Studying Students
The Undergraduate Research Project at the University of Rochester
edited by
Nancy Fried Foster and Susan Gibbons
Association of College and Research Libraries
A division of the American Library Association
Chicago 2007
Edited by
Nancy Fried Foster
Susan Gibbons
Studying Students:
The Undergraduate Research Project
at the University of Rochester
The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National
Standard for Information Sciences–Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI
Z39.48-1992. ∞
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Studying students : the Undergraduate Research Project at the University of Rochester / edited by
Nancy Fried Foster and Susan Gibbons.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-0-8389-8437-6 (pbk. : alk. paper)
1. University of Rochester. River Campus Libraries--Case studies. 2. University of Rochester-
-Students--Case studies. 3. Academic libraries--Use studies. 4. Report writing. 5. Research. 6.
Study skills. I. Foster, Nancy Fried. II. Gibbons, Susan (Susan L.), 1970-
Z733.U868S78 2007
025.5’877--dc22
2007028559
Printed in the United States of America.
11 10 09 08 07
5 4 3 2 1
Contents
v
Introduction to the Undergraduate Research Project
Nancy Fried Foster and Susan Gibbons
1
one. Faculty Expectations of Student Research
Barbara Alvarez and Nora Dimmock
7
two. Asking Students about Their Research
Vicki Burns and Kenn Harper
16
three. Night Owl Librarians: Shifting the Reference Clock
Suzanne Bell and Alan Unsworth
20
four. Library Design and Ethnography
Susan Gibbons and Nancy Fried Foster
30
five. Dream Catcher: Capturing Student-Inspired Ideas for the Libraries’ Web site
Jane McCleneghan Smith and Katie Clark
40
six. Photo Surveys: Eliciting More Than You Knew to Ask For
Judi Briden
48
seven. Mapping Diaries, or Where Do They Go All Day?
Katie Clark
55
eight. What an Experience: Library Staff Participation in Ethnographic Research
Helen Anderson and Ann Marshall
63
nine. Then and Now: How Today’s Students Differ
Sarada George
72
ten. The Mommy Model of Service
Nancy Fried Foster
79
eleven. Conclusion: Creating Student-Centered Academic Libraries
Susan Gibbons and Nancy Fried Foster
84
References
88
Author bios
The staff of the River Campus Libraries believe
that students’ literature research can be signifi-
cantly aided by consultation with information
experts,in particular librarians.The Undergradu-
ate Research Project provided us with a way to
test that belief and improve the ways we make
contact with students. Early in the project, we
formed a reference subteam to evaluate students’
experience seeking assistance from the reference
desk.The subteam consisted of one library assis-
tant and four librarians, representing the sciences
and humanities; the project’s anthropologist was
an ex-officio member of the subteam.
Reference Desk Survey
The subteam began by designing a survey for
undergraduates who came to the reference desk
at either the main humanities and social sciences
library or the science and engineering library to
seek help with a research paper. The subteam
designed the survey instrument (Appendix 2.1),
drew up detailed procedures, and pretested the
survey with two student employees to ensure that
the questions were clear.The survey was designed
to gather basic information about the student
and the assignment that brought him/her to the
reference desk, as well as the student’s motiva-
tion to come to the desk and expected outcomes.
Students were invited to complete the survey
at the end of their encounter at the reference
desk, and as a “thank-you” they received a small
flashlight in the shape of a carabiner with “River
Campus Libraries” printed on it. To enhance
the survey we sent each student two follow-up
e-mails, one within a few days and one after the
completion of the paper, to follow the student’s
progress. Thirteen reference staff volunteered to
help conduct the survey.
During the middle part of the 2005 spring
term, fifteen undergraduates were interviewed
at the reference desks, and about a third of the
students answered one or more of the e-mail
follow-up queries. One student was inter-
viewed in the science and engineering library,
the remaining fourteen at the main humani-
ties and social sciences library. Nearly all of the
students were in classes that featured integrated
library instruction; in one case, the professor
was a member of the library staff. Most stu-
dents were working under some time pressure,
as indicated by reports of deadlines of one day
to three weeks and by comments such as “the
bibliography is due tomorrow,” “paper is due,”
and “[need] to save time.”
Some students were apparently feeling more
than time pressure. One student explained,
“It’s hard to do research and I like to get help.”
Another reported, “I felt lost and overwhelmed
about getting started.” Although many stu-
dents could correctly name the databases they
had searched, others had developed their own
terminology, such as “regular database” (the
two. Asking Students about Their Research
Vicki Burns is Head, Rush Rhees Reference at the River Campus Libraries, University of Rochester; e-mail:
vburns@library.rochester.edu. Kenn Harper is Biology Librarian at the River Campus Libraries, University of
Rochester; e-mail: kharper@library.rochester.edu
Vicki Burns and Kenn Harper
7
8
Studying Students: The Undergraduate Research Project at the University of Rochester
libraries’ online catalog, Voyager), “searched
online” (Google?), or “search engine” (Voyager).
One or two students were regulars at the refer-
ence desk: “I always come to the desk.” What
students generally learned in the course of the
reference interaction with the librarians was the
existence of specialized databases or effective
ways to use the indexing of the databases.
In addition, some interesting commonali-
ties stood out. Every student had already made
an attempt to find information before seeking
assistance at the reference desk. Although 20
percent reported using only Google, over half
had used one or more of the databases provided
by the library. In addition, many had e-mailed
the librarian for an appointment, already knew
the reference staff they met at the desk, or had
a prior familiarity with the reference desk. In
sum, these findings suggest that the typical
student in our survey sample was familiar with
databases other than Google, was under a cer-
tain amount of time pressure, and was either
familiar with the reference staff in general or
had been encouraged by instructors, friends, or
family to seek library assistance.
After the survey was completed we con-
ducted a process review that included the plan-
ning subteam, those who had participated in
the reference desk survey, and other interested
staff. We especially looked for factors that in-
fluenced survey outcomes. One factor was that
we missed some potential interviews because
of busyness at the reference desk. We also dis-
covered that, although the questions were clear,
sometimes the answers were not. For example,
we had recorded answers such as “It was easy”
to the question “What made it easy or hard for
you to come to the reference desk?” or “I looked
online” to the question “What print or online
resources, if any, have you already checked?”
Some interviewers felt uncomfortable both
providing the reference assistance and conduct-
ing the survey about it.
Tese discoveries led us to spend some ex-
tended time thinking about the design of the
questions, survey procedures, and methodolo-
gies. Other data collected by the Undergradu-
ate Research Project indicated that some stu-
dents never considered asking for help from
the reference staff. After some deliberation we
decided that we would gain more useful infor-
mation about students by surveying them out-
side of the libraries, to reach those who usually
bypass the services of the reference desk.
“Outside the Library” Survey
Having decided to expand our investigations be-
yond the physical library, we conducted a survey
one evening in two locations where undergradu-
ates congregate: the food court at the student
center, and the main student computer center
on campus. In particular, we sought to target
undergraduate students in these locations who
were actively working on a research paper.
Aside from following a prescribed schedule
of questions (Appendix 2.2), the methodol-
ogy for this second survey was very different
from the first. In the student center we used a
student employee of the library to cruise the
food court and invite students to participate in
the survey. A librarian then screened these stu-
dents to ensure that they met the desired pro-
file, and a recent anthropology graduate con-
ducted the actual interviews. In the computer
center, our staff anthropologist undertook all
three roles. Because nonlibrarians conducted
the interviews themselves, we hoped that the
students would be more candid in their re-
sponses.
Te interviews lasted approximately twenty
minutes, and as a “thank-you” we gave the par-
ticipants their choice of cookies, pretzels, soft
drinks, water, or juice. We interviewed a total of
fifteen students in the two locations, capturing
their responses in notes as opposed to tran-
scribed recordings.
Asking Students about Their Research
9
Eight men and seven women participated in
the survey. We do not have the college year for
all the students, but know we had at least two
seniors, three freshmen, and one junior. Our li-
brary student worker encountered no problems
in enlisting students to participate. In fact, he
had to pace his recruitment efforts to prevent a
long waiting time for the actual interview. Te
academic disciplines were represented as fol-
lows: African American history, 1; anthropol-
ogy, 2; brain and cognitive science, 2; computer
science, 1; English, 3; history, 2; mathematics,
1; physics, 2; and religion, 1
Te questions asked in the interview ad-
dressed how the students felt about their as-
signment and the methods they employed to
bring it to a successful conclusion. We raised
the topic of the library and reference librarians
late in the interview to keep the focus on the
student work practices and attitudes. Te stu-
dent perspective was paramount for us.
Survey Responses
Question 1: Do you feel you have enough time to
f inish this paper/project?
The overwhelming majority (87 percent) of stu-
dents responded that they had sufficient time in
which to write their papers. The two seniors who
were writing honors theses were the only ones
concerned about completing everything in the time
they had left.One senior reported,“I’m,busy.I have
other things I need to do for school,also need to re-
lax,work,and dovolunteering.”Another responded
that “it was assigned at beginning of semester so if
rushed it is my own fault.” Other students echoed
this sentiment: they had the assignment early, and
it was up to them to manage their work effectively
to complete the assignment on time.
Question 2: How much do you really care about this
paper/project?
All except three students cared “a lot” about this
paper. Getting a good grade was important to
them. For some students, their concern for the
paper was driven by their interest in the topic.
One of the seniors reported,“It’s a culmination of
the work that I have done for the last two years.”
Another student liked her topic and was inter-
ested to see how it would turn out. One student
reported, “Initially I didn’t care about it much; I
became more interested while working on it.”
One of the students who did not care much
about the paper was taking the course for per-
sonal enjoyment and, though he wanted a “de-
cent grade,” he had other priorities to which he
was applying his energy and time. Another said
the class was a “requirement for my major, at
first the material was interesting but is boring
now, and I don’t really care anymore.”
Question 2-B: How well do you think you are going
to do on this assignment?
All the students expected to do well on the paper.
Forty-seven percent specifically mentioned that
they hoped to get an A grade on the paper. Oth-
ers mentioned that it was important to write a
successful paper because it was a large percentage
of their final grade. An intriguing response came
from the student quoted above who did not care
about his paper: “I will probably get an A because
writing a good paper and being interested are dif-
ferent; helps to be interested but not necessary. I
am motivated enough to want to do well in the
class. It is not much more effort to write a good
paper than a mediocre one, so why not write a
good one?”
Question 3: How is it going? Are you f inding all
your books and articles/data pretty easily?
Sixty percent of the students had found articles
and books for their papers; 27 percent (four stu-
dents) had not yet found enough appropriate ma-
terial.Two students had not begun their research.
Almost half the students (47 percent) received
recommendations for books and articles from
faculty; 73 percent also specifically mentioned
10
Studying Students: The Undergraduate Research Project at the University of Rochester
searching the library catalog and databases. Two
students searched Google—one of whom said she
had not yet searched the “library website.”Several
students reported mining bibliographies for ad-
ditional sources. Some students found it difficult
to find the “right” material for their papers.
Te students had greater confidence about
finding materials than they did about organiz-
ing and writing their papers:
“Just the fact that you weren’t given a
topic, no questions to answer, makes it a
little stressful at this time in the semester.”
“Lack of clarity from professor about the
topic makes it difficult to come up with
my own paper topic.”
“Te biggest challenge is figuring out
what to say; that is not clear in my mind
yet, but I have general idea that I am
moving toward. I find devoting time
and reading as much as possible is most
helpful in getting to ideas.”
“Coherency is the biggest challenge in
writing. I have too much to say and find
it hard to organize it. I think faster than I
write. I put a lot of ideas down and it gets
too random.”
“Te fact that I hate writing and feel
pressure because I want to do well. It
makes me not want to work.”
Tese students understand the difficulty
of writing the coherent, focused papers their
instructors expect and report greater concern
about organizing and writing than they do
about finding books and articles.
Question 4: Have you asked anyone to help you
with this?
Half of the students had consulted their professor
or teaching assistant or planned to do so. Several
commented that the professor was the best person
to go to for help. Some students expected that
their professor would review their papers before
they turned in the final version. The other half
had not consulted anyone. One student said that
she “would just never ask for help unless [she] was
completely clueless.”
Twenty-six percent of the students men-
tioned that they planned to go to the writing
center for assistance with their papers. Tese
students were seeking assistance for the part
of the paper they were finding the most diffi-
cult: the organization and presentation of their
ideas.
Question 4-e: Did you think of talking with a
librarian?
Of the fourteen students who answered this ques-
tion, 79 percent had not talked with a librarian.
Interestingly, 85 percent had worked with librar-
ians in the past. From these responses we can see
that once students have a research paper assigned
they do not head straight to the reference desk
for help. In fact, several in our sample lacked a
clear understanding of the ways a librarian can
assist them. Some students identified librarians
only with print and with locating materials in the
library collection.
Students reported successful assistance from
librarians in the past. Our notes record one stu-
dent saying, “Yes, librarians give more informa-
tion about topic and give me more directions.
Librarians are good.” But the student quoted
above as saying she would ask for help only
when she was “clueless,” responded, “I haven’t
used librarians; I would talk to a librarian when I
need to find books. I can’t imagine anything else
I would need them for. If I was bad with tech-
nology, I would ask how to use the computer.”
Another student responded: “I see them as
people to help me find materials on paper. I
Asking Students about Their Research
11
probably asked a librarian at some point but
found it mostly myself or from professor or
other specialist. I went to the professor because
they are the specialist in the subject area; I don’t
see librarians as specialists. Tey just know
about general information. Tey are knowl-
edgeable about search engines.”
Question 5—When was the last time you worked
on the paper? When’s the next time…?
These students belie the idea that papers are
written the night before they are due. It is clear
from their responses that they divide the larger
assignment into smaller tasks. One responded,
“I worked on it today and this weekend I will
find a source and do some reading.” Another: “I
haven’t started; I will start by making sure I have
articles by the end of the day—four days ahead
and may start writing it then.”Several noted that
they would return to the research paper once
they had other work completed. The responses
to this question provide further evidence that
these students manage their assignments well.
They appear to maintain fairly good control of
their academic work.
Survey Conclusions
Our goal was to learn about students, so we did
everything we could to focus on their work habits
and not on our workplace or ourselves. We met
the students on their turf during their working
hours (late evening) and inquired mainly about
their work habits.
Te students report that they are in control
of their research and writing assignments. Tey
are confident that they will do well, even when
they have concerns about the organization of the
paper. Tose interviewed report that they work
systematically through the research and writing
process and organize their work so that they will
complete their paper in the assigned time period.
Tese students depend upon library books,
journals, and databases for their academic re-
search. Although they may begin a project with
an Internet search, they understand that this
search is not sufficient for their assignments.
Many students are confident that they can find
books and articles on their own, but they often
look for recommendations from their profes-
sors and teaching assistants, whom they con-
sider to be subject experts.
Some students, especially those who meet
a librarian in a class, consult with a reference
librarian about their research. Other students
do not understand the role of a reference/sub-
ject librarian and associate librarians only with
hard-copy materials and stack locations.
Outcomes
The students tell us that faculty are the subject
experts. But although a professor may refer a stu-
dent to a specific article or book and sometimes
to a database such as JSTOR, s/he may not pro-
vide good direction for getting the student into
the literature of the discipline. We consider this
a vital professional responsibility for reference
librarians, who know about current databases
and library materials available to the university
community. One of our greatest challenges, then,
is to increase the undergraduates’ awareness of
librarians’ subject expertise.
Te most direct way to the undergraduates
is through the faculty. Traditionally subject
librarians have met with faculty members and
attended faculty meetings, conferences, and
seminars, serving as the main conduit of infor-
mation about the library’s programs and collec-
tions. Now we are expanding our librarian li-
aison role. Several subject librarians have office
hours outside of the library, in their respective
academic departments, where they meet with
faculty and graduate students. Others are au-
diting entire classes, which enables faculty and
students to get to know the librarians while
the librarians get an inside view of classes and
academic expectations. Strengthening the con-
12
Studying Students: The Undergraduate Research Project at the University of Rochester
nection between faculty and subject librarians
is a critical path to the students.
Our collaboration with the College Writing
Center is expanding as well. Reference librarians
have provided class-specific library instruction
in the first-year writing classes for many years.
In 2006 some librarians began serving as writing
tutors. At the request of the director of the writ-
ing center, additional subject librarians will be-
come tutors. In exchange, librarians give library
research training to the other tutors, to the first-
year writing instructors, and to the undergradu-
ate writing fellows. We find that writing tutor-
ing has helped with our work at the reference
desk, particularly when the research and writing
tasks are not differentiated by a student.
Several years ago we developed course pages
with direct links to e-reserves that presented
selected library resources appropriate for class
assignments and a photograph and contact
information for the subject librarian.
1
Many
students request appointments directly from
these pages. A similar program will be part of
the Blackboard course-management system the
university is now adopting.
We emphasized the role of subject librar-
ians in two entertaining ways this academic
year. Students told us that their parents often
edit their papers and advise them about assign-
ments, so we decided to get to know parents
through the libraries’ sponsorship of the parent
breakfast held during the class of 2010 orienta-
tion. With posters combining Beatles songs
and the theme “every class has a librarian,” we
discussed library programs and campus life
with many parents and students. In addition,
each year the libraries’ host a Halloween Scare
Fair. In the most recent fair, a fortune-teller
asked students about their majors and then
gave them a “ticket for success,” which high-
lighted “their” librarian, a wise saying, and some
trinkets. Believe it or not, students stood in a
long line to meet the fortune-teller.
Te Undergraduate Research Project has
provided unique insights into the ways students
do research and write their papers. We used the
findings reported above, and other data collect-
ed in the overall project, to inform our public
services retreat last year, at which we generated
several innovative project ideas. We are meet-
ing the students in new venues and building
broader coalitions with campus departments.
Although the Undergraduate Research Project
has formally ended, we continue to use the
skills we learned to update our understanding
and gather new information about our students
so that we may provide them with the best pos-
sible reference services.
Note
1.http://www.library.rochester.edu/index.cfm?page=courses.
Asking Students about Their Research
13
Appendix 2.1. Undergraduate Reference Survey Worksheet
Place of survey: RR - Carlson - e-mail - Chat - Other
Surveyor:
Date/Time:
Person Surveyed
Name: E-mail:
Major(s):
Year in School:
Course: When is the paper (etc.) due?
Topic of the paper/project:
When did they get their Gift?
Follow-up Dates 1)
2)
Question 1:
What print or online resources, if any, have you already checked?
Question 2:
Did you ask anyone else for help before you came to the Reference Desk?
Question 3:
What did you learn during our session that was new?
Question 4:
Why did you come to talk to the Reference Desk at this particular time?
Question 5:
What made it easy or hard for you to come to the Reference Desk?
Remember the gift for the student and to request permission to follow up in 3 days.
Follow-up Questions
Initial Follow-up—Send by e-mail on third day after original survey.
14
Studying Students: The Undergraduate Research Project at the University of Rochester
Follow-up 1:
After our session what additional resources did you look at—who else to you speak
to?
Follow-up 2:
Has another information question related to your paper/lab come up since we spoke
and how did you go about seeking answers?
Follow-up 3:
After you have turned in your paper, may I e-mail you with some wrap-up questions?
Final Follow-up Questions
—Send by e-mail after the paper/project is complete.
Final 1:
Over all how did the paper go?
Final 2:
How did the help that I give you help you with the paper?
Final 3:
Do you think that your grade was/will be influenced by the help that I gave you?
Asking Students about Their Research
15
Appendix 2.2. “Outside the Library” Interview Questions
1. Do you feel like you have enough time to finish this paper/project? [Are you feeling totally rushed?
Do you have time to do this properly?]
2. How much do you really care about this paper/project?
a. Why? What do you really want to get out of it? [prompt for grades, knowledge, other, if nec-
essary]
b. How well do you think you’re going to do [What are you going for? Is this as important as
other assignments, or do you just want to get an acceptable grade and spend more time on
other things?]
3. How is it going? Are you finding all your books and articles/data pretty easily?
a. If yes—how have you been finding them? [What have you found? How did you find it?]
b. If no—what have you tried? What has the problem been?
c. All: Is anything else about writing the paper hard? Is anything else slowing you down or giv-
ing you trouble?
4. Have you asked anyone to help you with this?
a. If yes—who?
b. If no—do you have a reason for not asking anyone to help you?
c. All: Who do you wish you could get help from? What prevents you from asking?
d. Rather than face-to-face, would you like it better if you could get help on your paper/project
through IM? Phone? Other technology?
e. All: Did you think of talking to a librarian? Why didn’t you? Would anything make you want
to get help from a librarian? Have you ever talked to a librarian? Can you tell me where it
was?
5.When is the last time you worked on your paper? How much later do you think you’ll be up tonight?
Will you work on this paper tonight? When’s the next time you think you’ll work on this paper? Where
do you think you’ll be the next time you work on this paper?
Abbott, Andrew. 2006.
Te University library:
Report of the task force on the university li-
brary
. http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/staff-
web/groups/space/abbott-report.html.
Albanese, Andrew Richard. 2005. Te best thing
a library can be is open.
Library Journal
130
(15): 42–44.
Alch, Mark L. 2000. Te echo-boom genera-
tion: A growing force in American society.
Futurist
34 (5): 42.
Alvarez, Barbara. 2007.
A new perspective on ref-
erence: Crossing the line between research and
writing
. Paper presented at the 5th “Ref-
erence in the 21st-Century” Symposium
at Columbia University. https://www1.
columbia.edu/sec/cu/libraries/bts/img/as-
sets/9337/Columbia%20paper.pdf.
Barnes & Noble Booksellers. n.d
. Barnes & No-
ble history
. http://www.barnesandnobleinc.
com/our_company/history/bn_history.html.
Barry, Christine A. 1997. Information skills
for an electronic world: Training doctoral
research students.
Journal of Information Sci-
ence
23( 3): 225–38.
Becker, Howard Saul, Blanche Geer, and Ever-
ett C. Hughes. 1968.
Making the grade: Te
academic side of college life
. New York: John
Wiley and Sons.
Bell, Suzanne S. 2006.
Librarian’s guide to online
searching
. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlim-
ited.
Beloit College. 2006. Mindset Lists. http://
www.beloit.edu/~pubaff/mindset/.
Borders Group. n.d.
Our history.
http://www.
bordersgroupinc.com/about/history.htm.
Briden, Judi, Vicki Burns, and Ann Marshall.
2007. Knowing our students: Undergradu-
ates in context. In
Proceedings of the 2007
ACRL National Conference
, Baltimore, MD.
http://docushare.lib.rochester.edu/docush-
are/dsweb/Get/Document-25072/Know-
ing_our_students_URochester.pdf.
Brun-Cottan, Francoise, and Patricia Wall.
1995. Using video to re-present the user.
Communications of the ACM
(Association for
Computing Machinery) 38 (5): 61–72.
Carlson, Jake. 2006. An examination of under-
graduate student citation behavior.
Journal
of Academic Librarianship
32 (1): 14–22.
Carlson, Scott. 2005. Net generation goes to
college.
Chronicle of Higher Education
52 (7):
A34.
Davis, Philip M. 2003. Effect of the Web on
undergraduate citation behavior: Guiding
student scholarship in a networked age.
Por-
tal: Libraries and the Academy
3 (1): 41–51.
References
84
References
85
DeRosa, Cathy. 2006.
College students’ perceptions
of libraries and information resources.
Dublin,
OH: OCLC Online Computer Library
Center, http://www.oclc.org/reports/per-
ceptionscollege.htm.
Foley, James A., and Robert K. Foley. 1969.
Te
college scene: Students tell it like it is
. New
York: Cowles Book Company.
Foster, Nancy Fried, and Susan Gibbons.
2005. Understanding faculty to improve
content recruitment for institutional
repositories,
D-Lib Magazine
11 (1).
http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january05/
foster/01foster.html. See also Grey Lit-
erature/DSpace Project: Shared Results
http://tinyurl.com/jufm2.
Gardner, Ralph Jr. 2006. In college, you can go
