Image
Abstract: Library Needs Assessment for Science Faculty at Appalachian State University
This needs assessment project aimed to assess science faculty's needs for library resources and services. It focused on their access to electronic resources, crucial for research and teaching, as they rely more on databases and journals than peers in humanities and social sciences.
In fall 2022 and spring 2023, approximately 230 faculty members from six science departments were called for participating in a survey comprising 18 questions. The survey covered Library resources, Library services, and Teaching resources and collected data on faculty rank and department. The survey used Likert scales, multiple-choice, and open-ended questions. Department heads distributed the survey via Qualtrics to faculty. 68 faculty participated, and 46 responses were usable upon review.
The survey data were analyzed using both descriptive and inferential statistics through SPSS.
Presented below are key findings from the survey:
• Access to electronic articles: When asked if science faculty struggled to find a journal article digitally in the past two years, 39% had occasional access issues (1-5 times), 26% faced frequent access problems (>5 times), while 24% accessed all journal articles through University Libraries.
• Access to books: 52% said they didn't find the books they needed a few times (1-5), 20% didn't look for books at the library while another 20% said they encountered no difficulty finding books.
• Approaches to obtain non-library books: 27% found an online version through Google while 26% requested the book via Interlibrary Loan (ILL). 21% purchased their own copy.
• Desired materials for library purchase: 62% wanted journals, 24% liked books, and 12% needed materials in their topics/subjects.
• Importance of information resources/search tools: 93% indicated e-journals were “important”, 79% said Google scholar, and 66% stated “subject databases.”
• Services used in the past two years: 27% indicated they used ILL, 20% used librarians online, and 11% used librarians in-person.
• Library services for their students: 20% indicated they referred their students to consult with librarians and use ILL. 15% asked students to use library service desks while 11% wanted students to use the Library Research Advisory Program.
• Library visits: When asked in a typical semester, how often did they physically visit the University Libraries? 70% indicated a few times per semester, while 22% said they didn’t visit the library at all. 4% indicated once a week.
• Work with librarians: 48% indicated they have not and also do not foresee working with a librarian while 33% said they have not, but would like to work with a librarian in this way. 15% noted they have worked with a librarian.
• Resources for students: 32% said journals, 31% referred students to databases, and 26% chose books.
• Library instruction: : 67% stated “ No, I have not and do not foresee making a request” and 22% said “No, I have not, but would like to make a request.” Only 7% said they had requested the library instruction for their class.
• Tenured versus untenured faculty: T-test revealed tenured professors faced significantly more access issues with non-library books than untenured faculty. Untenured faculty showed more interest in library instruction.
In fall 2022 and spring 2023, approximately 230 faculty members from six science departments were called for participating in a survey comprising 18 questions. The survey covered Library resources, Library services, and Teaching resources and collected data on faculty rank and department. The survey used Likert scales, multiple-choice, and open-ended questions. Department heads distributed the survey via Qualtrics to faculty. 68 faculty participated, and 46 responses were usable upon review.
The survey data were analyzed using both descriptive and inferential statistics through SPSS.
Presented below are key findings from the survey:
• Access to electronic articles: When asked if science faculty struggled to find a journal article digitally in the past two years, 39% had occasional access issues (1-5 times), 26% faced frequent access problems (>5 times), while 24% accessed all journal articles through University Libraries.
• Access to books: 52% said they didn't find the books they needed a few times (1-5), 20% didn't look for books at the library while another 20% said they encountered no difficulty finding books.
• Approaches to obtain non-library books: 27% found an online version through Google while 26% requested the book via Interlibrary Loan (ILL). 21% purchased their own copy.
• Desired materials for library purchase: 62% wanted journals, 24% liked books, and 12% needed materials in their topics/subjects.
• Importance of information resources/search tools: 93% indicated e-journals were “important”, 79% said Google scholar, and 66% stated “subject databases.”
• Services used in the past two years: 27% indicated they used ILL, 20% used librarians online, and 11% used librarians in-person.
• Library services for their students: 20% indicated they referred their students to consult with librarians and use ILL. 15% asked students to use library service desks while 11% wanted students to use the Library Research Advisory Program.
• Library visits: When asked in a typical semester, how often did they physically visit the University Libraries? 70% indicated a few times per semester, while 22% said they didn’t visit the library at all. 4% indicated once a week.
• Work with librarians: 48% indicated they have not and also do not foresee working with a librarian while 33% said they have not, but would like to work with a librarian in this way. 15% noted they have worked with a librarian.
• Resources for students: 32% said journals, 31% referred students to databases, and 26% chose books.
• Library instruction: : 67% stated “ No, I have not and do not foresee making a request” and 22% said “No, I have not, but would like to make a request.” Only 7% said they had requested the library instruction for their class.
• Tenured versus untenured faculty: T-test revealed tenured professors faced significantly more access issues with non-library books than untenured faculty. Untenured faculty showed more interest in library instruction.