Library Committee Handbook

Executive Committee

AUL Annual Reports

Committee Charge and Membership

Innovation Fund

2017-2018 Meeting Information

Previous Documents 

Position Table
Position Request Form

Standing Policies

Assessment Plan: Library Technology Prototyping Service

Assessment plan:  Library Technology Prototyping Service



Sue Searing, Jim Hahn, Lori Mestre, and Beth Namachchivaya met in early January 2013 to discuss the proposal Jim prepared for the Budget Group requesting funding of a Library technology prototyping service (TPS).  Sue and I recommend that the Library support the prototyping service request for up to 3 years, with an assessment in Year 2 of the service's effectiveness.  The Library's strategic plan calls out the importance of supporting innovation, in particular in the area of technology that can benefit and engage Library faculty and staff, as well as students.  The technology prototyping service is an important component of a Library technology innovation culture.   We want to ensure that there is strong outreach and communication to engage Library faculty, staff, and undergraduate students in the work of the service.  Jim has sought input into the work of the TPS, and has sent out targeted invitations to Library faculty and professionals who are interested in helping to shape the prototyping service.   Further, Beth and Jim Dohle will talk about more effective ways that Library IT can work with Jim Hahn and those engaged in shaping the prototyping service to ensure that it evolves into a service with Library-wide stakeholders and impact. 


Assessment Framework:


We recommend appointing an ad hoc group in June 2014 to carry out an assessment of the TPS. The membership of the group should include:


Points on which the TPS will be assessed:




How effectively does the service communicate with Library faculty, staff and students about opportunities to have input into the development of prototype services?

What types of outreach have been pursued with campus groups and organizations who are working on similar activities?


Goals and accomplishments:


What are the service’s goals, and how do the staff and faculty accomplish those goals?

How do the goals of the TPS tie in with the Library’s strategic plan?


Educational / research/ mentoring mission:


Has the TPS program influenced the perspective of students who participate to be more interested in LIS careers than they were prior to participating in the program?

            Data could be collected through exit interviews with undergraduate students; the GSLIS LAMP program might have a standard participant evaluation form that TPS could use as well.


Research mission:


Is there a set of research methods that students learn by participating in the service?

To what kinds of research experience are they exposed, and what are the requirements for them to demonstrate what they have learned/accomplished?

How do the lightweight prototypes developed by the service meet needs of users and Library staff?

If appropriate, has the TPS connected to the recently established Office of Undergraduate Research?




Jim and collaborators working in and with the TPS prepare a brief (up to 5 pages) report that addresses the above questions, by June 1, 2014.

The ad hoc group will review the TPS report, have conversations with Jim and others involved in the service, and will prepare a brief (up to 5 pages) report recommending further course of action, no later than July 30, 2014.