Solution Tag: Questionnaire

User survey at public libraries

Posted on September 12, 2018 by -

Context of research

The first large scale survey among users of public libraries took place in 2004. Over the last one and a half decades, the public library sector underwent substantial changes, among other things because of the increasing influence of the Internet, which redraw the media landscape. Although lending books remains at the core of public libraries, many libraries have reinvented themselves. Nowadays, public libraries are also community centers that host a variety of activities. Membership is no longer a condition to visit a library. The umbrella association of Flemish libraries (VVBAD – “Vlaamse Vereniging voor Bibliotheek, Archief en Documentatie”) ordered a follow-up survey in 2018.

The challenges

The follow-up survey was conducted via MOTUS. The flexibility of this softwareplatform needed to guarantee that:

  • Results are comparable with the survey from 2014;
  • Results are comparable between libraries;
  • The questionnaire was adapted to the changes that libraries underwent; and
  • The recruitment of respondents was expanded beyond members (after all, libraries are, for example, also community centers).

“MOTUS offers the flexibility to ask questions about the unique context of each individual library within the framework of a comparable research design.”

The survey

Between February and June 2018, users – in the broadest sense – of public libraries were invited to participate in the survey. On the central webpage (www.bib2018.be) they selected their own library and completed a general questionnaire as well as a library-specific questionnaire. Every library receives a personalised report. They will use the results to evaluate their functioning and improve it where necessary.

The survey in figures

  • 107 public libraries participated;
  • 61 libraries added personalised questions to the questionnaire;
  • Over 45.000 users had their say;
  • The questionnaire was online for five months;
  • The average completion time of the questionnaire was 28 minutes.

PhD survey

Posted on January 5, 2018 by -

Getting to know the PhD-trajectory

The PhD degree programme has made some implicit changes the past decade. Most important the number of PhD students grew significantly while at the same time number of promotors (University Professors) has not changed in the same way. With this PhD Survey the Vrije Universiteit Brussel wants to underpin:

  • how much time they devote to their research;
  • visualise the support PhD students receive from their supervisor(s) and from their broader scientific guidance network.

The main question is to assess the Quality in the PhD process.

Goal: more satisfied students

Almost every PhD student experiences the valley of doubt whether to successfully complete their PhD in time. Most typically this state occurs somewhere between the second and third year of the 4-year PhD-period.

The Central PhD Office is therefore focused on getting a better insight into every step of the PhD process, from the enrolment onwards, to avoid this trap that lowers the well-being of the PhD students.

An accompanying survey along the way

In this 5-year project we follow PhD-students from their first steps until they graduate as a Doctor. Via a survey, we collect valuable information on the research plan, the timing of the PhD-project, the workload, the working time arrangements, and the research output. We also focus on the support given by the supervisor, the extended network of colleagues, and the input of doctoral schools.

Towards a multi-actor action plan

This longitudinal approach makes it possible for the Central PhD Office to map problems, to see how the evolve over the years and to adapt their policies or actions.

To have an insight PhD-student receive an overview of their own situation or ‘feedback by self-evaluation’. Based on this output PhD-students can ask/or are asked to have a meeting with their faculty representatives, or faculty responsible.

Occupant-home interaction before and after renovation

Posted on February 14, 2017 by -

Our home: 5 features

We spend more than 90% of our time indoors, much of which is also spent in our own home. Studies show that the technical condition of a home also affects the physical and mental health of the people who live in it.

A healthy home usually has 5 features:

  • good sleeping conditions
  • comfortable indoor temperature
  • fresh air
  • plenty of natural light
  • good humidity level

Renovation: necessary, but not straightforward

In Europe the renovation of houses is an important focal point when it comes to energy efficiency. It is estimated that 9 out of 10 dwellings today will still be lived in by 2050. However, approximately 3/4 of these homes are not energy-efficient and so score poorly on at least 1 of the 5 features stated above. In fact, usually on several points. Yet despite that, many home-owners still hesitate to undertake the renovations needed due to a lack of knowledge and budget.

Affordable renovation in social housing

So how can we make sure that more homes are renovated? This is the question that VELUX asked when it embarked on a project in Anderlecht (Belgium), in the working-class district of Goede Lucht.  The project involved tackling a house built in the 1920s [JS1] where there was a significant need for structural renovation. Most of the residents of the area are tenants of the Social Housing company ‘Anderlechtse Haard’, which owns the building in question.

With this in mind, VELUX outlined an affordable renovation concept in which automatic controls play a key role: RenovActive.

From prototype to stereotype

Part of the affordability of this renovation project stems from the ability to replicate the renovation principles used. And so it was that the first renovated house was able to become the blueprint for 86 similar renovation projects in the neighbourhood. This means that RenovActive is now evolving from prototype to stereotype: millions of houses owned by social housing companies in Europe can use these same renovation principles.

OK – but what really changes for the occupant?

Every architect and manufacturer will argue based on the potential of the project or product in question. So it may be possible the effect that the renovation has on the way in which occupants actually use their house differs from the initial theoretical assessment.

A user analysis of the residents gives us an insight into the question of ‘how do various aspects of renovation have an effect on interaction between the occupant and the house?’.

Mixture of methods

Underlying the overall question, our aim is to gather knowledge about the 4 dimensions of the interaction between the occupant and the house:

  • Overall wellbeing
  • Satisfaction/happiness with the house
  • Perception of health
  • Patterns of behaviour

For this project hbits is using a combination of different data collection methods. There’s the (online) questionnaire, individual conversations and group discussions – and then there’s the MOTUS app for examining user behaviour.

The occupants use the MOTUS app to record their behaviour and answer context-related questions. The types of behaviour involve, on the one hand, the use/application of technical renovations (e.g. central ventilation, central heating, opening a window/door) and, on the other, day-to-day activities (work, domestic chores, free time, sleeping, etc.) at home/elsewhere, alone or with others.

The MOTUS app will also be used as an intermediary for communicating technical indicators (such as the consumption of heat) to the occupants and to ask extra questions about them. By doing this, we can link technical input with sociological input.

Before and after comparisons

All family members in the participating families are asked to take part in the screening at different periods of throughout the RenovActive project. The screening begins with a t-1 measurement at their old, unrenovated house and hence before they move back into their newly renovated home. Shortly after moving into the new dwelling, a t-0 measurement is carried out. A further 7 measurements are then carried out over a period of 2 years to assess any changes in behaviour and opinions. By doing this, we can also even out any seasonal variations.

The study began in 2016 and will end in 2018/19.