Electronic information interactions with the university student: an Australian/UK cross-national study I3 - information: interactions and impact Ruth Stubbings and Graham Walton Loughborough University

Content background the issues project outlines, methodology and challenges results effectiveness and quality of interactions information interactions in different contexts impact of information interactions on people and space lessons, issues and the future

Background: Reasons for exploring students interaction with information and its impact Nature of impact and interaction is changing rapidly move from print to electronic information PC use central to many areas of learning increasing use of group study and assessment different learning styles use of pcs proliferating across campus (including Library) different student expectations and needs in 2006 / 7

Background Explore how students relationship with electronic information was evolving across both Universities how students choose what labs to use what software students frequently use when they use PCs joint with La Trobe, Australia

La Trobe University, Bundoora Campus Loughborough University Background: project partners

Ruth Stubbings, Academic Services Manager, Loughborough University Graham Walton, Service Development Manager, Loughborough University Liz Burke, Associate Librarian (Reader Services), University of Western Australia Lea Beranek, Resource Delivery Services & Audiovisual Collection Development Librarian, La Trobe University Background: key players

Results: Category of Respondents La Trobe Uni (Bundoora Campus) Loughborough University both institutions had a similar number of responses to the Survey. La Trobe (757 responses) Loughborough (697) majority of respondents were undergraduate and full time

Effectiveness and quality of the interaction

range of different applications used factors that influence where to use applications / information role of information literacy

Range: applications frequently used in the libraries

Lboro: criteria for choosing PC location

Lboro: adequacy of services by lab

Information literacy implications students use Internet a lot students do not use e-journals or MetaLib a lot do they know what the resources are?

Information interactions in different contexts

similarities: range of software frequency impact of economics (printing costs and specialist software) differences: preferred locations selection process for labs

Results: similarities between institutions students expected to have immediate access to a PC more individual rather than group use of PCs most used applications: Internet, Microsoft Office and least used applications: library portals and e-journals students perceived printing was too expensive restrictive to have specialist software in specific labs

Results: preferred location for use of PCs

Results: how often respondents used PCs in Library

Results Lboro: frequency of PC use in labs

Results: reasons for choosing different labs La Trobe all three locations, top two reasons same availability of PCs print facilities third reason varied Library & Departmental lab location Computing Services opening hours Lboro Library opening hours environment availability of PCs Computing Services availability of PCs location opening hours Departmental labs software availability of PCs opening hours

Impact of information interaction on people and space

what expectations do students have from Library from its physical space? what expectations do students have from Library from its virtual space?

Physical space

Background: Loughborough University study on Library space use by students Library space survey how often various study spaces are used how long people spend in the Library reasons for library use and library non use importance of various factors in choosing Library space views on environment

Background: variety of study spaces in Loughborough University Library

Results Lboro: reasons for using the Library 1. Accessing resources : I study in the Library as I have all resources to hand regardless of what I am doing (revising, coursework, research) 2. Using learning space: There is a good variety of atmospheres: i.e. Level 3 is noisy and busy, Levels 1 and 2 are good for serious work 3. Learning environment: It provides minimal distraction when I need to concentrate and get a piece of work done and When I see other students it encourages me to study

Results Lboro: frequency of use of different spaces in Library

Results Lboro: space used in Library on daily basis Group study room Individual carrels Level 1 (no pcs) Level 1 (pcs) Level 2(no pcs) Level 2 (pcs) Open3 Rest of Level 3

Results Lboro: space types where need identified for more provision in Library Open3Rest of Level 3 PC cluster Level 2Level 1Group Study Room Study carrels

Virtual space

video conference on 7 th June 2007 between library staff from both Loughborough University and University of Western Australia overview of how Web 2.0 technologies are being used

Emerging issues on Web 2.0 applications in the two Universities wide range of applications (blogs/ wikis/ podcasts/ RSS feed/ digital video) low level of integration with services uncertainty about whether: appropriate to have library profile on social networking sites (e.g. Facebook) investment is justified

Lessons students from two different institutions across the world want similar things: access to PCs and software at a location & time that suits them cheaper printing physical space is important

Issues resources finance time staff expertise building restrictions no room for more PCs need more electrical sockets for wireless laptops some labs seen as not nice

The future - 1 need for closer collaboration between different stakeholders provision of thin client options to make applications more widely available printing continues to be key and has to develop cannot ignore physical environment where students interact with IT

The future - 2 continuously question assumptions enhance interactions by increasing flexibility make sure information providers have informed insight into how students interact with information

Acknowledgement we would like to thank our project partners: Lea Beranek Liz Burke