library Service -Lib QUAL+ Academic Test Results

Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Associatio of Research Libraries / Texas A&M Uiversity www.libqual.org All All

All All

Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Cotributors Collee Cook Texas A&M Uiversity Fred Heath Uiversity of Texas BruceThompso Texas A&M Uiversity Cosuella Askew Associatio of Research Libraries Amy Hoseth Associatio of Research Libraries Martha Kyrillidou Associatio of Research Libraries Joatha D. Sousa Associatio of Research Libraries Duae Webster Associatio of Research Libraries Associatio of Research Libraries / Texas A&M Uiversity www.libqual.org All All

Associatio of Research Libraries 21 Dupot Circle NW Suite 800 Washigto, DC 20036 Phoe 202-296-2296 Fax 202-872-0884 <http://www.libqual.org> Copyright 2004 Associatio of Research Libraries All All

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 1 of 89 1 Itroductio 1.1 Ackowledgemets This otebook cotais iformatio from the February - May 2004 admiistratio of the LibQUAL+ protocol. The material o the followig pages is draw from the aalysis of resposes from the participatig istitutios collected i 2004. The LibQUAL+ project requires the skills of a dedicated group. We would like to thak several members of the LibQUAL+ team for their key roles i this developmetal project. From Texas A&M Uiversity, the quatitative guidace of Bruce Thompso ad the qualitative leadership of Yvoa Licol have bee key to the project's itegrity. The behid-the-scees roles of Bill Chollet ad others from the library Systems ad Traiig uits were also formative. From the Associatio of Research Libraries, we are appreciative of the project maagemet role of Martha Kyrillidou, the techical developmet role of Joatha Sousa, ad the commuicatios ad traiig support that Amy Hoseth ad Cosuella Askew are providig. A New Measures Iitiative of this scope is possible oly as the collaborative effort of may libraries. To the directors ad liaisos at all participatig libraries goes the largest measure of gratitude. Without your commitmet, the developmet of LibQUAL+ would ot have bee possible. We would like to exted a special thak you to all admiistrators at the participatig cosortia ad libraries that are makig this project happe effectively across various istitutios. We would like to ackowledge the role of the Fud for the Improvemet of Post-secodary Educatio (FIPSE), U.S. Departmet of Educatio, which provided grat fuds of $498,368 over a three-year period (2001-03). We would also like to ackowledge the support of the Natioal Sciece Foudatio (NSF) for its grat of $245,737 over a three-year period (2002-04) to adapt the LibQUAL+ istrumet for use i the sciece, math, egieerig, ad techology educatio digital library commuity, a assessmet tool i developmet ow called e-qual. As we move towards the coclusio of these grat fudig activities, we would like to express our thaks for the fiacial support that has eabled the researchers egaged i this project to exceed all of our expectatios i stated goals ad objectives ad deliver a remarkable assessmet tool to the library commuity. Collee Cook Texas A&M Uiversity Fred Heath Uiversity of Texas Duae Webster Associatio of Research Libraries All All

Page 2 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 1.2 LibQUAL+ : Defiig ad Promotig Library Service Quality What is LibQUAL+? LibQUAL+ is a suite of services that libraries use to solicit, track, uderstad, ad act upo users opiios of service quality. These services are offered to the library commuity by the Associatio of Research Libraries (ARL ). The program s ceterpiece is a rigorously tested Web-based survey budled with traiig that helps libraries assess ad improve library services, chage orgaizatioal culture, ad market the library. The goals of LibQUAL+ are to: Foster a culture of excellece i providig library service Help libraries better uderstad user perceptios of library service quality Collect ad iterpret library user feedback systematically over time Provide libraries with comparable assessmet iformatio from peer istitutios Idetify best practices i library service Ehace library staff members aalytical skills for iterpretig ad actig o data As of sprig 2004, more tha 500 libraries have participated i the LibQUAL+ survey, icludig colleges ad uiversities, commuity colleges, health scieces ad hospital/medical libraries, law libraries, ad public librariessome through various cosortia, others as idepedet participats. LibQUAL+ has expaded iteratioally, with participatig istitutios i Caada, the U.K., ad Europe, ad has bee traslated ito a umber of laguages, icludig Frech, Swedish, ad Dutch. The growig LibQUAL+ commuity of participats ad its extesive dataset are rich resources for improvig library services. How will LibQUAL+ beefit your library? Library admiistrators have successfully used LibQUAL+ survey data to idetify best practices, aalyze deficits, ad effectively allocate resources. Beefits to participatig istitutios iclude: Istitutioal data ad reports that eable you to assess whether your library services are meetig user expectatios Aggregate data ad reports that allow you to compare your library s performace with that of peer istitutios Workshops desiged specifically for LibQUAL+ participats Access to a olie library of LibQUAL+ research articles Opportuity to become part of a commuity iterested i developig excellece i library services How does LibQUAL+ beefit your library users? LibQUAL+ gives your library users a chace to tell you where your services eed improvemet so you ca respod to ad better maage their expectatios. You ca develop services that better meet your users expectatios by comparig your library s data with that of peer istitutios ad examiig the practices of those libraries that are evaluated highly by their users. All All

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 3 of 89 How is the LibQUAL+ survey coducted? Coductig the LibQUAL+ survey requires little techical expertise o your part. You ivite your users to take the survey, distributig the URL for your library s Web form via e-mail. Respodets complete the survey form ad their aswers are set to a cetral database. The data are aalyzed ad preseted to you i reports describig your users desired, perceived, ad miimum expectatios of service. What are the origis of the LibQUAL+ survey? The LibQUAL+ survey evolved from a coceptual model based o the SERVQUAL istrumet, a popular tool for assessig service quality i the private sector. The Texas A&M Uiversity Libraries ad other libraries used modified SERVQUAL istrumets for several years; those applicatios revealed the eed for a ewly adapted tool that would serve the particular requiremets of libraries. ARL, represetig the largest research libraries i North America, partered with Texas A&M Uiversity Libraries to develop, test, ad refie LibQUAL+. This effort was supported i part by a three-year grat from the U.S. Departmet of Educatio s Fud for the Improvemet of Post-Secodary Educatio (FIPSE). All All

Page 4 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 1.3 Web Access to Data Data summaries from the 2004 iteratio of the LibQUAL+ survey will be available to project participats olie via the LibQUAL+ survey maagemet site: http://www.libqual.org/maage/results/idex.cfm All All

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 5 of 89 1.4 Explaatio of Charts ad Tables Radar Charts Radar charts are commoly used throughout the followig pages to display both aggregate results ad results from idividual istitutios. A workig kowledge of how to read ad derive relevat iformatio from these charts is essetial. Basic iformatio about radar charts is outlied below, ad additioal descriptive iformatio is icluded throughout this otebook. What is a radar chart? Radar charts are useful whe you wat to look at several differet factors all related to oe item. Sometimes called spider charts or polar charts, radar charts feature multiple axes or spokes alog which data ca be plotted. Variatios i the data are show by distace from the ceter of the chart. Lies coect the data poits for each series, formig a spiral aroud the ceter. I the case of the LibQUAL+ survey results, each axis represets a differet survey questio. Questios are idetified by a code at the ed of each axis. The three dimesios measured by the survey are grouped together o the radar charts, ad each dimesio is labeled: Affect of Service (AS), Library as Place (LP), ad Iformatio Cotrol (IC). Radar charts are used i this otebook to preset the item summaries (the results from the 22 core survey questios). How to read a radar chart Radar charts are a effective way to graphically show stregths ad weakesses by eablig you to observe symmetry or uiformity of data. Poits close to the ceter idicate a low value, while poits ear the edge idicate a high value. Whe iterpretig a radar chart, it is importat to check each idividual axis as well as the chart s overall shape i order to gai a complete uderstadig of its meaig. You ca see how much data fluctuates by observig whether the spiral is smooth or has spikes of variability. Respodets miimum, desired, ad perceived levels of service quality are plotted o each axis of your LibQUAL+ radar charts. The resultig gaps betwee the three levels are shaded i blue, yellow, gree, ad red. Geerally, a radar graph shaded blue ad yellow idicates that users perceptios of service fall withi the zoe of tolerace ; the distace betwee miimum expectatios ad perceptios of service quality is shaded i blue, ad the distace betwee their desired ad perceived levels of service quality is show i yellow. Whe users perceptios fall outside the zoe of tolerace, the graph will iclude areas of red ad gree shadig. If the distace betwee users miimum expectatios ad perceptios of service delivery is represeted i red, that idicates a egative service adequacy gap score. If the distace betwee the desired level of service ad perceptios of service delivery is represeted i gree, that idicates a positive service superiority gap score. s The mea of a collectio of umbers is their arithmetic average, computed by addig them up ad dividig by their total umber. I this otebook, meas are provided for users miimum, desired, ad perceived levels of service quality for each item o the LibQUAL+ survey. s are also provided for the geeral satisfactio ad iformatio literacy All All

Page 6 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries outcomes questios. Stadard Deviatio Stadard deviatio is a measure of the spread of data aroud their mea. The stadard deviatio () depeds o calculatig the average distace of each score from the mea. I this otebook, stadard deviatios are provided for every mea preseted i the tables. Service Adequacy The Service adequacy gap score is calculated by subtractig the miimum score from the perceived score o ay give questio, for each user. Both meas ad stadard deviatios are provided for service adequacy gap scores o each item of the survey, as well as for each of the three dimesios of library service quality. I geeral, service adequacy is a idicator of the extet to which you are meetig the miimum expectatios of your users. A egative service adequacy gap score idicates that your users perceived level of service quality is below their miimum level of service quality ad is prited i red. Service Superiority The Service superiority gap score is calculated by subtractig the desired score from the perceived score o ay give questio, for each user. Both meas ad stadard deviatios are provided for service superiority gap scores o each item of the survey, as well as for each of the three dimesios of library service quality. I geeral, service superiority is a idicator of the extet to which you are exceedig the desired expectatios of your users. A positive service superiority gap score idicates that your users perceived level of service quality is above their desired level of service quality ad is prited i gree. Sectios with charts ad tables are omitted from the followig pages whe there are three or fewer idividuals i a specific group. I the cosortium otebooks, istitutio type summaries are ot show if there is oly oe library for a istitutio type. Idividual library otebooks are produced separately for each participat. All All

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 7 of 89 1.5 A Few Words about LibQUAL+ 2004 Libraries today cofrot escalatig pressure to demostrate impact. As Culle (2001) has oted, Academic libraries are curretly facig their greatest challege sice the explosio i tertiary educatio ad academic publishig which bega after World War II... [T]he emergece of the virtual uiversity, supported by the virtual library, calls ito questio may of our basic assumptios about the role of the academic library, ad the security of its future. Retaiig ad growig their customer base, ad focusig more eergy o meetig their customers' expectatios is the oly way for academic libraries to survive i this volatile eviromet. ( pp. 662-663) I this eviromet, "A measure of library quality based solely o collectios has become obsolete" (Nitecki, 1996, p. 181). These cosideratios have prompted the Associatio of Research Libraries (ARL) to sposor a umber of "New Measures" iitiatives. The New Measures efforts represet a collective determiatio o the part of the ARL membership to augmet the collectio-cout ad fiscal iput measures that comprise the ARL Idex ad ARL Statistics, to date the most cosistetly collected statistics for research libraries, with outcome measures, such as assessmets of service quality ad satisfactio. Oe New Measures iitiative is the LibQUAL+ project (Cook, Heath & B. Thompso, 2002, 2003; Heath, Cook, Kyrillidou & Thompso, 2002; Thompso, Cook & Heath, 2003; Thompso, Cook & Thompso, 2002). The book by Cook, Heath ad Thompso (forthcomig) details much of the related history ad research. Withi a service-quality assessmet model, "oly customers judge quality; all other judgmets are essetially irrelevat" (Zeithaml, Parasurama, Berry, 1990, p. 16). LibQUAL+ was modeled o the 22-item SERVQUAL tool developed by Parasurama, Berry ad Zeithaml (Parasurama, Berry & Zeithaml, 1991). However, SERVQUAL has bee show to measure some issues ot particularly relevat i libraries, ad to ot measure some issues of cosiderable iterest to library users. The fial 22 LibQUAL+ items were developed through several iteratios of quatitative studies ivolvig a larger pool of 56 items. The selectio of items employed i the LibQUAL+ survey has bee grouded i the users' perspective as revealed i a series of qualitative studies ivolvig a larger pool of items. The items were idetified followig qualitative research iterviews with studet ad faculty library users at several differet uiversities (Cook, 2002a; Cook & Heath, 2001). LibQUAL+ is ot just a list of 22 stadardized items. First, LibQUAL+ offers libraries the ability to select five optioal local service quality assessmet items. Secod, the survey icludes a commets "box" solicitig opeeded user views. Almost half of the people respodig to the LibQUAL+ survey provide valuable feedback through the commets box. These ope-eded commets are helpful for (a) uderstadig why users provide certai ratigs, but also (b) uderstadig what policy chages users suggest, because may users feel the obligatio to be costructive. Participatig libraries are fidig the real-time access to user commets oe of the most useful devices i challegig library admiistrators to thik out of the box ad develop iovative ways for improvig library services. LibQUAL+ is a "way of listeig" to users called a total market survey. As Berry (1995) explaied, All All

Page 8 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Whe well desiged ad executed, total market surveys provide a rage of iformatio umatched by ay other method... A critical facet of total market surveys (ad the reaso for usig the word 'total') is the measuremet of competitors' service quality. This [also] requires usig o-customers i the sample to rate the service of their suppliers. (p. 37) Although (a) measurig perceptios of both users ad o-users ad (b) collectig perceptios data with regard to peer istitutios ca provide importat isights, LibQUAL+ is oly oe of 11 "ways of listeig" to customers, a "total market survey." Berry recommeded usig multiple listeig methods, ad emphasized that "Ogoig data collectio...is a ecessity. Trasactioal surveys, total market surveys, ad employee research should always be icluded" (Berry, 1995, p. 54). Score Scalig "Perceived" scores o the 22 LibQUAL+ core items, the three subscales, ad the total score, are all scaled 1 to 9, with 9 beig the most favorable. Both the gap scores ("Adequacy" = "Perceived" -"Miimum"; "Superiority" = " Perceived" - "Desired") are scaled such that higher scores are more favorable. Thus, a adequacy gap score of +1.2 o a item, subscale, or total score is better tha a adequacy gap score of +1.0. A superiority gap score of -0.5 o a item, subscale, or total score is better tha a superiority gap score of -1.0. Usig LibQUAL+ Data I some cases LibQUAL+ data may cofirm prior expectatios ad library staff will readily formulate actio plas to remedy perceived deficiecies. But i may cases library decisio-makers will seek additioal iformatio to corroborate iterpretatios or to better uderstad the dyamics uderlyig user perceptios. For example, oce a iterpretatio is formulated, library staff might review recet submissios of users to suggestio boxes to evaluate whether LibQUAL+ data are cosistet with iterpretatios, ad the suggestio box data perhaps also provide user suggestios for remedies. User focus groups also provide a powerful way to explore problems ad potetial solutios. A uiversity-wide retreat with a small-group facilitated discussio to solicit suggestios for improvemet is aother follow-up mechaism that has bee implemeted i several LibQUAL+ participatig libraries. Ideed, the ope-eded commets gathered as part of LibQUAL+ are themselves useful i fleshig out isights ito perceived library service quality. Respodets ofte use the commets box o the survey to make costructive suggestios o specific ways to address their cocers. Qualitative aalysis of these commets ca be very fruitful. I short, LibQUAL+ is ot 22 items. LibQUAL+ is 22 items plus a commets box! Cook (2002b) provided case study reports of how staff at various libraries have employed data from prior reditios of LibQUAL+. Heath, Kyrillidou, ad Askew (i press) edited a special issue of the Joural of Library Admiistratio reportig additioal case studies o the use of LibQUAL+ data to aid the improvemet of library service quality. 2004 Data Screeig The 22 LibQUAL+ core quatitative items measure perceptios of total service quality, as well as three subdimesios of perceived library quality: (a) Service Affect (9 items, such as "willigess to help users"); (b) Library All All

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 9 of 89 as Place (5 items, such as "a getaway for study, learig, or research"); ad (c) Iformatio Cotrol (8 items, such as "a library Web site eablig me to locate iformatio o my ow" ad "prit ad/or electroic joural collectios I require for my work"). However, as happes i ay survey, i 2004 some users provided icomplete data, or icosistet data, or both. I compilig the summary data reported here, several criteria were used to determie which respodets to omit from these aalyses. 1. Complete Data. The Web software that presets the 22 core items moitors whether a give user has completed all items. O each of these items, i order to submit the survery successfully, users must provide a ratig of (a) miimally-acceptable service, (b) desired service, ad (c) perceived service or rate the item "ot applicable" (" NA"). If these coditios are ot met, whe the user attempts to leave the Web page presetig the 22 core items, the software shows the user where missig data are located, ad requests complete data. The user may of course abado the survey withougt completig all the items. Oly records with complete data o the 22 items ad where respodets chose a "user group," if applicable, were retaied i summary statistics. 2. Excessive "NA" Resposes. Because some istitutios provided access to a lottery drawig for a icetive (e.g., a Palm PDA) for completig the survey, some users might have selected "NA" choices for all or most of the items rather tha reportig their actual perceptios. Or some users may have views o such a arrow rage of quality issues that their data are ot very iformative. I this survey it was decided that records cotaiig more tha 11 "NA" resposes should be elimiated from the summary statistics. 3. Excessive Icosistet Resposes. O LibQUAL+ user perceptios ca be iterpreted by locatig " perceived" results withi the "zoe of tolerace" defied by data from the "miimum" ad the "desired" ratigs. For example, a mea "perceived" ratig o the 1-to-9 (9 is highest) scale of 7.5 might be very good if the mea "desired " ratig is 6.0. But a 7.5 perceptio score is less satisfactory if the mea "desired" ratig is 8.6, or if the mea " miimum" ratig is 7.7. Oe appealig feature of such a "gap measuremet model" is that the ratig format provides a check for icosistecies i the respose data (Thompso, Cook & Heath, 2000). Logically, o a give item the "miimum" ratig should ot be higher tha the "desired" ratig o the same item. For each user a cout of such icosistecies, ragig from "0" to "22," was made. Records cotaiig more tha 9 logical icosistecies were elimiated from the summary statistics. LibQUAL+ Norms A importat way to iterpret LibQUAL+ data is by examiig the zoes of tolerace for items, the three subscale scores, ad the total scores. However, the collectio of such a huge umber of user perceptios has afforded us with the uique opportuity to create "orms" tables that provide yet aother perspective o results. Norms tell us how scores "stack up" withi a particular user group. For example, o the 1-to-9 (9 is highest) scale, users might provide a mea "perceived" ratig of 6.5 o a item, "the prited library materials I eed for my work." The same users might provide a mea ratig o "miimum" for this item of 7.0, ad a mea service-adequacy "gap score" (i.e., "perceived" mius "miimum") of -0.5. The zoe-of-tolerace perspective suggests that this library is ot doig well o this item, because "perceived" falls All All

Page 10 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries below "miimally acceptable." This is importat to kow. But there is also a secod way (i.e., ormatively) to iterpret the data. Both perspectives ca be valuable. A total market survey admiistered to more tha 100,000 users, as was LibQUAL+ i 2003, affords the opportuity to ask ormative questios such as, "How does a mea 'perceived' score of 6.5 stack up amog all idividual users who completed the survey?", or "How does a mea service-adequacy gap score of -0.5 stack up amog the gap scores of all istitutios participatig i the survey?" If 70 percet of idividual users geerated "perceived" ratigs lower tha 6.5, 6.5 might ot be so bad. Ad if 90 percet of istitutios had service-adequacy gap scores lower tha -0.5 (e.g., -0.7, -1.1), a mea gap score of -0.5 might actually be quite good. Users simply may have quite high expectatios i this area. They may also commuicate their dissatisfactio by ratig both (a) "perceived" lower ad (b) "miimum" higher. This does ot mea that a service-adequacy gap score of -0.5 is ecessarily a cause for celebratio. But a serviceadequacy gap score of -0.5 o a item for which 90 percet of istitutios have a lower gap score is a differet gap score tha the same -0.5 for a differet item i which 90 percet of istitutios have a higher service-adequacy gap score. Oly orms give us isight ito this comparative perspective. Ad a local user-satisfactio survey (as agaist a total market survey) ca ever give us this isight. Commo Miscoceptio Regardig Norms. A ufortuate ad icorrect miscoceptio is that orms make value statemets. Norms do ot make value statemets! Norms make fact statemets. If you are a forest rager, ad you make $25,000 a year, a orms table might iform you of the fact that you make less moey tha 85 percet of the adults i the Uited States. But if you love the outdoors, you do ot care very much about moey, ad you are very service-orieted, this fact statemet might ot be relevat to you. Or, i the cotext of your values, you might iterpret this fact as beig quite satisfactory. LibQUAL+ Norms Tables. Of course, the fact statemets made by the LibQUAL+ orms are oly valuable if you care about the dimesios beig evaluated by the measure. More backgroud o LibQUAL+ orms is provided by Cook ad Thompso (2001) ad Cook, Heath ad B. Thompso (2002). LibQUAL+ orms for earlier years are available o the Web at the followig URL: <http://www.coe.tamu.edu/~bthompso/libq2003.htm> Respose Rates At the America Library Associatio mid-witer meetig i Sa Atoio i Jauary, 2000, participats were cautioed that respose rates o the fial LibQUAL+ survey would probably rage from 25-33 percet. Higher respose rates ca be realized (a) with shorter surveys that (b) are directly actio-orieted (Cook, Heath & R.L. Thompso, 2000). For example, a very high respose rate could be realized by a library director admiisterig the followig oe-item survey to users: Istructios. Please tell us what time to close the library every day. I the future we will close at whatever time receives the most votes. All All

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 11 of 89 Should we close the library at? (A) 10 p.m. (B) 11 p.m. (C) midight (D) 2 p.m. Lower respose rates will be expected for total market surveys measurig geeral perceptios of users across istitutios, ad whe a itetioal effort is made to solicit perceptios of both users ad o-users. Two cosideratios should gover the evaluatio of LibQUAL+ respose rates. Miimum Respose Rates. Respose rates are computed by dividig the umber of completed surveys at a istitutio by the umber of persos asked to complete the survey. However, we do ot kow the actual respose rates o LibQUAL+, because we do ot kow the correct deomiators for these calculatios. For example, give iadequacy i records at schools, we are ot sure how may e-mail addresses for users are accurate. Ad we do ot kow how may messages to ivite participatio were actually opeed. I other words, what we kow for LibQUAL+ is the "lower-boud estimate" of respose rates. For example, if 200 out of 800 solicitatios result i completed surveys, we kow that the respose rate is at least 25 percet. But because we are ot sure whether 800 e-mail addresses were correct or that 800 e-mail messages were opeed, we are ot sure that 800 is the correct deomiator. The respose rate ivolvig oly correct e-mail addresses might be 35 or 45 percet. We do't kow the exact respose rate. Represetativeess Versus Respose Rate. If 100 percet of the 800 people we radomly selected to complete our survey did so, the we ca be assured that the results are represetative of all users. But if oly 25 percet of the 800 users complete the survey, the represetativeess of the results is ot assured. Nor is urepresetativeess assured. Represetativeess is actually a matter of degree. Ad several istitutios each with 25 percet respose rates may have data with differet degrees of represetativeess. We ca ever be sure about how represetative our data are as log as ot everyoe completes the survey. But we ca at least address this cocer by comparig the demographic profiles of survey completers with the populatio ( Thompso, 2000). At which uiversity below would oe feel more cofidet that LibQUAL+ results were reasoably represetative? Alpha Uiversity Completers (=200 / 800) Populatio (N=16,000) Geder Geder Studets 53% female Studets 51% female Faculty 45% female Faculty 41% female Disciplies Disciplies Liberal Arts 40% Liberal Arts 35% Sciece 15% Sciece 20% Other 45% Other 45% Completers (=200 / 800) Geder Studets 35% female Omega Uiversity Populatio (N=23,000) Geder Studets 59% female All All

Page 12 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Faculty 65% female Faculty 43% female Disciplies Disciplies Liberal Arts 40% Liberal Arts 15% Sciece 20% Sciece 35% Other 40% Other 50% The persuasiveess of such aalyses is greater as the umber of variables used i the comparisos is greater. The LibQUAL+ software has bee expaded to automate these comparisos ad to output side-by-side graphs ad tables comparig sample ad populatio profiles for give istitutios. Show these to people who questio result represetativeess. However, oe cautio is i order regardig percetages. Whe total is small for a istitutio, or withi a particular subgroup, huge chages i percetages ca result from very small shifts i umbers. LibQUAL+ Iteractive Statistics I additio to the istitutio ad group otebooks ad the orms, LibQUAL+ has also provided a iteractive eviromet for data aalysis where istitutios ca mie istitutioal data for peer comparisos. The LibQUAL+ Iteractive Statistics web page icludes graphig capabilities for all LibQUAL+ scores (total ad dimesio scores) for each idividual istitutio or groups of istitutios. Graphs may be geerated i either jpeg format for presetatio purposes or flash format that icludes more detailed iformatio for olie browsig. Tables may also be produced i a iteractive fashio for oe or multiple selectios of variables for all idividual istitutios or groups of participatig istitutios. Additioal developmet aims at deliverig orms i a iteractive eviromet. To access the LibQUAL+ Iteractive Statistics olie, go to: <http://www.libqual.org/maage/results/idex.cfm> Survey Data I additio to the otebooks, the iteractive statistics, ad the orms, LibQUAL+ also makes available (a) raw survey data i SPSS at the request of participatig libraries, ad (b) raw survey data i Excel for all participatig libraries. Additioal traiig usig the SPSS datafile is available as a follow-up workshop activity ad through the Service Quality Evaluatio Academy (see below), which also offers traiig o aalyzig qualitative data. The survey commets are also dowloadable i Excel format. ARL Service Quality Evaluatio Academy LibQUAL+ is a importat tool i the New Measures toolbox that librarias ca use to improve service quality. But, eve more fudametally, the LibQUAL+ iitiative is more tha a sigle tool. LibQUAL+ is a effort to create a culture of data-drive service quality assessmet ad service quality improvemet withi libraries. Such a culture must be iformed by more tha oe tool, ad by more tha oly oe of the 11 ways of listeig to users. To facilitate a culture of service quality assessmet, ad to facilitate more iformed usage of LibQUAL+ data, the Associatio of Research Libraries has created the aual ARL Service Quality Evaluatio Academy. For more iformatio about the Academy, see the LibQUAL+ evets page at <http://www.libqual.org/evets/idex.cfm> All All

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 13 of 89 The itesive, five-day Academy teaches both qualitative ad quatitative skills that library staff ca use to evaluate ad geerate service-quality assessmet iformatio. The secod cohort of Academy participats graduated i May, 2003. The Academy is oe more resource for library staff who would like to develop ehaced service-quality assessmet skills. For more iformatio, about LibQUAL+ or the Associatio of Research Libraries Statistics ad Measuremet program, see: <http://www.libqual.org/> <http://www.arl.org/stats/> <http://www.arl.org/> Refereces Berry, L.L. (1995). O great service: A framework for actio. New York: The Free Press. Cook, C.C., Heath F., Thompso, B. LibQUAL+ from the UK Perspective. 5th Northumbria Iteratioal Coferece Proceedigs, Durham, UK, July, 2003. Cook, C.C. (2002a). A mixed-methods approach to the idetificatio ad measuremet of academic library service quality costructs: LibQUAL+. (Doctoral dissertatio, Texas A&M Uiversity, 2001). Dissertatio Abstracts Iteratioal, 62, 2295A. (Uiversity Microfilms No. AAT3020024) Cook, C. (Guest Ed.). (2002b). Library decisio-makers speak to their uses of their LibQUAL+ data: Some LibQUAL+ " case studies. Performace Measuremet ad Metrics, 3. Cook, C., & Heath, F. (2001). Users' perceptios of library service quality: A "LibQUAL+ " qualitative study. Library Treds, 49, 548-584. Cook, C., Heath, F. & Thompso, B. (2002). Score orms for improvig library service quality: A LibQUAL+ study. portal: Libraries ad the Academy, 2, 13-26. Cook, C., Heath, F. & Thompso, B. (2003). "Zoes of tolerace" i perceptios of library service quality: A LibQUAL+ study. portal: Libraries ad the Academy, 3, 113-123. Cook, C., Heath, F. & Thompso, B. (forthcomig). Improvig service quality i libraries: LibQUAL+. Washigto, DC: Associatio of Research Libraries. (Iteratioal Stadard Book Number 0-918006-96-1 ) [out i Summer/Fall 2004] Cook, C., Heath, F., & Thompso, R.L. (2000). A meta-aalysis of respose rates i Web- or Iteret-based surveys. Educatioal ad Psychological Measuremet, 60, 821-836. Cook, C., & Thompso, B. (2001). Psychometric properties of scores from the Web-based LibQUAL+ study of perceptios of library service quality. Library Treds, 49, 585-604. Culle, R. (2001). Perspectives o user satisfactio surveys. Library Treds, 49, 662-686. Heath, F., Kyrillidou, M. & Askew, C.A. (Guest Eds.). (i press). Libraries report o their LibQUAL+ fidigs: From Data to Actio. Joural of Library Admiistratio. Heath, F., Cook, C., Kyrillidou, M., & Thompso, B. (2002). ARL Idex ad other validity correlates of LibQUAL + scores. portal: Libraries ad the Academy, 2, 27-42. Kyrillidou, M., Olshe, T., Heath, F., Boelly, C., ad Cote, J. P. Cross-cultural implemetatio of LibQUAL+ : the Frech laguage experiece. 5th Northumbria Iteratioal Coferece Proceedigs, Durham, UK, July, 2003. Kyrillidou, M. ad Youg, M. (2004). ARL Statistics 2002-03. Washigto, DC: Associatio of Research Libraries All All

Page 14 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries. Nitecki, D.A. (1996). Chagig the cocept ad measure of service quality i academic libraries. The Joural of Academic Librariaship, 22, 181-190. Parasurama, A., Berry, L.L., ad Zeithaml, V.A. Refiemet ad Reassessmet of the SERVQUAL Scale. Joural of Retailig 67 (1991): 420-450. Thompso, B. (2000, October). Represetativeess versus respose rate: It ai't the respose rate!. Paper preseted at the Associatio of Research Libraries (ARL) Measurig Service Quality Symposium o the New Culture of Assessmet: Measurig Service Quality, Washigto, DC. Thompso, B., Cook, C., & Heath, F. (2000). The LibQUAL+ gap measuremet model: The bad, the ugly, ad the good of gap measuremet. Performace Measuremet ad Metrics, 1, 165-178. Thompso, B., Cook, C., & Heath, F. (2003). Structure of perceptios of service quality i libraries: A LibQUAL+ study. Structural Equatio Modelig, 10, 456-464. Thompso, B., Cook, C., & Thompso, R.L. (2002). Reliability ad structure of LibQUAL+ scores: Measurig perceived library service quality. portal: Libraries ad the Academy, 2, 3-12. Zeithaml, V.A., Parasurama, A., Berry, L.L. (1990). Deliverig quality service: Balacig customer perceptios ad expectatios. New York: Free Press. All All

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 15 of 89 2 Demographic Summary for Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 2.1 Respodets by User Group User Group Udergraduate First year Secod year Third year Fourth year Fifth year ad above No-degree Graduate Masters Doctoral No-degree or Udecided Faculty Adjuct Faculty Assistat Professor Associate Professor Lecturer Professor Other Academic Status Library Staff Admiistrator Maager, Head of Uit Public Services Systems Techical Services Other Staff Research Staff Other staff positios Respodet Respodet % 67 11.04% 85 14.00% 65 10.71% 64 10.54% 19 3.13% 4 0.66% Sub Total: 304 50.08% 61 10.05% 133 21.91% 1 0.16% Sub Total: 195 32.13% 7 1.15% 22 3.62% 21 3.46% 1 0.16% 36 5.93% 9 1.48% Sub Total: 96 15.82% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 0.33% 0 0.00% 1 0.16% 2 0.33% Sub Total: 5 0.82% 3 0.49% 4 0.66% Sub Total: 7 1.15% Total: 607 100.00% All All

Page 16 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 2.2 Populatio ad Respodets by User Sub-Group The chart ad table below show a breakdow of survey respodets by sub-group (e.g. First year, Masters, Professor), based o user resposes to the demographic questios at the ed of the survey istrumet ad the demographic data provided by istitutios i the olie Represetativeess sectio*. The chart maps percetage of respodets for each user subgroup i red. Populatio percetages for each user subgroup are mapped i blue. The table shows the umber ad percetage for each user sub-group for the geeral populatio (N) ad for survey respodets (). *Note: Participatig istitutios were ot required to complete the Represetativeess sectio. Whe populatio data is missig or icomplete, it is because this data was ot provided. First year (Udergraduate) Secod year (Udergraduate) Third year (Udergraduate) Fourth year (Udergraduate) Fifth year ad above (Udergraduate) No-degree (Udergraduate) User Sub-Group Masters (Graduate) Doctoral (Graduate) No-degree or Udecided (Graduate) Adjuct Faculty (Faculty) Assistat Professor (Faculty) Associate Professor (Faculty) Lecturer (Faculty) Professor (Faculty) Other Academic Status (Faculty) Respodet Profile by User Sub-Group Populatio Profile by User Sub-Group 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 Percetage All (Excludig Library Staff, Staff) All (Excludig Library Staff, Staff)

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 17 of 89 User Sub-Group Populatio N Populatio Respodets Respodets % % %N - % First year (Udergraduate) 4,877 18.55% 67 11.26% 7.29% Secod year (Udergraduate) 4,320 16.43% 85 14.29% 2.14% Third year (Udergraduate) 4,523 17.20% 65 10.92% 6.28% Fourth year (Udergraduate) 4,475 17.02% 64 10.76% 6.26% Fifth year ad above (Udergraduate) 0 0.00% 19 3.19% -3.19% No-degree (Udergraduate) 1,092 4.15% 4 0.67% 3.48% Masters (Graduate) 3,130 11.90% 61 10.25% 1.65% Doctoral (Graduate) 2,197 8.36% 133 22.35% -14.00% No-degree or Udecided (Graduate) 664 2.53% 1 0.17% 2.36% Adjuct Faculty (Faculty) 0 0.00% 7 1.18% -1.18% Assistat Professor (Faculty) 260 0.99% 22 3.70% -2.71% Associate Professor (Faculty) 313 1.19% 21 3.53% -2.34% Lecturer (Faculty) 33 0.13% 1 0.17% -0.04% Professor (Faculty) 398 1.51% 36 6.05% -4.54% Other Academic Status (Faculty) 13 0.05% 9 1.51% -1.46% Total: 26,295 100.00% 595 100.00% 0.00% All (Excludig Library Staff, Staff) All (Excludig Library Staff, Staff)

Page 18 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 2.3 Populatio ad Respodets by Stadard Disciplie The chart ad table below show a breakdow of survey respodets by disciplie, based o user resposes to the demographic questios ad the demographic data provided by istitutios i the olie Represetativeess sectio*. This sectio shows survey respodets broke dow based o the LibQUAL+ stadard disciplie categories. The chart maps percetage of respodets for each disciplie i red. Populatio percetages for each disciplie are mapped i blue. The table shows the umber ad percetage for each disciplie, for the geeral populatio (N) ad for survey respodets (). *Note: Participatig istitutios were ot required to complete the Represetativeess sectio. Whe populatio data is missig or icomplete, it is because this data was ot provided. Agriculture / Evirometal Studies Architecture Busiess Commuicatios / Jouralism Educatio Egieerig / Computer Sciece Geeral Studies Disciplie Health Scieces Humaities Law Military / Naval Sciece Other Performig & Fie Arts Sciece / Math Social Scieces / Psychology Udecided Respodet Profile by Disciplie Populatio Profile by Disciplie 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Percetage All (Excludig Library Staff, Staff) All (Excludig Library Staff, Staff)

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 19 of 89 Disciplie Populatio N Populatio Respodets Respodets % % %N - % Agriculture / Evirometal Studies 922 4.11% 33 5.55% -1.44% Architecture 206 0.92% 13 2.18% -1.27% Busiess 2,929 13.04% 48 8.07% 4.98% Commuicatios / Jouralism 0 0.00% 2 0.34% -0.34% Educatio 1,064 4.74% 77 12.94% -8.20% Egieerig / Computer Sciece 1,948 8.68% 53 8.91% -0.23% Geeral Studies 169 0.75% 5 0.84% -0.09% Health Scieces 606 2.70% 24 4.03% -1.33% Humaities 12,568 55.97% 286 48.07% 7.90% Law 678 3.02% 9 1.51% 1.51% Military / Naval Sciece 279 1.24% 9 1.51% -0.27% Other 433 1.93% 3 0.50% 1.42% Performig & Fie Arts 653 2.91% 13 2.18% 0.72% Sciece / Math 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00% Social Scieces / Psychology 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00% Udecided 0 0.00% 20 3.36% -3.36% Total: 22,455 100.00% 595 100.00% 0.00% All (Excludig Library Staff, Staff) All (Excludig Library Staff, Staff)

Page 20 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 2.4 Populatio ad Respodets by Customized Disciplie The chart ad table below show a breakdow of survey respodets by disciplie, based o user resposes to the demographic questios ad the demographic data provided by istitutios i the olie Represetativeess sectio*. This sectio shows survey respodets broke dow based o the customized disciplie categories supplied by the participatig library. The chart maps percetage of respodets for each disciplie i red. Populatio percetages for each disciplie are mapped i blue. The table shows the umber ad percetage for each disciplie, for the geeral populatio (N) ad for survey respodets (). *Note: Participatig istitutios were ot required to complete the Represetativeess sectio. Whe populatio data is missig or icomplete, it is because this data was ot provided. Agriculture & Natural Resources Allied Health Busiess Cotiuig Studies Educatio Egieerig / Computer Sciece Disciplie Family Studies Geeral Studies Liberal Arts & Scieces Nursig Performig & Fie Arts Pharmacy Social Work Udecided Respodet Profile by Disciplie Populatio Profile by Disciplie 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Percetage All (Excludig Library Staff, Staff) All (Excludig Library Staff, Staff)

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 21 of 89 Disciplie Populatio N Populatio Respodets Respodets % % %N - % Agriculture & Natural Resources 922 4.11% 33 5.55% -1.44% Allied Health 206 0.92% 13 2.18% -1.27% Busiess 2,929 13.04% 48 8.07% 4.98% Cotiuig Studies 0 0.00% 2 0.34% -0.34% Educatio 1,064 4.74% 77 12.94% -8.20% Egieerig / Computer Sciece 1,948 8.68% 53 8.91% -0.23% Family Studies 606 2.70% 24 4.03% -1.33% Geeral Studies 169 0.75% 5 0.84% -0.09% Liberal Arts & Scieces 12,568 55.97% 286 48.07% 7.90% Nursig 678 3.02% 9 1.51% 1.51% Performig & Fie Arts 653 2.91% 13 2.18% 0.72% Pharmacy 279 1.24% 9 1.51% -0.27% Social Work 433 1.93% 3 0.50% 1.42% Udecided 0 0.00% 20 3.36% -3.36% Total: 22,455 100.00% 595 100.00% 0.00% All (Excludig Library Staff, Staff) All (Excludig Library Staff, Staff)

Page 22 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 2.5 Respodet Profile by Age This table shows a breakdow of survey respodets by age; both the umber of respodets () ad the percetage of the total umber of respodets represeted by each age group are displayed. Age Respodets Respodets % Uder 18 2 0.33% 18-22 284 47.18% 23-30 133 22.09% 31-45 98 16.28% 46-65 77 12.79% Over 65 8 1.33% Total: 602 100.00% 2.6 Populatio ad Respodet Profiles by Sex The table below shows a breakdow of survey respodets by sex, based o user resposes to the demographic questios ad the demographic data provided by istitutios i the olie Represetativeess sectio*. The umber ad percetage for each sex are give for the geeral populatio ad for survey respodets. *Note: Participatig istitutios were ot required to complete the Represetativeess sectio. Whe populatio data is missig or icomplete, it is because this data was ot provided. Sex Populatio N Populatio % Respodets Respodets % Male 12,250 48.93% 257 42.76% Female 12,787 51.07% 344 57.24% Total: 25,037 100.00% 601 100.00% All (Excludig Library Staff) All (Excludig Library Staff)

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 23 of 89 3 Survey Item Summary for Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 3.1 Core Questios Summary This radar chart shows aggregate results for the core survey questios. Each axis represets oe questio. A code to idetify each questio is displayed at the outer poit of each axis. While questios for each dimesio of library service quality are scattered radomly throughout the survey, o this chart they are grouped ito sectios: Affect of Service, Library as Place, ad Iformatio Cotrol. O each axis, respodets' miimum, desired, ad perceived levels of service quality are plotted, ad the resultig "gaps " betwee the three levels (represetig service adequacy or service superiority) are shaded i blue, yellow, gree, ad red. The two followig tables show mea scores ad stadard deviatios for each questio, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) AS-7 AS-6 AS-5 Affect of Service AS-8 AS-4 AS-9 AS-3 IC-1 AS-2 IC-2 AS-1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IC-3 LP-5 IC-4 LP-4 Iformatio Cotrol IC-5 IC-6 LP-2 LP-3 Library as Place IC-7 IC-8 LP-1 Perceived Less Tha Miimum Perceived Greater Tha Miimum Perceived Less Tha Desired Perceived Greater Tha Desired All (Excludig Library Staff) All (Excludig Library Staff)

Page 24 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries ID Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service AS-1 Employees who istill cofidece i users 5.65 7.58 6.70 1.05-0.87 553 AS-2 Givig users idividual attetio 5.85 7.32 6.71 0.86-0.61 576 AS-3 Employees who are cosistetly courteous 6.62 7.98 7.37 0.76-0.61 588 AS-4 Readiess to respod to users' questios 6.61 7.86 7.30 0.69-0.56 570 AS-5 Employees who have the kowledge to aswer 6.70 7.97 7.33 0.63-0.65 578 user questios AS-6 Employees who deal with users i a carig 6.40 7.85 7.22 0.81-0.64 572 fashio AS-7 Employees who uderstad the eeds of their 6.58 7.91 7.17 0.59-0.74 572 users AS-8 Willigess to help users 6.47 7.80 7.39 0.92-0.41 567 AS-9 Depedability i hadlig users' service problems 6.75 7.94 7.22 0.46-0.73 530 Iformatio Cotrol IC-1 Makig electroic resources accessible from my 6.73 8.30 6.90 0.17-1.40 580 home or office IC-2 A library Web site eablig me to locate 6.95 8.28 7.13 0.18-1.14 595 iformatio o my ow IC-3 The prited library materials I eed for my work 6.77 8.02 6.89 0.12-1.13 574 IC-4 The electroic iformatio resources I eed 6.74 8.12 7.10 0.36-1.02 591 IC-5 Moder equipmet that lets me easily access 6.96 8.22 7.40 0.43-0.82 594 eeded iformatio IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to fid 6.76 8.09 7.09 0.32-1.00 589 thigs o my ow IC-7 Makig iformatio easily accessible for 6.74 8.14 7.29 0.55-0.86 581 idepedet use IC-8 Prit ad/or electroic joural collectios I 6.90 8.14 6.92 0.02-1.22 567 require for my work Library as Place LP-1 Library space that ispires study ad learig 6.46 7.94 7.06 0.60-0.88 590 LP-2 Quiet space for idividual activities 6.55 7.91 6.98 0.43-0.93 582 LP-3 A comfortable ad ivitig locatio 6.49 7.93 7.48 0.99-0.44 590 LP-4 A getaway for study, learig, or research 6.46 7.89 7.24 0.78-0.65 564 LP-5 Commuity space for group learig ad group 5.79 7.24 6.68 0.89-0.56 511 study Overall: 6.56 7.94 7.12 0.56-0.82 602 All (Excludig Library Staff) All (Excludig Library Staff)

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 25 of 89 ID Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service AS-1 Employees who istill cofidece i users 1.81 1.56 1.66 1.91 1.81 553 AS-2 Givig users idividual attetio 2.00 1.67 1.77 1.88 1.70 576 AS-3 Employees who are cosistetly courteous 1.90 1.48 1.59 1.96 1.71 588 AS-4 Readiess to respod to users' questios 1.75 1.40 1.51 1.77 1.56 570 AS-5 Employees who have the kowledge to aswer 1.70 1.39 1.50 1.75 1.61 578 user questios AS-6 Employees who deal with users i a carig 1.91 1.45 1.58 1.88 1.62 572 fashio AS-7 Employees who uderstad the eeds of their 1.76 1.38 1.54 1.88 1.67 572 users AS-8 Willigess to help users 1.84 1.50 1.44 1.75 1.50 567 AS-9 Depedability i hadlig users' service problems 1.69 1.36 1.65 2.00 1.79 530 Iformatio Cotrol IC-1 Makig electroic resources accessible from my 1.73 1.16 1.82 2.25 1.99 580 home or office IC-2 A library Web site eablig me to locate 1.61 1.19 1.68 2.07 1.79 595 iformatio o my ow IC-3 The prited library materials I eed for my work 1.63 1.40 1.62 2.01 1.80 574 IC-4 The electroic iformatio resources I eed 1.61 1.22 1.44 1.93 1.67 591 IC-5 Moder equipmet that lets me easily access 1.63 1.18 1.47 1.78 1.42 594 eeded iformatio IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to fid 1.64 1.25 1.46 1.84 1.60 589 thigs o my ow IC-7 Makig iformatio easily accessible for 1.66 1.17 1.40 1.79 1.44 581 idepedet use IC-8 Prit ad/or electroic joural collectios I 1.78 1.44 1.70 2.17 1.92 567 require for my work Library as Place LP-1 Library space that ispires study ad learig 1.88 1.46 1.62 2.16 1.91 590 LP-2 Quiet space for idividual activities 1.91 1.46 1.73 2.34 2.01 582 LP-3 A comfortable ad ivitig locatio 1.82 1.38 1.45 1.94 1.67 590 LP-4 A getaway for study, learig, or research 1.89 1.46 1.44 1.96 1.62 564 LP-5 Commuity space for group learig ad group 2.16 2.00 1.72 2.32 2.23 511 study Overall: 1.33 0.94 1.10 1.38 1.11 602 All (Excludig Library Staff) All (Excludig Library Staff)

Page 26 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 3.2 Core Questio Dimesios Summary O the chart below, scores for each dimesio of library service quality have bee plotted graphically. The exterior bars represet the rage of miimum to desired mea scores for each dimesio. The iterior bars represet the rage of miimum to perceived mea scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimesio of library service quality. 9 8 7 6 5 4 Affect of Service Iformatio Cotrol Library as Place Overall Dimesio Rage of Miimum to Desired Rage of Miimum to Perceived ("Adequacy Gap") All (Excludig Library Staff) All (Excludig Library Staff)

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 27 of 89 The followig table displays mea scores for each dimesio of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+ survey, where is the umber of respodets for each particular dimesio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) A complete listig of the survey questios ad their dimesios ca be foud i Appedix A. Dimesio Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service 6.41 7.80 7.15 0.75-0.65 601 Iformatio Cotrol 6.82 8.17 7.09 0.27-1.08 602 Library as Place 6.37 7.79 7.09 0.73-0.70 600 Overall: 6.56 7.94 7.12 0.56-0.82 602 The followig table displays stadard deviatio for each dimesio of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+ survey, where is the umber of respodets for each particular dimesio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) A complete listig of the survey questios ad their dimesios ca be foud i Appedix A. Dimesio Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service 1.52 1.15 1.28 1.48 1.28 601 Iformatio Cotrol 1.34 0.95 1.18 1.52 1.25 602 Library as Place 1.60 1.24 1.26 1.73 1.46 600 Overall: 1.33 0.94 1.10 1.38 1.11 602 All (Excludig Library Staff) All (Excludig Library Staff)

Page 28 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 3.3 Local Questios Summary This table shows mea scores for each of the local questios added by the idividual library or cosortium, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Availability of olie help whe usig my library's electroic resources 6.05 7.68 6.54 0.49-1.14 542 Library orietatios / istructio sessios 5.22 6.67 6.57 1.35-0.10 507 Ready access to computers / Iteret / software 6.98 8.19 7.38 0.40-0.81 581 Access to photocopyig ad pritig facilities 6.77 8.13 6.70-0.07-1.43 583 Coveiet service hours 6.97 8.26 7.66 0.70-0.60 596 This table displays stadard deviatios for each of the local questios added by the idividual library or cosortium, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Availability of olie help whe usig my library's electroic resources 1.84 1.54 1.77 2.05 1.98 Library orietatios / istructio sessios 2.16 2.12 1.87 2.06 2.04 507 Ready access to computers / Iteret / software 1.75 1.32 1.64 2.06 1.74 581 Access to photocopyig ad pritig facilities 1.72 1.27 1.87 2.27 2.05 583 Coveiet service hours 1.70 1.17 1.50 2.10 1.76 596 542 All (Excludig Library Staff) All (Excludig Library Staff)

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 29 of 89 3.4 Geeral Satisfactio Questios Summary This table displays the mea score ad stadard deviatio for each of the geeral satisfactio questios: Satisfactio with Treatmet, Satisfactio with Support, ad Satisfactio with Overall Quality of Service, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. These scores are calculated from resposes to the geeral satisfactio questios o the LibQUAL+ survey, i which respodets rated their levels of geeral satisfactio o a scale from 1-9. Satisfactio Questio I geeral, I am satisfied with the way i which I am treated at the library. 7.43 1.55 602 I geeral, I am satisfied with library support for my learig, research, ad/or teachig eeds. 7.14 1.65 602 How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 7.29 1.34 602 3.5 Iformatio Literacy Outcomes Questios Summary This table displays the mea score ad stadard deviatio for each of the iformatio literacy outcomes questios, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. These scores are calculated from resposes to the iformatio literacy outcomes questios o the LibQUAL+ survey, i which respodets rated their levels of geeral satisfactio o a scale from 1-9 with 1 beig "strogly disagree" ad 9 represetig "strogly agree". Iformatio Literacy Outcomes Questios The library helps me stay abreast of developmets i my field(s) of iterest. 6.26 1.89 602 The library aids my advacemet i my academic disciplie. 7.04 1.65 602 The library eables me to be more efficiet i my academic pursuits. 7.13 1.65 602 The library helps me distiguish betwee trustworthy ad utrustworthy iformatio. 5.77 1.91 602 The library provides me with the iformatio skills I eed i my work or study. 6.51 1.77 602 All (Excludig Library Staff) All (Excludig Library Staff)

Page 30 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 3.6 Library Use Summary This chart shows a graphic represetatio of library use (both o the premises ad electroically), as well as use of olibrary iformatio gateways such as Yahoo ad Google. Bars represet the frequecy with which respodets report usig these resources: Daily, Weekly, Mothly, Quarterly, or Never. The table below the chart displays the umber ad percetage of respodets who selected each optio. 80 70 60 Percetage 50 40 30 20 How ofte do you use resources o library premises? How ofte do you access library resources through a library Web page? How ofte do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or o-library gateways for iformatio? 10 0 Daily Weekly Mothly Quarterly Never Frequecy Daily Weekly Mothly Quarterly Never / % How ofte do you use resources o library premises? 134 22.26% 259 43.02% 150 24.92% 51 8.47% 8 1.33% 602 100.00% How ofte do you access library resources through a library Web page? 152 25.29% 244 40.60% 131 21.80% 47 7.82% 27 4.49% 601 100.00% How ofte do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or o-library gateways for iformatio? 432 71.88% 116 19.30% 27 4.49% 11 1.83% 15 2.50% 601 100.00% All (Excludig Library Staff) All (Excludig Library Staff)

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 31 of 89 4 Udergraduate Summary 4.1 Demographic Summary for Udergraduate 4.1.1 Populatio ad Respodet Profiles for Udergraduate by Stadard Disciplie The chart ad table below show a breakdow of survey respodets by disciplie, based o user resposes to the demographic questios ad the demographic data provided by istitutios i the olie Represetativeess sectio*. This sectio shows survey respodets broke dow based o the LibQUAL+ stadard disciplie categories. The chart maps percetage of respodets for each disciplie i red. Populatio percetages for each disciplie are mapped i blue. The table shows the umber ad percetage for each disciplie, for the geeral populatio (N) ad for survey respodets (). Agriculture / Evirometal Studies Architecture Busiess Commuicatios / Jouralism Educatio Egieerig / Computer Sciece Geeral Studies Disciplie Health Scieces Humaities Law Military / Naval Sciece Other Performig & Fie Arts Sciece / Math Social Scieces / Psychology Udecided Respodet Profile by Disciplie Populatio Profile by Disciplie 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Percetage Udergraduate Udergraduate

Page 32 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Disciplie Populatio N Populatio Respodets Respodets % % %N - % Agriculture / Evirometal Studies 673 4.06% 16 5.26% -1.21% Architecture 138 0.83% 10 3.29% -2.46% Busiess 1,667 10.05% 38 12.50% -2.45% Commuicatios / Jouralism 0 0.00% 2 0.66% -0.66% Educatio 357 2.15% 21 6.91% -4.76% Egieerig / Computer Sciece 1,318 7.95% 14 4.61% 3.34% Geeral Studies 169 1.02% 4 1.32% -0.30% Health Scieces 521 3.14% 11 3.62% -0.48% Humaities 10,507 63.34% 150 49.34% 14.00% Law 564 3.40% 5 1.64% 1.76% Military / Naval Sciece 189 1.14% 7 2.30% -1.16% Other 0 0.00% 2 0.66% -0.66% Performig & Fie Arts 484 2.92% 6 1.97% 0.94% Sciece / Math 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00% Social Scieces / Psychology 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00% Udecided 0 0.00% 18 5.92% -5.92% Total: 16,587 100.00% 304 100.00% 0.00% Udergraduate Udergraduate

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 33 of 89 4.1.2 Populatio ad Respodet Profiles for Udergraduate by Customized Disciplie The chart ad table below show a breakdow of survey respodets by disciplie, based o user resposes to the demographic questios ad the demographic data provided by istitutios i the olie Represetativeess sectio*. This sectio shows survey respodets broke dow based o the customized disciplie categories supplied by the participatig library. The chart maps percetage of respodets for each disciplie i red. Populatio percetages for each disciplie are mapped i blue. The table shows the umber ad percetage for each disciplie, for the geeral populatio (N) ad for survey respodets (). Agriculture & Natural Resources Allied Health Busiess Cotiuig Studies Educatio Egieerig / Computer Sciece Disciplie Family Studies Geeral Studies Liberal Arts & Scieces Nursig Performig & Fie Arts Pharmacy Social Work Udecided Respodet Profile by Disciplie Populatio Profile by Disciplie 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Percetage Udergraduate Udergraduate

Page 34 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Disciplie Populatio N Populatio Respodets Respodets % % %N - % Agriculture & Natural Resources 673 4.06% 16 5.26% -1.21% Allied Health 138 0.83% 10 3.29% -2.46% Busiess 1,667 10.05% 38 12.50% -2.45% Cotiuig Studies 0 0.00% 2 0.66% -0.66% Educatio 357 2.15% 21 6.91% -4.76% Egieerig / Computer Sciece 1,318 7.95% 14 4.61% 3.34% Family Studies 521 3.14% 11 3.62% -0.48% Geeral Studies 169 1.02% 4 1.32% -0.30% Liberal Arts & Scieces 10,507 63.34% 150 49.34% 14.00% Nursig 564 3.40% 5 1.64% 1.76% Performig & Fie Arts 484 2.92% 6 1.97% 0.94% Pharmacy 189 1.14% 7 2.30% -1.16% Social Work 0 0.00% 2 0.66% -0.66% Udecided 0 0.00% 18 5.92% -5.92% Total: 16,587 100.00% 304 100.00% 0.00% Udergraduate Udergraduate

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 35 of 89 4.1.3 Respodet Profile for Udergraduate by Age This table shows a breakdow of survey respodets by age; both the umber of respodets () ad the percetage of the total umber of respodets represeted by each age group are displayed. Age Respodets Respodets % Uder 18 2 0.66% 18-22 277 91.12% 23-30 21 6.91% 31-45 4 1.32% 46-65 0 0.00% Over 65 0 0.00% Total: 304 100.00% 4.1.4 Populatio ad Respodet Profiles for Udergraduate by Sex The table below shows a breakdow of survey respodets by sex, based o user resposes to the demographic questios ad the demographic data provided by istitutios i the olie Represetativeess sectio*. The umber ad percetage for each sex are give for the geeral populatio ad for survey respodets. *Note: Participatig istitutios were ot required to complete the Represetativeess sectio. Whe populatio data is missig or icomplete, it is because this data was ot provided. Sex Populatio N Populatio % Respodets Respodets % Male 9,138 47.43% 116 38.28% Female 10,128 52.57% 187 61.72% Total: 19,266 100.00% 303 100.00% Udergraduate Udergraduate

Page 36 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 4.2 Core Questios Summary for Udergraduate This radar chart shows aggregate results for the core survey questios. Each axis represets oe questio. A code to idetify each questio is displayed at the outer poit of each axis. While questios for each dimesio of library service quality are scattered radomly throughout the survey, o this chart they are grouped ito sectios: Affect of Service, Library as Place, ad Iformatio Cotrol. O each axis, respodets' miimum, desired, ad perceived levels of service quality are plotted, ad the resultig "gaps " betwee the three levels (represetig service adequacy or service superiority) are shaded i blue, yellow, gree, ad red. The two followig tables show mea scores ad stadard deviatios for each questio, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) AS-7 AS-6 AS-5 Affect of Service AS-8 AS-4 AS-9 AS-3 IC-1 AS-2 IC-2 AS-1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IC-3 LP-5 IC-4 LP-4 Iformatio Cotrol IC-5 IC-6 LP-2 LP-3 Library as Place IC-7 IC-8 LP-1 Perceived Less Tha Miimum Perceived Greater Tha Miimum Perceived Less Tha Desired Perceived Greater Tha Desired Udergraduate Udergraduate

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 37 of 89 ID Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service AS-1 Employees who istill cofidece i users 5.38 7.41 6.76 1.38-0.65 277 AS-2 Givig users idividual attetio 5.52 7.00 6.50 0.99-0.50 288 AS-3 Employees who are cosistetly courteous 6.41 7.78 7.28 0.86-0.51 294 AS-4 Readiess to respod to users' questios 6.36 7.63 7.16 0.81-0.47 283 AS-5 Employees who have the kowledge to aswer 6.49 7.84 7.36 0.88-0.47 291 user questios AS-6 Employees who deal with users i a carig 6.21 7.62 7.20 0.99-0.42 293 fashio AS-7 Employees who uderstad the eeds of their 6.39 7.66 7.21 0.82-0.44 290 users AS-8 Willigess to help users 6.21 7.55 7.35 1.14-0.20 287 AS-9 Depedability i hadlig users' service problems 6.62 7.77 7.29 0.67-0.48 264 Iformatio Cotrol IC-1 Makig electroic resources accessible from my 6.39 8.01 6.88 0.49-1.13 288 home or office IC-2 A library Web site eablig me to locate 6.65 8.03 7.19 0.54-0.84 298 iformatio o my ow IC-3 The prited library materials I eed for my work 6.52 7.74 7.00 0.48-0.74 281 IC-4 The electroic iformatio resources I eed 6.40 7.79 7.20 0.79-0.60 296 IC-5 Moder equipmet that lets me easily access 6.95 8.13 7.54 0.59-0.59 302 eeded iformatio IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to fid 6.55 7.83 7.19 0.64-0.64 296 thigs o my ow IC-7 Makig iformatio easily accessible for 6.50 7.93 7.32 0.81-0.61 296 idepedet use IC-8 Prit ad/or electroic joural collectios I 6.47 7.66 6.95 0.48-0.71 275 require for my work Library as Place LP-1 Library space that ispires study ad learig 6.57 8.10 7.21 0.63-0.89 302 LP-2 Quiet space for idividual activities 6.73 8.12 7.03 0.30-1.09 303 LP-3 A comfortable ad ivitig locatio 6.65 8.10 7.67 1.01-0.43 304 LP-4 A getaway for study, learig, or research 6.67 8.03 7.45 0.78-0.58 296 LP-5 Commuity space for group learig ad group 6.23 7.70 6.81 0.58-0.89 288 study Overall: 6.42 7.81 7.17 0.75-0.64 304 Udergraduate Udergraduate

Page 38 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries ID Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service AS-1 Employees who istill cofidece i users 1.87 1.57 1.53 1.94 1.75 277 AS-2 Givig users idividual attetio 2.15 1.68 1.79 2.03 1.61 288 AS-3 Employees who are cosistetly courteous 1.98 1.62 1.51 1.94 1.67 294 AS-4 Readiess to respod to users' questios 1.84 1.48 1.46 1.80 1.40 283 AS-5 Employees who have the kowledge to aswer 1.80 1.44 1.36 1.68 1.45 291 user questios AS-6 Employees who deal with users i a carig 2.06 1.62 1.52 1.86 1.46 293 fashio AS-7 Employees who uderstad the eeds of their 1.85 1.50 1.41 1.87 1.48 290 users AS-8 Willigess to help users 1.97 1.62 1.39 1.84 1.44 287 AS-9 Depedability i hadlig users' service problems 1.81 1.48 1.53 1.98 1.61 264 Iformatio Cotrol IC-1 Makig electroic resources accessible from my 1.79 1.35 1.72 2.25 1.94 288 home or office IC-2 A library Web site eablig me to locate 1.70 1.36 1.65 2.10 1.71 298 iformatio o my ow IC-3 The prited library materials I eed for my work 1.78 1.53 1.61 1.98 1.72 281 IC-4 The electroic iformatio resources I eed 1.64 1.36 1.34 1.81 1.52 296 IC-5 Moder equipmet that lets me easily access 1.66 1.26 1.44 1.71 1.25 302 eeded iformatio IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to fid 1.78 1.38 1.45 1.97 1.55 296 thigs o my ow IC-7 Makig iformatio easily accessible for 1.76 1.29 1.37 1.87 1.36 296 idepedet use IC-8 Prit ad/or electroic joural collectios I 1.98 1.67 1.62 2.08 1.68 275 require for my work Library as Place LP-1 Library space that ispires study ad learig 1.86 1.33 1.56 2.14 1.71 302 LP-2 Quiet space for idividual activities 1.87 1.22 1.77 2.43 1.89 303 LP-3 A comfortable ad ivitig locatio 1.80 1.19 1.38 1.89 1.48 304 LP-4 A getaway for study, learig, or research 1.79 1.32 1.37 1.95 1.47 296 LP-5 Commuity space for group learig ad group 1.99 1.63 1.74 2.47 2.19 288 study Overall: 1.42 1.02 1.02 1.43 0.98 304 Udergraduate Udergraduate

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 39 of 89 4.3 Core Questio Dimesios Summary for Udergraduate O the chart below, scores for each dimesio of library service quality have bee plotted graphically. The exterior bars represet the rage of miimum to desired mea scores for each dimesio. The iterior bars represet the rage of miimum to perceived mea scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimesio of library service quality. 9 8 7 6 5 4 Affect of Service Iformatio Cotrol Library as Place Overall Dimesio Rage of Miimum to Desired Rage of Miimum to Perceived ("Adequacy Gap") Udergraduate Udergraduate

Page 40 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries The followig table displays mea scores for each dimesio of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+ survey, where is the umber of respodets for each particular dimesio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) A complete listig of the survey questios ad their dimesios ca be foud i Appedix A. Dimesio Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service 6.19 7.59 7.11 0.92-0.48 304 Iformatio Cotrol 6.57 7.91 7.17 0.60-0.73 304 Library as Place 6.58 8.01 7.23 0.66-0.78 304 Overall: 6.42 7.81 7.17 0.75-0.64 304 The followig table displays stadard deviatio for each dimesio of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+ survey, where is the umber of respodets for each particular dimesio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) A complete listig of the survey questios ad their dimesios ca be foud i Appedix A. Dimesio Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service 1.60 1.20 1.17 1.47 1.09 304 Iformatio Cotrol 1.42 1.07 1.09 1.52 1.09 304 Library as Place 1.50 1.03 1.21 1.71 1.26 304 Overall: 1.42 1.02 1.02 1.43 0.98 304 Udergraduate Udergraduate

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 41 of 89 4.4 Local Questios Summary for Udergraduate This table shows mea scores for each of the local questios added by the idividual library or cosortium, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Availability of olie help whe usig my library's electroic resources 5.82 7.44 6.59 0.77-0.84 275 Library orietatios / istructio sessios 5.01 6.50 6.48 1.47-0.02 260 Ready access to computers / Iteret / software 6.99 8.23 7.47 0.48-0.76 300 Access to photocopyig ad pritig facilities 6.61 7.97 6.98 0.37-0.99 299 Coveiet service hours 7.08 8.28 7.87 0.78-0.41 300 This table displays stadard deviatios for each of the local questios added by the idividual library or cosortium, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Availability of olie help whe usig my library's electroic resources 1.83 1.62 1.68 1.99 1.95 Library orietatios / istructio sessios 2.29 2.22 1.83 2.14 1.95 260 Ready access to computers / Iteret / software 1.80 1.30 1.61 2.13 1.67 300 Access to photocopyig ad pritig facilities 1.88 1.41 1.74 2.21 1.90 299 Coveiet service hours 1.76 1.15 1.37 1.99 1.47 300 275 Udergraduate Udergraduate

Page 42 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 4.5 Geeral Satisfactio Questios Summary for Udergraduate This table displays the mea score ad stadard deviatio for each of the geeral satisfactio questios: Satisfactio with Treatmet, Satisfactio with Support, ad Satisfactio with Overall Quality of Service, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. These scores are calculated from resposes to the geeral satisfactio questios o the LibQUAL+ survey, i which respodets rated their levels of geeral satisfactio o a scale from 1-9. Satisfactio Questio I geeral, I am satisfied with the way i which I am treated at the library. 7.46 1.35 304 I geeral, I am satisfied with library support for my learig, research, ad/or teachig eeds. 7.33 1.38 304 How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 7.40 1.14 304 4.6 Iformatio Literacy Outcomes Questios Summary for Udergraduate This table displays the mea score ad stadard deviatio for each of the iformatio literacy outcomes questios, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. These scores are calculated from resposes to the iformatio literacy outcomes questios o the LibQUAL+ survey, i which respodets rated their levels of geeral satisfactio o a scale from 1-9 with 1 beig "strogly disagree" ad 9 represetig "strogly agree". Iformatio Literacy Outcomes Questios The library helps me stay abreast of developmets i my field(s) of iterest. 6.13 1.76 304 The library aids my advacemet i my academic disciplie. 7.09 1.61 304 The library eables me to be more efficiet i my academic pursuits. 7.23 1.58 304 The library helps me distiguish betwee trustworthy ad utrustworthy iformatio. 6.02 1.85 304 The library provides me with the iformatio skills I eed i my work or study. 6.58 1.75 304 Udergraduate Udergraduate

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 43 of 89 4.7 Library Use Summary for Udergraduate 80 This chart shows a graphic represetatio of library use (both o the premises ad electroically), as well as use of olibrary iformatio gateways such as Yahoo ad Google. Bars represet the frequecy with which respodets report usig these resources: Daily, Weekly, Mothly, Quarterly, or Never. The table below the chart displays the umber ad percetage of respodets who selected each optio. 70 60 Percetage 50 40 30 20 How ofte do you use resources o library premises? How ofte do you access library resources through a library Web page? How ofte do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or o-library gateways for iformatio? 10 0 Daily Weekly Mothly Quarterly Never Frequecy Daily Weekly Mothly Quarterly Never / % How ofte do you use resources o library premises? 86 28.29% 134 44.08% 60 19.74% 20 6.58% 4 1.32% 304 100.00% How ofte do you access library resources through a library Web page? 34 11.18% 109 35.86% 99 32.57% 36 11.84% 26 8.55% 304 100.00% How ofte do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or o-library gateways for iformatio? 213 70.07% 64 21.05% 16 5.26% 7 2.30% 4 1.32% 304 100.00% Udergraduate Udergraduate

Page 44 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 5 Graduate Summary 5.1 Demographic Summary for Graduate 5.1.1 Populatio ad Respodet Profiles for Graduate by Stadard Disciplie The chart ad table below show a breakdow of survey respodets by disciplie, based o user resposes to the demographic questios ad the demographic data provided by istitutios i the olie Represetativeess sectio*. This sectio shows survey respodets broke dow based o the LibQUAL+ stadard disciplie categories. The chart maps percetage of respodets for each disciplie i red. Populatio percetages for each disciplie are mapped i blue. The table shows the umber ad percetage for each disciplie, for the geeral populatio (N) ad for survey respodets (). Agriculture / Evirometal Studies Architecture Busiess Commuicatios / Jouralism Educatio Egieerig / Computer Sciece Geeral Studies Disciplie Health Scieces Humaities Law Military / Naval Sciece Other Performig & Fie Arts Sciece / Math Social Scieces / Psychology Udecided Respodet Profile by Disciplie Populatio Profile by Disciplie 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Percetage Graduate Graduate

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 45 of 89 Disciplie Populatio N Populatio Respodets Respodets % % %N - % Agriculture / Evirometal Studies 192 3.85% 11 5.64% -1.79% Architecture 50 1.00% 2 1.03% -0.02% Busiess 1,183 23.74% 6 3.08% 20.66% Commuicatios / Jouralism 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00% Educatio 657 13.18% 39 20.00% -6.82% Egieerig / Computer Sciece 538 10.80% 34 17.44% -6.64% Geeral Studies 0 0.00% 1 0.51% -0.51% Health Scieces 68 1.36% 8 4.10% -2.74% Humaities 1,634 32.79% 85 43.59% -10.80% Law 94 1.89% 3 1.54% 0.35% Military / Naval Sciece 60 1.20% 1 0.51% 0.69% Other 396 7.95% 0 0.00% 7.95% Performig & Fie Arts 111 2.23% 3 1.54% 0.69% Sciece / Math 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00% Social Scieces / Psychology 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00% Udecided 0 0.00% 2 1.03% -1.03% Total: 4,983 100.00% 195 100.00% 0.00% Graduate Graduate

Page 46 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 5.1.2 Populatio ad Respodet Profiles for Graduate by Customized Disciplie The chart ad table below show a breakdow of survey respodets by disciplie, based o user resposes to the demographic questios ad the demographic data provided by istitutios i the olie Represetativeess sectio*. This sectio shows survey respodets broke dow based o the customized disciplie categories supplied by the participatig library. The chart maps percetage of respodets for each disciplie i red. Populatio percetages for each disciplie are mapped i blue. The table shows the umber ad percetage for each disciplie, for the geeral populatio (N) ad for survey respodets (). Agriculture & Natural Resources Allied Health Busiess Cotiuig Studies Educatio Egieerig / Computer Sciece Disciplie Family Studies Geeral Studies Liberal Arts & Scieces Nursig Performig & Fie Arts Pharmacy Social Work Udecided Respodet Profile by Disciplie Populatio Profile by Disciplie 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Percetage Graduate Graduate

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 47 of 89 Disciplie Populatio N Populatio Respodets Respodets % % %N - % Agriculture & Natural Resources 192 3.85% 11 5.64% -1.79% Allied Health 50 1.00% 2 1.03% -0.02% Busiess 1,183 23.74% 6 3.08% 20.66% Cotiuig Studies 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00% Educatio 657 13.18% 39 20.00% -6.82% Egieerig / Computer Sciece 538 10.80% 34 17.44% -6.64% Family Studies 68 1.36% 8 4.10% -2.74% Geeral Studies 0 0.00% 1 0.51% -0.51% Liberal Arts & Scieces 1,634 32.79% 85 43.59% -10.80% Nursig 94 1.89% 3 1.54% 0.35% Performig & Fie Arts 111 2.23% 3 1.54% 0.69% Pharmacy 60 1.20% 1 0.51% 0.69% Social Work 396 7.95% 0 0.00% 7.95% Udecided 0 0.00% 2 1.03% -1.03% Total: 4,983 100.00% 195 100.00% 0.00% Graduate Graduate

Page 48 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 5.1.3 Respodet Profile for Graduate by Age This table shows a breakdow of survey respodets by age; both the umber of respodets () ad the percetage of the total umber of respodets represeted by each age group are displayed. Age Respodets Respodets % Uder 18 0 0.00% 18-22 7 3.59% 23-30 107 54.87% 31-45 61 31.28% 46-65 20 10.26% Over 65 0 0.00% Total: 195 100.00% 5.1.4 Populatio ad Respodet Profiles for Graduate by Sex The table below shows a breakdow of survey respodets by sex, based o user resposes to the demographic questios ad the demographic data provided by istitutios i the olie Represetativeess sectio*. The umber ad percetage for each sex are give for the geeral populatio ad for survey respodets. *Note: Participatig istitutios were ot required to complete the Represetativeess sectio. Whe populatio data is missig or icomplete, it is because this data was ot provided. Sex Populatio N Populatio % Respodets Respodets % Male 1,909 46.95% 86 44.10% Female 2,157 53.05% 109 55.90% Total: 4,066 100.00% 195 100.00% Graduate Graduate

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 49 of 89 5.2 Core Questios Summary for Graduate This radar chart shows aggregate results for the core survey questios. Each axis represets oe questio. A code to idetify each questio is displayed at the outer poit of each axis. While questios for each dimesio of library service quality are scattered radomly throughout the survey, o this chart they are grouped ito sectios: Affect of Service, Library as Place, ad Iformatio Cotrol. O each axis, respodets' miimum, desired, ad perceived levels of service quality are plotted, ad the resultig "gaps " betwee the three levels (represetig service adequacy or service superiority) are shaded i blue, yellow, gree, ad red. The two followig tables show mea scores ad stadard deviatios for each questio, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) AS-7 AS-6 AS-5 Affect of Service AS-8 AS-4 AS-9 AS-3 IC-1 AS-2 IC-2 AS-1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IC-3 LP-5 IC-4 LP-4 Iformatio Cotrol IC-5 IC-6 LP-2 LP-3 Library as Place IC-7 IC-8 LP-1 Perceived Less Tha Miimum Perceived Greater Tha Miimum Perceived Less Tha Desired Perceived Greater Tha Desired Graduate Graduate

Page 50 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries ID Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service AS-1 Employees who istill cofidece i users 5.87 7.71 6.62 0.74-1.09 180 AS-2 Givig users idividual attetio 6.06 7.57 6.77 0.71-0.80 190 AS-3 Employees who are cosistetly courteous 6.66 8.14 7.43 0.77-0.71 192 AS-4 Readiess to respod to users' questios 6.80 8.07 7.41 0.61-0.66 186 AS-5 Employees who have the kowledge to aswer 6.81 8.05 7.19 0.38-0.86 185 user questios AS-6 Employees who deal with users i a carig 6.48 8.09 7.12 0.64-0.97 181 fashio AS-7 Employees who uderstad the eeds of their 6.75 8.25 7.15 0.41-1.10 182 users AS-8 Willigess to help users 6.66 8.04 7.39 0.73-0.65 181 AS-9 Depedability i hadlig users' service problems 6.79 8.11 7.06 0.27-1.05 174 Iformatio Cotrol IC-1 Makig electroic resources accessible from my 6.97 8.51 6.97 0.00-1.54 191 home or office IC-2 A library Web site eablig me to locate 7.22 8.45 7.20-0.02-1.25 194 iformatio o my ow IC-3 The prited library materials I eed for my work 6.99 8.33 6.81-0.19-1.52 194 IC-4 The electroic iformatio resources I eed 7.11 8.48 7.09-0.03-1.39 193 IC-5 Moder equipmet that lets me easily access 6.98 8.37 7.27 0.29-1.09 193 eeded iformatio IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to fid 6.95 8.39 7.05 0.10-1.34 192 thigs o my ow IC-7 Makig iformatio easily accessible for 6.98 8.43 7.29 0.31-1.13 188 idepedet use IC-8 Prit ad/or electroic joural collectios I 7.34 8.59 6.99-0.35-1.59 191 require for my work Library as Place LP-1 Library space that ispires study ad learig 6.41 7.85 6.81 0.40-1.03 189 LP-2 Quiet space for idividual activities 6.38 7.86 6.75 0.37-1.11 187 LP-3 A comfortable ad ivitig locatio 6.30 7.81 7.20 0.90-0.61 188 LP-4 A getaway for study, learig, or research 6.30 7.89 7.10 0.80-0.79 178 LP-5 Commuity space for group learig ad group 5.38 6.88 6.63 1.25-0.25 154 study Overall: 6.67 8.11 7.07 0.40-1.04 195 Graduate Graduate

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 51 of 89 ID Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service AS-1 Employees who istill cofidece i users 1.71 1.52 1.72 1.62 1.70 180 AS-2 Givig users idividual attetio 1.81 1.64 1.81 1.80 1.90 190 AS-3 Employees who are cosistetly courteous 1.83 1.31 1.64 2.04 1.71 192 AS-4 Readiess to respod to users' questios 1.61 1.27 1.53 1.63 1.61 186 AS-5 Employees who have the kowledge to aswer 1.58 1.38 1.74 1.91 1.81 185 user questios AS-6 Employees who deal with users i a carig 1.73 1.14 1.68 1.93 1.76 181 fashio AS-7 Employees who uderstad the eeds of their 1.59 1.02 1.62 1.78 1.72 182 users AS-8 Willigess to help users 1.50 1.23 1.45 1.55 1.49 181 AS-9 Depedability i hadlig users' service problems 1.54 1.19 1.75 2.11 1.99 174 Iformatio Cotrol IC-1 Makig electroic resources accessible from my 1.67 0.95 1.89 2.10 1.96 191 home or office IC-2 A library Web site eablig me to locate 1.45 1.04 1.70 1.91 1.83 194 iformatio o my ow IC-3 The prited library materials I eed for my work 1.45 1.18 1.63 1.96 1.76 194 IC-4 The electroic iformatio resources I eed 1.55 0.96 1.50 2.01 1.70 193 IC-5 Moder equipmet that lets me easily access 1.62 1.07 1.49 1.79 1.51 193 eeded iformatio IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to fid 1.49 1.05 1.47 1.66 1.58 192 thigs o my ow IC-7 Makig iformatio easily accessible for 1.43 0.97 1.50 1.69 1.54 188 idepedet use IC-8 Prit ad/or electroic joural collectios I 1.45 1.03 1.75 2.15 1.95 191 require for my work Library as Place LP-1 Library space that ispires study ad learig 1.86 1.47 1.74 2.24 2.16 189 LP-2 Quiet space for idividual activities 1.93 1.55 1.82 2.43 2.20 187 LP-3 A comfortable ad ivitig locatio 1.78 1.43 1.63 2.01 1.86 188 LP-4 A getaway for study, learig, or research 1.83 1.39 1.31 1.86 1.49 178 LP-5 Commuity space for group learig ad group 2.08 2.15 1.62 2.02 2.19 154 study Overall: 1.19 0.81 1.15 1.25 1.16 195 Graduate Graduate

Page 52 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 5.3 Core Questio Dimesios Summary for Graduate O the chart below, scores for each dimesio of library service quality have bee plotted graphically. The exterior bars represet the rage of miimum to desired mea scores for each dimesio. The iterior bars represet the rage of miimum to perceived mea scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimesio of library service quality. 9 8 7 6 5 4 Affect of Service Iformatio Cotrol Library as Place Overall Dimesio Rage of Miimum to Desired Rage of Miimum to Perceived ("Adequacy Gap") Graduate Graduate

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 53 of 89 The followig table displays mea scores for each dimesio of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+ survey, where is the umber of respodets for each particular dimesio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) A complete listig of the survey questios ad their dimesios ca be foud i Appedix A. Dimesio Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service 6.54 8.00 7.14 0.61-0.86 194 Iformatio Cotrol 7.07 8.45 7.08 0.01-1.37 195 Library as Place 6.20 7.70 6.90 0.71-0.80 194 Overall: 6.67 8.11 7.07 0.40-1.04 195 The followig table displays stadard deviatio for each dimesio of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+ survey, where is the umber of respodets for each particular dimesio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) A complete listig of the survey questios ad their dimesios ca be foud i Appedix A. Dimesio Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service 1.33 0.97 1.36 1.42 1.38 194 Iformatio Cotrol 1.22 0.75 1.25 1.40 1.28 195 Library as Place 1.57 1.25 1.31 1.75 1.59 194 Overall: 1.19 0.81 1.15 1.25 1.16 195 Graduate Graduate

Page 54 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 5.4 Local Questios Summary for Graduate This table shows mea scores for each of the local questios added by the idividual library or cosortium, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Availability of olie help whe usig my library's electroic resources 6.34 8.01 6.65 0.31-1.37 175 Library orietatios / istructio sessios 5.41 6.89 6.63 1.22-0.25 161 Ready access to computers / Iteret / software 7.05 8.24 7.32 0.28-0.92 192 Access to photocopyig ad pritig facilities 7.04 8.39 6.47-0.56-1.92 190 Coveiet service hours 6.95 8.38 7.37 0.42-1.01 194 This table displays stadard deviatios for each of the local questios added by the idividual library or cosortium, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Availability of olie help whe usig my library's electroic resources 1.80 1.38 1.83 2.01 2.02 Library orietatios / istructio sessios 1.93 2.03 1.86 1.90 2.16 161 Ready access to computers / Iteret / software 1.65 1.29 1.72 2.07 1.90 192 Access to photocopyig ad pritig facilities 1.49 1.00 1.95 2.35 2.04 190 Coveiet service hours 1.47 0.94 1.76 2.21 1.96 194 175 Graduate Graduate

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 55 of 89 5.5 Geeral Satisfactio Questios Summary for Graduate This table displays the mea score ad stadard deviatio for each of the geeral satisfactio questios: Satisfactio with Treatmet, Satisfactio with Support, ad Satisfactio with Overall Quality of Service, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. These scores are calculated from resposes to the geeral satisfactio questios o the LibQUAL+ survey, i which respodets rated their levels of geeral satisfactio o a scale from 1-9. Satisfactio Questio I geeral, I am satisfied with the way i which I am treated at the library. 7.40 1.71 195 I geeral, I am satisfied with library support for my learig, research, ad/or teachig eeds. 7.09 1.71 195 How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 7.26 1.42 195 5.6 Iformatio Literacy Outcomes Questios Summary for Graduate This table displays the mea score ad stadard deviatio for each of the iformatio literacy outcomes questios, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. These scores are calculated from resposes to the iformatio literacy outcomes questios o the LibQUAL+ survey, i which respodets rated their levels of geeral satisfactio o a scale from 1-9 with 1 beig "strogly disagree" ad 9 represetig "strogly agree". Iformatio Literacy Outcomes Questios The library helps me stay abreast of developmets i my field(s) of iterest. 6.48 1.91 195 The library aids my advacemet i my academic disciplie. 7.18 1.58 195 The library eables me to be more efficiet i my academic pursuits. 7.18 1.62 195 The library helps me distiguish betwee trustworthy ad utrustworthy iformatio. 5.62 1.86 195 The library provides me with the iformatio skills I eed i my work or study. 6.61 1.75 195 Graduate Graduate

Page 56 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 5.7 Library Use Summary for Graduate 80 This chart shows a graphic represetatio of library use (both o the premises ad electroically), as well as use of olibrary iformatio gateways such as Yahoo ad Google. Bars represet the frequecy with which respodets report usig these resources: Daily, Weekly, Mothly, Quarterly, or Never. The table below the chart displays the umber ad percetage of respodets who selected each optio. 70 60 Percetage 50 40 30 20 How ofte do you use resources o library premises? How ofte do you access library resources through a library Web page? How ofte do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or o-library gateways for iformatio? 10 0 Daily Weekly Mothly Quarterly Never Frequecy Daily Weekly Mothly Quarterly Never / % How ofte do you use resources o library premises? 44 22.56% 86 44.10% 50 25.64% 13 6.67% 2 1.03% 195 100.00% How ofte do you access library resources through a library Web page? 79 40.72% 89 45.88% 21 10.82% 4 2.06% 1 0.52% 194 100.00% How ofte do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or o-library gateways for iformatio? 137 70.62% 37 19.07% 8 4.12% 3 1.55% 9 4.64% 194 100.00% Graduate Graduate

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 57 of 89 6 Faculty Summary 6.1 Demographic Summary for Faculty 6.1.1 Populatio ad Respodet Profiles for Faculty by Stadard Disciplie The chart ad table below show a breakdow of survey respodets by disciplie, based o user resposes to the demographic questios ad the demographic data provided by istitutios i the olie Represetativeess sectio*. This sectio shows survey respodets broke dow based o the LibQUAL+ stadard disciplie categories. The chart maps percetage of respodets for each disciplie i red. Populatio percetages for each disciplie are mapped i blue. The table shows the umber ad percetage for each disciplie, for the geeral populatio (N) ad for survey respodets (). Agriculture / Evirometal Studies Architecture Busiess Commuicatios / Jouralism Educatio Egieerig / Computer Sciece Geeral Studies Disciplie Health Scieces Humaities Law Military / Naval Sciece Other Performig & Fie Arts Sciece / Math Social Scieces / Psychology Udecided Respodet Profile by Disciplie Populatio Profile by Disciplie 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Percetage Faculty Faculty

Page 58 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Disciplie Populatio N Populatio Respodets Respodets % % %N - % Agriculture / Evirometal Studies 57 6.44% 6 6.25% 0.19% Architecture 18 2.03% 1 1.04% 0.99% Busiess 79 8.93% 4 4.17% 4.76% Commuicatios / Jouralism 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00% Educatio 50 5.65% 17 17.71% -12.06% Egieerig / Computer Sciece 92 10.40% 5 5.21% 5.19% Geeral Studies 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00% Health Scieces 17 1.92% 5 5.21% -3.29% Humaities 427 48.25% 51 53.13% -4.88% Law 20 2.26% 1 1.04% 1.22% Military / Naval Sciece 30 3.39% 1 1.04% 2.35% Other 37 4.18% 1 1.04% 3.14% Performig & Fie Arts 58 6.55% 4 4.17% 2.39% Sciece / Math 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00% Social Scieces / Psychology 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00% Udecided 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00% Total: 885 100.00% 96 100.00% 0.00% Faculty Faculty

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 59 of 89 6.1.2 Populatio ad Respodet Profiles for Faculty by Customized Disciplie The chart ad table below show a breakdow of survey respodets by disciplie, based o user resposes to the demographic questios ad the demographic data provided by istitutios i the olie Represetativeess sectio*. This sectio shows survey respodets broke dow based o the customized disciplie categories supplied by the participatig library. The chart maps percetage of respodets for each disciplie i red. Populatio percetages for each disciplie are mapped i blue. The table shows the umber ad percetage for each disciplie, for the geeral populatio (N) ad for survey respodets (). Agriculture & Natural Resources Allied Health Busiess Cotiuig Studies Educatio Egieerig / Computer Sciece Disciplie Family Studies Geeral Studies Liberal Arts & Scieces Nursig Performig & Fie Arts Pharmacy Social Work Udecided Respodet Profile by Disciplie Populatio Profile by Disciplie 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Percetage Faculty Faculty

Page 60 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Disciplie Populatio N Populatio Respodets Respodets % % %N - % Agriculture & Natural Resources 57 6.44% 6 6.25% 0.19% Allied Health 18 2.03% 1 1.04% 0.99% Busiess 79 8.93% 4 4.17% 4.76% Cotiuig Studies 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00% Educatio 50 5.65% 17 17.71% -12.06% Egieerig / Computer Sciece 92 10.40% 5 5.21% 5.19% Family Studies 17 1.92% 5 5.21% -3.29% Geeral Studies 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00% Liberal Arts & Scieces 427 48.25% 51 53.13% -4.88% Nursig 20 2.26% 1 1.04% 1.22% Performig & Fie Arts 58 6.55% 4 4.17% 2.39% Pharmacy 30 3.39% 1 1.04% 2.35% Social Work 37 4.18% 1 1.04% 3.14% Udecided 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0.00% Total: 885 100.00% 96 100.00% 0.00% Faculty Faculty

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 61 of 89 6.1.3 Respodet Profile for Faculty by Age This table shows a breakdow of survey respodets by age; both the umber of respodets () ad the percetage of the total umber of respodets represeted by each age group are displayed. Age Respodets Respodets % Uder 18 0 0.00% 18-22 0 0.00% 23-30 4 4.17% 31-45 29 30.21% 46-65 55 57.29% Over 65 8 8.33% Total: 96 100.00% 6.1.4 Populatio ad Respodet Profiles for Faculty by Sex The table below shows a breakdow of survey respodets by sex, based o user resposes to the demographic questios ad the demographic data provided by istitutios i the olie Represetativeess sectio*. The umber ad percetage for each sex are give for the geeral populatio ad for survey respodets. *Note: Participatig istitutios were ot required to complete the Represetativeess sectio. Whe populatio data is missig or icomplete, it is because this data was ot provided. Sex Populatio N Populatio % Respodets Respodets % Male 1,203 70.56% 54 56.25% Female 502 29.44% 42 43.75% Total: 1,705 100.00% 96 100.00% Faculty Faculty

Page 62 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 6.2 Core Questios Summary for Faculty This radar chart shows aggregate results for the core survey questios. Each axis represets oe questio. A code to idetify each questio is displayed at the outer poit of each axis. While questios for each dimesio of library service quality are scattered radomly throughout the survey, o this chart they are grouped ito sectios: Affect of Service, Library as Place, ad Iformatio Cotrol. O each axis, respodets' miimum, desired, ad perceived levels of service quality are plotted, ad the resultig "gaps " betwee the three levels (represetig service adequacy or service superiority) are shaded i blue, yellow, gree, ad red. The two followig tables show mea scores ad stadard deviatios for each questio, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) AS-7 AS-6 AS-5 Affect of Service AS-8 AS-4 AS-9 AS-3 IC-1 AS-2 IC-2 AS-1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IC-3 LP-5 IC-4 LP-4 Iformatio Cotrol IC-5 IC-6 LP-2 LP-3 Library as Place IC-7 IC-8 LP-1 Perceived Less Tha Miimum Perceived Greater Tha Miimum Perceived Less Tha Desired Perceived Greater Tha Desired Faculty Faculty

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 63 of 89 ID Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service AS-1 Employees who istill cofidece i users 5.99 7.82 6.72 0.73-1.10 89 AS-2 Givig users idividual attetio 6.41 7.74 7.21 0.80-0.53 91 AS-3 Employees who are cosistetly courteous 7.06 8.21 7.58 0.52-0.63 95 AS-4 Readiess to respod to users' questios 6.89 8.03 7.46 0.56-0.57 94 AS-5 Employees who have the kowledge to aswer 7.02 8.15 7.46 0.44-0.68 95 user questios AS-6 Employees who deal with users i a carig 6.77 8.04 7.42 0.65-0.63 91 fashio AS-7 Employees who uderstad the eeds of their 6.76 7.99 7.05 0.29-0.94 93 users AS-8 Willigess to help users 6.78 8.03 7.47 0.68-0.57 92 AS-9 Depedability i hadlig users' service problems 6.99 8.08 7.25 0.26-0.84 85 Iformatio Cotrol IC-1 Makig electroic resources accessible from my 7.23 8.68 6.80-0.43-1.88 95 home or office IC-2 A library Web site eablig me to locate 7.31 8.64 6.83-0.48-1.80 96 iformatio o my ow IC-3 The prited library materials I eed for my work 7.03 8.15 6.68-0.35-1.47 92 IC-4 The electroic iformatio resources I eed 6.96 8.40 6.84-0.12-1.56 95 IC-5 Moder equipmet that lets me easily access 6.90 8.16 7.13 0.23-1.03 92 eeded iformatio IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to fid 6.99 8.26 6.86-0.13-1.39 94 thigs o my ow IC-7 Makig iformatio easily accessible for 6.92 8.21 7.19 0.27-1.02 90 idepedet use IC-8 Prit ad/or electroic joural collectios I 7.18 8.60 6.65-0.53-1.95 94 require for my work Library as Place LP-1 Library space that ispires study ad learig 6.14 7.59 7.09 0.95-0.50 92 LP-2 Quiet space for idividual activities 6.24 7.32 7.26 1.02-0.06 85 LP-3 A comfortable ad ivitig locatio 6.26 7.55 7.41 1.14-0.14 91 LP-4 A getaway for study, learig, or research 5.94 7.36 6.81 0.87-0.55 83 LP-5 Commuity space for group learig ad group 4.65 5.95 6.14 1.49 0.19 63 study Overall: 6.70 7.99 7.07 0.37-0.92 96 Faculty Faculty

Page 64 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries ID Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service AS-1 Employees who istill cofidece i users 1.77 1.60 1.95 2.22 2.13 89 AS-2 Givig users idividual attetio 1.73 1.55 1.53 1.57 1.59 91 AS-3 Employees who are cosistetly courteous 1.71 1.30 1.71 1.84 1.82 95 AS-4 Readiess to respod to users' questios 1.69 1.35 1.62 1.98 1.91 94 AS-5 Employees who have the kowledge to aswer 1.54 1.28 1.47 1.56 1.60 95 user questios AS-6 Employees who deal with users i a carig 1.71 1.35 1.61 1.83 1.75 91 fashio AS-7 Employees who uderstad the eeds of their 1.77 1.47 1.80 2.08 1.97 93 users AS-8 Willigess to help users 1.93 1.49 1.63 1.80 1.65 92 AS-9 Depedability i hadlig users' service problems 1.55 1.30 1.81 1.83 1.81 85 Iformatio Cotrol IC-1 Makig electroic resources accessible from my 1.40 0.66 1.99 2.47 2.14 95 home or office IC-2 A library Web site eablig me to locate 1.51 0.71 1.75 2.11 1.78 96 iformatio o my ow IC-3 The prited library materials I eed for my work 1.45 1.30 1.68 2.08 1.95 92 IC-4 The electroic iformatio resources I eed 1.42 0.94 1.62 1.88 1.75 95 IC-5 Moder equipmet that lets me easily access 1.59 1.15 1.51 1.96 1.61 92 eeded iformatio IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to fid 1.45 1.03 1.46 1.61 1.56 94 thigs o my ow IC-7 Makig iformatio easily accessible for 1.62 1.05 1.33 1.62 1.36 90 idepedet use IC-8 Prit ad/or electroic joural collectios I 1.55 0.92 1.85 2.24 2.15 94 require for my work Library as Place LP-1 Library space that ispires study ad learig 2.03 1.81 1.53 2.08 1.95 92 LP-2 Quiet space for idividual activities 2.02 1.82 1.33 1.77 1.79 85 LP-3 A comfortable ad ivitig locatio 1.98 1.75 1.24 2.00 1.83 91 LP-4 A getaway for study, learig, or research 2.23 1.97 1.80 2.24 2.27 83 LP-5 Commuity space for group learig ad group 2.52 2.43 1.75 2.08 2.28 63 study Overall: 1.29 0.90 1.25 1.43 1.30 96 Faculty Faculty

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 65 of 89 6.3 Core Questio Dimesios Summary for Faculty O the chart below, scores for each dimesio of library service quality have bee plotted graphically. The exterior bars represet the rage of miimum to desired mea scores for each dimesio. The iterior bars represet the rage of miimum to perceived mea scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimesio of library service quality. 9 8 7 6 5 4 Affect of Service Iformatio Cotrol Library as Place Overall Dimesio Rage of Miimum to Desired Rage of Miimum to Perceived ("Adequacy Gap") Faculty Faculty

Page 66 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries The followig table displays mea scores for each dimesio of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+ survey, where is the umber of respodets for each particular dimesio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) A complete listig of the survey questios ad their dimesios ca be foud i Appedix A. Dimesio Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service 6.73 8.00 7.29 0.56-0.70 96 Iformatio Cotrol 7.07 8.40 6.86-0.21-1.54 96 Library as Place 5.97 7.21 7.00 1.03-0.21 95 Overall: 6.70 7.99 7.07 0.37-0.92 96 The followig table displays stadard deviatio for each dimesio of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+ survey, where is the umber of respodets for each particular dimesio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) A complete listig of the survey questios ad their dimesios ca be foud i Appedix A. Dimesio Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service 1.53 1.21 1.46 1.61 1.53 96 Iformatio Cotrol 1.17 0.64 1.31 1.58 1.37 96 Library as Place 1.84 1.65 1.31 1.80 1.71 95 Overall: 1.29 0.90 1.25 1.43 1.30 96 Faculty Faculty

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 67 of 89 6.4 Local Questios Summary for Faculty This table shows mea scores for each of the local questios added by the idividual library or cosortium, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Availability of olie help whe usig my library's electroic resources 6.12 7.74 6.09-0.02-1.65 85 Library orietatios / istructio sessios 5.35 6.68 6.66 1.30-0.03 79 Ready access to computers / Iteret / software 6.72 7.89 7.11 0.39-0.78 82 Access to photocopyig ad pritig facilities 6.70 8.06 6.17-0.53-1.89 88 Coveiet service hours 6.65 8.03 7.58 0.93-0.45 95 This table displays stadard deviatios for each of the local questios added by the idividual library or cosortium, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Availability of olie help whe usig my library's electroic resources 1.87 1.48 1.91 2.25 1.90 Library orietatios / istructio sessios 2.14 1.99 2.07 2.17 2.17 79 Ready access to computers / Iteret / software 1.79 1.48 1.60 1.84 1.63 82 Access to photocopyig ad pritig facilities 1.54 1.24 1.97 2.08 2.26 88 Coveiet service hours 1.84 1.41 1.26 2.06 1.84 95 85 Faculty Faculty

Page 68 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 6.5 Geeral Satisfactio Questios Summary for Faculty This table displays the mea score ad stadard deviatio for each of the geeral satisfactio questios: Satisfactio with Treatmet, Satisfactio with Support, ad Satisfactio with Overall Quality of Service, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. These scores are calculated from resposes to the geeral satisfactio questios o the LibQUAL+ survey, i which respodets rated their levels of geeral satisfactio o a scale from 1-9. Satisfactio Questio I geeral, I am satisfied with the way i which I am treated at the library. 7.41 1.79 96 I geeral, I am satisfied with library support for my learig, research, ad/or teachig eeds. 6.67 2.15 96 How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 7.00 1.74 96 6.6 Iformatio Literacy Outcomes Questios Summary for Faculty This table displays the mea score ad stadard deviatio for each of the iformatio literacy outcomes questios, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. These scores are calculated from resposes to the iformatio literacy outcomes questios o the LibQUAL+ survey, i which respodets rated their levels of geeral satisfactio o a scale from 1-9 with 1 beig "strogly disagree" ad 9 represetig "strogly agree". Iformatio Literacy Outcomes Questios The library helps me stay abreast of developmets i my field(s) of iterest. 6.21 2.22 96 The library aids my advacemet i my academic disciplie. 6.65 1.89 96 The library eables me to be more efficiet i my academic pursuits. 6.75 1.90 96 The library helps me distiguish betwee trustworthy ad utrustworthy iformatio. 5.25 2.07 96 The library provides me with the iformatio skills I eed i my work or study. 6.05 1.86 96 Faculty Faculty

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 69 of 89 6.7 Library Use Summary for Faculty 80 This chart shows a graphic represetatio of library use (both o the premises ad electroically), as well as use of olibrary iformatio gateways such as Yahoo ad Google. Bars represet the frequecy with which respodets report usig these resources: Daily, Weekly, Mothly, Quarterly, or Never. The table below the chart displays the umber ad percetage of respodets who selected each optio. 70 60 Percetage 50 40 30 20 How ofte do you use resources o library premises? How ofte do you access library resources through a library Web page? How ofte do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or o-library gateways for iformatio? 10 0 Daily Weekly Mothly Quarterly Never Frequecy Daily Weekly Mothly Quarterly Never / % How ofte do you use resources o library premises? 4 4.17% 36 37.50% 38 39.58% 17 17.71% 1 1.04% 96 100.00% How ofte do you access library resources through a library Web page? 39 40.63% 40 41.67% 11 11.46% 6 6.25% 0 0.00% 96 100.00% How ofte do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or o-library gateways for iformatio? 75 78.13% 15 15.63% 3 3.13% 1 1.04% 2 2.08% 96 100.00% Faculty Faculty

Page 70 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 7 Library Staff Summary 7.1 Demographic Summary for Library Staff 7.1.1 Respodet Profile for Library Staff by Age This table shows a breakdow of survey respodets by age; both the umber of respodets () ad the percetage of the total umber of respodets represeted by each age group are displayed. Age Respodets Respodets % Uder 18 0 0.00% 18-22 1 20.00% 23-30 1 20.00% 31-45 1 20.00% 46-65 2 40.00% Over 65 0 0.00% Total: 5 100.00% 7.1.2 Respodet Profile for Library Staff by Sex The table below shows a breakdow of survey respodets by sex, based o user resposes to the demographic questios ad the demographic data provided by istitutios i the olie Represetativeess sectio*. The umber ad percetage for each sex are give for the geeral populatio ad for survey respodets. *Note: Participatig istitutios were ot required to complete the Represetativeess sectio. Whe populatio data is missig or icomplete, it is because this data was ot provided. Sex Respodets Respodets % Male 3 60.00% Female 2 40.00% Total: 5 100.00% Library Staff Library Staff

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 71 of 89 7.2 Core Questios Summary for Library Staff This radar chart shows aggregate results for the core survey questios. Each axis represets oe questio. A code to idetify each questio is displayed at the outer poit of each axis. While questios for each dimesio of library service quality are scattered radomly throughout the survey, o this chart they are grouped ito sectios: Affect of Service, Library as Place, ad Iformatio Cotrol. O each axis, respodets' miimum, desired, ad perceived levels of service quality are plotted, ad the resultig "gaps " betwee the three levels (represetig service adequacy or service superiority) are shaded i blue, yellow, gree, ad red. The two followig tables show mea scores ad stadard deviatios for each questio, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) AS-7 AS-6 AS-5 Affect of Service AS-8 AS-4 AS-9 AS-3 IC-1 AS-2 IC-2 AS-1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IC-3 LP-5 IC-4 LP-4 Iformatio Cotrol IC-5 IC-6 LP-2 LP-3 Library as Place IC-7 IC-8 LP-1 Perceived Less Tha Miimum Perceived Greater Tha Miimum Perceived Less Tha Desired Perceived Greater Tha Desired Library Staff Library Staff

Page 72 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries ID Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service AS-1 Employees who istill cofidece i users 7.00 8.40 7.80 0.80-0.60 5 AS-2 Givig users idividual attetio 7.00 8.20 7.80 0.80-0.40 5 AS-3 Employees who are cosistetly courteous 7.75 8.50 8.50 0.75 0.00 4 AS-4 Readiess to respod to users' questios 7.20 8.20 8.40 1.20 0.20 5 AS-5 Employees who have the kowledge to aswer 6.80 8.60 8.20 1.40-0.40 5 user questios AS-6 Employees who deal with users i a carig 7.40 8.40 8.40 1.00 0.00 5 fashio AS-7 Employees who uderstad the eeds of their 7.00 8.50 8.50 1.50 0.00 4 users AS-8 Willigess to help users 7.40 8.40 8.40 1.00 0.00 5 AS-9 Depedability i hadlig users' service problems 6.60 8.40 8.20 1.60-0.20 5 Iformatio Cotrol IC-1 Makig electroic resources accessible from my 5.80 7.80 5.80 0.00-2.00 5 home or office IC-2 A library Web site eablig me to locate 6.80 8.60 5.00-1.80-3.60 5 iformatio o my ow IC-3 The prited library materials I eed for my work 7.25 8.25 7.25 0.00-1.00 4 IC-4 The electroic iformatio resources I eed 7.20 8.60 8.00 0.80-0.60 5 IC-5 Moder equipmet that lets me easily access 6.80 8.60 8.00 1.20-0.60 5 eeded iformatio IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to fid 6.00 8.00 7.25 1.25-0.75 4 thigs o my ow IC-7 Makig iformatio easily accessible for 6.25 8.25 7.25 1.00-1.00 4 idepedet use IC-8 Prit ad/or electroic joural collectios I 6.40 8.20 8.00 1.60-0.20 5 require for my work Library as Place LP-1 Library space that ispires study ad learig 5.00 7.60 6.20 1.20-1.40 5 LP-2 Quiet space for idividual activities 6.20 7.40 6.80 0.60-0.60 5 LP-3 A comfortable ad ivitig locatio 6.40 8.60 7.20 0.80-1.40 5 LP-4 A getaway for study, learig, or research 6.60 8.20 8.00 1.40-0.20 5 LP-5 Commuity space for group learig ad group 5.50 8.00 7.25 1.75-0.75 4 study Overall: 6.68 8.27 7.53 0.86-0.74 5 Library Staff Library Staff

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 73 of 89 ID Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service AS-1 Employees who istill cofidece i users 2.74 0.89 1.30 2.28 0.89 5 AS-2 Givig users idividual attetio 2.00 0.84 0.84 1.64 0.89 5 AS-3 Employees who are cosistetly courteous 1.89 0.58 0.58 2.22 0.00 4 AS-4 Readiess to respod to users' questios 1.92 0.84 0.55 2.17 0.84 5 AS-5 Employees who have the kowledge to aswer 2.28 0.55 0.84 2.61 0.55 5 user questios AS-6 Employees who deal with users i a carig 1.67 0.89 0.55 1.87 0.71 5 fashio AS-7 Employees who uderstad the eeds of their 1.83 0.58 0.58 1.73 0.00 4 users AS-8 Willigess to help users 2.07 0.55 0.55 2.35 0.71 5 AS-9 Depedability i hadlig users' service problems 1.82 0.55 0.45 1.52 0.45 5 Iformatio Cotrol IC-1 Makig electroic resources accessible from my 2.86 1.10 2.77 4.74 3.54 5 home or office IC-2 A library Web site eablig me to locate 2.28 0.55 3.24 4.71 3.65 5 iformatio o my ow IC-3 The prited library materials I eed for my work 1.50 0.96 0.96 2.16 1.41 4 IC-4 The electroic iformatio resources I eed 1.48 0.55 0.71 0.84 0.89 5 IC-5 Moder equipmet that lets me easily access 1.48 0.55 0.71 1.30 0.89 5 eeded iformatio IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to fid 2.45 1.41 1.26 1.50 1.71 4 thigs o my ow IC-7 Makig iformatio easily accessible for 2.75 0.96 1.71 3.16 1.83 4 idepedet use IC-8 Prit ad/or electroic joural collectios I 2.19 0.84 0.71 2.07 0.84 5 require for my work Library as Place LP-1 Library space that ispires study ad learig 2.83 1.67 1.92 2.39 2.70 5 LP-2 Quiet space for idividual activities 1.64 1.82 1.48 0.89 1.34 5 LP-3 A comfortable ad ivitig locatio 2.07 0.55 1.64 2.59 1.52 5 LP-4 A getaway for study, learig, or research 1.82 1.10 0.71 1.34 0.84 5 LP-5 Commuity space for group learig ad group 2.65 1.41 1.26 1.50 1.71 4 study Overall: 1.68 0.71 0.38 1.55 0.50 5 Library Staff Library Staff

Page 74 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 7.3 Core Questio Dimesios Summary for Library Staff O the chart below, scores for each dimesio of library service quality have bee plotted graphically. The exterior bars represet the rage of miimum to desired mea scores for each dimesio. The iterior bars represet the rage of miimum to perceived mea scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimesio of library service quality. 9 8 7 6 5 4 Affect of Service Iformatio Cotrol Library as Place Overall Dimesio Rage of Miimum to Desired Rage of Miimum to Perceived ("Adequacy Gap") Library Staff Library Staff

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 75 of 89 The followig table displays mea scores for each dimesio of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+ survey, where is the umber of respodets for each particular dimesio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) A complete listig of the survey questios ad their dimesios ca be foud i Appedix A. Dimesio Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service 7.17 8.42 8.22 1.05-0.20 5 Iformatio Cotrol 6.57 8.32 7.08 0.51-1.24 5 Library as Place 5.93 7.89 7.07 1.14-0.82 5 Overall: 6.68 8.27 7.53 0.86-0.74 5 The followig table displays stadard deviatio for each dimesio of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+ survey, where is the umber of respodets for each particular dimesio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) A complete listig of the survey questios ad their dimesios ca be foud i Appedix A. Dimesio Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service 1.55 0.60 0.60 1.59 0.45 5 Iformatio Cotrol 1.82 0.74 0.42 2.07 1.07 5 Library as Place 1.96 1.14 1.12 1.38 1.05 5 Overall: 1.68 0.71 0.38 1.55 0.50 5 Library Staff Library Staff

Page 76 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 7.4 Local Questios Summary for Library Staff This table shows mea scores for each of the local questios added by the idividual library or cosortium, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Availability of olie help whe usig my library's electroic resources 6.00 8.25 6.50 0.50-1.75 4 Library orietatios / istructio sessios 5.67 8.33 7.67 2.00-0.67 3 Ready access to computers / Iteret / software 7.60 8.40 7.60 0.00-0.80 5 Access to photocopyig ad pritig facilities 6.20 8.00 7.60 1.40-0.40 5 Coveiet service hours 6.20 8.20 8.20 2.00 0.00 5 This table displays stadard deviatios for each of the local questios added by the idividual library or cosortium, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Availability of olie help whe usig my library's electroic resources 2.45 0.96 1.29 2.52 1.26 Library orietatios / istructio sessios 4.16 1.15 1.53 2.65 2.08 3 Ready access to computers / Iteret / software 1.14 0.89 0.89 0.71 1.10 5 Access to photocopyig ad pritig facilities 1.64 1.00 0.89 1.14 1.14 5 Coveiet service hours 2.28 0.84 0.84 2.55 0.71 5 4 Library Staff Library Staff

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 77 of 89 7.5 Geeral Satisfactio Questios Summary for Library Staff This table displays the mea score ad stadard deviatio for each of the geeral satisfactio questios: Satisfactio with Treatmet, Satisfactio with Support, ad Satisfactio with Overall Quality of Service, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. These scores are calculated from resposes to the geeral satisfactio questios o the LibQUAL+ survey, i which respodets rated their levels of geeral satisfactio o a scale from 1-9. Satisfactio Questio I geeral, I am satisfied with the way i which I am treated at the library. 8.00 0.71 5 I geeral, I am satisfied with library support for my learig, research, ad/or teachig eeds. 7.80 1.10 5 How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 8.20 0.84 5 7.6 Iformatio Literacy Outcomes Questios Summary for Library Staff This table displays the mea score ad stadard deviatio for each of the iformatio literacy outcomes questios, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. These scores are calculated from resposes to the iformatio literacy outcomes questios o the LibQUAL+ survey, i which respodets rated their levels of geeral satisfactio o a scale from 1-9 with 1 beig "strogly disagree" ad 9 represetig "strogly agree". Iformatio Literacy Outcomes Questios The library helps me stay abreast of developmets i my field(s) of iterest. 7.20 1.30 5 The library aids my advacemet i my academic disciplie. 8.00 1.22 5 The library eables me to be more efficiet i my academic pursuits. 8.00 1.22 5 The library helps me distiguish betwee trustworthy ad utrustworthy iformatio. 7.80 0.84 5 The library provides me with the iformatio skills I eed i my work or study. 8.00 0.71 5 Library Staff Library Staff

Page 78 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 7.7 Library Use Summary for Library Staff 80 This chart shows a graphic represetatio of library use (both o the premises ad electroically), as well as use of olibrary iformatio gateways such as Yahoo ad Google. Bars represet the frequecy with which respodets report usig these resources: Daily, Weekly, Mothly, Quarterly, or Never. The table below the chart displays the umber ad percetage of respodets who selected each optio. 70 60 Percetage 50 40 30 20 How ofte do you use resources o library premises? How ofte do you access library resources through a library Web page? How ofte do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or o-library gateways for iformatio? 10 0 Daily Weekly Mothly Quarterly Never Frequecy Daily Weekly Mothly Quarterly Never / % How ofte do you use resources o library premises? 4 80.00% 0 0.00% 1 20.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 5 100.00% How ofte do you access library resources through a library Web page? 3 60.00% 1 20.00% 1 20.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 5 100.00% How ofte do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or o-library gateways for iformatio? 4 80.00% 1 20.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 5 100.00% Library Staff Library Staff

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 79 of 89 8 Staff Summary 8.1 Demographic Summary for Staff 8.1.1 Respodet Profile for Staff by Age This table shows a breakdow of survey respodets by age; both the umber of respodets () ad the percetage of the total umber of respodets represeted by each age group are displayed. Age Respodets Respodets % Uder 18 0 0.00% 18-22 0 0.00% 23-30 1 14.29% 31-45 4 57.14% 46-65 2 28.57% Over 65 0 0.00% Total: 7 100.00% 8.1.2 Respodet Profile for Staff by Sex The table below shows a breakdow of survey respodets by sex, based o user resposes to the demographic questios ad the demographic data provided by istitutios i the olie Represetativeess sectio*. The umber ad percetage for each sex are give for the geeral populatio ad for survey respodets. *Note: Participatig istitutios were ot required to complete the Represetativeess sectio. Whe populatio data is missig or icomplete, it is because this data was ot provided. Sex Respodets Respodets % Male 1 14.29% Female 6 85.71% Total: 7 100.00% Staff Staff

Page 80 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 8.2 Core Questios Summary for Staff This radar chart shows aggregate results for the core survey questios. Each axis represets oe questio. A code to idetify each questio is displayed at the outer poit of each axis. While questios for each dimesio of library service quality are scattered radomly throughout the survey, o this chart they are grouped ito sectios: Affect of Service, Library as Place, ad Iformatio Cotrol. O each axis, respodets' miimum, desired, ad perceived levels of service quality are plotted, ad the resultig "gaps " betwee the three levels (represetig service adequacy or service superiority) are shaded i blue, yellow, gree, ad red. The two followig tables show mea scores ad stadard deviatios for each questio, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) AS-7 AS-6 AS-5 Affect of Service AS-8 AS-4 AS-9 AS-3 IC-1 AS-2 IC-2 AS-1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IC-3 LP-5 IC-4 LP-4 Iformatio Cotrol IC-5 IC-6 LP-2 LP-3 Library as Place IC-7 IC-8 LP-1 Perceived Less Tha Miimum Perceived Greater Tha Miimum Perceived Less Tha Desired Perceived Greater Tha Desired Staff Staff

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 81 of 89 ID Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service AS-1 Employees who istill cofidece i users 6.43 7.71 6.43 0.00-1.29 7 AS-2 Givig users idividual attetio 6.86 8.43 7.29 0.43-1.14 7 AS-3 Employees who are cosistetly courteous 8.00 8.86 7.29-0.71-1.57 7 AS-4 Readiess to respod to users' questios 7.71 8.86 7.57-0.14-1.29 7 AS-5 Employees who have the kowledge to aswer 8.14 8.86 7.43-0.71-1.43 7 user questios AS-6 Employees who deal with users i a carig 7.43 8.71 7.43 0.00-1.29 7 fashio AS-7 Employees who uderstad the eeds of their 7.43 8.71 7.29-0.14-1.43 7 users AS-8 Willigess to help users 8.14 8.57 7.86-0.29-0.71 7 AS-9 Depedability i hadlig users' service problems 8.00 8.71 8.00 0.00-0.71 7 Iformatio Cotrol IC-1 Makig electroic resources accessible from my 7.17 9.00 6.83-0.33-2.17 6 home or office IC-2 A library Web site eablig me to locate 7.14 8.86 6.86-0.29-2.00 7 iformatio o my ow IC-3 The prited library materials I eed for my work 7.29 8.57 7.29 0.00-1.29 7 IC-4 The electroic iformatio resources I eed 7.57 8.29 7.00-0.57-1.29 7 IC-5 Moder equipmet that lets me easily access 7.71 8.71 8.14 0.43-0.57 7 eeded iformatio IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to fid 7.57 8.71 6.71-0.86-2.00 7 thigs o my ow IC-7 Makig iformatio easily accessible for 8.00 8.86 7.14-0.86-1.71 7 idepedet use IC-8 Prit ad/or electroic joural collectios I 7.86 8.86 7.00-0.86-1.86 7 require for my work Library as Place LP-1 Library space that ispires study ad learig 6.86 8.57 7.14 0.29-1.43 7 LP-2 Quiet space for idividual activities 7.14 7.86 7.71 0.57-0.14 7 LP-3 A comfortable ad ivitig locatio 7.57 8.57 8.00 0.43-0.57 7 LP-4 A getaway for study, learig, or research 7.71 8.57 7.29-0.43-1.29 7 LP-5 Commuity space for group learig ad group 7.33 8.00 7.33 0.00-0.67 6 study Overall: 7.51 8.58 7.32-0.18-1.26 7 Staff Staff

Page 82 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries ID Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service AS-1 Employees who istill cofidece i users 0.98 1.11 0.98 0.82 1.60 7 AS-2 Givig users idividual attetio 1.77 0.79 1.60 0.79 1.21 7 AS-3 Employees who are cosistetly courteous 1.00 0.38 1.70 1.60 1.81 7 AS-4 Readiess to respod to users' questios 1.11 0.38 1.13 0.69 0.95 7 AS-5 Employees who have the kowledge to aswer 1.07 0.38 1.27 1.60 1.40 7 user questios AS-6 Employees who deal with users i a carig 1.13 0.49 1.40 1.00 1.11 7 fashio AS-7 Employees who uderstad the eeds of their 0.98 0.49 0.95 0.69 1.13 7 users AS-8 Willigess to help users 1.21 0.53 0.90 0.95 0.76 7 AS-9 Depedability i hadlig users' service problems 1.29 0.76 0.82 1.29 1.11 7 Iformatio Cotrol IC-1 Makig electroic resources accessible from my 2.04 0.00 1.33 1.51 1.33 6 home or office IC-2 A library Web site eablig me to locate 1.46 0.38 1.07 1.11 1.15 7 iformatio o my ow IC-3 The prited library materials I eed for my work 1.11 0.79 0.76 1.00 1.11 7 IC-4 The electroic iformatio resources I eed 1.13 0.95 0.82 1.51 1.38 7 IC-5 Moder equipmet that lets me easily access 1.25 0.49 0.90 1.27 0.98 7 eeded iformatio IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to fid 1.13 0.49 1.11 1.68 1.41 7 thigs o my ow IC-7 Makig iformatio easily accessible for 1.29 0.38 1.07 1.46 1.11 7 idepedet use IC-8 Prit ad/or electroic joural collectios I 1.07 0.38 1.00 1.21 1.07 7 require for my work Library as Place LP-1 Library space that ispires study ad learig 1.57 0.79 1.46 0.49 1.51 7 LP-2 Quiet space for idividual activities 1.57 1.68 0.95 1.51 1.57 7 LP-3 A comfortable ad ivitig locatio 1.13 0.79 0.82 1.40 1.40 7 LP-4 A getaway for study, learig, or research 1.70 0.53 0.95 1.72 0.95 7 LP-5 Commuity space for group learig ad group 1.37 1.26 1.37 1.67 2.25 6 study Overall: 0.84 0.37 0.74 0.53 0.82 7 Staff Staff

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 83 of 89 8.3 Core Questio Dimesios Summary for Staff O the chart below, scores for each dimesio of library service quality have bee plotted graphically. The exterior bars represet the rage of miimum to desired mea scores for each dimesio. The iterior bars represet the rage of miimum to perceived mea scores (the service adequacy gap) for each dimesio of library service quality. 9 8 7 6 5 4 Affect of Service Iformatio Cotrol Library as Place Overall Dimesio Rage of Miimum to Desired Rage of Miimum to Perceived ("Adequacy Gap") Staff Staff

Page 84 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries The followig table displays mea scores for each dimesio of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+ survey, where is the umber of respodets for each particular dimesio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) A complete listig of the survey questios ad their dimesios ca be foud i Appedix A. Dimesio Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service 7.57 8.60 7.40-0.17-1.21 7 Iformatio Cotrol 7.54 8.71 7.13-0.41-1.59 7 Library as Place 7.36 8.34 7.52 0.16-0.82 7 Overall: 7.51 8.58 7.32-0.18-1.26 7 The followig table displays stadard deviatio for each dimesio of library service quality measured by the LibQUAL+ survey, where is the umber of respodets for each particular dimesio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) A complete listig of the survey questios ad their dimesios ca be foud i Appedix A. Dimesio Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Affect of Service 0.91 0.32 1.05 0.83 1.11 7 Iformatio Cotrol 0.88 0.34 0.72 0.92 0.87 7 Library as Place 0.96 0.71 0.75 0.28 0.83 7 Overall: 0.84 0.37 0.74 0.53 0.82 7 Staff Staff

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 85 of 89 8.4 Local Questios Summary for Staff This table shows mea scores for each of the local questios added by the idividual library or cosortium, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Availability of olie help whe usig my library's electroic resources 7.29 8.57 7.29 0.00-1.29 7 Library orietatios / istructio sessios 7.00 8.14 7.43 0.43-0.71 7 Ready access to computers / Iteret / software 7.71 8.43 8.00 0.29-0.43 7 Access to photocopyig ad pritig facilities 7.67 8.83 8.00 0.33-0.83 6 Coveiet service hours 6.71 7.57 8.29 1.57 0.71 7 This table displays stadard deviatios for each of the local questios added by the idividual library or cosortium, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. (For a more detailed explaatio of the headigs, see the Itroductio to this otebook.) Questio Text Miimum Desired Perceived Adequacy Superiority Availability of olie help whe usig my library's electroic resources 1.38 0.79 0.95 1.29 0.95 Library orietatios / istructio sessios 1.53 0.90 0.98 1.72 1.38 7 Ready access to computers / Iteret / software 0.95 0.98 0.82 1.25 1.51 7 Access to photocopyig ad pritig facilities 1.03 0.41 0.89 1.03 0.75 6 Coveiet service hours 2.87 2.99 0.76 3.15 3.35 7 7 Staff Staff

Page 86 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 8.5 Geeral Satisfactio Questios Summary for Staff This table displays the mea score ad stadard deviatio for each of the geeral satisfactio questios: Satisfactio with Treatmet, Satisfactio with Support, ad Satisfactio with Overall Quality of Service, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. These scores are calculated from resposes to the geeral satisfactio questios o the LibQUAL+ survey, i which respodets rated their levels of geeral satisfactio o a scale from 1-9. Satisfactio Questio I geeral, I am satisfied with the way i which I am treated at the library. 7.43 1.62 7 I geeral, I am satisfied with library support for my learig, research, ad/or teachig eeds. 7.29 1.25 7 How would you rate the overall quality of the service provided by the library? 7.29 0.49 7 8.6 Iformatio Literacy Outcomes Questios Summary for Staff This table displays the mea score ad stadard deviatio for each of the iformatio literacy outcomes questios, where is the umber of respodets for each particular questio. These scores are calculated from resposes to the iformatio literacy outcomes questios o the LibQUAL+ survey, i which respodets rated their levels of geeral satisfactio o a scale from 1-9 with 1 beig "strogly disagree" ad 9 represetig "strogly agree". Iformatio Literacy Outcomes Questios The library helps me stay abreast of developmets i my field(s) of iterest. 6.43 1.27 7 The library aids my advacemet i my academic disciplie. 6.43 1.27 7 The library eables me to be more efficiet i my academic pursuits. 6.86 1.07 7 The library helps me distiguish betwee trustworthy ad utrustworthy iformatio. 6.43 1.62 7 The library provides me with the iformatio skills I eed i my work or study. 6.86 1.35 7 Staff Staff

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 87 of 89 8.7 Library Use Summary for Staff 100 This chart shows a graphic represetatio of library use (both o the premises ad electroically), as well as use of olibrary iformatio gateways such as Yahoo ad Google. Bars represet the frequecy with which respodets report usig these resources: Daily, Weekly, Mothly, Quarterly, or Never. The table below the chart displays the umber ad percetage of respodets who selected each optio. 80 Percetage 60 40 How ofte do you use resources o library premises? How ofte do you access library resources through a library Web page? How ofte do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or o-library gateways for iformatio? 20 0 Daily Weekly Mothly Quarterly Never Frequecy Daily Weekly Mothly Quarterly Never / % How ofte do you use resources o library premises? 0 0.00% 3 42.86% 2 28.57% 1 14.29% 1 14.29% 7 100.00% How ofte do you access library resources through a library Web page? 0 0.00% 6 85.71% 0 0.00% 1 14.29% 0 0.00% 7 100.00% How ofte do you use Yahoo(TM), Google(TM), or o-library gateways for iformatio? 7 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 7 100.00% Staff Staff

Page 88 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries 9 Appedix A: LibQUAL+ Dimesios LibQUAL+ measures dimesios of perceived library quality - that is, each survey questio is part of a broader category (a dimesio), ad scores withi those categories are aalyzed i order to derive more geeral iformatio about library users' perceptios of service. These dimesios were first based o the origial SERVQUAL survey istrumet (the framework for the LibQUAL+ survey tool; for more iformatio o the origis of LibQUAL+, go to <http://www.libqual.org/publicatios/>). The LibQUAL+ survey dimesios have evolved with each iteratio, becomig more refied ad focused for applicatio to the library cotext. The 2004 iteratio of the LibQUAL+ survey has three dimesios. Dimesios for each iteratio of the LibQUAL+ survey are outlied below. LibQUAL+ 2000 Dimesios The 2000 iteratio of the LibQUAL+ survey, which had 41 questios, measured eight separate dimesios: Assurace (the kowledge ad courtesy of employees, ad their ability to covey trust ad cofidece) Empathy (carig, idividual attetio) Library as Place (library as a sactuary/have or site for learig ad cotemplatio) Reliability (ability to perform the promised service depedably ad accurately) Resposiveess (willigess to help customers ad provide prompt service) Tagibles (appearace of physical facilities, equipmet, persoel ad commuicatios materials) Istructios/Custom Items Self-Reliace LibQUAL+ 2001 Dimesios After careful aalysis of the results from the 2000 survey, the dimesios were further refied to re-groud the SERVQUAL items i the library cotext. Four sub-dimesios resulted for the 2001 iteratio: Service Affect (ie items, such as willigess to help users ) Library as Place (five items, such as a have for quiet ad solitude ) Persoal Cotrol (six items, such as website eablig me to locate iformatio o my ow ), ad Iformatio Access (five items, such as comprehesive prit collectios ad coveiet busiess hours ) LibQUAL+ 2002 ad 2003 Dimesios For the 2002 iteratio of the LibQUAL+ survey, the dimesios were oce agai refied based o aalysis of the previous year's results. While the four dimesios were retaied, their titles were chaged slightly to more clearly represet the questios ad data. The same four dimesios were also used o the 2003 survey: Access to Iformatio Affect of Service Library as Place Persoal Cotrol All All

LibQUAL+ 2004 Survey Results - Uiversity of Coecticut Libraries Page 89 of 89 LibQUAL+ 2004 Dimesios After the 2003 survey was completed, factor ad reliability aalyses o the resultig data revealed that two of the dimesios measured by the survey - Access to Iformatio ad Persoal Cotrol - had collapsed ito oe. The followig three dimesios were measured by the 2004 istrumet: Library as Place, Affect of Service, ad Iformatio Cotrol. I additio, three core questios were elimiated from the 2004 versio of the survey, leavig 22 core items o the fial survey istrumet. The list below displays the dimesios used to preset the results i the 2004 otebooks, alog with the questios that relate to each dimesio. (Note: the questios below are those used i the College ad Uiversity implemetatio of the survey, versio.) Affect of Service [AS-1] Employees who istill cofidece i users [AS-2] Givig users idividual attetio [AS-3] Employees who are cosistetly courteous [AS-4] Readiess to respod to users questios [AS-5] Employees who have the kowledge to aswer user questios [AS-6] Employees who deal with users i a carig fashio [AS-7] Employees who uderstad the eeds of their users [AS-8] Willigess to help users [AS-9] Depedability i hadlig users service problems Iformatio Cotrol [IC-1] Makig electroic resources accessible from my home or office [IC-2] A library Web site eablig me to locate iformatio o my ow [IC-3] The prited library materials I eed for my work [IC-4] The electroic iformatio resources I eed [IC-5] Moder equipmet that lets me easily access eeded iformatio [IC-6] Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to fid thigs o my ow [IC-7] Makig iformatio easily accessible for idepedet use [IC-8] Prit ad/or electroic joural collectios I require for my work Library as Place [LP-1] Library space that ispires study ad learig [LP-2] Quiet space for idividual activities [LP-3] A comfortable ad ivitig locatio [LP-4] A getaway for study, learig or research [LP-5] Commuity space for group learig ad group study All All

All All

All All

Associatio of Research Libraries 21 Dupot Circle NW Suite 800 Washigto, DC 20036 Phoe 202-296-2296 Fax 202-872-0884 <http://www.libqual.org> Copyright 2004 Associatio of Research Libraries All All