Search results

Letters and opinions published in the Chronicle of Higher Education were analysed to identify metaphors relating to libraries used by faculty, academic administrators and librarians. Metaphors used in communications are assumed to reflect conceptual models held by the communicators. The qualitative methodology used in this study was built on the works of Schön, Reddy and Green. In this exploratory study, fourteen models of libraries were identified through linguistic examination of the appearance of the word stem ‘librar’ among published communications from academics. Differences were found in the conceptual models of libraries held among faculty, academic administrators and librarians. The study's findings suggest that to administrators in this case, libraries are contributors to the social structure of an academic environment, while to faculty, libraries are the repository for physical information resources to support their research. Librarians in the study tend to attribute an activist role to libraries, and to express a conceptual model of a library as a storehouse. The identification of metaphors about libraries, cited by academics, offers library managers insights into academic library users' conceptualisation of libraries.

This paper aims to describe the development and operation of an unmediated book‐lending service between seven academic libraries in the USA.

The approach is descriptive and analytical.

It was found that, after a decade of operations, Borrow Direct continues to be a successful service.

The paper offers insights that may be of value to other groups exploring ways to lower costs, improve service quality, and respond to continuing demand for books not available locally.

The purpose of this paper is to validate a proposed framework of library value as the relationships between diverse stakeholders’ perceptions of valued effect of a library and of causes for the effect. It does so through adaptation of the “five whys” inquiry, a tool for uncovering root causes used extensively for process improvement. A “library value wheel” graphically illustrates a diverse set of stakeholders (i.e. faculty, students, university administrators, librarians, donors, and library employees) and their perceptions of the most valued effects of the library. To begin this exploration the researchers have selected faculty as the initial stakeholder to study because of their important influence in the academy. The following research questions guide the study: What effects of the library do faculty most value? What are perceived causes of these valued effects? What effects of the library do faculty perceive other stakeholders [e.g. students and administrators] most value? What variations among the causes faculty identify for valued effects emerge from use of the five why inquiry?

This qualitative study consists of a series of individual and group interviews with faculty members representing different academic disciplines and rank at one US university. Adapting the “five whys” inquiry, the researchers conducted sufficient individual interviews to reach data saturation (typically 15 to 30 interviews) to identify root causes that address perceptions about value the academic library provides to faculty. The interviews were audio taped and transcribed for data analysis; the results were sent to the interviewees for a member check. In addition, the results of the analysis were validated in a focus group session with faculty members of the library advisory group. Lastly, the identified valued library effects and their causes were compared to elements of value identified in the literature.

Several root causes of perceived value were identified, with caution to generalize; among these are: increase my productivity; expand student ability; do my job; save money; indulge intellectual curiosity; not feel frustrated; meet accreditation criteria; and change the University.

The study emphasizes that value involves the stakeholders in the identification of the valued effect of the library. The “five whys” inquiry delves deeply and arrives at a root cause of value that will allow librarians to take steps to maximize an institutional perception that of the value the library provides its community. It is often difficult for stakeholders to articulate why the library is or is not of value and this approach will help them do so. In addition to eliciting the perceived value of the library to the faculty, the study also gathered faculty perceptions of causes of valued library effect on students and administrators. The study also introduced the “library value wheel” which broadly defines the causes of valued effects on stakeholders of libraries. The study's empirical data will be integrated into this framework in subsequent studies. Since value is a political tool, involving the faculty and focusing on their perceptions will be important for advocating library support. This study will communicate to librarians reasons faculty perceive the library to be of value. In essence, this approach partners influential stakeholders with librarians to develop strategies for maximizing the value of the library.

Librarians at three large universities successfully developed a reader‐initiated borrowing model of interlibrary resource sharing, known as Borrow Direct, that now operates among seven major academic libraries in the US. The underlying software allows the reader to perform a virtual broadcast search of members' online catalogs. Automatic electronic notification to readers and elimination of some staff processing has resulted in major service improvements as assessed by both customers and managers. Describes the history of the initiative to reach technical goals of delivering loans within four days of request submission and for less than $10 per transaction. Also summarizes results of a survey of the perceptions of those who use the service.

This essay is offered in response to an invitation to share reflections on a topic of current concern. The concern is how to position the library profession to not just gain appreciation and support of academic libraries, but to develop librarians as leaders continuing the values of higher education as essential to maintain and improve a democratic society. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This is a viewpoint piece.

The paper speculates that assessment alone may be an inadequate objective of an organizational culture for academic libraries; assessment is not universally accepted throughout higher education as a primary focus, perhaps with the exception when meeting accreditation requirements.

An informed citizenry, freedom of information, open and equitable access to knowledge, and intellectual diversity are important values to preserve. This concern overlaps with the authors’ shared and independent work to engage in assessment efforts and developing a library culture of assessment.

Preparation of academic librarians may benefit from more strongly advancing the core mission of their institutions rather than their service relationship to its customers as an objective of the library culture.

This is the first work to examine why assessment is not enough for libraries to be valued.

Describes the electronic library initiative project at Yale University and summarizes the first‐year collaborative research methodologies and initial results. Concludes that it offers several core contributions both through practical insights into the role of digital images in teaching, learning and service support, and in evolving a model of discovery and expression of an assessment project results.

This review covers three broad areas. Firstly, interlending statistics from West Germany and France are summarized. Secondly papers on interlending of specialist materials (microform, audiovisual materials and music) are discussed. Thirdly, the review looks at some recent applications of new technology: the use of electronic mail for request transmission in Canada, three experiments with telefacsimile transmission of documents in the USA together with a proposal for high‐speed telefacsimile transmission via satellite in Australia, and the use of microcomputers in interlibrary loan departments. A new article delivery service in the USA and the demise of the Pacific Northwest Bibliographic Center are reported. Finally, the publication of a draft version of guidelines on union catalogues of serials is mentioned.

The purpose of this paper is to measure service quality of academic libraries of a major university from students' perspectives and to determine libraries' own performance towards meeting users' expectations.

Research settings of the study were University of the Punjab's academic libraries, excluding the main library. A survey method was chosen as a method of investigation and a modified SERVQUAL questionnaire was used to explore users' desired and perceived service levels along a seven‐point Likert scale. The sample of the study was selected using stratified random sampling through proportional allocation.

The results revealed that users' expectations were high as compared to their perceptions, and a discrepancy was found between expectations and perceptions of all 22 SERVQUAL statements. The overall service quality and satisfaction of the university's libraries was found to be somewhat good. Users were satisfied with library staff's courteous and caring behavior. However, university librarians desperately need to take remedial actions to improve library staff's competency and physical facilities. Users preferred the “tangibles” dimension more than other dimensions.

This study is the first to measure the service quality of the university's academic libraries and is particularly significant for librarians and university administrators who wish to explore the strengths, weaknesses and threats of quality library services. The findings will assist them to review their service policies and take steps to improve service quality of a university's libraries.

Few issues in recent times have so provoked debate and dissention within the library field as has the concept of fees for user services. The issue has aroused the passions of our profession precisely because its roots and implications extend far beyond the confines of just one service discipline. Its reflection is mirrored in national debates about the proper spheres of the public and private sectors—in matters of information generation and distribution, certainly, but in a host of other social ramifications as well, amounting virtually to a debate about the most basic values which we have long assumed to constitute the very framework of our democratic and humanistic society.