Connecting Libraries to Organizational Mission: Using Assessment to Strengthen the Academic Health Sciences Librarys Institutional Role James Shedlock,

Connecting Libraries to Organizational Mission: Using Assessment to Strengthen

the Academic Health Sciences Library’s Institutional Role

James Shedlock, A.M.L.S., A.H.I.P., F.M.L.A.Director, Galter Health Sciences Library

Feinberg School of MedicineNorthwestern University

MLA 2008 Chicago – Nursing-Allied Health Resources Section Program

Connecting Libraries to Organizational Mission

• Presentation Outline– Context: Academic libraries and

organizational mission– Assessment techniques

• Benchmarks• Quality measures

– Ideas and Thoughts– Conclusion

Connecting Libraries to Organizational Mission: Context

• Library role recognized in academe. “Library is the heart of the university.”

• Educational, research, patient care missions speak to the need for academic libraries.

• Accrediting standards define need for libraries.


• Liaison Committee on Medical Education – AAMC + AMA– “The medical school must have access to well-

maintained library and information facilities, sufficient in size, breadth of holdings, and information technology to support its education and other missions.”

– “The library and information services staff must be responsive to the needs of the faculty, residents and students of the medical school.”


• National League of Nursing Accrediting Commission: – Libraries are not specifically mentioned in NLN program/school

accreditation standards. However, these standards include statements about how learning outcomes drives the curriculum and the resources to support learning. Standards speak about the need for appropriate “learning resources”.

• For example, see standard for Doctorate programs: Standard 5.1 … Evidence supports that resources are commensurate with the achievement of program outcomes:– Sufficiency of physical resources– Accessibility of learning resources– Allocation of budget to support program delivery


• Commission on Nursing Collegiate Education (CCNE): Proposed standard II – Program Quality: Institutional Commitment and Resources, Standard II-B. Academic support services are sufficient to ensure quality and are evaluated on a regular basis to meet program and student needs. – Elaboration: Academic support services (e.g., library,

technology, distance education support, research support, and admission and advising services) are adequate for students and faculty to meet program requirements and to achieve the mission, goals, and expected program outcomes. There is a defined process for regular review of the adequacy of the program’s academic support services. Review of academic support services occurs and improvements are made as appropriate.


• American Physical Therapy Association, CAPTE, Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education: Evaluative Criteria for Accreditation of Education Programs for the Preparation of Physical Therapist Assistants– SECTION 2: RESOURCES

• Preamble: Resources are available in sufficient quantity and quality to enable the education program to accomplish its objectives and to ensure the program's stability and continued viability. These resources include students, program faculty, staff, student services, finances, library, capital equipment, supplies, and academic and clinical facilities.


• APTA Standards … 2.6. Learning and Instructional Resources

• 2.6.1. The resources of the institutional library system and related learning resource centers are adequate to support the needs and meet the goals of the program. – Evidence of Compliance: Narrative:

• Describe the library resources, including the technological resources, available to the program faculty and students.

• Describe the accessibility of library resources to program faculty and students.

• If the educational program has its own facility for books, periodicals, instructional, and audiovisual materials, describe how the facility and materials are in an environment that is conducive to their intended purpose and accessible to students and academic faculty when needed.


• Standards are clear: library has a role in the academic mission.

• While library role within organizational mission is secure, this role cannot be taken for granted.

• Smart leadership senses the need for the library to show its value, provide accountability, and do what it can to connect the library to its organization.

• As in life, there are no guarantees that if you show value and provide accountability, the library will succeed. Environmental forces may overwhelm the best of plans and good intentions.

Connecting Libraries to Organizational Mission: Assessment Tools

• Outcome assessment is growing in importance and has value to connect libraries to organizational mission.

• Outcomes assessment is difficult to do … to correlate the work of the library with a specific outcome.– Gold standard: show a direct link between e-

journal access/availability and faculty success in winning grant awards.

Connecting Libraries to Organizational Mission: Assessment Tools –

Input/Output Data, Benchmarks

• When outcomes are not available, use what is available.• Take available input/output data and create benchmarks.• Use input/output data for peer comparison.• Change in comparisons over time demonstrates library

progress (or lack of it).• Comparisons provide context for conversation on library

roles, changes necessary to move library forward. Data supports the conversations with medical school administration, Library Committee, users (newsletter articles).

2006-2007 Comparative Report -- Electronic Serial Titles

11,287

7,770

6,156 5,714 5,478 5,261

3,240

4,304 4,1433,486

3,7103,7663,7683,853

23,979

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

Mou

nt S

inai S

choo

l of M

ed

Univ o

f Cali

f, San

Fra

ncisco

North

western

Uni

vers

ity

Yale

Unive

rsity

Univer

sity

of W

ashin

gton

John

s Hop

kins U

nivers

ity

Weill

Cornel

l Med

ical C

olleg

e

Duke

Unive

rsity

Stanf

ord U

niv M

edical

Cen

ter

Univ o

f Cali

forn

ia, S

an Die

go

U of N

Car

olina

at C

hape

l Hill

Vande

rbilt

Univers

ity

Univer

sity

of P

ittsbu

rgh

Wash

ingt

on Uni

v Sch

ool of M

ed

May

o Clin

ic

Peers

Ele

ctro

nic

Ser

ial T

itle

s

2006-2007 Comparative Report -- Total Annual Expenditures

$3,538,217

$0

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

$3,000,000

$4,000,000

$5,000,000

$6,000,000

$7,000,000

$8,000,000

Univ o

f Cali

f, San

Fra

ncisco

Univer

sity

of W

ashin

gton

Univer

sity

of P

ittsbu

rgh

May

o Clin

ic

John

s Hop

kins U

nivers

ity

U of N

Car

olina

at C

hape

l Hill

Univer

sity

of C

hicago

Vande

rbilt

Univers

ity

Univer

sity

of C

aliforn

ia, L

os A

ngel

es

Yale

Unive

rsity

Wash

ingt

on Uni

v Sch

ool of M

ed

Univ o

f TX S

outhw

este

rn M

ed Ctr

at Dal

las

Stanf

ord U

niv M

edical

Cen

ter

Mou

nt S

inai S

choo

l of M

ed

Emor

y Unive

rsity

Univ o

f Cali

forn

ia, S

an Die

go

Weill

Cornel

l Med

ical C

olleg

e

Univer

sity

of P

ennsy

lvania

Univ o

f Colo

rado

at D

enver &

Hea

lth S

ci Ctr

Colum

bia Unive

rsity

Duke

Unive

rsity

North

western

Uni

vers

ity

Univer

sity

of M

ichig

an

Case

Weste

rn R

eser

ve U

nive

rsity

Peers

To

tal A

nn

ual

Exp

end

itu

res

2006-2007 Comparative Report -- Collection Expenditures

$1,887,017

$0

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

$3,000,000

$4,000,000

$5,000,000

$6,000,000

Univer

sity

of C

hicago

May

o Clin

ic

Univer

sity

of P

ittsbu

rgh

U of N

Car

olina

at C

hape

l Hill

Wash

ingt

on Uni

v Sch

ool of M

ed

Vande

rbilt

Univers

ity

John

s Hop

kins U

nivers

ity

Yale

Unive

rsity

Univer

sity

of W

ashin

gton

Univer

sity

of C

aliforn

ia, L

os A

ngel

es

Stanf

ord U

niv M

edical

Cen

ter

Univer

sity

of P

ennsy

lvania

Colum

bia Unive

rsity

Univ o

f TX S

outhw

este

rn M

ed Ctr

at Dal

las

Emor

y Unive

rsity

Mou

nt S

inai S

choo

l of M

ed

Univ o

f Cali

forn

ia, S

an Die

go

Univ o

f Cali

f, San

Fra

ncisco

North

western

Uni

vers

ity

Weill

Cornel

l Med

ical C

olleg

e

Univer

sity

of M

ichig

an

Duke

Unive

rsity

Case

Weste

rn R

eser

ve U

nive

rsity

Peers

Co

llect

ion

Exp

end

itu

res

2006-2007 Comparative Report -- Endowment Earnings

$591,780

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

$800,000

$900,000

$1,000,000

Yale

Unive

rsity

North

western

Uni

vers

ity

Case

Weste

rn R

eser

ve U

nive

rsity

U of N

Car

olina

at C

hape

l Hill

Univ o

f Cali

f, San

Fra

ncisco

Weill

Cornel

l Med

ical C

olleg

e

Colum

bia Unive

rsity

Univer

sity

of C

hicago

Univer

sity

of P

ennsy

lvania

John

s Hop

kins U

nivers

ity

Univer

sity

of W

ashin

gton

May

o Clin

ic

Univ o

f Cali

forn

ia, S

an Die

go

Duke

Unive

rsity

Univ o

f TX S

outhw

este

rn M

ed Ctr

at Dal

las

Emor

y Unive

rsity

Univer

sity

of P

ittsbu

rgh

Vande

rbilt

Univers

ity

Univer

sity

of M

ichig

an

Wash

ingt

on Uni

v Sch

ool of M

ed

Stanf

ord U

niv M

edical

Cen

ter

Peers

En

do

wm

ent

Ear

nin

gs

2006-2007 Comparative Report -- Gate Count

422,861

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

Univer

sity

of P

ittsbu

rgh

Univ o

f Cali

f, San

Fra

ncisco

U of N

Car

olina

at C

hape

l Hill

Colum

bia Unive

rsity

Univer

sity

of C

aliforn

ia, L

os A

ngel

es

North

western

Uni

vers

ity

Univ o

f TX S

outhw

este

rn M

ed Ctr

at Dal

las

Univer

sity

of W

ashin

gton

Weill

Cornel

l Med

ical C

olleg

e

Univ o

f Cali

forn

ia, S

an Die

go

Univer

sity

of M

ichig

an

Wash

ingt

on Uni

v Sch

ool of M

ed

Emor

y Unive

rsity

Mou

nt S

inai S

choo

l of M

ed

Vande

rbilt

Univers

ity

Univer

sity

of P

ennsy

lvania

Yale

Unive

rsity

Stanf

ord U

niv M

edical

Cen

ter

Univer

sity

of C

hicago

Duke

Unive

rsity

John

s Hop

kins U

nivers

ity

Peers

Gat

e C

ou

nt


LibQUAL+ Survey

• LibQUAL+ survey is an ARL-supported tool to measure library quality.

• LibQUAL+ is “used to solicit, track, understand, and act upon users’ opinions of service quality.”

• LibQUAL+ “helps libraries assess and improve library services, change organizational culture, and market the library.”


LibQUAL+ Survey

LibQUAL+ survey is based on the premise/philosophy that says:

“Only users can determine quality.”


LibQUAL+ Survey

• LibQUAL+ assesses user perceptions of library quality in three areas: Information Control, Affect of Service, and Library as Place.

• Survey consists of 22 questions, an optional 5 local questions, and an open comment feature.

• Galter Library has used LibQUAL+ surveys since 2001 on an every-other year basis.

• A feature of the LibQUAL+ results are the radar or spider graphs.


LibQUAL+ Survey – Samples







Connecting Libraries to Organizational Mission: Ideas and Thoughts

• Today’s challenge is to connect the dots from outcomes and assessment to support institutional mission.-- use the language of outcomes and assessment in relation to

institutional mission.-- manage the “boss” (and other institutional leaders): meet his/her

expectations – what data/evidence does the boss find persuasive?

-- use available data/evidence (whatever the source: anecdotal, stories, interviews, testimonials/letters of support).

-- draw meaning from data/evidence that connects to institutional mission – tell the story.

-- honesty is best; manipulation is obvious.

Connecting Libraries to Organizational Mission: Conclusion

• Assessment tools can be powerful, persuasive instruments for change and improvement.– serve staff and management

• Assessment is evidence.

• Evidence supports the library’s changing role and its relation to institutional mission.

Documents

Connecting Libraries to Organizational Mission: Using Assessment to Strengthen the Academic Health Sciences Librarys Institutional Role James Shedlock,