2012 ICPSR Membership Survey
description
Transcript of 2012 ICPSR Membership Survey
2012 ICPSR Membership Survey
Official Representative – Designated Representative FeedbackJuly 2012
About the Research Project
• Current ORs and DRs were invited to participate
• Survey was conducted in April 2012• The response rate was over 40%
resulting in 325 completed surveys• Subgroup analysis has been conducted
on the results and differences noted where they exist
Report Content• Key Findings & Implications• OR Profiles• The OR Meeting• ICPSR Product Awareness & Satisfaction• Use of Other Data Sources• ICPSR Summer Program Feedback• Interest in New Data Services
Key Findings & Implications• The most common OR department continues to be the
library followed by ORs based in political science and sociology departments; the most common educational background is a Master’s degree in library sciences.
• The tenure served in the OR role is fairly short (half in role for less than 4 years).
ICPSR must continue producing multiple forms of outreach and training options including those aimed at educating (familiarizing) librarians about ICPSR resources and getting them comfortable in working with data.
Since librarians are natural promoters of resources, ICPSR needs to remind ORs frequently of the promotional materials available to them for their campuses as well as ICPSR training opportunities.
Key Findings & Implications• A declining number of ORs indicate they have ever visited
ICPSR in person for an OR Meeting. (Budgets will likely continue to impact ORs’ ability to attend an onsite meeting.)
• ORs desire program content that is about ICPSR resources, using data in teaching, speaks to digital curation of research data, and helps them function in their role better in part by networking with other ORs. Pre-meeting workshops should be continued.
ICPSR should continue to hold onsite meetings as well as consider regional meetings, if financially feasible, in the future; it is essential that all meetings have a virtual component.
ICPSR should develop the program to ensure significant content is dedicated to practical application and training with regard to ICPSR resources and teaching tools, and with increasing content dedicated to the science of digital curation of research data.
Key Findings & Implications• Awareness of several ICPSR tools is generally high, but
past year usage trails awareness significantly.• About half of ORs have used ICPSR data for research or
teaching, and only two in five ORs have held ICPSR workshops/orientation on their campuses.
• ORs award ICPSR with high levels of satisfaction on all items measured, especially staff responsiveness.
ICPSR must continue to remind (train) ORs about its resources and tools to promote not just familiarity, but usage and/or referral.
ICPSR must continue to focus on responsiveness and evolution of its resources to maintain not only high levels of satisfaction, but also high levels of value to its institutional members.
Key Findings & Implications• OR institutions utilize/subscribe to several other data
sources.• ORs suggested many acquisitions/collection
improvements, but were most focused on acquiring more international, economic, and health data; updating series data more quickly; and retrofitting older studies with statistical software files and SDA components.
• ORs believe their institutions would be most interested in the development of data-related teaching tool products.
As acquisition strategies are developed, these data should be in the review. In addition, when datasets are acquired or retrofitted, more promotion should surround their release.
ICPSR should investigate still more products related to teaching with data in the classroom.
Key Findings & Implications• About one in three ORs are very familiar with the
Summer Program, and one in five ORs send participants regularly.
• ORs continue to play key roles in communicating the Summer Program to potential participants.
• Cost/funding potential participants continues to concern ORs.
ICPSR should work to improve awareness and understanding of its Summer Program across ORs.
ICPSR should research scholarship/funding sources for the purposes of directing ORs/participants to sources where funding may be found.
OR Suggested Improvements• Make all datasets available in Stata, SPSS, SAS, xls, etc.• More data available in SDA• More international data• More economic data• More health data• More teaching tools (data in the classroom)
development• More data curation (repository) tools, training, and
products• Funding (or listing of resources) for Summer Program
attendance
Profiles – Official Representatives
OR Length of Service• The average OR has worked at their
current institution for about 14 years, ranging from one to 45 years served.
• On average, ORs have spent about 7 years in the OR role at their institution ranging from just started to 37 years.
• Just under half of ORs have served in their role for less than 4 years (46%).
• Average length of service as an OR is similar to 2005, 2008, & 2010.
Where ORs Work• Most ORs describe their work department as a Library (46%)• Nineteen percent (each) work in a Political Science or Sociology
department
Graduate Studies
Social Work
Health/Medical Sciences
Administration
History
Geography
Arts and Sciences
Business
Other
Education
Public Policy/Public Health
Law/Criminal Justice
Research (unspecified department)
Information or Computing Services
Research Center or Institute in Academic Setting
Data Center (unspecified department)
Economics
Social Science
Sociology
Political Science
Library
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%
1%
2%
2%
2%
2%
3%
3%
3%
4%
4%
4%
4%
4%
4%
7%
8%
10%
16%
19%
19%
46%
Librar
y
Socio
logy
Politi
cal Sc
i...
Data Cen
ter
Econo
mics0%
10%20%30%40%50%60%
46
19 198 10
45
1520
10 8
54
1116
8 5
41
12 15 135
42
1520
5
2316
39
124
2012 2010 2008 2005 1998 1988
Changes in Where ORs Work• Since 1988, more ORs indicate they work in the library
with notably less working in social sciences departments.• The percentage of ORs based in the Economics
department have increased since 1988.
NA
OR Educational Focus• The most frequently studied discipline among ORs is Library
Sciences (44%); 21% cite degrees in Political Science, 19% in Sociology, and 8% in Economics
• Note that degrees described as “Data/Information Sciences” increased from 2% in 2008 to 6% in 2012
• Most ORs have Master’s Degrees (55%) or Doctorates (41%)
Health/Medical SciencesLaw/Legal Services/Criminal Justice
Social WorkComputer Sciences
GeographyBusiness
Public Policy/AdministrationEducation
Data/Information SciencesHistory
Social ScienceEconomics
OtherSociology
Political ScienceLibrary Sciences
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%1%1%2%2%3%3%4%
5%6%6%
7%8%
13%19%
21%44%
The OR Meeting
OR Meeting Attendance
• About two in ten ORs attended the most recent OR Meeting in 2011
• Approximately one in three have attended an OR Meeting in Ann Arbor (34%)
16% 5
%
79%
2013 OR Meeting
Yes, onsiteYes, virtuallyNo
34%
66%
Ever Attended
YesNo
Attendance varies by Carnegie Class
• Extensive institutions (represented in the survey) continue to demonstrate the highest level of attendance at OR meetings
Extensive Intensive MA BA0
102030405060
3426
13 12
50
36 38
23
29
8
32 28
Percentage of ORs who Attended
2011 Onsite2009 Virtual2007 Onsite
OR Meeting: Future Attendance
• Most ORs would like to attend the 2013 onsite meeting• Only 9% predict they will “definitely attend” in 2013
Response Percent
Response Count
9% 2736% 11431% 9814% 4411% 36
3196skipped question
ICPSR is currently planning for an onsite OR Meeting in 2013 in Ann Arbor. Which statement best describes your prediction of your ability to attend?
I am not interested in attending an onsite OR Meeting
I will definitely attend
answered question
I would like to attend, but my attendance is unlikely
Not familiar enough with the mtg to have an opinion
I would like to attend but am unsure about my ability to
Preferred Meeting Content • ORs prefer meeting content that revolves around use of
ICPSR resources/tools and its data collections• Sessions on using data in teaching and on data curation
(data science) are also preferred
Other
Research presentations (from non-ICPSR researchers)
Networking opportunities
Presentations: non-ICPSR data providers
Presentations to increase effectiveness in OR/DR role
Presentations digital curation of research data
Presentations on how to use data in teaching
Presentations on ICPSR tools/resources
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
5%19%
31%
33%45%
54%54%
69%
Most Important OR Mtg Content
OR Suggestions to Improve OR Meeting
• Continue to conduct workshops the day before such as a mini data management course similar to the course by the 3 Amigos, online analysis, data curation, etc.
• Consider a session(s) dedicated how to intrigue (train) particular departments to use ICPSR data (departmental promotion)
• Include time dedicated to ‘formal’ networking across ORs (informal is not enough)
• Though admittedly a challenge for the program committee, involve more ORs in program content or panels
• Continue to offer OR meeting virtually since budgets and time constraints challenge onsite attendance
OR Product Awareness/Use of and Satisfaction with ICPSR Resources
Product Awareness & Use• OR’s highest ICPSR product awareness and use includes ICPSR
webinars and the OR Web site• Note that use by ORs of these resources has declined since 2010
• MyClass garners the lowest awareness & use
MyClassOLC
ICPSR Utilization ReportsUndergrad Opportunities
Data User Help CenterPromotional/Workshop Materials
OR Web SiteICPSR-sponsored Webinars
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 8016
5555
626363
6772
318
252222
2528
24
Used Past Year Familiar
OR Interaction with ICPSR Data
• Half of ORs have used ICPSR data for research or in-class instruction
• Two in five ORs held ICPSR workshops on campus
Yes41%
No41%
Not sure18%
Conducted ICPSR Workshop
Yes49%
No51%
Personally Used ICPSR Data
020406080
100
42 42 42 39 41 36 33 38
38 30 23 21 15 19 20 14
Some Significant
Interest Level in Potential ICPSR Data Products
• ORs believe the highest level of institutional interest to be in teaching with data products and training
• Secure data services (online) and catalog services (ability to list in ICPSR’s data union catalog) are also of greatest interest
Satisfaction• Over half of ORs rated ICPSR with a 9-10 in terms of overall
satisfaction (56%) with a mean of 8.4; satisfaction is similar to 2008 and 2010
Ease of finding info on websiteTeaching/classroom resources
Promotional materialsBreadth of data holdings
Value for moneyEvolution to meet changing needs
Summer ProgramEase of downloading dataQuality of documentation
Overall products/resourcesQuality of data provided
Ease of contacting User SupportStaff responsiveness
OVERALL
7.2 7.4 7.6 7.8 8 8.2 8.4 8.6 8.8 97.8
7.98.1
8.38.48.4
8.58.58.5
8.78.78.7
8.98.4
Satisfaction Scores (1-10)
26
Use of Other Data Sources
Other Data Sources for ORs• Roper Center• Association of
Religion Data Archives (ARDA)
• MPC: IPUMS; NHGIS• Sociometrics• UN Statistical
Division• Data Liberation
Initiative
• Gallup Poll• World Bank data• Pew Surveys• Free IGO data
sources• Social Explorer• American FactFinder• National Bureau of
Economic Research (NBER)
Acquisitions of Interest/ Collection Improvements
• More international data; more data from Asian countries
• Macroeconomic data, especially financial
• More recent data (update series sooner)
• More health data• LAPOP• IRS data• IMF data
• Environmental/global warming data
• Data on social media usage
• Retrofit entire collection to include SPSS, etc.
• GIS analysis capabilities• Provide xls files to read
into minitab, etc.• Home mortgage data• Religion data• Immigration data• Latinobarometer
29
The Summer Program
Summer Program Interaction•Most ORs have some familiarity with the Summer Program
35%
49%
16%
Familiarity
Very SomewhatNot very
•One in five ORs indicate they send participants regularly (every 2 years)
19%19%
46%
16%
Participation
Every 2 yearsEvery 3-5 yearsRarely/neverNot sure
Summer Program Impact
2% 22%
57%
19%
Impact on Membership
SP is primary reason for membershipSP is significant factor, among othersSP makes no differenceNot sure
• About one in five ORs (22%) report that the Summer Program is a significant factor, among others, for membership in ICPSR
• Two percent indicate it is a primary reason for membership
Learning about the Summer Program
• ORs are a significant source of information for potential Summer Program participants
• Faculty also play a large role in creating awareness as do potential participants
Information Source %I, as OR, initiate discussions w/ potential students 50%
Advisors/faculty seek out potential students 20%
Individuals initiate discussions with me 15%
Individuals initiate discussions with their advisors/faculty 14%
Individuals gather their own information w/ little help from me or others
12%
Individuals are generally unaware of the Summer Program 23%
Summer Program Assessment• About one in three ORs from institutions sending students
to the Summer Program (32%) report that their institution makes no effort to assess what participants learn.
• Across the 24% that put forth some type of assessment or follow-up, efforts are largely informal and qualitative:
• ORs ask participants for testimonials• Participants are asked to take part in research groups
who are updating their skills• Students asked to give a presentation about their
experience
Membership Overview – July 2012
• Membership in ICPSR consists of 715 consortium members
• US academic member institutions are represented in every US state except West Virginia and Hawaii for a total of 394 US universities and colleges
• 56% of institutions are affiliated as part of 46 Federation or National memberships
Institution Type CountsExtensives 137Intensives 45Masters 90Bachelors & Specialized
116
Community College 6Associate 26Canadian 35Non-North American 260