1. Devote appropriate funding to support the development of collections (as a proportion of total library budget).

1.1. Comparison with GA peer libraries of the % of total library expenditures devoted to materials acquisitions. The criterion for success is a % at or above the median for the peer group. Data will be collected and analyzed biennially.

2. Build and maintain book collections commensurate with UNC-GA peer institution libraries.

2.1. Comparison with GA peer libraries of the number of total volumes held per student. The criterion for success is volumes per student at least 75% of the mean for peer libraries. Data will be collected and analyzed biennially.

2.2. Comparison with GA peer libraries of the number of volumes added per student. The criterion for success is volumes added per student at or above the median for the peer group. Data will be collected and analyzed biennially.

3. Build and maintain periodical collections commensurate with UNC-GA peer institution libraries.

3.1. Comparison with GA peer libraries of the number of periodicals received per student. The criterion for success is periodicals received per student at or above the mean for the peer group. Data will be collected and analyzed biennially.

4. Build and maintain electronic resource collections commensurate with UNC-GA peer institution libraries.

4.1. Comparison with GA peer libraries of expenditures per student for electronic information resources. The criterion for success is expenditure per student at or above the median for the peer group. Data will be collected and analyzed biennially.

5. Maintain hours of operation commensurate with UNC-GA peer institution libraries in order to provide adequate access to UNCA students and faculty.

5.1. UNC Sophomore Survey – "Hours of Operation." The criterion for success is a percent responding favorably at or above the mean for the UNC system. Data will be collected and analyzed annually.

5.2. Graduating Senior Survey, B2 (Library) A – "Hours of Operation." The criterion for success is a percent responding good or excellent at or above the mean for the UNC system. Data will be collected and analyzed annually

5.3. Comparison with GA peer libraries of hours of public service availability for a typical week. The criterion for success is a number of hours at or above the median for peer libraries. Data will be collected and analyzed biennially.

Assessment Procedures (Outcomes)

Summary and conclusions of assessment results:

Ramsey Library continued to meet or exceed OUTCOME criteria for Goal 1, "Assessment Procedures"1-7 above (see Tables I, II, IV, V, and III, respectively). It should be emphasized that these indicators included student, faculty, and staff assessments of OVERALL library services, access to collections and databases, quality of library resources and access, and responsiveness – arguably the most significant attributes.

To achieve success in outcome measures for Goal I, the library has identified five strategies dealing with expenditure of the library’s budget, collection size and growth, expenditures on electronic resources, and hours of operation. Our approach in establishing "strategies" is the belief that our performance on these INPUTS has a direct relationship on the OUTCOMES identified under "Assessment Procedures." In fact, failure to maintain our position on these INPUTS vis-à-vis our peers will eventually lead to degradation of our performance on the OUTCOMES. In spite of the continued success as measured by OUTCOMES, we do note variation in results among several strategy (input) indicators.

Indicators related to collection size, growth, and expenditures present mixed messages. Ramsey Library exceeds strategy criterion 1.1 (Table IX). We have continued to devote a greater percentage of our overall budget to materials acquisitions than have our peers. However, we fail to meet strategy criteria 2.1, 2.2, and 3.1. Our collection is smaller per student than the median of our peers (Table X). This is likely inevitable given that our collection essentially dates from only the mid-1960’s whereas several among our peers boast of much older collections. In fact, this probably results in a better collection per volume given that the collection is far more current. Our falling below the medians for volumes ADDED (Table XI) and periodical subscriptions per student (Table XII) give reason for a bit more concern. However, when these inputs are considered in light of strategy criterion 4.1 (Table XII) it becomes apparent that Ramsey Library has opted to invest more heavily in electronic resources and less heavily in books and journals than our peers.

Indicators related to satisfaction with hours of operation are also somewhat mixed. In UNC Sophomore Surveys (strategy criterion 5.1, see Table VI) and UNC Graduating Senior Surveys (strategy criterion 5.2, see Table VII), UNCA students report satisfaction with library hours higher than the average for the UNC system. These results exceed, though not spectacularly, our target. (It should be noted that in the 1998 Senior Survey fewer than 80% NCSU students found their library hours of operation "excellent." The NCSU library is open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.). We do not meet out target for strategy criterion 5.3. As indicated in Table VIII, Ramsey Library is well below the median hours of operation for a typical week reported by our GA assigned peers. It should be noted that in spite of being "peer" institutions, most of those libraries are at purely residential liberal arts colleges relating somewhat differently to their students. In addition, it’s not clear what those libraries mean by being "open" (e.g., in some cases it might relate to a late study room, only). We take some comfort in noting that UNCA students are on average more satisfied with our hours of operation than are students at other UNC campuses.  TOP OF PAGE

Use of results to improve department.

Findings related to strategy criteria 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, and 4.1 have led to considerable discussion among the library faculty. The data reflects a long-standing belief that electronic resources provide a smaller academic library more "bang-for-the-buck" than does the same investment in traditional print materials. In addition to the putative cost-benefit of electronic resources, UNCA has greatly benefited over the past fifteen years by sharing our catalog with ASU and WCU with the concomitant outstanding document delivery service provided via ABC Express. In essence, UNCA students and faculty benefit from a book and journal collection many times that typically found at a four-year college library.

Nevertheless, these indicators point to the possibility of an over commitment to electronics. During fall semester 2000, the library will conduct a formal review of our commitments to electronic products in relation to book and journal purchases. In addition, budget planning for 2000-20001 will recommend the transfer of at least $30,000 from operating lines to the materials acquisitions budget (5600).

On another front, even though the library met strategy criteria 5.1 and 5.2 in relation to hours of operation, our position on criterion 5.3 causes concern. We have received no recommendations to extend hours and a proposal last year to open prior to 8 AM on class days was received with indifference by the Library and Media Services Committee. In light of our hours of operation compared to UNC-GA peers, however, we will conduct a user survey on this issue during fall 2000.  TOP OF PAGE

Enhance access to library resources through the use of established systems of classification and indexing, and the application of new technologies.  TOP OF PAGE

1. UNC Sophomore Survey – "Access to databases & collections." Graduating Senior Survey, B2 (Library) D – "Library services overall." The criterion for success is a percent responding favorably at or above the mean for the UNC system. Data will be collected and analyzed annually.
2. Graduating Senior Survey, B2 (Library) C – "Access to databases & collections." The criterion for success is a percent responding good or excellent at or above the mean for the UNC system. Data will be collected and analyzed annually.
3. Comparison with GA peer libraries of the three-year rolling average expenditures per student on computer hardware and software. The criterion for success is an average expenditure at or above the median for peer libraries. Data will be collected and analyzed biennially.
4. Comparison with GA peer libraries of circulation per student. The criterion for success is circulation per student at or above the median for the peer libraries. Data will be collected and analyzed biennially.
5. Comparison with GA peer libraries of interlibrary loans received per student. The criterion for success is ILL’s received per student at or above the median for peer libraries. Data will be collected and analyzed biennially.
6. Student, faculty, and staff suggestions to improve services or correct problems. The criterion for success is careful consideration of input and appropriate response as determined by the library faculty and the Faculty Library and Media Services Committee.  TOP OF PAGE

 

Summary and conclusions of assessment results:

For Goal 2, Ramsey Library met or exceeded assessment criteria for procedures 1, 2, 4, and 5 (Tables IV, V, XV, and XVI respectively). The library’s commitment to standard cataloging and classification schedules (Library of Congress), heavy investment in a state-of-the-art, web-accessible catalog (Innovative’s Millennium), an exemplary web site, and service innovations including online request for books and journals via ABC Express (the vast majority of ILL receipts) and online book renewal have resulted in high levels of user satisfaction as well as student use of our own and other collections well above that of the norm.

Technically (I suppose), we met the median for Expenditures on Hardware and Software Per Student (Procedure 3, Table XIV). It should be noted, however, that we do not have data to produce the three year rolling average called for in the criterion and that our $14 per student expenditure for 1998 (shared with the University of Puget Sound) does not compare well with the higher reported figures. These figures are highly variable from one year to the next and Ramsey Library expenditures for 1999 and 2000 are much higher.  TOP OF PAGE 

Use of results to improve department

In response to a student recommendation, Ramsey Library implemented online (Web) renewal of charged materials in the fall of 1999.

In response to a recommendation by the Library and Media Services Committee the library implemented a Web-based ILL request form during spring 1999. This was in addition to the already in-place Web request form for books from ASU and WCU via ABC Express and the implementation of Web request of journals via ABC Express in the fall of 1999.  TOP OF PAGE

Summary and conclusions of assessment results:

Ramsey Library meets or exceeds Assessment Plan criteria 1, 2, and 3 for Goal 3 (Tables XVII, XVIII, XVIX, respectively). Given our extensive investment in the Library Research course as well as all aspects of library instruction, we are extremely pleased to note that in 1998 81.4% of UNCA sophomores found their training to use the library good or excellent as compared to approximately 61% for the UNC average. The spread in 1997 was even greater: UNCA = 85.6% as compared to 63% for UNC. The library also compares UNCA student attendance at library instruction programs and reference questions asked per student to the medians for those indicators as reported by UNC-GA selected peer institutions.

We have not conducted focus groups among UNCA faculty to determine satisfaction with the outcomes of our instruction program (Assessment Plan criterion 4). This review is scheduled for fall 2000.

See also Ramsey Library Assessment of Library Research – 1998-99 (June 21, 1999) and Ramsey Library Report to the Academic Policies Committee on the Library Research Component of the General Education Requirements (August 1999).  TOP OF PAGE

Use of results to improve department:

Assessment of library instruction, and especially the Library Research course, is a near continuous effort. Highly collegial discussion among the library faculty focuses on what works, what doesn’t, and how we might change our offerings to better achieve the desired educational outcomes. During 1998-99, the library faculty evaluated student progress as well as input from course evaluation and the UNC system’s annual Sophomore Satisfaction Survey even while preparing our report on Library Research for the general education review.

Major actions resulting from assessment during 1998-99 include the following (see Ramsey Library Assessment of Library Research – 1998-99 (June 21, 1999) for justifications:

1. Perceptions of Administrative Offices Survey, perceived QUALITY of "Library-Media Services." The criterion for success is a percent responding good or excellent at or above the mean achieved by all UNCA offices. This survey is conducted every five years.
2. Perceptions of Administrative Offices Survey, perceived RESPONSIVENESS of "Library-Media Services." The criterion for success is a percent responding good or excellent at or above the mean achieved by all UNCA offices. This survey is conducted every five years.
3. Student, faculty, and staff suggestions to improve services or correct problems. The criterion for success is careful consideration of input and appropriate response as determined by the library faculty and the Faculty Library and Media Services Committee.  TOP OF PAGE

 

Summary and conclusions of assessment results:

Ramsey Library Media Services exceeds by a considerable margin Assessment Plan criteria 1 and 2 for Goal 4 (Table III). Assessment Plan 3 has been acted on as appropriate.

In response to a spring 2000 faculty suggestion, Ramsey Library is currently reviewing circulation policies for videocassettes. The likely recommendation will be to allow UNCA students to borrow most videos while maintaining a non-circulating collection to support in-class use by instructors. The Library and Media Services Committee will review this revision during fall 2000 prior to any implementation.  TOP OF PAGE

Summary and conclusions of assessment results:

Ramsey Library meets or exceeds (considerably for criteria 2 and 3) Assessment Plan criteria 1, 2, and 3 for Goal 5 (Tables XX and III, respectively).

Use of results to improve department:

Ramsey Library has been blessed with an outstanding, highly professional, and responsive staff. Their hard work, dedication, and total commitment to the UNCA mission have resulted in consistently high scores on the library’s outcome measures. We cannot, however, take this for granted.

Though unrelated to assessment results, I think it important to note that we are working to continually develop our staff and faculty. In addition to conference and workshop attendance, we are committed to applying the principles of a "learning organization" as expressed in Peter Senge’s The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of the Learning Organization as well as those of principled leadership espoused by Stephen Covey in his Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. To begin this process and more fully involve all staff and faculty in the planning and evaluation process we began monthly, 1-½ hour all-staff meetings during the spring of 2000. We are currently defining our organizational values. Next, we’ll move on to reassess our mission and goals before addressing annual objectives and assessment.  TOP OF PAGE

By ANY standard, Ramsey Library offers an attractive, welcoming environment that exceeds expectations of Goal 6. We have not conducted the assessment called for in Plan 1, above. This is planned for spring 2001.  TOP OF PAGE

During the past three years Ramsey Library has undergone significant reorganization:

• In October 1998, Media Services was moved out of the Public Services Division of the library where it had reported to the Associate University Librarian for Public Services (Ellie Marsh). From that time the Director of Media Services has reported to the University Librarian.
• In the summer of 1998 the library modified all reporting lines to reduce the number of supervisors and increase the number of personnel supervised by each individual to conform with UNC-GA "span of control" guidelines.
• During spring semester 2000 the technical support functions for distance learning (Greg Dillingham and John Myers) was transferred from Ramsey Media Services to the Computer Center.  TOP OF PAGE

Ramsey Library maintains key relationships with ALL UNCA academic departments in order to provide collections and services to support their teaching, research, and service missions. Ramsey Library also maintains close working relationships with the following UNCA units: Facilities Management to provide for the care of the facility; Human Resources for hiring, staff benefits, personnel records, etc.; the Business Office for cash deposits; the Budget Office; Accounts Payable; Purchasing; and Academic Affairs

Ramsey Library is also integrally involved with external agencies: the Western North Carolina Library Network (WCU, ASU, and UNCA); UNC Libraries Advisory Council; the Southeastern Library Network for catalog records and computer support services; and a plethora of commercial vendors for computer services, books, journals, electronic databases, etc.

All of these relationships are crucial to our effectiveness. TOP OF PAGE

• Implemented network access to the library catalog and electronic resources, fall 1998.
• User Education Librarian, Bryan Sinclair, initiated the very successful workshops@Ramsey series during the fall 1998 semester. These seminar-like presentations and discussions introduced the library’s many new electronic products to UNCA faculty and staff, and were keyed to meet the information needs and learning styles of this group. Although somewhat anticipated, we were particularly delighted to note that the informal format combined with the exploration of whole new classes of resources led to dialogue covering an extremely broad range of information and discipline-related topics.
• During 1998-99, Ramsey Library introduced networked access to the catalog, electronic resources, and the World Wide Web for public use. Over the year we went from 0 to 25 networked public workstations.
• In January 1999, the library extended access to its electronic resources to off-campus locations for members of the UNCA community. This was accomplished by purchasing web access management (WAM) software that provides the capability of limiting access to those who have valid ID’s.
• Ramsey Library offerings of electronic resources, both bibliographic and full-text, now rival those offered by medium-sized research collections. In 1997-98, Ramsey Library provided the campus remote access to the online catalog in addition to a few electronic databases accessible from within the library. During 1998-99 alone, the library added some 218 electronic resources. This amazingly large number is due to the windfall of titles provided free through the NC LIVE program in addition to selected products available via the Web and those paid for by the library. Several additions markedly enhance the research potential for students and faculty:

Arts & Humanities Citation Index
BIOSIS
CCH Tax Research Network
Compendex Web (includes Engineering Index)
GeoRef
GPO Access
The Grove Dictionary of Art Online
Historical Abstracts
Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe
Lexis-Nexis Congressional Universe
Lexis-Nexis Statistical Universe
MathSciNet (Mathematical Reviews, 1940-)
OED
OmniTax Online Library
Project Muse (the full-text of more than 40 Johns Hopkins Press journals)
Science Citation Index
Social Sciences Citation Index
Sociological Abstracts
Stat-USA

• Establishment of research seminars in support of faculty and staff use of library resources (e.g., "What Are You Working On?")
• Revision of the delivery of the Library Research component of the General Education requirements.
• Purchase with ASU and WCU, and beginning implementation of a new version ("Millennium") of our integrated library system that will provide improved functionality including electronic course reserves (fall 2000).  TOP OF PAGE

There are many more areas needing improvement than I’m about to enumerate, but I think it’s important that we focus on those core issues that will produce the greatest impact over the next few years. Here they are:

• Assessment – We need to become much more "client-centered." Like most libraries we’re pretty good about THINKING ABOUT what our customers want and need, and trying our best to satisfy those wants and needs. Also like most libraries, we’ve not been particularly good about ASKING. We’re going to get much better at that.
• Computer/network planning – We’ve done a VERY good job in a remarkably short time, thanks to the efforts, talent, and plain hard work of Robert Bland, Mark Stoffan, Araby Greene, and others. That’s not going to be enough. In very short order we have to come up with a way to manage our network that doesn’t drain staff resources as much as currently and allows for greater predictability over several years.
• Staff commitment to service – We’ve done pretty well here, but I think we have a way to go. We must ensure that concern for our customers drives every decision and each moment of our time. We’ve started working on this by involving everyone more completely in the planning and evaluation process with an early emphasis on establishing organizational values.  TOP OF PAGE

We have been and remain in pretty good shape. No library has enough money for books and journals, much less for electronic products and equipment. We will simply have to manage our available resources to provide the most information product for the dollar. We remain somewhat short of staff at the professional level. Obviously, with more staff we could provide improved services. I expect to be able to address this issue with enrollment increases and the expansion budget.

Inflation of the cost of information products (approximately 9% a year for books and journals combined, more like 15% a year for electronic products) in the face of relatively stable funding leads to an inevitable outcome. Fewer books, fewer journal, and/or fewer electronic resources. We will have to enhance our management of these dwindling resources to maximize return while lobbying GA for inflationary increases to library funding.  TOP OF PAGE

The above goals are current.

Table I

UNC Sophomore Surveys - 1997, 1998
Library Services Overall

Table II

UNC Graduating Senior Surveys – 1998, 1999
Library Services Overall

Table III

UNCA Perceptions of Administrative Offices Survey, 1995

Table IV

UNC Sophomore Surveys - 1997, 1998
Access to Databases & Collections

Table V

 UNC Graduating Senior Surveys – 1998, 1999
Access to Databases & Collections

Table VI

UNC Sophomore Surveys - 1997, 1998
Hours of Operation

Table VII

UNC Graduating Senior Surveys – 1998, 1999
Hours of Operation

Table VIII

 UNC-GA Peer Libraries, 1996
Public Service Hours

Table IX

UNC-GA Peer Libraries, 1998
Percent of Total Expenditures Devoted to Materials

Table X

UNC-GA Peer Libraries, 1998
Total Volumes Per Student

Table XI

UNC-GA Peer Institutions, 1998
Volumes Added Per Student

Table XII

UNC-GA Peer Institutions, 1998
Periodical Subscriptions Per Student

Table XIII

UNC-GA Peer Institutions, 1998
Electronic Resource Expenditures Per Student

Table XIV

UNC-GA Peer Institutions, 1998
Expenditures On Hardware and Software Per Student

Table XV

UNC-GA Peer Institutions, 1998
Circulation Per Student

Table XVI

UNC-GA Peer Institutions, 1998
ILLs Received Per Student (includes ABC Express)

Table XVII

UNC Sophomore Surveys - 1997, 1998
Training to Use the Library

Table XVIII

UNC GA Peer Institutions
Instructional Program Attendance per Student, 1998

Table XVIX

UNC GA Peer Institutions
Reference Transactions per Student, 1998

Table XX

UNC Graduating Senior Surveys – 1998, 1999
Staff Responsiveness