Program Evaluation in Libraries: Relating Operations and Clients

Evaluators of library programs have different perspectives on why to conduct an evaluation and also how to do so. The author suggests that a minimal approach to conducting a library program evaluation is to prove that the program exists. But this perspective has expanded to include different degrees of interest in the client and operations, culminating in a combined focus that leads evaluators to conduct outcome assessments. The chapter includes speculation on what motivates managers to undertake an evaluation, a review of some ways that library evaluations are conducted, and a discussion of several examples of program evaluations. Though there are not single directives for undertaking a library program evaluation, there are a variety of tools and advice to entice librarians to do more of them as a way to improve understanding the value of a library to its clientele and in society.     

Scholarly communication trends — voices from the vortex: a summary of specialist opinion

The views of specialists (academics, librarians, publishers and information scientists) on trends in scholarly communications were canvassed by means of structured questions. A greater commonality of views was found than might have been expected.     

Editorial zum Themenheft: ?‘Software-Reengineering“’

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

State of the art of expert searching: results of a Medical Library Association survey.

OBJECTIVES: Medical Library Association (MLA) members were surveyed to gather background about the current state of expert searching in institutions. The survey results were intended to guide the recommendations of the Task Force on Expert Searching for promoting the importance of expert searching and implementing those recommendations. METHODS: MLA members were surveyed, and data obtained from the survey were compiled and analyzed to answer three general questions: what is the perceived value of searching skills to the institution, how do health sciences librarians maintain and improve their searching skills, and how are searching services promoted and/or mandated in the institution. RESULTS: There were 256 responses to the survey. Over 95% of the respondents saw their expert-searching skills were of value to their institutions, primarily through performing mediated searches and search consultations. Over 83% of the respondents believed that their searching skills had improved over the past 10 years. Most indicated that continued training was very important in maintaining and improving their skills. Respondents promoted searching services most frequently through orientations, brochures, and the libraries' Web pages. No respondent's institution mandated expert searching. Less than 2% of respondents' institutions had best practice guidelines related to expert searching, and only about 8% had guidelines or policies that identified situations where expert searching was recommended. CONCLUSIONS: The survey supports the belief that health sciences librarians still play a valuable role in searching, particularly in answering questions about treatment options and in providing education. It also highlights the need for more expert searching courses. There has been minimal discussion about the perceived need for expert-searching guidelines in the institutions represented by survey respondents.