Foster-Gibbons.indb

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

Introduction to the Undergraduate Research Project

Nancy Fried Foster and Susan Gibbons

one. Faculty Expectations of Student Research

Barbara Alvarez and Nora Dimmock

two. Asking Students about Their Research

Vicki Burns and Kenn Harper

three. Night Owl Librarians: Shifting the Reference Clock

Suzanne Bell and Alan Unsworth

four. Library Design and Ethnography

Susan Gibbons and Nancy Fried Foster

five. Dream Catcher: Capturing Student-Inspired Ideas for the Libraries’ Web site

Jane McCleneghan Smith and Katie Clark

six. Photo Surveys: Eliciting More Than You Knew to Ask For

Judi Briden

seven. Mapping Diaries, or Where Do They Go All Day?

Katie Clark

eight. What an Experience: Library Staff Participation in Ethnographic Research

Helen Anderson and Ann Marshall

nine. Then and Now: How Today’s Students Differ

Sarada George

ten. The Mommy Model of Service

Nancy Fried Foster

eleven. Conclusion: Creating Student-Centered Academic Libraries

Susan Gibbons and Nancy Fried Foster

References

Author bios

How many words is a picture worth? In con-

ducting our Undergraduate Research Project at

the River Campus Libraries, we have found that

words and pictures in combination yield much

more information than either alone. During the

project we used a variety of methods that com-

bined capturing images and words: retrospective

interviews, photo surveys, mapping diaries (see

Chapter 7), and video-recorded dorm visits.This

chapter focuses on our experience with photo

surveys.

In previous research by the River Campus

Libraries on faculty use of gray literature, one

of the methods we used was work-practice

study, which borrows from ethnographic meth-

odology (Foster and Gibbons 2005). We met

with faculty in their offices or labs—the places

where they actually did their work. Interview-

ing and video-recording them in these contexts

captured a varied texture of details from which

we could learn about their environments. Fac-

ulty would point to books on their shelves,

papers on their desks, and documents on their

computer screens by way of illustration as they

talked about their research. Tey showed us

their computer desktops and performed some

of their work processes for us. Because we were

there, we were able to ask questions about what

they were showing us as well as capture images

for later review and analysis. Using work-prac-

tice study as a method contributed significantly

to our understanding of what faculty did.

As a result of this experience, when we

began the Undergraduate Research Project,

team members knew they wanted to talk with

and observe students in their dorms—places

where they lived and worked. At the start of the

project, however, we felt we did not know our

students well enough to know how best to ap-

proach them about making dorm visits. Until

we could figure that out, was there another way

to “see” students’ environments through their

own eyes?

Photo Survey

Some members of the project team were familiar

with cultural probes from the work of Gaver et al.

(1999), in which individuals were asked to reflect

on and photograph their environments. Nancy

Fried Foster, the lead anthropologist for the proj-

ect, introduced us to the research done by visual

sociologists, in particular the work of Douglas

Harper (1984, 2001, 2006), whose photo-elicita-

tion interview method provided a useful model.

As Harper (1984, 21) describes it, “This method

provides a way in which the interview can move

from the concrete (as represented by the literal

objects in the image) to the socially abstract

(what the objects in the photograph mean to the

individual being interviewed).”

Our project team decided to develop a pro-

tocol around the use of a disposable camera.

We asked students who participated to take

a series of photographs and then interviewed

six. Photo Surveys: Eliciting More Than You Knew to

Ask For

Judi Briden is Digital Librarian for Public Service at the River Campus Libraries, University of Rochester; e-mail:

jbriden@library.rochester.edu

Judi Briden

Photo Surveys

them about their pictures. We referred to this

method as a “photo survey.” We hoped that

data gathered by this method would suggest

new questions and areas for further research.

We also thought that using cameras might ap-

peal to students and engage them in a manner

that was different from other investigations

conducted for the project.

Te process was simple. We created a list

of things we wanted students to photograph,

purchased a one-time-use camera for each stu-

dent, attached the list to the cameras, and asked

students to return the cameras when they were

finished (Fig. 6.1). We had the film developed

and transferred to CD and then scheduled an

interview with each student to discuss his/her

photographs. Te interviews were audio-re-

corded and transcribed, so that the photographs

and interviews could be reviewed and analyzed

together by project team members.

In developing the list of photo requests, we

were concerned to keep instructions to a mini-

mum, allowing broad interpretation by each

student as to what to photograph. Tis was a

common thread throughout our research—ask

ing open-ended questions that did not imply

specific responses. In our planning, Foster char-

acterized photo surveys as “a way to discover

the unexpected, create artifacts that can be used

as a basis for discussion, and learn about differ-

ent parts of students’ lives we would not

learn about through conversation.”

So, what did we want them to photo-

graph? Te project subteams (reference

outreach, facilities, and digital) brain-

stormed about what each would like to

see from a student’s perspective. Our

ideas were prompted by questions we

had after conducting a few retrospec-

tive interviews about research paper

assignments, curiosity about students’

dorm environments, and our interest

in how they managed their academic

responsibilities. Te proposed photo requests

were compiled and reduced to a single list of

twenty:

1. Te computer you use in the library,

showing its surroundings

2. All the stuff you take to class

3. Something that you would call “high tech”

4. Something really weird

5. One picture of the libraries to show to a

new freshman

6. Your favorite place to study

7. Te place you keep your books

8. A person, any person

9. Your favorite person or people to study

with

10. Something you’ve noticed that you think

others don’t notice

11. Your communication devices

12. A picture of your dorm room, showing

your computer

13. Another view of your dorm room

14. How you manage your time or keep track

of your work

15. Your favorite part of the day

16. Te tools you use for writing assignments

17. Te things you always carry with you

18. A place in the library where you feel lost

19. Something you can’t live without

20. Te night before a big assignment is due

Te rest…whatever you want!

Figure 6.1. Camera with list of requested photo

subjects attached

Studying Students: The Undergraduate Research Project at the University of Rochester

rather than the initial question, that elicited the

greatest detail. As an example, the following is

an excerpt from an interview about a picture

showing “your favorite place to study”:

Foster:

And this is “your favorite place to

study”…

Student A:

Tis is our study lounge; there

is where I study for all my exams. I only

have exams in one class, but that’s where I

study for them.

Foster:

And this is on the first floor of

[your dorm]? Are you usually in there

alone?

Student:

No, when I’m studying for

science I have my friend [name] and

usually when we do work in here, we

work together because it’s better to have

somebody in there with you because you

can talk and take a break. . .

Foster:

Are there times when there are

many people in there studying many

different things?

Student:

Not really, because usually when

somebody goes in there, if there’s people

Figure 6.2. Student A’s “favorite place to

study”

Tere were more than twenty exposures

available in each camera; we wanted to re-

serve some for student serendipity. We also

wanted students to consider this “assign-

ment” fun, so some items on the list were

meant to be intriguing—4, 8, 10, 15, and 19,

for example.

Eight students participated by taking

photographs in late 2004 and the first half

of 2005. Tey were recruited individually—

some by asking students who were already

participating to refer their friends. Tey

completed the assignment at different times,

and we paid each student a small amount. As

the student returned his/her camera, we sched-

uled a follow-up interview, allowing sufficient

time to develop the images and transfer them

to CD. In the interview, which was audio-

recorded, Foster and the student viewed the

images on a computer screen and talked about

them. Viewing images on the computer made it

easier to talk about what was depicted and was

more comfortable than huddling over a snap-

shot. Often, after the student described what

the photo represented and was prompted for

amplification, Foster would then comment in

an open way about something else in the pic-

ture or expand on what the student had said by

asking about the same thing in other contexts.

Often, it was this gentle, follow-up probing,

Figure 6.3. Student B’s “favorite place to

study”

Photo Surveys

in there, they won’t stay in there, they’ll

leave.

Foster:

So it’s sort of like an unwritten

rule that if there’s some people in there

studying together, it’s sort of taken?

Student:

Well yeah, because you don’t

want to be in there with people talking,

you probably won’t go in if there’s other

people. And also people have different

times when they’re working, and we like

to work between 8 and 1, and usually

other people go to the library or they’ll

work in the afternoon.

Foster:

You’re talking about 8

A.M.?

Student:

No, 8 P.M

Foster:

At that hour, most people are

doing something else?

Student:

Tey’re usually in the library.

Most of our hall likes to work in [the

main campus computing center in same

building as the library]. Or they’ll be

in their room or dinner or watching

something.

Foster:

So, as it works out, you and your

friend are pretty much the ones who want

this space at that time. Have you ever had

to go somewhere else?

Student:

No, we’ve never had to go

somewhere else.

From an interview with a different stu-

dent:

Student B:

…that was my favorite

place to study. Or, not my favorite

place to study, well I guess that’s what

the question is called. I wouldn’t call it

my favorite place to study but I took

a picture of the upstairs level of [the

main campus computing center in same

building as the library] because I like the

atmosphere there. It’s more of a group

study atmosphere, it’s more casual, you’re

allowed to chat. I studied a few times

in the Great Hall [in the library] in the

quiet, respectful places, but I don’t think

I’m as constructive in those places. My

mind ends up wandering.

Foster:

When it’s quiet your mind

wanders, because you’re distracted by the

quiet?

Student:

Yeah, or I end up with music of

my own stuck in my head sometimes, or

in any case, unless I’m really into what I’m

reading I’m not going to be able to do it

in a quiet setting. So for a lot of studying,

especially if it’s something I can study

group-oriented, I do it here.

In these two excerpts, students are express-

ing very different needs. One wants a quiet

place to study, and the other cannot study if

it is too quiet. Te entire project reinforced

Figure 6.4. “A place in the library where a

student feels lost”

Studying Students: The Undergraduate Research Project at the University of Rochester

for us the importance of understanding and

accommodating the diverse needs of our stu-

dents.

One student’s photograph and discussion

about “a place in the library where you feel lost”

made us wince:

Student:…

I am still having a hard time

negotiating the library. So, whenever I get

there, I am trying to figure out where I

am going. So I just stare at this list [guide

to library stacks, posted by every elevator]

and figure out where I have to go…. I feel

very lost. Where am I going? Am I even

at the right elevator?

Foster:

You might

feel

lost when you are

standing here—have you ever actually

gotten

lost?

Student:

Yes, I got lost in the stacks, and

I had to find somebody else, get them to

help me get out because I didn’t know

where I was. It was very upsetting. I am

usually pretty good with landmarks, so

if I get myself somewhere I can usually

get myself back. Tis time I had been

meandering, and I pop out of the stacks

and there was no one and no exit signs.

Tis is the ultimate worst freshman

moment.

Foster:

So somebody just sort of

appeared?

Student:

No, I just wandered until I

found someone. And I was like, “Hi,

sorry to bother you. You look like you’re

studying pretty hard, but I don’t know

where I am. And I don’t know how to

get out, and I have an appointment in

fifteen minutes.” Tey were like, “You’re a

freshman?” And I was like, “Yeah.”

Like most large university libraries, ours is a

complex environment. Over the years, we have

looked for ways to improve signage and other

aids to wayfinding. We currently use a variety

of tactics including maps, contextual signs, in-

clusion in bibliographic instruction, help desk

assistance, tours, and special events that attract

students into the stacks. Tis student’s experi-

ence reminds us that we need to be doing more.

Te photographs taken by students of their

rooms, desks, bookshelves, and computers were

the most productive for eliciting details during

the interviews. As we asked questions about

what we could see in the images, we learned

how students did their work and what they

did for recreation and relaxation. We learned

about social interactions with roommates and

floor mates and friends. Te many objects

shown, and their juxtaposition, prompted us

Figure 6.5. Two students’ photos of “a picture of your dorm room, showing your

computer”

Photo Surveys

to ask questions we had not anticipated, but

that turned out to be very informative. As well,

these images helped us appreciate our students

as individuals with different personalities, pref-

erences, and unique environments. Figure 6.5

shows two of the many images we studied.

After each interview had been completed,

team members met to coview photos and listen

to the audio recording. Exposure to the data as

a group contributed to our shared understand-

ing and discussion of what we were seeing, how

it related to data from our other investigations,

what additional questions were raised but not

answered by the interview, and what points

we thought were most important to take away

from the session. Further analyses were un-

dertaken by team members during the course

of the project—to look at details of students’

rooms and computers for common or unique

elements, to compare what different students

carried to class, and to review the varied ways

students kept track of their work. Troughout

the project, we encountered data from different

investigations that supported specific findings.

Having disparate data inform a single conclu-

sion reaffirmed for us the value of using differ-

ent methods.

Lessons Learned

Photo surveys as a method worked quite well in

eliciting useful data. Combining the visual and

the oral provided us with more opportunities to

question and learn. We did, however, encounter

a few problems. We think that most of these

problems could be reduced or eliminated in the

future.

A camera’s flash did not always work for

every photograph. As a consequence, some im-

ages were too dark to show much detail. When

this happened, students were sometimes able

to say what the photographs were supposed to

be and to recall what they were thinking when

they took them.

Another problem was the time delay be-

tween a student taking his/her photos and the

interview. A student might have forgotten, or at

least be vague about, why s/he took a particular

shot. Overall, however, students were articulate

about most of their photos. And since the im-

ages prompted questions, they were still useful

for eliciting information.

A third problem we encountered was dif-

ficulty matching a student’s photos with items

on the list of photo requests. When we cre-

ated the list, by numbering them we implied

a specific sequence. At first, we actually asked

students to take pictures in the same order as

the list. In preparing the list, however, we failed

to evaluate the convenience of this sequence for

the students. When they were in their rooms, it

might be easier to take 2, 7, 11–14, and 16–17

together. Items 1, 5, and 18 might be easier to

photograph in a single visit to the library. Once

we realized this, we replaced the numbers on

the list with blank lines and asked students to

fill in the number of each photograph as they

took it. Tis was an improvement, but it was

still difficult at times to match the list with the

sequence of images on the CD. Further, when

the project team reviewed the interviews later,

we had to coordinate recorded interview seg-

ments, images, and list.

Findings

What did we learn from the photo surveys? Some

findings provided answers to specific questions we

were asking, some gave us hints that were con-

firmed through other investigations, and others

were completely unexpected. We were surprised

to discover how willing students were to show

us and tell us about their lives.Their comfort re-

duced our anxiety about asking them to take part

in the research. As a consequence, it was easier to

pursue other questions and to develop different

protocols. At the same time, we became more

sensitive about protecting the confidentiality of

Studying Students: The Undergraduate Research Project at the University of Rochester

these students who were so open with us, even if

they were unconcerned on their own behalf.

Having already conducted several retrospec-

tive interviews, we suspected that students were

quite busy and used a variety of techniques to

keep up with their academic and social com-

mitments. Photos of “how you manage your

time or keep track of your work” confirmed

this (Fig. 6.6). One student took a photo of his

head to show how he kept track, and another

described the merits of Linux calendaring

software to integrate personal and academic

responsibilities. Most students used more than

one tool to keep up with their lives. One re-

corded assignments three different ways—in

a class notebook, with computer scheduling

software, and on a PDA. Another used a plan-

ner and multiple sticky notes posted around

her desk. One first-year student had already

recorded in a notebook (her “life binder”) all of

the courses she would take as an undergradu-

ate, organized by major and cluster, and which

semesters she would be taking them.

Combined with the results of two other in-

vestigations, mapping diaries (see Chapter 7)

and dorm visits, we came to understand that

students were actually on the go day and night

and were seldom focused exclusively on any one

activity. Academic, social, recreational, work,

volunteer, and personal activities were all in the

mix, and each day was different.

We were very interested in the technologies

students had available and which ones they ac-

tually used. Photo request items 3, 11, 17, and

19 were intended to elicit this type of informa-

tion. Computers and cell phones were most

common. MP3 players showed up in some

photos or were mentioned in the interviews.

Only one student we interviewed for photo

surveys used a PDA. On their computers, many

students used e-mail, instant messaging, and

Facebook or MySpace. During dorm visits later

in the project, we followed up with more ques-

tions about what was on students’ computer

desktops and the activities associated with hav-

ing them there.

In asking about communication devices, we

discovered that “landline” telephones supplied

by the university in dorm rooms were not used

at all or were relegated to use only in limited

circumstances (e.g., for calls within the dorm

and to save on long distance charges from cell

phones’ out-of-state numbers). One student

described occasionally finding messages on his

room telephone long after they had been left,

simply because he never thought to check it.

Everyone he knew called him on his cell phone.

Overall, multiple communications technolo-

gies were used by students, but the specific ones

varied from student to student. Tis has impli-

cations for libraries trying to choose the best

means to communicate with their students.

In one instance, it was the absence of some-

thing that caught our attention. In photographs

showing “all the stuff you take to class,” we

observed that laptops were not included, even

though students had laptops (see Fig. 6.7). So,

we noted it down without understanding why,

until the mapping diaries, with more data about

students’ days, provided an answer (see Chapter

7). Tat is when we discovered how itinerant

students were during the day, carrying what

Figure 6.6. Student’s photo of “how you

manage your time or keep track of your

work”

Photo Surveys

they needed for long stretches. Tey covered a

lot of territory, and it simply was not practical

for most to include a laptop along with all the

other things they brought to classes. Instead,

laptops came out when students planned to be

in one place for a while to do their work, such

as in the library at night.

When we combined our data from visiting

the dorms with the photo surveys, it became eas-

ier to understand why our library buildings were

so popular with our students for working for long

periods on assignments. Friends going in and out

of rooms, impromptu activities down the hall,

games, music, and phone calls—these were just

some of the distractions working against getting

assignments done.Te library provided a refuge

when students just

had

to work.

Trough photo surveys, our students shared

details about their lives in a way that conven-

tional interviews alone could not achieve. Tey

showed us their rooms and the places they

liked to go, their friends and study buddies,

their possessions and preferred work environ-

ments. For library staff, the images and inter-

views pulled together varied facets of being an

undergraduate at the University of Rochester

that were previously unknown to us and made

them real and cohesive. We now understand

much more about our students’ lives beyond the

doors of the library.

Figure 6.7. Two students’ photos of “all the stuff you take to class”

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

References

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.

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.