ESP in the UK:from assessment to action

J. Stephen Town, Steve Hiller, Jim Self and Martha Kyrillidou

Summary

• Background to the program• The University of York• The ESP process in York• Findings• Actions • Observations and conclusions

Background to the program

ARL Supports the Assessment Community

• Tools– ARL Statistics– LibQUAL+®– MINES for Libraries®– ClimateQUAL™– ARL Library Scorecard Initiative (2009-)

• Building a Community of Practice– Library Assessment Conferences– Service Quality Evaluation Academy– Library Assessment blog– Workshops

• Individual Library Consultation (Jim and Steve) – Effective, Sustainable, Practical Library

Assessment

Key Reasons for Developing an Assessment Consulting Service

(2005-)• LibQUAL+® results – what to do with them• E-Metrics data – how to understand them• New emphasis on outcomes-based assessment

from accreditation agencies and associations• Data driven university administrations• Establishing sustainable assessment programs• Article by Jim and Steve, “From Measurement to

Management” . . . Library Trends , Summer 2004, highlighted issues involved with data collection, analysis and use (or non-use) in libraries.

ARL Assessment Consulting Service • Began in 2005 as “Making Library Assessment Work”

(MLAW) Assess the state of assessment efforts in individual research libraries, identify barriers and facilitators of assessment, and devise pragmatic approaches to assessment that can flourish in different local environments”

• Funded by participating libraries; limited to ARL members• Conducted by Steve Hiller and Jim Self under the aegis of

Martha Kyrillidou of ARL• In 2007 changed to “Effective, Sustainable and Practical

Library Assessment” (ESP) and opened up to all libraries• 41 libraries visited since February 2005

– 38 in North America (32 ARL libraries)– 3 others in Israel, South Africa and UK

ESP Insights• Strong interest in using assessment to improve • Uncertainty on how to establish and sustain

assessment• Lack of assessment knowledge among staff• Underutilization of campus assessment resources• More data collection than data utilization• Effectiveness not dependent on library size or

budget• Each library has a unique culture and mission• Organizational issues play a significant role in

sustainable assessment

Rationale

• http://www.arl.org/stats/initiatives/esp/• Those starting, prioritising or

embedding assessment activities• Evaluating current activities• Accreditation requirements• Developing a quality culture• LibQUAL+ active

The University of York

and its Library & Archives

The University

• Founded 1963• UK top ten; RAE 8th;

World 81st

• 11,000 students• >30 departments in

humanities, social sciences, science

• Campus growth• Collegiate and inclusive

The Library & Archives

• > 1m items• >100 staff• Traditional divisions• Archives extensive &

unique• Developing digital

library expertise• New Director 2007

The ESP process in York

Sustainable assessment week 21-29 Jun 2008

• LibQUAL+ Results meeting• International benchmarking seminar• ESP Dinner with senior University staff• Senior Management Team session

– UK, University and quality contexts, including 2008 survey results

• Team sessions with Library divisions (4)• Future initiatives

– SPEC Kit; WUN collaboration

Process observations

• No cultural issues, except …• Compact and efficient process• Commitment and insight• Similar to traditional UK consultancy or

peer review, but …

Post visit

• Report delivered and finalised promptly• Incorporation into Library planning cycle• Feedback to broader University• Follow up value for more remote

participants?

Findings

Current position

• Budget issues• National Student Survey results

disappointing• Inadequate reporting of survey results• Assessment not embedded• Culture values precedent and regulation• LibQUAL+ scores low

Suggestions and options 1

1. Practices and procedures for assessment1. Assessment group and leadership2. Training3. Culture

2. An Assessment plan3. Culture promotion

1. From budget to real costs2. From regulation to user perspective3. From risk aversion to ‘why not?’

Suggestions and options 2

4. Processes review1. Classification system2. Acquisition process review

5. LibQUAL+ results follow-up6. Review collection development and

liaison7. Seek areas of collaboration between

Library and the Archives

Actions and achievements

Progress 1

• Culture change and promotion– Middle management training & quality focus– University Staff survey 2009– All staff Awayday 2009 (User perspectives on library value)– Project styles

• Process review– Redesign of acquisition process to remove repeat touches

and increase trust across organisational boundaries– Reclassification proposal under consideration; supported by

University senior managers

Progress 2

• LibQUAL+ follow up and embedding– 2009 survey, results and breakdowns– Devolvement to proto-evaluation group– Improved results across almost all items and disciplines

• NSS results improvement– Moved from 78% overall to 81%– Met first improvement target

• Academic liaison transformation– Additional substantial investment– Role development and career paths

University of YorkLibQUAL+ 2008 to 2009 trends

• Superiority mean scores improved across all but one of the 22 core and 5 local questions

• The other item remained constant

• Discipline adequacy scores improved in all but six cases

• Information control overall adequacy score moved from negative to positive

• Substantial improvements in convenient service hours and online course support items (the latter also out of the red)

Confounding factors

• Departure of performance measurement lead and hiatus during replacement– Leadership and assessment group– In house capability and training

• Major library refurbishment program• Creation of Information directorate and

closer working with IT Services

Observations and conclusions

Benefits

• External view from professional experts• Succinct and compelling report• Broader scope than assessment alone• Specific recommendations outside the

comfort zone• Institutional and organisational

acceptance• Same language

Conclusions

• ESP is transferable to institutions outside North America

• The US origin can be a positive factor within aspirant world class institutions

• Practical and strategic insight very strong (and unexpected?)

• Successful in this case in contributing to culture, community and value