LibQUAL+ 2006 Results

Overview

The University Libraries conducted a library service quality survey between October 30 and November 20, 2006. The LibQUAL+ survey, which was developed by the Association of Research Libraries, was administered to randomly selected groups of undergraduate and graduate students and to the entire faculty population. For each of the 22 core and 5 custom questions, respondents provided a scale rating for their minimum level of service/resource, desired level of service/resource, and perceived level of service/resource. The survey also elicited responses on general satisfaction with the library, information literacy outcomes, and use of information resources.

The LibQUAL+ survey's 22 core questions are each assigned to one of three dimensions--Affect of Service, Library as Place, and Information Control. Survey results can be analyzed at both the question and dimension levels. LibQUAL+ suggests focusing on "adequacy gaps" (perceived level of service/resource score minus minimum level of service/resource score) and "service superiority gaps" (perceived level of service/resource score minus desired level of service/resource score). Negative adequacy gap scores indicate potential problem areas for the library.

Participation

Of those surveyed, 6.1% of undergraduate students (73 of 1200), 10.8% of graduate students (130 of 1200), and 22.1% of faculty (232 of 1050) responded; the overall response rate was 12.6%. 228 survey respondents took the opportunity to provide comments. The University Libraries offered 3 incentive prizes--$150, $100, and $50 campus bookstore gift certificates; the incentive prize winners were announced in January.

Results

LibQUAL+ produced a summary report which gives average scores, satisfaction ratings and other information for the entire respondent population and for each of the sub-populations--undergraduate students, graduate students, and faculty. Survey respondents indicated that the library generally exceeds their minimum set of expectations. (In the series of box plots below, the red squares indicate the mean perceived rating, while the top and bottom sides of the green boxes indicate the mean desired rating and mean minimum rating, respectively. A red square that sits in the middle of a green box indicates that the library exceeds the average minimum expectation, but does not exceed the average desired expectation.)

In the service affect dimension, the library exceeds minimum expectations for each group of respondents.

In the library as place dimension, the library is exceeding minimum expectations for faculty and undergraduate students, while just meeting the minimum set by graduate students.

Within the information control dimension, respondents’ views of the library are more problematic. While the library exceeds the minimum expectations of undergraduate students, it does not meet those of faculty and graduate students. Faculty and graduate students are most critical of the library’s website, its print holdings and its electronic and print journal holdings.

Next Steps

The University Libraries received many survey comments that are particularly useful in making incremental changes to our programs. For example, several respondents commented on the responsiveness of the interlibrary loan (ILL) service. As a result, the Libraries are now implementing a new ILL system that allows users to check the status of their requests online. We hope that you will notice other changes in response to your comments and suggestions.

The Libraries' negative adequacy gap scores in the information control dimension are more difficult to improve in the short-term. An analysis of LibQUAL results for Mason’s SCHEV peers suggests that negative adequacy gaps in this dimension are common. We will seek to improve the utility of the library to faculty and students through increased investment in collections and electronic access.

The University Libraries plan to regularly survey the campus community in the future, perhaps using LibQUAL+ or another standardized survey instrument. In the meantime, we welcome comments and suggestions. For more information on the LibQUAL+ survey, please contact James Nalen.