Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.15358/9783800664672-231
R. Gleich
{"title":"6 Performance Measurement in der Anwendung – Fallstudien und spezielle Lösungen für die Industrie","authors":"R. Gleich","doi":"10.15358/9783800664672-231","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15358/9783800664672-231","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44583,"journal":{"name":"Performance Measurement and Metrics","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80023831","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-22DOI: 10.1108/pmm-03-2020-0013
Leila Jabbari, A. Dizaji, Mila Malekolkalami
PurposeThe purpose of this study is to measure the gap and compare the quality of services provided by the Central Library of the University of Tehran and Allameh Tabataba'i University and identify the components of service that need improvement in these libraries.Design/methodology/approachIn this study, a descriptive survey method is used for data collection. The study sample contains 205 people selected out of 31,000 members of Tehran University and 100 people out of 15,000 members at Allameh Tabataba'i University. The LibQual tool is used to measure different levels of users' perceptions of library service quality.FindingsBased on the findings of the study, the level of service received at the University of Tehran was higher than the minimum expected level, and at Allameh Tabataba'i University, the level of service received was lower than the minimum level of expected, which indicates users' satisfaction at this index at the University of Tehran and users' dissatisfaction at Allameh Tabataba'i University. In the index of information control and library as a place in Tehran University, the level of service received was higher than the minimum level and in Allameh Tabataba'i University, the level of service received was lower than the minimum level, which indicates the satisfaction of users in this index at the University of Tehran and users' dissatisfaction at Allameh Tabataba'i University.Practical implicationsService quality, or quality of service, is the measurement and comparison of the size of service provided with users' expectations. The following principles illustrate the dimensions of service quality: Quality of service is much more difficult to measure than the quality of goods. The quality of service is based on users' expectations. Quality of service varies in status, meaning that the quality of a service is measured against the customer's initial expectations of that service (Parasuraman et al., 1985).Originality/valueBeing the first performance evaluation, community synchronization, economic justification, user satisfaction and customer orientation are the values of the present study.
目的本研究的目的是衡量德黑兰大学中央图书馆和阿拉梅塔巴塔巴大学提供的服务质量的差距和比较，并确定这些图书馆需要改进的服务组成部分。设计/方法/方法本研究采用描述性调查法收集数据。研究样本包括从德黑兰大学31,000名成员中选出的205人，以及阿拉梅塔巴塔巴大学15,000名成员中选出的100人。LibQual工具用于衡量不同层次的用户对图书馆服务质量的看法。根据研究结果，德黑兰大学的服务水平高于最低预期水平，而阿拉梅·塔巴塔巴大学的服务水平低于最低预期水平，这表明德黑兰大学的用户对该指标满意，阿拉梅·塔巴塔巴大学的用户不满意。在信息控制和图书馆作为场所的指标中，德黑兰大学获得的服务水平高于最低水平，阿拉梅·塔巴塔巴大学获得的服务水平低于最低水平，说明该指标中的用户对德黑兰大学满意，而对阿拉梅·塔巴塔巴大学不满意。实际意义服务质量或服务质量是根据用户期望提供的服务大小的度量和比较。以下原则说明了服务质量的维度:服务质量比商品质量更难衡量。服务的质量是基于用户的期望。服务质量因状态而异，这意味着服务质量是根据客户对该服务的最初期望来衡量的(Parasuraman et al.， 1985)。原创性/价值作为第一绩效评价，社区同步性、经济合理性、用户满意度和顾客导向是本研究的价值。
{"title":"Gap assessment and comparison of the quality of services between central libraries of the University of Tehran and Allameh Tabataba'i University","authors":"Leila Jabbari, A. Dizaji, Mila Malekolkalami","doi":"10.1108/pmm-03-2020-0013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/pmm-03-2020-0013","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe purpose of this study is to measure the gap and compare the quality of services provided by the Central Library of the University of Tehran and Allameh Tabataba'i University and identify the components of service that need improvement in these libraries.Design/methodology/approachIn this study, a descriptive survey method is used for data collection. The study sample contains 205 people selected out of 31,000 members of Tehran University and 100 people out of 15,000 members at Allameh Tabataba'i University. The LibQual tool is used to measure different levels of users' perceptions of library service quality.FindingsBased on the findings of the study, the level of service received at the University of Tehran was higher than the minimum expected level, and at Allameh Tabataba'i University, the level of service received was lower than the minimum level of expected, which indicates users' satisfaction at this index at the University of Tehran and users' dissatisfaction at Allameh Tabataba'i University. In the index of information control and library as a place in Tehran University, the level of service received was higher than the minimum level and in Allameh Tabataba'i University, the level of service received was lower than the minimum level, which indicates the satisfaction of users in this index at the University of Tehran and users' dissatisfaction at Allameh Tabataba'i University.Practical implicationsService quality, or quality of service, is the measurement and comparison of the size of service provided with users' expectations. The following principles illustrate the dimensions of service quality: Quality of service is much more difficult to measure than the quality of goods. The quality of service is based on users' expectations. Quality of service varies in status, meaning that the quality of a service is measured against the customer's initial expectations of that service (Parasuraman et al., 1985).Originality/valueBeing the first performance evaluation, community synchronization, economic justification, user satisfaction and customer orientation are the values of the present study.","PeriodicalId":44583,"journal":{"name":"Performance Measurement and Metrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48059507","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-23DOI: 10.1108/pmm-03-2020-0015
Panagiotis Tsigaris, J. A. T. Silva
PurposeIn 2017, one study (Derek Pyne; Journal of Scholarly Publishing; DOI: 10.3138/jsp.48.3.137; University of Toronto Press) in the “predatory” publishing literature attracted global media attention. Now, over three years, according to adjusted Google Scholar data, with 53 citations (34 in Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science), that paper became that author's most cited paper, accounting for one-third of his Google Scholar citations.Design/methodology/approachIn this paper, the authors conducted a bibliometric analysis of the authors who cited that paper.FindingsWe found that out of the 39 English peer-reviewed journal papers, 11 papers (28%) critically assessed Pyne's findings, some of which even refuted those findings. The 2019 citations of the Pyne (2017) paper caused a 43% increase in the Journal of Scholarly Publishing 2019 Journal Impact Factor, which was 0.956, and a 7.7% increase in the 2019 CiteScore.Originality/valueThe authors are of the opinion that scholars and numerous media that cited the Pyne (2017) paper were unaware of its flawed findings.
2017年，一项研究(Derek Pyne;学术出版杂志;DOI: 10.3138 / jsp.48.3.137;多伦多大学出版社(University of Toronto Press)以“掠夺性”出版的文学作品吸引了全球媒体的关注。现在，三年多来，根据调整后的谷歌Scholar数据，该论文被引用53次(Clarivate Analytics的Web of Science中有34次)，成为该作者被引用最多的论文，占其谷歌Scholar被引用次数的三分之一。在本文中，作者对引用该论文的作者进行了文献计量学分析。我们发现，在39篇英国同行评议的期刊论文中，有11篇(28%)对派恩的发现进行了批判性评价，其中一些甚至驳斥了这些发现。Pyne(2017)论文的2019年引用导致《学术出版期刊》2019年期刊影响因子增加43%，为0.956,2019年CiteScore增加7.7%。原创性/价值作者认为，引用Pyne(2017)论文的学者和众多媒体没有意识到其有缺陷的发现。
{"title":"Bibliometric analysis of a controversial paper on predatory publishing","authors":"Panagiotis Tsigaris, J. A. T. Silva","doi":"10.1108/pmm-03-2020-0015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/pmm-03-2020-0015","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeIn 2017, one study (Derek Pyne; Journal of Scholarly Publishing; DOI: 10.3138/jsp.48.3.137; University of Toronto Press) in the “predatory” publishing literature attracted global media attention. Now, over three years, according to adjusted Google Scholar data, with 53 citations (34 in Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science), that paper became that author's most cited paper, accounting for one-third of his Google Scholar citations.Design/methodology/approachIn this paper, the authors conducted a bibliometric analysis of the authors who cited that paper.FindingsWe found that out of the 39 English peer-reviewed journal papers, 11 papers (28%) critically assessed Pyne's findings, some of which even refuted those findings. The 2019 citations of the Pyne (2017) paper caused a 43% increase in the Journal of Scholarly Publishing 2019 Journal Impact Factor, which was 0.956, and a 7.7% increase in the 2019 CiteScore.Originality/valueThe authors are of the opinion that scholars and numerous media that cited the Pyne (2017) paper were unaware of its flawed findings.","PeriodicalId":44583,"journal":{"name":"Performance Measurement and Metrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/pmm-03-2020-0015","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45106890","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-16DOI: 10.1108/pmm-04-2020-0022
S. Salau, F. P. Abifarin, J. A. Alhassan, S. J. Udoudoh
PurposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the usability effectiveness of a webware for electronic theses and dissertations (ETDs) in Nigerian repositories. The webware (etdsearch.com.ng) is a web application system that curates ETDs from three sampled Federal government-owned universities. The system also links users to the repositories where the theses and dissertations are hosted.Design/methodology/approachThe case study research strategy was adopted for the study. Sixty postgraduate students from three universities were randomly selected. A usability evaluation questionnaire based on the ISO 9241-11 framework was used to collect data after performing pre-defined queries/tasks based on the informational and transactional query models. The research questions were analysed using the median of the performance score (fx) of the three universities for each item evaluated, while the Kruskall–Wallis test by ranks was used to test the null hypothesis at a 5% level of significance.FindingsThe study answered two research questions and tested two null hypotheses on the usability effectiveness of the webware based on the informational and transactional queries. The participants found the ETD search system effectively useable. In addition, there was no significant difference in the opinions of the participants.Research limitations/implicationsThe webware used simulated repositories as a feed bed for the ETDs in order to have control over the workability of the repositories. Thus, the results may differ slightly when “live” repositories are used.Practical implicationsThe effectiveness of a webware that aggregates ETDs in Nigerian repositories will present libraries in Nigeria with evidence on how these systems work and can be improved upon.Originality/valueThere is a dearth of literature on practical usability studies of digital information systems in Nigerian libraries.
{"title":"Usability effectiveness of a federated search system for electronic theses and dissertations in Nigerian institutional repositories","authors":"S. Salau, F. P. Abifarin, J. A. Alhassan, S. J. Udoudoh","doi":"10.1108/pmm-04-2020-0022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/pmm-04-2020-0022","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the usability effectiveness of a webware for electronic theses and dissertations (ETDs) in Nigerian repositories. The webware (etdsearch.com.ng) is a web application system that curates ETDs from three sampled Federal government-owned universities. The system also links users to the repositories where the theses and dissertations are hosted.Design/methodology/approachThe case study research strategy was adopted for the study. Sixty postgraduate students from three universities were randomly selected. A usability evaluation questionnaire based on the ISO 9241-11 framework was used to collect data after performing pre-defined queries/tasks based on the informational and transactional query models. The research questions were analysed using the median of the performance score (fx) of the three universities for each item evaluated, while the Kruskall–Wallis test by ranks was used to test the null hypothesis at a 5% level of significance.FindingsThe study answered two research questions and tested two null hypotheses on the usability effectiveness of the webware based on the informational and transactional queries. The participants found the ETD search system effectively useable. In addition, there was no significant difference in the opinions of the participants.Research limitations/implicationsThe webware used simulated repositories as a feed bed for the ETDs in order to have control over the workability of the repositories. Thus, the results may differ slightly when “live” repositories are used.Practical implicationsThe effectiveness of a webware that aggregates ETDs in Nigerian repositories will present libraries in Nigeria with evidence on how these systems work and can be improved upon.Originality/valueThere is a dearth of literature on practical usability studies of digital information systems in Nigerian libraries.","PeriodicalId":44583,"journal":{"name":"Performance Measurement and Metrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49333744","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-13DOI: 10.1108/pmm-04-2020-0020
Hamed Nasibi-Sis, Saeideh Valizadeh-Haghi, M. Shekofteh
PurposeMany researchers in ResearchGate (RG) engage in scholarly activity and share research findings. The researchers' activities in this social network may increase the probability of their works being cited. Thus, this study aims to examine the status of RG indices and the Scopus citation indicators of the allied medical sciences lecturers and their association with their academic rankings.Design/methodology/approachA cross-sectional, descriptive analytical study was performed. As a first step, the names of all 50 lecturers at the School of Allied Medical Sciences were searched through RG to find all the lecturers with profiles. Then, the h-index as well as the number of citations by them were extracted from Scopus. Spearman's correlation coefficient test was performed to explore the association of the RG score with the Scopus citation indicators and the academic rankings of the lecturers.FindingsThe findings demonstrated that there is a statistically significant relationship between the RG indices (except the question and answer indices) and the Scopus citation indicators with the academic rankings of the lecturers (p-value < 0.01).Originality/valueKnowledge of the significant relationship between the RG indices and the Scopus citation indicators may encourage the lecturers to make more efforts to be active on RG. Furthermore, policymakers can encourage their researchers and lecturers to be more active in this scientific social network, which could lead to promoting the university rankings in the global and national rankings systems.
{"title":"ResearchGate Altmetric scores and Scopus bibliometric indicators among lecturers","authors":"Hamed Nasibi-Sis, Saeideh Valizadeh-Haghi, M. Shekofteh","doi":"10.1108/pmm-04-2020-0020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/pmm-04-2020-0020","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeMany researchers in ResearchGate (RG) engage in scholarly activity and share research findings. The researchers' activities in this social network may increase the probability of their works being cited. Thus, this study aims to examine the status of RG indices and the Scopus citation indicators of the allied medical sciences lecturers and their association with their academic rankings.Design/methodology/approachA cross-sectional, descriptive analytical study was performed. As a first step, the names of all 50 lecturers at the School of Allied Medical Sciences were searched through RG to find all the lecturers with profiles. Then, the h-index as well as the number of citations by them were extracted from Scopus. Spearman's correlation coefficient test was performed to explore the association of the RG score with the Scopus citation indicators and the academic rankings of the lecturers.FindingsThe findings demonstrated that there is a statistically significant relationship between the RG indices (except the question and answer indices) and the Scopus citation indicators with the academic rankings of the lecturers (p-value < 0.01).Originality/valueKnowledge of the significant relationship between the RG indices and the Scopus citation indicators may encourage the lecturers to make more efforts to be active on RG. Furthermore, policymakers can encourage their researchers and lecturers to be more active in this scientific social network, which could lead to promoting the university rankings in the global and national rankings systems.","PeriodicalId":44583,"journal":{"name":"Performance Measurement and Metrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/pmm-04-2020-0020","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46680943","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-12DOI: 10.1108/pmm-05-2020-0028
M. Shoeb, S. M. Zabed Ahmed
PurposeThe main aim of this paper is to examine the extent to which the major public university libraries in Bangladesh are meeting students' service expectations through analyzing LibQUAL+ core items.Design/methodology/approachThe survey data were obtained from students using a paper version of the questionnaire consisting of LibQUAL+ core 22 service items at four top-ranked public universities in Bangladesh. Students rated the items on three service levels each using a nine-point scale: Minimum level, Desired level and Perceived Level. Descriptive statistics, i.e. mean and SD were obtained and service adequacy gap (SAG) scores between perceived and minimum levels were computed to see whether the libraries are meeting students' minimum expectation. Non-parametric Wilcoxon sign rank test was conducted to examine the differences between minimum and perceived scores. Finally, Mann–Whitney and Kruskal–Wallis tests were conducted to see the effect of students' demographic variables on their ratings on minimum and perceived scores.FindingsThe findings revealed that the service performances of major university libraries are lagging far behind from students' minimum expectation (minimum > perceived). There are significant differences between minimum and perceived scores. Significant differences are also found in students' gender, age and enrolment level concerning their ratings on minimum and perceived service levels.Practical implicationsThe result of this study analyzes the service quality of major university libraries in Bangladesh. These findings can be used to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the library services.Originality/valueLibQUAL+ has been used mostly in academic libraries in developed countries but this is for the first time a paper-version of the instrument was used in university libraries in Bangladesh.
{"title":"How far are the public university libraries in Bangladesh meeting students' expectations? – An analysis of service quality through LibQUAL+ core items","authors":"M. Shoeb, S. M. Zabed Ahmed","doi":"10.1108/pmm-05-2020-0028","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/pmm-05-2020-0028","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe main aim of this paper is to examine the extent to which the major public university libraries in Bangladesh are meeting students' service expectations through analyzing LibQUAL+ core items.Design/methodology/approachThe survey data were obtained from students using a paper version of the questionnaire consisting of LibQUAL+ core 22 service items at four top-ranked public universities in Bangladesh. Students rated the items on three service levels each using a nine-point scale: Minimum level, Desired level and Perceived Level. Descriptive statistics, i.e. mean and SD were obtained and service adequacy gap (SAG) scores between perceived and minimum levels were computed to see whether the libraries are meeting students' minimum expectation. Non-parametric Wilcoxon sign rank test was conducted to examine the differences between minimum and perceived scores. Finally, Mann–Whitney and Kruskal–Wallis tests were conducted to see the effect of students' demographic variables on their ratings on minimum and perceived scores.FindingsThe findings revealed that the service performances of major university libraries are lagging far behind from students' minimum expectation (minimum > perceived). There are significant differences between minimum and perceived scores. Significant differences are also found in students' gender, age and enrolment level concerning their ratings on minimum and perceived service levels.Practical implicationsThe result of this study analyzes the service quality of major university libraries in Bangladesh. These findings can be used to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the library services.Originality/valueLibQUAL+ has been used mostly in academic libraries in developed countries but this is for the first time a paper-version of the instrument was used in university libraries in Bangladesh.","PeriodicalId":44583,"journal":{"name":"Performance Measurement and Metrics","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/pmm-05-2020-0028","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41662773","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-11DOI: 10.1108/pmm-05-2020-0027
Jane Cho
PurposeThis study attempts to prove the extent of the gaps in the academic ecosystem by using the Gini coefficient.Design/methodology/approachThis study measures the gap between research document volume and citation by country and academic field using the latest ten years of research data of the Web of Science.FindingsAs a result, there is a large volume of documents in the USA and China, and the gap between global countries is g = 0.88 with high inequality. The fields of arts and humanities and social sciences are led by British and American cultures, and the gap between countries (g = 0.91, 0.89) is larger than in other fields. In the meantime, there is also inequality (g = 0.40) about the volumes of research documents between six academic fields, and the gap between the average numbers of citations per publication is the highest in social science (g = 0.80) and the lowest in life science (g = 0.71).Originality/valueThis study proves the extent of the gaps in the academic ecosystem by using the Gini coefficient with large amount research data.
{"title":"Analysis of global inequality in research outcome using the Gini coefficient","authors":"Jane Cho","doi":"10.1108/pmm-05-2020-0027","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/pmm-05-2020-0027","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis study attempts to prove the extent of the gaps in the academic ecosystem by using the Gini coefficient.Design/methodology/approachThis study measures the gap between research document volume and citation by country and academic field using the latest ten years of research data of the Web of Science.FindingsAs a result, there is a large volume of documents in the USA and China, and the gap between global countries is g = 0.88 with high inequality. The fields of arts and humanities and social sciences are led by British and American cultures, and the gap between countries (g = 0.91, 0.89) is larger than in other fields. In the meantime, there is also inequality (g = 0.40) about the volumes of research documents between six academic fields, and the gap between the average numbers of citations per publication is the highest in social science (g = 0.80) and the lowest in life science (g = 0.71).Originality/valueThis study proves the extent of the gaps in the academic ecosystem by using the Gini coefficient with large amount research data.","PeriodicalId":44583,"journal":{"name":"Performance Measurement and Metrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47319744","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-10DOI: 10.1108/pmm-01-2020-0004
Elizabeth Sterner
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the literature to determine how academic librarians are measuring their libraries' institutional level impact on student success as measured by grade point average, a metric commonly used in American education. This paper highlights a range of methods, outcomes and challenges in an initial scoping study.Design/methodology/approachThe methodology centered on a literature review of measuring the impact of academic libraries on student success as quantified by grade point average (GPA) from 2010 to present. Searches in ProQuest, EBSCO and Google Scholar were used to identify the relevant literature. Keywords searched in databases included various combinations of academic impact, student success, learning outcomes, library and higher education.FindingsThe analysis of 15 papers shows that academic librarians have demonstrated a small, nonnegligible positive correlation of library usage on GPA. The results of studies have highlighted that correlation does not prove the cause. Concerns and limitations of studies included using the GPA as a measurement of student success, differences between GPAs in subject areas, timeframes used, sample size collected, student privacy and the meanings of the results.Research limitations/implicationsThis study is limited to articles published in English measuring student success as quantified by GPA and focuses heavily on American sources.Originality/valueThe research can guide librarians through known challenges and highlight successful designs and study methods used by other academic librarians to measure the impact of the library on student success.
{"title":"Impact of academic libraries on grade point average (GPA): a review","authors":"Elizabeth Sterner","doi":"10.1108/pmm-01-2020-0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1108/pmm-01-2020-0004","url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the literature to determine how academic librarians are measuring their libraries' institutional level impact on student success as measured by grade point average, a metric commonly used in American education. This paper highlights a range of methods, outcomes and challenges in an initial scoping study.Design/methodology/approachThe methodology centered on a literature review of measuring the impact of academic libraries on student success as quantified by grade point average (GPA) from 2010 to present. Searches in ProQuest, EBSCO and Google Scholar were used to identify the relevant literature. Keywords searched in databases included various combinations of academic impact, student success, learning outcomes, library and higher education.FindingsThe analysis of 15 papers shows that academic librarians have demonstrated a small, nonnegligible positive correlation of library usage on GPA. The results of studies have highlighted that correlation does not prove the cause. Concerns and limitations of studies included using the GPA as a measurement of student success, differences between GPAs in subject areas, timeframes used, sample size collected, student privacy and the meanings of the results.Research limitations/implicationsThis study is limited to articles published in English measuring student success as quantified by GPA and focuses heavily on American sources.Originality/valueThe research can guide librarians through known challenges and highlight successful designs and study methods used by other academic librarians to measure the impact of the library on student success.","PeriodicalId":44583,"journal":{"name":"Performance Measurement and Metrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46153827","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：