No abstract

Purpose This study aims to focus on how librarians use and promote Google Scholar (GS) within their library instruction sessions. This study also examines how Google Scholar and the Google Scholar discovery layer, library links, is promoted on library websites. This information is then analyzed across the three date ranges. Design/methodology/approach This study provides a longitudinal analysis of the opinions and uses of Google Scholar by the Ohio consortium of libraries, OhioLINK. This study uses survey data that was collected in 2007, 2014 and 2019 via the OhioLINK Listserv and builds off of co-author’s previous study (2008), which examined the attitudes of OhioLINK librarians as it related to Google Scholar. Findings The results of this research suggested that there were significant changes in use and opinions of Google Scholar between 2007 and 2014 with more normalization of uses and opinions occurring between 2014 and 2019. Research limitations/implications Respondents were not asked for the type of library where they work or to identify their position within their libraries, which necessarily limits the conclusions that can be drawn from the survey responses. In retrospect, limiting the sample to instruction librarians or faculty librarians might have yielded more meaningful results. Additionally, this project did not evaluate the uses and opinions of librarians using GS at the reference desk. By providing this information, it would be easier to truly glean the uses and opinions of librarians with regard to GS. Practical implications This research will assist librarians contextualize how one of the most popular research resources has been used and promoted by those within the field and how those opinions have changed over time. This study will provide context into how Google Scholar became one of the most popular research tools and how attitudes of this unprecedented, and controversial, resource came to be accepted by librarians over the past 15 years. Social implications This study will help librarians better contextualize how other librarians use and promote Google Scholar. Furthermore, it demonstrates how a controversial information research tool became accepted by those in the field over time. Originality/value According to the authors’ knowledge, this research is the only study to provide a longitudinal analysis of the librarian opinions of Google Scholar. It targeted the same audience in identical surveys in a way no other Google Scholar research has done. It builds off of the co-author’s (2008) work, which is a well-cited study regarding librarian attitudes of Google Scholar. This research was done on the 15th year anniversary of Google Scholar.

The title of this book might lead readers to expect a manual filled with examples of jazzy learning objects; however, the content goes far beyond that, broadly defining instructional design as “intentional, sound instructional or programmatic creation, delivery, and assessment that takes into account the audience, course, or program context, and shared learning goals” (p. ix). Why does instructional design in this larger sense matter for librarians? The way that libraries define themselves has shifted from materials to services, so the quality and relevance of instruction classes, online content, programs, and outreach initiatives are increasingly critical to their success.

No abstract

Supporting student learning is the name of the game for academic librarians, but what that means in the dynamic arena of higher education is constantly evolving. Barbara Allan’s Emerging Strategies for Supporting Student Learning: A Practical Guide for Librarians and Educators presents a helpful overview of the many facets of the topic, with plenty of real-life examples and case studies, plus theoretical underpinnings and references to the literature for those wanting more depth.