local user research: taking the 'ass' out of assumption

@charbooth IL 2009 L O C A L U S E R R E S E A R C H UC Berkeley * O b l i g a t o r y C l e v e r S u b t i t l e

@charbooth IL 2009 UC Berkeley

@charbooth IL 2009 UC Berkeley technolust

@charbooth IL 2009 UC Berkeley us them

@charbooth IL 2009 UC Berkeley @ weelib ra rian

@charbooth IL 2009 UC Berkeley @ wi llk urt

@charbooth IL 2009 UC Berkeley @ griffey

@charbooth IL 2009 L O C A L U S E R R E S E A R C H UC Berkeley * O b l i g a t o r y C l e v e r S u b t i t l e . . .

@charbooth IL 2009 L O C A L U S E R R E S E A R C H UC Berkeley T a k i n g t h e A s s o u t o f A s s u m p t i o n

@charbooth IL 2009 L O C A L U S E R R E S E A R C H UC Berkeley o r , P u t t i n g t h e A s s i n A s s e s s m e n t

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 using data to test your notions of true/fa lse.*

the digital divide. them us

them.

us.

(them * us)/context = ?

the panacea. LIBRARY 2.0 them us

the questions. * did 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 ?*

our context. Oh ioLINK participan t 20, 00 0+ stude nts be ta-toleran t cultu re ohio university libraries large cen tr al fac ility sup er wh ite 24/ 5 in fo com mons

the 2.0 “strategy”. wikis Meebo reference browser toolbars emerging Skype reference services video kiosks social site proﬁles podcasts blogs

the (staff) problem. = normal wikis = benign Meebo reference = risqué = scary browser toolbars emerging skype reference services video kiosks social site proﬁles text reference podcasts Second Life blogs video blogs

the (user) problem. Meebo reference Second… Life video kiosks? blogs text reference skype reference browser toolbars social site proﬁles video blogs “wikis” …podcasts

the (user) problem. Meebo reference Second… Life video kiosks? blogs text reference skype reference technolust browser toolbars social site proﬁles video blogs “wikis” …podcasts

the solution. * investigate the actual technolog y and libr ar y need s/cultures of Ohio University students.

the solution. * investigate the actual technolog y and libr ar y need s/cultures of Ohio University students. env ir o nm e nt al sc a n evaluate needs prioritize goals challenge assumptions understand users

the solution. * investigate the actual technolog y and libr ar y need s/cultures of Ohio University students. env ir o nm e nt al sc a n use adoption use perceptions technology library skills ownership skills receptivity

the methodology. * investigate the actual technolog y and libr ar y need s/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 | 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 | in-person and virtual library use library web visits library computer use library visits

findings | open-ended library assessment

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% * * *

the discovery. * generat ional assump ti ons li brary pred isposit ion

local user research. redeﬁning them us

the report + sample survey instrument. ti nyurl.com/i i-b ooth

the end. * cha r boot h | @charb ooth e-l ea rning li brarian | uc berk eley cboot h@li brary .berkeley .edu bl og: infomat ional.com

local user research: taking the 'ass' out of assumption

0 comments

Notes on slide 1

1 Favorite