Liaison Services · 41
If yes, please indicate the method of evaluation. Check all that apply. N=36
Tracked number of instruction sessions 26 72%
Tracked number of reference/research interviews 24 67%
Conducted user surveys 16 44%
Interviewed members of department(s) 11 31%
Tracked number of department meetings attended by liaisons 7 19%
Conducted focus groups 7 19%
Other (please specify) 15 42%
“Although no assessment of the service as a whole, many of the methods noted above have been used by
supervisors to evaluate performance for annual reviews.”
“Annual survey of faculty library collections needs.”
“Assessment study underway—no results yet.”
“Each highly variable by library and/or discipline.”
“For instruction, faculty were surveyed.”
“Individual performance evaluations of progress on individual liaison goals; LibQUAL+® user survey.”
“Individual performance is addressed as part of the annual performance appraisal process.”
“Informal/ad hoc: Some liaison librarians meet with each department annually to discuss instruction program;
feedback from faculty (under-served departments, perhaps); annual performance reviews; LibQUAL+® survey
conducted Jan/Feb 2007 reveals successes/areas to work on.”
“Liaisons prepare formal annual reports of their activities.”
“LibQUAL+® 2002, 2005.”
“Not specifically evaluated as a program, but related information gathered via triennial surveys.”
“Note that these have been done only for some departments and irregularly.”
“The Libraries have never formally evaluated liaison services but we do collect instruction and consultation
statistics, and also include liaison services in annual goal-setting exercises (as mentioned earlier).”
“We get tons of positive feedback all over campus.”
“While we do keep a record of things such as the number of instruction sessions and reference/research
interviews, I don’t think of those as evaluation since we’re not benchmarking against anything.”
Previous Page Next Page