What Students Really Want- Library as Place at Andrews University

Purdue University Purdue e-Pubs Jun 3rd, 12:00 AM What Students Really Want: Library as Place at Andrews University Sila Marques de Oliveira Andrews University Sila Marques de Oliv

Purdue University

Purdue e-Pubs

Jun 3rd, 12:00 AM

What Students Really Want: Library as Place at Andrews

University

Sila Marques de Oliveira

Andrews University

Sila Marques de Oliveira, "What Students Really Want: Library as Place at Andrews University."

Proceedings of the IATUL Conferences Paper 7

https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/iatul/2014/posters/7

This document has been made available through Purdue e-Pubs, a service of the Purdue University Libraries

Please contact epubs@purdue.edu for additional information

254 (20%) 124 (18%) 233 (19%) 120 (17%) 211 (17%) 93 (14%) 112 (9%) 85 (12%) 133 (11%) 67 (10%)

305 (24%) 198 (29%)

165 (19%) 213 (20%) 144 (16%) 216 (20%) 129 (15%) 171 (16%) 117 (13%) 75 (7%) 90 (10%) 105 (9%)

231 (26%) 279 (26%) 252 (27%) 258 (26%) 156 (17%) 222 (22%) 222 (24%) 138 (14%) 132 (14%) 168 (17%) 78 (8%) 114 (11%) 96 (10%) 99 (10%) 29% 24% 22% 17% 15% 22% 15% 16% 10% 9% 9% 12%

What Students Really Want:

Library as Place at Andrews University

Closed Individual

Study Areas Open Individual Study Areas Closed Group Study Areas Study Areas Open Group Spaces Social Learning Spaces Interactive

The debate over academic libraries’ importance and role in

higher education is not new Papers presented at a conference

at Harvard in 1949 questioned the future of the library in

academic institutions and declared the end of the printed

book (Convey, 1949; Wector, 1950) These issues still resonate

65 years later Scott Carlson’s (2001) article “The Deserted

Library” predicted the death of the academic library—and

prompted a passionate response, indicating that the issue

was still under intense debate (Antell & Engel, 2006)

William H Wisner (2001, p 68) painted a bleak scenario

for academic library buildings, claiming that “we must accept

that the historic mission of libraries is finished…and that

the portable e-book, once perfected, will drive the last nail

into our collective coffins.” Only one decade ago, Shuler

(2004) stated that spending time in a library is a “trip down

nostalgia lane.”

This trend seems to have changed and taken an opposite

direction In 2001 Carlson promoted an online discussion

titled “Are College Libraries Too Empty?” An overwhelming

number of participants indicated that their libraries were

bustling with students and that they were using the building

for collaborative learning and research (Carlson, 2001)

Weise (2004, p 9) notes that the “popular image of the library

has evolved from a ‘storehouse’ of information to an active

participant in the educational process.” Walt Crawford (1995),

Larry Dowlet (1996), William A Gosling (2000), and Michael

Gorman (2003), amongst others, have also argued against the

idea that the library building is living on ‘borrowed time’ as its

role in universities is evolving

Eingenbrodt (2011, p 35) states that “at the very moment when the library as a physical space came into question because of technical and social changes, librarians and scholars started to think about the future role of libraries

as places.”

Many new and renovated buildings have seen significant increases in usage among students and faculty, and reports indicate that students are satisfied My recent visit to the Mary Edema Pew Library, built in 2011 with current students’

needs in mind, testifies to that The library has been, since its inception, packed with students from the Grand Valley State University in Grand Rapids, Michigan

Shill and Tonner (2004) report that 80% of the 354 libraries that went through major improvements between 1995 and

2002 experienced greater facility usage in 2001–2002

This is a significant indication that students are not abandoning academic libraries when facilities are new or have been renovated

According to Bilandzic and Foth (2013), “Literacy in the twenty-first century requires a different set of knowledge and skills compared to literacy in the previous century Libraries as facilitators of education and learning have been challenged to reshape their approaches to meeting the changing needs.”

Although there is abundant information available remotely,

and albeit studies reporting a decrease in academic library use,

higher education students and teachers still seek the campus

library to meet many of their teaching, research, and learning

needs The usefulness of the spaces provided by the academic

library is directly dependent on the match between those

spaces and the learning and teaching styles students and teachers engage in today Thus, the purpose of this study is to identify what types of spaces students really want and value

in order to better accomplish their academic requirements and satisfy their learning needs The data was collected using a design charrette, an ethnographic approach

Identify what types of library spaces students at Andrews University want or value mostly to accomplish their academic requirements and social needs

The data was collected through a design charrette technique

Pictures depicting 6 different types of library spaces were shown to students: (1) Closed Individual Study Areas;

(2) Open Individual Study Areas; (3) Closed Group Study Areas; (4) Open Group Study Areas; (5) Social Spaces; and (6) Interactive Learning Spaces Each of these spaces is represented by a different symbol A total of 138 students

were asked to place these symbols corresponding to the actual library spaces in a sheet of paper resembling the library according to their preferences The number of each symbol placed on the blank sheet of paper (the library) indicates the degree of importance, preference, or value they attribute to that specific type of library space A total of 1,935 symbols were used

The core of the debate today regarding academic library

as place is whether or not students prefer open social and gathering spaces over quiet individual study areas

Contradicting the trend today, which asserts that students want social and group/gathering spaces to accomplish their academic activities, this study revealed that, overall, students

at Andrews University prefer quiet individual study areas

This preference is highlighted by students who attend the library more frequently In terms of social spaces, the results demonstrate that men and graduate students prefer it more

than women and undergraduates, which also goes against the general perception of librarians and educators today

Academic libraries should reflect and embrace changes within the pedagogical and learning styles which emphasize collaboration, interaction, and flipped classroom by providing different types of spaces to satisfy different types of needs and expectations As students still consider the library as the place to be for serious studies, libraries should not neglect the traditional quiet individual study areas as they remodel and renovate or build new library buildings

CITED REFERENCES

Antell, K & Engel, D (2006) Conduciveness to scholarship: The essence of academic library as place College & Research Libraries, 67(6):536-560.

Bilandzic, Mark & Foth Marcus (2013) Libraries as co-working spaces: understanding user motivations and perceived barriers to social learning Library Hi Tech, (31)2, 251-273.

Carlson, Scott (2001) The Deserted Library Chronicle of Higher Education, (48)16, A35

Coney, Donald (1949) The Future of Libraries in Academic Institutions Harvard Library Bulletin, 3, 327–31.

Crawford, Walt & Gorman, Michael (1995) Future Libraries: Dreams, Madness & Reality Chicago: American Library Association, pp.118–19;

Dowler, Larry (1996) Our Edifice at the Precipice Library Journal, 121, 118.

Eigenbrodt, Olaf The multifaceted place: current approaches to university library space In: Matthews, G & Graham, W (eds) (2011) University libraries and space in the digital world Ashgate: Farmhan pp 35-50.

Gorman, Michael (2003) The Enduring Library: Technology, Tradition and the Quest for Balance Chicago: American Library Association, pp.4-5

Gosling, William A (2002) To Go or Not to Go? Library as Place American Libraries, 31, 44–45.

Shill, Harold B & Tonner, Shawn (2004) Does the Building Still Matter? Usage Patterns in New, Expanded, and Renovated Libraries, 1995–2002 College & Research Libraries, 65, 148

Shuler, John A (2004) Ask Not for Whom the Bells Toll Journal of Academic Librarianship, (30)78, 68

Wector, Dixon (1950) General Reading in a University Library Harvard Library Bulletin, 4, 5–15

Weise, Frieda (2004) Being There: The Library as Place Journal of the Medical Library Association, 92, 9

Wisner, William H (2001) Librarianship Enters the Twilight Library Journal, 126, 68.

Male Female Undergraduate Graduate Participated Inside

the Library Participated Outside the Library High Frequency Low Frequency

2 Space Preferences

by Gender 3 Space Preferences by Program Level Participated Inside and Outside the Library 4 Space Preference by Students Who 5 Space Preference by Library Use Frequency

26%

(510)

20%

(378) 18%

(360)

16%

(300)

10%

(195)

10%

(192)

1 Overall Preferred Spaces