Abstract
This paper shares the Georgia Southern University Library’s experience of LibQUAL in user-centered and service-oriented academic learning environment. On the basis of reviewing the library literature on LibQUAL, this study presents the process of data analysis and data visualization for academic library assessments. Using the 2016 LibQUAL Survey at the Georgia Southern University Library as a sample, this study illustrates basic methods of analyzing and interpreting the LibQUAL Survey Raw Data and User Response Raw Data saved in Excel files. Also mentioned in this study are other common statistical tools and a set of general procedures, including data analysis, data validation, data migration, data mining, and data visualization, for academic library assessments to identify patron needs and satisfactory factors.
References
Association of Research Libraries. (n.d.). What is LibQUAL+®? Retrieved from https://www.libqual.org/about/about_lq/general_info
Association of Research Libraries. (2016). LibQUAL+ 2016 survey comments: Georgia Southern University. Retrieved from https://www.libqual.org/repository/MCZSCPA
Association of Research Libraries. (2016). LibQUAL+ 2016 survey: Georgia Southern University. Retrieved from https://www.libqual.org/documents/LibQual/notebooks/13098.pdf
Association of Research Libraries. (2016). LibQUAL+ 2016 survey raw data: Georgia Southern University. Retrieved from https://www.libqual.org/repository/MRDZSCPA
Association of Research Libraries. (2016). LibQUAL+ 2016 survey report: Georgia
Southern University. Retrieved from https://www.libqual.org/documents/LibQual/notebooks/13098.pdf
Boyce, C. (2017). Measuring perceptual (in) congruence between information service providers and users. College & Research Libraries, 78(3), 359-381. doi:10.5860/crl.78.3.359
Chen, H. M. (2017). Information visualization. Chicago, IL: ALA TechSource.
Cook, C., & Heath, F. (2001). Users' perceptions of library service quality: A LibQUAL+ qualitative study. Library Trends, 49(4), 548-584.
Dennis, M., Greenwood, J., & Watson, A. (2013). LibQUAL revisited: Further analysis of qualitative and quantitative survey results at the University of Mississippi. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 39(6), 512-516. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2013.08.009
Detlor, B., & Ball, K. (2015). Getting more value from the LibQUAL (R) survey: The merits of qualitative analysis and importance-satisfaction matrices in assessing library patron
comments. College & Research Libraries, 76(6), 796-810. doi:10.5860/crl.76.6.796
Fagan, J. C. (2014). The dimensions of library service quality: A confirmatory factor analysis of the LibQUAL instrument. Library & Information Science Research, 36(1), 36-48. doi:10.1016/j.lisr.2013.10.003
Georgia Southern University Library (GSUL). (2016). 2016 LibQUAL+ Survey. Statesboro, GA: GSUL.
Greenwood, J. T., Watson, A. P., & Dennis, M. (2011). Ten years of LibQual: A study of qualitative and quantitative survey results at the University of Mississippi 2001–2010. The Journal of Academic Librarianship,37(4), 312-318.
Helgesen, Ø., & Nesset, E. (2011). Does LibQUAL TM account for student loyalty to a university college library? Quality Assurance in Education, 19(4), 413-440. doi:10.1108/09684881111170104
Hossain, M. J. (2016). Determining the key dimensions for evaluating service quality and satisfaction in academic libraries. International Information & Library Review, 48(3), 176-189. doi:10.1080/10572317.2016.1205350
Ju, A. (2015). Data analytical tool comparison: Excel, SPSS and SAS. Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/data-analytics-tool-comparison-excel-spss-sas-angela-ju
Kalb, S. (2010). Benchmarking on a national scale: the 2007 LibQUAL ® Canada experience. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 11(2), 161-171. doi:10.1108/14678041011064070
Killick, S., Weerden, A. V., & Weerden, F. V. (2014). Using LibQUAL ® to identify commonalities in customer satisfaction: the secret to success? Performance Measurement and Metrics, 15(1/2), 23-31. doi:10.1108/pmm-04-2014-0012
Lakos, A., & Phipps, S. E. (2004). Creating a culture of assessment: A catalyst for organizational change. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 4(3), 345-361. Retrieved from https://muse.jhu.edu/article/170684/pdf
Lewin, H. S., & Passonneau, S. M. (2012). An analysis of academic research libraries assessment data: A look at professional models and benchmarking data. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 38(2), 85-93. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2012.01.002
Li, L. L. (2016). The GSUL’s 2016 LibQUAL user response data report. Statesboro, GA: Georgia Southern University Library (GSUL).
Library Assessment. (2017). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_assessment
Matthews, J. R. (2015). Library assessment in higher education. (2nd ed.). Westport, Conn.: Libraries Unlimited.
Morales, M., Ladhari, R., Reynoso, J., Toro, R., & Sepulveda, C. (2012). An independent assessment of the unidimensionality, reliability, validity and factor structure of the LibQUAL™ scale. The Service Industries Journal, 32(16), 2585-2605.
doi:10.1080/02642069.2011.593167
Neurohr, K., Ackermann, E., O'mahony, D. P., & White, L. S. (2013). Coding practices for LibQUAL ® open-ended comments. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 8(2), 96. doi:10.18438/b80g6v
Roy, A., Khare, A., Liu, B. S., Hawkes, L. M., & Swiatek-Kelley, J. (2012). An investigation of affect of service using a LibQUAL ™ survey and an experimental study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 38(3), 153-160. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2012.03.018
Savage, D., Piotrowski, P., & Massengale, L. (2017). Academic librarians engage with assessment methods and tools. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 17(2), 403-417. doi:10.1353/pla.2017.0025
Tatarka, A., Chapa, K., Li, X., & Rutner, J. (2010). Library assessment plans: Four case studies. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 11(2), 199-210. doi:10.1108/14678041011064106
Thompson, B. (n.d.). Birth of LibQUAL+. In LibQual+. Retrieved from https://www.libqual.org/about/about_lq/birth_lq
Thompson, B., Cook, C., & Heath, F. (2000). The LibQUAL gap measurement model: The bad, the ugly, and the good of gap measurement. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 1(3), 165-178. doi:10.1108/eum0000000007216
Thompson, B., Cook, C., & Heath, F. (2001). How many dimensions does it take to measure users' perceptions of libraries?: A LibQUAL Study. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 1(2), 129-138. doi:10.1353/pla.2001.0030
Thompson, B., Cook, C., & Kyrillidou, M. (2005). Concurrent validity of LibQUAL ™ scores: What do LibQUAL ™ scores measure? The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 31(6), 517-522. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2005.08.002
Thompson, B., Cook, C., & Thompson, R. L. (2002). Reliability and structure of LibQUAL scores: Measuring perceived library service quality. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 2(1), 3-12. doi:10.1353/pla.2002.0022
Voorbij, H. (2012). The use of LibQUAL by European research libraries. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 13(3), 154-168. doi:10.1108/14678041211284704
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and the initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).