Search results

This study aims to examine if differences exist in undergraduate students' library use, perceptions and grade point average (GPA) among science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) and non-STEM disciplines.

The current study used data from the 2018 student survey. Among 2,277 students who completed the survey (response rate = 8%), only undergraduate students (n = 1,265) were selected for this study because the current study aims to examine the differences between STEM and non-STEM undergraduate students.

The findings from a Mann–Whitney U test revealed that STEM respondents perceived specific library resources (subject and course guide, library instructions and library workshops) as slightly less than non-STEM respondents. The results from ANOVA demonstrated that the mean scores in GPA for STEM respondents who never used online library, journals and databases were lower than respondents who used those library resources, regardless of STEM and non-STEM disciplines.

Revisiting the data collected and analyzing specific user groups will be valuable to academic libraries because this study will provide academic librarians with a deeper understanding of specific user needs and perceptions of library resources and services.

This study examines differences in library use patterns (in-person visits, online use, reference transactions, library resource and services use) pre-COVID-19 and during the COVID-19 pandemic through multiple data sets.

Using library statistics collected during 2017/2018 and 2020/2021 and student responses to a biennial library use survey distributed in 2018 and 2021, the potential impact of the pandemic on users' behaviors was explored.

Library use statistics and the biennial survey responses demonstrate that users' overall library use was impacted by COVID-19. Both the library's gate count and students' frequency of library visits showed a dramatic decrease. The use of virtual support to patrons increased during COVID-19 as reflected by the increase in email and chat reference interactions and virtual consultations.

As students return to the physical classroom, observing library use via various data will help inform how well use of the library rebounded or if there are changes in users' behavior that suggest the need for the promotion of library services or an expansion in alternative services to support users.

This article highlights the importance of continuously obtaining various data sets to observe trends and changes. By observing multiple data points, some changes are aligned across data, whereas other changes or patterns are different. While impact on physical library use may be obvious, library use before and during the pandemic will help guide and inform how academic libraries should be prepared for hybrid environments post-pandemic.

The purpose of this study is to learn what factors liaison librarians in academic research libraries consider in determining whether to refer chat reference patrons to subject specialists.

Subject specialists were asked what policies guided their decisions to refer to a specialist and then assessed unreferred chat session transcripts both within and outside their specializations to determine need for a referral.

Few respondents were guided by formal policies. Contrary to an initial hypothesis, subject area was not a key factor in referring chat. A broader set of criteria included reference interviewing, provision of relevant resources and information literacy instruction. Respondents valued both the depth that subject specialists can provide to reference interactions and the ability of a skilled generalist to support information literacy.

Findings are most applicable to large, public doctoral universities with liaison librarian programs. Assignment of respondents to subject specialist categories was complicated by their broad range of background and expertise.

The study contributes new understanding of referrals to subject specialists who have potential to guide development of formal referral policies in academic library virtual reference services.

The study is the first empirical examination of chat reference referral decisions.