Advocating For Systematic/ Profession-wide Collection Of Data That Could Be Useful Bob Dugan University of West Florida
Perspectives ….. • Currently-used library metrics are no longer effective in illustrating library value. • Academics: IPEDS-AL component, ACRL, and ARL annual surveys. • Publics: IMLS-PLS and PLA’s Public Library Data Service (PLDS) annual surveys. • Hinders evidence-based advocacy -- sharing evidence with stakeholders to tell the story of the library’s impact, so that they will then advocate on our behalf.
Reminder of Learning Outcomes • Understand the importance of data collecting and reporting as they relate to library-advocacy. • Discover ongoing activities for data collection and reporting to reflect the 21st Century library. • Articulate two strategies for collecting and reporting data.
Data Requested IPEDS and IMLS Multiple focus on collecting stakeholders and reporting request inputs inputs and and outputs for outputs. context. So, what can we do with inputs and outputs?
Make the Best of It! • Visibility/ transparency / accountability for stakeholders’ perspectives • Institutional effectiveness • Happiness • Trends • Benchmarking • Best practices • Advocate to improve the inputs and outputs requested to align with our reality.
Perspective on “Perspectives” • Inputs and outputs are not outcomes – they have a different application and value. • Standards need to be applied. • Instructions / FAQ text needs to be clear. • Legacies: changes in data collected and reported when needed. I can best speak to academic data, but I expect there are parallels to public libraries’ data .
a • Academic Libraries (AL) component (started in 2014) of the spring data collection is a mandatory, annual survey for all degree-granting Title IV institutions. • There were early problems with the instrument and the instructions.
• Information about library staffing levels -- moved to the HR component • Details on library materials expenditures • Details on library collections • Information about instruction sessions and attendance • Information on hours open and gate counts • Information about digitizing activities • Information about reference transactions
And While That is Going On …. • ACRL revised its survey instrument.
• Fortunately, the first IPEDS AL component survey director wanted to make sure that the survey was successful. • ACRL, ARL and ALA organized a joint Task Force to provide informed input to IPEDS. • This Task Force is now in its third year.
Joint Task Force Objectives • Improve definitions and instructions to improve the data (consistency, clarity). • The inputs and outputs collected represent the work of academic libraries.
TF Recommended and Accepted Changes … So Far • Emphasized online systems and discovery. • Replaced volumes with titles. • Count Open Access materials. • Report serial titles in the collections. • Report reserve collections in physical circulation. • Include physical serials in circulation; still excludes e-serials usage. • Use COUNTER.
Via the Task Force, IPEDS is Considering: • Institutional Repositories • E-serials usage • Shared collections • New COUNTER measures as they are developed and deployed
We Learned …. • Clarifying instructions • This effort represents reduces the number an activity libraries are asked to do – of help desk continuous questions. improvement. • Apply NISO’s data • IPEDS has constraints definitions whenever on all of its survey possible. It’s OK for us to ask instruments and the that survey questions instructions. be aligned with reality.
ACRL Annual Survey • 100% aligned with IPEDS - one response for two surveys • Captured “the best of 1998-2012 ALS” • Timeliness • Adoption of changes based upon respondent feedback • Pilots survey questions for IPEDS • ACRL Metrics portal – peer benchmarking and best practices (see also timeliness)
Benchmark from ACRL Metrics % Librarian % Other % All Other % Student Sorted on % Librarian Staff to Total Total # of Staff to Total Professional Staff Paid Staff to Assistants to Staff Staff FTEs Staff to Total Staff Total Staff Total Staff Western Carolina University (NC) 53.63 37.29 0.00 52.21 10.50 Valdosta State University (GA) 51.30 31.19 19.49 27.88 21.44 University of Arkansas at Little Rock 35.50 30.99 22.54 25.35 21.13 Rowan University (NJ) 49.09 30.56 8.15 50.52 10.78 Stephen F Austin State University (TX) 57.00 29.82 21.05 24.56 24.56 Median 51.30 29.82 19.49 28.13 21.13 Average 52.73 28.27 15.63 36.79 22.78 University of South Dakota 32.00 28.13 25.00 28.13 18.75 University of West Florida 46.08 25.95 0.00 51.17 22.87 East Tennessee State University 54.00 25.93 11.11 46.30 16.67 University of West Georgia 96.00 14.58 2.08 25.00 58.33
Best Practice from ACRL Metrics Best Practice: Libraries open between 112 and 120 hours/week; Total Staff FTE between 46.0 and 50.0 Hours open, typical week Total # of Staff FTEs Colby College (ME) 119.00 46.93 Bowdoin College (ME) 112.00 47.06 CUNY College of Staten Island (NY) 112.00 49.00 University of West Florida 112.00 46.08
• Have to email your peers for comparative data. • Face inconsistent and unevenly- applied definitions. • Don't know if your peers are collecting anything you need. What would happen if input and output data were not collected through library surveys?
Tell Your Story • Visibility, transparency, and accountability. • Multiplicity of stakeholders want this data. • There is more research going on about libraries than we know (e.g., using derived ratios). • Standardized surveys provide quality data sources Value of the library especially if they have experience doing it. and the profession • Trends analysis, benchmarking and best practices will help to show -- studies. “it's not all on the Internet.” • Surveys will continue to change as libraries change IF we are involved.
Strategies: Don’t Catch Fire
IPEDS AL Component / IMLS Public Libraries Survey • Integral part of IPEDS’ and IMLS’ data collection efforts. • Keeps us accountable at the campus / local level. • Increases library’s visibility. • Annual surveys contribute to a rich data set.
Establish a Culture • This is not the same process as assessing outcomes. • Not necessary for a MLS to do the counting; much is automated or mechanized. • Depend upon your staff. • Show your staff the value of their measurement work -- show them what you show the It’s OK to measure stakeholders. inputs and outputs.
Plan • Set up a data collection plan based upon present stakeholder needs. • Maybe charge an internal team to coordinate and manage data collection. • An objective: answer any input/output question from a stakeholder in 10 minutes or less.
Advocacy • Be aware of stakeholders’ needs for data. • Standards are critical for consistency. • Instructions are critical for clarity. See also “standards.” • Help us construct and improve surveys for our reality. Be proactive, become involved. • Goal: one survey, multiple responses.
Recommend
More recommend
