Indiana University Kokomo
Home • Site Index • Find People •

IU Seal
Center for Teaching, Learning, and Assessment

Summary of Assessment Reports:
Library

2007-2008

Plan

The library assessed the cost per use of all print journal titles that had an active subscription during the 2006-2007 fiscal year in order to identify titles that cost more than $100 per use.

Method

A spreadsheet with all active journal subscription titles was created and used to keep a statistical count of the number of times a title (whether current issue, bound issue or microfilm issue) was used from July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2007. These statistics were gathered as library student assistants re-shelved materials. Cost of the subscription, plus binding costs if applicable, was recorded for the same titles as the subscription was paid in the 2006-2007 fiscal year. The cost per use for current/ bound issues was calculated by totaling the cost of the subscription and binding costs, and then dividing the total cost by the number of total uses of the paper/bound issues. The cost per use of the microfilm was calculated by dividing the cost of the microfilm subscription by the number of microfilm uses. A total cost per use of each title was calculated by adding the cost per use of the paper/bound to the cost per use of the microfilm.

Results

A total of 488 titles were assessed for cost per use. Of those 488 titles 302 exceeded the $100 cost per use limit. The statistical information was shared with all schools and departments and was used to initiate cancellation or format conversion (mostly print to electronic) discussions between the library faculty and the teaching faculty. As a result of those discussions many titles in print format were cancelled and a plan to create a more robust online environment for use 24/7 by library users was developed and implemented.

Executive Summary Report prepared by:
Ria Lukes
Head, Technical Services
September 7, 2008

Full Assessment Report for 2007-2008 available at this link

2006-2007

Plan

The Library assessed its facility, staff practices and resources.

Method

The Library used Association of Research Libraries (ARL) LibQUAL+ ® survey which was distributed by e-mail to all students, faculty, and staff between February 12 and March 2, 2007.

The LibQUAL+ ® survey utilizes gap scores to determine if a library is meeting the level of service expectations of its users. The survey asks participants to rate, on a scale of 1-9 (1 being the lowest and 9 the highest score) the minimum, desired, and perceived levels of service that the library provides.

The Library will be focusing on Service Adequacy which is calculated by subtracting the minimum score from the perceived score on any given question, for each user. In general, Service Adequacy is an indicator of the extent to which the Library is meeting the minimum expectations of our users. The Association of Research Libraries, the creators of LibQUAL+ ®, set the gap scores which have a mean of 0 and may be positive or negative. The higher the service adequacy scores, the better the Library’s performance. Conversely, a negative score indicates that user’s perceived level of service quality is below their minimum expectations.

The Library has set the minimum Service Adequacy gap score of 0 as a benchmark on each outcome addressed by each question asked on the survey. Scores that are less than 0 will indicate areas of concern.

Results

The following chart indicates the Service Adequacy scores for each question and group responding. The Library has already begun to initiate changes to correct any deficiencies that were detected.

 
 
Undergraduate
Faculty
Graduate
Student
Staff
All

Facility
Library as Place

0.03

0.51

-0.23

1.09

0.11

Staff Practices
Affect of Services

-0.08

0.26

0.39

0.19

0.00

Resources
Information Control

0.05

-0.21

0.05

0.03

0.02

Overall

-0.02

0.14

0.11

0.34

0.02

Summary Report prepared by:
John C. Stachacz
Director of Library Resources
November 2, 2007

Full Assessment Report for 2006-2007 available at this link.
LibQUAL+ Survey Report for 2006-2007 available at this link.

2005-2006

Plan

The Library assessed the first module of a four module information literacy series presented in English Composition I & II (W131 & W132).

Method

The outcome assessed by the Library was: Students will locate a book in the IU Kokomo Library using IUCAT. This outcome is a part of the Library’s Information Literacy goals for W131: English Composition I. The IUCAT outcome was assessed in 100% of W131 sections taught over the Fall 2005 semester. This included the three e-courses and the blended course taught in that particular semester. In all, that totaled 16 sections and 20 presentations as the large e-courses/blended course were each split into two groups. The librarians worked with almost 300 freshmen in learning to locate books in a college library by topic. The students used the online catalog, the campus printing system, retrieved a book from the stacks, and brought it to the librarian to match with their print-out.

Results

The assessment results indicate that the Library should continue to include an instruction module on the use of the catalog of Indiana University Libraries in the freshman classes. Freshmen do not arrive on campus knowledgeable in the use of the library.

In addition to the IUCAT exercise assessment, the Library prepared a concurrent survey (mentioned above) administered online via Zoomerang software. This survey included ancillary information about the campus Library as well as specific practice with the Library of Congress (LC) call number system. Knowledge of the LC call numbers was needed to complete the IUCAT outcome. The Zoomerang Pre-Test/Post-Test shows a decided improvement in the use of library call numbers. (Students went from 35% to 68% in being able to correctly place the first call number in a set of five. Only 10% of all W131 students could correctly place all 5 call numbers on the pre-test while 47% could do so on the post-test.)

Although changes are made in the IUCAT module every semester due to updates in the online catalog, the assessment results indicate that no design changes are needed in the instructional module.

Summary Report prepared by:
Gail L. MacKay, Associate Librarian
Library Instruction/Information Literacy
March 4, 2007

Full Assessment Report for 2005-2006 available at this link