ACRL College & Research Libraries News

College & Research Libraries News

Guide to Methods of Library Evaluation

No. 9, October 1968

JULY 7, 1968

ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries, Vol. 29, No. 5

This documentis designed as an aid in judging the adequacy of an academic library. It is organized into sections of descending impor-

I. Prime evidence: books, reading spaces, and professional staff.

II. Secondary evidence: such as budget and planning documents.

III. Special activities suggesting excellence: such as a student book club and publica-

Since books, space, and staff constitute the ingredients which can make any library great, there often will be no need to document or consider the points of “secondary evidence” or the “special activities.” Local circumstances will determine the advisability of using these subordinate data to clarify evaluation.

In applying these evaluation methods to the well established library, it is important to watch for danger signs where the library may be slipping in one or another index, or is failing to meet new conditions posed by evolving instructional or research patterns and practices.

In applying these methods to a library which has not yet established its quality, it is emphasized that the most important condition is a strong rate of improvement; the mere fact of meeting minimum quantitative standards is of far less importance.

Various sets of minimum standards exist and can be discriminatingly applied in library evaluation. These have been established by the

Association of College and Research Libraries,¹ the several regional accrediting associations, and a large number of professional associations;² this guide does not contradict any of these; it does not purport to set standards. Rather it suggests the methods for judging the library program for any institution of higher education. In the course of such judgment, standards can be of use in threshold cases; yet, even for these libraries, the momentum of library development and the effectiveness made of available resources is of far greater significance than is sole reliance on quantitative data. The published ranges of actual library statistics may also serve as benchmarks.³

I. Prime Evidence

All three of these must be adequate for the clientele and its program. Otherwise no library can be judged to be satisfactory, no matter what other activities or qualities it may offer. A. Books and related materials.

In evaluating the collections, there must be

The full scope of course and research interests must be covered by good books, both as to chronological periods and degrees of subject specificity, including primary and secondary works and a fair quantity of collateral and even minor works in the major fields.

There must also be a reasonable quantity of books, including duplicate copies of heavily used titles, and there must be particular relevance of these books to the range and level of the curricula offered.

The currency of the collections must be maintained; that is, a substantial and continuing infusion of new books discriminately selected must be in evidence in each field.

Finally, the physical condition of the collection must be adequate to assure its availability for the next generations of students, especially in bibliographies, reference works, primary sources, and journals.

Evaluation Method.Use select lists to check on thoroughness of coverage. Ask a few specialists to spot check various areas in their field and ask various faculty members about the adequacy of the collections in their fields. (These first two techniques will be of no appreciable value in a library far beyond meeting any minimum quantitative standards, yet even in these libraries these techniques may be applied in the fields of newly established departments or new graduate programs.)

Ask a sampling of students about their ease in obtaining sources. Check titles on the “new books shelf” or on the shelves of new receipts in the acquisitions department. Check through part of the outstanding order file for scope, range, and currency for various fields. Inspect the “standing order” file, and such desiderata lists as may exist; and review some titles on outgoing interlibrary loan requests to get a feel for requested material that is lacking in the collections. Read any recent self-study or report by a consultant on the state of the collections. Sample the bindings or other preservation treatment given the collection, including microfilms, by visiting various parts of the library.

B. Reading Spaces.

The library (including departmental libraries) must be located on campus in a convenient place so that trips from classes or dormitories or commuter’s parking do not discourage library use.

It must be open adequate hours to meet needs, including weekends; and all major de-

ACRL Membership August 31, 1968 . . 12,859

August 31, 1967 . . 12,060

August 31, 1966 . . 10,539

The internal organization of the library must make it a place conducive to study and arranged for convenient access to the books.

The individual chairs and tables should be generous in number, generous in size of work space, and with space for advanced students to leave books and notes.

The environment must be sufficiently comfortable to permit concentration on studying rather than disturbance by hard seats, bad lighting, noise distractions, and faulty venti-

Evaluation Method—Determine site convenience through study of campus plan and talking with some students. Sample a reader’s ease in finding one’s way around the library and test proximity of books to reading spaces. Determine the number of seats available and compare with enrollment. Consider adequacy of quarters for the advanced students: shelves, or lockers, oversize Carrells, or areas in which they have reserved rights. Sample the environmental comfort and watch for signs of student disturbance, including conditions in special areas such as audio facility, microtext reading quarters, and art print study area.

C. Professional Staff Service.

The evaluation of staff should be in terms of adequacy as to quantity and quality, since no library can be better than those who create and operate it. However, the tangible results can be evaluated more easily through judgment of such areas as the following:

The status of the professional library staff and the relationship of faculty and staff should be such as to establish mutual respect and

The faculty should be allowed (and encouraged) to help in book selection and they should know if their counsel is generally followed.

There should be evidence of a book selection policy mutually developed by the staff and the faculty.

The catalogs and serial records for the collections should be easily found and readily interpretable.

Processing arrearages in cataloging, binding, and card filing should be no more than reasonable in quantity, i.e., maintained below what would be normal staff production for one month.

Books should be easily found on the shelves, clear records maintained of books not in regular shelf order, and loan policies should aid, not hamper easy access to the collection.

Qualified professional reference direction or guidance should be easily and constantly available nearly all hours the library is open.

Photocopying services should be available in or near the library. Interlibrary borrowing for advanced students and faculty should be easily available.

Evaluation Method—Talk with a sampling of students and faculty to gain insight into their satisfaction with services. Inquire of and see the mass and character of processing arrears. Spot check the catalog and other public records, and consider the logic in shelf arrangements. Review the circulation policy statement. Determine availability of photocopying and interlibrary loan services. Talk with a few staff members at major service points to gain a sense of the public image of the library.

II. Secondary Evidence

There are conditions or activities which indirectly reflect the quality of the library. They suggest what may be the strong or weak points of the library by offering insight into aspects of its work. However, they must be used only as clues to help further the basic evaluation of the prime features. Some may be particularly useful in evaluating the momentum of the large, well established library, since the maintained quality and sensitivity to service needs in a very large library is difficult to grasp.

A. Use.

The use the students make of the library is the ultimate test of its effectiveness and is the result of various library conditions and faculty teaching methods. Significance may be found in the extent of student use of reading spaces, the quantity of reference service asked of librarians, and the size of annual circulation volume for the reserve and general collections. Insight may also be gained by questioning a selection of students on the character of their

B. Budget.

A significant set of figures is the percentages of the institution’s instructional and research expenditures that go to the library over a period of years. Another useful set is formed by the percentage of the library budget that goes to each of the categories of: personnel, books, binding, and miscellaneous expenses. Changes in these categories in recent years could reveal trends as well as a persistent weakness.

C. Faculty Library Committee Minutes.

The record of discussions and decisions, even though very brief, may be useful in revealing administrative emphasis, major concerns, longrange goals, and even special reasons for the particular treatment of book funds. A talk with the chairman (or senior faculty member if the librarian serves as chairman) may be most instructive for the evaluation.

D. Administrative Relations.

A diagram showing the relation of the librarian to other administrative officers may help one understand the real workings of the institution. A similar diagram for the library staff, together with a staffing table, may help with questions of internal effectiveness. A talk with the President may be necessary if a serious lack of information or conflicting evidence exists.

E. Means of Communication.

The procedures for distributing information to students, faculty, and library staff may be used to help understand problems of library effectiveness. This may include publicity published in the student paper and talks before students, lists of new acquisitions and information letters mailed to the faculty, and staff news bulletins as well as a series of library administrative memoranda.

F. Personnel Policies and Salary Scale.

The status of librarians, methods and form of appointments, promotion and termination procedures, vacation and leave policies, travel funds, retirement plan, and salary ranges by classification may provide evidence to help with questions concerning staff effectiveness.

G. Planning Documents.

Forecasts of growth and needs over three, five, or more years are useful documents to read in evaluating the library’s preparedness and the institution’s awareness of the future library needs. Budget projections, physical plant needs and plans, and book fund development programs can each indicate the status of planning.

III. Special Activities Suggesting Excellence

Some attention and credit may be given for achievements which do not directly alter the fundamental effectiveness of the library. These are efforts, however, which may suggest something about the student feeling toward the library, the faculty regard for it, and the interest in the library by the general public. The result may be an unseen and undetectable esteem for the library and wide public knowledge about its collections and services which augurs well for its future support. Yet again it must be emphasized that these are subtle points and should usually be given very slight weight in an evaluation of the adequacy and quality of the library.

A. Student book club meeting in the library or with librarians.

B. A “friends of the library” group, perhaps offering a student book collection prize.

C. A lecture series held in or sponsored by the library.

D. A series of major annotated exhibitions of library materials.

E. Published guides, handbook, catalogs, or bibliographies to assist in use of the library collections.

F. A course on library research methods, or a series of lectures by librarians incorporated within departmental courses.

G. Seminars conducted in the library by faculty using the collections as a working laboratory.

ACRL Committee on Liaison with Accrediting Agencies.

Notes

1. “Standards for College Libraries” College and Research Libraries, vol. 20 (July 1959) p. 274-280. “Standards for Junior College Libraries,” College and Research Libraries, vol. 21 (May 1960), p. 200-206.
2. Standards for the six regions and twenty-one professional associations were com piled as College and University Library Accreditation Standards—1957, Chicago, Association of College and Research Libraries, 1958. 46p. ACRL Monograph, no. 20.
3. Library Statistics of College and Universities: Institutional Data,annual publication of the U.S. Office of Education. discrimination among subject fields and some attention paid to needs of individual courses.