Library Impact Data Project Phase II the data strikes back
description
Transcript of Library Impact Data Project Phase II the data strikes back
Library Impact Data Project Phase IIthe data strikes back
Graham Stone
Information Resources Manager
NAG Conference5-6 September 2012
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License
#lidphttp://eprints.hud.ac.uk/14514
Warning!You may experience data overload from this presentation
http://www.flickr.com/photos/opensourceway/5755219017/
• …Library Impact Data Project
Previously on…
http://www.ncdd.nl/blog/?p=2468
4
Non/Low Use Projectdigging deeper into data
Measuring Library Impact2008/9 honours graduates
Analysis of the results consistently revealed a correlation between e-resource use, book borrowing and student attainment
This appears to be the case across all disciplines
JISC Activity Data Call
• Obtained funding from the JISC Activity Data Call
• 6 month project (Feb-Jul 2011)
Library Impact Data Project
To prove the hypothesis that…
“There is a statistically significant correlation across a number of universities between library activity data
and student attainment”
Data requirements
• For each student who graduated in a given year, the following data was required:– Final grade achieved– Number of books borrowed– Number of times e-resources were accessed – Number of times each student entered the library, e.g. via a
turnstile system that requires identity card access– School/Faculty
Library Impact Data Projectbook loans & Athens (2009/10)
Library Impact Data Projectlibrary PC logins & visits (2009/10)
Linking back to non/low usage
• Our research showed that for books and e-resource usage, there appeared to be a statistical significance across all partner libraries
• While identifying a relationship is of great importance in both academic library use, identifying specific groups of high or low users of resources and their level of achievement will provide data which can be used more extensively to the benefit of library users.
Library Impact Data ProjectPhase II (Jan-Oct 2012)
Library Impact Data ProjectPhase II (Jan-Oct 2012)
• Phase I looked at over 33,000 students across 8 universities
• Phase II looks at around 2,000 FT undergraduate students at Huddersfield
Library Impact Data ProjectAims and objectives
• Addition of other relevant data such as demographics, retention data etc.
• To use the enriched data to provide better management information
• To conduct a feasibility study on the viability of a JISC shared service that involves collection and analysis of library impact data for all UK HE libraries
Library Impact Data ProjectAdditional data
• We had some new library usage metrics which weren’t available during Phase I– Demographics– Overnight usage– The number of e-resources accessed
• as distinct from the hours spent logged into e-resources• the number of e-resources accessed 5 or more times
• the number of e-resources accessed 25 or more times.
Library usageAge and usage
Library usageGender and usage
Library usageEthnicity and usage
Library usageCountry of domicile and usage
Library usageBy discipline
• Each of the 100 (ish) courses has been classified into one of 17 ‘clusters’
• Clusters have been aggregated to form six ‘groups’ – Groups compared to see some overarching differences– Then drilled down to compare clusters within groups, to get a
more detailed understanding
• Statistically significant effect sizes are highlighted by the depth of colour– small effects pale, medium effects a little darker, and large effects
very dark.
Library usageAggregated subject groups
Library usageHealth group
Library usageComputing and Engineering group
Library usageHumanities group
Library usageSocial Science group
Library usageArts group
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brianscott/3745357149/
Library usageRetention
• Looking at one year of data for every student• Only looking at people who dropped out in term three• Using a cumulative measure of usage for the first two
terms of the 2010-11 academic year• All the students included in this study were at the
university in the first two terms, and they have all had exactly the same opportunity to accumulate usage.
Library usageRetention
Time of day of usage and outcomesaverage hourly use
Time of day of usage and outcomesaverage hourly use as percentage
Final results and usageNumber of e-resources accessed
• The number of e-resources accessed– as distinct from the hours spent logged into e-resources– the number of e-resources accessed 5 or more times– the number of e-resources accessed 25 or more times
• Showing how many of Huddersfield’s 240+ e-resources, a student has logged into during the year, once, at least five times or at least 25 times.
Number of e-resources accessedDepth and breadth
LIDP Phase IIMyReading
Profiling users
• Investigate the use of reading lists– Matching attainment with use of essential, recommended and
wider reading
• Working with copacAD
LIDP Phase IILemon Tree
LIDP Phase IIStill to do
• UCAS points vs. library usage– A proxy for value added services?
• Predicting final grade• % use for on and off campus vs. library usage• A final data blog• Toolkit ver.2.0• Student workshops• Due mid October
Looking forwardWhy is Google so easy and the library so hard?
Other factorsNumber of e-resources accessed
• Both borrowing books and logging onto electronic resources does not guarantee the item has been read, understood and referenced
• Heavy usage does not equate to high information seeking or academic skills
• Additionally, students on particular courses may be using more primary materials only available outside of library resources: non-use of library resources does not mean students are using poor quality information
EBEAMLearning analytics
Measureable targetsadding value
• To contribute towards a dashboard for student retention– to use non-use of library e-resources as an indicator of possible
retention issues
• To tie LIDP II results in with the MyReading project– to measure depth and breadth of student reading
• To use the outputs from the LIDP to work with a number of academic ‘champions’– To improve attainment– To improve retention
Measureable targetsadding value
• To demonstrate VfM from the library’s resources– Using UCAS points, attainment and usage to show value
• To create staffing efficiencies– Using impact data to concentrate staff resources at the right
point
A shared service for Library Impact Data?
• Can we build a suite of management reports to aid the above targets
• A national shared service to allow manipulation of data and benchmarking?
• Joint copacAD/LIDP questionnaire to go to SCONUL directors in September 2012
• RLUK/SCONUL workshop to be held in October 2012
Acknowledgements
Ellen Collins
Research Information Network
46
LookItsDavePattern
Thank you
Library Impact Data Project blog
http://library.hud.ac.uk/blogs/projects/lidp/
Graham [email protected]
@Graham_Stone
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License
#lidphttp://eprints.hud.ac.uk/14514