LibQUAL Description

LibQUAL+ ™ (www.libqual.org) is an online, quality of service survey developed by the Association of Research Libraries and the Texas A&M Libraries. It uses 22 questions and a comment box to determine users' perceptions in three dimensions: Affect of Service, Information Control, and Library as Place. Each respondent rates each item on a 1 to 9 scale (9 being the highest) for three levels of service quality: minimum acceptable, perceived (or current), and desired (or maximum). The differences between these three scores are the “gaps”. The adequacy gap is the perceived-minimum, which indicates how well the library is meeting or exceeding the user’s minimum expectations. The superiority gap is the perceived-desired level of satisfaction, which indicates how close the library is coming to meeting or exceeding the user’s maximum desired level of satisfaction.

Survey Strategy

In consultation with the university’s Office of Assessment, we decided to do a sample of the whole (or census). In 2005, the undergraduate and graduate students were surveyed, followed in 2006 by the faculty and staff. The 2005 and 2006 surveys both ran during February for two weeks. This time was selected because it was a time when the survey population was settled in, undistracted by the intense array of social events that characterized the Fall, and not yet fatigued by mid-terms. This time period also avoided potential survey fatigue by preceding all other surveys planned by the Office of Assessment for the same population. It also provided the Library with an opportunity to promote itself to the entire target population via the survey notification and follow-up emails. 

Both the 2005 and 2006 surveys offered incentives to prospective respondents. In 2005, a 40GB iPod, gift cards to the RU bookstore, and free coffee for a semester at the Library coffee shop were given away. In 2006, a 60GB video iPod, two chances for dinner for two at a popular local restaurant, and free coffee for a semester at the Library coffee shop were awarded.

Respondents

Response rate by respondent group.

Notes: a Full-time and part-time Teaching & Research, Special Purpose, and Administrative/
Professional faculty. b Aggregated data from 2004-2007 for RU Peer institutions for which the data is available.

Survey response rate is an important and well-known factor. The larger the response rate, the more likely the data will accurately reflect the population from which it is drawn. Compared to our peer institutions, McConnell Library had a much higher response rate, at least three times that of our peers for all but the faculty group, which was only slightly lower.

Response representativeness by respondent group.

Just as important as response rate is how representative the respondents are of the target population. For example, a high response rate consisting mainly of faculty members would not be representative of the population of a large undergraduate teaching university. An examination of the table above shows that the RU respondent groups are proportional to the survey population as a whole, within 8%. The undergraduates are slightly underrepresented in the data (-8%), while the graduate students (+6%) and faculty are slightly overrepresented (+6% and +2% respectively). So we can say with some confidence that the survey data is reasonably representative of the RU faculty and students, certainly more so than our peers are of their undergraduate students and faculty.