ARL New Measures Initiative was initiated at the October 1999 Membership Meeting by the ARL Statistics and Measurement Committee and the ARL Research Library Leadership and Management Committee. The ARL New Measures Initiative is in response to the following two needs: 1) Increasing demand for libraries to demonstrate outcomes/impacts in areas important to the institution; and 2) Increasing pressure to maximize use of resources - benchmark best practices to save or reallocate resources. (Source: ARL's website)Southern Association of Colleges & Schools' (SACS) Commission on Colleges division is the recognized regional accrediting body in the eleven U.S. Southern states (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia) and in Latin America for those institutions of higher education that award associate, baccalaureate, master's or doctoral degrees. The Commission on Colleges is the representative body of the College Delegate Assembly and is charged with carrying out the accreditation process. (Source: SACS website)
Andaleeb, S. S. & Simmonds, P. L. (1998). Explaining user satisfaction with academic libraries: strategic implications. College & Research Libraries, 59, 156-167.
Association of College and Research Libraries. College Libraries Section's University Library Standards Review Committee. (1989). Standards for university libraries: evaluation of performance. College & Research Libraries News, 50, 679-691.
Barter, R. (1994). In search of excellence in libraries: The management writings of Tom Peters and their implications for library and information services. Library Management, 15(8), 4-15.
Christ, M., Daub, P. & Mac Adam. B. (1994). User studies: reality check and future perfect. Wilson Library Bulletin 68, 38-44.
Clougherty, L., Forys, J.W., Lyles, & T. A. (1998). The University of Iowa Undergraduate user needs assessment. College & Research Libraries, 59, 572-584.
Cullen, R. & Calvert, P. (1996). New Zealand University Libraries effectiveness project: dimensions and concepts of organizational effectiveness. Library and Information Science Research, 18, 99-120. Retrieved May 20, 2003, from EBSCOhost Electronic Journals Service.
Edwards, S. & Browne, M. (1995). Quality in information services: do users and librarians differ in their expectations? Libraries and Information Science Research, 17, 163-182. Retrieved May 20, 2003, from EBSCOhost Electronic Journals Service.
Harwood, N. & Bydder, J. (1998). Student expectations and satisfaction with the university library. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 24, 161-171. Retrieved May 20, 2003, from EBSCOhost Electronic Journals Service.
Hernon, P. & Calvert, P. (1996). Methods for measuring service quality in university libraries in New Zealand. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 22, 387-391. Retrieved May 20, 2003, from EBSCOhost Electronic Journals Service.
Hernon, P., Nitecki, D. & Altman, E. (1999). Service quality and customer satisfaction: an assessment and future directions. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 25, 9-17. Retrieved May 20, 2003, from Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals.
Johnson, D. T. (1995). Focusing on the library customer: revelation, revolution, or redundancy? Library Trends, 43, 318-325. Retrieved May 20, 2003, from Factiva journals (via GALILEO).
Kleiner, J. & Hamaker, C. (1997). Libraries 2000: transforming libraries using document delivery, needs assessment, and networked resources. College & Research Libraries, 58, 355-374.
Martula-Millson, C. & Menon, V. (1995). Customer expectations: concepts and reality for academic library service. College & Research Libraries, 56, 33-47.
Pack, T. & Pemberton, J. (1999). A harbinger of change: the cutting edge library at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. ONLINE Magazine, 34-42.
Powell, R. R. (1992). Impact Assessment of University Libraries: A consideration of issues and research methodologies. Library and Information Science Research, 14, 245-257.
Pritchard, S. (1996). Determining quality in academic libraries. Library Trends, 44, 572-594. Retrieved May 20, 2003, from Factiva journals (via GALILEO).
Robinson, E. (1995). Studying user satisfaction: why do it? How to do it? Where next? One library's experience. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 1, 179-185.
Tuck, J. (1995). Operational planning and performance measurement in the John Rylands University Library of Manchester. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 1, 15-31.
Wehmeyer, S., Auchter, D. & Hirshorn, A. (1996). Saying what we will do and doing what we say: implementing a customer service plan. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 22, 173-180. Retrieved May 20, 2003, from Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals.
Widdows, R., Hensler, T., & Wyncott, M. (1991). The focus group interview: a method for assessing users' evaluation of library service. College & Research Libraries, 52, 352-359.
Young, V. (1993). Focus on focus groups. College & Research Libraries News 54, 391-394.
Coleman, V., Xiao, Y., & Blair, L. (1997). Toward a TQM paradigm: using SERVQUAL to measure library service quality. College & Research Libraries, 58, 237-251.
Doyle, C. (1995). Perceptions of Library Service Questionnaire (PLSQ): development of a reliable instrument to measure quality service in an academic library. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 1, 139-159.
Harvey, L. (1995). Student satisfaction. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 1, 161-173.
Talbot, D., Lowell, G. R., & Martin, K. (1998). From the users' perspective--the UCSD Libraries user survey project. Journal of Academic Librarianship 24, 357-364. Retrieved May 20, 2003, from EBSCOhost Electronic Journals Service.
A PowerPoint Presentation by Sue Achtemeier, from UGA's Office of Institutional Effectiveness, addressing the Libraries' role in SACS Accreditation.
 |
Last update: December 12, 2005
Comments to: Susan Morris Copyright © University of Georgia. All rights reserved. URL=http://dataserv.libs.uga.edu/assessment/resources.html |