If You Build It, Will They Care?

Loading...

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

0 comments

Post a comment

    Post a comment
    Embed Video
    Edit your comment Cancel

    6 Favorites

    If You Build It, Will They Care? - Presentation Transcript

    1. If You Buil d It, Will They Care? ACRL 2009 Char Booth: UC Berkeley Trac king Stu den t Rec eptivity to Libra ry Tech nologie s Chris Guder: Ohio University
    2. the point. * und ersta nding local patr on cultur es is essentia l to cr ea ting used and useful (technolog y) ser vices. at OU, an envir onmenta l scan ning user resea rch project help ed us get ther e.*
    3. the context. Oh ioLINK participan t 20, 00 0+ stude nts be ta-toleran t cultu re ohio university libraries heavy librar y use large cen tr al fac ility 24/ 7 in fo com mons
    4. the problem. wikis Meebo reference browser toolbars Skype reference eme rgin g ser v ices video kiosks social site profiles podcasts blogs
    5. the problem. = normal wikis = benign Meebo reference = risqué = scary browser toolbars skype reference st af f perc ept ions video kiosks social site profiles text reference podcasts Second Life blogs video blogs
    6. the problem. Meebo reference Second… Life video kiosks? blogs text reference skype reference browser toolbars social site profiles video blogs “wikis” …podcasts
    7. the problem. Meebo reference Second… Life video kiosks? blogs text reference skype reference browser toolbars technolust social site profiles video blogs “wikis” …podcasts
    8. the solution. * investigate the actual technolog y and libr ar y use pa tterns of Ohio University stud ents.
    9. the solution. * investigate the actual technolog y and libr ar y use pa tterns of Ohio University stud ents. envir on mental scanning pr oje ct evaluate needs prioritize goals challenge assumptions understand users
    10. the solution. * investigate the actual technolog y and libr ar y use pa tterns of Ohio University stud ents. envir on mental scanning pr oje ct use adoption use perceptions technology library skills ownership skills receptivity
    11. the solution. * investigate the actual technolog y and libr ar y use pa tterns of Ohio University stud ents. envir on mental scanning pr oje ct Survey 1 Survey 2 time f ra m e Wi nt e r Q ua r t e r 2 0 0 7- 8 Sp ri n g Q u ar t er 2 0 0 8 55 o n l in e q ues t i on s , mo s tl y 22 o n l in e q ues t i on s , m ul t i pl e desi g n clos ed - f or m ( Li ke r t s c al e , m ul t . choi c e a nd o p en r es po ns e choi c e ) scop e te ch n o l og y a nd l i br a r y u s e lib r ar y us e a nd p er c e pt i on s 3,648 r es po n d ent s (1 8% o f 1,651 r es po n d ent s (8 % o f samp l e st ude nt bo d y ) st ude n t bo d y ) ince n ti v e 3 $100 p ri zes a w ar d ed 1 $100 p ri ze aw ar de d prom o ti o n all- s tu d en t e ma i l , l i b r ar y b l o g all- s tu d en t e ma i l , l i b r ar y b l o g anal y si s de s c ri pt i ve s , c ro ss ta b s cod ed v er ab a ti m r es po ns e s
    12. demographics | age & gender, & standing *age *gender *standing
    13. findings | time online per week u n d e r g ra d u a te g r a d u a te les s t h an 5 hou r s 4% 4% 6- 1 0 22% 18% 11- 2 0 33% 26% 21- 3 0 23% 21% 31- 4 0 10% 15% mor e t h an 4 0 7% 14%
    14. findings | time online per week u n d e r g ra d u a te g r a d u a te les s t h an 5 hou r s 4% 4% 6- 1 0 22% 18% 11- 2 0 33% 26% 21- 3 0 23% 21% 31- 4 0 10% 15% * mor e t h an 4 0 7% 14%
    15. findings | student technology ownership
    16. findings | use of emerging technologies by age age of respondent 1 7- 1 9 2 0- 2 2 2 3- 2 6 2 7- 3 0 31+ w e b c a l li n g 1 6% 1 8% 3 1% 4 0% 3 3% s e c o nd l i f e 5% 8% 1 2% 1 0% 1 0% blogs 1 5% 1 6% 2 3% 2 7% 2 0% w e b - b a s ed i m 7 1% 6 6% 5 9% 5 4% 4 3% p o d c as t s 2 9% 2 9% 3 5% 3 7% 4 1% t e x t in g 8 9% 8 5% 6 7% 5 8% 5 1% wikis 6 5% 7 1% 7 4% 7 3% 7 8% f a c e bo o k 9 4% 9 2% 7 6% 5 6% 3 5% m y s p ac e 4 0% 3 6% 3 6% 3 4% 1 9% f l i c kr 3% 4% 5% 1 4% 8% y o u t ub e 6 7% 6 3% 4 8% 3 4% 2 5% t w i t te r .3% .2% .7% 0% .5% d e l i ci o us .6% .8% 2% 2% 3%
    17. findings | use of emerging technologies by age age of respondent 1 7- 1 9 2 0- 2 2 2 3- 2 6 2 7- 3 0 31+ w e b c a l li n g 1 6% 1 8% 3 1% 4 0% 3 3% * s e c o nd l i f e 5% 8% 1 2% 1 0% 1 0% blogs 1 5% 1 6% 2 3% 2 7% 2 0% w e b - b a s ed i m 7 1% 6 6% 5 9% 5 4% 4 3% * p o d c as t s 2 9% 2 9% 3 5% 3 7% 4 1% t e x t in g 8 9% 8 5% 6 7% 5 8% 5 1% * wikis 6 5% 7 1% 7 4% 7 3% 7 8% f a c e bo o k 9 4% 9 2% 7 6% 5 6% 3 5% m y s p ac e 4 0% 3 6% 3 6% 3 4% 1 9% * f l i c kr 3% 4% 5% 1 4% 8% y o u t ub e 6 7% 6 3% 4 8% 3 4% 2 5% t w i t te r .3% .2% .7% 0% .5% * d e l i ci o us .6% .8% 2% 2% 3%
    18. findings | use of emerging technologies by age age of respondent 1 7- 1 9 2 0- 2 2 2 3- 2 6 2 7- 3 0 31+ w e b c a l li n g 1 6% 1 8% 3 1% 4 0% 3 3% s e c o nd l i f e 5% 8% 1 2% 1 0% 1 0% blogs 1 5% 1 6% 2 3% 2 7% 2 0% * w e b - b a s ed i m 7 1% 6 6% 5 9% 5 4% 4 3% p o d c as t s 2 9% 2 9% 3 5% 3 7% 4 1% * t e x t in g 8 9% 8 5% 6 7% 5 8% 5 1% wikis 6 5% 7 1% 7 4% 7 3% 7 8% f a c e bo o k 9 4% 9 2% 7 6% 5 6% 3 5% * m y s p ac e 4 0% 3 6% 3 6% 3 4% 1 9% f l i c kr 3% 4% 5% 1 4% 8% * y o u t ub e 6 7% 6 3% 4 8% 3 4% 2 5% t w i t te r .3% .2% .7% 0% .5% d e l i ci o us .6% .8% 2% 2% 3%
    19. findings | use of emerging technologies by age age of respondent 1 7- 1 9 2 0- 2 2 2 3- 2 6 2 7- 3 0 31+ w e b c a l li n g 1 6% 1 8% 3 1% 4 0% 3 3% s e c o nd l i f e 5% 8% 1 2% 1 0% 1 0% blogs 1 5% 1 6% 2 3% 2 7% 2 0% w e b - b a s ed i m 7 1% 6 6% 5 9% 5 4% 4 3% p o d c as t s 2 9% 2 9% 3 5% 3 7% 4 1% t e x t in g 8 9% 8 5% 6 7% 5 8% 5 1% wikis 6 5% 7 1% 7 4% 7 3% 7 8% f a c e bo o k 9 4% 9 2% 7 6% 5 6% 3 5% m y s p ac e 4 0% 3 6% 3 6% 3 4% 1 9% f l i c kr 3% 4% 5% 1 4% 8% y o u t ub e 6 7% 6 3% 4 8% 3 4% 2 5% * t w i t te r .3% .2% .7% 0% .5% d e l i ci o us .6% .8% 2% 2% 3%
    20. findings | in-person and virtual library use library web visits library computer use library visits
    21. findings | awareness of library services
    22. findings | library technology receptivity
    23. findings | library technology receptivity Digital Status Academic Status n a t i ve i m m i gr a nt u n d e rg r ad u a t e g r a d ua t e Very r e ce p t i ve 23% 42% 23% 33% S o m e wh a t r e c ep t iv e 53% 47% 53% 45% N o t r e c ep t i v e 24% 11% 24% 22%
    24. findings | library technology receptivity Digital Status Academic Status n a t i ve i m m i gr a nt u n d e rg r ad u a t e g r a d ua t e * Very r e ce p t i ve 23% 42% 23% 33% S o m e wh a t r e c ep t iv e 53% 47% 53% 45% * N o t r e c ep t i v e 24% 11% 24% 22% * * *
    25. findings | priceless verbatim comments “Two words - air conditioning.” “The library kind of smells.” “The ‘stack floors’ are creepy.” “More stables for people to study at.” “Constan t talks to stu de nts as how to acc ess libra ry resourc es.” “Prom ote librar y ser vic es more !!”
    26. implementation | skype Skype a librarian & video kiosk low use/i nterest st affing is sues … creepy? under ev al uat io n
    27. implementation | mobile access mobile library website low current interest hi gh growt h area tech innova t ing push servi ce?
    28. implementation | texting OPAC texting services hi gher int eres t ea sier to imp l ement push to 1st years launchi ng soo n
    29. implementation | second life Second Life low st udent use AD A potent ia l ca mp us interest surv ey hi ndsi ght
    30. implementation | browser addons Firefox library toolbars pra cti ca l hi ghest int eres t new itera ti ons st udent s unaw are
    31. implementation | social networking Facebook library page hi gh int erest div id ed opi nion “conveni ence ” ea sy to mai nta i n
    32. implementation | non-tech related facility-based changes lat e access po li cy com put ers & print ing quiet spa ce & ho urs bull eti n bo ard s, et c.
    33. implementation | non-tech related marketing/advertising low awareness sha re survey result s out rea ch st rat egies si gna ge
    34. conclusion qu estion gene rational in vestigate loc al assu m ption s patron cultur es takeaways use data to prom ote em erging inf or m dec ision s ser vic es
    35. Q/A * cha r booth | cboo th@libr ar y .ber k eley e-lea rning lib r ar ia n university of califor nia , ber k eley * chris gud er | gud er@ ohio.edu refe rence & instr uction lib rar ian ohio univer sity

    + char boothchar booth, 8 months ago

    custom

    839 views, 6 favs, 2 embeds more stats

    Contributed paper presentation at the ACRL 2009 Con more

    More info about this document

    © All Rights Reserved

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 839
      • 731 on SlideShare
      • 108 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 6
    • Downloads 16
    Most viewed embeds
    • 107 views on http://infomational.wordpress.com
    • 1 views on http://209.85.173.132

    more

    All embeds
    • 107 views on http://infomational.wordpress.com
    • 1 views on http://209.85.173.132

    less

    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Cancel
    File a copyright complaint
    Having problems? Go to our helpdesk?

    Categories