A survey of readers was carried out between Monday 8 th March and Saturday 13 th March 2010 in order to find out how satisfied readers are with the library's collections and information services. The original two-page survey form created in 2003 was used, as it has been every year since, to ensure consistent quality measurements. Posters advertising the survey were put up throughout the library for the whole of the survey week and survey forms were continually available at the library entrance, on the Issue & Enquiry Desk and on the IALS website. Members of the Academic Services team placed them on tables in the reading rooms and handed them out to readers to encourage returns. A pop-up with a direct link to the online survey was created on all library PCs to encourage participation. The form was also sent electronically to lecturers who teach on the University of London LLM programme, and through Millenium to all of our academic members. A prize draw (£50 worth of cinema, theatre or book vouchers) was also offered to encourage reader participation.

The survey asked readers to rate how the library generally meets their needs in terms of books, journals, electronic databases, library catalogue, computers, photocopiers, printing, helpfulness of staff, training sessions, study facilities, study environment and opening and closing times. Respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction on a 4-point scale. The definitions of each category were as follows:

In total 195 completed survey forms were returned, of which 121 were from LLM students or other postgraduate taught course students, 41 from academic and research staff, and 30 from postgraduate research degree students (also 1 legal practitioner and 2 private scholars). Respondents did not always answer every question.

Highlights of the Survey

The overall satisfaction rate (those who indicated they were either often or usually satisfied) was 95.31 % (98.34 % in 2009).

The top rating was tied between 99.49 % for helpfulness of the staff, and overall satisfaction at 95.31%, quality of computing facilities at 94.83%, range of books at 93.3%, range of journals at 91.63%, ease of use of library catalogue at 91.06%, and electronic training sessions at 90.07%. The fact that the rating for our electronic training sessions has remained above 90% for the third year running, is particularly gratifying as we have expanded and developed these, and this result clearly shows that researcher and students view our annual programme of training sessions as a major value-added service.

Ratings above 80% were received for range of electronic journals and databases, study facilities, availability of PCs, photocopiers and printers, the study environment - noise, and opening times. We are particularly pleased that the rating for noise levels has remained over 80% for the second year running, as staff have been trying to police noise in the reading rooms more actively, undertaking regular patrols to ensure a quiet study environment. Therefore whilst the comments section still includes various references to abuse of mobile phones in the reading rooms, we are confident that the situation is both being monitored and improving.

The rating regarding the availability of PCs seems to have plateaued - down ever so slightly to 82.02%, from 82.84% in 2009, 81.48% in 2008, 74.18% in 2007, and just 66.66% in 2006. It was suggested last year that demand for library PCs might have peaked, with more people bringing in their own laptops, and this seems to be the case. The internet cables which users can borrow to connect their laptops to the web are very popular, and the introduction of wireless networking facilities (Wials) has continued this trend. It should be noted however that there were numerous comments requesting more terminals throughout the building, specifically on floors 2 and 3.

These ratings are generally consistent with the ratings of the previous two years although slightly down in that seven questions were rated over 90%, down from eight last year, and a further seven questions were rated 80-90%.

A rating of 73.38% was given for sufficient copies of core LLM textbooks, down quite significantly from 87.67% in 2009. There are a number of reasons to explain this change. Firstly, now that the devolved LLM programme is in full swing, there is necessarily greater competition for the key resources, as each key LLM topic is now being taught over five different sets of students. Secondly, the acquisitions budget was reduced this year, and it was agreed that multiple copies would receive less money.

Ratings of below 70% were received for Study environment - heating, closing times and cost of printing. The rating for the temperature in the study environment had actually been improving year on year, from 69.78% in 2007 to 71.61% in 2008, to 74.58% in 2009. The current year's rating of 67.55% is the lowest for some time. This rating can be put into perspective: the central University of London's heating system broke down at the start of the year forcing the library to close early on one day. In addition it has proved increasingly difficult for the Estates Department to maintain a constant, comfortable temperature in the library - depending on the outside temperature it has either been too cold (for most of January) or far too hot (in February or March). Until a new temperature controlled system has been installed by the Central University, we will continue to receive complaints from users and this uncomfortable temperature will act as a significant deterrent to some of them using us on a long term basis.

The rating for closing times has fallen again from a high two years ago of 80.24%, down to 76% last year and 67.37% this year. A trend has developed over the last few years of academic libraries opening longer (sometimes even 24/7), particularly over exam times, and IALS library is likely to continue to receive pressure to alter its opening times accordingly. To this end, the Academic Services Manager has been investigating possible ways to increase our hours.

The lowest rating given was for the cost of photocopies at 56.4% which is disappointingly much lower than last year's rating of 63.58%, and represents a reverse in the improving marks we had been receiving. The cost of photocopies has been reduced on three occasions in recent years and now stands at 5 pence per copy, which compares favourably with similar libraries. Indeed, the cost was reduced to 5 pence as most of the University of London college libraries have this charge and we are now in line with them. It may be that students are increasingly used to having scanning facilities available to them, or perhaps even free printing through their college. In order to update its information, the Library has again enquired about prices at other libraries: most University of London colleges (UCL, SOAS, KDCL, SHL) still charge 5 pence per A4 copy, and 10 pence per A3. LSE reduced its price to 4 pence and 8 pence for A4 and A3 respectively. SOAS charges 5 pence per page, but external readers must buy a £1 card, which has only 45 pence worth of copies on it. KC charges 5 pence per copy, but readers must purchase a £2 card with only 50 pence worth of copies on it, and UCL also charge 5 pence, but a blank £1 copy card must be purchased first. The Senate House Library also charges 5 pence per copy. The Bodleian Law Library (University of Oxford) has recently increased its fees from 5 pernce to 7 pence per copy; and the Squire Law Library (Unversity of Cambridge) have increased A4 copy charges from 7 pence to 10 pence.

Finally, given the choice, the majority of all respondents wanted more books available in the library ( 64.86% ) rather than more lending outside the library ( 35.14% ).

The comments section of the questionnaire provided the standard mix of compliments and suggestions, and can be read in a separate report. It should be noted that, in keeping with last year's survey, there were far more positive, complimentary comments than in previous years. The Library notes that, since the replacement of our photocopiers at the start of the academic year, negative comments regarding photocopying facilities have virtually ceased. There was an increase in requests for extended loan periods this year, and this may be due to that fact that post devolution of the intercollegiate LLM programme students are in greater competition for materials. This can be comfortably offset against the large majority of our users who prefer greater availability of materials in the library as opposed to greater loan privileges (indeed, many of the people who left comments requesting greater loan periods ticked the greater availability in the library option). An issue which has come up this year for the first time is people complaining about the length of time it takes new books and journals to become available for use. Some of this may simply be unrealistic expectations of speed on the part of our users, and of course we cannot guarantee the service levels of our third party suppliers. However, processing speed may also have been affected by the library being forced to drop a trainee, and our serials department having only one trainee based in the section. As in previous years, requests were made by students for a group study room to be available, which considering our zero tolerance policy towards noise would be of value to all users, although which we sadly would not be able to provide until the building is fully refurbished. All collection development and book stock comments can be read in the appendices.

To conclude, the Library is very pleased and reassured that since its inception in 2003, we have received consistently high results across almost all categories in our annual user survey, despite our regularly changing reader base.

Laura Griffiths
22nd March 2010

Full results of the survey

The following full results of the survey contain responses across all reader categories to 19 specific questions. By ticking 3 or 4 on the 4-point scale, we have assumed that the respondent's needs are either often satisfied (3) or usually satisfied (4).

Download copy of this report on IALS Library Reader Satisfaction Survey 2010

Any comments on this public report of the 2010 IALS Reader Satisfaction Survey should be emailed to Laura Griffiths, Assistant Librarian, Academic Services at Laura.Griffiths@sas.ac.uk .