Article Note: On Libraries, Retention and ROI

Citation for the article:

Mezick, Elizabeth M. "Return on Investment: Libraries and Student Retention." The Journal of Academic Librarianship 33.5 (September 2007): 561-566.

Read via E-journals from EBSCO.


The essence of this article is that the author looked at library expenses and staff hiring to measure the impact of those factors on student retention. I have been thinking about retention here and there and in some other places. The article reinforces the common argument that libraries cannot afford to be complacent, and that they need to be more accountable to their constituents.

Things that made me think:

• "Retaining a student is fundamental to the ability of an academic institution to carry out its mission. A high rate of attrition is indicative of a failure on the part of an institution to achieve its purpose" (561). Basically, if you are losing a lot of students, especially half or more, there is definitely something going on that needs to be addressed.
  
• "Libraries need to be able to demonstrate how expenditures for resources and services result in significant contributions to academic and social environments that positively impact institutional outcomes such as student persistence" (561). You not only need to build the facilities and staff, but you also need to document how exactly these things contribute to the mission of the campus and to student success.
  
• On the importance of information literacy: "Attainment of information competency and related skills, such as the ability to research effectively using print, online, and electronic retrieval systems, is essential to the learning process" (562). Our instruction librarian and I are pretty much in agreement on this. She is very passionate about the idea that if students do not learn the necessary research and information literacy skills early on then they will not be able to succeed later when they will need to apply those skills in new ways.
• More on the role of the librarian: "Librarians, acting as teachers and counselors, address student needs on a daily basis. Through their observation of and interaction with students, they are aware of deficiencies in student skills that may be indicative of high-risk students" (562). This is something that a lot of people on campus, including administrators, do not give us credit for. We do a lot of work with students, and as a result, we learn a lot about their needs and how to help them be successful. I am thinking that this is a conversation that we need to be having between librarians and the teaching faculty as well as some administrators. Librarians learn so much about student needs just in their daily work, and I can attest to that from my days as an instruction librarian. I am willing to bet that I knew more about a good number of those students than their professors.
  

The article provides a literature review on the topic of retention. It then moves on to the methodology, which I will admit was a bit heavy for me once it went into variables and coefficients. I do understand the concept of correlations though. So, what did the author find when it was all said and done?

• "These findings appear to be consistent with earlier studies that found providing quality library resources to students insures better academic performance and, in turn, leads to student persistence" (564).
• "Through use of measures of association and other performance indicators, library administrators can demonstrate the academic library's positive impact upon institutional outcomes. Such evaluative techniques may also be used to identify areas where use of limited economic resources may have the greatest impact" (565).
  

Article Note: On learning commons evolution

Citation for the article:

Roberts, Regina Lee. "The Evolving Landscape of the Learning Commons." Library Review 56.9 (2007): 803-810.

Read via Emerald.

This article looks at the evolution of the learning commons concept and its relation to libraries. The library's learning commons is a response to the users' changing needs. As pedagogy becomes more student-centered, spaces that nurture collaborative learning become important. This is what a learning commons does. The author writes that "academic institutions are supporting a learning commons model because the faculty and administration recognize that students learn in dynamic ways" (803).

The author goes on to suggest that the library is a natural place for this type of environment. This is because the library is more than just a collection of books and electronic resources. The library is a center of knowledge, a place where members of the academic community can come together. The learning commons can also add to the value that users find in their libraries. Roberts adds that "in this context, by providing the space and tools of a learning commons the library provides yet another excellent service to its users" (804).

The author does emphasize there is a difference between an information commons and a learning commons. In brief, an information commons is the laboratory structure that helps with seeking information. Think of the big computer lab with a variety of other features. The learning commons is the space where knowledge is created with the information tools available. Learners share a common learning interest, and they collaborate in their own learning process. The learning that occurs in the learning commons does not have to be class-related, i.e. formal. Basically, as I understand it, the learning commons can have the features of the information commons, the technology, but it also has the strong social and learning components. One is made for seeking information. The other is used to create it as well.

Other ideas:

• This can get complicated: "Offering more services can become a complicated mandate because libraries will also want to maintain a commitment to the traditional library role of collecting, organizing, storing, and disseminating information" (806). It is a balancing act. Many administrators often think that once you set up an information commons, you can get rid of the books and other more "traditional" resources. They fail to realize that often knowledge is found and created by using the more "traditional" resources as well as the electronic ones. Plus, as the Roberts suggests, the learning commons has the potential then to increase the value of collection development (806). This will come into place as students find the need to seek out a variety of sources to meet their learning needs.
  
• You need assessment, and you need to document benefits and value:
  
• "Lakos and Phipps (2004) are strong proponents of assessments as a means of encouraging stakeholder support. Sustainable programs require measurable outcomes" (806). The Lakos and Phipps piece is from Portal 4.3, pgs. 345-361.
• "Therefore, a library that includes a learning commons should also include a systematic plan to measure the outcomes and methods of the activities of the learning commons" (807).
  
• The role of a librarian will change with a learning commons. There will be a need to be flexible and to engage in continual learning. These librarians need to keep up, and they have to be willing to experiment. "It also requires that the librarian participate in the learning process not just for information literacy but as a collaborative partner and possibly a project facilitator" (807).
  

After the part about librarians' roles, the author does go on into what seems a digression on digital projects and their preservation. While this could be an important activity of an information commons, the item in the article seems to take away from the rest of article, giving more the impression that the learning commons is to become some sort of digital repository. What happened to the rest of the mission? At any rate, the article does provide some food for thought.

On hitting the books, inspired by General Patton

One of my favorite books is Alex Axelrod's Patton on Leadership. I discovered it a while back (see my note here). There is a passage discussing how the general was an avid reader. Those who have seen the film with George C. Scott playing the general may recall the big tank battle where the general yells out about having read Rommel's book. Personally, I find that scene very inspiring as it highlights the importance of reading to know your rivals as well as to know your field and line of work.

The passage from the book is entitled "Hit the Books." Find it on page 78. You would think that for librarians this would be a piece of cake, but it does not cease to amaze me how some librarians can be poor readers. I don't mean their reading skill. I mean their breadth and scope of reading. But that would be another ranting post topic. Anyhow, here is the quote that Axelrod uses:

"The only right way of learning the science of war is to read and reread the campaigns of the great captains." --Napoleon, quoted by Patton in his reading notes.

I find so cool the idea of keeping reading notes. It is a big reason why I keep my blogs. Axelrod then expands on the quote:

"Patton added to this quotation, a comment of his own, 'And think about what you read.'"

That is a lot of what I try to do, to think about what I read as well as about my craft as a librarian. Here is more of what Axelrod wrote:

"It behooves any leader to know the history of his or her discipline and to read all the experts in the field, particularly experts whose knowledge is based on actual experience. The object is not to follow any example or method slavishly, but to develop a strategic and tactical vocabulary that will create solutions faster and more efficiently than having to reinvent the wheel with each problem that is encountered."

I will add that, in our case, we should be reading experts in our field as well as experts out of our field who are relevant to what we do. We should be reading in areas like information technology, education, communication, psychology, and a few others. We should also be looking to those with experience who write about those experiences well. Unfortunately, this may not be as easy given the nature of the literature of librarianship; you may need to work a little more at it to find something good. Notice also that Axelrod reminds us that we have to think. We are not just to follow any fad or trend. Are you listening out there, 2.0 cultists? You know who you are. Sure, there are some very good 2.0 tools that can provide a myriad of solutions. If they are examined and found to do the job, and they can be implemented, then go for it. Don't just do it to be cool or hip. Think as well as act. This keeps coming back to me because in one of my job interviews before I got my current job that point was one of the issues they were interested in. The question came up about my views on various 2.0 tools, and I said something along the lines that it was important to think about what a tool would be solving, if anything. We were in agreement at the end of the conversation about the need to examine and think, not simply act slavishly. An FYI for the curious readers out there, yes, I was offered that job. No, it was not this job. The point is that, in my humble estimation, one can easily get the impression from reading the many blogs kept by librarians out there that a substantial number of libraries and librarians are rushing to put in every 2.0 toy out there. Talking to front line people I know that is not the case. Thus, you read, you think, but in learning, you also seek out those with experience in order to learn from them as well.

A thought on the library literature

It seems that reading the library literature may be either a rarity or a joke. I read a post by Sarah Houghton-Jan a while back on this topic, and I left it in the aggregator to ponder about it at some point. She wonders if library literature is generally useless. It is the dirty little secret that a lot of the library literature is pretty much written by people who just need to write something to get their tenure. OK, maybe it is a dirty secret, but it certainly is not a little secret. It is pretty widely accepted by those who write the articles as well as by those who read them. Part of the reason that this got me thinking is because I read a good amount of the professional literature in our field. I also read in other areas, but I am digressing now. Getting back to the professional literature of librarianship, the few people who visit this blog know that I keep reading notes on articles that I read. When I read those articles, it is usually because some topic caught my eye, and I am hoping to learn something new. I read a lot. That is a given. Unfortunately, when it comes to some of the library literature, I have read some stuff that could only be politely described as "low quality." A good number of articles I read or scan will not be noted on the blog. I will admit, to an extent I make my notes available here on the blog in the hope, infinitesimal as it may be, that on some distant planet, someone somewhere may find the notes useful as well. So, on that basis, I try not to blog about some article that says nothing new, that rehashes stuff I have read in a few other places (and much better written), or just is a vanity piece, again, to be polite.

It is not that librarianship is not a profession and discipline that does not need research. The area of instruction alone is a field that can draw from the works in education as well as create its own research in order to apply ideas and create new knowledge. The model of the teacher-researcher would work well in library instruction. I wish more instruction librarians would follow such an approach. Instead, what we often get in the library journals are the articles detailing how X library did Y project and how cool it was. Or we get the article that starts, "we did a survey of 200 students, 50 filled it out, 35 filled it out correctly, and the results, which may not be generalized by the way (but we will generalize anyhow) are. . . ." We don't need any more of that. We need serious, reflective research and inquiry. Maybe that's why, in my case, I don't like the idea of librarians on a tenure line. I don't see myself having to churn out little pieces of "my library is so cool because. . ." in order to earn my living. I am librarian. My work is to provide service for my academic community. I am an educator, which means my work involves teaching and working with students. Yes, I seek to learn how to be a better teacher, but I prefer to do so at my own pace and in a reflective way that actually has meaning. So, I keep a blog. I write in a personal journal that is not online (hey, there is something to be said for writing the old fashioned way, and there are things that really should remain private). I read a lot, and I think about it, and in my own humble way, I try to apply what I learn.

I am not saying that all the library literature is bad. I would not be reading it and seeking it out if that were the case, but it is clear that some room for improvement is in order. These days, a lot of what I find relevant is available in blogs and other less formal venues. Very often, by the time I see something in a journal, I already saw it in a blog months ago. So, this is probably something that the profession should be discussing at some point. Just a thought.

On blogging about my library experience

Since I changed jobs last month, it has made for a chance to reflect on my blogging and where I may want to go. The question of blogging about my library experience is one I have thought about in and out since I started blogging. For the most part, here is how I handle things:

• When it comes to my experience as a librarian, I am willing and able to write about it in my blogs. This is mostly in general terms. So I am looking more at lessons learned, reflections, ideas I want to try out, etc.
  
• When it comes to my actual place of work, I try to keep the references to that to a minimum. I rarely mention people's names. Those who have read my blogs will usually notice I use titles ("my director," "our interlibrary loan librarian," etc.). If asked to explain it, I am not terribly sure why I do it other than it just seems to work for me. Maybe a part of me works on the assumption that it's my blog, and I should not be dragging others in it more than I have to. You could label it a little superstition of mine.
  

Those are the little basics. It is pretty much ingrained in me that you do not blog specifics about your workplace. Certainly you don't do it with your name in the blog someplace. I have been fortunate in both work instances that my bosses knew of my blogs. I believe this blog, in some small measure, helped me get the job I have now. But overall, you don't air the dirty laundry in public. It does not mean, however, that I will shy away when I want to say something that may or not be politically correct. Though for the more personal things, I do put them over at The Itinerant Librarian.

So, why am I thinking about this now? As I said, in part it is because I am in a new job. It is a new beginning, and new beginnings are always good points to stop and think a bit. I have recently posted a few things about work, mostly the fun stuff. Will I post about the "not-so-fun" stuff? The long meetings where I would rather commit seppuku than sit on them another minute? I honestly don't have the answer, but I will reassure my readers I won't be posting the details of those meetings here, tempting as it may be. It's not what this blog is about. At the end of the day, when it comes to answering the question, I just have to go back to the purpose of this blog. This is my professional blog. It is a tool of reflection. It is my workshop. It is where I keep a lot of my reading notes. It is where I think in writing about my profession, my work, what I read, what I learn, and what I need to learn and improve. The other stuff that does not fall into that purpose? I let the unruly cousin handle it. I will tell you this much. I am not going to worry over it much. After all, it is my personal space at the end of the day.

This rambling thought was prompted by Sarah Houghton-Jan's post on "Blogging your own library's experience." I will point out that we are currently planning to implement a library blog here at the library. It is not as easy as it sounds since we may have some administrators who may be a bit leery (the whole image thing) given that, apparently, no one here has tried it before. At any rate, while we were recently conversing in a meeting, my director suggested linking to my blog in the library blog, to which I told her, gently, no since it was a personal blog. The issue is addressed in Ms. Houghton-Jan's post, which is why I am mentioning it now. Way I see it, it's not a library resource. Sure, it is online, freely available, and so on. If you find it and want to add it to your favorite aggregator or just visit now and then, that is fine. I hope you enjoy your visit and tell a bunch of your friends about it. But not on the official site. Besides, we'll be linking to all sorts of good stuff on the library blog when it goes online, so no need to put in this old thing. At any rate, I think that it is up to each blogger to find their limits and boundaries. Be honest and be yourself. Take a risk now and then if that is your nature; I do. The rest will work itself out.