Search

This column provides an overview of the newly updated Proficiencies for Assessment in Academic Libraries (approved June 2023) and outlines the steps and rationale for each phase of the revision process. It is our hope that you will not only apply and share these assessment proficiencies in your own organizations and practice but also consider how you might adapt the strategies for inclusivity and transparency that were used to update the Proficiencies in your own work such as strategic planning, updating or revising programs, or creating new services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This column discusses the benefits and limitations of continuous assessment by reporting on the authors' perspectives of ongoing assessment using examples from patron surveys designed to understand user experience in the physical library and to measure whether needs were met throughout the pandemic. This column will be helpful to anyone involved in assessment or who is interested in what factors to consider while carrying out ongoing assessment or using evidence-based data for decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article follows up on two previously published studies regarding the incorporation of student feedback amid the COVID-19 pandemic. It builds on the model of embracing user experience, focusing on how library employees and patrons felt about the health safety protocols in place during Fall 2021. Analyzing both surveys from employees and patrons, the findings indicated that both groups felt safe in the library. This article recommends that when library decision-makers are in doubt about policies and practices, they should consult with the groups directly affected, and demonstrates the importance of ensuring stakeholders feel heard and can contribute to decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article demonstrates how a public research university library responded to user needs following radical service changes during Fall 2020 and assesses whether the library met challenges resulting from COVID-19. The library reduced hours and occupancy and implemented a reservation system and new health safety guidelines with the goal of a safe environment. During Fall 2020, 540 survey respondents reported feeling their health was not at risk, suggesting the goal was accomplished. Additionally, users provided feedback about the altered landscape. This article will benefit administrators and user experience librarians who need to balance user preferences and administrative reality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study aims to examine if differences exist in undergraduate students' library use, perceptions and grade point average (GPA) among science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) and non-STEM disciplines. Design/methodology/approach: The current study used data from the 2018 student survey. Among 2,277 students who completed the survey (response rate = 8%), only undergraduate students (n = 1,265) were selected for this study because the current study aims to examine the differences between STEM and non-STEM undergraduate students. Findings: The findings from a Mann–Whitney U test revealed that STEM respondents perceived specific library resources (subject and course guide, library instructions and library workshops) as slightly less than non-STEM respondents. The results from ANOVA demonstrated that the mean scores in GPA for STEM respondents who never used online library, journals and databases were lower than respondents who used those library resources, regardless of STEM and non-STEM disciplines. Originality/value: Revisiting the data collected and analyzing specific user groups will be valuable to academic libraries because this study will provide academic librarians with a deeper understanding of specific user needs and perceptions of library resources and services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]