Academic and National Library Training Co-operative Home | News | Contacts |Events | Feedback | Awards | Links | Reports

ANLTC Annual Report 2003

ANLTC Committee, 2003 

Miriam Corcoran (Dublin City University): Programme Evaluator

Pauline Corrigan (University College Dublin): Treasurer

John Cox (National University of Ireland, Galway): Chair, Web Site Manager

Catherine Fahy (National Library of Ireland)

Ned Fahy (University College Cork): Secretary

Helen Fallon (National University of Ireland, Maynooth): Programme Evaluator

Margaret Flood (Trinity College Dublin): External Liaison

Ursula Gavin (Dublin Institute of Technology): Continuing Professional Development

Trevor Lyttle (Queens University Belfast): Continuing Professional Development

Colette McKenna (University of Ulster)

Lindsay Mitchell (University of Limerick): Research

Paul Murphy (Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland): Meetings Coordinator

From the Chair

2003 proved to be a year of innovation for ANLTC, culminating in a number of new initiatives, including this annual report. At the end of 2002 the Committee commenced a review process, re-examining its activities and organisation. Much of the past year has been taken up with agreeing, planning and initiating some key actions aimed at enhancing the way in which ANLTC serves its members.  

An important focus has been on the way in which the Committee organises itself. Most members now have a brief or function, eg meetings coordinator, CPD specialist, and programme evaluator. This makes for clearer responsibility, a wider pool of knowledge and a greater emphasis on evaluation of activities. Procedures have been clarified or regularised and information shared through the development of a Committee intranet which acts as a shared archive for a range of documentation. All of this has assisted the smooth running of a Committee whose members are geographically scattered and whose “day jobs” are extremely busy.

ANLTC’s relevance to its members is paramount in all its activities. The most obvious deliverable in this regard is the annual meetings programme, described and evaluated elsewhere in this report. A diverse and well attended series of events marked 2003. Every effort will be made to match this in 2004, the programme for which was planned in some detail during the second half of the year with valuable input from CONUL and An Chomhairle Leabharlanna. Linkage with these groups is vital to ANLTC, as are contacts with groups outside Ireland such as SCONUL and CILIP. Planning of future activities will be guided by the results of a survey of member libraries in the coming year. The profile of the group should also be enhanced through the use of a new logo. The logo will feature strongly on a re-designed ANLTC Web site (www.anltc.ie) which will continue to be a key tool for communication with users.

Finally, I must thank the members of the Committee who met six times during the year and committed themselves enthusiastically to a programme of change. Thanks also to all who attended ANLTC events during 2003. A milestone will be reached in 2004 in the shape of our 100^th event. Here’s to the next 100!

John Cox
Chair

2003 Programme Evaluation 

Introduction

During the 2003 calendar year 9 activities were offered on the programme to ANLTC participant Libraries. 5 of the 9 events were held in the greater Dublin area. The programme comprised 8 courses/seminars and 1 library visit:

1          Library Services to Non-Traditional Users (UU) – ANLTC 80

2          Collection Management Strategies for the Hybrid Library (UCD)– ANLTC 81

3          Searching the Web (NUIG) – ANLTC 82

4          Group Facilitation Skills (NUIM) – ANLTC 83

5          Supervisory Skills (NLI) – ANLTC 84

6          Marrying Effective Learning and Teaching with Online Technology (DCU) – ANLTC 86

7          Tools and Techniques for Project Management (NUIG) – ANLTC 87

8          Disaster Planning (UL) – ANLTC 89

9          Visit to James Ussher Library (TCD) – ANLTC 90

In total 157 people attended programme activities. Of this total 37 attended the James Ussher Library visit. 120 participants, giving an average of 15 per course, attended courses. This average, however, was skewed by the attendance of 22 participants at each of two courses; ANLTC 81 and ANLTC 89. The data on which the analysis are based are in Appendix 1.

1.       Analysis Methodology

Out of 120 participants, 88% submitted an evaluation form; conversely 12% did not respond. This represents a high response rate to the evaluation process.

1.1            Participants were asked to respond to a number of questions under the
Following sections:-

·                                             General design (3 questions);

·                                             Subject material covered (3 questions);

·                                             Presentation (6 questions);

·                                             Practical sessions (4 questions);

·                                             Organisation and Venue (4 questions); and

·                                             A number of open-ended questions.

1.2     The questions, apart from open-ended questions, required the participants to select from the following options:-

·      Strongly agree;

·      Agree;

·      Disagree; or

·      Strongly disagree.

1.3     Analysis was undertaken on the actual number of responses received from participants. For example the total population for General Design is the number of questions by the number of responses, 3 questions by 105 responses, a total population of 315. It should also be noted that not all participants answered all questions and in some cases a participant selected more than one response to a question.

1.4     The following graphic depicts the percentage dispersion of responses to questions within sections. It should be noted that the 12% response to Practical Sessions as a percentage of overall responses is in part explained by the fact that some courses did not have a practical component.

2.       Overall Response to Programme

Overall it may be concluded that there is a high level of satisfaction both with the individual elements of the programme and the programme as a whole.

2.1     The following graph highlights this level of satisfaction as expressed by responding participants. In general, participants responded positively to all elements of the programme with the greatest levels of satisfaction recorded for Presentation.

2.2     The majority of the responses fall into either the Strongly Agree or Agree category with it being the exception to Disagree or Strongly Disagree to the question posed.

2.3     Further analysis of the responses highlights a high degree of consistency within the ANLTC programme. The graph below provides an analysis of the Strongly Agree responses by course attendees. Please note the number of attendees on each course is quoted in square brackets.

2.4    Please note that the Practical Sessions depicted in the preceding graph are slightly skewed as they only  relate to 6 out of the 8 courses in the programme.

2.5            A review of the Agree response from participants is depicted in the following graph.

2.6            There is greater variation in the response pattern depicted in the Agree graph; however this may be explained by responses being biased to Strongly Agree thus depressing the percentage response to particular courses.

3.       Analysis by Element

3.1     General Design

          When strongly agree and agree responses are totalled, there is 99% satisfaction with the General Design of courses. This area covers the overall content and format design and method of course delivery. 6 of the 8 courses involved practical sessions. Where practicals were held, these were considered to be extremely useful. A number of comments from a review of the open questions suggested that more time could be devoted to these practical interactive sessions. Breakout and smaller group sessions were also considered useful.

An analysis of the open question responses showed a clear demand for 2 day courses for some topics. This was particularly the case with the following courses:

·      Collection Management Strategies for the Hybrid Library

·      Searching the Web

·      Marrying Effective Learning and Teaching with Online Technology

·      Tools and Techniques for Project Management

3.2     Subject Material Covered

          This area also scored a high satisfaction rate of 99%. Participants felt confident that they left the course able to understand the subject material and able to apply it in their work. The lowest score (54% strongly agreed) in this area was in response to the statement “the subject matter was treated in appropriate depth”. On reviewing the open questions and comments there is no explicit statement regarding subject level, however there are many comments suggesting more time was required. The core issue seems to be the balance of information given within the limitation of a one-day course.

3.3     Presentation

          This is consistently the highest scoring area in course satisfaction across the entire programme with 80% of scores falling in the Strongly Agree category. Presenters are consistently seen to deliver high quality courses and to be regarded as experts in their subject areas (88% strongly agree). Presenters are also seen to be open and responsive to questions from participants and to supporting open discussion, (82% strongly agree).

Taking the strongly agree and agree categories together results in a satisfaction score of 98%. Repeated comments in the open question sections demonstrate that handouts are judged to be extremely useful and the lack of handouts is expressly commented on in a couple of instances. This highlights the importance of supplementary material to support the learning once the course has finished.

3.4     Practical Sessions

6 of the 8 courses provided the opportunity for practical sessions. These included practical online work, interactive groupwork, breakout sessions, role plays etc. Clearly some courses such as Supervisory Skills lend themselves to a mix of formats and, where used, these are successful. There was a 3% dissatisfaction score for this section overall. The open questions reveal that time constraints curtailed practical sessions at a number of courses. Again the duration of some courses was seen to be a contributory factor to the (albeit small) dissatisfaction score.

3.5     Organisation

          This section also scored high satisfaction. This section covers the quality of course organisation, advance information and general satisfaction with facilities and catering. Some comments were expressed about the level of comfort in the training suites but in general facilities were adequate and the quality of catering was consistently good. Overall course organisation scored a very high 87% in the strongly agree category.

Conclusion

It may be concluded the ANLTC Programme 2003 was evaluated as a success. Course design and organisation are considered highly satisfactory. The presenters and facilitators are also considered to be consistently excellent. Issues that emerge from the analysis that are particularly noteworthy include:

·      The need to ensure adequate supplementary materials and handouts wherever possible. 

·      The benefit of providing a mix of formats within the training day

·      The need to provide adequate time for practical sessions

·      The need to review the duration of some courses and consider an extension from one to two days.

Miriam Corcoran
Programme Evaluat or

Financial Report 2003

During 2003, 8 courses were held out of 10 planned.  A total of 120 staff participated from 22 different institutions (the core 11 ANLTC institutions plus 11 others, invited to supplement course attendances).

The attendance fee was maintained at €100 per person in 2003. At the year end, the closing profit carry-over for courses in 2003 was €181.38, which was marginal.

Other than course expenses, the main additional expenditure was on web design [€908], web support and financial support [€200]. It is evident from these figures that either the participant charge should be increased in the near future, or that we use more of our own staff as course presenters; in courses where this happens, the profit margins are significantly higher. In courses where presenters are commercial, or travel from the UK, losses were incurred, or at best small margins achieved.

One of the arguments against increasing fees, is the financial difficulty institutions would have in justifying sending more than one participant, if any at all, given the current financial climate in universities. It is clear from the attendance figures from 2003 that several institutions may have had this sort of difficulty in the last year, and an increase in fees would have a negative impact.

In 2004 we are committed to supporting the CONUL bursary award, which will require financial support from ANLTC [in 2002 this came to €500].

Overall there is still an accrued profit of €8291.23 in the ANLTC account at 31^st December 2003. A summary financial report is outlined below, detailed accounts for 2003 will be available by March 2004.

Pauline Corrigan
Treasurer

ANLTC courses 2003 

Updated: 10 May 2004