¡@

LibQUAL+(TM) Library Survey Results 2007

¡@
Links to full reports for the Survey Results:
¡@
| Background Information |
The Library has been conducting its own user surveys annually for over 10 years. This year the Library initiated and coordinated a partnership with six other UGC-funded university libraries in using LibQual+, a survey instrument developed in 2000 by the Association of Research Libraries in the United States. Over 14,500 Hong Kong students, faculty and staff participated in the survey, with 331 completing the survey at Lingnan University.
The participants in LibQual+ were:
|
¡@ |
Participants |
% |
|
City University of Hong Kong - English |
449 |
3.07% |
|
Hong Kong Polytechnic University - English |
1,158 |
7.92% |
|
Hong Kong Polytechnic University - Chinese |
5,624 |
38.48% |
|
Lingnan University - Chinese |
305 |
2.09% |
|
Lingnan University - English |
28 |
0.19% |
|
The Chinese University of Hong Kong |
2,928 |
20.04% |
|
The Hong Kong Institute of Education - English |
121 |
0.83% |
|
The Hong Kong Institute of Education ¡V Chinese |
822 |
5.62% |
|
The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology - English |
452 |
3.09% |
|
The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology - Chinese |
1,445 |
9.89% |
|
University of Hong Kong |
1,282 |
8.77% |
|
Sub Total: |
14,614 |
100.00% |
¡@
| What is LibQual+? |
LibQual+ was based on SERVQUAL, an instrument developed to measure service
performance in the private sector. Like SERVQUAL, it measures the difference
between customer expectations of service and their perceptions of satisfaction.
Users are asked to assign a value to the level of service they desire, the
minimum level they would accept and their perceptions of how well their
institution meets their needs. In the Library context LibQual+ measures three
areas: ¡¥Affect of Service¡¦ or how users perceive library staff; ¡¥Information
Control¡¦, or how users perceive the quantity and accessibility of information
resources; and ¡¥Library as Place¡¦ or how users perceive the physical environment
of the Library. Over 1,000 libraries in the United States, Canada, Europe, the
Middle East, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand have participated in
LibQual+. This year marks the first appearance of LibQual+ in Asia, and the
first Chinese translation, prepared by Lingnan University Library staff. LibQual+
in Hong Kong was conducted in both Chinese and English, with some libraries
opting to use both languages and some only using the English-language version.
Lingnan University offered both languages, with most participants using the
Chinese version.
| Summary of LibQual+ Results |
From the LibQual+ results we can see that Lingnan undergraduates and
postgraduates both focus on the library as a place, giving areas that concern
physical space the highest values for both desired and minimum rankings. For
Lingnan undergraduates and postgraduates the biggest gaps between perceived mean
and desired mean and the narrowest satisfaction for perceived mean and minimum
mean were for the question concerning ¡¥Quiet space for individual work¡¦.
Students rely on the Library as a place to study, alone or with others. ¡¥Library
as place¡¦ matters most for all students in Hong Kong as all participating
undergraduates gave a quiet space for study their highest ranking.
Faculty and Staff have offices on campus and are less concerned with the
physical library but very concerned with access tools and help from Librarians.
The biggest gaps between perceived mean and minimum and desired means for
faculty were in the areas of ¡¥Printed materials I need for my work¡¦ and
¡¥electronic resources I need¡¦.
Undergraduates gave their highest satisfaction ranking to the Library as a
¡¥Comfortable & Inviting Location¡¦ while postgraduates, faculty, and staff gave
their highest satisfaction ranking to ¡¥Courteous library staff¡¦.
¡@
Table 1: Lingnan University Values
|
|
Undergraduates |
Postgraduates |
Faculty |
Staff |
|
Highest Desired |
Haven for study |
Space for group study |
Easy to access tools and electronic resources |
Library Web site |
|
Highest Minimum |
Haven for study |
Quiet space for individual work |
Readiness to respond to enquiries |
Making resources available from office |
|
Lowest Minimum |
Giving users individual attention |
Giving users individual attention |
Space for group study |
Space for group study |
|
Most Satisfaction |
Comfortable & Inviting Location |
Courteous library staff |
Courteous library staff |
Courteous library staff |
Undergraduate, postgraduate, and faculty responses at other university libraries
in Hong Kong have different values but show the same pattern. Undergraduates and
postgraduates most value the library as a place, a quiet haven of study. Faculty
primarily value access to resources, particularly print and electronic journals.
At most institutions the greatest satisfaction for both students and faculty is
for library staff who instil confidence in users. Table 2 provides a comparison
of Lingnan University¡¦s scores with those of JULAC (the seven participating UGC-funded
libraries in Hong Kong); ARL, a consortium of 46 American and Canadian research
libraries; SCONUL, a consortium of 20 British libraries; and the combined scores
of all participants in the 2007 LibQual+ exercise. Although Hong Kong students
and faculty have lower expectations (lower minimum and desired means) than
foreign respondents, Lingnan University respondents have higher expectations
than other Hong Kong respondents. Lingnan¡¦s scores indicate that the Library
seems to be providing a service that is closer to what users want than any of
the consortia, with an adequacy mean that is higher than the others and the
smallest gap between what is desired and what is perceived.
¡@
Table 2: Lingnan University compared with Hong Kong and foreign consortia and 2007 participants
|
|
Lingnan |
JULAC (Hong Kong Libraries) |
ARL 2006 (American and Canadian Research Libraries) |
SCONUL (British Libraries) |
All 2007 Participants in Session 1 |
|
Minimum Mean |
5.91 |
5.79 |
6.51 |
6.4 |
6.59 |
|
Desired Mean |
7.57 |
7.47 |
7.95 |
7.78 |
7.94 |
|
Perceived Mean |
6.89 |
6.65 |
6.98 |
6.73 |
7.08 |
|
Adequacy Mean |
0.99 |
0.85 |
0.47 |
0.33 |
0.49 |
|
Superiority Mean |
-0.68 |
-0.82 |
-0.97 |
-1.05 |
-0.86 |
¡@
Although Lingnan University students and faculty viewed the Library very favourably, there are some areas where the Library can do better and the comments section of the survey provide the Library with specific information on areas that users felt needed improvement. There were 331 valid surveys and nearly 39% of users left comments. Of the comments received, 20 were either words of praise or provided unique suggestions or comments. The other 109 can be clustered under 11 areas of concern. The largest number, 28 (25.7% of the 109 and 8% of the total survey population), expressed dissatisfaction with the Library¡¦s stock of books, journals, databases, or AV materials, with half of the complaints coming from postgraduates and academic staff.
¡@
| Focus Groups |
Focus groups were held with undergraduate students on the
19th of February and with postgraduates and faculty on 3 March. Both groups were
asked to complete a short questionnaire and rank their top 5 out of 20 possible
choices. For undergraduates the top five priorities were:
1. Printing too expensive
2. Too cold
3. More books/journals
4. More library guides
5. Longer weekend opening hours
For postgraduate and faculty the top five priorities were:
1. More books/journals
2. More online materials
3. More library guides
4. More computers
5. More library workshops
¡@
| Library's responses |
The undergraduates had several suggestions about improving
the Library that the Library has acted upon. The Library agrees that more and
better Library guides are certainly needed, especially with the new
reclassification of the collection. New aisle signs will be installed this
summer that will easily enable students to find the key Library of Congress
sections at a glance. Students are concerned about waste and the environment and
at their suggestion the Library will, where possible, set duplex printing as the
default on the Octopus printers to save paper and place prominently labelled
recycling bins near all printers and photocopiers. Students also want drinking
fountains to be available and the Library will work with the Comptroller¡¦s
Office see if water coolers can be installed in the Cafˆm and on the 2nd floor.
There are several areas of concern that the Library will not address at this
time. Printing costs are felt to be reasonable by the Library but students
compare Lingnan University with other universities that allow a free print
quota. As the University is moving towards Octopus printing, a quota system may
not work, but the matter will be brought before the administration for
discussion. The Library anticipates that renovations this summer will solve or
alleviate the problem of too-cold rooms. Longer weekend hours could involve a
financial commitment from the University and will be considered as we evaluate
midnight coverage again at the end of the term. Most other UGC libraries are
open until 19:00 or later on Sundays while Lingnan University closes at 17:30.
The Library recently conducted a student survey to determine when students
return to campus on weekends and what weekend hours they would use the Library
if it were open. From the survey it appears that opening at 13.00 and closing at
19:30 or 20:00 would satisfy the greatest number of students.
The faculty/postgraduate focus group was concerned with resource problems. Some
databases that some faculty consider necessary for their research are extremely
expensive and the Library has been unable to afford them. Other areas are new to
Lingnan University and the Library collections need substantial improvements to
support them adequately. Undergraduates are also concerned about resources and
especially seem to want more books on the newer majors, particularly for visual
studies and third languages. Our students seem to believe in liberal arts and
want a more diverse collection.
Other faculty concerns can be addressed by Web site and search engine redesign,
by training more staff to use some of the specialized databases, and by working
with faculty to acquire journals that they find they do need but that are the
Library does not currently acquire. Resources are a concern. The Library budget
for books, serials and databases has been relatively stable over the past years.
Although new and superior databases have been acquired recently this was done by
reallocating resources within the existing budget. Additional funds assigned to
the Library on a one-off basis to acquire materials for new programmes went not
only for books but also for new serial or database subscriptions, adding to the
burden of the Library in the following years. Although it is noted that even
much better resourced Hong Kong universities fail to satisfy their faculty¡¦s
demands, some consideration should be given towards providing additional
resources, particularly in the development of new majors and new programmes as
we move towards 2012.
¡@
| Conclusion |
The Library will continue to run its own in-house annual survey so that it may continue to benchmark against its previous performance. LibQual+ has been valuable to the Libraries in Hong Kong as it provided all of them with an internationally recognized survey instrument that could prove useful in demonstrating library achievements for the forthcoming Quality Assurance Council audit. It is anticipated that the university libraries in Hong Kong would run LibQual+ every three or four years. That would give the libraries time to implement any necessary changes to their operations and allow for a linear measure of student and faculty satisfaction with library services.
¡@
| Further Comments |
If you have further suggestions and feedbacks, please feel free to let us know.
¡@