The Guide Review Committee (GRC) will review guides annually to assess if they continue to be of value to the collection. After assessment, a guide will either be kept for the year (and assessed again next year), or if the guide does not pass, the guide owner will have the option for further development, and/or promotion, or retirement. The GRC will use the average number of views per year per Guide to rank and assess.
Guides will be assessed annually, after two years of published status (allow them to gain traction)
Assessment ranking will be based on the average view of the previous 12 months (1 year)
Assessment will also consider:
Content duplication
Related Course/Program status
Whether the program is still active
Program size/student group size (I.e., a guide could be very actively used by the program, but the program has a small student group)
Program run intermittently (I.e., very active but only run once a year (so peak number for a few months and low numbers in other months - bringing the average down)
Statistics are taken from SpringShare (which gives us total views for the Guide*). Results will be filtered using the following categories
Group: Guides
Status: Published (we are not assessing unpublished or private guides)
Ranking: Average number of views / year
|
Code |
Ranking |
Range (avg views/year) |
Result / Assessment |
|
Red |
very low |
<10 |
at risk must be addressed asap |
|
Orange |
low |
10-35 |
at risk, should be addressed |
|
Yellow |
average |
35-60 |
average, recommend intervention |
|
Lt green |
high |
60-80 |
higher than average, keep up the great work |
|
Dk green |
very high |
>80 |
very high, exceptional work |
*We do acknowledge that the statistics from SpringShare are not perfect, but they do give us a reasonable picture of usage.
**the Guides home page, and technical guides held by Mark Nelson are not included in this assessment.
The GRC will notify Owners that their guide fell into the red or orange categories of the review metrics.
Owners will take the following action(s):
Further development – in this we highly recommend approaching faculty for more information or opportunity for faculty collaboration. If this guide was created with faculty, explore options for revision or further development.
And/Or
Promotion – work with Program Support and Promotions to enhance the visibility of the guide through staff news, blog posts, social media, etc.
And/Or
Retire the guide (either permanently (delete) or temporarily (unpublish)) ***NOTE: the switch of status will be completed by GRC at the recommendation of the guide owner**
Resolution of ‘at risk’ guides will be addressed on a case-by-case basis.
Notify the GRC of how they plan to address the guide in question (we are happy to answer questions and assist)
A response is required within 2 weeks of notification
Offer a timeline of when they anticipate changes will be complete (if opting for development)
3 months guideline for ‘relaunch’
Let the GRC know of any development or communication with faculty, Program Support and Promotions, etc.
Owners should notify GRC if a guide’s category status changes. Ex. A discussion with faculty reveals that an ‘at risk’ guide has low numbers because the class that uses it is small and only runs once a year.
Guides falling into these categories may have additional considerations during the assessment.
Faculty and Inter-departmental Collaboration Guides
(were created in partnership with faculty or others upon request and are an integral part of programming; low numbers in these guides may require further discussion with faculty),
Database Instruction Guides
(retired when we no longer subscribe to a database)
Strategic Plan and Value-based Guides
(guides of particular interest to the broader college community)
e.g., Residential Schools, Anti-Racism, Sexual assault awareness, healthy minds etc.
Point of Need Guides
(will be retired based on need no longer required)
e.g., Working from Home Guide set,
Excel spreadsheets of annual weeding documents are kept on the GRC Team General / Weeding
