a range of information unmatched by any other method... A critical facet of total market surveys (and the reason for using the word 'total') is the measurement of competitors' service quality. This [also] requires using non-customers in the sample to rate the service of their suppliers. (p. 37)

Although (a) measuring perceptions of both users and non-users, and (b) collecting perceptions data with regard to peer institutions can provide important insights Berry recommended using multiple listening methods and emphasized that "Ongoing data collection... is a necessity. Transactional surveys, total market surveys, and employee research should always be included" (Berry, 1995, p. 54). Score Scaling

"Perceived" scores on the 22 LibQUAL+® core items, the three subscales, and the total score, are all scaled 1 to 9, with 9 being the most favorable. Both the gap scores ("Adequacy" = "Perceived" - "Minimum"; "Superiority" = "Perceived" - "Desired") are scaled such that higher scores are more favorable. Thus, an adequacy gap score of +1.2 on an item, subscale, or total score is better than an adequacy gap score of +1.0. A superiority gap score of -0.5 on an item, subscale, or total score is better than a superiority gap score of -1.0. Using LibQUAL+® Data

In some cases LibQUAL+® data may confirm prior expectations and library staff will readily formulate action plans to remedy perceived deficiencies. But in many cases library decision-makers will seek additional information to corroborate interpretations or to better understand the dynamics underlying user perceptions. For example, once an interpretation is formulated, library staff might review recent submissions of users to suggestion boxes to evaluate whether LibQUAL+® data are consistent with interpretations, and the suggestion box data perhaps also provide user suggestions for remedies. User focus groups also provide a powerful way to explore problems and potential solutions. A university-wide retreat with a small-group facilitated discussion to solicit suggestions for improvement is another follow-up mechanism that has been implemented in several LibQUAL+® participating libraries. Indeed, the open-ended comments gathered as part of LibQUAL+® are themselves useful in fleshing out insights into perceived library service quality. Respondents often use the comments box on the survey to make constructive suggestions on specific ways to address their concerns. Qualitative analysis of these comments can be very fruitful. In short, LibQUAL+® is not 22 items. LibQUAL+® is 22 items plus a comments box

Cook (2002b) provided case study reports of how staff at various libraries have employed data from prior renditions of LibQUAL+®. Heath, Kyrillidou, and Askew edited a special issue of the Journal of Library Administration (Vol. 40, No. 3/4) reporting additional case studies on the use of LibQUAL+® data to aid the improvement of library service quality. This special issue has also been published by Hayworth Press as a monograph. These publications can be ordered by sending an email to [email protected]. 2007 Data Screening

The 22 LibQUAL+® core items measure perceptions of total service quality, as well as three sub-dimensions of perceived library quality: (a) Service Affect (9 items, such as "willingness to help users"); (b) Information Control (8 items, such as "a library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own" and "print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work"); and (c) Library as Place (5 items, such as "a getaway for study, learning, or research").

Revised 9/17/07

16

However, as happens in any survey, in 2007 some users provided incomplete data, inconsistent data, or both. In compiling the summary data reported here, several criteria were used to determine which respondents to omit from these analyses. 1. Complete Data. The Web software that presents the 22 core items monitors whether a given user has completed all items. On each of these items, in order to submit the survey successfully, users must provide a rating of (a) minimally-acceptable service, (b) desired service, and (c) perceived service or rate the item "not applicable" ("NA"). If these conditions are not met, when the user attempts to leave the Web page presenting the 22 core items, the software shows the user where missing data are located, and requests complete data. The user may of course abandon the survey without completing all the items. Only records with complete data on the 22 items and where respondents chose a "user group," if applicable, were retained in summary statistics. 2. Excessive "NA" Responses. Because some institutions provided access to a lottery drawing for an incentive (e.g., a Palm PDA) for completing the survey, some users might have selected "NA" choices for all or most of the items rather than reporting their actual perceptions. Or, some users may have views on such a narrow range of quality issues that their data are not very informative. In this survey it was decided that records containing more than 11 "NA" responses should be eliminated from the summary statistics. 3. Excessive Inconsistent Responses. On the LibQUAL+® survey, user perceptions can be interpreted by locating "perceived" results within the "zone of tolerance" defined by data from the "minimum" and the "desired" ratings. For example, a mean "perceived" rating of 7.5 on the 1-to-9 (9 is highest) scale might be very good if the mean "desired" rating is 6.0. But a 7.5 perception score is less satisfactory if the mean "desired" rating is 8.6, or if the mean "minimum" rating is 7.7. One appealing feature of such a "gap measurement model" is that the rating format provides a check for inconsistencies (i.e., score inversions) in the response data (Thompson, Cook & Heath, 2000). Logically, on a given item the "minimum" rating should not be higher than the "desired" rating on the same item. For each user a count of such inconsistencies, ranging from "0" to "22," was made. Records containing more than 9 logical inconsistencies were eliminated from the summary statistics. LibQUAL+® Norms

An important way to interpret LibQUAL+® data is by examining the zones of tolerance for items, the three subscale scores, and the total scores. However, the collection of such a huge number of user perceptions has afforded us with the unique opportunity to create norms tables that provide yet another perspective on results. Norms tell us how scores "stack up" within a particular user group. For example, on the 1-to-9 (9 is highest) scale, users might provide a mean "perceived" rating of 6.5 on an item, "the printed library materials I need for my work." The same users might provide a mean rating on "minimum" for this item of 7.0, and a mean service-adequacy "gap score" (i.e., "perceived" minus "minimum") of -0.5.

The zone-of-tolerance perspective suggests that this library is not doing well on this item, because "perceived" falls below "minimally acceptable." This is important to know. But there is also a second way (i.e., normatively) to interpret the data. Both perspectives can be valuable. A total market survey administered to more than 100,000 users, as was LibQUAL+® in 2004 and 2005, affords the opportunity to ask normative questions such as, "How does a mean 'perceived' score of 6.5 stack up among all

Revised 9/17/07

17

individual users who completed the survey?", or "How does a mean service-adequacy gap score of -0.5 stack up among the gap scores of all institutions participating in the survey?" If 70 percent of individual users generated "perceived" ratings lower than 6.5, 6.5 might not be so bad. And if 90 percent of institutions had service-adequacy gap scores lower than -0.5 (e.g., -0.7, -1.1), a mean gap score of -0.5 might actually be quite good. Users simply may have quite high expectations in this area. They may also communicate their dissatisfaction by rating both (a) "perceived" lower and (b) "minimum" higher. This does not mean that a service-adequacy gap score of -0.5 is necessarily a cause for celebration. But a service-adequacy gap score of -0.5 on an item for which 90 percent of institutions have a lower gap score is a different gap score than the same -0.5 for a different item in which 90 percent of institutions have a higher service-adequacy gap score. Only norms give us insight into this comparative perspective. And a local user-satisfaction survey (as against a total market survey) can never provide this insight. Common Misconception Regarding Norms. An unfortunate and incorrect misconception is that norms make value statements. Norms do not make value statements Norms make fact statements. If you are a forest ranger, and you make $25,000 a year, a norms table might inform you of the fact that you make less money than 85 percent of the adults in the United States.

But if you love the outdoors, you do not care very much about money, and you are very service-oriented, this fact statement might not be relevant to you. Or, in the context of your values, you might interpret this fact as being quite satisfactory. LibQUAL+® Norms Tables. Of course, the fact statements made by the LibQUAL+® norms are only valuable if you care about the dimensions being evaluated by the measure. More background on LibQUAL+® norms is provided by Cook and Thompson (2001), and Cook, Heath and B. Thompson (2002). LibQUAL+® norms for earlier years are available on the Web at the following URLs:

<http://www.coe.tamu.edu/~bthompson/libq2005.htm> <http://www.coe.tamu.edu/~bthompson/libq2004.htm>

Response Rates

At the American Library Association (ALA) Midwinter Meeting in San Antonio in January 2000, participants were cautioned that response rates on the final LibQUAL+® survey would probably range from 25-33 percent. Higher response rates can be realized (a) with shorter surveys that (b) are directly action-oriented (Cook, Heath & R.L. Thompson, 2000). For example, a very high response rate could be realized by a library director administering the following one-item survey to users:

Instructions. Please tell us what time to close the library every day. In the future we will close at whatever time receives the most votes. Should we close the library at?

(A) 10 p.m. (B) 11 p.m. (C) midnight (D) 2 p.m.

Revised 9/17/07

18

Lower response rates will be expected for total market surveys measuring general perceptions of users across institutions, and when an intentional effort is made to solicit perceptions of both users and non-users. Two considerations should govern the evaluation of LibQUAL+® response rates. Minimum Response Rates. Response rates are computed by dividing the number of completed surveys at an institution by the number of persons asked to complete the survey. However, we do not know the actual response rates on LibQUAL+®, because we do not know the correct denominators for these calculations. For example, given inadequacy in records at schools, we are not sure how many e-mail addresses for users are accurate. And we do not know how many messages to invite participation were actually opened. In other words, what we know for LibQUAL+® is the "lower-bound estimate" of response rates. For example, if 200 out of 800 solicitations result in completed surveys, we know that the response rate is at least 25 percent. But because we are not sure whether 800 e-mail addresses were correct or that 800 e-mail messages were opened, we are not sure that 800 is the correct denominator. The response rate involving only correct e-mail addresses might be 35 or 45 percent. We don't know the exact response rate. Representativeness Versus Response Rate. If 100 percent of the 800 people we randomly selected to complete our survey did so, then we can be assured that the results are representative of all users. But if only 25 percent of the 800 users complete the survey, the representativeness of the results is not assured. Nor is unrepresentativeness assured. Representativeness is actually a matter of degree. And several institutions each with 25 percent response rates may have data with different degrees of representativeness. We can never be sure about how representative our data are as long as not everyone completes the survey. But we can at least address this concern by comparing the demographic profiles of survey completers with the population (Thompson, 2000). At which university below would one feel more confident that LibQUAL+® results were reasonably representative?

Alpha University Completers (n=200 / 800) Population (N=16,000) Gender Gender Students 53% female Students 51% female Faculty 45% female Faculty 41% female Disciplines Disciplines Liberal Arts 40% Liberal Arts 35% Science 15% Science 20% Other 45% Other 45% Omega University Completers (n=200 / 800) Population (N=23,000) Gender Gender Students 35% female Students 59% female Faculty 65% female Faculty 43% female Disciplines Disciplines Liberal Arts 40% Liberal Arts 15% Science 20% Science 35% Other 40% Other 50%

Revised 9/17/07

19

The persuasiveness of such analyses is greater as the number of variables used in the comparisons is greater. The LibQUAL+® software has been expanded to automate these comparisons and to output side-by-side graphs and tables comparing sample and population profiles for given institutions. Show these to people who question result representativeness. However, one caution is in order regarding percentages. When total n is small for an institution, or within a particular subgroup, huge changes in percentages can result from very small shifts in numbers. LibQUAL+® Interactive Statistics

In addition to the institution and group notebooks and the norms, LibQUAL+® has also provided an interactive environment for data analysis where institutions can mine institutional data for peer comparisons in 2003 and 2004. The LibQUAL+® Interactive Statistics for these years includes graphing capabilities for all LibQUAL+® scores (total and dimension scores) for each individual institution or groups of institutions. Graphs may be generated in either JPEG format for presentation purposes or flash format that includes more detailed information for online browsing. Tables may also be produced in an interactive fashion for one or multiple selections of variables for all individual institutions or groups of participating institutions. To access the LibQUAL+® Interactive Statistics online, go to:

<http://www.libqual.org/Manage/Results/index.cfm>

LibQUAL+® Analytics

The LibQUAL+® Analytics is a new tool that permits participants to dynamically create institution-specific tables and charts for different subgroups and across years. The current interface grants access to 2004-2006 statistical data and has two sections:

(a) Institution Explorer includes a summary of all questions and dimension means for any combination of user groups and disciplines.

(b) Longitudinal Analysis allows participants to perform longitudinal comparisons of their data across

survey years.

These two functionalities are only the beginning of our effort to provide more customized analysis. More features are in development based on feedback we receive from our participants. Survey Data

In addition to the notebooks, the norms, the Interactive Statistics, and the Analytics, LibQUAL+® also makes available (a) raw survey data in SPSS at the request of participating libraries, and (b) raw survey data in Excel for all participating libraries. Additional training using the SPSS data file is available as a follow-up workshop and through the Service Quality Evaluation Academy (see below), which also offers training on analyzing qualitative data. The survey comments are also downloadable in Excel format from the Web site. ARL Service Quality Evaluation Academy

LibQUAL+® is an important tool in the New Measures toolbox that librarians can use to improve service quality. But, even more fundamentally, the LibQUAL+® initiative is more than a single tool. LibQUAL+® is an effort to create a culture of data-driven service quality assessment and service quality improvement within libraries. Such a culture must be informed by more than one tool, and by more than only one of the 11 ways of listening to users. To facilitate a culture of service quality assessment, and to facilitate more informed usage of LibQUAL+® data,

Revised 9/17/07

20

the Association of Research Libraries has created the ARL Service Quality Evaluation Academy. For more information about the Academy, see the LibQUAL+® events page at

<http://www.libqual.org/Events/index.cfm>

The intensive, five-day Academy teaches both qualitative and quantitative skills that library staff can use to evaluate and generate service-quality assessment information. The Academy is one more resource for library staff who would like to develop enhanced service-quality assessment skills. For more information, about LibQUAL+® or the Association of Research Libraries’ Statistics and Measurement program, see:

<http://www.libqual.org/> <http://www.statsqual.org/> <http://www.arl.org/stats/>

References

Berry, L.L. (1995). On great service: A framework for action. New York: The Free Press. Cook, C.C., Heath F., Thompson, B. LibQUAL+® from the UK Perspective. 5th Northumbria International Conference

Proceedings, Durham, UK, July, 2003. Cook, C.C. (2002a). A mixed-methods approach to the identification and measurement of academic library service

quality constructs: LibQUAL+®. (Doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University, 2001). Dissertation Abstracts International, 62: 2295A. (University Microfilms No. AAT3020024)

Cook, C. (Guest Ed.). (2002b). Library decision-makers speak to their uses of their LibQUAL+® data: Some

LibQUAL+® case studies. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 3. Cook, C., & Heath, F. (2001). Users' perceptions of library service quality: A "LibQUAL+®" qualitative study. Library

Trends, 49: 548-584. Cook, C., Heath, F. & Thompson, B. (2002). Score norms for improving library service quality: A LibQUAL+® study.

portal: Libraries and the Academy, 2: 13-26. Cook, C., Heath, F. & Thompson, B. (2003). "Zones of tolerance" in perceptions of library service quality: A

LibQUAL+® study. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 3: 113-123. Cook, C., Heath, F., & Thompson, R.L. (2000). A meta-analysis of response rates in Web- or Internet-based surveys.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60: 821-836. Cook, C., & Thompson, B. (2001). Psychometric properties of scores from the Web-based LibQUAL+® study of

perceptions of library service quality. Library Trends, 49: 585-604. Cullen, R. (2001). Perspectives on user satisfaction surveys. Library Trends, 49: 662-686. Heath, F., Kyrillidou, M. & Askew, C.A. (Guest Eds.). (2004). Libraries report on their LibQUAL+® findings: From Data

to Action. Journal of Library Administration (40) 3/4 (2004).

Revised 9/17/07

21

Heath, F., Cook, C., Kyrillidou, M., & Thompson, B. (2002). ARL Index and other validity correlates of LibQUAL+® scores. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 2: 27-42.

Kyrillidou, M. (2005). The globalization of library assessment and the role of LibQUAL+®. From library science to

information science: studies in honor of G. Kakouri (Athens, Greece: Tipothito-Giorgos Dardanos, 2005). [in Greek]

Kyrillidou, M. (2005/2006). Library assessment as a collaborative enterprise. Resource Sharing and Information

Networks, 18 ½: 73-87. Kyrillidou, M. (2006). Measuring library service quality: A perceived outcome for libraries. In Peter Hernon (Ed.),

Robert E. Dugan (Ed.), and Candy Schwartz (Ed.), Revisiting Outcomes Assessment in Higher Education (pp. 351-366). Westport, CT: Library Unlimited.

Kyrillidou, M., Olshen, T., Heath, F., Bonnelly, C., and Cote, J. P. Cross-cultural implementation of LibQUAL+®: the

French language experience. 5th Northumbria International Conference Proceedings, Durham, UK, July, 2003.

Kyrillidou, M. and Young, M. (2005). ARL Statistics 2003-04. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries. Nitecki, D.A. (1996). Changing the concept and measure of service quality in academic libraries. The Journal of

Academic Librarianship, 22: 181-190. Parasuraman, A., Berry, L.L., and Zeithaml, V.A. (1991). Refinement and reassessment of the SERVQUAL scale.

Journal of Retailing, 67: 420-450. Thompson, B. (2000, October). Representativeness versus response rate: It ain't the response rate . Paper presented

at the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) Measuring Service Quality Symposium on the New Culture of Assessment: Measuring Service Quality, Washington, DC.

Thompson, B., Cook, C., & Heath, F. (2000). The LibQUAL+® gap measurement model: The bad, the ugly, and the

good of gap measurement. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 1: 165-178. Thompson, B., Cook, C., & Heath, F. (2003). Structure of perceptions of service quality in libraries: A LibQUAL+®

study. Structural Equation Modeling, 10: 456-464. Thompson, B., Cook, C., & Thompson, R.L. (2002). Reliability and structure of LibQUAL+® scores: Measuring

perceived library service quality. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 2: 3-12. Thompson, B., Cook, C., & Kyrillidou, M. (2005). Concurrent validity of LibQUAL+® scores: What do LibQUAL+®

scores measure? Journal of Academic Librarianship, 31: 517-522. Thompson, B., Cook, C., & Kyrillidou, M. (2006). Using localized survey items to augment standardized

benchmarking measures: A LibQUAL+® study. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 6(2): 219-230. Thompson, B., Cook, C., & Kyrillidou, M. (2006). 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.

Revised 9/17/07

22

Thompson, B., Cook, C., Kyrillidou, M. (2006). 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.

Zeithaml, V.A., Parasuraman, A., Berry, L.L. (1990). Delivering quality service: Balancing customer perceptions and

expectations. New York: Free Press.

Revised 9/17/07

23

2 Respondents by Institution for LibQUAL Canada Below is a listing of all the consortium institutions that participated in the 2007 LibQUAL+® survey. Where applicable, they have been separated out by library type (e.g. Academic Health Sciences, College or University, Community College). The number of respondents from each institution and the percentage of the total number of consortium respondents that they represent are provided. Institution Type Institution Name Respondents

(N) Respondents %

Canadian Government Canada Institute for Scientific and Technical Information 431 0.90% Canadian Museum of Civilization 82 0.17% Cour suprême du Canada / Supreme Court of Canada 12 0.02% Institut canadien de l'information scientifique et technique 100 0.21% Musée canadien des civilisations 73 0.15% Supreme Court of Canada / Cour suprême du Canada 42 0.09% Canadian Government Total 740 1.54% College or University Acadia University 873 1.82% Bishop's University 387 0.80% Bishop's University - French 17 0.04% Carleton University 764 1.59% Concordia University Libraries 949 1.97% Concordia University Libraries - French 18 0.04% Dalhousie University 1,278 2.66% École de technologie supérieure 659 1.37% Ecole Polytechnique de Montréal 1,631 3.39% Grant MacEwan College 1,527 3.18% HEC Montréal 782 1.63% Lakehead University Library 1,377 2.86% Laurentian University 1,030 2.14% Malaspina University-College Library 1,411 2.93% McMaster University Libraries 716 1.49% Memorial University of Newfoundland 819 1.70% Mount Saint Vincent University 413 0.86% Mount Saint Vincent University - French 1 0.00% Nipissing University / Canadore College 499 1.04% Queen's University 1,594 3.31% Ryerson University Library 823 1.71% Université de Montréal 464 0.96% Université de Sherbrooke 2,230 4.64% Université du Québec à Montréal 1,893 3.94% Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières 815 1.69% Université du Québec en Outaouais 860 1.79% Université Laurentienne 130 0.27% Université Laval 1,177 2.45% University College of the Fraser Valley 485 1.01% University of Alberta - French 10 0.02% University of Alberta Libraries 528 1.10% University of British Columbia Library 711 1.48% University of British Columbia Okanagan 831 1.73% University of Calgary Libraries and Cultural Resources 686 1.43%

Revised 9/17/07

24

Institution Type Institution Name Respondents (N)

Respondents %

University of Guelph 1,332 2.77% University of Manitoba 963 2.00% University of Manitoba - French 4 0.01% University of New Brunswick 1,120 2.33% University of Northern British Columbia 537 1.12% University of Ottawa - English 444 0.92% University of Ottawa - French 178 0.37% University of Saskatchewan Library 500 1.04% University of Toronto Libraries 594 1.24% University of Toronto Mississauga 258 0.54% University of Toronto Scarborough Library 227 0.47% University of Victoria Libraries 562 1.17% University of Waterloo 565 1.18% University of Western Ontario 2,165 4.50% University of Windsor 1,476 3.07% UOIT-DurhamCollege-Trent in Oshawa 478 0.99% Wilfrid Laurier University 2,370 4.93% York University Libraries 879 1.83% College or University Total 43,040 89.51% Community College Centennial College Learning and Resource Centres 1,058 2.20% Nova Scotia Community College 1,211 2.52% Okanagan College 355 0.74% Red Deer College 704 1.46% Saskatchewan Institute of Applied Science and Technology 977 2.03% Community College Total 4,305 8.95%

Grand Total 48,085 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

25

3 Canadian Government Results for LibQual Canada

3.1 Demographics Summary

3.1.1 Population and Respondent Profiles 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 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%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Humanities Law Other Science /Math

SocialSciences /Psychology

Discipline

Perc

enta

ge Population Profile byDiscipline

Respondent Profile byDiscipline

Discipline Population

(N) Population % Respondents

(n) Respondents

% %N-%n

Humanities 736 14.79% 106 14.34% 0.45% Law 133 2.67% 44 5.95% -3.28% Other 300 6.03% 67 9.07% -3.04% Science / Math 3,626 72.88% 472 63.87% 9.01% Social Sciences / Psychology

180 3.62% 50 6.77% -3.15%

Grand Total 4,975 100.00% 739 100.00% 0.00%

Revised 9/17/07

26

3.1.2 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 group are displayed. Unified Age Group Respondents

(n) Under 18 0 18 - 22 14 23 - 30 83 31 - 45 304 46 - 65 322 Over 65 14

Grand Total 737 By Language Response Language Age Group Respondents

(n) American English Under 18 0 18 - 22 6 23 - 30 52 31 - 45 230 46 - 65 251 Over 65 14 Sub-total 553 Canadian French Under 18 0 18 - 22 8 23 - 30 31 31 - 45 74 46 - 65 71 Over 65 0 Sub-total 184

Grand Total 737

3.1.3 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 Representativness section. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided. Unified Sex Population N Population % Respondent N Respondent % Male 3,438 34.69% 459 62.45% Female 6,472 65.31% 276 37.55%

Grand Total 9,910 100.00% 735 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

27

By Response Language Response Language Sex Respondents

(n) American English Female 194

Male 357 American English Total 551 Canadian French Female 82

Male 102 Canadian French Total 184

Grand Total 735

3.1.4 Population and Respondent Profiles by Employment Status Users were asked to answer the question, “Please check your employment status.” The table below shows a breakdown of survey respondents by employment status, based on user responses to that demographic question and the demographic data provided by institutions through the online Representativness section*. The number and percentages for each option are given for both general population and 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. Unified Status Population N Population % Respondents (n) Respondent % Permanent 5,542 61.36% 554 74.86% Term or casual 1,190 13.18% 121 16.35% Contractor 1,734 19.20% 36 4.86% Student 566 6.27% 29 3.92%

Grand Total 9,032 100.00% 740 100.00% By Response Language Response Language Status Respondents

(n) American English Contractor 18 Permanent 423 Student 18 Term or casual 96 American English Total 555 Canadian French Contractor 18 Permanent 131 Student 11 Term or casual 25 Canadian French Total 185

Grand Total 740

Revised 9/17/07

28

3.1.5 Respondent Profile by Level of Education Unified Level Respondents (n) High school 23 Associates degree 62 Bachelors degree 155 Masters degree 184 PhD 271 Professional degree 44

Grand Total 739 By Response Language Response Language Level Respondents

(n) American English High school 17 Associates degree 26 Bachelors degree 115 Masters degree 128 Professional degree 37 PhD 231 American English Total 554 Canadian French High school 6 Associates degree 36 Bachelors degree 40 Masters degree 56 Professional degree 7 PhD 40 Canadian French Total 185

Grand Total 739

3.1.6 Population and Respondent Profiles by Profession Unified Profession Population Population

% Respondents

(n) Respondents

% Library / Information Management / Museum collection specialist

536 5.41% 48 6.52%

Administration professional or support 1,802 18.18% 87 11.82% Senior Manager 110 1.11% 25 3.40% Manager 532 5.37% 58 7.88% Museum exhibition programs and planning

298 3.01% 34 4.62%

Research Scientist or professional 4,620 46.62% 363 49.32% Research Technician 944 9.53% 77 10.46% Lawyer 90 0.91% 30 4.08% Policy / Program analyst 978 9.87% 14 1.90%

Grand Total 9,910 100.00% 736 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

29

By Response Language Response Language Profession Respondents (n)

American English Library / Information Management / Museum collection specialist

33

Administration professional or support 43 Senior Manager 22 Manager 41 Museum exhibition programs and planning 16 Research Scientist or professional 305 Research Technician 55 Lawyer 25 Policy / Program analyst 13 American English Total 553 Canadian French Library / Information Management / Museum

collection specialist 15

Administration professional or support 44 Senior Manager 3 Manager 17 Museum exhibition programs and planning 18

Research Scientist or professional 58 Research Technician 22 Lawyer 5 Policy / Program analyst 1 Canadian French Total 183

Grand Total 736

3.1.7 Population and Respondent Profiles by Internal Network Unified Response Population Population

% Respondents

(n) Respondents

% Yes 8,716 96.48% 396 53.59% No 318 3.52% 343 46.41%

Grand Total 9,034 100.00% 739 100.00% By Response Language Response Language Response Respondents

(n) American English No 254 Yes 300 American English Total 554 Canadian French No 89 Yes 96 Canadian French Total 185

Grand Total 739

Revised 9/17/07

30

3.1.8 Population and Respondent Profiles by Primary Access Method Unified Method Population Population

% Respondents (n)

Respondents %

E-mail 1,902 18.38% 59 7.97% Internet/Intranet/Virtual Library 6,342 61.29% 489 66.08% Phone 870 8.41% 7 0.95% Physical library 1,234 11.93% 185 25.00%

Grand Total 10,348 100.00% 740 100.00% By Response Language Response Language Method Respondents

(n) American English E-mail 48 Internet/Intranet/Virtual Library 397 Phone 5 Physical library 105 American English Total 555 Canadian French E-mail 11 Internet/Intranet/Virtual Library 92 Phone 2 Physical library 80 Canadian French Total 185

Grand Total 740

Revised 9/17/07

31

3.2 Survey Item Summary

3.2.1 Core Question Summary 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.) Unified

Perceived Less Than Minimum Perceived Less Than Desired Perceived Greater than Minimum Perceived Greater than Desired

Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 6.37 7.74 7.52 1.15 -0.22 702 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 6.31 7.46 7.55 1.24 0.08 720 AS-3 Employees who are consistently courteous 7.06 8.01 8.20 1.14 0.19 726 AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions 6.86 7.91 7.90 1.04 -0.01 723 AS-5 Employees who have the knowledge to answer

user questions 6.95 8.01 7.87 0.92 -0.14 725

AS-6 Employees who deal with users in a caring fashion

6.61 7.72 7.85 1.24 0.12 713

Revised 9/17/07

32

Question Minimum Mean

Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n

AS-7 Employees who understand the needs of their users

6.81 7.87 7.73 0.91 -0.14 716

AS-8 Willingness to help users 6.82 7.94 7.97 1.15 0.03 721 AS-9 Dependability in handling users' service

problems 6.80 7.88 7.76 0.96 -0.12 615

IC-1 Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office

6.61 7.90 7.00 0.39 -0.90 678

IC-2 A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own

6.81 8.02 6.88 0.08 -1.13 704

IC-3 The printed library materials I need for my work 6.40 7.47 7.32 0.92 -0.15 659 IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 6.92 8.11 7.37 0.45 -0.74 702 IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily access

needed information 6.82 7.91 7.45 0.64 -0.45 671

IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my own

6.88 8.10 7.04 0.16 -1.06 699

IC-7 Making information easily accessible for independent use

6.84 7.98 7.33 0.49 -0.65 684

IC-8 Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work

6.99 8.07 7.40 0.41 -0.67 650

LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning 5.50 6.69 6.40 0.90 -0.29 620 LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 5.60 6.65 6.78 1.18 0.14 575 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 5.91 7.09 6.99 1.08 -0.10 625 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 5.99 7.11 6.83 0.84 -0.28 608 LP-5 Community space for group learning and group

study 4.83 5.90 5.88 1.05 -0.01 471

Grand Total 6.49 7.62 7.32 0.83 -0.30 669 Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 1.70 1.39 1.50 1.67 1.46 702 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 1.79 1.46 1.56 1.74 1.47 720 AS-3 Employees who are consistently courteous 1.63 1.24 1.10 1.55 1.22 726 AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions 1.52 1.19 1.29 1.61 1.37 723

AS-5 Employees who have the knowledge to answer user questions 1.49 1.09 1.28 1.65 1.33 725

AS-6 Employees who deal with users in a caring fashion 1.74 1.35 1.31 1.67 1.36 713

AS-7 Employees who understand the needs of their users 1.58 1.22 1.30 1.62 1.41 716

AS-8 Willingness to help users 1.55 1.19 1.22 1.58 1.26 721

AS-9 Dependability in handling users' service problems 1.56 1.20 1.27 1.52 1.25 615

IC-1 Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office 1.82 1.52 1.90 2.02 1.99 678

IC-2 A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own 1.58 1.27 1.72 2.08 1.88 704

IC-3 The printed library materials I need for my work 1.81 1.66 1.59 1.68 1.58 659 IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 1.51 1.16 1.50 1.82 1.64 702

IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily access needed information 1.58 1.28 1.40 1.78 1.59 671

IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my own 1.51 1.12 1.58 1.97 1.76 699

IC-7 Making information easily accessible for independent use 1.49 1.13 1.51 1.84 1.61 684

IC-8 Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work 1.62 1.31 1.50 1.87 1.68 650

LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning 2.20 2.08 1.91 2.34 2.39 620

Revised 9/17/07

33

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n

LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 2.21 2.18 1.76 2.12 2.16 575 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 2.00 1.83 1.69 2.19 2.07 625 LP-4 "A getaway for study 1.99 1.94 1.69 1.95 1.93 608

LP-5 Community space for group learning and group study 2.26 2.33 1.99 2.25 2.29 471

Grand Total 1.73 1.46 1.53 1.84 1.67 669

American English


Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 6.26 7.71 7.42 1.15 -0.30 518 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 6.30 7.47 7.55 1.25 0.08 540 AS-3 Employees who are consistently courteous 6.98 7.99 8.15 1.17 0.15 543 AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions 6.85 7.96 7.87 1.02 -0.09 542 AS-5 Employees who have the knowledge to answer

user questions 6.87 7.99 7.82 0.95 -0.17 543


6.47 7.64 7.77 1.31 0.14 531


6.74 7.87 7.66 0.93 -0.20 537


problems 6.74 7.88 7.71 0.97 -0.17 470


6.60 7.91 6.95 0.35 -0.96 518

Revised 9/17/07

34


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


6.83 8.05 6.90 0.07 -1.15 537




6.88 8.12 7.02 0.14 -1.10 536


6.87 8.03 7.32 0.45 -0.71 514


6.99 8.08 7.42 0.43 -0.66 510

LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning 5.24 6.46 6.30 1.06 -0.16 452 LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 5.35 6.39 6.67 1.32 0.29 417 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 5.73 6.91 6.94 1.21 0.03 458 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 5.94 7.08 6.81 0.87 -0.27 459 LP-5 Community space for group learning and group

study 4.54 5.62 5.80 1.26 0.18 343


SD Desired

SD Percieved

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 1.76 1.48 1.57 1.70 1.52 518 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 1.82 1.53 1.64 1.79 1.57 540 AS-3 Employees who are consistently courteous 1.67 1.28 1.14 1.58 1.24 543 AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions 1.57 1.21 1.36 1.65 1.41 542 AS-5 Employees who have the knowledge to answer

user questions 1.55 1.12 1.31 1.71 1.39 543


1.83 1.43 1.38 1.76 1.42 531


1.63 1.25 1.36 1.71 1.48 537


problems 1.61 1.22 1.36 1.59 1.30 470


1.87 1.60 1.94 2.03 2.02 518


1.59 1.30 1.75 2.03 1.87 537

IC-3 The printed library materials I need for my work 1.90 1.74 1.65 1.75 1.66 515 IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 1.55 1.17 1.52 1.84 1.66 542 IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily access

needed information 1.65 1.33 1.44 1.83 1.63 504


1.55 1.12 1.64 2.02 1.83 536


1.56 1.15 1.61 1.93 1.70 514


1.68 1.35 1.55 1.89 1.71 510

LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning 2.25 2.21 1.98 2.38 2.50 452 LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 2.28 2.31 1.83 2.18 2.28 417 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 2.10 1.94 1.77 2.26 2.16 458 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 2.08 2.06 1.78 1.98 1.99 459 LP-5 Community space for group learning and group

study 2.30 2.44 2.07 2.29 2.38 343

Grand Total 1.79 1.52 1.59 1.89 1.73 503

Revised 9/17/07

35

Canadian French


Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 6.67 7.82 7.81 1.14 -0.01 184 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 6.33 7.44 7.54 1.22 0.10 180 AS-3 Employees who are consistently courteous 7.30 8.05 8.33 1.03 0.28 183 AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions 6.87 7.77 7.98 1.12 0.22 181 AS-5 Employees who have the knowledge to answer

user questions 7.18 8.07 8.01 0.83 -0.06 182


7.03 7.97 8.06 1.03 0.09 182


7.04 7.89 7.92 0.88 0.03 179


problems 6.97 7.88 7.93 0.96 0.06 145


6.67 7.86 7.18 0.51 -0.68 160


6.72 7.90 6.84 0.11 -1.06 167




6.88 8.03 7.09 0.20 -0.94 163

Revised 9/17/07

36


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


6.78 7.85 7.36 0.58 -0.49 170


6.99 8.02 7.31 0.32 -0.71 140

LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning 6.18 7.30 6.67 0.48 -0.64 168 LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 6.27 7.34 7.07 0.80 -0.27 158 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 6.39 7.57 7.13 0.74 -0.45 167 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 6.13 7.17 6.87 0.74 -0.30 149 LP-5 Community space for group learning and group

study 5.60 6.63 6.09 0.48 -0.54 128


SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


user questions 1.30 1.00 1.16 1.46 1.13 182


1.34 1.07 1.06 1.36 1.18 182


1.38 1.13 1.06 1.34 1.13 179


problems 1.35 1.15 0.94 1.27 1.05 145


1.64 1.27 1.76 1.97 1.90 160


1.52 1.19 1.65 2.22 1.92 167

IC-3 The printed library materials I need for my work 1.47 1.31 1.34 1.43 1.23 144 IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 1.36 1.11 1.41 1.74 1.55 160 IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily access



1.35 1.10 1.38 1.80 1.51 163


1.25 1.06 1.16 1.56 1.31 170


1.36 1.15 1.26 1.79 1.56 140

LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning 1.88 1.56 1.65 2.17 2.03 168 LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 1.86 1.63 1.54 1.90 1.78 158 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 1.62 1.39 1.44 1.95 1.74 167 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 1.68 1.52 1.37 1.84 1.74 149 LP-5 Community space for group learning and group

study 1.95 1.84 1.74 2.04 1.92 128

Grand Total 1.51 1.24 1.31 1.68 1.46 165

Revised 9/17/07

37

3.2.2 Core Question Dimension Summary On the chart below, scores for each dimension of library service quality have been plotted graphically. The exterior bars represent the range of minimum to desired mean scores for each dimension. The interior bars represent the range of minimum to perceived mean scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimension of library service quality. Unified

The following tables display mean scores and standard deviations 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. Dimension Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

Affect of Service 6.73 7.83 7.80 1.08 -0.03 740 Information Control 6.79 7.94 7.24 0.45 -0.70 739 Library as Place 5.64 6.78 6.66 1.02 -0.12 697

Overall 6.55 7.68 7.37 0.82 -0.31 740 Dimension Minimum

SD Desired SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n

Affect of Service 1.37 1.01 1.12 1.33 1.07 740 Information Control 1.29 0.95 1.24 1.49 1.32 739 Library as Place 1.87 1.78 1.52 1.82 1.81 697

Overall 1.29 0.96 1.08 1.30 1.08 740

Revised 9/17/07

38

American English


Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

Affect of Service 6.66 7.82 7.75 1.09 -0.07 555 Information Control 6.79 7.97 7.23 0.44 -0.73 555 Library as Place 5.47 6.63 6.61 1.14 -0.03 523


SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


Overall 1.31 0.99 1.14 1.33 1.14 555

Revised 9/17/07

39

Canadian French


Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

Affect of Service 6.93 7.87 7.95 1.02 0.09 185 Information Control 6.80 7.88 7.27 0.47 -0.61 184 Library as Place 6.15 7.22 6.81 0.66 -0.41 174


SD Desired

SD Perceived SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


Overall 1.20 0.87 0.88 1.19 0.87 185

Revised 9/17/07

40

3.2.3 Local Questions Summary This table shows mean scores and 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.) Unified Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.93 8.10 6.77 -0.16 -1.33 511 Accuracy in the catalog, borrowing, and overdue records 7.18 8.00 7.78 0.60 -0.22 126 Adequate hours of service 6.24 7.40 7.38 1.14 -0.02 419 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions 6.68 7.83 8.02 1.34 0.19 47 Convenient service hours 6.44 7.47 7.57 1.13 0.10 88 Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other libraries 6.54 7.86 7.60 1.06 -0.26 558 Librarians teaching me how to effectively use the electronically available databases, journals, and books 6.57 7.71 7.45 0.88 -0.26 86 Library keeping me informed about all of its services 6.10 7.26 7.01 0.91 -0.25 100 Library orientations / instruction sessions 6.05 6.99 6.91 0.86 -0.08 165 Making me aware of library resources and services 6.18 7.42 7.03 0.85 -0.38 624 Resources added to library collections on request 6.57 7.61 7.58 1.02 -0.03 122 Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information 5.76 7.09 6.87 1.11 -0.23 416 Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 6.82 8.14 7.86 1.04 -0.28 93 Question Minimum


SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1.46 1.14 1.77 2.01 1.94 511 Accuracy in the catalog, borrowing, and overdue records 1.42 1.04 1.34 1.72 1.42 126 Adequate hours of service 1.83 1.57 1.54 1.76 1.49 419 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions 2.08 1.37 1.15 2.00 0.92 47 Convenient service hours 1.47 1.69 1.17 1.33 1.42 88 Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other libraries 1.61 1.20 1.40 1.78 1.45 558 Librarians teaching me how to effectively use the electronically available databases, journals, and books 1.56 1.56 1.58 1.40 1.21 86 Library keeping me informed about all of its services 1.44 1.44 1.45 1.61 1.49 100 Library orientations / instruction sessions 1.92 1.75 1.86 2.27 1.90 165 Making me aware of library resources and services 1.80 1.54 1.68 1.92 1.84 624 Resources added to library collections on request 1.45 1.32 1.20 1.54 1.22 122 Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information 1.98 1.86 1.74 2.03 2.04 416 Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 1.23 1.05 1.18 1.37 1.25 93

Revised 9/17/07

41

American English Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.94 8.10 6.69 -0.25 -1.41 418 Accuracy in the catalog, borrowing, and overdue records

7.08 7.96 7.72 0.64 -0.24 72

Adequate hours of service 6.24 7.41 7.38 1.14 -0.03 407 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

6.61 7.81 8.06 1.44 0.25 36

Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other libraries

6.52 7.86 7.56 1.04 -0.30 505

Making me aware of library resources and services

6.10 7.38 6.99 0.89 -0.39 544

Resources added to library collections on request

6.69 7.77 7.69 1.00 -0.09 70

Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information 5.76 7.09 6.87 1.11 -0.23 416 Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1.47 1.16 1.83 2.06 2.01 418 Accuracy in the catalog, borrowing, and overdue records

1.42 1.05 1.18 1.56 1.20 72

Adequate hours of service 1.84 1.58 1.54 1.76 1.49 407 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

2.13 1.43 1.01 2.21 0.97 36


1.63 1.22 1.42 1.79 1.46 505

Making me aware of library resources and services

1.82 1.60 1.68 1.94 1.85 544


1.48 1.32 1.07 1.56 1.21 70

Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information 1.98 1.86 1.74 2.03 2.04 416 Canadian French Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.85 8.06 7.09 0.24 -0.98 93 Accuracy in the catalog, borrowing, and overdue records

7.31 8.06 7.85 0.54 -0.20 54


6.91 7.91 7.91 1.00 0.00 11

Convenient service hours 6.44 7.47 7.57 1.13 0.10 88 Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other libraries

6.74 7.85 7.98 1.25 0.13 53

Librarians teaching me how to effectively use the electronically available databases, journals, and books

6.57 7.71 7.45 0.88 -0.26 86

Library keeping me informed about all of its services

6.10 7.26 7.01 0.91 -0.25 100

Library orientations / instruction sessions 6.14 7.07 6.98 0.84 -0.09 165 Making me aware of library resources and services

6.74 7.68 7.31 0.58 -0.36 80


6.40 7.40 7.44 1.04 0.04 52

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 6.82 8.14 7.86 1.04 -0.28 93

Revised 9/17/07

42

Question Minimum


SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1.40 1.02 1.46 1.76 1.51 93 Accuracy in the catalog, borrowing, and overdue records

1.41 1.04 1.55 1.93 1.69 54


1.97 1.22 1.58 1.10 0.77 11


1.46 0.97 1.22 1.66 1.30 53


1.56 1.56 1.58 1.40 1.21 86


1.44 1.44 1.45 1.61 1.49 100

Library orientations / instruction sessions 3.62 3.25 3.61 4.44 3.79 165 Making me aware of library resources and services

1.50 1.05 1.63 1.81 1.74 80


1.42 1.30 1.36 1.53 1.24 52

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 1.23 1.05 1.18 1.37 1.25 93

3.2.4 General Satisfaction Questions Summary This table displays mean score and standard deviation for each of the general satisfaction questions: Satisfaction with Treatment, Satisfaction with Support, and Satisfaction with Overall Quality of Service, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the general satisfaction questions on the LibQUAL+® survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9. Unified Question Response

Mean Response

SD n

How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library?

7.82 1.14 740

In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research, and/or teaching needs.

7.67 1.46 736

In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library. 8.04 1.20 739 American English Question Response

Mean Response

SD n


7.78 1.22 555


7.63 1.49 554

In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library. 8.00 1.24 554 Canadian French Question Response

Mean Response

SD n


7.94 0.82 185


7.79 1.37 182

Revised 9/17/07

43

Question Response Mean

Response SD

n

In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library. 8.16 1.05 185

3.2.5 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary 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". Unified Question Response

Mean Response

SD n

The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline. 6.93 1.83 737 The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits. 6.99 1.81 734 The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy information.

6.11 1.96 737

The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 7.07 1.71 739 The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study.

6.64 1.77 735

American English Question Response

Mean Response

SD n


6.04 1.96 555

The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 7.00 1.83 555 The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 6.65 1.82 554 Canadian French Question Response

Mean Response

SD n


6.32 1.96 182

The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 7.27 1.31 184 The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 6.61 1.62 181

Revised 9/17/07

44

3.2.6 Library Use Summary This chart shows a graphic representation of library use (both on the premises and electronically), as well as use of non-library information gateways such as Yahoo™ and Google™. Bars represent the frequency with which respondents report using these resources: Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, or Never. The table below the chart displays the number and percentage of respondents who selected each option. Unified

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never

Frequency

Perc

enta

ge How often do you access library resources through alibrary Web page?

How often do you use resources on library premises?

How often do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), ornon-library gatew ays for information?

Master Question Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never n How often do you access library resources through a library Web page?

198 235 125 96 85 739

How often do you use resources on library premises? 69 182 173 208 108 740 How often do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or non-library gateways for information?

501 148 41 25 25 740

Master Question Daily % Weekly

% Monthly

% Quarterly

% Never

% Total

How often do you access library resources through a library Web page?

27% 32% 17% 13% 12% 100%

How often do you use resources on library premises? 9% 25% 23% 28% 15% 100% How often do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or non-library gateways for information?

68% 20% 6% 3% 3% 100%

Revised 9/17/07

45

American English

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Frequency

Perc

enta





166 185 90 59 54 554


386 105 33 13 18 555


% Monthly

% Quarterly

% Never

% Total


30% 33% 16% 11% 10% 100%


70% 19% 6% 2% 3% 100%

Revised 9/17/07

46

Canadian French

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Frequency

Perc

enta





32 50 35 37 31 185


115 43 8 12 7 185


% Monthly

% Quarterly

% Never

% Total


17% 27% 19% 20% 17% 100%


62% 23% 4% 6% 4% 100%

Revised 9/17/07

47

4 College or University Libraries Results for LibQual Canada

4.1 College or University Libraries - All

4.1.1 Respondents by User Group Unified User Group Rank Respondents

(n) %

Undergraduate First year 6,893 16.02% Second year 6,472 15.04% Third year 6,873 15.97% Fourth year 6,023 13.99% Fifth year and above 1,580 3.67% Non-degree 503 1.17% Undergraduate Total 28,344 65.86%

Graduate Masters 5,320 12.36% Doctoral 2,602 6.05% Non-degree or Undecided 347 0.81% Graduate Total 8,269 19.21%

Faculty Adjunct Faculty 191 0.44% Assistant Professor 1,211 2.81% Associate Professor 1,258 2.92% Lecturer 558 1.30% Other Academic Status 445 1.03% Professor 1,355 3.15% Faculty Total 5,018 11.66%

Library Staff Administrator 15 0.03% Manager, Head of Unit 36 0.08% Other 41 0.10% Public Services 188 0.44% Systems 16 0.04% Technical Services 48 0.11% Library Staff Total 344 0.80%

Staff Other staff positions 686 1.59% Research Staff 379 0.88% Staff Total 1,065 2.47%

Grand Total 43,040 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

48

American English User Group Rank Respondents

(n) %

Undergraduate First year 4,615 14.35% Second year 4,767 14.82% Third year 5,019 15.60% Fourth year 5,277 16.40% Fifth year and above 1,387 4.31% Non-degree 339 1.05%

Undergraduate Total 21,404 66.53% Graduate Masters 3,352 10.42% Doctoral 1,824 5.67% Non-degree or Undecided 191 0.59%

Graduate Total 5,367 16.68% Faculty Adjunct Faculty 179 0.56% Assistant Professor 1,072 3.33% Associate Professor 1,084 3.37% Lecturer 393 1.22% Other Academic Status 405 1.26% Professor 1,164 3.62%

Faculty Total 4,297 13.36% Library Staff Administrator 14 0.04% Manager, Head of Unit 33 0.10% Other 34 0.11% Public Services 138 0.43% Systems 11 0.03% Technical Services 36 0.11%

Library Staff Total 266 0.83% Staff Other staff positions 568 1.77% Research Staff 269 0.84%

Staff Total 837 2.60%

Grand Total 32,171 100.00% Canadian French User Group Rank Total % Undergraduate First year 2,278 20.96% Second year 1,705 15.69% Third year 1,854 17.06% Fourth year 746 6.86% Fifth year and above 193 1.78% Non-degree 164 1.51% Undergraduate Total 6,940 63.85%

Graduate Masters 1,968 18.11% Doctoral 778 7.16% Non-degree or Undecided 156 1.44% Graduate Total 2,902 26.70% Faculty Adjunct Faculty 12 0.11% Lecturer 165 1.52% Assistant Professor 139 1.28%

Revised 9/17/07

49

User Group Rank Total % Associate Professor 174 1.60% Other Academic Status 40 0.37% Professor 191 1.76% Faculty Total 721 6.63% Library Staff Administrator 1 0.01% Manager, Head of Unit 3 0.03% Other 7 0.06% Public Services 50 0.46% Systems 5 0.05% Technical Services 12 0.11% Library Staff Total 78 0.72% Staff Other staff positions 118 1.09% Research Staff 110 1.01% Staff Total 228 2.10%

Grand Total 10,869 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

50

4.1.2 Population and Respondent Profiles by User Sub-Group The charts and tables 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 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. Unified

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

First

year

Secon

d yea

r

Third

year

Fourt

h yea

r

Fifth

year

and a

bove

Non-de

gree

Master

s

Doctor

al

Non-de

gree o

r Und

ecide

d

Adjunc

t Fac

ulty

Lectu

rer

Assist

ant P

rofes

sor

Assoc

iate P

rofes

sor

Profes

sor

Other A

cade

mic Stat

us

Discipline

Perc

enta

ge

Population Profile by User Sub-Group

Respondent Profile by User Sub-Group

Level Rank Population

(N) Population

% Respondents

(n) Respondents

% N%-n%

Undergraduate First year 231,761 24.40% 6,893 16.56% 7.84% Second year 170,554 17.95% 6,472 15.55% 2.41% Third year 161,576 17.01% 6,873 16.51% 0.50% Fourth year 124,896 13.15% 6,023 14.47% -1.32% Fifth year and above 21,426 2.26% 1,580 3.80% -1.54% Non-degree 37,214 3.92% 503 1.21% 2.71% Undergraduate Total 747,427 78.68% 28,344 68.08% 10.60% Graduate Masters 93,457 9.84% 5,320 12.78% -2.94% Doctoral 38,701 4.07% 2,602 6.25% -2.18% Non-degree or Undecided 4,882 0.51% 347 0.83% -0.32% Graduate Total 137,040 14.43% 8,269 19.86% -5.44%

Revised 9/17/07

51

Level Rank Population (N)

Population %

Respondents (n)

Respondents %

N%-n%

Faculty Adjunct Faculty 9,847 1.04% 191 0.46% 0.58% Lecturer 9,799 1.03% 558 1.34% -0.31% Assistant Professor 12,174 1.28% 1,211 2.91% -1.63% Associate Professor 12,124 1.28% 1,258 3.02% -1.75% Professor 16,750 1.76% 1,355 3.25% -1.49% Other Academic Status 4,791 0.50% 445 1.07% -0.56% Faculty Total 65,485 6.89% 5,018 12.05% -5.16%

Grand Total 949,952 100.00% 41,631 100.00% 0.00% American English

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

First

year

Secon

d yea

r

Third

year

Fourt

h yea

r

Fifth

year

and a

bove

Non-de

gree

Master

s

Doctor

al

Non-de

gree o

r Und

ecide

d

Adjunc

t Fac

ulty

Lectu

rer

Assist

ant P

rofes

sor

Assoc

iate P

rofes

sor

Profes

sor

Other A

cade

mic Stat

us

Discipline

Perc

enta

ge




(N) Population

% Respondents

(n) Respondents

% N%-n%

Undergraduate First year 146,161 22.16% 4,615 14.85% 7.31% Second year 124,709 18.91% 4,767 15.34% 3.57% Third year 118,026 17.90% 5,019 16.15% 1.74% Fourth year 99,695 15.12% 5,277 16.99% -1.87% Fifth year and above 18,925 2.87% 1,387 4.46% -1.59% Non-degree 24,611 3.73% 339 1.09% 2.64% Undergraduate Total 532,127 80.68% 21,404 68.89% 11.79% Graduate Masters 55,665 8.44% 3,352 10.79% -2.35% Doctoral 25,784 3.91% 1,824 5.87% -1.96% Non-degree or Undecided 1,599 0.24% 191 0.61% -0.37% Graduate Total 83,048 12.59% 5,367 17.28% -4.68%

Revised 9/17/07

52


Population %

Respondents (n)

Respondents %

N%-n%

Faculty Adjunct Faculty 7,699 1.17% 179 0.58% 0.59% Lecturer 8,251 1.25% 1,072 3.45% -2.20% Assistant Professor 8,591 1.30% 1,084 3.49% -2.19% Associate Professor 4,573 0.69% 393 1.26% -0.57% Professor 11,651 1.77% 1,164 3.75% -1.98% Other Academic Status 3,586 0.54% 405 1.30% -0.76% Faculty Total 44,351 6.72% 4,297 13.83% -7.11%

Grand Total 659,526 100.00% 31,068 100.00% 0.00% Canadian French

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

First

year

Secon

d yea

r

Third

year

Fourt

h yea

r

Fifth

year

and a

bove

Non-de

gree

Master

s

Doctor

al

Non-de

gree o

r Und

ecide

d

Adjunc

t Fac

ulty

Lectu

rer

Assist

ant P

rofes

sor

Assoc

iate P

rofes

sor

Profes

sor

Other A

cade

mic Stat

us

Discipline

Perc

enta

ge




(N) Population

% Respondents

(n) Respondents

% N%-n%

Undergraduate First year 85,600 29.47% 2,278 21.57% 7.91% Second year 45,845 15.79% 1,705 16.14% -0.36% Third year 43,550 15.00% 1,854 17.55% -2.56% Fourth year 25,201 8.68% 746 7.06% 1.61% Fifth year and above 2,501 0.86% 193 1.83% -0.97% Non-degree 12,603 4.34% 164 1.55% 2.79% Undergraduate Total 215,300 74.13% 6,940 65.70% 8.43% Graduate Masters 37,792 13.01% 1,968 18.63% -5.62% Doctoral 12,917 4.45% 778 7.37% -2.92% Non-degree or Undecided 3,283 1.13% 156 1.48% -0.35% Graduate Total 53,992 18.59% 2,902 27.47% -8.88% Faculty Adjunct Faculty 2,148 0.74% 12 0.11% 0.63% Lecturer 5,226 1.80% 165 1.56% 0.24% Assistant Professor 3,923 1.35% 139 1.32% 0.03%

Revised 9/17/07

53


Population %

Respondents (n)

Respondents %

N%-n%

Associate Professor 3,533 1.22% 174 1.65% -0.43% Professor 5,099 1.76% 191 1.81% -0.05% Other Academic Status 1,205 0.41% 40 0.38% 0.04% Faculty Total 21,134 7.28% 721 6.83% 0.45%

Grand Total 290,426 100.00% 10,563 100.00% 0.00%

4.1.3 Population and Respondent Profiles 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 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. Unified

0%2%4%6%8%

10%12%14%16%18%

Agricu

lture

/ Env

ironm

ental

Stud

ies

Archite

cture

Busine

ss

Commun

icatio

ns / J

ourna

lism

Educa

tion

Engine

ering

/ Com

puter

Scienc

e

Genera

l Stud

ies

Health

Scienc

es

Human

ities

Law

Military

/ Nav

al Scie

nce

Other

Perform

ing & Fine

Arts

Scienc

e / M

ath

Social

Scienc

es / P

sych

ology

Undec

ided

Discipline

Per

cent

age

Population Profile by Discipline

Respondent Profile by Discipline

Discipline Population (N) Population

% Respondents (n) Respondents

% N%-n%

Agriculture / Environmental Studies 24,683 2.53% 1,207 2.90% -0.38% Architecture 2,690 0.28% 177 0.43% -0.15% Business 111,123 11.37% 3,906 9.39% 1.98% Communications / Journalism 14,179 1.45% 747 1.80% -0.34%

Revised 9/17/07

54

Discipline Population (N) Population %

Respondents (n) Respondents %

N%-n%

Education 70,666 7.23% 2,938 7.06% 0.17% Engineering / Computer Science 100,208 10.25% 4,939 11.87% -1.62% General Studies 21,331 2.18% 485 1.17% 1.02% Health Sciences 119,799 12.26% 3,977 9.56% 2.70% Humanities 131,121 13.42% 6,558 15.76% -2.34% Law 18,256 1.87% 878 2.11% -0.24% Military / Naval Science 856 0.09% 134 0.32% -0.23% Other 30,521 3.12% 1,708 4.10% -0.98% Performing & Fine Arts 30,620 3.13% 1,494 3.59% -0.46% Science / Math 119,687 12.25% 5,825 14.00% -1.75% Social Sciences / Psychology 144,759 14.81% 5,904 14.19% 0.62% Undecided 36,888 3.77% 737 1.77% 2.00%


0%2%4%6%8%

10%12%14%16%18%20%

Agricu

lture

/ Env

ironm

ental

Stud

ies

Archite

cture

Busine

ss

Commun

icatio

ns / J

ourna

lism

Educa

tion

Engine

ering

/ Com

puter

Scienc

e

Genera

l Stud

ies

Health

Scienc

es

Human

ities

Law

Military

/ Nav

al Scie

nce

Other

Perform

ing & Fine

Arts

Scienc

e / M

ath

Social

Scienc

es / P

sych

ology

Undec

ided

Discipline

Per

cent

age





% N%-n%

Agriculture / Environmental Studies 19,169 2.78% 1,023 3.29% -0.52% Architecture 1,618 0.23% 104 0.33% -0.10% Business 73,899 10.71% 2,879 9.27% 1.44% Communications / Journalism 3,274 0.47% 169 0.54% -0.07% Education 40,499 5.87% 1,875 6.04% -0.17% Engineering / Computer Science 70,787 10.26% 2,196 7.07% 3.19% General Studies 11,088 1.61% 336 1.08% 0.53% Health Sciences 81,230 11.78% 3,261 10.50% 1.28%

Revised 9/17/07

55



N%-n%

Humanities 97,384 14.12% 5,578 17.96% -3.84% Law 10,248 1.49% 494 1.59% -0.11% Military / Naval Science 856 0.12% 95 0.31% -0.18% Other 21,013 3.05% 1,415 4.56% -1.51% Performing & Fine Arts 21,759 3.15% 1,066 3.43% -0.28% Science / Math 92,286 13.38% 5,176 16.67% -3.29% Social Sciences / Psychology 113,943 16.52% 4,699 15.13% 1.39% Undecided 30,754 4.46% 690 2.22% 2.24%

Grand Total 689,807 100.00% 31,056 100.00% 0.00% Canadian French

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Agricu

lture

/ Env

ironm

ental

Stud

ies

Archite

cture

Busine

ss

Commun

icatio

ns / J

ourna

lism

Educa

tion

Engine

ering

/ Com

puter

Scienc

e

Genera

l Stud

ies

Health

Scienc

es

Human

ities

Law

Military

/ Nav

al Scie

nce

Other

Perform

ing & Fine

Arts

Scienc

e / M

ath

Social

Scienc

es / P

sych

ology

Undec

ided

Discipline

Per

cent

age





% N%-n%

Agriculture / Environmental Studies 5,514 1.92% 184 1.74% 0.17% Architecture 1,072 0.37% 73 0.69% -0.32% Business 37,224 12.94% 1,027 9.73% 3.22% Communications / Journalism 10,905 3.79% 578 5.47% -1.68% Education 30,167 10.49% 1,063 10.07% 0.42% Engineering / Computer Science 29,421 10.23% 2,743 25.98% -

15.75% General Studies 10,243 3.56% 149 1.41% 2.15% Health Sciences 38,569 13.41% 716 6.78% 6.63% Humanities 33,737 11.73% 980 9.28% 2.45% Law 8,008 2.78% 384 3.64% -0.85% Military / Naval Science - 0.00% 39 0.37% -0.37%

Revised 9/17/07

56



N%-n%

Other 9,508 3.31% 293 2.78% 0.53% Performing & Fine Arts 8,861 3.08% 428 4.05% -0.97% Science / Math 27,401 9.53% 649 6.15% 3.38% Social Sciences / Psychology 30,816 10.72% 1,205 11.41% -0.70% Undecided 6,134 2.13% 47 0.45% 1.69%

Grand Total 287,580 100.00% 10,558 100.00% 0.00%

4.1.4 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 group are displayed. Unified Age Group Respondents (n) Respondents % Under 18 119 0.28% 18 - 22 18,273 42.81% 23 - 30 13,092 30.67% 31 - 45 6,677 15.64% 46 - 65 4,270 10.00% Over 65 250 0.59%

Grand Total 42,681 100.00% By Language Response Response Language Age Group Respondents (n) Respondents % American English Under 18 100 0.23% 18 - 22 14,365 33.66% 23 - 30 8,616 20.19% 31 - 45 5,024 11.77% 46 - 65 3,557 8.33% Over 65 233 0.55% American English Total 31,895 74.73% Canadian French Under 18 19 0.04% 18 - 22 3,908 9.16% 23 - 30 4,476 10.49% 31 - 45 1,653 3.87% 46 - 65 713 1.67% Over 65 17 0.04% Canadian French Total 10,786 25.27%

Grand Total 42,681 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

57

4.1.5 Population and Respondent Profile 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 Representativness section. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided. Unified Sex Population (N) Population % Respondents

(n) Respondents %

N%-n%

Female 589,505 56.51% 26,246 61.51% -5.00% Male 453,715 43.49% 16,423 38.49% 5.00%

Grand Total 1,043,220 100.00% 42,669 100.00% 0.00% By Response Language Response Language Sex Respondents (n) Respondents % American English Female 20,437 47.90% Male 11,444 26.82% Sub-total 31,881 74.72% Canadian French Female 5,809 13.61% Male 4,979 11.67% Sub-total 10,788 25.28%

Grand Total 42,669 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

58

4.1.6 Core Question Summary 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.) Unified (Excludes Library Staff) f


Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 5.86 7.58 6.79 0.92 -0.79 40,855 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 5.81 7.20 6.60 0.79 -0.59 40,706 AS-3 Employees who are consistently

courteous 6.84 8.07 7.43 0.58 -0.64 42,077

3

4

5

6

7

8

9AS-6

AS-5

AS-4

AS-3

AS-2

AS-1

LP-5

LP-4

LP-3

LP-2

LP-1IC-8

IC-7

IC-6

IC-5

IC-4

IC-3

IC-2

IC-1

AS-9

AS-8

AS-7

Revised 9/17/07

59


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n

AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions 6.67 7.89 7.29 0.62 -0.60 40,635 AS-5 Employees who have the knowledge to

answer user questions 6.88 8.07 7.45 0.57 -0.62 40,883


6.52 7.83 7.21 0.68 -0.62 40,969


6.63 7.86 7.21 0.58 -0.65 40,510

AS-8 Willingness to help users 6.64 7.89 7.27 0.63 -0.62 40,807 AS-9 Dependability in handling users' service

problems 6.66 7.89 7.11 0.45 -0.78 34,169


6.82 8.29 7.13 0.31 -1.16 41,700


6.88 8.20 7.13 0.25 -1.06 42,219

IC-3 The printed library materials I need for my work

6.62 7.89 6.79 0.17 -1.10 38,650

IC-4 The electronic information resources I need

6.82 8.14 7.03 0.22 -1.11 41,614

IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily access needed information

6.84 8.10 7.16 0.31 -0.95 41,492


6.82 8.11 7.09 0.28 -1.02 41,769


6.82 8.11 7.19 0.37 -0.92 41,542


7.00 8.25 6.91 -0.08 -1.34 39,908

LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning

6.36 7.88 6.39 0.03 -1.49 41,066

LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 6.62 7.91 6.69 0.07 -1.22 40,413 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 6.40 7.86 6.80 0.40 -1.06 41,472 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or

research 6.49 7.90 6.80 0.32 -1.10 40,338

LP-5 Community space for group learning and group study

6.00 7.39 6.52 0.52 -0.86 37,111

Grand Total 6.59 7.92 7.00 0.41 -0.92 40,496 Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users

1.69 1.40 1.56 1.80 1.64 40,855

AS-2 Giving users individual attention 1.85 1.61 1.69 1.82 1.70 40,706 AS-3 Employees who are consistently

courteous 1.67 1.20 1.55 1.91 1.64 42,077

AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions

1.59 1.24 1.46 1.72 1.51 40,635

AS-5 Employees who have the knowledge to answer user questions

1.57 1.16 1.39 1.68 1.44 40,883


1.67 1.30 1.48 1.79 1.57 40,969


1.61 1.24 1.42 1.73 1.50 40,510

AS-8 Willingness to help users 1.64 1.26 1.48 1.75 1.52 40,807 AS-9 Dependability in handling users' service

problems 1.59 1.25 1.49 1.77 1.58 34,169

Revised 9/17/07

60

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.68 1.14 1.62 2.02 1.76 41,700


1.59 1.14 1.53 1.88 1.64 42,219


1.65 1.34 1.58 1.95 1.80 38,650


1.55 1.14 1.43 1.85 1.61 41,614


1.56 1.15 1.45 1.83 1.59 41,492


1.54 1.13 1.40 1.81 1.55 41,769


1.52 1.11 1.37 1.75 1.49 41,542


1.60 1.14 1.59 2.06 1.79 39,908


1.75 1.44 1.85 2.29 2.17 41,066

LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 1.80 1.47 1.84 2.35 2.16 40,413 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 1.72 1.33 1.72 2.15 1.95 41,472 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or

research 1.75 1.41 1.65 2.10 1.89 40,338


1.98 1.78 1.80 2.34 2.22 37,111

Grand Total 1.66 1.29 1.56 1.92 1.71 40,496

Revised 9/17/07

61

American English (Excludes Library Staff)


Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


5.80 7.54 6.63 0.84 -0.91 30,205

AS-2 Giving users individual attention 5.81 7.20 6.59 0.78 -0.61 30,407 AS-3 Employees who are consistently

courteous 6.83 8.06 7.36 0.53 -0.71 31,377


6.72 7.93 7.31 0.59 -0.62 30,443


6.86 8.06 7.37 0.51 -0.69 30,469


6.54 7.83 7.18 0.65 -0.65 30,541


6.65 7.87 7.17 0.52 -0.69 30,229


problems 6.68 7.90 7.09 0.41 -0.82 26,066


6.89 8.36 7.13 0.24 -1.23 31,330


6.92 8.24 7.11 0.19 -1.13 31,610

3

4

5

6

7

8

9AS-6

AS-5

AS-4

AS-3

AS-2

AS-1

LP-5

LP-4

LP-3

LP-2

LP-1IC-8

IC-7

IC-6

IC-5

IC-4

IC-3

IC-2

IC-1

AS-9

AS-8

AS-7

Revised 9/17/07

62


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


6.61 7.90 6.74 0.13 -1.15 29,387


6.87 8.20 7.00 0.13 -1.20 31,236


6.89 8.13 7.14 0.25 -0.99 30,874


6.85 8.14 7.07 0.22 -1.07 31,185


6.86 8.13 7.17 0.31 -0.96 30,935


7.06 8.30 6.91 -0.15 -1.39 30,175


6.30 7.86 6.29 -0.01 -1.57 30,654


research 6.47 7.88 6.77 0.30 -1.11 30,025


5.92 7.29 6.51 0.60 -0.78 27,458


SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.74 1.47 1.60 1.82 1.69 30,205


courteous 1.72 1.24 1.59 1.96 1.68 31,377

AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions 1.62 1.27 1.47 1.74 1.52 30,443 AS-5 Employees who have the knowledge to

answer user questions 1.63 1.21 1.42 1.72 1.47 30,469


1.75 1.35 1.52 1.85 1.62 30,541


1.66 1.28 1.45 1.76 1.52 30,229


problems 1.63 1.28 1.51 1.80 1.61 26,066


1.71 1.14 1.62 2.01 1.74 31,330


1.63 1.15 1.55 1.90 1.65 31,610


1.69 1.38 1.60 1.99 1.84 29,387


1.59 1.16 1.46 1.89 1.63 31,236


1.61 1.18 1.46 1.85 1.59 30,874


1.58 1.16 1.42 1.83 1.56 31,185


1.56 1.14 1.38 1.77 1.50 30,935


1.64 1.15 1.60 2.08 1.80 30,175


1.82 1.53 1.86 2.34 2.23 30,654

LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 1.89 1.57 1.88 2.44 2.26 30,046 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 1.78 1.39 1.70 2.14 1.93 30,926

Revised 9/17/07

63

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n

LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research

1.82 1.48 1.65 2.13 1.91 30,025


2.06 1.89 1.78 2.37 2.27 27,458

Grand Total 1.71 1.33 1.58 1.95 1.74 30,272 Canadian French (Excludes Library Staff)


Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


6.05 7.69 7.22 1.17 -0.47 10,650

AS-2 Giving users individual attention 5.80 7.18 6.65 0.85 -0.53 10,299 AS-3 Employees who are consistently

courteous 6.89 8.09 7.63 0.74 -0.46 10,700


6.51 7.76 7.23 0.71 -0.54 10,192


6.93 8.11 7.68 0.75 -0.43 10,414


6.49 7.80 7.28 0.80 -0.52 10,428

3

4

5

6

7

8

9AS-6

AS-5

AS-4

AS-3

AS-2

AS-1

LP-5

LP-4

LP-3

LP-2

LP-1IC-8

IC-7

IC-6

IC-5

IC-4

IC-3

IC-2

IC-1

AS-9

AS-8

AS-7

Revised 9/17/07

64


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


6.57 7.84 7.31 0.74 -0.53 10,281

AS-8 Willingness to help users 6.49 7.80 7.17 0.69 -0.62 10,392 AS-9 Dependability in handling users'

service problems 6.62 7.85 7.18 0.56 -0.67 8,103


6.60 8.09 7.13 0.53 -0.96 10,370


6.77 8.07 7.21 0.44 -0.87 10,609


6.64 7.87 6.92 0.28 -0.95 9,263


6.64 7.97 7.14 0.50 -0.83 10,378


6.70 8.02 7.19 0.49 -0.83 10,618


6.72 8.04 7.15 0.43 -0.88 10,584


6.72 8.03 7.25 0.53 -0.79 10,607


6.79 8.11 6.91 0.12 -1.20 9,733


6.53 7.94 6.68 0.15 -1.26 10,412


research 6.53 7.94 6.89 0.36 -1.05 10,313


6.25 7.65 6.55 0.30 -1.09 9,653


SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.53 1.17 1.36 1.69 1.44 10,650


courteous 1.48 1.07 1.39 1.73 1.48 10,700




1.44 1.12 1.36 1.59 1.40 10,428


1.45 1.13 1.34 1.60 1.41 10,281


problems 1.46 1.15 1.45 1.68 1.51 8,103


1.57 1.13 1.63 2.04 1.80 10,370


1.45 1.09 1.47 1.79 1.60 10,609


1.50 1.20 1.52 1.81 1.66 9,263


1.41 1.08 1.33 1.70 1.50 10,378


1.40 1.05 1.42 1.78 1.58 10,618

Revised 9/17/07

65

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.39 1.05 1.35 1.73 1.52 10,584


1.38 1.03 1.33 1.67 1.47 10,607


1.47 1.09 1.56 1.99 1.78 9,733


1.51 1.16 1.77 2.14 1.99 10,412

LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 1.50 1.11 1.66 2.06 1.84 10,367 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 1.51 1.15 1.77 2.17 2.00 10,546 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or

research 1.54 1.19 1.63 2.02 1.82 10,313


1.68 1.41 1.83 2.24 2.08 9,653

Grand Total 1.49 1.15 1.50 1.82 1.63 10,223

4.1.7 Core Question Dimension Summary On the chart below, scores for each dimension of library service quality have been plotted graphically. The exterior bars represent the range of minimum to desired mean scores for each dimension. The interior bars represent the range of minimum to perceived mean scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimension of library service quality. Unified (Excludes Library Staff)

Revised 9/17/07

66

The following table displays standard deviation for each dimension of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+® survey, where n is the number of respondents for each particular dimension. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.) A complete listing of the survey questions and their dimensions can be found in Appendix A.

Revised 9/17/07

67

American English (Excludes Library Staff)

Revised 9/17/07

68


Canadian French (Excludes Library Staff)

Revised 9/17/07

69


4.1.8 Local Questions Summary This table shows mean scores and 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.) Unified (Excludes Library Staff) Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

A library environment that is hospitable and conducive to finding and using information

6.87 8.09 7.14 0.27 -0.94 1,250

A secure and safe place 7.09 8.12 7.62 0.53 -0.50 1,899 Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.81 8.14 6.97 0.16 -1.17 25,360 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, Cd burners, PDAs, syncing stations

5.95 7.29 6.31 0.36 -0.98 4,955

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 6.56 7.82 6.95 0.39 -0.87 1,640 Access to rare and historical materials 5.68 7.06 6.48 0.80 -0.58 545 Adequate hours of service 6.86 8.10 7.32 0.46 -0.78 22,967 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

7.30 8.28 7.98 0.68 -0.30 401

Availability of subject specialist assistance 5.65 7.30 6.27 0.62 -1.03 1,312 Comprehensive collections of fulltext articles online

6.69 8.22 6.62 -0.07 -1.60 777

Convenient business hours 6.72 7.99 7.36 0.64 -0.63 4,385 Convenient service hours 6.95 8.17 7.84 0.89 -0.33 861

Revised 9/17/07

70


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


6.50 7.89 6.91 0.41 -0.98 17,484

Ease of use of electronic resources 6.64 7.99 7.31 0.67 -0.68 2,153 Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery 6.71 7.79 7.11 0.40 -0.68 874 Electronic resources matching my information needs

6.85 8.17 6.89 0.04 -1.28 2,448

Enabling me to find information myself 24 hours a day

6.82 7.97 7.03 0.20 -0.94 1,334

Improving library-use skills as a by-product of seeking assistance from library staff

5.82 7.39 6.91 1.09 -0.48 1,139

Librarians providing help that assists in finding information needed now while improving my research skills

6.55 7.91 7.57 1.02 -0.34 3,281

Librarians providing help that both assists in finding the information needed now, and improves skills useful in future information searches

6.62 7.96 7.47 0.85 -0.49 521


6.45 7.69 6.97 0.52 -0.73 2,734


6.20 7.42 6.46 0.26 -0.96 968

Library orientations / instruction sessions 5.70 6.98 6.71 1.01 -0.27 2,952 Making me aware of library resources and services

6.03 7.40 6.56 0.54 -0.84 26,768

Making me aware of library services 5.73 7.10 6.43 0.70 -0.66 1,020 Online course support (readings, links, references)

6.30 7.85 6.77 0.47 -1.08 1,599

Providing search tools that permit me to work autonomously

6.68 8.05 7.17 0.49 -0.88 1,841

Ready access to computers / Internet / software

6.80 8.13 7.62 0.82 -0.51 2,150


6.45 7.57 6.43 -0.02 -1.14 782

Space for group / individual study and research needs

6.32 7.52 6.12 -0.20 -1.41 576

Space for students to study and work in groups

5.86 7.20 6.00 0.14 -1.20 788

Space that facilitates quiet study 6.48 7.65 6.16 -0.32 -1.49 609 Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information

6.00 7.41 6.68 0.68 -0.74 26,192

Teaching me how to locate, evaluate, and use information

6.48 7.76 7.22 0.74 -0.54 1,580

The library collection provides information resources reflecting diverse points of view

6.93 7.95 7.21 0.28 -0.74 1,267

The library program teaches me how to access, evaluate, and use information

6.15 7.43 6.63 0.48 -0.80 676

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 6.75 7.99 7.13 0.38 -0.86 2,753 Timely document delivery/interlibrary loan 6.49 7.92 7.49 1.00 -0.43 1,418 Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.46 1.03 1.50 1.86 1.62 1,250

A secure and safe place 1.90 1.48 1.42 1.92 1.63 1,899

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1.59 1.15 1.55 1.95 1.70 25,360 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, Cd burners, PDAs, syncing stations

1.89 1.68 1.82 2.17 2.08 4,955

Revised 9/17/07

71

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 1.71 1.36 1.73 2.09 1.92 1,640

Access to rare and historical materials 2.07 2.01 1.73 2.07 2.10 545

Adequate hours of service 1.67 1.23 1.68 2.17 1.91 22,967 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

1.54 0.99 1.14 1.38 1.10 401

Availability of subject specialist assistance 1.80 1.57 1.72 1.93 1.89 1,312 Comprehensive collections of fulltext articles online

1.61 1.20 1.50 2.03 1.76 777

Convenient business hours 1.50 1.15 1.58 2.00 1.73 4,385


1.71 1.34 1.64 2.03 1.81 17,484

Ease of use of electronic resources 1.41 1.06 1.35 1.77 1.55 2,153

Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery 1.78 1.48 1.65 1.99 1.86 874 Electronic resources matching my information needs

1.41 1.04 1.44 1.85 1.66 2,448


1.79 1.39 1.69 2.01 1.81 1,334


1.79 1.44 1.37 1.77 1.56 1,139


1.59 1.23 1.41 1.76 1.53 3,281


1.61 1.25 1.22 1.57 1.34 521


1.83 1.47 1.73 2.03 1.86 2,734


1.65 1.39 1.68 1.85 1.75 968

Library orientations / instruction sessions 2.05 1.86 1.80 2.07 1.92 2,952 Making me aware of library resources and services

1.79 1.51 1.65 1.98 1.85 26,768

Making me aware of library services 1.90 1.67 1.72 2.05 1.95 1,020 Online course support (readings, links, references)

1.69 1.34 1.46 1.82 1.65 1,599


1.38 1.02 1.32 1.64 1.46 1,841


1.44 1.02 1.34 1.75 1.46 2,150


1.72 1.50 1.72 1.99 1.99 782


2.08 1.89 1.82 2.61 2.49 576


2.01 1.93 1.89 2.39 2.41 788

Space that facilitates quiet study 2.02 1.82 1.94 2.75 2.57 609 Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information

1.80 1.58 1.67 1.95 1.85 26,192


1.85 1.45 1.56 1.84 1.61 1,580


1.70 1.36 1.53 1.82 1.60 1,267


1.91 1.72 1.69 1.92 1.88 676

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 1.69 1.29 1.58 1.87 1.68 2,753 Timely document delivery/interlibrary loan 1.48 1.12 1.36 1.82 1.56 1,418

Revised 9/17/07

72

American English (Excludes Library Staff) Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


6.87 8.18 7.17 0.30 -1.02 382

A secure and safe place 7.09 8.12 7.62 0.53 -0.50 1,899 Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.89 8.20 6.99 0.09 -1.21 21,029 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

6.00 7.30 6.22 0.22 -1.08 3,490

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 6.25 7.63 7.05 0.80 -0.59 824 Access to rare and historical materials 5.68 7.06 6.48 0.80 -0.58 545 Adequate hours of service 6.86 8.11 7.31 0.44 -0.80 20,768 Availability of subject specialist assistance 5.65 7.30 6.27 0.62 -1.03 1,312 Comprehensive collections of fulltext articles online

6.69 8.22 6.62 -0.07 -1.60 777

Convenient business hours 7.07 8.24 7.41 0.34 -0.83 784 Convenient service hours 6.95 8.17 7.84 0.89 -0.33 861 Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other libraries

6.52 7.92 6.93 0.40 -0.99 15,021

Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery 6.66 7.75 7.10 0.43 -0.65 773 Electronic resources matching my information needs

7.06 8.38 6.79 -0.27 -1.59 657


6.82 7.97 7.03 0.20 -0.94 1,334


5.82 7.39 6.91 1.09 -0.48 1,139


6.37 7.79 7.24 0.87 -0.55 1,408


6.62 7.96 7.47 0.85 -0.49 521


6.33 7.59 6.72 0.39 -0.87 944


6.03 7.41 6.54 0.51 -0.87 22,032

Making me aware of library services 5.73 7.10 6.43 0.70 -0.66 1,020 Online course support (readings, links, references)

6.30 7.85 6.77 0.47 -1.08 1,599


6.41 7.53 6.39 -0.02 -1.14 701


6.32 7.52 6.12 -0.20 -1.41 576


5.86 7.20 6.00 0.14 -1.20 785


5.97 7.39 6.70 0.73 -0.69 19,277


6.48 7.76 7.22 0.74 -0.54 1,580


6.93 7.95 7.21 0.28 -0.74 1,267


6.15 7.43 6.63 0.48 -0.80 676

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 6.79 8.03 7.11 0.31 -0.93 2,197

Revised 9/17/07

73

Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.60 1.04 1.49 1.89 1.55 382

A secure and safe place 1.90 1.48 1.42 1.92 1.63 1,899 Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1.61 1.14 1.56 1.98 1.72 21,029 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

1.98 1.80 1.88 2.25 2.20 3,490

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 1.86 1.56 1.63 1.99 1.82 824 Access to rare and historical materials 2.07 2.01 1.73 2.07 2.10 545 Adequate hours of service 1.69 1.25 1.70 2.19 1.94 20,768 Availability of subject specialist assistance 1.80 1.57 1.72 1.93 1.89 1,312 Comprehensive collections of fulltext articles online

1.61 1.20 1.50 2.03 1.76 777

Convenient business hours 1.56 1.12 1.53 1.98 1.69 784 Convenient service hours 1.72 1.24 1.34 1.92 1.52 861 Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other libraries

1.74 1.36 1.64 2.04 1.82 15,021


1.50 0.98 1.48 1.95 1.60 657


1.79 1.39 1.69 2.01 1.81 1,334


1.79 1.44 1.37 1.77 1.56 1,139


1.76 1.42 1.43 1.80 1.59 1,408


1.61 1.25 1.22 1.57 1.34 521


1.95 1.62 1.90 2.14 2.06 944


1.81 1.53 1.66 1.99 1.87 22,032

Making me aware of library services 1.90 1.67 1.72 2.05 1.95 1,020 Online course support (readings, links, references)

1.69 1.34 1.46 1.82 1.65 1,599


1.71 1.53 1.72 2.02 2.02 701


2.08 1.89 1.82 2.61 2.49 576


2.01 1.93 1.89 2.40 2.41 785


1.86 1.65 1.65 1.95 1.86 19,277


1.85 1.45 1.56 1.84 1.61 1,580


1.70 1.36 1.53 1.82 1.60 1,267


1.91 1.72 1.69 1.92 1.88 676

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 1.72 1.30 1.59 1.89 1.69 2,197

Revised 9/17/07

74

Canadian French (Excludes Library Staff) Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


6.88 8.05 7.13 0.26 -0.91 868

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.41 7.84 6.90 0.50 -0.94 4,331 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, Cd burners, PDAs, syncing stations

5.85 7.29 6.55 0.69 -0.75 1,465

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 6.87 8.01 6.85 -0.02 -1.16 816 Adequate hours of service 6.83 8.05 7.50 0.68 -0.55 2,199 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

7.30 8.28 7.98 0.68 -0.30 401

Convenient business hours 6.64 7.94 7.35 0.71 -0.59 3,601 Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other libraries

6.35 7.73 6.81 0.46 -0.92 2,463


6.77 8.09 6.93 0.16 -1.16 1,791


6.68 7.99 7.81 1.13 -0.18 1,873


6.51 7.75 7.09 0.59 -0.66 1,790


6.20 7.42 6.46 0.26 -0.96 968


6.01 7.38 6.69 0.68 -0.69 4,736


6.68 8.05 7.17 0.49 -0.88 1,841


6.80 8.13 7.62 0.82 -0.51 2,150


6.79 7.88 6.79 0.00 -1.09 81


6.67 7.67 6.33 -0.33 -1.33 3

Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information

6.10 7.49 6.62 0.53 -0.86 6,915

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 6.55 7.79 7.21 0.66 -0.58 556 Timely document delivery/interlibrary loan 6.49 7.92 7.49 1.00 -0.43 1,418 Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.39 1.02 1.51 1.85 1.65 868

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1.42 1.16 1.46 1.76 1.61 4,331 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

1.62 1.35 1.64 1.91 1.76 1,465

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 1.48 1.09 1.83 2.11 1.98 816 Adequate hours of service 1.41 1.06 1.44 1.86 1.62 2,199 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

1.54 0.99 1.14 1.38 1.10 401

Convenient business hours 1.47 1.14 1.59 2.00 1.74 3,601 Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other libraries

1.53 1.26 1.62 1.98 1.77 2,463

Revised 9/17/07

75

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n

Ease of use of electronic resources 1.41 1.06 1.35 1.77 1.55 2,153 Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery 1.66 1.21 1.61 1.97 1.83 101 Electronic resources matching my information needs

1.36 1.05 1.42 1.81 1.67 1,791


1.43 1.06 1.34 1.72 1.46 1,873


1.76 1.38 1.62 1.96 1.75 1,790


1.65 1.39 1.68 1.85 1.75 968


1.68 1.40 1.64 1.90 1.74 4,736


1.38 1.02 1.32 1.64 1.46 1,841


1.44 1.02 1.34 1.75 1.46 2,150


1.75 1.25 1.68 1.75 1.68 81


0.58 1.53 1.53 1.15 0.58 3


1.64 1.37 1.72 1.94 1.80 6,915


Timely document delivery/interlibrary loan 1.48 1.12 1.36 1.82 1.56 1,418

4.1.9 General Satisfaction Questions Summary This table displays mean scores and standard deviations 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. Unified (Excludes Library Staff) Question Response

Mean Response SD Respondents

(n) How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library?

7.13 1.31 42,690


7.02 1.59 42,690

In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library.

7.41 1.52 42,694

American English (Excludes Library Staff) Question Response



7.08 1.36 31,901


6.92 1.64 31,900

Revised 9/17/07

76

Question Response Mean

Response SD Respondents (n)


7.33 1.58 31,903

Canadian French (Excludes Library Staff) Question Response



7.25 1.15 10,789


7.33 1.41 10,790


7.62 1.33 10,791

4.1.10 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary 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". Unified (Excludes Library Staff) Question Response

Mean Response

SD Respondents

(n) The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline.

6.81 1.64 42,692

The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits.

6.90 1.65 42,690

The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy information.

6.10 1.92 42,691

The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest.

6.17 1.77 42,694

The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study.

6.38 1.77 42,690

American English (Excludes Library Staff) Question Response

Mean Response

SD Respondents


6.75 1.66 31,903


6.85 1.67 31,901


6.11 1.93 31,901


6.01 1.81 31,903


6.33 1.77 31,900

Revised 9/17/07

77

Canadian French (Excludes Library Staff) Question Response

Mean Response

SD Respondents


6.98 1.56 10,789


7.03 1.58 10,789


6.09 1.88 10,790


6.67 1.52 10,791


6.52 1.74 10,790

4.1.11 Library Use Summary This chart shows a graphic representation of library use (both on the premises and electronically), as well as use of non-library information gateways such as Yahoo™ and Google™. Bars represent the frequency with which respondents report using these resources: Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, or Never. The table below the chart displays the number and percentage of respondents who selected each option. Unified (Excludes Library Staff)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly NeverFrequency

Perc

enta

ge

How often do you accesslibrary resources through alibrary Web page?

How often do you useresources on librarypremises?

How often do you useYahoo(TM), Google(TM), ornon-library gatew ays forinformation?

Revised 9/17/07

78

Question Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never Total How often do you access library resources through a library Web page?

9,778 19,278 8,800 3,690 1,146 42,692


6,822 18,375 11,134 5,450 912 42,693

How often do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or non-library gateways for information?

29,566 8,913 2,293 1,008 911 42,691


22.90% 45.16% 20.61% 8.64% 2.68% 100.00%


15.98% 43.04% 26.08% 12.77% 2.14% 100.00%

How often do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or non-library gateways for information? 69.26% 20.88% 5.37% 2.36% 2.13% 100.00% American English (Excludes Library Staff)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Frequency

Perc

enta

ge





7,848

14,892 6,240 2,096 826 31,902


5,531

13,655 8,181 3,716 820 31,903


21,543 6,964 1,860 763 771 31,901


24.60% 46.68% 19.56% 6.57% 2.59% 100.00%


17.34% 42.80% 25.64% 11.65% 2.57% 100.00%

How often do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or non-library gateways for information? 67.53% 21.83% 5.83% 2.39% 2.42% 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

79

Canadian French (Excludes Library Staff)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Frequency

Perc

enta

ge





1,930

4,386 2,560 1,594 320 10,790


1,291

4,720 2,953 1,734 92 10,790


8,023

1,949 433 245 140 10,790


17.89% 40.65% 23.73% 14.77% 2.97% 100.00%


11.96% 43.74% 27.37% 16.07% 0.85% 100.00%


74.36% 18.06% 4.01% 2.27% 1.30% 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

80

4.2 College or University Libraries - Undergraduate


0%2%4%6%8%

10%12%14%16%18%

Agricu

lture

/ Env

ironm

ental

Stud

ies

Archite

cture

Busine

ss

Commun

icatio

ns / J

ourna

lism

Educa

tion

Engine

ering

/ Com

puter

Scienc

e

Genera

l Stud

ies

Health

Scienc

es

Human

ities

Law

Military

/ Nav

al Scie

nce

Other

Perform

ing & Fine

Arts

Scienc

e / M

ath

Social

Scienc

es / P

sych

ology

Undec

ided

Discipline

Per

cent

age





% N%-n%

Agriculture / Environmental Studies 18,809 2.38% 739 2.61% -0.23% Architecture 1,116 0.14% 71 0.25% -0.11% Business 91,165 11.55% 2,996 10.57% 0.98% Communications / Journalism 11,580 1.47% 607 2.14% -0.68% Education 52,088 6.60% 1,998 7.05% -0.45% Engineering / Computer Science 75,885 9.61% 3,055 10.78% -1.17% General Studies 19,669 2.49% 332 1.17% 1.32% Health Sciences 85,619 10.85% 2,404 8.48% 2.36%

Revised 9/17/07

81



N%-n%

Humanities 109,066 13.82% 4,564 16.10% -2.29% Law 14,963 1.90% 672 2.37% -0.48% Military / Naval Science 789 0.10% 97 0.34% -0.24% Other 25,957 3.29% 1,211 4.27% -0.99% Performing & Fine Arts 26,066 3.30% 1,094 3.86% -0.56% Science / Math 98,108 12.43% 4,059 14.32% -1.90% Social Sciences / Psychology 125,093 15.85% 3,901 13.76% 2.08% Undecided 33,479 4.24% 540 1.91% 2.34%


0%2%4%6%8%

10%12%14%16%18%20%

Agricu

lture

/ Env

ironm

ental

Stud

ies

Archite

cture

Busine

ss

Commun

icatio

ns / J

ourna

lism

Educa

tion

Engine

ering

/ Com

puter

Scienc

e

Genera

l Stud

ies

Health

Scienc

es

Human

ities

Law

Military

/ Nav

al Scie

nce

Other

Perform

ing & Fine

Arts

Scienc

e / M

ath

Social

Scienc

es / P

sych

ology

Undec

ided

Discipline

Per

cent

age

Population Profile by DisciplineRespondent Profile by Discipline


% Respondents

(n) Respondents % N%-n%

Agriculture / Environmental Studies 14,746 2.58% 628 2.93% -0.36% Architecture 534 0.09% 33 0.15% -0.06% Business 63,256 11.06% 2,355 11.00% 0.06% Communications / Journalism 2,773 0.48% 152 0.71% -0.23% Education 29,934 5.24% 1,266 5.92% -0.68% Engineering / Computer Science 54,433 9.52% 1,242 5.80% 3.72% General Studies 10,569 1.85% 247 1.15% 0.69% Health Sciences 60,508 10.58% 1,943 9.08% 1.50% Humanities 83,349 14.58% 3,956 18.49% -3.91% Law 8,906 1.56% 387 1.81% -0.25% Military / Naval Science 789 0.14% 76 0.36% -0.22% Other 17,842 3.12% 1,006 4.70% -1.58% Performing & Fine Arts 18,979 3.32% 774 3.62% -0.30% Science / Math 77,273 13.51% 3,664 17.12% -3.61% Social Sciences / Psychology 100,499 17.58% 3,154 14.74% 2.84% Undecided 27,412 4.79% 518 2.42% 2.37%

Grand Total 571,802 100.00% 21,401 100.00% 0.00%

Revised 9/17/07

82

Canadian French

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Agricu

lture

/ Env

ironm

ental

Stud

ies

Archite

cture

Busine

ss

Commun

icatio

ns / J

ourna

lism

Educa

tion

Engine

ering

/ Com

puter

Scienc

e

Genera

l Stud

ies

Health

Scienc

es

Human

ities

Law

Military

/ Nav

al Scie

nce

Other

Perform

ing & Fine

Arts

Scienc

e / M

ath

Social

Scienc

es / P

sych

ology

Undec

ided

Discipline

Perc

enta

ge



% Respondents

(n) Respondents % N%-n%

Agriculture / Environmental Studies 4,063 1.87% 111 1.60% 0.27% Architecture 582 0.27% 38 0.55% -0.28% Business 27,909 12.82% 641 9.24% 3.59% Communications / Journalism 8,807 4.05% 455 6.56% -2.51% Education 22,154 10.18% 732 10.55% -0.37% Engineering / Computer Science 21,452 9.86% 1,813 26.13% -16.27% General Studies 9,100 4.18% 85 1.22% 2.96% Health Sciences 25,111 11.54% 461 6.64% 4.89% Humanities 25,717 11.82% 608 8.76% 3.05% Law 6,057 2.78% 285 4.11% -1.32% Military / Naval Science - 0.00% 21 0.30% -0.30% Other 8,115 3.73% 205 2.95% 0.77% Performing & Fine Arts 7,087 3.26% 320 4.61% -1.36% Science / Math 20,835 9.57% 395 5.69% 3.88% Social Sciences / Psychology 24,594 11.30% 747 10.77% 0.53% Undecided 6,067 2.79% 22 0.32% 2.47%

Grand Total 217,650 100.00% 6,939 100.00% 0.00%

Revised 9/17/07

83

4.2.2 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 group are displayed. Unified Age Group Respondents (n) Respondents

% Under 18 114 0.40% 18 - 22 17,946 63.32% 23 - 30 7,624 26.90% 31 - 45 2,055 7.25% 46 - 65 570 2.01% Over 65 31 0.11%

Grand Total 28,340 100.00% American English Age Group Respondents (n) Respondents

% Under 18 96 0.45% 18 - 22 14,200 66.35% 23 - 30 5,190 24.25% 31 - 45 1,449 6.77% 46 - 65 440 2.06% Over 65 28 0.13%

Grand Total 21,403 100.00% Canadian French Age Group Respondents (n) Respondents

% Under 18 18 0.26% 18 - 22 3,746 54.00% 23 - 30 2,434 35.09% 31 - 45 606 8.74% 46 - 65 130 1.87% Over 65 3 0.04%

Grand Total 6,937 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

84

4.2.3 Population and Respondent Profile 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 Representativness section. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided. Unified Sex Population (N) Population % Respondents

(n) Respondents

% Female 589,505 56.51% 26,246 61.51% Male 453,715 43.49% 16,423 38.49%

Grand Total 1,043,220 100.00% 42,669 100.00% By Language Response Language Sex Respondents

(n) Respondents %

American English Female 20,437 47.90% Male 11,444 26.82% Sub-total 31,881 74.72% Canadian French Female 5,809 13.61% Male 4,979 11.67% Sub-total 10,788 25.28%

Grand Total 42,669 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

85



Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 5.73 7.50 6.67 0.93 -0.83 27,181 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 5.67 7.10 6.47 0.80 -0.63 27,017 AS-3 Employees who are consistently courteous 6.76 8.04 7.33 0.56 -0.71 27,942 AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions 6.56 7.82 7.21 0.64 -0.61 26,854

3

4

5

6

7

8

9AS-6

AS-5

AS-4

AS-3

AS-2

AS-1

LP-5

LP-4

LP-3

LP-2

LP-1IC-8

IC-7

IC-6

IC-5

IC-4

IC-3

IC-2

IC-1

AS-9

AS-8

AS-7

Revised 9/17/07

86


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


6.80 8.03 7.42 0.62 -0.61 27,080


6.48 7.81 7.15 0.67 -0.67 27,235


6.53 7.79 7.16 0.63 -0.63 26,896


problems 6.56 7.82 7.04 0.49 -0.78 22,451


6.63 8.20 7.09 0.45 -1.12 27,604


6.73 8.11 7.13 0.40 -0.98 27,988


6.56 7.86 6.84 0.28 -1.02 25,761

IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 6.64 8.02 7.01 0.37 -1.01 27,520 IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily access

needed information 6.78 8.07 7.15 0.37 -0.92 27,759


6.70 8.03 7.07 0.37 -0.97 27,737


6.71 8.03 7.16 0.44 -0.87 27,681


6.82 8.14 6.94 0.12 -1.19 26,188

LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning 6.42 8.00 6.47 0.04 -1.53 27,981 LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 6.73 8.06 6.80 0.07 -1.26 27,898 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 6.46 7.96 6.88 0.42 -1.08 28,003 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 6.56 8.00 6.90 0.34 -1.10 27,609 LP-5 Community space for group learning and

group study 6.20 7.63 6.63 0.43 -1.00 26,536

Grand Total

6.53 7.90 6.99 0.46 -0.92 27,092

Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 1.68 1.22 1.59 1.95 1.68 27,942 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 1.68 1.28 1.49 1.81 1.57 27,235 AS-3 Employees who are consistently courteous 1.63 1.26 1.42 1.74 1.50 26,896 AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions 1.66 1.27 1.50 1.78 1.53 27,107 AS-5 Employees who have the knowledge to



1.59 1.18 1.40 1.70 1.45 27,080


1.62 1.28 1.50 1.79 1.60 22,451


problems 1.85 1.62 1.71 1.84 1.73 27,017


1.69 1.23 1.70 2.13 1.89 28,003


1.57 1.17 1.42 1.81 1.56 27,737


1.70 1.19 1.64 2.03 1.78 27,604

IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 1.55 1.15 1.38 1.76 1.51 27,681 IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily

access needed information 1.65 1.20 1.58 2.04 1.79 26,188


1.73 1.29 1.82 2.31 2.08 27,898

Revised 9/17/07

87

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.71 1.30 1.82 2.26 2.09 27,981


1.65 1.32 1.54 1.90 1.74 25,761


1.57 1.19 1.43 1.83 1.61 27,520

LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 1.86 1.56 1.78 2.33 2.15 26,536 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 1.69 1.26 1.61 2.07 1.81 27,609 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 1.58 1.16 1.47 1.85 1.60 27,759 LP-5 Community space for group learning and

group study 1.62 1.18 1.54 1.87 1.65 27,988

Grand Total

1.66 1.27 1.56 1.92 1.70 27,092

American English


Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


Revised 9/17/07

88


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


6.78 8.01 7.34 0.56 -0.67 20,413


6.50 7.84 7.13 0.62 -0.71 20,543


6.55 7.80 7.13 0.58 -0.67 20,290


problems 6.57 7.83 7.02 0.45 -0.81 17,359


6.70 8.27 7.08 0.38 -1.19 21,003


6.76 8.15 7.11 0.35 -1.04 21,193


6.55 7.86 6.80 0.25 -1.06 19,730


6.68 8.07 6.97 0.29 -1.10 20,899


6.83 8.11 7.15 0.32 -0.96 20,905


6.72 8.06 7.05 0.32 -1.01 20,935


6.74 8.05 7.14 0.40 -0.91 20,859


6.88 8.19 6.95 0.06 -1.24 20,104


6.39 8.02 6.39 -0.01 -1.63 21,178

LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 6.68 8.03 6.67 -0.01 -1.36 21,049 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 6.50 8.00 6.97 0.47 -1.03 21,166 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 6.56 8.01 6.88 0.32 -1.13 20,829 LP-5 Community space for group learning and

group study 6.15 7.58 6.63 0.48 -0.95 20,030

Grand Total

6.54 7.92 6.95 0.42 -0.96 20,502

Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 1.72 1.47 1.60 1.82 1.70 20,324 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 1.90 1.68 1.74 1.88 1.77 20,404 AS-3 Employees who are consistently

courteous 1.74 1.26 1.63 2.01 1.72 21,057




1.74 1.33 1.53 1.87 1.62 20,543


1.68 1.29 1.45 1.78 1.53 20,290


problems 1.65 1.30 1.51 1.82 1.62 17,359


1.73 1.19 1.64 2.02 1.77 21,003


1.67 1.20 1.56 1.90 1.66 21,193


1.69 1.36 1.56 1.93 1.77 19,730


1.62 1.21 1.46 1.88 1.65 20,899

Revised 9/17/07

89

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.63 1.18 1.47 1.86 1.60 20,905


1.62 1.20 1.43 1.83 1.58 20,935


1.60 1.18 1.39 1.79 1.51 20,859


1.69 1.21 1.59 2.06 1.80 20,104


1.77 1.35 1.83 2.29 2.11 21,178


group study 1.93 1.63 1.76 2.34 2.17 20,030

Grand Total

1.71 1.31 1.58 1.95 1.72 20,502

Canadian French


Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 5.96 7.64 7.16 1.20 -0.48 6,857 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 5.73 7.14 6.59 0.86 -0.55 6,613

Revised 9/17/07

90


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n

AS-3 Employees who are consistently courteous

6.82 8.06 7.56 0.74 -0.50 6,885




6.40 7.74 7.21 0.82 -0.52 6,692


6.48 7.77 7.26 0.78 -0.51 6,606


problems 6.51 7.77 7.10 0.59 -0.67 5,092


6.43 7.98 7.10 0.67 -0.88 6,601


6.66 8.00 7.20 0.54 -0.79 6,795


6.60 7.84 6.96 0.37 -0.88 6,031


6.50 7.85 7.15 0.65 -0.70 6,621


6.62 7.97 7.17 0.55 -0.80 6,854


6.62 7.97 7.14 0.52 -0.83 6,802


6.62 7.97 7.22 0.60 -0.75 6,822


6.61 7.97 6.93 0.32 -1.04 6,084


6.52 7.96 6.72 0.20 -1.24 6,803

LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 6.88 8.13 7.18 0.31 -0.95 6,849 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 6.35 7.85 6.61 0.26 -1.24 6,837 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 6.55 7.98 6.98 0.43 -1.00 6,780 LP-5 Community space for group learning and

group study 6.35 7.77 6.62 0.27 -1.15 6,506

Grand Total

6.49 7.86 7.08 0.58 -0.78 144,984

Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 1.52 1.16 1.37 1.69 1.43 6,857 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 1.70 1.44 1.63 1.72 1.58 6,613 AS-3 Employees who are consistently

courteous 1.49 1.08 1.43 1.76 1.52 6,885




1.45 1.13 1.37 1.59 1.41 6,692


1.46 1.15 1.33 1.59 1.39 6,606


problems 1.48 1.18 1.45 1.69 1.52 5,092


1.58 1.17 1.65 2.03 1.81 6,601


1.46 1.11 1.47 1.76 1.59 6,795


1.49 1.19 1.49 1.78 1.62 6,031

Revised 9/17/07

91

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.41 1.11 1.31 1.66 1.46 6,621


1.43 1.07 1.44 1.82 1.61 6,854


1.40 1.07 1.36 1.72 1.51 6,802


1.39 1.05 1.36 1.67 1.49 6,822


1.50 1.13 1.54 1.95 1.74 6,084


1.51 1.13 1.77 2.15 1.99 6,803


group study 1.63 1.29 1.85 2.28 2.10 6,506

Grand Total

1.49 1.15 1.50 1.82 1.62 6,590

Revised 9/17/07

92


This table shows mean 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.)

Revised 9/17/07

93

American English

Revised 9/17/07

94


Canadian French

Revised 9/17/07

95


4.2.6 Local Questions Summary These tables show mean scores and 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.) Unified Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


6.82 8.09 7.13 0.31 -0.96 944


5.94 7.31 6.31 0.37 -0.99 3,847

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 6.57 7.86 7.06 0.49 -0.80 1,287 Access to rare and historical materials 5.53 7.03 6.38 0.85 -0.65 314 Adequate hours of service 6.86 8.15 7.30 0.45 -0.85 15,479 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

7.34 8.31 7.97 0.63 -0.33 192

Availability of subject specialist assistance 5.54 7.36 6.16 0.63 -1.20 536 Comprehensive collections of fulltext articles online

6.38 8.11 6.56 0.19 -1.55 431


Revised 9/17/07

96


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


6.34 7.75 6.80 0.46 -0.95 10,891


6.73 8.04 7.03 0.31 -1.00 1,520


6.82 7.98 7.00 0.18 -0.98 1,108


5.77 7.36 6.89 1.13 -0.47 738


6.45 7.87 7.52 1.07 -0.35 1,744


6.46 7.88 7.50 1.04 -0.38 274


6.39 7.65 6.97 0.57 -0.69 2,119


6.16 7.40 6.40 0.24 -1.00 694


5.93 7.35 6.50 0.57 -0.85 18,026

Making me aware of library services 5.65 7.07 6.36 0.71 -0.71 852 Online course support (readings, links, references)

6.30 7.91 6.76 0.46 -1.14 1,165


6.60 7.98 7.23 0.63 -0.75 1,335


6.72 8.11 7.57 0.85 -0.54 1,359


6.34 7.48 6.42 0.07 -1.07 639


6.91 8.14 6.14 -0.78 -2.01 228


6.04 7.44 6.23 0.20 -1.21 392


5.94 7.40 6.64 0.69 -0.76 18,508


6.43 7.77 7.15 0.72 -0.62 1,139


6.88 7.93 7.22 0.34 -0.71 1,057


6.34 7.63 6.33 -0.01 -1.30 220

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 6.49 7.80 7.02 0.53 -0.77 1,386

Timely document delivery/interlibrary loan 6.30 7.78 7.44 1.14 -0.34 760 Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.51 1.06 1.56 1.93 1.68 944

A secure and safe place 1.78 1.26 1.38 1.84 1.46 1,085 Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1.62 1.19 1.54 1.95 1.70 16,031

Revised 9/17/07

97

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n

Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

1.88 1.66 1.80 2.17 2.09 3,847

Access to photocopying and printing facilities

1.71 1.34 1.72 2.06 1.90 1,287

Access to rare and historical materials 2.10 2.00 1.72 2.00 2.06 314 Adequate hours of service 1.68 1.18 1.74 2.24 1.96 15,479 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

1.66 0.98 1.26 1.46 1.06 192

Availability of subject specialist assistance 1.76 1.45 1.68 1.88 1.81 536 Comprehensive collections of fulltext articles online

1.68 1.31 1.54 2.08 1.83 431

Convenient business hours 1.49 1.12 1.59 2.01 1.73 2,812 Convenient service hours 1.71 1.21 1.34 1.91 1.50 719 Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other libraries

1.74 1.40 1.65 2.06 1.84 10,891

Ease of use of electronic resources 1.45 1.10 1.33 1.73 1.55 1,331 Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery

1.77 1.51 1.68 2.05 1.93 704

Electronic resources matching my information needs

1.39 1.06 1.37 1.79 1.58 1,520


1.80 1.37 1.74 2.05 1.85 1,108


1.79 1.40 1.34 1.77 1.50 738


1.58 1.22 1.47 1.82 1.57 1,744


1.63 1.25 1.23 1.49 1.35 274


1.81 1.47 1.74 2.02 1.87 2,119


1.70 1.43 1.74 1.91 1.82 694


1.80 1.51 1.67 2.01 1.88 18,026

Making me aware of library services 1.86 1.65 1.72 2.05 1.98 852 Online course support (readings, links, references)

1.67 1.26 1.46 1.82 1.62 1,165


1.35 1.03 1.28 1.57 1.42 1,335


1.44 1.00 1.39 1.80 1.51 1,359


1.71 1.53 1.70 1.95 1.96 639


1.75 1.37 1.94 2.60 2.48 228


1.89 1.72 1.86 2.34 2.30 392


1.79 1.55 1.68 1.96 1.84 18,508


1.83 1.44 1.60 1.87 1.62 1,139

Revised 9/17/07

98

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.71 1.35 1.54 1.82 1.58 1,057


1.72 1.35 1.83 2.09 1.96 220


Timely document delivery/ nterlibrary loan 1.55 1.18 1.39 1.86 1.56 760 American English Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


6.82 8.16 7.12 0.30 -1.04 325


5.99 7.32 6.22 0.23 -1.09 2,881


6.33 7.71 7.14 0.81 -0.57 697

Access to rare and historical materials 5.53 7.03 6.38 0.85 -0.65 314 Adequate hours of service 6.86 8.17 7.29 0.43 -0.87 14,159 Availability of subject specialist assistance 5.54 7.36 6.16 0.63 -1.20 536 Comprehensive collections of fulltext articles online

6.38 8.11 6.56 0.19 -1.55 431


6.36 7.79 6.82 0.45 -0.97 9,590

Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery

6.48 7.64 6.95 0.47 -0.69 627


6.84 8.30 6.80 -0.04 -1.50 230


6.82 7.98 7.00 0.18 -0.98 1,108


5.77 7.36 6.89 1.13 -0.47 738


6.28 7.78 7.10 0.82 -0.68 590


6.46 7.88 7.50 1.04 -0.38 274


6.27 7.56 6.63 0.37 -0.93 800


5.94 7.37 6.49 0.55 -0.88 15,124


6.30 7.91 6.76 0.46 -1.14 1,165


6.30 7.46 6.39 0.10 -1.06 578

Revised 9/17/07

99


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


6.91 8.14 6.14 -0.78 -2.01 228


6.03 7.43 6.23 0.19 -1.21 391


5.93 7.39 6.67 0.74 -0.73 13,938


6.43 7.77 7.15 0.72 -0.62 1,139


6.88 7.93 7.22 0.34 -0.71 1,057

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 6.53 7.84 7.00 0.47 -0.84 1,098 Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.63 1.07 1.51 1.91 1.57 325

A secure and safe place 1.78 1.26 1.38 1.84 1.46 1,085 Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1.65 1.18 1.56 1.98 1.71 13,340 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

1.95 1.74 1.85 2.24 2.19 2,881


1.83 1.49 1.63 1.97 1.80 697

Access to rare and historical materials 2.10 2.00 1.72 2.00 2.06 314 Adequate hours of service 1.70 1.19 1.76 2.26 1.98 14,159 Availability of subject specialist assistance 1.76 1.45 1.68 1.88 1.81 536 Comprehensive collections of fulltext articles online

1.68 1.31 1.54 2.08 1.83 431


1.77 1.40 1.66 2.07 1.85 9,590


1.78 1.52 1.68 2.05 1.93 627


1.58 1.00 1.56 2.20 1.72 230


1.80 1.37 1.74 2.05 1.85 1,108


1.79 1.40 1.34 1.77 1.50 738


1.75 1.41 1.50 1.83 1.63 590


1.63 1.25 1.23 1.49 1.35 274


1.91 1.57 1.91 2.13 2.07 800


1.81 1.53 1.67 2.02 1.89 15,124

Making me aware of library services 1.86 1.65 1.72 2.05 1.98 852

Revised 9/17/07

100

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n

Online course support (readings, links, references)

1.67 1.26 1.46 1.82 1.62 1,165


1.71 1.55 1.70 1.97 1.99 578


1.75 1.37 1.94 2.60 2.48 228


1.90 1.72 1.86 2.35 2.30 391


1.84 1.60 1.65 1.96 1.85 13,938


1.83 1.44 1.60 1.87 1.62 1,139


1.71 1.35 1.54 1.82 1.58 1,057

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 1.77 1.40 1.62 1.91 1.73 1,098 Canadian French Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


6.82 8.06 7.14 0.31 -0.92 619

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.31 7.75 6.92 0.61 -0.83 2,691 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

5.79 7.29 6.58 0.80 -0.71 966


6.85 8.04 6.95 0.10 -1.08 590

Adequate hours of service 6.79 8.03 7.44 0.65 -0.59 1,320 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

7.34 8.31 7.97 0.63 -0.33 192

Convenient business hours 6.59 7.93 7.36 0.77 -0.57 2,358 Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other libraries

6.14 7.47 6.66 0.52 -0.81 1,301

Ease of use of electronic resources 6.50 7.90 7.34 0.84 -0.56 1,331 Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery 7.13 8.05 7.12 -0.01 -0.94 77 Electronic resources matching my information needs

6.70 7.99 7.08 0.37 -0.92 1,290


6.54 7.91 7.73 1.19 -0.18 1,154


6.71 7.84 7.00 0.29 -0.84 1,319


6.16 7.40 6.40 0.24 -1.00 694


5.87 7.27 6.56 0.68 -0.72 2,902


6.60 7.98 7.23 0.63 -0.75 1,335


6.72 8.11 7.57 0.85 -0.54 1,359


6.79 7.74 6.62 -0.16 -1.11 61

Revised 9/17/07

101


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


7.00 9.00 8.00 1.00 -1.00 1


6.00 7.40 6.54 0.54 -0.86 4,570


6.34 7.63 6.33 -0.01 -1.30 220

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 6.33 7.71 7.27 0.94 -0.44 1,048 Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.44 1.05 1.59 1.94 1.73 619

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1.44 1.14 1.49 1.78 1.62 2,691 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

1.64 1.37 1.61 1.91 1.72 966


1.50 1.12 1.82 2.09 1.97 590

Adequate hours of service 1.45 1.06 1.51 1.97 1.70 1,320 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

1.66 0.98 1.26 1.46 1.06 192

Convenient business hours 1.46 1.13 1.59 1.99 1.73 2,358 Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other libraries

1.55 1.32 1.58 1.95 1.77 1,301

Ease of use of electronic resources 1.45 1.10 1.33 1.73 1.55 1,331 Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery

1.58 1.31 1.68 1.99 1.98 77


1.35 1.07 1.33 1.70 1.54 1,290


1.48 1.10 1.40 1.81 1.52 1,154


1.67 1.32 1.84 2.01 1.93 1,319


1.70 1.43 1.74 1.91 1.82 694


1.71 1.43 1.68 1.91 1.77 2,902


1.35 1.03 1.28 1.57 1.42 1,335


1.44 1.00 1.39 1.80 1.51 1,359


1.69 1.34 1.69 1.73 1.63 61


1


1.65 1.39 1.76 1.95 1.81 4,570


1.72 1.35 1.83 2.09 1.96 220


Revised 9/17/07

102

4.2.7 General Satisfaction Questions Summary This table displays mean score and standard deviation for each of the general satisfaction questions: Satisfaction with Treatment, Satisfaction with Support, and Satisfaction with Overall Quality of Service, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the general satisfaction questions on the LibQUAL+® survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9. Unified Question Response Mean Response

SD Respondents


7.08 1.30 28,341


6.99 1.57 28,343


7.33 1.56 28,343

American English Question Response Mean Response

SD Respondents


7.03 1.35 21,403


6.89 1.61 21,403


7.26 1.61 21,403

Canadian French Question Response Mean Response

SD Respondents


7.22 1.14 6,938


7.27 1.42 6,940


7.56 1.35 6,940

4.2.8 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary 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". Unified Question Response Mean Response

SD Respondents

(n) The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline. 6.74 1.62 28,344 The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits.

6.85 1.64 28,343


6.28 1.87 28,342


6.06 1.71 28,344


6.44 1.73 28,343

Revised 9/17/07

103


SD Respondents


6.81 1.65 21,403


6.31 1.87 21,403


5.89 1.74 21,404


6.41 1.72 21,403


SD Respondents


6.97 1.60 6,940


6.19 1.86 6,939


6.58 1.49 6,940


6.52 1.74 6,940

Revised 9/17/07

104


0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%


Perc

enta




Question Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never n How often do you access library resources through a library Web page?

4,221 12,987 7,199 3,016 920 28,343

How often do you use resources on library premises? 5,326 12,666 6,979 2,934 437 28,342 How often do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or non-library gateways for information?

19,288 6,184 1,596 686 587 28,341


14.89% 45.82% 25.40% 10.64% 3.25% 100.00%

How often do you use resources on library premises? 18.79% 44.69% 24.62% 10.35% 1.54% 100.00% How often do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or non-library gateways for information?

68.06% 21.82% 5.63% 2.42% 2.07% 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

105

American English

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%


Perc

enta





3,490 10,367 5,236 1,671 639 21,403

How often do you use resources on library premises? 4,391 9,595 5,158 1,873 385 21,402 How often do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or non-library gateways for information? 14,159 4,910 1,310 523 499 21,401 Question Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never n How often do you access library resources through a library Web page?

16.31% 48.44% 24.46% 7.81% 2.99% 100.00%


20.52% 44.83% 24.10% 8.75% 1.80% 100.00%

How often do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or non-library gateways for information? 66.16% 22.94% 6.12% 2.44% 2.33% 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

106

Canadian French

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%


Perc

enta





731 2,620 1,963 1,345 281 6,940


935 3,071 1,821 1,061 52 6,940


5,129 1,274 286 163 88 6,940


10.53% 37.75% 28.29% 19.38% 4.05% 100.00%


13.47% 44.25% 26.24% 15.29% 0.75% 100.00%


73.90% 18.36% 4.12% 2.35% 1.27% 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

107

4.3 College or University Libraries - Graduate


0%2%4%6%8%

10%12%14%16%18%20%

Agricu

lture

/ Env

ironm

ental

Stud

ies

Archite

cture

Busine

ss

Commun

icatio

ns / J

ourna

lism

Educa

tion

Engine

ering

/ Com

puter

Scienc

e

Genera

l Stud

ies

Health

Scienc

es

Human

ities

Law

Military

/ Nav

al Scie

nce

Other

Perform

ing & Fine

Arts

Scienc

e / M

ath

Social

Scienc

es / P

sych

ology

Undec

ided

Discipline

Per

cent

age



% Respondents

(n) Respondents

% N%-n%

Agriculture / Environmental Studies

4,184 3.10% 285 3.45% -0.35%

Architecture 1,389 1.03% 80 0.97% 0.06% Business 16,597 12.28% 610 7.38% 4.90% Communications / Journalism 1,832 1.36% 93 1.12% 0.23% Education 15,786 11.68% 678 8.20% 3.48% Engineering / Computer Science 19,550 14.46% 1,497 18.10% -3.64% General Studies 1,169 0.86% 101 1.22% -0.36% Health Sciences 19,566 14.48% 787 9.52% 4.96% Humanities 15,164 11.22% 1,023 12.37% -1.15% Law 2,260 1.67% 135 1.63% 0.04% Military / Naval Science 48 0.04% 22 0.27% -0.23% Other 3,216 2.38% 335 4.05% -1.67%

Revised 9/17/07

108


Respondents (n)

Respondents %

N%-n%

Performing & Fine Arts 2,471 1.83% 187 2.26% -0.43% Science / Math 15,414 11.40% 1,057 12.78% -1.38% Social Sciences / Psychology 13,776 10.19% 1,230 14.87% -4.68% Undecided 2,740 2.03% 149 1.80% 0.23%


0%2%4%6%8%

10%12%14%16%18%

Agricu

lture

/ Env

ironm

ental

Stud

ies

Archite

cture

Busine

ss

Commun

icatio

ns / J

ourna

lism

Educa

tion

Engine

ering

/ Com

puter

Scienc

e

Genera

l Stud

ies

Health

Scienc

es

Human

ities

Law

Military

/ Nav

al Scie

nce

Other

Perform

ing & Fine

Arts

Scienc

e / M

ath

Social

Scienc

es / P

sych

ology

Undec

ided

Discipline

Per

cent

age



(N) Population

% Respondents

(n) Respondents

% N%-n%

Agriculture / Environmental Studies 3,065 3.65% 227 4.23% -0.58% Architecture 967 1.15% 53 0.99% 0.16% Business 8,521 10.14% 288 5.37% 4.78% Communications / Journalism 364 0.43% 3 0.06% 0.38% Education 8,999 10.71% 424 7.90% 2.81% Engineering / Computer Science 13,142 15.64% 700 13.04% 2.60% General Studies 219 0.26% 44 0.82% -0.56% Health Sciences 12,831 15.27% 618 11.51% 3.76% Humanities 9,304 11.07% 741 13.81% -2.73% Law 785 0.93% 61 1.14% -0.20% Military / Naval Science 48 0.06% 7 0.13% -0.07% Other 2,055 2.45% 257 4.79% -2.34% Performing & Fine Arts 1,323 1.57% 112 2.09% -0.51% Science / Math 10,344 12.31% 857 15.97% -3.66% Social Sciences / Psychology 9,372 11.15% 844 15.73% -4.57% Undecided 2,682 3.19% 131 2.44% 0.75%

Grand Total 84,021 100.00% 5,367 100.00% 0.00%

Revised 9/17/07

109

Canadian French

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Agricu

lture

/ Env

ironm

ental

Stud

ies

Archite

cture

Busine

ss

Commun

icatio

ns / J

ourna

lism

Educa

tion

Engine

ering

/ Com

puter

Scienc

e

Genera

l Stud

ies

Health

Scienc

es

Human

ities

Law

Military

/ Nav

al Scie

nce

Other

Perform

ing & Fine

Arts

Scienc

e / M

ath

Social

Scienc

es / P

sych

ology

Undec

ided

Discipline

Perc

enta

ge



(N) Population

% Respondents

(n) Respondents

% N%-n%

Agriculture / Environmental Studies 1,119 2.19% 58 2.00% 0.19% Architecture 422 0.83% 27 0.93% -0.11% Business 8,076 15.79% 322 11.10% 4.70% Communications / Journalism 1,468 2.87% 90 3.10% -0.23% Education 6,787 13.27% 254 8.75% 4.52% Engineering / Computer Science 6,408 12.53% 797 27.46% -14.93% General Studies 950 1.86% 57 1.96% -0.11% Health Sciences 6,735 13.17% 169 5.82% 7.35% Humanities 5,860 11.46% 282 9.72% 1.74% Law 1,475 2.88% 74 2.55% 0.33% Military / Naval Science - 0.00% 15 0.52% -0.52% Other 1,161 2.27% 78 2.69% -0.42% Performing & Fine Arts 1,148 2.24% 75 2.58% -0.34% Science / Math 5,070 9.91% 200 6.89% 3.02% Social Sciences / Psychology 4,404 8.61% 386 13.30% -4.69% Undecided 58 0.11% 18 0.62% -0.51%

Grand Table 51,141 100.00% 2,902 100.00% 0.00%

Revised 9/17/07

110

4.3.2 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 group are displayed. Unified Age Group Respondents (n) Respondents % Under 18 2 0.02% 18 - 22 310 3.75% 23 - 30 5,108 61.79% 31 - 45 2,260 27.34% 46 - 65 575 6.96% Over 65 12 0.15%

Grand Total 8,267 100.00% American English Age Group Respondents (n) Respondents % Under 18 1 0.02% 18 - 22 155 2.89% 23 - 30 3,154 58.79% 31 - 45 1,617 30.14% 46 - 65 428 7.98% Over 65 10 0.19%

Grand Total 5,365 100.00% Canadian French Age Group Respondents (n) Respondents % Under 18 1 0.03% 18 - 22 155 5.34% 23 - 30 1,954 67.33% 31 - 45 643 22.16% 46 - 65 147 5.07% Over 65 2 0.07%


Revised 9/17/07

111

4.3.3 Population and Respondent Profile 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 Representativness section. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided. Unified Sex Population (N) Population % Respondents

(n) Respondents

% Male 65,907 46.96% 3,524 42.64% Female 74,436 53.04% 4,741 57.36%

Grand Total 140,343 100.00% 8,265 100.00% American English Sex Respondents

(n) Respondents

% Male 2,129 39.70% Female 3,234 60.30%

Grand Total 5,363 100.00% Canadian French Sex Respondents

(n) Respondents

% Male 1,395 48.07% Female 1,507 51.93%


Revised 9/17/07

112



Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


3

4

5

6

7

8

9AS-6

AS-5

AS-4

AS-3

AS-2

AS-1

LP-5

LP-4

LP-3

LP-2

LP-1IC-8

IC-7

IC-6

IC-5

IC-4

IC-3

IC-2

IC-1

AS-9

AS-8

AS-7

Revised 9/17/07

113


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


6.95 8.15 7.49 0.54 -0.65 7,931


6.54 7.85 7.27 0.73 -0.59 7,919


6.70 7.94 7.27 0.57 -0.67 7,812


problems 6.77 7.99 7.19 0.42 -0.80 6,625


7.06 8.45 7.21 0.15 -1.24 8,171


7.07 8.33 7.18 0.11 -1.14 8,219


6.73 8.01 6.77 0.03 -1.25 7,469


7.08 8.36 7.06 -0.02 -1.30 8,158


6.92 8.19 7.20 0.28 -0.99 8,014


6.96 8.24 7.17 0.21 -1.07 8,110


6.97 8.25 7.26 0.29 -0.99 8,056


7.26 8.46 6.89 -0.37 -1.58 7,991


6.28 7.77 6.27 -0.02 -1.50 7,844


group study 5.73 7.08 6.42 0.69 -0.66 6,714

Grand Total

6.66 7.98 7.02 0.36 -0.96 7,823

Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n




1.62 1.27 1.44 1.74 1.53 7,919


1.55 1.21 1.40 1.68 1.48 7,812


problems 1.54 1.20 1.49 1.74 1.57 6,625


1.58 1.03 1.60 2.00 1.72 8,171


1.52 1.07 1.51 1.85 1.60 8,219


1.62 1.31 1.58 1.96 1.80 7,469


1.46 1.02 1.43 1.85 1.59 8,158

Revised 9/17/07

114

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.48 1.09 1.41 1.76 1.55 8,014


1.46 1.06 1.37 1.75 1.50 8,110


1.43 1.03 1.34 1.69 1.44 8,056


1.46 1.01 1.59 2.02 1.75 7,991


1.77 1.52 1.87 2.34 2.26 7,844


group study 2.04 1.92 1.75 2.32 2.25 6,714

Grand Total

1.61 1.26 1.54 1.90 1.70 7,823

American English


Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 5.88 7.63 6.76 0.88 -0.87 5,020 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 5.90 7.26 6.72 0.82 -0.54 5,089 AS-3 Employees who are consistently courteous 6.86 8.10 7.43 0.57 -0.67 5,262

Revised 9/17/07

115


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n




6.52 7.83 7.21 0.69 -0.62 5,108


6.73 7.94 7.22 0.49 -0.73 5,049


problems 6.78 8.00 7.13 0.35 -0.86 4,372


7.19 8.56 7.22 0.03 -1.34 5,320


7.17 8.40 7.16 -0.01 -1.24 5,335


6.74 8.04 6.71 -0.03 -1.33 4,972


7.21 8.47 7.02 -0.19 -1.45 5,327


6.98 8.23 7.17 0.19 -1.06 5,154


7.03 8.29 7.16 0.13 -1.14 5,247


7.04 8.30 7.24 0.20 -1.06 5,196


7.38 8.54 6.89 -0.49 -1.65 5,224


6.16 7.69 6.08 -0.08 -1.61 5,055

LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 6.41 7.70 6.31 -0.09 -1.38 4,931 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 6.31 7.76 6.72 0.41 -1.04 5,129 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 6.42 7.83 6.63 0.21 -1.20 4,945 LP-5 Community space for group learning and

group study 5.53 6.84 6.37 0.84 -0.47 4,188

Grand Total

6.67 7.98 6.97 0.30 -1.01 5,058

Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n




1.73 1.35 1.50 1.82 1.60 5,108


1.61 1.25 1.43 1.70 1.50 5,049


problems 1.61 1.25 1.51 1.78 1.60 4,372


1.60 1.00 1.60 1.97 1.68 5,320


1.56 1.07 1.53 1.86 1.60 5,335


1.67 1.36 1.60 2.00 1.84 4,972

Revised 9/17/07

116

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.49 1.01 1.47 1.87 1.59 5,327


1.54 1.12 1.42 1.78 1.56 5,154


1.49 1.08 1.39 1.75 1.50 5,247


1.48 1.04 1.36 1.71 1.45 5,196


1.48 1.00 1.60 2.03 1.73 5,224


1.88 1.65 1.89 2.44 2.38 5,055


group study 2.18 2.08 1.74 2.40 2.37 4,188

Grand Total

1.68 1.31 1.56 1.93 1.74 5,058

Canadian French


Revised 9/17/07

117


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 6.10 7.75 7.30 1.20 -0.45 2,860 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 5.83 7.22 6.70 0.87 -0.52 2,783 AS-3 Employees who are consistently courteous 6.97 8.13 7.72 0.76 -0.41 2,878 AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions 6.61 7.85 7.35 0.75 -0.49 2,761 AS-5 Employees who have the knowledge to



6.57 7.89 7.36 0.79 -0.52 2,811


6.64 7.92 7.37 0.72 -0.56 2,763


problems 6.74 7.96 7.29 0.54 -0.67 2,253


6.83 8.26 7.20 0.37 -1.06 2,851


6.90 8.19 7.23 0.33 -0.96 2,884


6.71 7.95 6.87 0.16 -1.08 2,497

IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 6.84 8.15 7.13 0.30 -1.02 2,831 IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily

access needed information 6.80 8.11 7.23 0.43 -0.88 2,860


6.84 8.16 7.19 0.35 -0.96 2,863


6.84 8.14 7.29 0.45 -0.85 2,860


7.01 8.31 6.88 -0.14 -1.43 2,767


6.51 7.90 6.60 0.09 -1.30 2,789


group study 6.07 7.48 6.51 0.44 -0.97 2,526

Grand Total

6.64 7.97 7.12 0.48 -0.85 2,766

Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n




1.41 1.12 1.34 1.58 1.39 2,811


1.44 1.13 1.34 1.64 1.43 2,763


problems 1.41 1.09 1.43 1.65 1.50 2,253


1.53 1.06 1.61 2.04 1.77 2,851


1.43 1.05 1.48 1.81 1.58 2,884

Revised 9/17/07

118

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.50 1.20 1.53 1.86 1.69 2,497

IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 1.37 1.01 1.36 1.74 1.54 2,831 IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily access

needed information 1.35 1.02 1.40 1.71 1.53 2,860


1.37 1.02 1.35 1.73 1.51 2,863


1.34 1.00 1.30 1.65 1.43 2,860


1.39 1.00 1.57 1.98 1.77 2,767

LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning 1.52 1.24 1.79 2.13 1.98 2,789 LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 1.52 1.16 1.67 2.09 1.88 2,781 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 1.52 1.18 1.80 2.16 2.00 2,835 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 1.54 1.24 1.65 2.02 1.88 2,770 LP-5 Community space for group learning and

group study 1.75 1.52 1.75 2.14 2.02 2,526

Grand Total

1.47 1.14 1.49 1.81 1.62 2,766


Revised 9/17/07

119


American English

Revised 9/17/07

120


Canadian French

Revised 9/17/07

121



Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


6.98 8.02 7.15 0.17 -0.87 167

A secure and safe place 7.04 8.12 7.49 0.45 -0.63 429 Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.97 8.28 7.01 0.04 -1.27 5,233 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

5.99 7.29 6.34 0.35 -0.95 649

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 6.81 7.92 6.61 -0.21 -1.31 203 Access to rare and historical materials 5.88 7.07 6.64 0.76 -0.42 153 Adequate hours of service 6.92 8.13 7.43 0.51 -0.69 4,096 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

7.29 8.27 8.03 0.74 -0.24 131


7.13 8.44 6.67 -0.46 -1.77 236


Revised 9/17/07

122


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


6.67 8.12 7.09 0.41 -1.03 3,474

Ease of use of electronic resources 6.77 8.14 7.31 0.54 -0.83 602 Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery 7.33 8.28 7.78 0.44 -0.51 81 Electronic resources matching my information needs

6.98 8.37 6.66 -0.32 -1.71 571


6.71 7.93 6.88 0.17 -1.05 41


5.92 7.50 6.92 1.01 -0.57 260


6.59 7.98 7.64 1.05 -0.33 1,154


6.79 8.13 7.49 0.70 -0.64 193


6.55 7.83 6.89 0.33 -0.95 461


6.22 7.37 6.34 0.12 -1.04 161


6.16 7.53 6.66 0.50 -0.88 4,805


6.22 7.76 6.72 0.50 -1.03 286


6.81 8.21 7.05 0.24 -1.16 419

Ready access to computers / Internet / software 6.90 8.18 7.77 0.87 -0.41 593 Resources added to library collections on request

6.66 7.84 6.23 -0.43 -1.61 61


6.32 7.64 6.30 -0.02 -1.34 142

Space for students to study and work in groups 5.86 7.13 5.95 0.08 -1.19 258 Space that facilitates quiet study 6.70 7.80 5.99 -0.70 -1.81 151 Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information

6.13 7.52 6.75 0.62 -0.77 4,347


6.79 7.90 7.35 0.57 -0.54 271


6.90 7.90 6.95 0.05 -0.95 40


6.11 7.38 6.79 0.68 -0.59 217

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 6.99 8.22 7.26 0.27 -0.96 805 Timely document delivery/interlibrary loan 6.62 8.09 7.60 0.98 -0.49 472 Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.22 0.94 1.28 1.55 1.40 167

A secure and safe place 1.78 1.33 1.39 1.83 1.57 429 Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1.51 1.06 1.54 1.88 1.66 5,233

Revised 9/17/07

123

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.74 1.55 1.83 2.07 2.00 649

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 1.49 1.12 1.74 2.11 1.94 203 Access to rare and historical materials 1.94 2.01 1.60 2.01 2.10 153 Adequate hours of service 1.61 1.22 1.56 2.03 1.78 4,096 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

1.37 0.99 1.02 1.35 1.15 131


1.37 0.98 1.50 1.87 1.68 236

Convenient business hours 1.47 1.14 1.54 1.97 1.71 1,152 Convenient service hours 1.82 1.38 1.44 2.33 1.84 57 Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other libraries

1.63 1.21 1.64 2.00 1.77 3,474

Ease of use of electronic resources 1.33 1.00 1.36 1.82 1.54 602 Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery 1.62 1.13 1.30 1.70 1.43 81 Electronic resources matching my information needs

1.40 0.94 1.52 1.89 1.70 571


1.69 1.47 1.42 1.91 1.67 41


1.78 1.46 1.35 1.74 1.58 260


1.57 1.20 1.31 1.64 1.44 1,154


1.56 1.07 1.21 1.52 1.19 193


1.86 1.44 1.77 2.08 1.86 461


1.38 1.31 1.53 1.61 1.61 161


1.74 1.46 1.60 1.91 1.79 4,805


1.67 1.44 1.46 1.83 1.66 286


1.43 1.01 1.40 1.74 1.49 419

Ready access to computers / Internet / software 1.43 1.04 1.21 1.63 1.37 593 Resources added to library collections on request

1.58 1.28 1.71 2.03 2.03 61


1.84 1.64 1.65 2.52 2.31 142

Space for students to study and work in groups 1.89 1.94 1.76 2.35 2.46 258 Space that facilitates quiet study 1.84 1.60 1.97 2.79 2.55 151 Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information

1.76 1.55 1.65 1.91 1.81 4,347


1.75 1.33 1.53 1.69 1.39 271


1.50 1.43 1.57 1.55 1.45 40

Revised 9/17/07

124

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.95 1.71 1.53 1.92 1.91 217

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 1.61 1.14 1.52 1.78 1.56 805 Timely document delivery/interlibrary loan 1.35 1.02 1.31 1.73 1.58 472 American English Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


7.70 8.50 7.50 -0.20 -1.00 10

A secure and safe place 7.04 8.12 7.49 0.45 -0.63 429 Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 7.09 8.37 7.02 -0.08 -1.36 3,967 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

6.06 7.25 6.06 0.00 -1.19 270

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 6.90 7.93 6.60 -0.30 -1.34 151 Access to rare and historical materials 5.88 7.07 6.64 0.76 -0.42 153 Adequate hours of service 6.93 8.13 7.40 0.47 -0.73 3,450 Availability of subject specialist assistance 5.71 7.30 6.29 0.58 -1.01 561 Comprehensive collections of fulltext articles online

7.13 8.44 6.67 -0.46 -1.77 236


6.73 8.16 7.11 0.38 -1.06 2,639

Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery 7.40 8.31 7.81 0.41 -0.50 78 Electronic resources matching my information needs

7.19 8.50 6.81 -0.38 -1.69 156


6.71 7.93 6.88 0.17 -1.05 41


5.92 7.50 6.92 1.01 -0.57 260


6.36 7.83 7.34 0.98 -0.48 607


6.79 8.13 7.49 0.70 -0.64 193


6.62 7.75 7.08 0.46 -0.67 79


6.17 7.54 6.57 0.40 -0.97 3,429


6.22 7.76 6.72 0.50 -1.03 286


6.64 7.80 6.15 -0.49 -1.64 59


6.32 7.64 6.30 -0.02 -1.34 142

Space for students to study and work in groups 5.86 7.13 5.95 0.08 -1.19 258 Space that facilitates quiet study 6.70 7.80 5.99 -0.70 -1.81 151

Revised 9/17/07

125


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


6.08 7.44 6.72 0.64 -0.72 2,542


6.79 7.90 7.35 0.57 -0.54 271


6.90 7.90 6.95 0.05 -0.95 40

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 7.10 8.31 7.25 0.15 -1.06 604 Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.34 0.71 1.27 1.40 1.33 10

A secure and safe place 1.78 1.33 1.39 1.83 1.57 429 Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1.52 1.02 1.56 1.91 1.67 3,967 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

1.94 1.87 1.99 2.23 2.21 270

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 1.45 1.07 1.82 2.14 1.97 151 Access to rare and historical materials 1.94 2.01 1.60 2.01 2.10 153 Adequate hours of service 1.66 1.24 1.59 2.07 1.82 3,450 Availability of subject specialist assistance 1.82 1.59 1.80 1.95 1.89 561 Comprehensive collections of fulltext articles online

1.37 0.98 1.50 1.87 1.68 236


1.66 1.23 1.64 2.00 1.77 2,639


1.39 0.85 1.43 1.84 1.61 156


1.69 1.47 1.42 1.91 1.67 41


1.78 1.46 1.35 1.74 1.58 260


1.73 1.37 1.36 1.73 1.52 607


1.56 1.07 1.21 1.52 1.19 193


2.18 1.85 1.97 2.26 1.95 79


1.79 1.50 1.60 1.92 1.83 3,429


1.67 1.44 1.46 1.83 1.66 286


1.59 1.28 1.68 2.03 2.05 59


1.84 1.64 1.65 2.52 2.31 142

Space for students to study and work in groups 1.89 1.94 1.76 2.35 2.46 258 Space that facilitates quiet study 1.84 1.60 1.97 2.79 2.55 151

Revised 9/17/07

126

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.86 1.69 1.65 1.89 1.83 2,542


1.75 1.33 1.53 1.69 1.39 271


1.50 1.43 1.57 1.55 1.45 40

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 1.61 1.07 1.49 1.77 1.53 604 Canadian French Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


6.94 7.99 7.13 0.19 -0.86 157

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.66 8.00 7.15 0.50 -0.84 1,266 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

5.94 7.32 6.54 0.60 -0.78 379

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 6.56 7.87 6.63 0.08 -1.23 52 Adequate hours of service 6.86 8.10 7.59 0.73 -0.51 646 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

7.29 8.27 8.03 0.74 -0.24 131

Convenient business hours 6.72 7.98 7.39 0.67 -0.59 925 Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other libraries

6.50 7.98 7.02 0.53 -0.96 835

Ease of use of electronic resources 6.77 8.14 7.31 0.54 -0.83 602 Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery 5.67 7.67 7.00 1.33 -0.67 3 Electronic resources matching my information needs

6.91 8.32 6.60 -0.30 -1.71 415


6.85 8.14 7.97 1.13 -0.17 547


6.27 7.92 7.54 1.27 -0.38 382


6.22 7.37 6.34 0.12 -1.04 161


6.13 7.52 6.87 0.74 -0.65 1,376


6.81 8.21 7.05 0.24 -1.16 419


7.00 9.00 8.50 1.50 -0.50 2


6.22 7.64 6.80 0.58 -0.84 1,805


6.11 7.38 6.79 0.68 -0.59 217


SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.21 0.95 1.28 1.57 1.40 157

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1.39 1.16 1.41 1.63 1.50 1,266

Revised 9/17/07

127

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.59 1.28 1.68 1.90 1.82 379

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 1.58 1.25 1.50 2.02 1.87 52 Adequate hours of service 1.32 1.08 1.37 1.76 1.52 646 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

1.37 0.99 1.02 1.35 1.15 131

Convenient business hours 1.45 1.12 1.56 1.97 1.72 925 Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other libraries

1.50 1.15 1.66 2.01 1.76 835


1.41 0.97 1.55 1.91 1.73 415


1.32 0.95 1.18 1.54 1.32 547


1.61 1.38 1.34 1.96 2.03 382


1.38 1.31 1.53 1.61 1.61 161


1.63 1.35 1.56 1.85 1.67 1,376


1.43 1.01 1.40 1.74 1.49 419


1.41 0.00 0.71 0.71 0.71 2


1.61 1.32 1.64 1.93 1.77 1,805


1.95 1.71 1.53 1.92 1.91 217


4.3.7 General Satisfaction Questions Summary This table displays mean score and standard deviation for each of the general satisfaction questions: Satisfaction with Treatment, Satisfaction with Support, and Satisfaction with Overall Quality of Service, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the general satisfaction questions on the LibQUAL+® survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9. Unified Question Response Mean Response SD Respondents


7.17 1.31 8,269


7.12 1.58 8,268


7.51 1.45 8,269

Revised 9/17/07

128

American English Question Response Mean Response SD Respondents


7.11 1.37 5,367


6.96 1.66 5,366


7.39 1.52 5,367

Canadian French Question Response Mean Response SD Respondents


7.29 1.16 2,902


7.42 1.37 2,902


7.72 1.28 2,902

4.3.8 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary 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". Unified Question Response Mean Response

SD Respondents

(n) The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline. 7.02 1.60 8,269 The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits. 7.03 1.62 8,268 The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy information.

5.82 1.94 8,269


6.35 1.83 8,269


6.37 1.78 8,269


SD Respondents

(n) The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline. 6.96 1.65 5,367 The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits. 6.98 1.67 5,366 The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy information.

5.77 1.96 5,367


6.11 1.93 5,367


6.27 1.80 5,367


SD Respondents

(n) The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline. 7.12 1.50 2,902

Revised 9/17/07

129

Question Response Mean Response SD

Respondents (n)

The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits. 7.12 1.52 2,902 The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy information.

5.93 1.89 2,902


6.80 1.53 2,902


6.56 1.72 2,902


0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%


Perc

enta





3,218 3,847 886 259 59 8,269

How often do you use resources on library premises? 1,133 3,657 2,233 1,068 178 8,269 How often do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or non-library gateways for information?

5,978 1,561 390 168 172 8,269


38.92% 46.52% 10.71% 3.13% 0.71% 100.00%


72.29% 18.88% 4.72% 2.03% 2.08% 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

130

American English

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%


Perc

enta





2,318 2,478 438 97 36 5,367

How often do you use resources on library premises? 818 2,324 1,391 674 160 5,367 How often do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or non-library gateways for information?

3,754 1,066 295 116 136 5,367


43.19% 46.17% 8.16% 1.81% 0.67% 100.00%


69.95% 19.86% 5.50% 2.16% 2.53% 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

131

Canadian French

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%


Perc

enta





900 1,369 448 162 23 2,902

How often do you use resources on library premises? 315 1,333 842 394 18 2,902 How often do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or non-library gateways for information?

2,224 495 95 52 36 2,902


31.01% 47.17% 15.44% 5.58% 0.79% 100.00%


76.64% 17.06% 3.27% 1.79% 1.24% 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

132

4.4 College or University Libraries - Faculty


0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Agricu

lture

/ Env

ironm

ental

Stud

ies

Archite

cture

Busine

ss

Commun

icatio

ns / J

ourna

lism

Educa

tion

Engine

ering

/ Com

puter

Scienc

e

Genera

l Stud

ies

Health

Scienc

es

Human

ities

Law

Military

/ Nav

al Scie

nce

Other

Perform

ing & Fine

Arts

Scienc

e / M

ath

Social

Scienc

es / P

sych

ology

Undec

ided

Discipline

Per

cent

age



(N) Population

% Respondents

(n) Respondents

% N%-n%


1,690 3.20% 183 3.66% -0.45%

Architecture 185 0.35% 26 0.52% -0.17% Business 3,361 6.37% 300 5.99% 0.37% Communications / Journalism 767 1.45% 47 0.94% 0.51% Education 2,792 5.29% 262 5.23% 0.06% Engineering / Computer Science 4,773 9.04% 387 7.73% 1.31% General Studies 493 0.93% 52 1.04% -0.10% Health Sciences 14,614 27.69% 786 15.70% 11.99% Humanities 6,891 13.06% 971 19.40% -6.34% Law 1,033 1.96% 71 1.42% 0.54% Military / Naval Science 19 0.04% 15 0.30% -0.26% Other 1,348 2.55% 162 3.24% -0.68% Performing & Fine Arts 2,083 3.95% 213 4.26% -0.31% Science / Math 6,165 11.68% 709 14.17% -2.48%

Revised 9/17/07

133

Discipline Population (N)

Population %

Respondents (n)

Respondents %

N%-n%

Social Sciences / Psychology 5,890 11.16% 773 15.44% -4.28% Undecided 669 1.27% 48 0.96% 0.31%


0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Agricu

lture

/ Env

ironm

ental

Stud

ies

Archite

cture

Busine

ss

Commun

icatio

ns / J

ourna

lism

Educa

tion

Engine

ering

/ Com

puter

Scienc

e

Genera

l Stud

ies

Health

Scienc

es

Human

ities

Law

Military

/ Nav

al Scie

nce

Other

Perform

ing & Fine

Arts

Scienc

e / M

ath

Social

Scienc

es / P

sych

ology

Undec

ided

Discipline

Per

cent

age



(N) Population

% Respondents

(n) Respondents

% N%-n%


1,358 4.00% 168 3.92% 0.08%

Architecture 117 0.34% 18 0.42% -0.08% Business 2,122 6.24% 236 5.50% 0.74% Communications / Journalism 137 0.40% 14 0.33% 0.08% Education 1,566 4.61% 185 4.31% 0.29% Engineering / Computer Science 3,212 9.45% 254 5.92% 3.53% General Studies 300 0.88% 45 1.05% -0.17% Health Sciences 7,891 23.22% 700 16.32% 6.90% Humanities 4,731 13.92% 881 20.55% -6.62% Law 557 1.64% 46 1.07% 0.57% Military / Naval Science 19 0.06% 12 0.28% -0.22% Other 1,116 3.28% 152 3.54% -0.26% Performing & Fine Arts 1,457 4.29% 180 4.20% 0.09% Science / Math 4,669 13.74% 655 15.28% -1.54% Social Sciences / Psychology 4,072 11.98% 701 16.35% -4.37% Undecided 660 1.94% 41 0.96% 0.99%

Grand Total 33,984 100.00% 4,288 100.00% 0.00%

Revised 9/17/07

134

Canadian French

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Agricu

lture

/ Env

ironm

ental

Stud

ies

Archite

cture

Busine

ss

Commun

icatio

ns / J

ourna

lism

Educa

tion

Engine

ering

/ Com

puter

Scienc

e

Genera

l Stud

ies

Health

Scienc

es

Human

ities

Law

Military

/ Nav

al Scie

nce

Other

Perform

ing & Fine

Arts

Scienc

e / M

ath

Social

Scienc

es / P

sych

ology

Undec

ided

Discipline

Perc

enta

ge



% Respondents

(n) Respondents

% N%-n%


332 1.77% 15 2.09% -0.33%

Architecture 68 0.36% 8 1.12% -0.75% Business 1,239 6.59% 64 8.93% -2.33% Communications / Journalism 630 3.35% 33 4.60% -1.25% Education 1,226 6.53% 77 10.74% -4.21% Engineering / Computer Science

1,561 8.31% 133 18.55% -10.24%

General Studies 193 1.03% 7 0.98% 0.05% Health Sciences 6,723 35.78% 86 11.99% 23.79% Humanities 2,160 11.50% 90 12.55% -1.06% Law 476 2.53% 25 3.49% -0.95% Military / Naval Science

- 0.00% 3 0.42% -0.42%

Other 232 1.23% 10 1.39% -0.16% Performing & Fine Arts 626 3.33% 33 4.60% -1.27% Science / Math 1,496 7.96% 54 7.53% 0.43% Social Sciences / Psychology 1,818 9.68% 72 10.04% -0.37% Undecided 9 0.05% 7 0.98% -0.93%

Grand Total 18,789 100.00% 717 100.00% 0.00%

Revised 9/17/07

135

4.4.2 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 group are displayed. Unified Age Group Respondents (n) Respondents % Under 18 3 0.06% 18 - 22 5 0.10% 23 - 30 153 3.05% 31 - 45 1,918 38.26% 46 - 65 2,736 54.58% Over 65 198 3.95%

Grand Total 5,013 100.00% American English Age Group Respondents (n) Respondents % Under 18 3 0.07% 18 - 22 5 0.12% 23 - 30 119 2.77% 31 - 45 1,615 37.61% 46 - 65 2,364 55.05% Over 65 188 4.38%

Grand Total 4,294 100.00% Canadian French Age Group Respondents (n) Respondents % Under 18 - 0.00% 18 - 22 - 0.00% 23 - 30 34 4.73% 31 - 45 303 42.14% 46 - 65 372 51.74% Over 65 10 1.39%

Grand Total 719 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

136

4.4.3 Population and Respondent Profile 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 Representativness section. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided. Unified Sex Population (N) Population % Respondents

(n) Respondents

% Male 35,146 64.84% 2,817 56.32% Female 19,062 35.16% 2,185 43.68%

Grand Total 54,208 100.00% 5,002 100.00% American English Sex Respondents

(n) Respondents

% Male 2,352 54.90% Female 1,932 45.10%

Grand Total 4,284 100.00% Canadian French Sex Respondents

(n) Respondents

% Male 465 64.76% Female 253 35.24%


Revised 9/17/07

137

4.4.4 Core Question Summary 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.)

Unified


Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n



3

4

5

6

7

8

9AS-6

AS-5

AS-4

AS-3

AS-2

AS-1

LP-5

LP-4

LP-3

LP-2

LP-1IC-8

IC-7

IC-6

IC-5

IC-4

IC-3

IC-2

IC-1

AS-9

AS-8

AS-7

Revised 9/17/07

138


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


6.69 7.82 7.41 0.72 -0.41 4,773


6.99 8.08 7.34 0.36 -0.74 4,777


problems 6.99 8.10 7.30 0.31 -0.80 4,217


7.40 8.55 7.25 -0.15 -1.30 4,924


7.37 8.45 7.08 -0.28 -1.37 4,965


6.75 7.90 6.48 -0.27 -1.43 4,570

IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 7.32 8.45 7.10 -0.23 -1.35 4,942 IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily



7.18 8.33 7.09 -0.09 -1.23 4,890


7.18 8.32 7.24 0.07 -1.07 4,795


7.48 8.56 6.79 -0.70 -1.77 4,854


6.07 7.36 6.04 -0.03 -1.32 4,308


group study 5.00 6.14 5.88 0.87 -0.26 3,167


SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n




1.73 1.44 1.45 1.75 1.57 4,773


1.55 1.21 1.45 1.72 1.54 4,777


problems 1.51 1.19 1.47 1.73 1.56 4,217


1.51 0.93 1.56 1.91 1.66 4,924


1.44 0.96 1.50 1.86 1.62 4,965


1.71 1.51 1.74 2.16 2.07 4,570




1.44 1.01 1.39 1.83 1.56 4,890


1.41 1.01 1.35 1.73 1.47 4,795

Revised 9/17/07

139

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.42 0.94 1.67 2.08 1.82 4,854


1.95 1.92 1.91 2.46 2.50 4,308


group study 2.34 2.44 1.88 2.46 2.57 3,167

Grand Total 1.67 1.37 1.56 1.95 1.79 4,610 American English


Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n




6.65 7.78 7.38 0.73 -0.40 4,072


6.98 8.07 7.32 0.34 -0.75 4,086

Revised 9/17/07

140


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


problems 7 8.1 7.29 0.29 -0.82 3,632


7.44 8.58 7.27 -0.17 -1.3 4,227


7.4 8.48 7.07 -0.33 -1.41 4,260


6.75 7.92 6.45 -0.30 -1.47 3,994

IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 7.36 8.47 7.1 -0.26 -1.38 4,235 IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily



7.2 8.34 7.09 -0.11 -1.25 4,191


7.19 8.33 7.24 0.05 -1.09 4,089


7.51 8.57 6.77 -0.74 -1.8 4,164


5.97 7.28 5.96 -0.01 -1.32 3,678


group study 4.86 5.99 5.86 1.00 -0.13 2,697

Grand Total 6.74 7.9 6.97 0.23 -0.93 3,948

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n




1.78 1.49 1.48 1.79 1.6 4,072


1.58 1.24 1.46 1.75 1.55 4,086


problems 1.53 1.21 1.48 1.74 1.57 3,632


1.52 0.93 1.56 1.91 1.65 4,227


1.45 0.96 1.51 1.86 1.62 4,260


1.73 1.54 1.76 2.19 2.1 3,994




1.46 1.01 1.4 1.84 1.55 4,191


1.43 1.02 1.35 1.73 1.47 4,089

Revised 9/17/07

141

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.43 0.94 1.67 2.08 1.81 4,164


2 2.01 1.93 2.51 2.58 3,678


group study 2.38 2.49 1.88 2.48 2.61 2,697

Grand Total 1.7 1.4 1.58 1.97 1.81 3,948 Canadian French


Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 6.58 7.98 7.44 0.86 -0.54 708 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 6.25 7.37 6.93 0.67 -0.44 689 AS-3 Employees who are consistently courteous 7.21 8.22 7.93 0.72 -0.29 713 AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions 6.96 8.03 7.58 0.61 -0.45 699 AS-5 Employees who have the knowledge to

answer user questions 7.18 8.22 7.7 0.52 -0.52 709


6.9 8.03 7.55 0.65 -0.48 701


7.02 8.14 7.45 0.44 -0.68 691

Revised 9/17/07

142


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n

AS-8 Willingness to help users 6.96 8.03 7.55 0.59 -0.49 697 AS-9 Dependability in handling users' service

problems 6.96 8.1 7.41 0.45 -0.69 585


7.21 8.43 7.12 -0.08 -1.31 697


7.18 8.3 7.17 -0.01 -1.13 705


6.7 7.77 6.64 -0.07 -1.14 576

IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 7.14 8.31 7.12 -0.02 -1.19 707 IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily

access needed information 7.02 8.18 7.18 0.16 -1 688


7.06 8.23 7.11 0.05 -1.12 699


7.06 8.22 7.27 0.21 -0.95 706


7.32 8.46 6.87 -0.45 -1.6 690


6.65 7.86 6.52 -0.13 -1.33 630

LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 6.67 7.8 6.67 0.00 -1.13 560 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 6.56 7.78 6.63 0.07 -1.15 663 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 6.4 7.7 6.56 0.16 -1.14 581 LP-5 Community space for group learning and

group study 5.83 7.02 5.98 0.14 -1.04 470


SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 1.51 1.11 1.27 1.56 1.47 708 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 1.64 1.42 1.57 1.63 1.57 689 AS-3 Employees who are consistently courteous 1.44 0.98 1.18 1.59 1.36 713 AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions 1.41 1.01 1.32 1.59 1.44 699 AS-5 Employees who have the knowledge to

answer user questions 1.33 0.95 1.17 1.49 1.31 709


1.39 1 1.25 1.53 1.41 701


1.35 0.98 1.34 1.55 1.49 691


problems 1.41 1.05 1.37 1.65 1.53 585


1.39 0.92 1.55 1.93 1.69 697


1.38 0.95 1.45 1.83 1.61 705


1.58 1.3 1.66 1.95 1.84 576

IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 1.35 0.95 1.34 1.72 1.55 707 IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily

access needed information 1.33 0.93 1.37 1.71 1.52 688


1.37 0.99 1.33 1.78 1.58 699


1.32 0.94 1.3 1.72 1.5 706


1.35 0.89 1.66 2.07 1.86 690

Revised 9/17/07

143

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.5 1.17 1.74 2.15 2.01 630

LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 1.57 1.27 1.71 2.14 1.99 560 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 1.48 1.2 1.74 2.14 2.01 663 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 1.66 1.36 1.7 2.10 1.95 581 LP-5 Community space for group learning and

group study 1.94 1.87 1.85 2.19 2.17 470

Grand Total 1.46 1.11 1.46 1.8 1.65 662


Revised 9/17/07

144


Revised 9/17/07

145

American English


Revised 9/17/07

146

Canadian French


Revised 9/17/07

147


Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


7.13 8.18 7.33 0.19 -0.86 119


5.94 7.04 6.10 0.16 -0.94 324

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 6.09 7.35 6.50 0.40 -0.86 141 Access to rare and historical materials 5.89 7.11 6.48 0.60 -0.63 62 Adequate hours of service 6.78 7.84 7.24 0.46 -0.60 2,904 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

7.19 8.21 7.90 0.70 -0.31 77


7.08 8.22 6.76 -0.33 -1.46 83


6.92 8.16 7.09 0.17 -1.07 2,628

Ease of use of electronic resources 7.18 8.14 7.04 -0.13 -1.09 137 Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery 7.56 8.29 7.73 0.18 -0.56 79 Electronic resources matching my information needs

7.24 8.49 6.62 -0.62 -1.87 233


7.04 8.13 7.28 0.24 -0.86 138


5.89 7.31 6.91 1.03 -0.40 116


6.73 7.82 7.53 0.80 -0.29 249


6.77 7.81 7.26 0.49 -0.55 53


6.92 7.94 7.21 0.29 -0.73 124


6.46 7.63 7.08 0.62 -0.56 104


6.29 7.47 6.75 0.45 -0.73 3,346


6.39 7.60 6.91 0.53 -0.69 129


7.29 8.41 6.76 -0.52 -1.65 63

Ready access to computers / Internet / software 6.97 8.01 7.42 0.45 -0.59 122

Revised 9/17/07

148


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


7.23 8.14 6.73 -0.50 -1.41 74


5.42 6.66 5.68 0.27 -0.98 130

Space for students to study and work in groups 5.41 6.65 5.19 -0.22 -1.46 104 Space that facilitates quiet study 5.59 6.82 5.88 0.29 -0.94 138 Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information

6.10 7.34 6.80 0.70 -0.54 2,764


6.22 7.43 7.43 1.21 0.00 142


7.23 8.10 7.20 -0.03 -0.89 132


6.00 7.30 6.76 0.76 -0.54 239



SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.36 0.89 1.28 1.67 1.42 119


2.23 2.13 2.00 2.41 2.39 324

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 1.95 1.76 1.66 2.22 1.99 141 Access to rare and historical materials 2.32 2.22 2.08 2.51 2.34 62 Adequate hours of service 1.66 1.41 1.54 1.99 1.81 2,904 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

1.53 1.00 1.06 1.25 1.12 77


1.56 1.17 1.40 1.99 1.74 83


1.59 1.21 1.57 1.97 1.75 2,628


1.44 0.97 1.56 1.95 1.77 233


1.58 1.16 1.43 1.72 1.44 138


1.78 1.62 1.64 1.93 1.96 116


1.80 1.51 1.51 1.93 1.72 249


1.68 1.71 1.16 1.99 1.73 53

Revised 9/17/07

149

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.88 1.56 1.56 1.96 1.80 124


1.65 1.27 1.38 1.66 1.49 104


1.74 1.53 1.63 1.93 1.81 3,346


1.94 1.75 1.40 1.75 1.77 129


1.36 0.78 1.49 1.69 1.58 63

Ready access to computers / Internet / software 1.54 1.15 1.35 1.83 1.42 122


1.62 1.20 1.92 2.28 2.16 74


2.37 2.29 1.88 2.82 2.67 130

Space for students to study and work in groups 2.41 2.34 2.14 2.61 2.72 104


1.92 1.82 1.61 1.95 1.93 2,764


2.13 1.71 1.37 1.93 1.77 142


1.68 1.46 1.42 1.74 1.70 132


2.02 2.00 1.67 1.67 1.69 239

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 1.61 1.24 1.60 1.93 1.73 516 Timely document delivery/interlibrary loan 1.40 1.06 1.32 1.75 1.47 122 American English Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


7.14 8.39 7.53 0.39 -0.86 36


5.88 6.99 6.09 0.22 -0.90 251

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 6.97 8.00 6.59 -0.38 -1.41 69 Access to rare and historical materials 5.89 7.11 6.48 0.60 -0.63 62 Adequate hours of service 6.78 7.82 7.22 0.44 -0.61 2,700 Availability of subject specialist assistance 5.60 7.12 6.46 0.86 -0.66 145 Comprehensive collections of fulltext articles online

7.08 8.22 6.76 -0.33 -1.46 83


6.92 8.16 7.11 0.19 -1.05 2,366

Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery 7.71 8.21 7.79 0.09 -0.41 58

Revised 9/17/07

150


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


7.26 8.48 6.75 -0.51 -1.73 170


7.04 8.13 7.28 0.24 -0.86 138


5.89 7.31 6.91 1.03 -0.40 116


6.44 7.63 7.28 0.84 -0.35 142


6.77 7.81 7.26 0.49 -0.55 53


7.00 7.83 7.37 0.37 -0.46 54


6.27 7.45 6.72 0.45 -0.73 2,992


6.39 7.60 6.91 0.53 -0.69 129


7.38 8.11 6.59 -0.79 -1.52 56


5.42 6.66 5.68 0.27 -0.98 130

Space for students to study and work in groups 5.39 6.65 5.19 -0.21 -1.46 102 Space that facilitates quiet study 5.59 6.82 5.88 0.29 -0.94 138 Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information

6.03 7.27 6.82 0.79 -0.46 2,338


6.22 7.43 7.43 1.21 0.00 142


7.23 8.10 7.20 -0.03 -0.89 132


SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.38 0.64 1.36 1.96 1.44 36


2.39 2.32 2.07 2.52 2.51 251

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 1.33 0.94 1.78 2.08 1.90 69 Access to rare and historical materials 2.32 2.22 2.08 2.51 2.34 62 Adequate hours of service 1.67 1.43 1.56 2.02 1.84 2,700 Availability of subject specialist assistance 1.90 1.88 1.63 2.24 2.22 145 Comprehensive collections of fulltext articles online

1.56 1.17 1.40 1.99 1.74 83


1.61 1.23 1.57 1.97 1.76 2,366

Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery 1.58 1.63 1.45 1.83 1.77 58

Revised 9/17/07

151

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.52 0.99 1.47 1.87 1.58 170


1.58 1.16 1.43 1.72 1.44 138


1.78 1.62 1.64 1.93 1.96 116


2.02 1.75 1.53 2.11 1.88 142


1.68 1.71 1.16 1.99 1.73 53


2.01 1.95 1.58 1.99 1.97 54


1.76 1.56 1.63 1.92 1.81 2,992


1.94 1.75 1.40 1.75 1.77 129


1.45 1.30 2.01 2.35 2.22 56


2.37 2.29 1.88 2.82 2.67 130


1.97 1.89 1.60 1.96 1.94 2,338


2.13 1.71 1.37 1.93 1.77 142


1.68 1.46 1.42 1.74 1.70 132

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 1.63 1.26 1.62 1.95 1.76 467 Canadian French Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


7.13 8.10 7.24 0.11 -0.86 83

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.95 8.19 7.02 0.07 -1.17 269 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

6.16 7.21 6.12 -0.04 -1.08 73

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 5.25 6.74 6.40 1.15 -0.33 72 Adequate hours of service 6.85 8.00 7.50 0.64 -0.51 204 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

7.19 8.21 7.90 0.70 -0.31 77


6.86 8.18 6.89 0.02 -1.29 262

Ease of use of electronic resources 7.18 8.14 7.04 -0.13 -1.09 137 Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery 7.14 8.52 7.57 0.43 -0.95 21

Revised 9/17/07

152


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


7.19 8.51 6.25 -0.94 -2.25 63


7.11 8.07 7.85 0.74 -0.21 107


6.89 8.10 7.15 0.27 -0.95 70


6.46 7.63 7.08 0.62 -0.56 104


6.49 7.66 6.95 0.46 -0.71 354


7.29 8.41 6.76 -0.52 -1.65 63


6.78 8.22 7.17 0.39 -1.06 18

Space for students to study and work in groups 6.50 7.00 5.50 -1.00 -1.50 2 Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information

6.50 7.72 6.74 0.25 -0.98 426


6.00 7.30 6.76 0.76 -0.54 239


SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.36 0.97 1.24 1.53 1.42 83

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1.41 1.00 1.49 1.90 1.68 269 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

1.56 1.29 1.76 2.01 1.93 73


1.53 1.00 1.06 1.25 1.12 77


1.37 1.03 1.55 1.93 1.71 262


1.23 0.93 1.72 2.15 2.16 63


1.38 1.08 1.43 1.68 1.48 107


1.81 0.99 1.39 1.77 1.58 70


1.65 1.27 1.38 1.66 1.49 104


1.54 1.23 1.58 2.04 1.82 354

Revised 9/17/07

153

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.36 0.78 1.49 1.69 1.58 63


2.05 0.81 1.58 1.82 1.95 18

Space for students to study and work in groups 0.71 1.41 0.71 0.00 0.71 2 Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information

1.58 1.32 1.65 1.83 1.80 426


2.02 2.00 1.67 1.67 1.69 239



Mean Response

SD Respondents


7.26 1.36 5,015


7.03 1.72 5,016

In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library. 7.63 1.44 5,017 American English Question Response

Mean Response

SD Respondents


7.25 1.38 4,294


6.96 1.75 4,295

In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library. 7.61 1.47 4,296 Canadian French Question Response

Mean Response

SD Respondents


7.34 1.25 721


7.48 1.42 721


Revised 9/17/07

154


Mean Response

SD Respondents


6.83 1.79 5,017


6.98 1.75 5,017


5.60 2.06 5,016


6.48 1.93 5,017


6.09 1.93 5,015


Mean Response

SD Respondents


6.80 1.81 4,296


6.95 1.77 4,296


5.56 2.06 4,295


6.40 1.96 4,296


6.05 1.94 4,294

Canadian French Question Response

Mean Response

SD Respondents


7.03 1.7 721


7.14 1.61 721


5.86 2.02 721


6.96 1.71 721


6.37 1.86 721

Revised 9/17/07

155


0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%


Perc

enta





2,146 2,087 481 216 85 5,015

How often do you use resources on library premises? 310 1,831 1,588 1,073 215 5,017 How often do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or non-library gateways for information?

3,538 978 250 128 122 5,016


42.79% 41.62% 9.59% 4.31% 1.69% 100.00%

How often do you use resources on library premises? 6.18% 36.50% 31.65% 21.39% 4.29% 100.00% How often do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or non-library gateways for information? 70.53% 19.50% 4.98% 2.55% 2.43% 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

156

American English

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%


Perc

enta




Question Daily Weekly Monthly Quarterly Never Total


1,905 1,769 377 169 75 4,295

How often do you use resources on library premises? 278 1,576 1,362 882 199 4,297 How often do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or non-library gateways for information?

3,031 842 209 101 113 4,296


44.35% 41.19% 8.78% 3.93% 1.75% 100.00%


70.55% 19.60% 4.86% 2.35% 2.63% 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

157

Canadian French

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%


Perc

enta





241 318 104 47 10 720


507 136 41 27 9 720


33.47% 44.17% 14.44% 6.53% 1.39% 100.00%


70.42% 18.89% 5.69% 3.75% 1.25% 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

158

4.5 College or University Libraries - Library Staff

4.5.1 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 group are displayed. Unified Age Group Respondents (n) Respondents % Under 18 - 0.00% 18 - 22 5 1.45% 23 - 30 44 12.79% 31 - 45 112 32.56% 46 - 65 181 52.62% Over 65 2 0.58%

Grand Total 344 100.00% American English Age Group Respondents (n) Respondents % Under 18 - 0.00% 18 - 22 5 1.88% 23 - 30 29 10.90% 31 - 45 82 30.83% 46 - 65 148 55.64% Over 65 2 0.75%

Grand Total 266 100.00% Canadian French Age Group Respondents (n) Respondents % Under 18 - 0.00% 18 - 22 - 0.00% 23 - 30 15 19.23% 31 - 45 30 38.46% 46 - 65 33 42.31% Over 65 - 0.00%


Revised 9/17/07

159

4.5.2 Population and Respondent Profile 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 Representativness section. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided. Unified Sex Respondents (n) Respondents % Male 81 23.55% Female 263 76.45%

Total 344 100.00% American English Sex Respondents (n) Respondents % Male 61 22.93% Female 205 77.07%

Total 266 100.00% Canadian French Sex Respondents (n) Respondents % Male 20 25.64% Female 58 74.36%

Total 78 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

160



Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 6.58 8.10 7.06 0.48 -1.04 335 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 6.68 7.82 7.13 0.46 -0.68 336 AS-3 Employees who are consistently courteous 7.47 8.37 7.48 0.02 -0.89 341

3

4

5

6

7

8

9AS-6

AS-5

AS-4

AS-3

AS-2

AS-1

LP-5

LP-4

LP-3

LP-2

LP-1IC-8

IC-7

IC-6

IC-5

IC-4

IC-3

IC-2

IC-1

AS-9

AS-8

AS-7

Revised 9/17/07

161


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n

AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions 7.23 8.29 7.55 0.32 -0.74 336 AS-5 Employees who have the knowledge to



7.04 8.20 7.38 0.34 -0.82 335


7.17 8.31 7.41 0.24 -0.90 335


problems 7.07 8.19 7.30 0.23 -0.89 330


7.05 8.26 7.53 0.48 -0.73 330


7.06 8.23 6.89 -0.18 -1.35 342


6.85 8.00 6.90 0.05 -1.10 320

IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 6.98 8.11 7.26 0.29 -0.85 331 IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily

access needed information 7.15 8.25 7.10 -0.05 -1.15 343


7.07 8.23 7.04 -0.03 -1.19 341


7.04 8.23 7.20 0.16 -1.03 342


7.07 8.23 7.25 0.18 -0.99 314


6.67 8.03 6.17 -0.50 -1.86 331

LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 6.82 7.89 6.28 -0.54 -1.60 323 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 6.76 8.09 6.56 -0.20 -1.53 334 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 6.72 7.93 6.83 0.11 -1.11 323 LP-5 Community space for group learning and

group study 6.25 7.45 6.25 0.00 -1.20 313


SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


user questions 1.25 0.90 1.08 1.46 1.28 336


1.38 1.02 1.23 1.58 1.33 335


1.30 0.87 1.14 1.45 1.30 335


problems 1.32 0.96 1.23 1.50 1.32 330


1.50 1.10 1.17 1.43 1.30 330


1.39 1.10 1.46 1.71 1.59 342


1.30 1.14 1.39 1.63 1.50 320

IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 1.35 1.17 1.23 1.36 1.24 331

Revised 9/17/07

162

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.30 1.08 1.42 1.72 1.53 343


1.24 1.01 1.22 1.51 1.38 341


1.30 0.99 1.12 1.37 1.25 342


1.31 1.00 1.18 1.49 1.28 314

LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning 1.46 1.21 1.66 2.11 2.02 331 LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 1.49 1.34 1.82 2.06 2.09 323 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 1.38 1.11 1.58 1.90 1.81 334 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 1.50 1.28 1.42 1.72 1.67 323 LP-5 Community space for group learning and

group study 1.74 1.67 1.77 2.11 2.03 313

Grand Total 1.38 1.09 1.33 1.62 1.48 332 American English


Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 6.55 8.07 6.86 0.32 -1.2 259 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 6.73 7.89 7.07 0.34 -0.82 259 AS-3 Employees who are consistently courteous 7.53 8.39 7.42 -0.11 -0.96 264 AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions 7.31 8.37 7.54 0.23 -0.83 259

Revised 9/17/07

163


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


7.27 8.38 7.42 0.16 -0.96 260


7.11 8.23 7.31 0.20 -0.93 259


7.18 8.33 7.31 0.13 -1.02 259


problems 7.13 8.27 7.25 0.12 -1.02 254


7.1 8.33 7.53 0.43 -0.81 257


7.11 8.25 6.81 -0.30 -1.45 264


6.9 8.01 6.88 -0.02 -1.13 252

IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 6.98 8.13 7.24 0.26 -0.89 257 IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily access



7.08 8.25 6.98 -0.11 -1.27 264


7.06 8.25 7.15 0.09 -1.10 265


7.14 8.27 7.27 0.13 -1.00 245

LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning 6.69 8.05 6.15 -0.54 -1.89 255 LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 6.85 7.87 6.13 -0.71 -1.74 247 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 6.77 8.09 6.65 -0.12 -1.44 258 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 6.7 7.91 6.78 0.08 -1.13 246 LP-5 Community space for group learning and

group study 6.16 7.35 6.13 -0.03 -1.22 236

Grand Total 7 8.15 7.03 0.04 -1.12 257 Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n




1.36 1.03 1.3 1.58 1.37 259


1.27 0.86 1.2 1.46 1.36 259


problems 1.29 0.91 1.25 1.49 1.34 254


1.49 1.08 1.18 1.41 1.29 257


1.4 1.11 1.52 1.68 1.69 264


1.27 1.14 1.43 1.69 1.52 252

IC-4 The electronic information resources I need 1.34 1.18 1.29 1.39 1.33 257 IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily access


Revised 9/17/07

164

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.22 1.02 1.26 1.52 1.44 264


1.31 1.02 1.19 1.33 1.28 265


1.26 0.99 1.17 1.48 1.32 245


group study 1.81 1.82 1.78 2.09 2.12 236

Grand Total 1.37 1.11 1.35 1.62 1.52 257 Canadian French


Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 6.67 8.2 7.72 1.05 -0.47 76 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 6.51 7.56 7.34 0.83 -0.22 77 AS-3 Employees who are consistently courteous 7.25 8.31 7.69 0.44 -0.62 77 AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions 6.95 8.01 7.58 0.64 -0.43 77 AS-5 Employees who have the knowledge to



6.79 8.11 7.63 0.84 -0.47 76

Revised 9/17/07

165


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


7.12 8.25 7.72 0.61 -0.53 76


problems 6.87 7.93 7.46 0.59 -0.47 76


6.89 7.99 7.52 0.63 -0.47 73


6.9 8.15 7.15 0.26 -1.00 78


6.63 7.99 6.97 0.34 -1.01 68


needed information 7.04 8.25 6.62 -0.42 -1.62 77


7.01 8.17 7.26 0.25 -0.91 77


6.97 8.17 7.39 0.42 -0.78 77


6.83 8.1 7.16 0.33 -0.94 69

LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning 6.58 7.99 6.22 -0.36 -1.76 76 LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 6.75 7.93 6.78 0.03 -1.16 76 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 6.74 8.08 6.26 -0.47 -1.82 76 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 6.78 7.99 6.97 0.19 -1.01 77 LP-5 Community space for group learning and

group study 6.55 7.77 6.62 0.08 -1.14 77


SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n




1.42 1 0.92 1.48 1.09 76


1.39 0.93 0.86 1.4 0.99 76


problems 1.42 1.07 1.16 1.48 1.14 76


1.52 1.11 1.12 1.47 1.29 73


1.36 1.07 1.23 1.76 1.14 78


1.39 1.14 1.2 1.36 1.4 68




1.31 1.01 1.06 1.43 1.09 77


1.28 0.88 0.85 1.51 1.07 77


1.45 1.03 1.22 1.54 1.16 69

Revised 9/17/07

166

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n

LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning 1.53 1.11 1.7 2.26 1.95 76 LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 1.51 1.14 1.63 1.9 1.65 76 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 1.42 0.99 1.52 2 1.74 76 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 1.45 1.04 1.28 1.57 1.29 77 LP-5 Community space for group learning and

group study 1.48 1.06 1.69 2.19 1.75 77

Grand Total 1.4 1.03 1.19 1.59 1.28 76


Revised 9/17/07

167


American English

Revised 9/17/07

168


Canadian French

Revised 9/17/07

169


4.5.5 Local Questions Summary 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.) Unified Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


6.33 8.67 5.00 -1.33 -3.67 3

A secure and safe place 7.58 8.06 7.08 -0.50 -0.98 48 Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.99 8.15 6.55 -0.44 -1.59 212 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

6.37 7.46 6.67 0.30 -0.78 46

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 7.00 8.33 6.00 -1.00 -2.33 3 Access to rare and historical materials 6.13 7.50 6.50 0.38 -1.00 8 Adequate hours of service 7.02 8.04 7.64 0.62 -0.40 144 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

4.00 9.00 9.00 5.00 0.00 1


7.38 8.88 7.38 0.00 -1.50 8

Convenient business hours 7.11 8.05 7.26 0.16 -0.79 19 Convenient service hours 6.00 7.00 9.00 3.00 2.00 1 Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other libraries

6.81 8.14 7.38 0.57 -0.76 146

Ease of use of electronic resources 6.85 7.85 7.00 0.15 -0.85 27

Revised 9/17/07

170


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n

Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery 8.00 8.50 7.50 -0.50 -1.00 2 Electronic resources matching my information needs

6.34 7.76 6.66 0.31 -1.10 67


7.19 8.13 8.00 0.81 -0.13 16


6.00 7.00 6.50 0.50 -0.50 2


7.21 8.15 8.21 1.00 0.05 39


9.00 9.00 6.00 -3.00 -3.00 1


6.82 8.55 7.77 0.95 -0.77 22


5.00 7.50 5.50 0.50 -2.00 2


6.70 7.88 6.72 0.02 -1.16 165


5.00 8.00 6.00 1.00 -2.00 2


6.30 7.83 7.13 0.83 -0.70 23


6.50 7.00 7.00 0.50 0.00 2


6.74 7.64 5.55 -1.19 -2.10 42

Space for students to study and work in groups 6.68 7.89 6.11 -0.58 -1.79 19 Space that facilitates quiet study 6.59 7.61 5.30 -1.30 -2.32 44 Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information

6.54 7.88 6.98 0.44 -0.90 192


6.89 8.11 7.00 0.11 -1.11 9


7.33 7.93 7.53 0.20 -0.40 15



SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.15 0.58 0.00 1.15 0.58 3

A secure and safe place 1.56 1.37 1.58 1.79 1.38 48 Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1.35 1.25 1.57 1.74 1.70 212 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

1.50 1.63 1.79 1.43 1.36 46

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 0.00 0.58 2.00 2.00 2.08 3 Access to rare and historical materials 2.03 0.93 0.53 1.77 0.93 8 Adequate hours of service 1.29 1.04 1.25 1.54 1.44 144

Revised 9/17/07

171

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n

Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

1


1.19 0.35 0.52 1.31 0.76 8

Convenient business hours 1.33 1.27 1.69 1.54 1.32 19 Convenient service hours 1 Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other libraries

1.30 1.07 1.27 1.62 1.58 146


1.48 1.40 1.24 1.42 1.22 67


1.17 1.09 0.97 1.42 1.02 16


1.41 1.41 0.71 0.71 0.71 2


1.22 0.99 0.86 1.10 0.72 39


1


1.79 0.51 1.19 1.91 1.31 22


0.00 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.00 2


1.39 1.11 1.41 1.72 1.66 165


0.00 1.41 1.41 1.41 2.83 2


1.52 1.07 0.97 1.40 0.97 23


0.71 0.00 0.00 0.71 0.00 2


1.27 1.62 1.89 1.95 2.05 42


1.51 1.18 1.22 1.73 1.46 192


1.83 1.36 1.73 2.42 1.90 9


1.23 1.03 1.41 1.15 0.99 15


Timely document delivery/interlibrary loan 0.93 0.80 0.99 1.23 0.82 26

Revised 9/17/07

172


Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


7.00 9.00 5.00 -2.00 -4.00 1

A secure and safe place 7.58 8.06 7.08 -0.50 -0.98 48 Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 7.00 8.19 6.52 -0.48 -1.66 193 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

6.65 7.77 7.19 0.54 -0.58 26

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 7.00 8.50 5.00 -2.00 -3.50 2 Access to rare and historical materials 6.13 7.50 6.50 0.38 -1.00 8 Adequate hours of service 7.00 8.03 7.59 0.59 -0.44 133 Availability of subject specialist assistance 6.92 7.83 7.67 0.75 -0.17 12 Comprehensive collections of fulltext articles online

7.38 8.88 7.38 0.00 -1.50 8


6.84 8.17 7.40 0.56 -0.77 138

Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery 8.00 8.50 7.50 -0.50 -1.00 2 Electronic resources matching my information needs

6.20 7.59 6.43 0.23 -1.16 44


7.19 8.13 8.00 0.81 -0.13 16


6.00 7.00 6.50 0.50 -0.50 2


7.64 8.55 8.36 0.73 -0.18 11


9.00 9.00 6.00 -3.00 -3.00 1


8.00 8.00 8.00 0.00 0.00 1


6.67 7.90 6.66 -0.01 -1.25 145


5.00 8.00 6.00 1.00 -2.00 2


6.50 7.00 7.00 0.50 0.00 2


6.74 7.64 5.55 -1.19 -2.10 42

Space for students to study and work in groups 6.68 7.89 6.11 -0.58 -1.79 19 Space that facilitates quiet study 6.59 7.61 5.30 -1.30 -2.32 44 Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information

6.57 7.84 6.89 0.32 -0.95 148


6.89 8.11 7.00 0.11 -1.11 9


7.33 7.93 7.53 0.20 -0.40 15


Revised 9/17/07

173

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1

A secure and safe place 1.56 1.37 1.58 1.79 1.38 48 Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1.36 1.25 1.60 1.79 1.73 193 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

1.50 1.50 1.83 1.42 1.53 26

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 0.00 0.71 1.41 1.41 0.71 2 Access to rare and historical materials 2.03 0.93 0.53 1.77 0.93 8 Adequate hours of service 1.30 1.07 1.28 1.54 1.47 133 Availability of subject specialist assistance 1.44 1.19 1.23 1.06 1.11 12 Comprehensive collections of fulltext articles online

1.19 0.35 0.52 1.31 0.76 8

Convenient business hours 1.19 0.53 0.92 1.67 0.99 8 Convenient service hours 1 Ease and timeliness in getting materials from other libraries

1.29 1.01 1.26 1.58 1.54 138


1.39 1.54 1.25 1.38 1.36 44


1.17 1.09 0.97 1.42 1.02 16


1.41 1.41 0.71 0.71 0.71 2


1.36 0.69 0.67 1.19 0.60 11


1


1


1.40 1.10 1.42 1.72 1.65 145


0.00 1.41 1.41 1.41 2.83 2


0.71 0.00 0.00 0.71 0.00 2


1.27 1.62 1.89 1.95 2.05 42


1.48 1.20 1.24 1.70 1.56 148


1.83 1.36 1.73 2.42 1.90 9


1.23 1.03 1.41 1.15 0.99 15


Revised 9/17/07

174

Canadian French Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


6.00 8.50 5.00 -1.00 -3.50 2

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 6.87 7.72 6.82 -0.05 -0.89 19 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

6.00 7.05 6.00 0.00 -1.05 20


4.00 9.00 9.00 5.00 0.00 1


6.25 7.63 7.00 0.75 -0.63 8

Ease of use of electronic resources 6.85 7.85 7.00 0.15 -0.85 27 Electronic resources matching my information needs

6.61 8.09 7.09 0.48 -1.00 23


7.04 8.00 8.14 1.11 0.14 28


6.76 8.57 7.76 1.00 -0.81 21


5.00 7.50 5.50 0.50 -2.00 2


6.90 7.75 7.20 0.30 -0.55 20


6.30 7.83 7.13 0.83 -0.70 23

Ready access to computers / Internet / software 7.03 8.07 7.72 0.69 -0.34 29 Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information

6.43 8.02 7.27 0.84 -0.75 44

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan 6.98 7.88 7.88 0.91 0.01 34 Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.41 0.71 0.00 1.41 0.71 2

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily 1.21 1.16 1.13 1.10 1.12 19 Access to equipment that is not readily available in my department, e.g., scanners, CD burners, PDAs, syncing stations

1.45 1.73 1.52 1.41 1.10 20

Access to photocopying and printing facilities 1 Adequate hours of service 1.27 0.60 0.75 1.58 0.89 11 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

1


1.58 1.92 1.31 2.38 2.33 8

Ease of use of electronic resources 1.20 1.17 1.07 1.17 0.72 27 Electronic resources matching my information needs

1.64 1.04 1.12 1.50 0.90 23

Revised 9/17/07

175

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.14 1.05 0.93 1.07 0.76 28


1.81 0.51 1.22 1.95 1.33 21


0.00 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.00 2


1.25 1.21 1.24 1.72 1.70 20


1.52 1.07 0.97 1.40 0.97 23

Ready access to computers / Internet / software 1.02 0.92 0.75 1.23 0.97 29 Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information

1.62 1.13 1.15 1.76 1.06 44



Mean Response

SD Respondents


7.43 1.09 344


7.24 1.39 344

In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library. 7.50 1.36 343 American English Question Response

Mean Response

SD Respondents


7.39 1.17 266


7.08 1.48 266

In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library. 7.39 1.45 266 Canadian French Question Response

Mean Response

SD Respondents


7.58 0.76 78


7.76 0.87 78


Revised 9/17/07

176


Mean Response

SD Respondents

(n)


6.74 1.69 343


6.81 1.46 344


7.02 1.52 343


Mean Response

SD Respondents

(n)


6.68 1.77 266


6.62 1.53 266


6.85 1.59 266


Mean Response

SD Respondents

(n)


6.95 1.36 77


7.44 0.96 78


7.6 1.08 77

Revised 9/17/07

177


0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%


Perc

enta





238 73 20 10 3 344


261 54 10 12 7 344


69.19% 21.22% 5.81% 2.91% 0.87% 100.00%


75.87% 15.70% 2.91% 3.49% 2.03% 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

178

American English

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%


Perc

enta





188 57 14 5 2 266


213 38 7 4 4 266


70.68% 21.43% 5.26% 1.88% 0.75% 100.00%


80.08% 14.29% 2.63% 1.50% 1.50% 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

179

Canadian French

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%


Perc

enta





50 16 6 5 1 78


48 16 3 8 3 78


64.10% 20.51% 7.69% 6.41% 1.28% 100.00%


61.54% 20.51% 3.85% 10.26% 3.85% 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

180

4.6 College or University Libraries - Staff

4.6.1 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 group are displayed. Unified Age Group Respondents (n) Respondents % Under 18 - 0.00% 18 - 22 12 1.13% 23 - 30 207 19.51% 31 - 45 444 41.85% 46 - 65 389 36.66% Over 65 9 0.85%

Total 1,061 100.00% American English Age Group Respondents (n) Respondents % Under 18 - 0.00% 18 - 22 5 0.60% 23 - 30 153 18.37% 31 - 45 343 41.18% 46 - 65 325 39.02% Over 65 7 0.84%

Total 833 100.00% Canadian French Age Group Respondents (n) Respondents % Under 18 - 0.00% 18 - 22 7 3.07% 23 - 30 54 23.68% 31 - 45 101 44.30% 46 - 65 64 28.07% Over 65 2 0.88%

Total 228 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

181

4.6.2 Population and Respondent Profile 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 Representativness section. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided. Unified Sex Respondents (n) Respondents % Male 368 34.68% Female 693 65.32%

Total 1,061 100.00% American English Sex Respondents (n) Respondents % Male 263 31.57% Female 570 68.43%

Total 833 100.00% Canadian French Sex Respondents (n) Respondents % Male 105 46.05% Female 123 53.95%

Total 228 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

182



Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


3

4

5

6

7

8

9AS-6

AS-5

AS-4

AS-3

AS-2

AS-1

LP-5

LP-4

LP-3

LP-2

LP-1IC-8

IC-7

IC-6

IC-5

IC-4

IC-3

IC-2

IC-1

AS-9

AS-8

AS-7

Revised 9/17/07

183


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


7.11 8.08 7.51 0.40 -0.58 1,030


6.91 7.94 7.43 0.52 -0.51 1,042


7.01 7.98 7.40 0.38 -0.58 1,025


problems 6.97 7.96 7.33 0.37 -0.63 876


6.92 8.20 7.09 0.17 -1.11 1,001


7.12 8.23 7.06 -0.06 -1.17 1,047


6.64 7.74 6.96 0.31 -0.79 850


needed information 7.09 8.11 7.27 0.19 -0.84 1,001


7.10 8.14 7.12 0.02 -1.02 1,032


7.04 8.11 7.27 0.23 -0.84 1,010


7.16 8.20 6.98 -0.18 -1.22 875

LP-1 Library space that inspires study and learning 6.43 7.60 6.62 0.19 -0.97 933 LP-2 Quiet space for individual activities 6.57 7.61 6.83 0.26 -0.78 879 LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location 6.52 7.66 6.95 0.43 -0.71 991 LP-4 A getaway for study, learning, or research 6.47 7.61 6.88 0.41 -0.73 897 LP-5 Community space for group learning and

group study 5.83 6.84 6.47 0.65 -0.36 694


SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n




1.58 1.23 1.34 1.72 1.50 1,042


1.50 1.17 1.30 1.65 1.40 1,025


problems 1.54 1.23 1.38 1.74 1.52 876


1.60 1.14 1.61 1.93 1.74 1,001


1.49 1.10 1.50 1.89 1.69 1,047


1.59 1.33 1.48 1.84 1.69 850


needed information 1.42 1.04 1.26 1.71 1.45 1,001

Revised 9/17/07

184

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.42 1.10 1.34 1.79 1.58 1,032


1.44 1.05 1.26 1.68 1.42 1,010


1.45 1.11 1.53 1.94 1.70 875


group study 2.12 2.06 1.74 2.26 2.22 694

Grand Total 1.61 1.29 1.47 1.86 1.65 970 American English


Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 6.30 7.71 6.97 0.66 -0.74 797 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 6.37 7.55 7.05 0.68 -0.50 810 AS-3 Employees who are consistently courteous 7.25 8.19 7.61 0.36 -0.58 831 AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions 7.05 8.04 7.48 0.43 -0.56 810 AS-5 Employees who have the knowledge to answer

user questions 7.11 8.07 7.46 0.35 -0.61 810

Revised 9/17/07

185


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


6.92 7.95 7.42 0.49 -0.53 818


7.05 8.00 7.39 0.34 -0.61 804


problems 6.99 7.97 7.36 0.37 -0.61 703


6.92 8.20 7.06 0.14 -1.14 780


7.15 8.26 7.05 -0.10 -1.21 822


6.63 7.75 6.95 0.31 -0.80 691




7.13 8.16 7.10 -0.03 -1.06 812


7.06 8.13 7.25 0.19 -0.88 791


7.19 8.20 7.03 -0.16 -1.18 683


group study 5.69 6.68 6.50 0.82 -0.18 543


SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n




1.63 1.28 1.36 1.75 1.53 818


1.53 1.2 1.31 1.65 1.4 804


problems 1.56 1.26 1.33 1.72 1.5 703


1.63 1.17 1.6 1.9 1.72 780


1.54 1.15 1.49 1.87 1.68 822


1.63 1.36 1.49 1.87 1.73 691




1.45 1.11 1.38 1.81 1.59 812

Revised 9/17/07

186

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.47 1.09 1.27 1.65 1.4 791


1.49 1.15 1.48 1.84 1.61 683


group study 2.17 2.14 1.68 2.24 2.21 543

Grand Total 1.64 1.33 1.47 1.85 1.65 764 Canadian French


Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n

AS-1 Employees who instill confidence in users 6.35 7.68 7.25 0.90 -0.43 225 AS-2 Giving users individual attention 6.12 7.25 6.9 0.78 -0.36 214 AS-3 Employees who are consistently courteous 7.17 8.18 7.79 0.63 -0.38 224 AS-4 Readiness to respond to users' questions 6.79 7.87 7.39 0.60 -0.48 220 AS-5 Employees who have the knowledge to answer

user questions 7.1 8.13 7.69 0.59 -0.44 220


6.87 7.91 7.48 0.61 -0.43 224

Revised 9/17/07

187


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


6.89 7.9 7.44 0.56 -0.46 221


problems 6.86 7.94 7.23 0.37 -0.71 173


6.9 8.18 7.17 0.27 -1.01 221


7 8.13 7.11 0.11 -1.02 225


6.69 7.73 7.01 0.31 -0.72 159




7 8.05 7.2 0.20 -0.85 220


6.98 8.04 7.32 0.34 -0.72 219


7.04 8.21 6.81 -0.23 -1.40 192


group study 6.33 7.38 6.36 0.03 -1.03 151


SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n




1.37 1.06 1.26 1.63 1.40 224


1.39 1.02 1.25 1.66 1.40 221


problems 1.45 1.12 1.58 1.83 1.62 173


1.48 1.01 1.65 2.04 1.80 221


1.3 0.93 1.55 1.96 1.74 225


1.43 1.19 1.46 1.71 1.48 159




1.29 1.04 1.22 1.73 1.52 220


1.3 0.91 1.23 1.76 1.47 219

Revised 9/17/07

188

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


1.31 0.94 1.68 2.24 1.98 192


group study 1.86 1.61 1.96 2.21 2.13 151

Grand Total 1.45 1.11 1.45 1.86 1.64 206


Revised 9/17/07

189


Revised 9/17/07

190

American English


Revised 9/17/07

191

Canadian French


Revised 9/17/07

192


Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


6.85 7.90 6.70 -0.15 -1.20 20

A secure and safe place 6.98 7.76 7.49 0.51 -0.28 123 Ability to navigate library Web pages easily

7.09 8.18 6.95 -0.14 -1.23 711


6.13 7.47 6.64 0.51 -0.83 135


6.67 7.78 6.44 -0.22 -1.33 9

Access to rare and historical materials 5.81 7.38 6.81 1.00 -0.56 16

Adequate hours of service 6.89 7.77 7.52 0.64 -0.25 488 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

9.00 9.00 9.00 0.00 0.00 1

Availability of subject specialist assistance

6.19 7.30 6.64 0.46 -0.66 70

Comprehensive collections of fulltext articles online

6.78 8.07 6.63 -0.15 -1.44 27


6.65 7.88 7.12 0.47 -0.76 491

Ease of use of electronic resources 7.05 8.06 7.27 0.22 -0.80 83 Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery

6.80 7.70 7.10 0.30 -0.60 10


7.00 8.22 6.73 -0.27 -1.49 124


6.30 7.21 7.06 0.77 -0.15 47


5.96 7.28 7.12 1.16 -0.16 25


7.03 7.99 7.62 0.59 -0.37 134


7.00 7.00 7.00 0.00 0.00 1


6.53 7.63 7.20 0.67 -0.43 30


6.56 7.44 6.22 -0.33 -1.22 9


6.35 7.46 6.77 0.42 -0.69 591

Revised 9/17/07

193


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


6.95 7.79 7.11 0.16 -0.68 19


6.96 8.25 6.75 -0.21 -1.50 24


7.18 8.21 7.62 0.43 -0.59 76


6.00 6.88 6.00 0.00 -0.88 8


6.05 6.92 6.46 0.41 -0.46 76


5.26 6.62 6.24 0.97 -0.38 34

Space that facilitates quiet study 6.15 7.06 6.44 0.29 -0.62 87 Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information

6.30 7.53 6.84 0.53 -0.70 573


6.93 7.82 8.07 1.14 0.25 28


7.39 8.08 7.13 -0.26 -0.95 38

Timely document delivery / interlibrary loan

6.93 7.78 7.37 0.43 -0.41 46

Timely document delivery/interlibrary loan

6.89 8.05 7.66 0.77 -0.39 64

Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.31 1.02 1.66 1.81 1.64 20

A secure and safe place 2.17 1.90 1.38 2.19 2.08 123 Ability to navigate library Web pages easily

1.51 1.10 1.50 1.99 1.66 711


1.75 1.52 1.66 1.92 1.62 135


1.22 0.83 2.35 3.23 2.74 9

Access to rare and historical materials 1.72 1.45 1.38 2.13 1.75 16 Adequate hours of service 1.60 1.35 1.44 1.87 1.67 488 Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

1

Availability of subject specialist assistance

1.53 1.45 1.49 1.48 1.53 70


1.50 1.11 1.33 2.21 1.25 27


1.69 1.29 1.59 1.99 1.74 491

Ease of use of electronic resources 1.18 0.92 1.16 1.58 1.41 83 Efficient interlibrary loan / document delivery

1.62 1.25 1.73 1.06 1.07 10


1.39 1.07 1.44 1.69 1.51 124

Revised 9/17/07

194

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n


2.21 1.92 1.48 1.95 1.84 47


1.93 1.54 1.13 1.21 1.14 25


1.31 0.98 1.16 1.44 1.31 134


1


1.74 1.59 1.35 1.99 1.85 30


1.51 1.01 1.39 2.35 1.30 9


1.75 1.49 1.60 1.96 1.77 591


1.39 1.32 1.76 2.12 1.89 19


1.37 0.79 1.36 1.86 1.32 24


1.12 0.84 1.21 1.58 1.28 76


2.27 2.36 1.51 1.85 2.30 8


2.27 2.21 1.50 2.10 2.09 76


2.53 2.27 1.76 2.48 2.06 34


1.77 1.46 1.59 1.99 1.78 573


1.36 1.49 0.94 1.48 1.78 28


1.53 1.15 1.70 2.21 1.93 38


1.60 1.13 1.29 1.73 1.51 46

Timely document delivery/interlibrary loan

1.39 0.97 1.43 1.75 1.55 64


Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


6.73 7.82 7.09 0.36 -0.73 11

A secure and safe place 6.98 7.76 7.49 0.51 -0.28 123 Ability to navigate library Web pages easily

7.18 8.22 6.97 -0.22 -1.26 606


6.24 7.64 6.77 0.53 -0.86 88

Revised 9/17/07

195


Desired Mean

Perceived Mean

Adequacy Mean

Superiority Mean

n


7.17 8.00 6.17 -1.00 -1.83 6

Access to rare and historical materials 5.81 7.38 6.81 1.00 -0.56 16 Adequate hours of service 6.86 7.75 7.48 0.61 -0.28 459 Availability of subject specialist assistance

6.19 7.30 6.64 0.46 -0.66 70


6.78 8.07 6.63 -0.15 -1.44 27


6.65 7.87 7.15 0.50 -0.72 426


6.80 7.70 7.10 0.30 -0.60 10


7.04 8.19 6.80 -0.24 -1.39 101


6.30 7.21 7.06 0.77 -0.15 47


5.96 7.28 7.12 1.16 -0.16 25


6.97 7.90 7.41 0.43 -0.49 69


7.00 7.00 7.00 0.00 0.00 1


6.79 7.89 6.95 0.16 -0.95 19


6.32 7.45 6.68 0.36 -0.77 487


6.95 7.79 7.11 0.16 -0.68 19


6.00 6.88 6.00 0.00 -0.88 8


6.05 6.92 6.46 0.41 -0.46 76


5.26 6.62 6.24 0.97 -0.38 34

Space that facilitates quiet study 6.15 7.06 6.44 0.29 -0.62 87 Teaching me how to access, evaluate, and use information

6.25 7.49 6.85 0.60 -0.64 459


6.93 7.82 8.07 1.14 0.25 28


7.39 8.08 7.13 -0.26 -0.95 38


6.86 7.86 7.18 0.32 -0.68 28

Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.56 1.25 1.51 1.63 1.42 11

Revised 9/17/07

196

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n

A secure and safe place 2.17 1.90 1.38 2.19 2.08 123 Ability to navigate library Web pages easily

1.49 1.10 1.50 1.96 1.65 606


1.86 1.46 1.71 2.10 1.67 88


1.17 0.89 2.86 3.69 3.25 6

Access to rare and historical materials 1.72 1.45 1.38 2.13 1.75 16 Adequate hours of service 1.62 1.37 1.46 1.91 1.71 459 Availability of subject specialist assistance

1.53 1.45 1.49 1.48 1.53 70


1.50 1.11 1.33 2.21 1.25 27


1.71 1.31 1.56 1.94 1.69 426


1.62 1.25 1.73 1.06 1.07 10


1.39 1.10 1.39 1.55 1.33 101


2.21 1.92 1.48 1.95 1.84 47


1.93 1.54 1.13 1.21 1.14 25


1.42 1.03 1.02 1.23 1.08 69


1


1.40 1.33 1.43 1.80 1.81 19


1.78 1.53 1.64 1.98 1.83 487


1.39 1.32 1.76 2.12 1.89 19


2.27 2.36 1.51 1.85 2.30 8


2.27 2.21 1.50 2.10 2.09 76


2.53 2.27 1.76 2.48 2.06 34


1.82 1.53 1.61 1.98 1.79 459


1.36 1.49 0.94 1.48 1.78 28


1.53 1.15 1.70 2.21 1.93 38


1.76 1.21 1.42 2.02 1.70 28

Revised 9/17/07

197

Canadian French Question Minimum

Mean Desired

Mean Perceived

Mean Adequacy

Mean Superiority

Mean n


7.00 8.00 6.22 -0.78 -1.78 9

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily

6.81 7.92 6.97 0.16 -0.94 105


5.94 7.17 6.40 0.47 -0.77 47


5.67 7.33 7.00 1.33 -0.33 3


9.00 9.00 9.00 0.00 0.00 1


6.65 7.94 6.95 0.31 -0.98 65

Ease of use of electronic resources 7.05 8.06 7.27 0.22 -0.80 83 Electronic resources matching my information needs

6.83 8.35 6.39 -0.43 -1.96 23


7.09 8.09 7.85 0.75 -0.25 65


6.09 7.18 7.64 1.55 0.45 11


6.56 7.44 6.22 -0.33 -1.22 9


6.48 7.50 7.18 0.70 -0.32 104


6.96 8.25 6.75 -0.21 -1.50 24


7.18 8.21 7.62 0.43 -0.59 76


6.50 7.69 6.77 0.27 -0.92 114


6.97 7.86 7.66 0.69 -0.20 82

Question Minimum

SD Desired

SD Perceived

SD Adequacy

SD Superiority

SD n


1.00 0.71 1.79 1.92 1.79 9

Ability to navigate library Web pages easily

1.40 1.00 1.52 2.06 1.69 105


1.52 1.59 1.56 1.57 1.55 47


0.58 0.58 1.00 1.53 1.15 3

Adequate hours of service 1.20 0.87 0.75 1.09 0.87 29

Revised 9/17/07

198

Question Minimum SD

Desired SD

Perceived SD

Adequacy SD

Superiority SD

n

Assuring users of the accuracy and confidentiality of their transactions

1


1.55 1.16 1.78 2.30 2.00 65

Ease of use of electronic resources 1.18 0.92 1.16 1.58 1.41 83 Electronic resources matching my information needs

1.44 0.93 1.67 2.23 2.10 23


1.20 0.93 1.27 1.63 1.51 65


2.21 1.94 1.12 2.07 1.63 11


1.51 1.01 1.39 2.35 1.30 9


1.61 1.29 1.36 1.82 1.46 104


1.37 0.79 1.36 1.86 1.32 24


1.12 0.84 1.21 1.58 1.28 76


1.51 1.12 1.54 2.00 1.72 114


1.37 1.00 1.23 1.47 1.32 82


Mean Response

SD Respondents


7.36 1.20 1,065


7.13 1.55 1,063

In general, I am satisfied with the way in which I am treated at the library. 7.56 1.40 1,065 American English Question Response

Mean Response

SD Respondents


7.35 1.22 837


7.05 1.58 836


Revised 9/17/07

199


Mean Response

SD Respondents


7.41 1.12 228


7.42 1.42 227



Mean Response

SD Respondents

(n)

The library aids my advancement in my academic discipline. 6.63 1.68 1,062 The library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits. 6.78 1.67 1,062 The library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy information. 5.93 1.84 1,064 The library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest. 6.43 1.72 1,064 The library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study. 6.40 1.74 1,063 American English Question Response

Mean Response

SD Respondents

(n)


5.88 1.84 836


6.24 1.76 836


6.34 1.75 836


Mean Response

SD Respondents

(n)


6.14 1.84 228


7.12 1.40 228


6.62 1.69 227

Revised 9/17/07

200


0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%


Perc

enta





193 357 234 199 82 1,065

How often do you use resources on library premises? 53 221 334 375 82 1,065 How often do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or non-library gateways for information?

762 190 57 26 30 1,065


18.12% 33.52% 21.97% 18.69% 7.70% 100.00%


71.55% 17.84% 5.35% 2.44% 2.82% 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

201

American English

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%


Perc

enta





135 278 189 159 76 837


599 146 46 23 23 837


16.13% 33.21% 22.58% 19.00% 9.08% 100.00%


71.57% 17.44% 5.50% 2.75% 2.75% 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

202

Canadian French

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%


Perc

enta





58 79 45 40 6 228


163 44 11 3 7 228


25.44% 34.65% 19.74% 17.54% 2.63% 100.00%


71.49% 19.30% 4.82% 1.32% 3.07% 100.00%

Revised 9/17/07

203

5 Community College Libraries Results for LibQual Canada

5.1 Community College Libraries - All

5.1.1 Respondents by User Group

Revised 9/17/07

204

5.1.2 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 in the online Representativeness section*. The chart maps percentage of respondents for each user subgroup in red. Population percentages for each user subgroup are mapped in blue. The table shows the number and percentage for each user sub-group for 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.

Revised 9/17/07

205

Revised 9/17/07

206


Revised 9/17/07

207

5.1.4 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 group are displayed.

Revised 9/17/07

208

5.1.5 Population and Respondent Profile 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 Representativness section. When population data is missing or incomplete, it is because this data was not provided.


Revised 9/17/07

209

Revised 9/17/07

210

Revised 9/17/07

211

5.1.7 Core Question Dimension Summary On the chart below, scores for each dimension of library service quality have been plotted graphically. The exterior bars represent the range of minimum to desired mean scores for each dimension. The interior bars represent the range of minimum to perceived mean scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimension of library service quality.

Revised 9/17/07

212

Revised 9/17/07

213

5.1.8 Local Questions Summary 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.)

This table displays the standard deviation for each of the local questions added by the individual library or consortium, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. (For a more detailed explanation of the headings, see the Introduction to this notebook.)

Revised 9/17/07

214

5.1.9 General Satisfaction Questions Summary This table displays mean score and standard deviation for each of the general satisfaction questions: Satisfaction with Treatment, Satisfaction with Support, and Satisfaction with Overall Quality of Service, where n is the number of respondents for each particular question. These scores are calculated from responses to the general satisfaction questions on the LibQUAL+® survey, in which respondents rated their levels of general satisfaction on a scale from 1-9.

5.1.10 Information Literacy Outcomes Questions Summary 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".

Revised 9/17/07

215

5.1.11 Library Use Summary This chart shows a graphic representation of library use (both on the premises and electronically), as well as use of non-library information gateways such as Yahoo™ and Google™. Bars represent the frequency with which respondents report using these resources: Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, or Never. The table below the chart displays the number and percentage of respondents who selected each option.

Revised 9/17/07

216

5.2 Community College Libraries – Student


Revised 9/17/07

217



Revised 9/17/07

218


Revised 9/17/07

219

Revised 9/17/07

220

Revised 9/17/07

221


Revised 9/17/07

222


Revised 9/17/07

223



Revised 9/17/07

224


Revised 9/17/07

225


Revised 9/17/07

226

5.3 Community College Libraries – Faculty


Revised 9/17/07

227


Revised 9/17/07

228


Revised 9/17/07

229


Revised 9/17/07

230

Revised 9/17/07

231


Revised 9/17/07

232

Revised 9/17/07

233



Revised 9/17/07

234




Revised 9/17/07

235

Revised 9/17/07

236

5.4 Community College Libraries – Library Staff



5.4.3 Core Question Summary Core Quest 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.)

Revised 9/17/07

237

Revised 9/17/07

238

Revised 9/17/07

239


Revised 9/17/07

240

Revised 9/17/07

241



Revised 9/17/07

242




Revised 9/17/07

243

Revised 9/17/07

244

5.5 Community College Libraries – Staff




Revised 9/17/07

245

Revised 9/17/07

246

Revised 9/17/07

247


Revised 9/17/07

248

Revised 9/17/07

249



Revised 9/17/07

250




Revised 9/17/07

251

Revised 9/17/07

252

6 Appendix A: LibQUAL+® Dimensions LibQUAL+® measures dimensions of perceived library quality---that is, each survey question is part of a broader category (a dimension), and scores within those categories are analyzed in order to derive more general information about library users' perceptions of service. These dimensions were first based on the original SERVQUAL survey instrument (the framework for the LibQUAL+® survey tool; for more information on the origins of LibQUAL+®, go to <http://www.libqual.org/Publications/>). The LibQUAL+® survey dimensions have evolved with each iteration, becoming more refined and focused for application to the library context. Dimensions for each iteration of the LibQUAL+® survey are outlined below. LibQUAL+® 2000 Dimensions The 2000 iteration of the LibQUAL+® survey, which had 41 questions, measured eight separate dimensions:

� Assurance (the knowledge and courtesy of employees, and their ability to convey trust and confidence) � Empathy (caring, individual attention) � Library as Place (library as a sanctuary/haven or site for learning and contemplation) � Reliability (ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately) � Responsiveness (willingness to help customers and provide prompt service) � Tangibles (appearance of physical facilities, equipment, personnel and communications materials) � Instructions/Custom Items � Self-Reliance

LibQUAL+® 2001 Dimensions After careful analysis of the results from the 2000 survey, the dimensions were further refined to re-ground the SERVQUAL items in the library context. Four sub-dimensions resulted for the 2001 iteration:

� Service Affect (nine items, such as “willingness to help users”) � Library as Place (five items, such as “a haven for quiet and solitude”) � Personal Control (six items, such as “website enabling me to locate information on my own”), and � Information Access (five items, such as “comprehensive print collections” and “convenient business hours”)

LibQUAL+® 2002 and 2003 Dimensions For the 2002 iteration of the LibQUAL+® survey, the dimensions were once again refined based on analysis of the previous year's results. While the four dimensions were retained, their titles were changed slightly to more clearly represent the questions and data. The same four dimensions were also used on the 2003 survey:

� Access to Information � Affect of Service � Library as Place � Personal Control

LibQUAL+® 2004 - 2007 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

Revised 9/17/07

253

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 2007 notebooks, along with the questions that relate to each dimension. (Note: The questions below are those used in the College and University implementation of the survey, American English version.) Affect of Service [AS-1] Employees who instill confidence in users [AS-2] Giving users individual attention [AS-3] Employees who are consistently courteous [AS-4] Readiness to respond to users’ questions [AS-5] Employees who have the knowledge to answer user questions [AS-6] Employees who deal with users in a caring fashion [AS-7] Employees who understand the needs of their users [AS-8] Willingness to help users [AS-9] Dependability in handling users’ service problems Information Control [IC-1] Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office [IC-2] A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own [IC-3] The printed library materials I need for my work [IC-4] The electronic information resources I need [IC-5] Modern equipment that lets me easily access needed information [IC-6] Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my own [IC-7] Making information easily accessible for independent use [IC-8] Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work Library as Place [LP-1] Library space that inspires study and learning [LP-2] Quiet space for individual activities [LP-3] A comfortable and inviting location [LP-4] A getaway for study, learning or research [LP-5] Community space for group learning and group study

Revised 9/17/07

254

Revised 9/17/07

255

Association of Research Libraries 21 Dupont Circle NW

Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036

Phone 202-296-2296 Fax 202-872-0884

http://www.libqual.org Copyright © 2007 Association of Research Libraries

59407-772-X (paperback) ISBN 1-59407-773-8 (PDF)

libqual canada - library.queensu.ca · revised 9/17/07 3 libqual canada contributors colleen cook...

Documents