Presenter: Laura Wright. Presented at the Georgia Libraries Conference in Macon, GA on 10/09/2019. How can we effectively communicate the value of library instruction to faculty and administrators? Over the past 5 years, we have committed to collecting data for assessing the effect of library instruction on retention and student achievement. As we discuss the results of our first research project, you’ll learn about our data collection decisions, challenges we faced, and lessons learned.

1. Laura Wright
Valdosta State University

2.  Library Instruction
 Builds a foundation of research skills
 Builds information literacy skills
 Improves confidence and research ability

3.  How do you convince skeptics that library instruction is valuable?
 How do you market to professors who do not include library instruction in their
courses?
 Speak their language!

4.  Colleges and universities are exploring ways to improve student outcomes, including
student success and retention (Matthews, 2012; Murray, Ireland, & Hackathorn,
2016).
 Colleges and universities are looking for data-based methods to:
 Identify at-risk students
 Improve student outcomes: grade point average (GPA), retention (Whalen, Saunders, &
Shelley, 2009)
 Library instruction could serve as a risk factor. Risk factors indicate when a student
is at higher risk of leaving or having a lower GPA.
 Library instruction could serve as a intervention. Interventions are designed to help
at-risk students succeed.

5.  Can we do a statistical analysis that shows library instruction supports GPA and
retention?
 Several researchers have investigated the relationship between library instruction and
retention or GPA in recent years.
 Attending a required, but not strictly enforced, library instruction session has been used as a
predictor for retention (Gammell, Allen, & Banach, 2012).
 Wong & Cmor found that the frequency of attending library instruction is positively
associated with student achievement (2011).
 Research on the relationship of library instruction and workshops on retention and GPA is not
consistent (Soria, Fransen, & Nackerud, 2013; Soria, Fransen, & Nackerud, 2014).

6.  Building on our existing culture
 Existing statistics
 Number of attendees at library
instruction
 Existing Assessment
 Student Opinion of Library
Instruction
 Minute papers
 Faculty Survey after Library
Instruction
 Library statistics
 Door count
 Number of books circulated
 Interlibrary Loan and GIL Express
 Electronic Resources
 Technology statistics
 Computer usage
 Printer usage

7.  Administration
 Librarians
 Data Warehouse
 Professors

8.  Why did we decide to collect LI attendance at in-person classes?
 Simple, easy to implement.
 Need LI attendance data if want to examine relationship between library instruction and
GPA or retention.
 Meeting with Data Warehouse
 Help plan how to collect LI attendance data.
 They collect lots of other data as a matter of course (GPA, retention, etc.).
 How does data collection affect librarians teaching LI?
 Added a step to teaching LI.
 How does data collection affect professors?
 Minimal impact – most already collect attendance.

9.  Workflow
 Schedule LI
 Prepare print rosters from data
warehouse widget
 Collect attendance
 Enter attendance in widget
 File rosters
 Challenges & Lessons Learned
 Lost data
 Checking accuracy
 Repeat LIs – you get what you ask for

10.  My dissertation examines the following relationships at Odum Library at Valdosta
State University (VSU):
 The relationship between library instruction and first-time, full-time freshmen
retention.
 The relationship between library instruction and first-year cumulative grade point
average (GPA).
 The relationship between GPA and first-time, full-time freshmen retention.

11.  Institutional Data is collected from VSU’s Data Warehouse
 Fall 2015 through Spring 2018
 Independent Variables
 Attending library instruction
 GPA
 Dependent Variables
 GPA
 First-time, full-time freshmen retention
 Control Variables
 Gender
 Race/ethnicity
 Pell Grant status (socioeconomic status)

12.  Library instruction is positively associated with retention.
 Chi-squared Test and binomial logistic regression.
 Of the students who were retained, 72.60% did attend library instruction and
64.80% did not attend library instruction (p < 0.001).
 If a student attended library instruction, they are 59% more likely to be retained
(Odds ratio (OR) =1.419, p<0.001) than students who did not attend library
instruction.
 The model only accounts for 2.6% of the variation in retention.
Is there a statistically significant relationship between
attending library instruction and first-time, full-time freshman
retention?

13.  Library instruction is positively associated with GPA.
 Multiple linear regression.
 Overall R-square of 0.112, indicating that 11.2% of the variation in GPA is
explained by the model.
 Gender accounts for 4.2% of the variability observed in GPA
 Pell Grant status accounts for an additional 2.5%
 Library instruction attendance accounts for an additional 0.6%
 Race/ethnicity accounts for an additional 3.9%
 Library instruction attendance accounts for only 0.6% of the variation in the
model.
Is there a statistically significant relationship between
attending library instruction and GPA?

14.  Library instruction has a very small positive association with retention.
 Students who attend library instruction are 59% more likely to be retained.
 Model accounts for 2.6% of the variation in retention.
 Library instruction has a very small positive association with GPA.
 Attending library instruction accounts for 0.6% of the variation observed in GPA.
 Size of the two relationships is consistent with previous research that found
positive associations.
 Cannot easily generalize or compare institutions because library instruction
varies in its format and delivery.

15.  GPA is positively associated with retention.
 Binomial logistic regression.
 If a student has a higher GPA, they are 77% more likely to be retained (Odds
Ratio (OR)=3.404, p<0.001).
 Gender, Pell Grant recipient, and race/ethnicity do not have a significant effect on
retention.
 This model accounts for 26% of the variability in retention.
Is there a statistically significant relationship between
GPA and first-time, full-time freshman retention?

16.  Spring cumulative GPA is positively associated with retention.
 Students with a higher GPA are 77% more likely to be retained.
 The model is statistically reliable and explains 26% of the variation in first-time, full-
time freshman retention.
 Results are statistically significant and practically significant.
 This research is consistent with previous research that identifies GPA as one of
the most important predictors for retention and student outcomes.
 Academic strategies that improve first-year GPA could improve retention, future
academic success (GPA), and graduation.

17.  Library instruction can be used as a risk factor and as an intervention.
 Risk factor: freshmen who do not attend library instruction are at higher risk of
not being retained and having lower GPAs.
 Intervention: attending library instruction improves both student success and
student engagement.
 Library Instruction for a specific class
 Research appointments
 Workshops and library instruction not associated with a specific class

18.  Engagement is one of the few predictors of student success that universities can
influenced.
 Increased by providing meaningful educational activities that encourage cognitive
development.
 Interventions work by increasing student engagement which leads to improved
learning and retention.
 Behavioral engagement: participating in library instruction.
 Emotional engagement: how students feel during and after the instruction
session.
 Cognitive engagement: willingness and ability to participate in library instruction.

19.  Limitations:
 Scope & generalizability.
 Encourage other libraries to collect similar data and repeat methodology!
 At Odum Library
 Continue data collection and expand future research with a larger data-set.
 Examine all college years.
 Include other forms of library instruction and assistance.

20.  Supports student success
 Contributes to higher retention rates both directly and indirectly
 Strengthens all three aspects of engagement: emotional, cognitive, and behavioral
 Teaches students college success skills, research skills, and information literacy
skills
 Improves students’ confidence, comfort level in seeking help, and research abilities
 Benefits extend to college career and post-graduation

21.  Compelling narrative:
 Library instruction is an effective strategy for improving student engagement,
retention, and academic achievement.

23.  Gammell, W. J., Allen, G. J., & Banach, P. S. (2012). Leveraging existing data:
Indicators of engagement as early predictors of student retention. In Proceedings
of the First Annual North East Regional Learning Analytics (NERLA)
symposium (pp. 9-17).
 Matthews, J. R. (2012). Assessing library contributions to university outcomes:
The need for individual student level data. Library Management, 33(6/7), 389-
402.
 Murray, A., Ireland, A., & Hackathorn, J. (2016). The value of academic libraries:
Library services as a predictor of student retention. College & Research
Libraries, 77(5), 631-642
 Soria, K. M., Fransen, J., & Nackerud, S. (2013). Library use and undergraduate
student outcomes: New evidence for students' retention and academic
success. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 13(2), 147-164.
 Soria, K. M., Fransen, J., & Nackerud, S. (2014). Stacks, serials, search engines,
and students' success: First-year undergraduate students' library use, academic
achievement, and retention. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(1), 84-91.
 Whalen, D., Saunders, K., & Shelley, M. (2009). Leveraging what we know to
enhance short-term and long-term retention of university students. Journal of
College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 11(3), 407-430.
 Wong, S. H. R., & Cmor, D. (2011). Measuring association between library
instruction and graduation GPA. College and Research Libraries, 72(5), 464-473.