Q1. In the last 3 years, have you developed any technology-based projects that you would have or did include as components of your annual evaluation or your dossier for promotion, continued appointment, or 2/4-year review?

		No	(9/28 responses)
		Yes	(19/28 responses)
100% of the people who took this survey (28 / 28) answered this question.

Q2. Do you feel that librarians are encouraged to develop technology-based projects at University Libraries?

		No	(2/28 responses)
		Yes	(26/28 responses)
100% of the people who took this survey (28 / 28) answered this question.

Q3. Do you feel that librarians are supported in their development of technology-based projects at University Libraries?

		Yes	(21/27 responses)
		No	(6/27 responses)
96.43% of the people who took this survey (27 / 28) answered this question.

If yes, please comment on how you feel they are supported (for example, equipment, software, programming suport, or other areas)?

Text Responses (16 for this question)
"All of the above."
"allowed to use work time for development, but on top of regular duties. Although I haven't needed special software, I think it would be provided if the project was work-related."
"Being able to acquire software programs for projects."
"College Librarians are encouraged to maintain current and useful web pages. Librarians like Larry have been recognized for innovcations such as canned tutorials. I know we could do much more though, and the PCA process clearly needs to be made more open to accomplishments in this area."
"equipment, software and training are available, The programming suport is a bit trickier."
"equipment, training"
"Excellent equipment, software, and training"
"Free software, excellent equipment in their offices, or access to equipment, programming support, training classes on how to use technology, money to travel to learn or talk about technology based projects, etc. etc."
"My project - participation in an online, for-credit class in an academic department - was supported by an equipment upgrade from the library."
"software"
"The equipment, software and training for the task arre provided by the University Libraries"
"through workshops and short courses"
"We are expected to develop web pages as part of our jobs, especially when writing procedures manuals, etc. Publishing in an e-journal would be fine too. We're given all the software we need."
"We are supported in that we are encouraged to take the time to create them. I would like to see tangible rewards for those who do, even if that was a machine upgrade, larger monitor. Doesn't have to be big!"
"We have workshops on software packages that enhance our development of Web pages (such as Dreamweaver & Whiz Quiz) and we have access to FDI workshops to learn emerging technologies if we wish to sign up for them."
"Yes and No. It is possible to find technical support and advice from individuals in the library. Often I have had to seek support beyond the libraries."

If no, please comment on how they could be supported (for example, equipment, software, programming suport, or other areas)?

Text Responses (6 for this question)
"Equipment and software is poorly or incorrectly installed and people have to fight to get control of their systems so they can do their jobs. If they do get control of their systems, then they will not get any support from Library Systems."
"It is assumed that people will, for example, create and maintain web sites, and equipment is provided. But I'm not sure there is institutional recognition for the amount of effort this takes or the amount of support should be provided."
"release time for development activities"
"The technology support is out there, if you want to pursue it. What is lacking is the support to take the time necessary to develop these projects."
"There is little recognition of thesee projects by administration. It is difficult for users to find these projects because of the complexities of navigating the libraries web site. Sometimes equipment is not available, for example OCR or DAT equipment."
"Would actually prefer to have answered both yes and no. Why -- I think that we get support in terms of technological support, i.e. equipment and software, but NO support in terms of being relieved of other responsibilities during the time we are working on the technology-based project. I do not think that there is much real understanding of how much concentrated time and thought it takes to do a really good project, especially when it involves technology."

Q4. Below are some reasons for creating technology-based projects in libraries. Please indicate which ones are appropriate for VT University Libraries.
Select all that apply.

		Provides opportunity for librarian research/scholarship	(12/103 responses)
		Enhances awareness of and responsiveness to needs of constitutents outside the university	(18/103 responses)
		Fulfills needs of library/university need (e.g., to provide library/user interfaces)	(24/103 responses)
		Fulfills need in the library profession	(11/103 responses)
		Improves instruction in use of library or research materials	(24/103 responses)
		Provides professional recognition for librarians	(14/103 responses)
96.43% of the people who took this survey (27 / 28) answered this question.

Please provide other reasons for creating technology-based projects.

Text Responses (7 for this question)
"All of above are legitimate, though serving university community most important."
"As far as I personally am concerned the only really valid reason for creating any project, technological or otherwise, is that the end result of the project is better service to one's constituent clientelle. If my primary market will have better access to and a better understanding of how to access information resources, then the project is worth doing. But there are times when I think we engage in projects for the sake of doing the project regardless of its long-run benefit to anyone. Further, I do not think that librarians necessarily need to be the technology experts -- we are subject matter (ie information resources and information retrieval) experts. In many ways it would be a much more effecient and effective use of library faculty time, if librarian were paired with a technology experts and projects became a joint responsibility."
"enjoyment of technology learning to publish in different ways"
"Information technology is a fundamental tool of the library profession and one can hardly be a librarian without working on technology-based projects. Now we can ask what do you mean by a technology-based project? Almost everything I've done at Tech in 20 years has been technology-based projects."
"Outreach tool--. FUll text of oral history interviewsAbility to share information with an incredible range of users and promote dialog with students, alums, administration, and those beyond the university. Build virtual information bridges to draw people to and involve them with the university."
"To optimize library operations"
"web pages substitute for procedures manuals & notebooks. People can print out what they want. Saves printing costs because people print them selectively."

Q5. In the last 3 years, have you developed any of the following technology-based projects that you would have or did include as components of your annual evaluation or your dossier for promotion, continued appointment, or 2/4-year review?
Select all that apply.

		Videotape or audiotape (e.g., library tour/introduction audio or video)	(1/45 responses)
		Electronic list ownership or moderation	(2/45 responses)
		Web-based tutorial or other major Web project (including digitization)	(10/45 responses)
		Software program or package	(3/45 responses)
		Personal Web homepage	(8/45 responses)
		Subject or resource related Web page	(16/45 responses)
		Article in electronic journal	(5/45 responses)
71.43% of the people who took this survey (20 / 28) answered this question.

If there other types of technology-based projects that were or would have been components of your annual evaulation or your dossier, please specify.

Text Responses (5 for this question)
"Databases created for optimizing library operations"
"Participation in team-taught, online course"
"see above"
"Web sites and timelines documenting various aspects of Virignia Tech and Blacksburg history. Full text of oral history interviews."
"Worked on database design providing input, testing, etc. but don't take credit for the final product"

Q6. Within the past 3 years, has there been an increase in the number of technology-based projects on which you collaborated?

		Yes	(18/27 responses)
		No	(9/27 responses)
96.43% of the people who took this survey (27 / 28) answered this question.

If yes, who did you collaborate with?

� � � [select all that apply]

		Others in the university (but outside the library)	(13/30 responses)
		Others in the library (but outside your department)	(5/30 responses)
		Others in your department	(12/30 responses)
67.86% of the people who took this survey (19 / 28) answered this question.

Q7. Within the past 3 years, has there been an increase in the number of technology-based projects that you initiatied?

		No	(11/27 responses)
		Yes	(16/27 responses)
96.43% of the people who took this survey (27 / 28) answered this question.

Q8. The merit of a technology-based project may be assessed through its quality, its relevance, or its contribution to the profession. Please indicate which materials you might evaluate when making a decision about the merit of a technology-based project.
Select all that apply.

		Peer reviews of the project	(19/132 responses)
		Written comments by end users of the product	(21/132 responses)
		Accompanying print component in a refereed journal	(10/132 responses)
		Accompanying print component in a non-referreed journal	(2/132 responses)
		Written description of the procedures involved in its creation	(8/132 responses)
		Detailed written description of the content of the project	(9/132 responses)
		The product itself	(25/132 responses)
		A summary of the purpose and content of the project	(15/132 responses)
		Information about the decrease in staff hours required since using technology	(8/132 responses)
		Number of accesses to a Web site (i.e., hits)	(15/132 responses)
96.43% of the people who took this survey (27 / 28) answered this question.

Please specify other materials that you might evaluate when making a decision about the merit of a technology-based project.

Text Responses (3 for this question)
"Benefit of the project to the general public"
"Its usefulness to me or its users"
"Personally, I would use two basic criteria (although these might be broken down into several subsets). First I would want the project to have clarity of purpose and be logically organized. Second, I would want to know or ascertain that it actually met one or more needs of its target audience. If a project doesn't intrinsically make sense and doesn't serve the needs of the audience for whom it is built, then it is a waste of my time (not to mention the end-user's time)."

Q9. Below are some criteria that might be used to determine the merit of a technology-based project for annual evaluation or promotion, continued appointment, or 2/4-year review. Please indicate below if the criterion SHOULD be used in our library.
Select all that apply.

		National/international recognition of the project	(18/145 responses)
		Local recognition of the project	(20/145 responses)
		Exhibits complexity of design	(5/145 responses)
		Includes a thorough review of prior developments in the project's area of research	(7/145 responses)
		Presents logical development of ideas	(10/145 responses)
		Makes a significant or scholarly contribution to library science	(23/145 responses)
		Exhibits uniqueness or creativity	(17/145 responses)
		Makes a significant or scholarly contribution to local library services	(25/145 responses)
		Information about the decrease in staff hours required since using technology	(11/145 responses)
		Number of accesses to a Web site (i.e., hits)	(9/145 responses)
96.43% of the people who took this survey (27 / 28) answered this question.

Please specify other criteria that SHOULD be used to determine the merit of technology-based projects in annual evaluations or for promotion, continued appointment, or 2/4-year review.

Text Responses (7 for this question)
"contribution to collaborative efforts (both service and instructional) with faculty outside the library, i.e. where library technology enhances distance learning initiatives in specific courses."
"Exhibits an intellectual understanding of the topic"
"Having the value for making other operations run better or enabling others to work more efficiently"
"Its overall usefulness to library staff or its users. Projects consisting of fluff should be discounted from promotion/CA evaluations."
"Makes a significant or scholarly contribution to the University"
"My comments in Q8 apply to this question also. If a project doesn't make logical sense and doesn't serve the needs of the end-user (target audience) what is the point. Why should we be doing something that is, in the final analysis, for show rather than use. Interesting that one of the listed criteria deals with a "decrease in staff hours required." I have the impression that technology based projects do not decrease the number of required staff hours at all -- although they may shift where those staff hours come from."
"This needs to be clarified. Most of the above criteria are legitimate and COULD be used. However, most of the time only a few of them would be used. A project may be very useful for local library services, but there may be no national recognition of the project. So, when saying they SHOULD be used, I mean they are legitimate to use. I don't mean that every criteria should be used on every project."

Q10. Should technology-based projects specifically be addressed in the VT University Libraries' "Guidelines for Promotion and Continued Appointment?"

		Yes	(13/27 responses)
		No	(14/27 responses)
96.43% of the people who took this survey (27 / 28) answered this question.

If yes, why?

Text Responses (11 for this question)
"Because it may not be as valued if it is not specifically mentioned, though I believe the format is not as important as what the work is meant to accomplish in terms of scholarship, research, or service."
"Every time there's an orientation to preparing a dossier, this question comes up and it is explained that "significant" contributions can be added. It would be nice to have more clarification of what types of materials can be included and how they will be evaluated. These added guidelines would then help the faculty member decide if and what to include."
"I think that we should be able to interpret the document broadly enough to include technology-based projects. But it would probably be worthwhile to revise the document anyway to address other issues as well. So yes."
"If the P&CA committee looks only at content and not at format there should be no need for specifially addressing the issue. If there's a bias towards paper (it's more respectable) or towards electronic (it's more up-to-date) then perhaps there needs to be a reminder in the guidelines that content and quality of the project is the key, not format."
"If they're taking up chunks of time, then they should be addressed. Plus they should be adding value in some way."
"Only that they are acceptable projects."
"So that it is clearly understood that such projects are worthy of recognition."
"Technology based projects are very time-consuming and labor intensive at times. Faculty who spend time working on such projects need to be acknowledged and rewarded for their efforts. This area should be not REQUIRED as part of faculty evaluations, but INCLUDED so that we may support those who are working in this area to the exclusion of traditional areas of achievement."
"They are viewed by supervisors as part of the job"
"They often have more impact on the profession than print articles or conference presentations."
"To make sure everyone knows achievement in this domain is valued. However, we'd want to revisit this periodically because in a few years ago it may seem so obvious to all that to say it is gratuitous."

If no, why not?

Text Responses (13 for this question)
"Again, this is an ambivalent question for me. Technology based projects should be addressed to the extent that acceptable projects should be defined by the guidelines. But the thought that technology based projects might become a requirement for promotion and continued appointment is one with which I strongly disagree. Technology based projects should be treated approximately like any other project one engages in -- does it serve a real need? In my mind there is a fundamental difference between scholarship (where one is researching and analysing some facet of a topic) and projects (where one is building something which prior research has indicated there is a need for). Scholarship can and often does lead to projects (which leads perhaps to thinking the two are the same thing) -- but, I think that in terms of the P & CA guidelines they should be addressed separately."
"Already adequately addressed. Format is irrelevant."
"Already covered in concept by what is there."
"Because having technology is not a goal, it is merely the means to achieve the goals already outlined in the Guidelines such as impact on the profession."
"I think it should be assumed to fall under the categories already listed."
"No greater emphasis should be given to technology-based projects than is given to publishing an article, presenting at a conference, etc."
"Not every department has access to projects that could be both scholary and technology based. Not every librarian has the desire to create technology based projects. Library skills don't necessarily include an affinity with technolgy. Why should they be denied continuing appointment or tenure based on the fact that they have better people skills, or research skills or cataloging skills, rather than the ability to design a web page or write HTML code. Use of their skills in collaborating for a project would be acceptable."
"Not everyone has received adequate training and/or equipment to complete projects. Funding is not always available."
"Technology is a process not a result. I think that any innovative project should be considered not just those that have a technology process."
"Technology-based projects should be evaluated like any other types of projects and should not be singled out for special mention. Projects should be evaluated on their , whether technology-based ot otherwise."
"the present document includes publishing, research, instruction, etc. in any format."
"They are already being treated as a form of publication - all we need to do is add the words "technology-based products" to the current document."
"They are not inherently different from any other projects. Maybe some guidelines for when and when not to include web pages in dossier would be helpful."

Q11. Do you think that technology-based projects deserve more credibility in annual evaluations, promotion, continued appointment, or 2/4-year review than they currently receive?

		More	(9/26 responses)
		Same	(16/26 responses)
		Less	(1/26 responses)
92.86% of the people who took this survey (26 / 28) answered this question.

If you answered "more," what do you think would give them more credibility?

Text Responses (8 for this question)
"Creativity, accuracy, relevance, originality"
"I believe that they do receive adequate credibility from the committees that I've served on, but since I don't know what happens on other committees I guess i would like our procedures and documentation standardized so everyone receives the same review."
"I don't know how much credibility they currently have, so can't answer the question."
"More, even if all it does is motivate some people who could use technology more but are being hesitant to learn more so that they can take advantage of the many positive aspects of technology."
"Perhaps financial recognition in annual salary."
"Recognition of the increasing role that technology-based projects have in our discipline -- and I think the recognition is increasing on a national scale and perhaps we just need to look at that documentation and support material that is being published."
"Seems to me they already count."
"They are highly technical and time consuming."

If you answered "less," why do you think technology-based project deserve less credibility?

Text Responses (3 for this question)
"Because technology is a process not a "product"."
"See answer to no. 10."
"Technology is a tool. Properly used it can assist a librarian in providing superious information services. Improperly used (and all too often) it becomes glitz and hype -- something one does because the current mindset says that this is the only way to do things. There are many ways to "skin a cat." The first question I would ask of any project, whether technology-based or not, is: has it met a need and is it helping those in its target audience."

Q12. In your opinion, will technology-based projects alone (without additional traditional scholarship) ever be sufficient evidence of scholarship for granting promotion or continued appointment?

		No	(13/26 responses)
		Yes	(13/26 responses)
92.86% of the people who took this survey (26 / 28) answered this question.

Q13. Please choose the appropriate answer to the following questions as a means of identifying survey participants by broad categories:
My role in the library is: [Select all that apply]

		Other	(0/36 responses)
		Technical services	(6/36 responses)
		Digital Library and Archives	(2/36 responses)
		Reference	(7/36 responses)
		Instruction	(5/36 responses)
		Interlibrary Loan	(1/36 responses)
		Collection management	(4/36 responses)
		College librarian	(4/36 responses)
		Branch head	(2/36 responses)
		Administration	(5/36 responses)
78.57% of the people who took this survey (22 / 28) answered this question.

How long have you worked at Virginia Tech?

		16-20 years	(3/25 responses)
		11-15 years	(2/25 responses)
		7-10 years	(4/25 responses)
		4-6 years	(5/25 responses)
		>20 years	(5/25 responses)
		<3 years	(6/25 responses)
89.29% of the people who took this survey (25 / 28) answered this question.

Do you have tenure/continued appointment?

		No	(9/27 responses)
		Yes	(16/27 responses)
		Not on continued appointment track	(2/27 responses)
96.43% of the people who took this survey (27 / 28) answered this question.

http://lumiere.lib.vt.edu/surveys/results/view_results.php3
Generated at 05:06 pm on Monday, October 26th, 2015