Presented at LISDIS 2016, Saturday 5 November 2016 at UCL

1. The Hybrid
Music Library
Researching User Format Preferences at
Leeds College of Music Library
Megan Dyson
@MeganDyson3
m.dyson@lcm.ac.uk

2. Overview
About us – brief introduction to Leeds
College of Music Library
Research aims, methodology and research
design
Results
Recommendations and implications
Challenges and lessons learned

3. About us
Photos
Images © Leeds College of Music, used with permission

4. About us
Photos
Images © Leeds College of Music, used with permission
This is our specialist music library.
That means we’ve got all the
usual library stock plus printed
music, CDs, LPs and also a Jazz
Archive.
We’re the largest conservatoire in
the UK with a strong tradition of
training musicians in non-Classical
genres. Popular Music and Music
Production are our most popular
courses.

5. Research aims
Investigate the hybrid music
library
Inform the Library collection
development policy

6. Research aims
Investigate the hybrid music
library
Inform the Library collection
development policy
“Hybrid library” describes nearly
every library today, where there is
a mix of traditional print
collections and online resources,
all of which you can access in an
integrated way via an online
catalogue.
Do we need to change what we
stock? Are we meeting user
needs?

7. Methodology
Usage data analysis
User survey
Benchmarking study

8. Methodology
Usage data analysis
User survey
Benchmarking study
This was an analysis of usage
data collected from our LMS and
online resources from the Autumn
semester, Sep 2015-Jan 2016.
A VERY BRIEF survey tagged on
the end of our annual Library
survey in Spring 2016.
Compared us against other
conservatoires in the UK and
Ireland and placed us in the
national context (I didn’t cover this
in the presentation).

9. The idea with this research design was to fill a gap in the music
library literature by looking at both what users said they wanted
(qualitative survey data) and what they actually used
(quantitative usage data), from a UK conservatoire perspective.
Existing studies, all from US academic libraries, looked at one
or the other (see Clark, 2013 and Knop, 2015).
Research Design
Convergent parallel mixed methods
research design (after Creswell, 2014, p. 220)

10. Convergent parallel mixed methods research design
(after Creswell, 2014, p. 220).
What users said they wanted (survey)
What they actually used (usage data)
Here it got interesting because
the two data sets did not always
agree.

11. Scope of the study
For various reasons,
the scope of the study
was limited to three
types of material:
scores (sheet music),
books and audio.

12. Results - Books
71% of survey respondents
preferred print books
Print and e-book collections
used at similar rates
Differences in usage patterns
evidenced by statistical
analysis of book borrowing
and e-book usage

13. Results - Books
71% preferred print books
Print and e-book collections
used at similar rates
Differences in usage patterns
evidenced by statistical
analysis of book borrowing and
e-book usage
27% of the print collection and
34% of the e-book collection
was used over the sample
period. (N.B. I know this seems
low, it would likely have been
better with a longer sample
period, such as one academic
year.)
Warning: slightly intimidating
graph on next slide.

14. Normalised book usage data: top 20% of used titles
82%
49%
Creativity & Communication e-book

15. Normalised book usage data: top 20% of used titles
82%
49%
Creativity & Communication e-book
This graph shows results of the print book
and e-book usage data analysis (called
data normalisation) and how usage was
spread across used titles. Print use was
measured in issues, and e-books in section
requests (cf. COUNTER, 2012).
Important points:
• Of the print books that were borrowed,
the top 20% of issued titles accounted
for 49% of the issues.
• Of the e-books that were used, the top
20% of used titles accounted for 82% of
the section requests; one e-book
accounted for 49% of the usage (shown
by shaded blue box).

16. Normalised book usage data: top 20% of used titles
82%
49%
Creativity & Communication e-book
Conclusion:
This analysis suggests a
browsing type behaviour for print
books and a highly targeted use
of e-books, where specific core
texts are sought.

17. Results - Scores
63% of survey respondents
preferred printed scores; 18%
preferred online
Use of Library digital scores
was miniscule
Classical students were
super users

18. Results - Scores
63% of survey respondents
preferred printed scores; 18%
preferred online
Use of Library digital scores
miniscule
Classical students were
super users
Classical students
accounted for 57% of
printed music borrowing –
not a surprise since
Classical music is a very
notation-dependent
discipline.
Scores were the only clear
area of agreement between
survey and usage data –
printed scores still reign.

19. Results - Audio
49% preferred
online audio, 30%
physical, 16% said it
depends
CD use vastly
outstripped Library
online equivalents
Unseen use
Link between
subject area &
format preference

20. Results - Audio
49% preferred
online audio, 30%
physical, 16% said it
depends
CD use vastly
outstripped Library
online equivalents
Unseen use
Link between
subject area &
format preference
22% of the CD
collection vs. 0.03% of
the online audio
collection was used
over the sample
period.
The caveat to what
appears to be strong CD
use is the probable
massive use of non-
Library audio resources
e.g. YouTube which is
‘unseen’ by the Library
About 85% of CD
borrowing was from
students on non-Classical
courses, e.g. Production.
This supports our
hypotheses that LCoM’s
strong tradition of non-
Classical training partially
explains why we are one
of the only UK
conservatoires with
healthy CD usage.

21. Overall themes from the user
survey
Overall preference for physical resources
(55%); 27% preferred online formats; 14%
said it depends on what they’re using it for.
‘Magic wand question’ and user information
needs
This question has a long history of use in
library research (Showers, 2015).
It asks, ‘If you had a magic wand, what would
be your ideal way of getting information?’

22. Online access
26% cite physical sources
‘Accio Information!’
Broad themes of user information
behaviour from the magic wand
question

23. Online access
26% cite physical sources
‘Accio Information!’
Broad themes of user information
behaviour from the magic wand
question This remains extremely
important and many
respondents cited some
variation on an ideal ‘one-
stop shop’ for information
via a networked device.
Somewhat in contrast to the other
survey results citing overall
preference for physical formats,
only 26% cited this as their ideal
way of getting information.
Referencing the Harry Potter summoning
spell, this response sums up the key
concerns of 21% of respondents: they
want information that is convenient, quick
and easy to access. This confirms other
studies’ findings (e.g. Caperon, 2015;
Williams et al., 2008).

24. Recommendations and
implications for LCoM Library
Implications for book collections
Promoting (and prescribing?) online
resources
Maintaining constant feedback loop

25. Recommendations and
implications for LCoM Library
Implications for book collections
Promoting (and prescribing?) online
resources
Maintaining constant feedback loopThe research supports
maintaining a wide-
ranging print book
collection which seems to
be meeting user demand
to browse; in contrast e-
book collecting should
prioritise acquiring key
module texts.
E-resources were
underused. They need to
be constantly promoted
and made as user
friendly as possible.
Should we prescribe their
use in assignments…?
One study found
favourable results with
this approach (Clark,
2014).
This research showed just
how nuanced format
preferences are –
demonstrating the need for
the library to constantly
reevaluate user information
needs. We should also
build services around users
rather than trying to keep
up with every new
technology.

26. Challenges / Lessons
learned
Plan, plan, plan (and plan some more…!)
Pilot your survey questions…with intended
respondents!
Usage data – minefield!
Comparing physical vs. online use –
minefield!
Unseen use online – maybe a minefield!

27. Challenges / Lessons
learned
Plan, plan, plan (and plan some more…!)
Pilot your survey questions…with intended
respondents!
Usage data – minefield!
Comparing physical vs. online use –
minefield!
Unseen use online – maybe a minefield!
Self explanatory but so important!
Make a Plan B for key research
elements.
Again self explanatory
but important.
From collecting, standardizing to
analysis, it was a minefield. Both for
our online resources and getting data
from our LMS. Services like JUSP
(http://jusp.mimas.ac.uk/) will make
this job easier.
How do you equate a print book issue
to an e-book section request? No
one’s found a good solution yet to
this apples to oranges problem.
There is likely massive amounts of unseen
use of non-Library online resources.
Gaining a better understanding of this will
be crucial going forward.

28. To get in touch…
Twitter: @MeganDyson3
Email: m.dyson@lcm.ac.uk
Blog: www.notesandmarks.wordpress.com
Thanks for your interest!

29. References
Caperon, L. (2015) ‘Developing Adaptable, Efficient Mobile Library Services: Librarians as Enablers’, Ariadne,
(73). Available at: http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue73/caperon (Accessed: 18 August 2016).
Clark, J. C. (2013) ‘Format Preferences of Performing Arts Students’, The Journal of Academic Librarianship,
39(3), pp. 297–307. doi: 10.1016/j.acalib.2013.02.005.
Clark, J. C. (2014) ‘Information-Seeking Behavior and Library Use by Distance Education Graduate Music
Education Students’, Music Reference Services Quarterly, 17(4), pp. 207–225. doi:
10.1080/10588167.2014.965606.
COUNTER (2012) ‘COUNTER Code of Practice for e-Resources, Release 4: Appendix A: Glossary of Terms’.
Available at: https://www.projectcounter.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/APPA.pdf (Accessed: 2 September
2016).
Creswell, J. W. (2014) Research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. 4th edn.
London: Sage.
Knop, K. (2015) ‘Music Library Patron Material Preferences: Use and Discovery of Resources in Print and
Digital Formats’, Music Reference Services Quarterly, 18(2), pp. 79–99. doi: 10.1080/10588167.2015.1030946.
Showers, B. (ed.) (2015) ‘Going beyond the numbers: using qualitative research to transform the library user’s
experience’, in Library analytics and metrics: using data to drive decisions and services. London: Facet, pp. 79–
111.
Williams, P., Rowlands, I. and Fieldhouse, M. (2008) ‘The “Google Generation” - myths and realities about
young people’s digital information behaviour’, in Nicholas, D. and Rowlands, I. (eds) Digital consumers:
Reshaping the information profession. London: Facet Publishing, pp. 159–192.
All images (except where noted) in the public domain from Morguefile.com and Pixabay.com