Professional Development Survey

continuing education survey 
 

   Three questions about professional development were presented to survey participants. Two questions inquired about professional involvement: 1) What professional organizations are you a member of? and 2) What conferences do you regularly attend? The third question was about funding for professional development. The results are listed under each question.

   What professional organizations are you a member of?

Responses
Organization Number Percentage
ALA 87 69.6%
ACRL 81 64.8%
ASEE ELD 45 36.0%
SLA STD 38 30.4%
STS 65 52.0%
Other (see below for specific organizations) 53 42.4%

Other organizations listed included state and regional associations, additional divisions of ALA and SLA, other library and information associations, and science organizations.

Other Library Organizations

  • American Society for Information Science and Technology
  • (ASIST)Association of Computing Machinery (ACM)
  • Atmospheric Science Librarians International (ASLI)
  • Canadian Library Association (CLA)
  • Council on Botanical and Horticultural Libraries (CBHL)
  • Geoscience Information Society (GSIS)
  • International Association of Aquatic and Marine Science Libraries and Information Centers (IAMSLIC)
  • Library Orientation Exchange (LOEX)
  • Medical Library Association (MLA)
  • North American Serials Interest Group (NASIG)
  • Patent Information Users Group (PIUG)

Science Organizations

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
  • American Chemical Society (ACS)
  • ACS Division of Chemical Information (CINF)
  • American Public Health Association (APHA)
  • Indiana Academy of Science
  • Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
  • International Association of Agricultural Information Specialists (IAALD)
  • United States Agricultural Information Network (USAIN)

   What conferences do you regularly attend?

Tables are by membership in an organization. The column at the far right shows the percentage of respondents belonging to that organization who plan to attend each conference.

ALA | ACRL | ASEE ELD | SLA Scitech | STS

   ALA Members

ALA Member Responses
Attendance Plans
Attendees
Percent of total respondents
Respondents not in this group
Percent of respondents not in this group
Percent who are ALA members
ALA Annual 44 33% 89 67% 51%
ACRL 24 18% 109 82% 28%
ASEE Annual 16 12% 1170 88% 18%
SLA Annual 16 12% 117 88% 18%

   ACRL Members

ACRL Member Responses
Attendance Plans
Attendees
Percent of total respondents
Respondents not in this group
Percent of respondents not in this group
Percent who are ACRL members
ALA Annual 41 31% 92 69% 51%
ACRL 26 20% 107 80% 32%
ASEE Annual 15 11% 118 89% 19%
SLA Annual 14 11% 119 89% 17%

   ASEE ELD Members

ASEE ELD Member Responses
Attendance Plans
Attendees
Percent of total respondents
Respondents not in this group
Percent of respondents not in this group
Percent who are ASEE ELD members
ALA Annual 9 7% 124 93% 20%
ACRL 9 7% 124 93% 20%
ASEE Annual 30 23% 103 77% 67%
SLA Annual 7 5% 126 95% 16%

   SLA Scitech Members

SLA Scitech Member Responses
Attendance Plans
Attendees
Percent of total respondents
Respondents not in this group
Percent of respondents not in this group
Percent who are SLA Scitech members
ALA Annual 11 8% 122 92% 29%
ACRL 6 5% 127 95% 16%
ASEE Annual 6 5% 127 95% 16%
SLA Annual 27 20% 106 80% 71%

   STS Members

STS Member Responses
Conference
Number who plan to attend
Percent of total respondents
Respondents not in this group
Percent of respondents not in this group
Percent who are STS members
ALA Annual 38 29% 95 71% 58%
ACRL 18 14% 115 86% 28%
ASEE Annual 13 10% 120 90% 20%
SLA Annual 10 8% 123 92% 15%


   Funding for Professional Development

Survey respondents were asked to respond to the question " How much funding do you receive for professional development each year?"

Responses
Amount of Funding Number Percentage
None 2 1.6%
$0-499 10 7.9%
$500-999 37 29.1%
$1000-1499 40 31.5%
$2000-2499 5 3.9%
$2500-2999 3 2.4%
$3000 + 3 2.4%
Other 16 12.6%

Comments in the “other” box were quite varied, describing professional development situations unique to their institutions. No trends were evident from these comments.