Student research behavior — prototype application (at CIL)

1,180 views

Published on

Presentation from Computers in Libraries 2009 on how to model and analyze the information-seeking behaviors of college students (prototype).

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,180
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Student research behavior — prototype application (at CIL)

    1. 1. Student research behavior — prototype application From research conducted at the University of Maryland, 2005-2006 Computers in Libraries, March 2009 Dan Wendling, MLS, & Neal Kaske, PhD [email_address] http://ponder-matic.com
    2. 2. How did students use Google in their last course-related search for information? (n=544; 2005-06) Who When How
    3. 3. How did students use UMD’s ResearchPort in their last course-related search? (n=544; 2005-06) (ResearchPort is the University of Maryland Libraries’ gateway to licensed content.)
    4. 4. Comparison of who used Google and ResearchPort in course-related searching (n=544)
    5. 5. Comparison of when Google and ResearchPort were accessed in course-related searching (n=544)
    6. 6. This presentation <ul><li>How should we describe information-seeking behavior? Project research questions / methodology </li></ul><ul><li>Demonstration of the application prototype at http://www.ponder-matic.com </li></ul><ul><li>Results, conclusions, next steps </li></ul><ul><li>More information: Conference book, page 43 </li></ul>
    7. 7. Foudy, Johnson, & Kaske 2005 research questions <ul><li>What are contemporary university students’ information-seeking behaviors and what role(s), if any, do libraries and/or librarians play in these behaviors? </li></ul><ul><li>What are contemporary students’ mental models of the tasks performed by librarians? </li></ul><ul><li>Do these behaviors or mental models differ according to level of matriculation, from freshmen through graduate students? </li></ul>
    8. 8. Basic Research Design Methodology: Mixed Method Approach, 2005-2006 <ul><ul><li>Individual interviews with 544 students </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(N=544; 256 + 288) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>On campus </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Not in, not near a library </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Sampling –“convenience” </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Critical incident reporting </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Run one week in April 2005 and one week in November 2006 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Focus group interviews with 110 students </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(N=12; 110 participants) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>3 groups each for: </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Freshmen </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Sophomores </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Juniors & Seniors </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Graduate students </li></ul></ul></ul></ul>
    9. 9. Individual Interview Form (page 1 of 2) (Reproduced in your conference book and on our web site.)
    10. 10. Project coding sheet, version 9 (See conference book or web site for version 10.)
    11. 11. Model: How students move through information space
    12. 12. Anatomy of one session, a ResearchPort search
    13. 13. Demo of the prototype at http://www.ponder-matic.com
    14. 14. What makes projects like this work <ul><li>Selected bullets from the book Competing on Analytics, by Davenport and Harris, “Signposts of effective IT”: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Information workers spend their time analyzing data and understanding its implications rather than collecting and formatting data. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Managers focus on improving processes and business performance, not culling data. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A hypothesis can be quickly analyzed and tested without a lot of manual behind-the-scenes preparation beforehand. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Analysts have direct, nearly instantaneous access to data. </li></ul></ul>
    15. 15. Where to go for more background <ul><li>Your conference book </li></ul><ul><li>LOEX Library Instruction Conference Procedings 2006: “Is Google God? How do students look for information today?” ( description ) </li></ul><ul><li>Paper for ARL’s 2008 Library Assessment Conference, Student research behavior: Quantitative and qualitative research findings presented with visualizations . </li></ul>
    16. 16. Key influences <ul><li>Competing on Analytics , a business book by Tom Davenport and Jeanne Harris </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A ‘good Google’ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Also the podcast “ Competing on Analytics ” by Jeanne Harris </li></ul></ul><ul><li>A presentation on information visualization by Ben Shneiderman </li></ul><ul><li>The ideas about the importance of assessing libraries locally </li></ul><ul><li>Our bibliography has more information </li></ul>
    17. 17. Acknowledgements <ul><li>University of Maryland students of the College of Information Studies, LBSC 713: Planning & Evaluating Library Services, two classes: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Spring semester 2005 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Fall semester 2006 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Initial project funding from the University of Maryland Libraries </li></ul>
    18. 18. Contact Information <ul><li>Web site: http ://www.ponder-matic.com </li></ul><ul><li>Dan Wendling, MLS: [email_address] </li></ul><ul><li>Neal K. Kaske, PhD: [email_address] </li></ul><ul><li>The contents of this presentation reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the opinions, facts, and the accuracy of the data presented. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the author’s employers or of the University of Maryland Libraries. </li></ul>
    19. 19. Questions?

    ×