AVC LibraryFaculty Survey

Development and Quantitative ResultsDr. Scott Lee

Information Competency LibrarianAntelope Valley College

Fall, 2012

Survey Development• Fall, 2010– Library intern Marianne McNeese researched the surveying of

classroom faculty by academic libraries.– She collected example surveys and articles on their

development and use.– Questions from examples were put into a proposed survey.

Librarians, Carolyn Burrell and Van Rider provided feedback.– A preliminary survey was created and then given to Carolyn,

Van and Dr. Charlotte Forte’-Parnell, Dean of Instructional Resources and Extended Services (IRES) for additional feedback.

Survey DevelopmentSpring, 2011

Taking the feedback, a version of the survey was created in SurveyMonkey.

This version was shown to Carolyn, Van and Dean Forte’-Parnell for approval and additional feedback before being finalized.

A final version was built in SurveyMonkey.

Survey DevelopmentSpring, 2011

Scott, Van and Carolyn discussed the value of an incentive to attract participation by classroom faculty. A group of incentives was agreed upon to be given away as a raffle:$50 See’s Candies Gift Card would be awarded to the first name

chosen at random.$25 See’s Candies Gift Cards would be awarded to the next two

names chosen at random.These were paid for with funds from the Hingley Endowment.

Survey ImplementationFall, 2011

The survey was opened in October.Scott worked with Vicki Mathias to create posters and flyers to

announce and advertise the survey.

Survey ImplementationFall, 2011

Carolyn, Van and Scott attended Division Meetings to announce the survey.10/24 – Math/Science10/25 – Business, Counseling10/28 – Social & Behavioral, IRES, VAPA11/03 – Kinesiology11/08 – Language Arts, Technical Ed

An email announcement was sent on 11/22.

Survey ImplementationFall, 2011

The survey closed on 12/11.Winners were selected and notified by 12/17.Gift cards were dispersed later in December, after the

semester.

Survey AnalysisSpring, 2012

Survey data was downloaded from SurveyMonkey.The survey data was imported into Excel where it was:

Scrubbed to locate surveys that could not be used because they were too incomplete, not completed by faculty members, or other issues.

Reorganized and restructured so it could be imported into SPSS.

Survey AnalysisSpring, 2012

Survey data was imported into SPSS for analysis.The data was given appropriate labels and data-type categories so

it can be usefully analyzed.Data analysis techniques used were descriptive consisting of:

Frequencies – how often a piece of data occurs.Crosstabulations – how often two or more pieces of data appear

together.

Survey ResultsSurvey Sample

119 Completed SurveysThe Goal Was 100

Sample Size = 20% of AVC Faculty

Survey SampleSurvey Sample AVC*

Full-Time Faculty 55% 31%

Teaching at Lancaster

76% 76%

Teaching at Palmdale 24% 14%

Teaching Online 8% 8%

Average Years @ AVC

11 Years Data not Available

*Fall, 2011 Numbers

Survey SampleDiscipline n %

Math 10 7%

English 8 6%

Business 7 5%

Computer Applications

7 5%

Management 6 4%

Biology 5 4%

CIS 5 4%

Nursing 5 4%

Accounting 4 3%

History 4 3%

Top 10 Ranked by % of Survey

Survey SampleDivision AVC Survey

SampleDifference

BCSED 13% 25% 12%

Health Science 9% 12% 3%

IRES 1% 1% -

Language Arts 14% 12% -2%

MSE 18% 19% 1%

KAD 5% 4% -1%

SABS 10% 9% -1%

Technical Ed 13% 6% -7%

VAPA 15% 9% -6%

Student Services 2% 4% 2%

Survey SampleDivision AVC Survey

SampleDifference

BCSED 13% 25% 12%

Health Science 9% 12% 3%

IRES 1% 1% -

Language Arts 14% 12% -2%

MSE 18% 19% 1%

KAD 5% 4% -1%

SABS 10% 9% -1%

Technical Ed 13% 6% -7%

VAPA 15% 9% -6%

Student Services 2% 4% 2%

Divisions with greatest difference between college & survey.

Survey SampleInconsistencies with AVC

Overrepresents full-time faculty by 22%.Underrepresents Palmdale faculty by 10%.Overrepresents BCSED by 12%.Underrepresents Tech Ed. & VAPA by 6% and 7%.

ConclusionThis sample, while not perfect, is large enough and close

enough, demographically, to accurately represent AVC classroom faculty.

Survey Data – Use of the Library

How do faculty use the AVC Library?

Use of the LibraryDo Faculty Use the Library:

To Prepare for Classes48% - Regular or Occasional Use51% - Rare or No Use

For Personal Enrichment54% - Regular or Occasional Use45% - Rare or No Use

Occasional & Rare were the most chosen for each.

Use of the Library

63% - Integrate Research Assignments into Classes

70% - Create Assignments that Require Research

Use of the Library51% Never Assign Library Tutorials

14% Regularly Assign

68% Never Assign The Library Walking Tour9% Regularly Assign

.

Use of the LibraryDo faculty work with librarians to recommend purchases?

30% Regularly or Occasionally71% Rarely or Never

Never was the most selected at 42%.

74% do not know the collection development librarian for their discipline.

Use of the LibraryWhat Library resources do faculty actually use?

Books, 22%Databases, 21%*Textbook Reserves, 19%Reference, 10%

Electronic Reference Books (8%), Electronic Books & ILL (7%), Online Videos (5%)

*The Library implemented a new database discovery system in Fall of 2012, so this data could be different now.

Use of the LibraryWhat do faculty use the AVC Library website for?

EBSCOhost, 24%*Library Catalog, 22%Learn Library Hours, 21%Access Research Guides, 11%Learn Library Policies, 10%

Request ILL’s & Workshops (6%)

*EBSCOhost replaced by EBSCO Discovery Service (EDS) in Fall of 2012.

StudentsDo faculty encourage students to use the library and what do they

hear about the library from students?

StudentsDo faculty encourage students to use library resources?

Electronic Resources48% Regularly, 25% Occasionally, 16% Never

Print Resources42% Regularly, 32% Occasionally, 12% Never

Students“Students need the library to successfully complete my

classes.”61% Strongly Agree or Agree48% Disagree or Strongly Disagree

Most selected answer was Disagree at 41%.

“Library experience is important for students.”96% Strongly Agree or Agree4% Disagree or Strongly Disagree

Students“Students need the library to successfully complete my

classes.”Disciplines with most Strongly Agrees.

English (8), Management (4), Biology (3)Disciplines with most Strongly Disagrees.

Math (7), Computer Applications (5), Accounting (4)

StudentsWhat do instructors hear from students about the library?

Students complain about the services of the library.33% Rarely Hear This Complaint50% Never Hear This Complaint

Students complain about not getting the resources they need from the library.31% Rarely Hear This Complaint43% Never Hear This Complaint

Faculty OpinionsWhat do faculty think of the Library, its resources, and student

research skills?

Faculty Opinions91% call themselves advocates for the Library.

77% feel the Library has enough resources to support classes.

94% say that librarians have the knowledge & experience to help students in their disciplines.

Faculty Opinions65% rate the Library’s databases as Excellent or Good at

meeting students’ needs.14% Average, 1% Poor, 22% Unsure

38% rate the Library’s print books as Excellent or Good at meeting students’ needs.26% Average, 15% Poor, 21% Unsure

31% rate the Library’s e-books as Excellent or Good at meeting students’ needs.17% Average, 5% Poor, 46% Unsure

Faculty OpinionsStudent Research Skills

61% do not feel they can teach research skills to students on their own.

91% say librarians do a good job teaching research skills.48% believe that students are capable of using the Internet by

themselves to complete assignments.96% believe that Information Literacy (definition was provided)

is needed by successful students.

Research Methods Workshops

Who uses the workshops, who does not, and why?

RMW’s85% of faculty do not use workshops.

Who does use them:20% of Full-Time, 10% of Part-Time15% of Lancaster Faculty, 8% of Palmdale Faculty

RMW’sDisciplines Using the Most

Ranked by % for disciplines with multiple participantsPsychology, 100%Biology, 60%English, 40%Earth Science, 50%Marketing, 50%

RMW’sDisciplines Using the Least

Ranked by % for disciplines with multiple participantsOffice Technology, 33%Computer Information Systems, 20%Management, 17%Business, 14%Computer Applications, 14%

RMW’sPercent Using by Division

30%, Business and Math/Science20%, Language Arts15%, Social & Behavioral5%, Student Services0%, Health Science, Kinesiology, Tech Ed, VPA

RMW’sWhy do faculty use RMW’s?

Library Faculty Expertise (39%)Have Seen Student Improvement (32%)Prefer Having Librarians Do It (25%)Recommendation From Another Instructor (4%)

RMW’sOf faculty who do not use RMW’s, the most

selected reasons were.Not Aware of Them (20%)No Research Assignments (18%)Research Not Needed For Discipline (16%)No Time (14%)Students Should Already Know How (10%)Tutorials Are Enough (6%)They Can Teach Students Themselves (4%)Students Have Enough Research Skills (4%)

RMW’sWhat Library teaching resources do faculty combine with

RMW’s?EBSCOhost Tutorial (13%)*Research Tutorial (10%)Catalog Tutorial (7%) Journal Tutorial (5%)Library Walking Tour (3%)

*This tutorial no longer available. A new version for EDS is being developed for Spring, 2013.

Future AnalysisWhat is there left to do with our data?

Future AnalysisDiscuss recommendations for changes in Library processes or

policies based on data.

Run additional crosstabs as needed.

Analyze qualitative data (comments sections).

Conduct inferential analysis (assistance from Office of Institutional Research would be needed).

Use survey data to develop protocols for future focus groups.

Compare to data from other libraries (if available).

AVC Library FacultyCarolyn Burrell, M.L.S.

cburrell@avc.edu

Scott Lee, M.S.L.S., Ed.D.slee@avc.edu

Van Rider, M.L.S.vrider@avc.edu

http://www.avc.edu/studentservices/library/