Developing an Academic Library Assessment Plan: A Case Study

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to analyze the process of developing an academic library assessment plan and its relation to the furtherance of a culture of assessment. Design/methodology/approach – Qualitative study of a university library’s assessment planning process; findings based on documentary evidence as well as an employee survey; analysis framed in relationship to relevant literature. Findings – Planning for the future of assessment offered the Jerry Falwell Library a significant opportunity for organizational change. Evaluations of the planning process were mixed, but generally revealed evidence of conditions associated with the development of a culture of assessment. Participants saw planning as the product of both external and internal factors. The plan’s orientation toward value and impact, though clearly understood, was not universally appreciated. Implementation of the plan remains a substantial challenge. Research limitations/implications – Reliability is subject to the limitations inherent to qualitative methods. Single case study design limits generalizability to different contexts. Practical implications – The goal of developing a culture of assessment is not to be achieved easily or quickly. Library employees may be most inclined to support an assessment agenda when it is driven by internal factors such as quality improvement and the pursuit of efficiency and effectiveness. Originality/value – The study emphasizes the process of developing an assessment plan at a university with a strong teaching mission. Additionally, it provides insight into the relationship between assessment planning and a culture of assessment

High Intensity Exercise Countermeasures does not Prevent Orthostatic Intolerance Following Prolonged Bed Rest

Approximately 20% of Space Shuttle astronauts became presyncopal during operational stand and 80deg headup tilt tests, and the prevalence of orthostatic intolerance increases after longer missions. Greater than 60% of the US astronauts participating in Mir and early International Space Station missions experienced presyncope during postflight tilt tests, perhaps related to limitations of the exercise hardware that prevented high intensity exercise training until later ISS missions. The objective of this study was to determine whether an intense resistive and aerobic exercise countermeasure program designed to prevent cardiovascular and musculoskeletal deconditioning during 70 d of bed rest (BR), a space flight analog, would protect against postBR orthostatic intolerance. METHODS Twentysix subjects were randomly assigned to one of three groups: nonexercise controls (n=11) or one of two exercise groups (ExA, n=8; ExB, n=7). Both ExA and ExB groups performed the same resistive and aerobic exercise countermeasures during BR, but one exercise group received testosterone supplementation while the other received a placebo during BR in a doubleblinded fashion. On 3 d/wk, subjects performed lower body resistive exercise and 30 min of continuous aerobic exercise (75% max heart rate). On the other 3 d/wk, subjects performed only highintensity, intervalstyle aerobic exercise. Orthostatic intolerance was assessed using a 15min 80 headup tilt test performed 2 d (BR2) before and on the last day of BR (BR70). Plasma volume was measured using carbon monoxide rebreathing on BR3 and before rising on the first recovery day (BR+0). The code for the exercise groups has not been broken, and results are reported here without group identification. RESULTS Only one subject became presyncopal during tilt testing on BR2, but 7 of 11 (63%) controls, 3 of 8 (38%) ExA, and 4 of 7 (57%) ExB subjects were presyncopal on BR70. Survival analysis of postBR tilt tests revealed no differences (p=0.77) between groups. Plasma volume (absolute or relative to body mass index) decreased (p<0.001) from pre to postBR, with no differences between groups. CONCLUSIONS These preliminary results corroborate previous reports that the performance of a vigorous exercise countermeasure protocol during BR, even with testosterone supplementation, does not protect against orthostatic intolerance or plasma volume loss. Preventing postBR orthostatic intolerance may require additional countermeasures, such as orthostatic stress during BR or endofBR fluid infusion

High Intensity Resistive and Rowing Exercise Countermeasures Do Not Prevent Orthostatic Intolerance Following 70 Days of Bed Rest

More than 60% of US astronauts participating in Mir and early International Space Station missions (greater than 5 months) were unable to complete a 10min 80 deg headup tilt test on landing day. This high incidence of postspaceflight orthostatic intolerance may be related to limitations of the inflight exercise hardware that prevented high intensity training. PURPOSE: This study sought to determine if a countermeasure program that included intense lowerbody resistive and rowing exercises designed to prevent cardiovascular and musculoskeletal deconditioning during 70 days of 6 deg head-down tilt bed rest (BR), a spaceflight analog, also would protect against post BR orthostatic intolerance. METHODS: Sixteen males participated in this study and performed no exercise (Control, n=10) or performed an intense supine exercise protocol with resistive and aerobic components (Exercise, n=6). On 3 days/week, exercise subjects performed lower body resistive exercise and a 30min continuous bout of rowing (greater than or equal to 75% max heart rate). On 3 other days/week, subjects performed only highintensity, intervalstyle rowing. Orthostatic intolerance was assessed using a 15min 80 deg headup tilt test performed 2 days (BR2) before and on the last day of BR (BR70). Plasma volume was measured using a carbon monoxide rebreathing technique on BR3 and before rising on the first recovery day (BR+0). RESULTS: Following 70 days of BR, tilt tolerance time decreased significantly in both the Control (BR2: 15.0 +/- 0.0, BR70: 9.9 +/- 4.6 min, mean +/- SD) and Exercise (BR2: 12.2 +/- 4.7, BR70: 4.9 +/- 1.9 min) subjects, but the decreased tilt tolerance time was not different between groups (Control: 34 +/- 31, Exercise: 56 +/- 16%). Plasma volume also decreased (Control: 0.56 +/- 0.40, Exercise: 0.48 +/- 0.33 L) from pre to postBR, with no differences between groups (Control: 18 +/- 11%, Exerciser: 15 +/-1 0%). CONCLUSIONS: These findings confirm previous reports in shorter BR studies that the performance of an exercise countermeasure protocol by itself during BR does not prevent orthostatic intolerance or plasma volume loss. This suggests that protection against orthostatic intolerance in astronauts following longduration spaceflight will require an additional intervention, such as periodic orthostatic stress, fluid repletion, and/or lowerbody compression garments

High Intensity Exercise Countermeasures do not Prevent Orthostatic Intolerance following Prolonged Bed Rest

No abstract availabl

NASA's Functional Task Test: High Intensity Exercise Improves the Heart Rate Response to a Stand Test Following 70 Days of Bedrest

Cardiovascular adaptations due to spaceflight are modeled with 6deg head-down tilt bed rest (BR) and result in decreased orthostatic tolerance. We investigated if high-intensity resistive and aerobic exercise with and without testosterone supplementation would improve the heart rate (HR) response to a 3.5-min stand test and how quickly these changes recovered following BR. During 70 days of BR male subjects performed no exercise (Control, n=10), high intensity supine resistive and aerobic exercise (Exercise, n=9), or supine exercise plus supplemental testosterone (Exercise+T, n=8; 100 mg i.m., weekly in 2-week on/off cycles). We measured HR for 2 min while subjects were prone and for 3 min after standing twice before and 0, 1, 6, and 11 days after BR. Mixed-effects linear regression models were used to evaluate group, time, and interaction effects. Compared to pre-bed rest, prone HR was elevated on BR+0 and BR+1 in Control, but not Exercise or Exercise+T groups, and standing HR was greater in all 3 groups. The increase in prone and standing HR in Control subjects was greater than either Exercise or Exercise+T groups and all groups recovered by BR+6. The change in HR from prone to standing more than doubled on BR+0 in all groups, but was significantly less in the Exericse+T group compared to the Control, but not Exercise group. Exercise reduces, but does not prevent the increase in HR observed in response to standing. The significantly lower HR response in the Exercise+T group requires further investigation to determine physiologic significance