ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries 8421 C&RL News Taming the purple monster By Joe Jaros Head, Instructional Services Texas A&M University and Candace R. Benefi el Humanities Reference Librarian Texas A&M University Analyzing faculty responses to an informational brochure. I n the fall of 1988 the Sterling C. Evans Library of Texas A&M University brought up a new automated catalog online, NOTIS. The old syst with its numerous shortcomings, including fre­ quent and prolonged downtime and a lack of any subject searching capabilities, had been the focus of growing patron dissatisfaction. The widespread dislike of the system, bordering at times on hostil­ ity, had lead to a general distrust of the automated catalog. When the decision was made to implement a new system, one which promised far more flexi­ bility in searching methods and increased reliabil­ ity, the library recognized the need to publicize NOTIS effectively. Patrons, particularly faculty, needed to be made aware that a new system was available, and that it offered many advantages in comparison. For example, the introduction of sub­ ject and keyword searching capabilities, the latter employing Boolean logic, increased greatly the points of access available to users, but meant that users would need to acquire more sophisticated searching techniques in order to gain the most benefit from NOTIS. The public relations campaign mounted to in­ form the university community about NOTIS con­ tained initiatives directed toward several target audiences, including students, external support groups, and—perhaps most importantly—the fac­ ulty. The Public Relations Committee, working in cooperation with the bibliographic instruction li­ brarians, felt that an informative and educational approach would be better for the faculty than e catchy slogans and glitz. We therefore decided to develop an informational brochure that would not mon, ly describe the new system to the faculty, but would also give them a chance to seek out more information or instruction regarding NOTIS. In the past, efforts at disseminating this type of information had been limited in scope and were usually directed toward new faculty or a smaller group of faculty, such as a department or two that might be interested in a new service. This time, however, we were faced with trying to contact the entire university faculty and numerous associated professional staff members and agency employees affiliated with the university, such as the Texas Agricultural Extension Service, the Texas Agricul­ tural Experiment Station, and the Texas Engineer­ ing Extension Service. Altogether, the group num­ bered close to 4,000. This presented problems not only in the logistics of the mailing, but also meant that the brochure itself needed to include informa­ tion germane to the research needs of a very di­ verse audience. Design and production of the brochure had to be approached carefully, with each step being re­ viewed and approved by the library administration to ensure that the content and style fulfilled the goal of the project. The resulting brochure was printed on orchid paper and consequently became more or less affectionately known as the “purple monster.” It provided general background con­ cerning the new system and gave brief instructions on the various searching modes available on October 1990 / 843 NOTIS, with examples of basic search strategies. Printed on legal-sized paper and folded four times, the final panel consisted of a tear-away form with preprinted requests for further information or in­ struction on NOTIS. Previous experiences in mailing brochures and other material had shown that bulk mailing to departments often resulted in overall poor distri­ bution, forcing a reliance upon the clerical staff of each departm ent, who could not always be trusted to distribute bulk mail material in a timely fashion. In addition, we felt that addressing each brochure individually in such a way that the mailing label would be on the tearsheet would make filling out the request sheet much simpler, and would allow us to respond to requests more easily. The next diffi­ culty lay in finding a complete mailing list for faculty and professional staff. This was eventually overcome by purchasing a set of com puter-pro­ duced mailing labels from the budget office of the university. The tearsheet included blanks for requesting rem o te access directions, d etailed searching guides, individual instruction, and demonstrations for classes or other groups. The form was in no way a formal questionnaire, and response was re ­ quested only if the addressee wanted additional information. Although the major purpose of the mailing was to inform faculty about the new system and give them a chance to receive additional information and instruction regarding it, during the planning process another aspect arose. We realized that, through an analysis of the responses to the bro­ chure, we were gathering information that might prove valuable. The analysis of the responses to the mailing would allow librarians to gauge what de­ partm ents on campus displayed the most interest in the more sophisticated applications of the new system. After identifying the departments inter­ ested in various options for instruction and infor­ mation, it should then become apparent which departm ents needed to be targeted for further contact and instruction regarding the system. Methodology The brochure was distributed via campus mail to all teaching faculty and most administrative and research personnel, with the major exception of the library faculty (who were already well-informed concerning the new system). The brochure in­ cluded instructions for returning the tearsheet through campus mail, and also gave the Reference D epartm ent phone num ber for those who pre­ ferred calling in to returning the form. The returned tearsheets were collected and re­ sponded to by the assistant head of instructional services, who also kept a running total on requests. Once the main flow of responses had decreased, more formal statistics were compiled from the returned sheets and from phoned-in requests, many of which were directly prom pted by the brochure. Statpal, a statistical software package for microcomputers, was used to generate descriptive statistics, which were then studied to ascertain patterns of response to the brochure. Results Five hundred fifty-five responses were received out of a mailing of almost 4,000 for a response rate of 14.55%. The responses included 430 purple forms and 125 responses of other types such as phoned-in or in-person requests. Although the response rate appears quite low, it should be reiter­ ated that the brochure was primarily intended as an introductory informational guide to the new sys­ tem, a means of announcing to faculty the arrival of the new system and the increased searching capa­ bilities now available at the Library. While the responses to the brochure in the form of returned tearsheets and telephone requests for further in­ formational material lent themselves to quantita­ tive measurement, no mechanism existed to meas­ ure informal response to the brochure. Many fac­ ulty, perhaps prom pted by the brochure or other publicity visited the library to investigate NOTIS on their own initiative. Another factor in the re­ sponse rate was that the tearsheet was closer in nature to an order form than a questionnaire, and solicited a response only if further information or instruction was desired. Many of the respondents checked more than one option from the list on the tearsheet; perhaps the most frequent combination was a request for rem ote access instructions accompanied by a de­ tailed searching guide. O f those responding, 90.3% wanted a detailed searching guide, 13.2% wanted individual instruction, and 8.1% wanted dem on­ strations of one type or another. Remote access instructions also proved quite popular, with 92.3% requesting rem ote access guides for either micro­ computers and modems as well as hardwired ter­ minals. The majority of the requests specified in­ structions for microcomputers with modems, while 6.7% preferred using a hardwired terminal (Figure 1). An additional 14.1% wanted information on access by both types of terminal setup. All those requesting remote access instructions were also sent a detailed searching guide, in order to aid them in using the system once they accessed it. Upon analysis, responses from the individual colleges reveal a significant contrast (Figure 2). The response rate for individual colleges ranged from 23.2% for the College of Business to 8.3% for the College of Science. The Colleges of Geosci­ ences, Engineering, Architecture, and Liberal Arts 8441 C&RL News REMOTE ACCESS REQUESTS: Computer Setups Figure 1. Remote access requests. had a return rate between 16% and 17%, with Education and Agriculture following at about 14%. One of the lower rates came from Veterinary Medicine, at 9.9%. It should be noted, however, that the College of Veterinary Medicine has long had its own independent library. Other descriptive statistics allowed for several comparisons of interest. While the percentage of responses requesting remote access guides was high from every college, the College of Business and the College of Science led the way with over 97% of responses indicating an interest in remote access instructions (Figure 3). At the low end of range were the College of Education, at 75.9% and the College of Liberal Arts at 85.5%. When looking at the requests for individual instruction sessions, however, the picture is quite different (Figure 4). Of those responding from the College of Educa­ tion, 31% requested individual instruction, with the next highest rates being 17.6% and 17.8% from the College of Architecture and the University Administration. The college with the lowest rate of RESPONSES BY COLLEGE Figure 2. Response rate by college. See Appendix fo r graph key. October 1990 / 845 REMOTE ACCESS: Information Requests Figure 3. Information requests on remote access by college. See Appendix fo r graph key. INDIVIDUAL INSTRUCTION: Requests Figure 4. Information requests on individual instruction by college. See Appendix fo r graph key. DEMONSTRATION REQUESTS Figure 5. Requests fo r demonstrations by college. See Appendix f o r graph key. 846 / C&RL News DEMONSTRATIONS REQUESTED Figure 6. Type o f demonstrations requested. requests for individual instruction was Veterinary Medicine, with 4%. All the other colleges ranged between 10% and 16%. In tabulating the requests for demonstrations, the pattern changes once again (Figure 5). Al­ though not traditionally a college that asks for bibliographic instruction, the College of Architec­ ture desired far more demonstrations than any other college, with 23.5% of its respondents choos­ ing this option. By contrast, the next highest is the College of Geosciences at 16%. The University Administration, Liberal Arts and Engineering all fall between 11% and 13%. The college requesting the least demonstrations was the College of Sci­ ence at 2.7%. Figure 6 shows the types of demon­ strations requested. Requests for departmental demonstrations comprised 37.8% of the total, and demonstrations for classes made up 28.9%. 24.4% of the requests were from other groups, which included campus administration offices, computer user groups, and demonstrations for external Uni­ versity support groups. 8.9% opted to combine class demonstrations with departmental demon­ strations. Conclusions It is dangerous to draw overgeneralized conclu­ sions concerning the total population from a rela­ tively small body of data; however, certain patterns became apparent from the responses to the “purple monster.” The brochure was, from all indications, widely read on campus and did serve its primary purpose of alerting the faculty to the existence of the new system. The relatively high number of returned tearsheets and phoned-in requests did indicate that the brochure had caught the attention of its target audience, enabled the library to gauge what requests were most frequent, and to judge what areas were of most interest to the faculty. Responses to the brochure indicated that inter­ est in remote access to the system from home and office was high. With the knowledge of this wide interest in remote access, the Reference Division responded by emphasizing remote access instruc­ tion during NOTIS training sessions for public services faculty and staff in order to answer tele­ phone queries from users who encountered prob­ lems while accessing the system from outside the Library. The requests for remote access instructions also leaned heavily toward microcomputers with mo­ dems, indicating that most were not as interested in hardwired terminals, which are available on cam­ pus. The number of calls received at the Reference Desk during the evening requesting assistance with remote access would tend to indicate that many faculty and students are using their home comput­ ers to dial into the system. The NOTIS system currently averages 150 dial-in users per day, and has had as many as 300 on peak days. In studying the data, we noticed that interest in remote access was particularly high among those colleges which have an interest in technology by the nature of their disciplines, both in scientific research, and business applications. Other less technical colleges, such as Education, showed greater interest in individualized instruction ses­ sions. As libraries become more driven by technology, librarians must not ignore the traditionally heavy users of the library, the Liberal Arts and Education October 1990 / 847 faculty. Many of these faculty members are hesi­ tant or uneasy about the encroachment of comput­ ers into th eir book and journal-oriented re ­ searches. Liberal Arts faculty are often surprised and pleased to learn that the newer library tech­ nologies, which many assume to be almost totally directed toward scientists or business faculty, have much to offer the serious scholar in Liberal Arts. For example, faculty have been glad to discover the keyword and Boolean search capabilities of NOTIS which enable them to narrow searches by language, date, edition, and even publisher. Faculty have, in the past, frequently been un­ willing to receive instruction in the use of online and other computerized sources, as it meant stand­ ing out in a public area where their students might observe them. In the case of NOTIS training, faculty were instructed using a NOTIS terminal located in the Reference Division offices, where they could be comfortably seated and be assured of privacy. Giving faculty the chance to receive indi­ vidualized instruction in a discreet setting should result in a greater willingness on their parts to encourage their students to use NOTIS and other aspects of technology in the library. Demonstra­ tions of the system are another excellent way of reaching these faculty members, and showing them that the online catalog is not to be feared, and may indeed prove beneficial. Departmental demonstrations gave librarians a chance to contact faculty members who do not come into the library frequently, and offered them the opportunity to learn firsthand about what the new system could do for them, as well as providing a concrete example of remote access at work. Class demonstrations, on the other hand, enabled librari­ ans to reach both students and faculty with the message that the new computer system was avail­ able and an improvement on the previous system. In a different way, demonstrations of the system for audiences not directly connected with the uni­ versity also prove worthwhile, especially from a public relations standpoint. Such demonstrations for external support groups generated considerable interest in the system, which was presented as a major enhancement to library services and to the educational experience of all students at Texas A&M. These demonstrations even resulted in the donation of several NOTIS terminals, printers, and cash gifts to the library by interested groups. As a result of this study, we learned that the Colleges of Liberal Arts and Education need to be specially targeted for training and other outreach activities concerning all aspects of library automa­ tion. Other colleges less inclined to use the library, such as Agriculture and Science, have long been areas of concern for library instruction generally and the advent of new technology has provided an opportunity for the library to renew its efforts on their behalf. In the final analysis, the data produced by the study of the responses to the brochure enabled librarians to formulate further plans for instructional outreach concerning the online cata­ log to university faculty and researchers. Appendix Colleges responding to the brochure as listed on the graphs: A = Business B = Medicine C = Geosciences D = Engineering E = Architecture F = Liberal Arts G = Education H = Agriculture I = University Administration J = Research Agencies K = Veterinary Medicine L = Science M = Non-University Gay/Lesbian Book Awards The ALA Gay and Lesbian Task Force is calling for nominations for its 1991 Gay/Lesbian Book Awards. Awards are made for both fiction and nonfiction of exceptional merit relating to the gay/ lesbian experience. To be eligible, a book must have been published in calendar year 1990. The awards are not limited to American publications; books published outside the United States and in non-English languages are also eligible. The awards have been given since 1971, making them the oldest gay and lesbian award in the United States. A committee made up of members of the ALA Gay and Lesbian Task Force decides each year’s winners from a list of nominations compiled throughout the year. Any individual or group not affiliated with the publisher of the book being nominated may submit nominations to the chair of the Gay/Lesbian Book Award Committee: Adam L. Schiff, Assistant Science Librarian, University of Colorado at Boulder, Campus Box 184, Boulder, CO 80309-0184; fax, (303) 482-2185; e-mail, schiff_a@cubldr.colorado.edu. A short statement describing why a book is being nominated must accompany the nomination. Nominations must be mailed by December 31,1990. The award winners will be announced in March 1991. ■ ■ mailto:schiff_a@cubldr.colorado.edu ISBC® is the index to count on. The Index to Scientific Book Contents® is the only research tool that indexes scientific books at the individual chapter level. It covers more than 36,000 chapters from over 2,000 multi-authored books and book series, so your patrons can search the scientific book literature...without looking through all the books. They can search by author/editor name, book and chapter title words, general book category, author affiliation or author’s geographic location. Or they can turn straight to the complete listing of book contents to find the necessary bibliographic information. For more information or to receive a free quarterly sample issue, call toll-free: 800-336-4474, operator R346 (U.S. and Canada). Or write to one of the addresses below. ISBC. Count on it for searching scientific books. Institute for Scientific Information ® 3501 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA European Branch: 132 High Street, Uxbridge, Middlesex UB8 1DP United Kingdom, Telephone: +44-895-70016 S -12 - 6 1 7 6