UNIVESITY LIBRARIES Tina BudziseWeaver Susan P Goodwin QQML

UNIVESITY LIBRARIES Tina Budzise-Weaver & Susan P. Goodwin QQML 2013, June 4 -7 A Coded Analysis of Student Feedback and Implications for Bibliographic Instruction Programs

Overview • Specific themes that emerged: – Student Class – Repeat vs. First-Time Attendees – College Affiliation • Personal and emotional themes • Instruction: Areas for Improvement

TAMU Libraries

Texas A&M University Libraries Students 39, 280 Undergraduates 9, 114 Graduates Library Users 3. 3 Million Physical Users 4 Million Web Users Holdings 4. 5 Million Volumes 1. 1 Million E-books 161, 000 Electronic Serials 1400 Databases

Yearly Bibliographic Instruction Program 995 • Instruction & Orientatio n Sessions • Student 47, 000 Participants in Sessions

Participant Overview • 28, 942 Feedback Forms • 5 School terms Represented • 2006 – 2011 637 • Sample Size 99% • Confidence Level ± 5% • Confidence Interval

Classification of Sample Population Graduate Student 11% Did Not Identify 2% First Year 31% Fourth Year + 29% Third Year 14% Second Year 13%

Overview of Codes Code Categories Content Instructor/Session • Content 48 Coverage • e. Resources 107 • Resources 24 • Services 39 • Research Process 96 • Course Materials 24 • Instructor 44 • Session 110 • Informative 137 • Interactive 14 • Classroom Technology 14 Reflective Statements • Wish Knew Before • Prior Knowledge • Learned Something New • Confidence Compliment General 14 42 64 18 • Compliment General 86

Undergraduates Compliment General 10% Content 39% Reflective Statements 16% Instructor/ Session 36%

Graduates Compliment General 10% Content 35% Reflective Statements 16% Instructor/ Session 39%

Attended BI Before: Undergraduates 200 177 180 156 Code Occurrences 160 140 120 100 94 95 80 BI: YES 65 51 49 60 40 21 20 0 Content Instructor/Session Reflective Statements Code Categories Compliment General BI: NO

Attended BI Before: Graduates 30 26 25 Code Occurrences 21 23 20 15 12 BI: YES 9 10 8 5 BI: NO 6 5 0 Content Instructor/Session Reflective Statements Code Categories Compliment General

Agriculture Top Codes Content • e. Resources “I didn’t know about the databases” Instructor/ Session • Informative • Session “I learned more than I expected and am motivated to use the library now that I know what it offers” Reflective Statements • Learned Something New “I feel more aware of my resources”

Architecture Top Codes Content • e. Resources • Research Process • Services “Learned about additional TAMU search functions” Instructor/ Session • Informative • Session “Important information for the future”

Bush School Top Codes Content • Content Coverage • e. Resources • Research Process Instructor/ Session Reflective Statements • Informative • Session • Learned Something New “Presentation was engaging and informative” “It made me aware of the resources available to me”

Business Top Codes Content • Research Process “It taught me where to find articles” Instructor/ Session • Informative • Session “Very thorough and specific to our project”

Education Top Codes Content • e. Resources • Research Process “Learned about new databases and material” Instructor/ Session • Informative “This helped me understand how to use the resources offered”

Engineering Top Codes Content • Research Process “I learned how to search online” Instructor/ Session • Informative • Session “Useful sites and sources”

General Studies Top Codes Content • Research Process “Learned how to search easier” Instructor/ Session • Informative “She answered my questions” Reflective Statements • Learned Something New Compliment General • Compliment General

Geosciences Top Codes Content • Content Coverage • Course materials • e. Resources “Specific resources on class guide [were useful]” Reflective Statements • Learned Something New “I learned about stuff I didn't know”

Liberal Arts Top Codes Content • e. Resources • Research Process “I found out how to detect scholarly sources” Instructor/ Session • Informative “It was a good start to what I needed”

Sciences Top Codes Content • e. Resources • Research Process “Learned a lot about web of science” Instructor/ Session • Informative • Session “More useful Power. Point's and more helpful librarians”

Veterinarian Medicine Top Codes Content • Content Coverage • e. Resources • Services “It helped me learn more about how to utilize the library online” Instructor/ Session • Informative “Information given was good” Reflective Statements • Prior knowledge “I have heard this information before but hearing it again is helpful”

General Findings • UGs and Grads were similar when compared to four main code categories • UGs who had not attended a BI session before provided more code occurrences than those that had previously attended – The reverse was true for graduates • e. Resources, Session and Informative were the top sub-codes across the disciplines

Personal and Emotional Themes 1 st year • 9 2 nd year • 0 3 rd year • 6 4 th year • 3 Grad • 0 Confidence: 18 code occurrences How Confident? Focus Groups

Instruction: Areas for Improvement • In process of converting paper form to electronic format • Looking at speeding up the assessment process • Hiring an new Learning & Outreach Coordinator with focus on Assessment • Plans to conduct focus groups

Thank You Tina Budzise-Weaver Humanities & Social Sciences Librarian Texas A&M University Libraries tmweaver@library. tamu. edu Susan P. Goodwin Associate Dean for User Services Texas A&M University Libraries sgoodwin@library. tamu. edu