Rebecca A. Croxton, MLIS Doctoral Student UNCG School of Education

1. Is it time for a Paradigm Shift? Increasing the Intersection of Academic Libraries and Undergraduate Students through a Holistic Approach Rebecca A. Croxton, MLIS Doctoral Student UNCG School of Education

2. Statement of Problem University retention rates are low... Only 59 percent of first-time full-time students who began seeking a bachelor’s degree at a 4-year institution in fall 2007 completed the degree at that institution by 2013. National Center for Education Statistics (2015)

3. Academic libraries can be part of the solution... The academic library is equipped to play a critical role in engaging students in both the formal and informal systems of the institution, thus having the potential to positively affect student retention. (Tinto, 1975) Image Source: Allaboutvision.com

4. However ... … Undergraduate students are turning away from their academic libraries in favor of more attractive alternatives for their information seeking. Colón-Aguirre & Fleming-May, 2012 Denison & Montgomery, 2012 Image Source: Allaboutvision.com

5. The Undergraduate Information Seeking Literature Suggests... • Undergraduates prefer quick, easy, and convenient alternatives that do not include the library (Denison & Montgomery, 2012; De Rosa et al., 2011; Head & Eisenberg, 2009). • In a nationwide OCLC survey study (N=2,229, n=256 college students), De Rosa et al. (2011) noted: • Search engines dominate among college students as most preferred electronic source (93%). • Between 2005 to 2011, a decline was reported among college students in use of • library Web sites (62% to 58%), electronic journals (54% to 40%), online databases (35% to 30%) (Decline driven primarily by decrease in usage among 25-64 year olds.) • From 2005 to 2011, use rates among 18-24 year old college students showed either slight increase or flat: • Modest increase for library websites (53% to 58%) • Slight decline for e-journal use (41% to 39%) • No change for online databases (30%)

6. This is concerning because… • Significant, positive correlational evidence suggests library utilization is closely related to both students’ academic performance and retention. • Suggesting… ... when students are more engaged with academic resources they are also more likely to achieve academic success and graduate (Haddow, 2013; Soria, Fransen & Nackerud, 2013, 2014).

7. This is concerning because… Haddow, 2013 (n=6330) • ` • Percentages of Withdrawn/Retained x Logins to Authenticated Library Resources • Students who withdrew or returned for second semester of study • 39% of those who withdrew had 0 logins • 46% of those retained had 1-28 logins • 33.4% of those retained had 29+ logins • Students who withdrew or returned for fourth semester of study • 58.3% of those who withdrew had 0 logins • 53.1% of those retained had 1-25 logins. • 29.3% of those retained had 26+ logins.

8. Regression Analysis to Predict Return Following Semester… Factor Odds Female 0.62 Student of Color 1.25 International 4.13 First Generation 0.64 ACT 0.98 AP Credits 1.05 Freshman Sem 0.85 Veteran 1.28 Res Hall 2.23 ATS Prog 1.06 Pell Grant 0.98 Any Library Use 1.54 Factor Odds Female0.62 Student of Color 1.25 International 4.13 First Generation 0.64 ACT 0.98 AP Credits 1.05 Freshman Sem 0.85 Veteran 1.28 Res Hall 2.23 ATS Prog 1.06 Pell Grant 0.98 Database 1.03 Electronic Book 1.08 Loan 0.98 Electronic Jrnl 1.00 Intro to Lib I 0.94 Intro to Lib II 7.04 Odds ratios suggest that undergraduate students who: Used the library at least once during the initial semester were 1.54 times more likely to return the following semester. Attended Library Research II class were 7.04 times more likely to return the following semester. (Soria, Fransen, & Nackerud, 2013)

9. Libraries are Active University Partners for Retention

10. Despite these efforts... ...Many students continue to rely upon Google to find materials for their research, despite the fact that they had received library instruction that highlighted the value of using library resources to enhance and streamline the research process. (Colón-Aguirre & Fleming-May, 2012; Coulter, Clark, & Scamman, 2007; Detlor, Serenko, & Julien, 2012; Rempel & Cossarini, 2013) Image Source: usnews.com Image Source: Allaboutvision.com

11. While libraries are working to address these trends... ...What may be missing from the equation is a user-centered approach that looks at motivation of students to engage with the library. Image Source: standingstrongwellness.com Image Source: Allaboutvision.com

12. Purpose of Study Develop a deeper understanding of why undergraduate students are turning to sources beyond the academic library to meet their information needs • Explore ways by which to reverse these trends and bring undergraduates and academic libraries into closer alignment in support of academic success and university retention.

13. Four Key Research Questions • RQ1: What are the current and everyday life information seeking needs of undergraduates? • RQ2: What are the current academic and everyday life information seeking preferences of undergraduates? • RQ3: What are undergraduates’ perceptions about the usability of their academic library’s online resources? • RQ4: What are the perceptions, goals, mission, and strategic plans of the university library with regard to engaging and retaining students?

14. Key Findings in the Literature Information Needs • Formal: • Academic Resources (Library Use, Academic Success, & Retention - positively correlated) • Career Information • Students are largely extrinsically motivated to use academic resources. • Informal: • Reasons for drop-out: lack of preparation, academic issues, feelings of isolation, concerns about future. • Everyday life information needs & academic information needs are overlapping Information Seeking Preferences • Resources: • Search Engines - Convenient, fast, easy • Library - Confusing, difficult • Technology: • Pew (2011) report re: undergraduates: • 96% own smartphones • 88% own laptops • 59% own desktop computers • 63% use the internet on cell phones • Students are interested in searching library databases through mobile sites, though many databases not optimized (Pendell, 2012, Seeholzer & Salem, 2011).

15. Key Findings in the Literature Perceived Usefulness • Students recognize usefulness of library to achieve good grades when required by faculty. • Students - largely satisfied with Google results to meet academic needs. • Willing to sacrifice quality for convenience & accessibility. Perceived Ease of Use • Students experience high failure rates using online library resources. • High failure rates increase incidence of low self-efficacy for using the library resources. • Students tend to avoid activities in which they expect to fail.

16. Gaps in the Literature Student Motivation • Infrequent use of motivational terminology, though factors related to cost were often noted by researchers to help explain underutilization of libraries. • No large scale LIS studies noted using a motivational framework. Student Perspectives • Majority of studies in literature framed using a systems- centric approach that focused on if, whether, or how users engage with library. • Few studies actively used a user- centered approach that included students’ voices & perspectives to explain info seeking needs, preferences, and motivational factors.

17. Methodology

18. Why Mixed Methods? • Provides a richer set of data than one single method. Qualitative data gives rich, descriptive data sets, while quantitative data can reveal large scale trends. • Triangulate findings across multiple methods (interviews, surveys, website analysis, focus groups) • Developmental - Earlier phases inform development of subsequent phases • Complementary - Data from subsequent phases help explain data in earlier phases.

19. Participants & Context • Undergraduate students enrolled at a mid-sized doctoral granting public university in the southeastern United States • Library Administrators & Librarians

20. Data Sources Multiple data sources were required to answer the research questions.

21. Results

22. RQ1: Everyday Life Information Needs Everyday life and academic information seeking needs of students are complementary & overlapping.

23. RQ1: Course Related Research & Information Needs Papers that present an argument about an issue are most frequently cited academic information need; papers that present a close reading or interpretation of text are second most frequently cited.

24. RQ2: Search Engines Most Preferred Information Resource Search engines such as Google - rated most preferred for everyday life & academic information seeking.

25. RQ2: Academic Information Resource Preferences “I start with Google to get ideas and try to pick out the main points I like and then try to find a scholarly source after that” -- Undergraduate Student Interview, June 2015 “In general, I would probably start by doing a basic introductory level orientation to the topic using Google. I would try to find some layman articles and then go to the library to find some scholarly articles” -- Undergraduate Student Interview, June 2015 Note: These students had previously attended a library instruction course at their university. Using Google is often the first step in the academic research, followed up by accessing library resources.

26. Information Resource Rankings Everyday Life Information Seeking Academic Information Seeking

27. RQ3: Usability of Information Resources “ Undergraduate students perceive freely available online resources to be more “usable” than academic library online resources.

28. RQ3: Usability of Information Resources “ Undergraduate students are confident they can effectively use both freely available and academic library online resources.

29. RQ4: University Libraries’ Commitment to Engaging & Retaining Students • University Libraries: • Are partners in University High Impact Initiatives for retention. • Are committed to students’ academic success (e.g., dedicated first-year instruction librarian) • Passively addresses students’ everyday life information needs via leisure materials collaborative meeting/work/gathering space, and teaching life-long information literacy skills. • Not able to actively dedicate time/resources to addressing specific everyday life information needs. • Undergraduate students are interested in personalized information resources (M=5.48 out of 7 pts) University Libraries actively work to address students’ academic information needs and passively address everyday life information needs.

30. Summary of Key Findings • Everyday life and academic information needs overlap. • Data suggest that both everyday and academic information needs drive information seeking, thus the library may be able to play a role in addressing information needs beyond academic. • Search engines are most popular; academic library resources are valued for quality. • Free online resources are more likely to be accepted than academic library resources. • Undergraduate students are confident and savvy online information seekers. Because academic and everyday life information needs of students are closely intertwined, attending to these needs from an information science perspective may help to promote retention.

31. Study Limitations • Sampling Frame - A single university in the southeastern United States. • Study conducted during the summer - uncertain whether participants are representative of student population. • Freshman participants - unclear if students have taken any college classes or are new. • Majority of respondents completed library instruction, possibly skewing results. • Small sample - n=176 students (6.2% survey response rate), only 3 student interviews.

32. Recommendations for Future Directions • Determine academic barriers students face and consider ways the library can address these barriers from an information science perspective. • Explore the motivational factors that influence students’ engagement with the library. • Replicate study on large scale with representative participants at multiple institutions of higher education. • Consider ways to make library systems easier to use.

33. What Next? Large Scale Mixed Method Dissertation Study RQ1: What motivational variables best predict academic library utilization by undergraduate students? RQ2: What are the social cognitive information needs of successful students? RQ3: How do undergraduate students prefer to meet their information needs? RQ4: To what extent is addressing the everyday life information needs of students a viable option for academic libraries?

34. Student in Context The first step in understanding the information seeking needs & preferences of students is to understand their “where they’re coming from.”

35. Conceptual Framework: With student in context, explore the motivational variables that may impact a student’s choice to engage with the library.

36. Four study phases...

37. References Colón-Aguirre, M., & Fleming-May, R. A. (2012). “You just type in what you are looking for”: Undergraduates' use of library resources vs. Wikipedia. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 38(6), 391-399. Coulter, P., Clarke, S., & Scamman, C. (2007). Course grade as a measure of effectiveness of one-shot information literacy instruction. Public Services Quarterly, 3,147–163. Denison, D. R., & Montgomery, D. (2012). Annoyance or delight? College students' perspectives on looking for information. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 38, 380–390. De Rosa, C., Cantrell, J., Carlson, M., Gallagher, P., Hawk, J., & Schwartz, C. (2011). Perceptions of Libraries, 2010: Context and Community. Dublin, OH: OCLC Online Computer Library Center. Detlor, B., Booker, L., Serenko, A. & Julien, H. (2012). Student perceptions of information literacy instruction: The importance of active learning. Education for Information, 29, 147-161. Haddow, G. (2013). Academic library use and student retention: A quantitative analysis. Library & Information Science Research, 35, 127-136. Head, A. J., & Eisenberg, M. B. (2011). How college students use the Web to conduct everyday life research. First Monday, 16(4). Retrieved from: http://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3484/2857

38. References National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences. (2014). Fast facts: Enrollment. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=98 Pendell, K. D., & Bowman, M.S. (2012). Usability Study of a Library's Mobile Website: An Example from Portland State University. Information Technology & Libraries, 31 (2) 45-64. Rempel, D., & Cossarini, D. M. (2013). Communicating the relevance of the library in the age of Google: Improving undergraduate research skills and information literacy through new models of library instruction. Nordic Journal of Information Literacy in Higher Education, 5(1), 49-53. Seeholzer, J., & Salem., J. A. (2011). Library on the Go: A Focus Group Study of the Mobile Web and the Academic Library, College & Research Libraries 72 (1), 19. Soria, K. M., Fransen, J., & Nackerud, S. (2013). Library use and undergraduate student outcomes: New evidence for students' retention and academic success. Portal: Libraries & The Academy, 13, 147-164. Soria, K. M., Fransen, J., & Nackerud, S. (2014). Stacks, serials, search Engines, and students' success: First-year undergraduate students' library use, academic achievement, and retention. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40, 84-91. Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research, 45(1), 89-125. doi:10.3102/00346543045001089

39. Questions, Comments, & Advice For more information, contact Becky Croxton racroxto@uncg.edu