Abstract
This exploratory study considered the problem of assessing quality in academic libraries. The research question that framed the investigation asked whether service quality scores from the LibQUAL+™ instrument were related to the following college or university characteristics: institutional type, enrollment level, or the level of investment made in libraries. Data regarding Carnegie classification, FTE enrollment, and library expenditures were collected for 159 college and university libraries that participated in LibQUAL+™ during 2006. Descriptive statistics, bivariate correlations, and regression analyses were calculated and the Bonferroni adjustment was applied to significance levels to compensate for errors caused by repeated calculations using the same data. Several statistically significant relationships were found; notably, negative correlations were found between each of the LibQUAL+™ scores and total library expenditures. The study suggested that higher expectations among library users in large, research libraries led to slightly lower LibQUAL+™ scores. Implications for practice included that survey results should only be used as one component of an assessment strategy, and practitioners might consider the potential role of library marketing or public relations efforts to influence user expectations. Recommendations were made for future research including replicating some aspects of this study with a more representative sample, analyzing respondent comments as well as score data, and exploring whether there are reliable differences in results for different types of institutions or among groups of respondents (students and faculty, or faculty by discipline). This exploratory study considered the problem of assessing quality in academic libraries. The research question that framed the investigation asked whether service quality scores from the LibQUAL+™ instrument were related to the following college or university characteristics: institutional type, enrollment level, or the level of investment made in libraries. Data regarding Carnegie classification, FTE enrollment, and library expenditures were collected for 159 college and university libraries that participated in LibQUAL+™ during 2006. Descriptive statistics, bivariate correlations, and regression analyses were calculated and the Bonferroni adjustment was applied to significance levels to compensate for errors caused by repeated calculations using the same data. Several statistically significant relationships were found; notably, negative correlations were found between each of the LibQUAL+™ scores and total library expenditures. The study suggested that higher expectations among library users in large, research libraries led to slightly lower LibQUAL+™ scores. Implications for practice included that survey results should only be used as one component of an assessment strategy, and practitioners might consider the potential role of library marketing or public relations efforts to influence user expectations. Recommendations were made for future research including replicating some aspects of this study with a more representative sample, analyzing respondent comments as well as score data, and exploring whether there are reliable differences in results for different types of institutions or among groups of respondents (students and faculty, or faculty by discipline).