Network Analysis of Libraries Used by Faculty, Staff, and APs
1 / 12

Methods - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Network Analysis of Libraries Used by Faculty, Staff, and APs Arranged alphabetically JoAnn Jacoby University Library University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Methods.

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Methods' - elmo-conrad

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

Network Analysis of Libraries Used by Faculty, Staff, and APs Arranged alphabeticallyJoAnn JacobyUniversity LibraryUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Methods APs

  • Data mined from the survey sent to all faculty & staff in Spring 2006 were used to create social network maps of UIUC Libraries

  • Responses to “Indicate your primary library/ (ies)” were used to create network maps

    • Respondents could choose as many libraries as they pleased

  • Reveals connections between departmental libraries from the users’ perspective


Network map of connections among all UIUC libraries. APs Lines were drawn when

5 or more respondents reported using both of the libraries. Selected nodes in color.


Pink – Spanish, Italian & Portuguese, Associate Professor APs

Indigo - Physics, Professor

Green - Agricultural Science (ACES), Academic Professional

Light Blue -Cinema Studies, Assistant Professor

Some Individual Faculty


Major connections APs - 20 or more respondents.


English APs


* Distributed by a campus-mediated “massmail,” the survey was sent to 12,399 (not 13103) individuals because the headcount at the time was less than the annual maximum. The response rate was therefore slightly higher than shown in this chart based on DMI figures.