Assessing the Library’s Influence on Freshman and Senior Level Outcomes with User Surveys

Abstract

the terms of the Creative CommonsAttribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike License 4.0 International (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-ncsa/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the same or similar license to this one. AbstractObjectives -This study seeks to identify areas where relationships exist between a student's library usage and student outcomes at Bellarmine University, a private master's level institution. The study has two primary aims. The first is to see if an operationally oriented user survey can be used to provide evidence of the library's support for institutionally important student outcomes. The second is to develop a regression model that provides a big picture with multiple variables to determine if library factors are still significant in student outcomes when controlling for significant demographic factors.Methods -The library regularly conducts student user surveys, and this study examines the results of the first three surveys, from 2007, 2008 and 2010. These surveys include individually identifiable data on why students come to the library and how often they use it in person and online. Researchers aggregated student responses into class-based cohorts and used regression analysis to analyze the extent and significance of the relationships, if any, that exist between Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 2015, 10.2 9 student use of the library and student outcomes such as retention, graduation and cumulative GPA. The study takes into consideration known significant student demographic factors such as American Collect Testing (ACT) composite score, full-or part-time status, and their session GPA.Results -The study identifies specific library services and resources that have significant correlations with the selected student learning measures and outcomes. For freshman students, the ability to access the library online influences both retention and graduation. In looking at freshman learning outcomes represented by GPA, the results again indicate that the library has a positive influence on a student's GPA. The library's influence appears through two factors that highlight the library as a place: providing a place to study alone and as a place that has specialized equipment available to students. The library influences seniors' cumulative GPA differently than for freshmen, primarily through the library's role as an information resource. The variable check out books had a positive impact on senior's GPA.Conclusions -This study indicates that the library does have an influence on student outcomes, whether learning outcomes, represented by cumulative GPA, or more typical student success outcomes, represented by second-year retention and graduation. This is true even when controlling for certain demographics, including the student's ACT score, whether the student is part-time or full-time...

A Comprehensive Primer to Library Learning Analytics Practices, Initiatives, and Privacy Issues

“…80 Other library LA studies include data gathered from student participation in first-year experience programs 81 and uses of tutoring services. 82 To this is added data gathered outside classroom environments, such as four-year graduation rates 83 and year-to-year retention. 84 Additional information often obtained from institutional sources includes demographic information such as age, gender, and ethnicity to create subgroups for comparison.…”

Data Management Practices in Academic Library Learning Analytics: A Critical Review

“…In the first category, there are nine studies in which, for the purposes of analytics, the library appears to be retaining transactional data that should otherwise be deleted (Allison, 2015;Cook, 2014;B. Cox & Jantti, 2012a, 2012bKome, 2017;Renaud, Britton, Wang, & Ogihara, 2015;Stemmer & Mahan, 2015Wong & Webb, 2011). Renaud et al (2015) harvested transactional data every week for an academic year as a workaround for the fact that the library's integrated library system (ILS) did not maintain historical circulation data.…”

“…They exported data every two weeks and calculated the change from the previous data set in order to measure circulation over time. Other libraries kept data from several years to draw comparisons across cohorts or as students progressed through their degrees; such analyses have been done over two years (Allison, 2015), three years (Wong & Webb, 2011), four years (Stemmer & Mahan, 2015), six years (Stemmer & Mahan, 2016), and twelve years (Cook, 2014). Nominally, transactional library records would be used and then discarded under a relevant retention schedule, yet analytics projects can conflict with previously established retention practices.…”

“…A significant number of studies, 46 of the 54 examined, imply transferring individual-level data between the library and a central university office (Allison, 2015;Black & Murphy, 2017;Bowles-Terry, 2012;Çetin & Howard, 2016;Collins & Stone, 2014;Coulter, Clarke, & Scamman, 2007;Cox & Jantti, 2012a, 2012bde Jager et al, 2018;Fransen & Peterson, 2016;Goodall & Pattern, 2011;Haddow, 2013;Haddow & Joseph, 2010;Jantti, 2016;Jantti & Cox, 2013;J. L. Jones, 2010;Kot & Jones, 2015;LeMaistre, 2015;LeMaistre et al, 2018;Massengale, Piotrowski, & Savage, 2016;McCarthy, 2017;Montenegro et al, 2016;Murray et al, 2016;Nackerud et al, 2012Nackerud et al, , 2013Odeh, 2012;Pepper & Jantti, 2015;Renaud et al, 2015;Scarletto et al, 2013;Scott, 2014;Soria et al, 2014Soria et al, , 2017aSoria et al, , 2017bSoria et al, , 2013Soria et al, , 2015Squibb & Mikkelsen, 2016;Stemmer & Mahan, 2015Stone, Pattern, & Ramsden, 2012;Thorpe et al, 2016;…”

“…The best example of "opt in" is Thorpe et al, which harvested and analyzed library usage data for the 75 students opting into the study (Thorpe et al, 2016). Stemmer and Mahan also performed data harvesting and analytics only on students who opted to take the library's survey, though they did not publish any information describing their informed consent process (Stemmer & Mahan, 2015. LeMaistre et al (2018) provide the sole example of "opt out, " linking to their Terms of Use and Privacy Policy from the EZ-Proxy login web page (proxy logins served as the main library usage data collected for the study).…”