1 / 19

Student research behavior — prototype application From research conducted at the University of Maryland, 2005-2006

Student research behavior — prototype application From research conducted at the University of Maryland, 2005-2006. Computers in Libraries, March 2009 Dan Wendling, MLS, & Neal Kaske, PhD wendlingd@acm.org http://ponder-matic.com.

dirk
Télécharger la présentation

Student research behavior — prototype application From research conducted at the University of Maryland, 2005-2006

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Student research behavior — prototype applicationFrom research conducted at the University of Maryland, 2005-2006 Computers in Libraries, March 2009 Dan Wendling, MLS, & Neal Kaske, PhD wendlingd@acm.org http://ponder-matic.com

  2. How do students use Google in their last course-related search for information? (n=544; 2005-06) When Who How http://www.ponder-matic.com

  3. How do students use UMD’s ResearchPort in their last course-related search? (n=544; 2005-06) (ResearchPort is the University of Maryland Libraries’ gateway to licensed content.) http://www.ponder-matic.com

  4. Comparison of who used Google and ResearchPort in course-related searching (n=544) http://www.ponder-matic.com

  5. Comparison of when Google and ResearchPort were accessed in course-related searching (n=544) http://www.ponder-matic.com

  6. This presentation • How should we describe information-seeking behavior? Project research questions / methodology • Demonstration of the application prototype at http://www.ponder-matic.com • Results, conclusions, next steps http://www.ponder-matic.com

  7. Foudy, Johnson, & Kaske 2005 research questions • What are contemporary university students’ information-seeking behaviors and what role(s), if any, do libraries and/or librarians play in these behaviors? • What are contemporary students’ mental models of the tasks performed by librarians? • Do these behaviors or mental models differ according to level of matriculation, from freshmen through graduate students? http://www.ponder-matic.com

  8. Individual interviews with 544 students (N=544; 256 + 288) On campus Not in, not near a library Sampling –“convenience” Critical incident reporting Run one week in April 2005 and one week in November 2006 Focus group interviews with 110 students (N=12; 110 participants) 3 groups each for: Freshmen Sophomores Juniors & Seniors Graduate students Basic Research Design Methodology: Mixed Method Approach, 2005-2006 http://www.ponder-matic.com

  9. Individual Interview Form (page 1 of 2) (Reproduced in your conference book and on our web site.) http://www.ponder-matic.com

  10. Project coding sheet, version 9 (See conference book or web site for version 10.) http://www.ponder-matic.com

  11. Model: How students move through information space http://www.ponder-matic.com

  12. Anatomy of one session, a ResearchPort search http://www.ponder-matic.com

  13. Demo of the prototype at http://www.ponder-matic.com http://www.ponder-matic.com

  14. What makes projects like this work • Selected bullets from the book Competing on Analytics, by Davenport and Harris, “Signposts of effective IT”: • Information workers spend their time analyzing data and understanding its implications rather than collecting and formatting data. • Managers focus on improving processes and business performance, not culling data. • A hypothesis can be quickly analyzed and tested without a lot of manual behind-the-scenes preparation beforehand. • Analysts have direct, nearly instantaneous access to data. http://www.ponder-matic.com

  15. Where to go for more background • Your conference book • LOEX Library Instruction Conference Procedings 2006: “Is Google God? How do students look for information today?” (description) • Paper for ARL’s 2008 Library Assessment Conference, Student research behavior: Quantitative and qualitative research findings presented with visualizations. http://www.ponder-matic.com

  16. Key influences • Competing on Analytics, a business book by Tom Davenport and Jeanne Harris • A ‘good Google’ • Also the podcast “Competing on Analytics” by Jeanne Harris • A presentation on information visualization by Ben Shneiderman • The ideas about the importance of assessing libraries locally • Our bibliography has more information http://www.ponder-matic.com

  17. University of Maryland students of the College of Information Studies, LBSC 713: Planning & Evaluating Library Services, two classes: Spring semester 2005 Fall semester 2006 Initial project funding from the University of Maryland Libraries Acknowledgements http://www.ponder-matic.com

  18. Contact Information • Web site: http://www.ponder-matic.com • Dan Wendling, MLS: wendlingd@acm.org • Neal K. Kaske, PhD: nkaske@noaa.gov The contents of this presentation reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the opinions, facts, and the accuracy of the data presented. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the author’s employers or of the University of Maryland Libraries. http://www.ponder-matic.com

  19. Questions?

More Related