LibQUAL+ Survey 2004 @ Queen's University Library : analysis of results

Queen's University Library was one of 202 libraries, including 57 members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL), to survey its users in spring 2004 using the LibQUAL+ survey instrument. LibQUAL+ was designed by ARL to assist libraries in assessing the quality of their services and identifying areas for improvement. # Overall: Queen's scored higher than the average for all ARL participants and 1st among the 2004 Canadian participants. This relatively high rating is due to very high scores in the dimensions of Library as Place and Affect of Service. However, there is considerable need for improvement in the area of Information Control where Queen's rated well below the ARL average. # Affect of Service: Queen's strong overall ratings are supported by the many respondent comments praising customer service throughout the system. The ratings and survey comments indicate greatest appreciation by faculty and more experienced students (e.g. graduate students) for the instruction and on-site services provided by the libraries. The ratings also indicate that undergraduates, growing up with the web, want and expected to be able to access library resources independently and do not value these services as highly. The comments also indicated some specific areas for improvement throughout the library system. # Library as Place : All Queen's libraries except for Law ranked well above the ARL and Canadian averages. Overall, Library as Place ranked lowest in importance among the service dimensions for all ARL participants including Queen's. Comparative analysis of LibQUAL results since the survey began shows a decline in “desired” ratings for Library as Place. However, undergraduates continue to give strong "desired" ratings to certain aspects of Library as Place and a relatively high rating for "minimum expected" service. The comments from Queen's survey respondents and ARL's analyses of focus groups indicate that undergraduates value the library much more as a place to study and work with peers rather than for its on-site resources and services. # Information Control: This is the area in greatest need of attention. While it ranked highest in importance for all user groups by a wide margin, Queen's performed poorly in this category. Overall, Queen's ranked far below both the ARL average and the top three Canadian scores. However, the major dissatisfaction was concentrated in the humanities/social sciences (Stauffer primary users) and the health sciences (Bracken primary users) where the overall rating of perceived service quality ranked below the minimum expected service rating. Primary users of the Education, Engineering/Science and Law libraries rated this service dimension higher than the ARL average. The great success of the Canadian National Site License Program (CNSLP) is reflected in the high overall rating generated by Engineering/Science Library users. The low ratings from the humanities and social sciences are supported by respondents' comments and are generally consistent with other ARL participants.

LibQUAL+ Survey 2007 at Queen’s University Library: Analysis of Results

Analysis of 2007 LibQUAL+ results from the survey conducted by Queen's University in February 2007.

Melancholy and the Early Modern University

Critics have observed that in early Stuart England, the broad, socially significant concept of melancholy was recoded as a specifically medical phenomenon—a disease rather than a fashion. This recoding made melancholy seem less a social attitude than a private ailment. However, I argue that at the Stuart universities, this recoded melancholy became a covert expression of the disillusionment, disappointment, and frustration produced by pressures there—the overcrowding and competition which left many men “disappointed” in preferment, alongside James I’s unprecedented royal involvement in the universities. My argument has implications for Jürgen Habermas’s account of the emergence of the public sphere, which he claims did not occur until the eighteenth-century. I argue that although the university was increasingly subordinated to the crown’s authority, a lingering sense of autonomy persisted there, a residue of the medieval university’s relative autonomy from the crown; politicized by the encroaching Stuart presence, an alienated community at the university formed a kind of public in private from authority within that authority’s midst. The audience for the printed book, a sphere apart from court or university, represented a forum in which the publicity at the universities could be consolidated, especially in seemingly “private” literary forms such as the treatise on melancholy. I argue that Robert Burton’s exaggerated performance of melancholy in The Anatomy of Melancholy, which gains him license to say almost anything, resembles the performed melancholy that the student-prince Hamlet uses to frustrate his uncle’s attempts to surveil him. After tracing melancholy’s evolving literary function through Hamlet, I go on to discuss James’s interventions into the universities. I conclude by considering two printed (and widely circulated) books by university men: the aforementioned The Anatomy of Melancholy by Burton, an Oxford cleric, and The Temple by George Herbert, who left a career as Cambridge’s public orator to become a country parson. I examine how each of these books uses the affective pattern of courtly-scholarly disappointment—transumed by Burton as melancholy, and by Herbert as holy affliction—to develop an empathic form of publicity among its readership which is in tacit opposition to the Stuart court.

Bystander Narratives: The Fiction of J.M. Coetzee and the Holocaust

J.M. Coetzee’s novels are suffused with a pervasive, though often oblique, Holocaust awareness. Direct references to the event and to the historical era to which it belongs, subtle stylistic and thematic echoes of Holocaust writing, and the recurrent mobilization of Holocaust imagery in Coetzee’s novels all contribute to suggest the significance of the event to the author’s work and thought. Providing Coetzee with a lens through which to view the contemporary situation, both local and global, the Holocaust offers Coetzee a means by which difficult and complex questions of ethics and historiographical truth may be approached. Above all, the Holocaust and its representation contribute to Coetzee’s exploration of the dilemmas of translating the traumatic lived experience of atrocity – including, but not limited to, life in apartheid South Africa – into narrative form. Taken as a whole, Coetzee’s oeuvre initially anticipates and later responds to, in characteristically oblique fashion, the narrative project(s) facing post-apartheid South Africa as the newly-democratic nation sought to make sense of its past through a variety of means, the most important of which was the country’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Implicitly challenging the TRC’s findings as well as its narrative assumptions, the Coetzean oeuvre accordingly invites being read as offering a continuous and evolving counter-narrative to the TRC and its construction of a narrative of the apartheid past for the post-apartheid nation. In utilizing the Holocaust, its representations, and the reception thereof to frame his response to apartheid, Coetzee implicates both in a critique of the Western model of modernity, suggesting, in the process, the importance of reconfiguring modernity in a more ethical shape.