Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to identify the ability of college freshmen to successfully use common academic software and manage files. Design/methodology/approach – In total, 39 college freshmen from three college campuses were recruited for the study. An online test environment and screen recording software were used to measure student proficiency in using PDFs, Microsoft Word, Microsoft PowerPoint, Microsoft Excel, Gmail, and Windows. Data were collected in September 2013. Findings – Student use of academic technology is common, but their software skills are not comprehensive or deep. Students were most proficient at using PDFs and Microsoft Word. Microsoft Excel tasks were the most difficult for the students, and many struggled to use Gmail to compose a message and send an attachment. Students were able to open a PowerPoint document and view a slideshow, but they were less comfortable navigating the software’s printing environment. Originality/value – Having concrete data about student technology skills, rather than anecdotal data from reference desk interactions, can help librarians design improved instruction and tutorials that target areas of student technology weakness.

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to seek to explore faculty perceptions versus actual student usage of print and online, full-text articles. Design/methodology/approach -Surveys were given to faculty and their students at four Penn State campuses. Both the six-question instructor survey and the 11-question student survey related to article retrieval for one particular class assignment. Findings -Data gathered from the surveys surprisingly indicated that faculty are overestimating student use of online articles and underestimating their use of print. This study also showed that a majority of students will reject an article that is not available online in full-text. Research limitations/implications -In this study there was a discrepancy between students stating that they knew to cite online sources differently from print sources, and faculty stating that they could tell the percentage of online articles used from their students' bibliographies. In future studies, more of an emphasis would be placed on measuring faculty knowledge of citing online resources. Practical implications -This paper could be used to support the continued purchase of print resources. It could also be used to support the need for faculty to keep current on citing new technological formats and instructing their students on the same. Originality/value -This study was conceived in an attempt to statistically verify not only faculty perceptions of full-text use, but also librarians' perceptions of faculty and student article practices. While a literature search produced several studies on faculty perceptions of internet usage, few were found that touched specifically on full-text articles.

When asked to print the full text of an article, many undergraduate college students print the abstract instead of the full text. This study seeks to determine the underlying cause(s) of this confusion. In this quantitative study, participants (n=40) performed five usability tasks to assess ease of use and usefulness of five commercial library databases and were surveyed on their understanding of library terminology. The study revealed that more than half of the students correctly defined the term "Abstract" and over 75 percent understood "full text." However, only 25 percent of the students were able to successfully complete all five database tasks.ver the past 10 to 15 years, while working at the reference desk, the authors have come across hundreds of printouts of journal article abstracts lying unclaimed next to the library's printers. These orphan abstracts beg the question, "Do students know the difference between an abstract and the full text of an article before they hit the print button?" For all of the abstracts that were left unclaimed, the authors knew that many more were being given to professors as examples of journal articles and being used as sources for research papers. In a previous research study, the authors found that, of 39 students who had been exposed to the concepts of "abstract" and "full text" through library instruction, only 62 percent were able to find and print the full text of five articles related to their research assignment. The remaining 38 percent of students printed at least one abstract in place of the full text. 1The authors were interested in studying the underlying cause or causes of this disconnect. Did our students not know the difference between an abstract and the full text of an article, even when they had received instruction on these concepts? Or were the database results pages designed so that the full text of the article was too difficult to find? Or was there a combination of factors leading to the students' obvious confusion?

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to report on how researchers at Penn State University used video screen capture technology to learn more about student usage of the library's databases. Design/methodology/approach -The process of identifying and implementing a novel way to capture and analyze the human-computer interaction is outlined and discussed. Findings -Because of the drawbacks associated with both formal, direct physical observation of research participants and videotaping participants, video screen capture technology is chosen as a better way to track human-computer interaction. Practical implications -Video screen capture technology is an inexpensive, user-friendly way to enhance electronic resource usability studies in any library. Research files can be easily exported into coding software for data analysis. Originality/value -The paper examines a new, non-invasive way to capture student research behavior. It shows how any library could use this same technology to conduct research on how their resources are being used by their user population.