A qualitative investigation of patrons’ experiences with academic library research consultations

Abstract Objective – As reference services continue to evolve, libraries must make evidence based decisions about their services. This study seeks to determine the value of reference services in relation to student learning acquired during research consultations, by soliciting students’ and librarians’ perceptions of consultation success and examining the degree of alignment between them. Methods – The alignment of students’ learning outcomes (reported skills and knowledge acquired) with librarians’ expectations for student learning during consultations was assessed. An online questionnaire was conducted to gather responses from students who had sought consultation services; 20 students participated. In-person interviews took place with eight librarians who had provided these consultations. The online questionnaire for students included questions about students’ assessments of their self-identified learning goals through consultation with a librarian and their success at applying the knowledge and skills gained. Librarian interviews elicited responses about students’ prior research experience, librarians’ objectives for student learning, librarians’ perceptions of student learning outcomes, and perceived consultation success. The responses of both the students and the librarians were coded, matched, and compared. Results – Students and librarians both considered the consultation process to be successful in advancing learning objectives and research skills. All students reported that the consultations met their expectations, and most reported that the skills acquired were applicable to their projects and significantly improved the quality of their work. Librarians expressed confidence that students had gained competency in the following skill sets: finding sources, search strategy development, topic exploration, specific tool use, and library organization and access. A high degree of alignment was observed in the identification by both students and librarians of “finding sources” as the skill set most in need of enhancement or assistance, while some disparity was noted in the ranking of “search strategy development,” which librarians ranked second and students ranked last. Conclusion – The data demonstrate that both students and librarians perceived individual research consultations as an effective means to meet student learning expectations. Study findings suggest that as reference models continue to change and reference desk usage declines, research consultations remain a valuable element in a library’s service model and an efficient use of human resources.

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Advancing the Reference Narrative: Assessing Student Learning in Research Consultations

Bradley¹,

Oehrli²,

Rieh³

et al. 2020

“…Librarians have used various methods to assess research consultations including surveys (e.g., Butler & Byrd, 2016;Drew & Vaz, 2008), usage statistics (Fournier & Sikora, 2015), citation analysis (e.g., Hanlan & Riley, 2015;Reinsfelder, 2012), pre and post testing (e.g., Sikora, Fournier, & Rebner, 2019), focus groups (e.g., Watts & Mahfood, 2015), interviews (e.g., Rogers & Carrier, 2017), mystery shoppers (e.g., Newton & Feinberg, 2020), and examining students' course grades (e.g., Cox, Gruber, & Neuhaus, 2019;Newton & Feinberg, 2020). While most of these articles discuss the limitations of the particular method, direct comparison of different consultation assessment methods is limited.…”

Section: Consultation Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Evaluation of Methods to Assess Team Research Consultations

Kogut¹,

Melgoza²

2020

Objective – Due to the individualized nature of consultations and institutional constraints, research consultations can be challenging to assess. At Texas A&M University Libraries, subject librarians use research consultations to teach information literacy to upper-division engineering student teams working on a technical paper project. This paper describes an action research project designed to evaluate which assessment method for consultations with student teams would provide the most actionable data about the instruction and the consultation logistics as well as optimize librarian time. Methods – For three semesters, we simultaneously used up to four consultation assessment methods: one-minute papers, team process interviews, retrospective interviews, and questionnaires. We followed the action research cycle to plan the assessments, implement the assessments, reflect on the data collected and our experiences implementing the assessments, and revise the assessments for the next semester. Each assessment method was distributed to students enrolled in an engineering course at a different point in the technical paper project. The one-minute paper was given immediately after the consultation. The team process interviews occurred after project deliverables. The questionnaire was distributed in-person on the last day of class. Focus groups were planned for after the assignment was completed, but low participation meant that instead of focus groups we conducted retrospective interviews. We used three criteria to compare the assessments: information provided related to the effectiveness of the instruction, information provided about the logistics of the consultation, and suitability as an assessment method in our context. After comparing the results of the assessment methods and reflecting on our experiences implementing the assessments, we modified the consultation and the assessment methods for the next semester. Results – Each assessment method had strengths and weaknesses. The one-minute papers provided the best responses about the effectiveness of the instruction when questions were framed positively, but required the most staff buy-in to distribute. The team process interviews were time intensive, but provided an essential understanding of how students think about and prepare for each progress report. Recruiting for and scheduling the focus groups required more time and effort than the data collected about the instruction and logistics warranted. The questionnaire provided student perspectives about their learning after the assignment had been completed, collected feedback about the logistics of the consultations, was easy to modify each semester, and required minimal librarian time. Conclusion – Utilizing multiple assessment methods at the same time allowed us to determine what would work best in our context. The questionnaire, which allowed us to collect data on the instruction and consultation logistics, was the most suitable assessment method for us. The description of our assessment methods and our findings can assist other libraries with planning and implementing consultation assessment.

“…User surveys and feedback forms have provided librarians with comments from students, illustrating the usefulness of IRCs (Butler & Byrd, 2016). Researchers have discussed the benefits IRCs can provide for students, such as the "overwhelming usefulness" students often reported following a one-on-one meeting with a librarian (Butler & Byrd, 2016), the opportunity to aid in developing students' problem-solving skills (Fields, 2006), the overall positive patron experience with academic library research consultations (Rogers & Carrier, 2017), or the increase in goodwill between libraries and faculty members that extends beyond the library environment (Handler, Lackey, & Vaughn, 2009). While these interactions have positive connotations to encourage ongoing relationships between librarians and students, they are subjective in nature, and do not provide an objective method to analyze a student's success in developing future research skills.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the Impact of Individualized Research Consultations Using Pre and Posttesting in an Academic Library: A Mixed Methods Study

Sikora

Fournier

Rebner

2019

Abstract Objective – Academic librarians consistently offer individualized help to students and researchers. Few studies have empirically examined the impact of individualized research consultations (IRCs). For many librarians, IRCs are an integral part of their teaching repertoire. However, without any evidence of an IRC’s effectiveness or value, one might ask if it’s worth investing so much time and effort. Our study explored the impact of IRCs on students' search techniques and self-perceived confidence levels. We attempted to answer the following questions: 1) Do IRCs improve students’ information searching techniques, including the proper use of keywords and/or subject headings, the accurate use of Boolean operators, and the appropriate selection of specialized resources/databases? 2) Do IRCs influence students’ confidence level in performing effective search strategies? Methods – Our study used a mixed-methods approach. Our participants were students from the Faculties of Health Sciences and Medicine at the University of Ottawa, completing an undergraduate or graduate degree, and undertaking a research or thesis project. Participants were invited to complete two questionnaires, one before and one after meeting with a librarian. The questionnaires consisted of open-ended and multiple choice questions, which assessed students' search techniques, their self-perceived search techniques proficiency and their confidence level. A rubric was used to score students' open-ended questions, and self-reflective questions were coded and analyzed for content using the software QSR NVivo. Results – Twenty-nine completed pre and posttests were gathered from February to September 2016. After coding the answers using the rubric, two paired-samples t-tests were conducted. The first t-test shows that students’ ability to use appropriate keywords was approaching statistical significance. The second t-test showed a statistically significant increase in students’ ability to use appropriate search strings from the pretest to the posttest. We performed a last paired-samples t-test to measure students’ confidence level before and after the appointment, and a statistically significant increase in confidence level was found. Conclusion – Out of three paired t-tests performed, two showed a statistically significant difference from the pretest to the posttest, with one t-test approaching statistical significance. The analysis of our qualitative results also supports the statement that IRCs have a positive real impact on students’ search techniques and their confidence levels. Future research may explore specific techniques to improve search strategies across various disciplines, tips to improve confidence levels, and exploring the viewpoint of librarians.