한국도서관정보학회지 (Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society)

한국도서관정보학회 (Korean Library and Information Science Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

국내 대학도서관 정책 성과에 대한 현장 인식 조사

Field Perception Analysis on Policy Outcomes of Academic Libraries

  • 이종욱 (경북대학교 문헌정보학과) ;
  • 강우진 (경북대학교 문헌정보학과) ;
  • 정영미 (동의대학교 문헌정보학과)
  • 투고 : 2023.12.06
  • 심사 : 2023.12.13
  • 발행 : 2023.12.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구에서는 제2차 대학도서관진흥종합계획(2019~2023)의 완료 시기가 도래함에 따라 기존 종합계획의 추진과제에 대한 이행 수준을 대학도서관 주요 통계와 도서관 직원의 인식을 토대로 살펴보고자 하였다. 이를 위해 최근 5년간 대학도서관 주요 통계 지표 변화를 살펴보았으며, 도서관 직원을 대상으로 제2차 종합계획에 대한 전반적인 인식과 17개 세부과제에 대한 중요도와 수행도 인식을 설문 조사하였다. 총 369명의 설문 응답을 분석한 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 대다수 응답자는 제2차 종합계획에 대해 잘 알고 있었으며, 도서관 발전계획이나 시행계획 수립에 빈번하게 활용하고 있었다. 둘째, 세부과제 17개에 대한 IPA 분석 결과, 대학의 유형과 상관없이 시설 개선이나 교수-학습 지원, 학술자원 접근성 확대는 꾸준히 유지되어야 하며, 도서관 정책을 개발하고 인력과 재정을 확충하기 위한 노력이 강화되어야 하는 것으로 나타났다. 셋째, 4년제 대학은 전문대학에 비해 해외 학술자원의 접근성 확대를 특히 중요시하고 있었으며, 전문대학은 4년제 대학에 비해 기초소양 함양 프로그램이나 포용적 서비스를 더 중요하게 인식하고 있었다. IPA 대각선 모형 적용 결과 모든 세부과제에 대한 수행도가 중요도에 비해 낮은 것으로 드러났는데, 이는 추후 종합계획 수립 시 실효성 제고를 위한 전략적 모색이 중요하다는 것을 시사한다.

In this study, we aimed to examine the level of implementation of the second comprehensive plan for promoting academic libraries (2019-2023) by analyzing key statistics of academic libraries and gathering perceptions from library staff. We analyzed the changes in major statistical indicators of libraries over the past five years. Additionally, we surveyed library staff to understand their overall perceptions of the plan and their attitudes towards the 17 sub-tasks outlined in it. The analysis of 369 survey responses revealed several key findings. Firstly, most respondents comprehended the plan well and frequently utilized it for developing their libraries' development and implementation plans. Secondly, the IPA results indicated that regardless of the type of university, there should be a continuous focus on facility improvement, teaching-learning support, and expanding access to academic resources. Efforts to develop library policies and strengthen human and financial resources were identified as crucial. Thirdly, four-year universities particularly emphasized the importance of expanding access to international academic resources compared to junior colleges. Conversely, junior colleges perceived foundational skill-building programs and inclusive services as more significant than four-year universities. The application of the IPA diagonal model revealed that the performance levels of all sub-tasks were lower than their perceived importance levels, suggesting the need for strategies to enhance effectiveness in future comprehensive plan formulation.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Chang, Durk Hyun (2019). Perceived effects and tasks of library strategic plans of universities in Korea. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 53(4), 213-230. https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2019.53.4.213
  2. Chang, Yunkeum, Lee, Hye-Eun, Moh, Young-Kyu, & Jeon, Kyungsun (2020). Exploring key strategy areas for academic library development planning in Korea. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 54(3), 97-114. https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2020.54.3.097
  3. Choi, Jae-Hwang & Lee, Jongwook (2019). Comparative analysis on the statistics of academic libraries of major universities in South Korea and North America. Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, 51(3), 197-221. http://dx.doi.org/10.16981/kliss.51.3.202009.197
  4. Framework Act on Public Service Evaluation. Act No. 14839.
  5. Han, Hye-Young (2005). Comparative analysis on current status of research university libraries between Korea and the united states. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 39(4), 25-44. https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2005.39.4.025
  6. Jung, Youngmi (2020). Users and librarians' perceptions and needs analysis on the university library space. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 54(1), 223-242. https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2020.54.1.223
  7. Korea Education and Research Information Service (2019). Analysis of Factors Influencing National Research Competitiveness through Academic Resources (CR 2019-8).
  8. Korean Library Association (2013). Korean Library Standards. Seoul: Korean Library Association.
  9. Lee, Jae-Whoan (2012). Progress and problems in Korean academic library policies. Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, 43(4), 317-346, http://dx.doi.org/10.16981/kliss.43.4.201212.317
  10. Lee, Jae-Won (2019). A study of policy and agenda adoption trends of university library in Korea. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 53(3), 83-99. https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2019.53.3.083
  11. Ministry of Education (2019). 2nd Action plans for the promotion of university libraries: 2019~2023.
  12. Ministry of Education [n.d.]. Lookup Statistics, Rinfo. Available: http://www.rinfo.kr/stat/search/basic/1
  13. Oh, Sunhye & Kwak, Seung-Jin (2021). A study on the development of the research support service model of the university library based on the research life cycle. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 55(3), 321-342. https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2021.55.3.321
  14. University And College Libraries Promotion Act. Act No. 18547.
  15. University And College Libraries Promotion Act Enforcement Decree. Presidential Decree No. 32528.
  16. Bacon, D. R. (2003). A comparison of approaches to importance-performance analysis. International Journal of Market Research, 45(1), 55-71. https://doi.org/10.1177/147078530304500101
  17. Boley, B. B., Mcgehee, N. G., & Hammett, A. L. T. (2017). Importance-performance analysis (IPA) of sustainable tourism initiatives: the resident perspective. Tourism Management, 58, 66-77.
  18. Chen, J.-K. (2021). A new approach for diagonal line model of importance-performance analysis: a case study of tourist satisfaction in China. SageOpen, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244021989276
  19. Doran, G. T. (1981). There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives. Management Review, 70(11), 35-36.
  20. Goodall, D. & Pattern, D. (2011). Academic library non/low use and undergraduate student achievement: a preliminary report of research in progress. Library Management, 32(3), 159-170. https://doi.org/10.1108/01435121111112871
  21. Martilla, J. A. & James, J. C. (1977). Importance-performance analysis. Journal of Marketing, 41(1), 77-79. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224297704100112
  22. Montenegro, M., Clasing, P., Kelly, N., Gonzalez, C., Jara, M., Alarcon, R., Sandora, I., & Saurina, E. (2016). Library resources and students' learning outcomes: do all the resources have the same impact on learning?. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 42(5), 551-556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2016.06.020
  23. Oppenheim, C. & Stuart, D. (2004). Is there a correlation between investment in an academic library and a higher education institution's ratings in the Research Assessment Exercise?. Aslib Proceedings, 56(3), 156-165. https://doi.org/10.1108/00012530410699578