{"title":"B(u)y the book: evaluation of a university initiative to provide students with funds to buy books","authors":"F. Porritt, Linda Murphy, G. Wells, Emma Burns","doi":"10.1108/pmm-08-2019-0038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nIn the era of high student fees and intense market competition, many universities now buy books for their new students, and recently have incorporated student choice into the offer, enabling students to choose how to spend funds. Teesside University has successfully piloted such an approach with one academic School, the School of Social Sciences, Humanities and Law. The pilot has now been extended to all academic Schools, with all students receiving £100 per academic year to spend on reading list books. The scheme covers new full-time undergraduate students at the University, and is operated in collaboration with an external company, John Smiths. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the Teesside University Advance scheme against baseline data of book borrowing and reservation patterns of reading list titles. The paper explores the impact upon the student experience and student perceptions of the Library.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe project used a mixed methods approach. The quantitative strand analysed book borrowing and reservation patterns data from library systems and from book purchasing patterns data provided by the online store supporting the scheme. Students were also surveyed about the scheme. The qualitative strand, via one-to-one interviews conducted by the student researcher, gained an insight into why students select certain titles to purchase; and what their expectations of the university library are for the supply of reading list titles.\n\n\nFindings\nAnalysis revealed an overall decline in book borrowing from the library of the titles selected for purchase by students via the scheme. Student perceptions of the library were positive and demonstrated a strategic use of library resources alongside book purchases and open web resources. At early stages of university undergraduate study, students need guidance on most appropriate resources to use and why, from either reading lists or book bundles.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nTeesside University scheme is unique in the UK in covering all new full-time undergraduates and letting them choose which reading list titles to buy with the university funds provided.\n","PeriodicalId":44583,"journal":{"name":"Performance Measurement and Metrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/pmm-08-2019-0038","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Performance Measurement and Metrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/pmm-08-2019-0038","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
In the era of high student fees and intense market competition, many universities now buy books for their new students, and recently have incorporated student choice into the offer, enabling students to choose how to spend funds. Teesside University has successfully piloted such an approach with one academic School, the School of Social Sciences, Humanities and Law. The pilot has now been extended to all academic Schools, with all students receiving £100 per academic year to spend on reading list books. The scheme covers new full-time undergraduate students at the University, and is operated in collaboration with an external company, John Smiths. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the Teesside University Advance scheme against baseline data of book borrowing and reservation patterns of reading list titles. The paper explores the impact upon the student experience and student perceptions of the Library.
Design/methodology/approach
The project used a mixed methods approach. The quantitative strand analysed book borrowing and reservation patterns data from library systems and from book purchasing patterns data provided by the online store supporting the scheme. Students were also surveyed about the scheme. The qualitative strand, via one-to-one interviews conducted by the student researcher, gained an insight into why students select certain titles to purchase; and what their expectations of the university library are for the supply of reading list titles.
Findings
Analysis revealed an overall decline in book borrowing from the library of the titles selected for purchase by students via the scheme. Student perceptions of the library were positive and demonstrated a strategic use of library resources alongside book purchases and open web resources. At early stages of university undergraduate study, students need guidance on most appropriate resources to use and why, from either reading lists or book bundles.
Originality/value
Teesside University scheme is unique in the UK in covering all new full-time undergraduates and letting them choose which reading list titles to buy with the university funds provided.
在高昂的学费和激烈的市场竞争的时代,许多大学现在为新生购买书籍,最近还将学生选择纳入报价,让学生选择如何使用资金。提赛德大学(Teesside University)在社会科学、人文和法律学院(School of Social Sciences, Humanities and Law)成功地试行了这种方法。这个试点项目现在已经扩展到所有的学院,所有的学生每学年都可以得到100英镑用于阅读清单上的书。该计划涵盖了新入学的全日制本科生,并与外部公司John Smiths合作实施。本文的目的是对提赛德大学提前计划与借书模式和书目书目预订模式的基线数据进行评估。本文探讨了对学生体验和学生对图书馆的看法的影响。设计/方法/方法这个项目采用了混合方法。定量链分析了来自图书馆系统的图书借阅和预订模式数据以及支持该方案的在线商店提供的图书购买模式数据。学生们也对该计划进行了调查。定性分析通过学生研究员进行的一对一访谈,深入了解了学生选择购买某些书籍的原因;以及他们对大学图书馆提供阅读书目的期望是什么。分析结果显示,学生通过该计划选择购买的图书从图书馆借阅的数量总体下降。学生对图书馆的看法是积极的,并展示了图书馆资源与图书购买和开放网络资源的战略使用。在大学本科学习的早期阶段,学生需要从阅读清单或书籍包中获得最合适的资源使用和原因的指导。原创/价值提赛德大学的计划在英国是独一无二的,它覆盖了所有新的全日制本科生,让他们选择用大学提供的资金购买哪些阅读书目。
期刊介绍:
■Quantitative and qualitative analysis ■Benchmarking ■The measurement and role of information in enhancing organizational effectiveness ■Quality techniques and quality improvement ■Training and education ■Methods for performance measurement and metrics ■Standard assessment tools ■Using emerging technologies ■Setting standards or service quality