Background for Conducting the Study
In 1996, the Institute of Museum and Library Services was created when Congress passed the Museum and Library Services Act, drawing together federal support for these centers of learning and community engagement. IMLS administers museum programs under the Museum Services Act and library programs authorized by the Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA). IMLS administers a variety of grant programs under each law. For instance, LSTA funds both the IMLS Grants to States program (which is administered by SLAAs) and the competitive National Leadership Grants for Libraries program, among others.
Since aspects of both funding programs impact the applications of technology in libraries and museums, IMLS undertook this study of their technology use and digitization activities, and the perceived role of IMLS in both of these areas. This report of the study offers insights into the uses, challenges, and technology capacity of both types of institutions.
IMLS' Office of Research and Technology was responsible for this study. The role of this office is to help identify the needs of the museum and library communities and the effectiveness of IMLS' programs in addressing the needs.
The contractor for the survey was the Center for Organizational Excellence, located in Rockville, Maryland.
Purpose of the Survey
The purpose of the survey was to collect information on the use of technologies, digitization activities, and related plans and policies of libraries, museums, and State Library Administrative Agencies across the country.
The survey consisted of four sections:
- Background on the respondent: demographic information on museums and libraries, including type, size, and location.
- Status of technology: current and planned use of technology, funding sources, use of technology in programming.
- Digitization plans, practices, and policies: current and planned digitization activities, funding sources, hindrances, digitization goals and materials being digitized, policies in use, and collaboration activities.
- IMLS role: how IMLS should support implementation of technologies and digitization in individual institutions and within the museum and library communities.
IMLS will use the findings of this survey to determine its appropriate role in supporting technology and digitization activities, in museums and libraries, particularly to support services to the public. The information provided by the survey results will help IMLS shape the focus and thrust of the agency's grant programs and related activities. The research will help IMLS to be better positioned to meet the future needs of libraries and museums.
The final published information can be used by museums, libraries, and State Library Administrative Agencies to understand where they are in the continuum of technology implementation, and to plan for further technology developments. The report can help individual institutions with fundraising and advocacy activities.
Involving the Museum and Library Communities
IMLS involved stakeholders from the museum and library communities at key points in the survey process.
- Prior to conducting the survey, IMLS convened a group of museum, public library, academic library, and State Library Administrative Agency representatives to discuss content and approaches.
- A number of individuals representing each of the survey groups participated in the pilot test of the survey, including taking the preliminary survey online, then participating in a focus group. Their comments and suggestions were very helpful in the final survey design.
- As the survey report was being prepared, individuals from each of the groups in the survey read and provided helpful comments and feedback.
IMLS appreciates the assistance received from the many individuals who helped with the survey.
Methodology for identifying the sample
The potential respondent universe was composed of four groups: public libraries, academic libraries, State Library Administrative Agencies, and museums.
All 51 State Library Administrative Agencies received surveys.
Random samples for museums, public libraries, and academic libraries were identified. The available museum and library populations for the survey were identified by using:
- a database of museums supplied by the National Conference for State Museum Associations (NCSMA)
- the American Library Directory on Disc by Bowker.
- Museums: The database of the museum universe did not have sufficient information to stratify by museum discipline, so a simple random sample across all museums in the database was selected. (see Figure 12)
Figure 12: Museum Universe and Sample Size
Note: The planned sample size for museums was 1,500. However, when substantial numbers of surveys were undeliverable, a re-sampling was done, resulting in a total of 1,558 surveys sent to museums.
Public libraries were stratified in terms of the size of the population served by the library. Because there was particular interest in comparing across groups, an equal number of institutions from each category was sampled. For population categories that contained less than 150, the total population was used for the sample. (see Figure 13)
Figure 13: Public Library Universe and Sample Size
Academic libraries were stratified by the type of academic setting the library serves. The database did not allow for stratifying the academic library groups by public and private institution, so the stratification was done with 2-year colleges versus 4-year colleges and universities. (see Figure 14)
Figure 14: Academic Library Universe and Sample Size
Conducting the Survey
The data collection was conducted during May and June 2001. To elicit a greater response rate, the deadline was extended by two weeks and a follow-up letter or e-mail was sent to all institutions in the samples.
Response Rate and Validity of the Data
A total of 2,836 surveys were sent: 1,558 to museums, 1,227 to public and academic libraries, and 51 to State Library Administrative Agencies. A total of 701 survey responses were received. There were six surveys that were not identified as a library or museum, so they were not used in the analysis. The overall response rate to the survey was 25 percent. (See Figure 15)
Figure 15: Survey Response Rates
The findings of the survey are statistically representative at the following levels:
- Public Libraries at the 90 percent (+/-10 percent) level
- Academic Libraries at the 90 percent (+/-10 percent) level
- Museums at the 90 percent (+/-5 percent) level
- State Library Administrative Agencies (SLAAs) at the 95 percent (+/-5 percent) level
At these confidence levels, the findings for State Library Administrative Agencies are definitive. The specific results for museums, public libraries, and academic libraries can be discussed in terms of trends for each. Trend results are also discussed when breaking the data by demographic information, such as size of population served (public libraries) and size of budget (museums).
Definitions
The following definitions are provided for key terms used in the survey:
Technology refers to computer-based equipment, software applications, and telecommunication network capabilities that are used in libraries and museums.
Digitization is defined as the process of converting, creating, and maintaining books, art works, historical documents, photos, journals, etc. in electronic representations so they can be viewed via computer and other devices. (By digitizing portions of their collections, museums and libraries can provide the public with access to materials that otherwise might not be seen, such as historical documents and collections of objects that are not generally on display.)
Programming refers to activities and services that are designed to instruct, inform, and engage people in museums and libraries. Programming takes many forms, both physical and virtual. The term has different connotations in the museum and library communities.
|
