Search results

The purpose of this paper is to better understand the perceptions international STEM students have of the library and higher education based on their responses to the Ithaka S+R Graduate Student Survey.

To better understand these groups, this study conducted the Mann–Whitney–Wilcoxon test on the Ithaka survey results to compare the groups and identify any statistically significant differences that the international STEM graduate students group (ISG) has to other groups.

This paper found that ISG valued Higher Education objective variables more than the non-ISG group, with the exception of one question. The ISG group also valued 7 of the 13 role of the library (ROL) variables statistically different.

Since the students self-reported as international or STEM, the authors are unable to assess whether the response pool is representative of the university as a whole.

By understanding how international/STEM students may differ from other populations, libraries can better design spaces and services for these groups.

Existing studies tend to focus on international students or STEM students and information literacy. This study intends to fill a gap in the understanding of how these groups perceive the ROL and their education.

With the rise of alternate discovery services, such as Google Scholar, in conjunction with the increase in open access content, researchers have the option to bypass academic libraries when they search for and retrieve scholarly information. This state of affairs implies that academic libraries exist in competition with these alternate services and with the patrons who use them, and as a result, may be disintermediated from the scholarly information seeking and retrieval process. Drawing from decision and game theory, bounded rationality, information seeking theory, citation theory, and social computing theory, this study investigates how academic librarians are responding as competitors to changing scholarly information seeking and collecting practices. Bibliographic data was collected in 2010 from a systematic random sample of references on CiteULike.org and analyzed with three years of bibliometric data collected from Google Scholar. Findings suggest that although scholars may choose to bypass libraries when they seek scholarly information, academic libraries continue to provide a majority of scholarly documentation needs through open access and institutional repositories. Overall, the results indicate that academic librarians are playing the scholarly communication game competitively.

Academic libraries are undergoing a paradigm shift of service, due to various changes in their environment and internally. The maker culture is one of these factors and implies challenges regarding space, infrastructures, and services organization. This situation extends to research support services, in which the users have a particular informative behavior. This chapter aims to analyze whether the academic library has created research support services adapted to the era of maker culture. It examines how research is a key factor in the higher education system to contextualize the importance of research support services in academic libraries. How the researcher accepts or not the role of academic libraries in the process of production and communication of research is studied. As critical elements of the process, we examine part of researcher information behavior in the era of maker culture and the relationship of these users with librarians.

Because of online digital resources, academic libraries no longer need to spend as much time and energy organizing their own collections as they used to. They now have an opportunity to pivot their expertise in organizing information outward. “Inside-out” library services can include support for special collections, digital scholarship, scholarly communication, and data management. A key characteristic of such services is that an academic library takes on broader information management challenges at their college or university. This chapter will examine what it takes to build successful inside-out library services by looking at their cost, how well they complement existing library expertise and culture, and their impact on teaching, research, and the wider community.