informing innovation at lauc-b 2009: part 2

LAUC-B Char Booth 2009 INFORMING INNOVATION UC Berkeley Tracking Student Interest in Library Technologies

the questions. * ha s lib r ar y 2.0 and us/them think ing created a one- size-ﬁt s all app r oach to technology develop ment? what motivates user s to integ ra te lib ra ries into their per sonal lear ning envir onments ?*

breakout session. * generat ional assump ti ons li brary pred isposit ion implications for assessment & services

investigating preconceptions. * generat ional assump ti ons immigrants natives uncomfortable Game players old and frightened Unafraid/fearless rigidinflexible Social/impatient wasting time Young and abrasive

methodology. * investigate the actual technolog y and libr ar y use pa tterns/cultures of Ohio University students. env ir o nm e nt al sc a n 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

findings | demographics *age *gender *standing

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%

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%

findings | student technology ownership

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%

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 t e x t in g 2 9% 8 9% 2 9% 8 5% 3 5% 6 7% 3 7% 5 8% 4 1% 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%

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 p o d c as t s 7 1% 2 9% 6 6% 2 9% 5 9% 3 5% 5 4% 3 7% 4 3% 4 1% * t e x t in g wikis 8 9% 6 5% 8 5% 7 1% 6 7% 7 4% 5 8% 7 3% 5 1% 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%

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%

findings | relative technology unfamiliarity

findings | google app use 17 - 1 9 20 - 2 2 23 - 2 6 27 - 3 0 31 + Se arc h 98% 97% 95% 98% 99% Im age s 66% 61% 54% 53% 37% Ma ps 47% 51% 62% 55% 51% Ne ws 21% 23% 21% 20% 23% Gm ai l 17% 25% 44% 47% 34% Sc hol ar 13% 20% 38% 40% 37% iG oog le 9% 9% 11% 11% 8% Do cum ent s 8% 10% 15% 20% 20% Bo ok s 5% 6% 14% 16% 11% Ta lk 3% 4% 12% 12% 8% Bl og S ea rc h 2% 2% 4% 4% 6% Pi cas a 2% 5% 13% 9% 8% Re ade r 1% 2% 3% 6% 3%

findings | in-person and virtual library use library web visits library computer use library visits

findings | open-ended library assessment

findings | library vs. research skill

findings | awareness of library services

findings | library technology receptivity

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%

findings | library predisposition 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 S o m e wh a t r e c ep t iv e 23% 53% 42% 47% 23% 53% 33% 45% * N o t r e c ep t i v e 24% 11% 24% 22% * * *

findings | priceless verbatim comments “Two words - air con dition ing.” “The librar y kin d of sm ells.” “The ‘stack ﬂoors ’ are cre ep y.” “Mor e stab le s for pe op le to stu dy 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 !!”

implementation | skype Skype a librarian & video kiosk low use/i nterest st afﬁng is sues … creepy? under ev al uat io n

implementation | mobile access mobile library website low current interest hi gh growt h area tech innova t ing push servi ce?

implementation | texting OPAC texting services hi gher int eres t ea sier to imp l ement push to 1st years launchi ng soo n

implementation | second life Second Life low st udent use AD A potent ia l ca mp us interest surv ey hi ndsi ght

implementation | browser add-ons Firefox library toolbars pra cti ca l hi ghest int eres t new itera ti ons st udent s unaw are

implementation | social networking Facebook library page hi gh int erest div id ed opi nion “conveni ence ” ea sy to mai nta i n

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.

implementation | non-tech related marketing/advertising low awareness sha re survey result s out rea ch st rat egies si gna ge

the point. * und ersta nding local patr on cultur es is essentia l to cr ea ting used and useful (technolog y) ser vices. envir onmenta l scan ning is a scalab le mea ns of investig ating need s and per ceptions.*

the point. qu estion gene rational in vestigate loc al assu m ption s patron cultur es takeaways promote emerging use data to services inf or m dec ision s

Q/A * cha r boot h e-learning li brarian | uc berk eley cboot h@li brary .berkeley .edu report: ti nyurl.com/i i-b ooth | bl og: infomat ional.com

informing innovation at lauc-b 2009: part 2

by char booth on Oct 28, 2009

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

Embed Views

Statistics

informing innovation at lauc-b 2009: part 2 — Presentation Transcript

Get analytics right now with SlideShare PRO

An effective way to find out who is viewing your content

http://infomational.wordpress.com	11
https://allwordofmouth.wordpress.com	1