davidson.p65 Faculty and Student Attitudes toward Credit Courses for Library Skills 155 Faculty and Student Attitudes toward Credit Courses for Library Skills Jeanne R. Davidson Faculty, student, and library staff attitudes toward credit courses, as well as various other instructional methods, for teaching library and research skills were assessed. A surprising number of faculty and students did not know about the courses offered. Although other methods, such as Web tutorials and written guides, are preferred, credit courses may still be considered a viable option. To be successful, the courses must be well marketed to both faculty and students, and their importance and content must be clearly understood by faculty advisors. ibraries have used credit classes as one method of teach­ ing library and research skills to students for many years. A 1995 survey conducted by the LOEX Clearinghouse for Library Instruction re­ ported that 30 percent of libraries offer basic library skills courses or academic subject area library research classes for credit.1 Credit courses have been used consistently since 1987 at the institutions surveyed. Other methods such as lec­ tures, computer-assisted instruction, vid­ eotapes, and pathfinders or guides also have been used consistently since 1987.2 The relative merits of these various methods also have been debated for many years. Several studies have documented the effectiveness of credit courses for im­ proving students’ knowledge of library and research skills using pretests and posttests of student learning.3 Credit courses continue to be developed and added into some college and university curricula, whereas other universities have discontinued for-credit library courses.4, 5 Research Questions Despite these evaluations and long-stand­ ing debates, little research is reported on what value faculty and students place on credit courses. Do the faculty and stu­ dents consider instruction in library and research skills important? What methods of instruction do they prefer? What are they willing to use? How much adminis­ trative support is necessary for credit classes? This paper reports on a study addressing these questions. Background Librarians at Oregon State University (OSU) teach several one-credit, discipline- specific library research courses for aca­ demic departments. In 1998, the library assessed the importance of these classes to the faculty and students as part of an overall review of the services provided to the campus by Information Services (IS).6 The courses reviewed included: • AG 111 Computers in Agriculture: One credit of this three-credit course fo­ cuses on the importance of preplanning Jeanne R. Davidson is the Physical Science Reference Librarian in the Valley Library at Oregon State University; e-mail: jeanne.davidson@orst.edu. 155 mailto:jeanne.davidson@orst.edu 156 College & Research Libraries March 2001 and effectively using electronic resources, including the Internet, to find and evalu­ ate agricultural information. • ALS 112 Computer Technology Sur­ vival Skills: One-credit, pass/no-pass course introduces students to technolo­ gies provided by IS, including e-mail, li- brary/Web research, PowerPoint, and HTML. • CH 507 Chemical Information Semi­ nar: One-credit topic in the Chemical Seminars series focuses on finding and evaluating print, electronic, and Web- based chemical information. • ENG 200 Library Skills for Literary Study: One-credit class required for En­ glish majors focuses on finding, evaluat­ ing, and utilizing information resources in literature. • ENGR 485/585 Comprehensive Litera­ ture Searching in Engineering: One-credit course focuses on finding and evaluating print, electronic, and Web-based engi­ neering information. Methodology The review process included gathering information in three areas: surveying ex­ ternal stakeholders (those outside IS) and internal stakeholders (those within IS), estimating the cost of providing the ser­ vice to determine cost-effectiveness, and comparing practices at peer institutions. Finally, a written recommendation based on the information gathered was given to IS administration regarding the need for continuation of the service. The five reference librarians who teach the courses conducted the review, assisted by the head of reference and an outside facilita­ tor who helped develop the process. The first step in gathering the infor­ mation required identification of key stakeholders for the service. Students are obviously a primary external stakeholder group. Faculty were considered in two groups: general faculty not directly as­ sociated with a department for which a class is taught; and faculty in depart­ ments for which courses are taught, in­ cluding department chairs and head ad­ visors in each department or college. In­ ternal stakeholders included all members of the reference department and manag­ ers for other areas within Information Services. External Stakeholders Surveys Surveys for external stakeholders were distributed using a variety of methods. The survey for students was conducted using paper questionnaires handed out at OSU’s Memorial Union and Web-based forms prominently displayed on the library’s computer stations; 234 responses were received. The surveys for students focused on: their perceptions of the im­ portance of instruction for various library and research skills, their perceptions of the usefulness of various teaching meth­ ods for learning these skills, their aware­ ness of these credit courses, and whether they had taken one of these courses (or a similar one elsewhere). To document practices at other institutions, library instruction coordinators at eleven peer institu­ tions were contacted by phone. The survey for general faculty was conducted via e-mail. The subject librar­ ian responsible for liaison with each col­ lege or department sent an e-mail copy of the survey and the URL for the Web- based faculty survey to their depart­ ments; nineteen responses were received. The surveys for general faculty focused on their perceptions of the importance of instruction for various library and re­ search skills, their perceptions of the use­ fulness of various teaching methods, their awareness of any of these credit courses, and whether they recommended any of these courses to their students. The methods of distribution for stu­ dents and general faculty are clearly self- selected in favor of those who regularly use the library, have a potential interest in library instruction, and are proficient with electronic media. No attempt was made to ensure a statistically valid sample size or representation for either of these groups. Faculty and Student Attitudes toward Credit Courses for Library Skills 157 Because of the importance of informa­ tion from the departments for which the courses are taught, these faculty, head advisors, and department chairs were contacted by phone; forty-four responses were received. Survey questions for this group focused on their awareness of the courses; whether the courses were or were not recommended to students; if the courses were not recommended, why not; the impact of the class on students’ abil­ ity to find and evaluate information (for chemistry and English faculty); and the likelihood of the class continuing with­ out instructors provided by the library. Internal Stakeholders Surveys Internal stakeholders were surveyed by e-mail. The survey for reference staff, which received ten responses, focused on their perceptions of the importance of credit classes in supporting the university’s educational mission and goals; the perceived impact on staff workloads; the importance of teaching credit classes for professional develop­ ment; their perceptions of the importance of various teaching methods; and their perceptions of the “political” importance of teaching credit classes. Questions for IS managers, which re­ ceived four responses, emphasized their perceptions of the importance of credit classes in supporting the university’s edu­ cational mission and goals; their percep­ tion of the cost-effectiveness of the classes; the importance of teaching credit classes for professional development; their per­ ceptions of the political importance of teaching credit classes; and the perceived impact of credit classes on staffing. To assist in assessing the cost-effective­ ness of the courses, the managers were provided an estimated cost of teaching the courses. The cost estimate was based on expenses for personnel, services and sup­ plies, capital expense, and revenue gen­ erated by the classes. The cost for person­ nel included the librarian FTE for teach­ ing, classified staff, and student time in­ volved in materials preparation, course administration, and/or teaching assis­ tance. Services and supplies costs in­ cluded primarily duplicating and print­ ing costs and any online searching charges. Capital expenses are those in­ curred for facilities. Comparison with Other Institutions To document practices at other institu­ tions, library instruction coordinators at eleven peer institutions were contacted by phone. In addition, a survey was con­ ducted on BI-L, a large library instruction e-mail discussion list, which received twenty-six responses. Questions for both groups focused on whether credit classes are offered, whether other academic fac­ ulty are involved in library credit course development, the presence of information literacy standards, reimbursement to the library for credit classes taught, availabil­ ity of other credit classes focusing on li­ brary/research skills on campus, and other methods used for library instruc­ tion including level of faculty involve­ ment. Summary of Results Suternal Stakeholders Students clearly find instruction for vari­ ous aspects of library research important (see figure 1). Most useful instructional method from the student perspective is more variable. Summing across the num­ ber of student responses of three or bet­ ter (three is “would consider,” five is “would prefer to use”), students indicated a preference for Web-based tutorials with written guides and assignments a close second (see figure 2). Single-session workshops were next and credit classes were the least preferred method. Even though credit classes are the least-preferred method, approximately 63 percent of student respondents indicated they would consider taking a credit class as a means of learning library research skills. In contrast, 72 percent indicated they would take one of the described classes if it were relevant to their major. Clearly, students will be more receptive to credit classes if they understand the relevance of the course to their majors. 158 College & Research Libraries March 2001 FIGURE 1 Usefulness of Classroom Instructions to Students Students: Please rate the usefulness to you of classroom instruction in the following areas. Use a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is "not useful" and 5 is "very important." 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 1 2 3 4 5 1=Not us eful 5=Very important Finding library materials Use of electronic resources Use of Internet/WWW Search strategies Evaluating information Only 23 percent of students were aware of the classes offered, and only 9 percent had participated in one of the classes of­ fered. Most of the general faculty respond­ ing to the survey rated instruction for the various aspects of library research at the highest level of importance (see figure 3). More faculty considered Web-based tuto­ rials potentially useful than did students (see figure 4, summing responses of three or better). Credit courses were considered least useful and less potentially useful by faculty than by students (approximately 55% of faculty rated credit courses at three or better versus 63% of students). Of the general faculty responding to the survey, 63 percent do not recommend FIGURE 2 Usefulness of Instructional Methods to Students Students: Please rate the usefulness and practicality for you of the following instructional methods. Use a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is "would never use," 3 is "would consider using," and 5 is "would prefer to use." 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 1 2 3 4 5 1=Not Us eful 5=Very Important Credit cours e Web-based tutorial Single-s es s ion works hop Written guides or as signments Faculty and Student Attitudes toward Credit Courses for Library Skills 159 FIGURE 3 Importance of Different Types of Instruction to Faculty Faculty: Please rate the importance of having instruction in the following areas available to your students. Use a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is "not useful" and 5 is "very important." 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 1 2 3 4 5 1=Not Useful 5=Ve ry Important Finding library materials Use of electronic resources Use of Internet/WWW Search strategies Evaluating information the courses to their students. For those not recommending the courses, 45 per­ cent indicated the courses were not rel­ evant to what they teach, 33 percent were unaware of them, and 22 percent indi­ cated other reasons for not recommend­ ing. Unlike the general faculty response, 74 percent of the departmental faculty, chairs, and head advisors do recommend the courses with 77 percent being aware of them. Only 13 percent of departmen­ tal faculty, chairs, and advisors indicated that the courses would continue without the librarian as the instructor and 39 per­ cent did not know whether the courses would continue. Chemistry and English faculty commented that the quality of the courses was directly related to having li­ brarians as instructors for these courses. Those indicating that the course would continue were primarily from the En­ glish department where the course is a requirement for the major. FIGURE 4 Usefulness of Training Methods to Faculty Faculty: Please rate the usefulness and practicality of the following training methods for your students. Use a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 is "would never use," 3 is "would consider using," and 5 is "would prefer to use." 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 1 2 3 4 5 Credit course Web-based tutorial Single-session workshop Written guides/assgn. 1=Not Useful 5=Very Important 160 College & Research Libraries March 2001 FIGURE S Importance of Teaching Credit Courses to Librarians Librarians: Please rate the importance of librarians and IS faculty teaching credit courses in meeting the goals and mission of the university and in professional development and scholarship. 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 1 2 3 4 5 1=Not Important 5=Essential Meeting the goals & miss ion of the univers ity Profes s ional development & scholars hip Internal Stakeholders Librarians clearly perceive teaching credit classes as very important in meeting the university’s educational mission and goals (see figure 5). IS managers did not perceive the teaching of credit classes to be nearly as important. Half of the sponsors respond­ ing rated this at two and the remaining respondents split at three and four (one is “not important” and five is “essential”). Reference staff also consider credit classes to be important for the professional devel­ opment of the teaching librarian. The man­ agers were clearly ambivalent on this, as they were unanimous in rating it at three. In addition, 79 percent of the reference li­ brarians responding felt that teaching credit courses is politically important, 14 percent disagreed, and 7 percent thought it might be. Managers were split on the political importance: one said no, one maybe, and two yes (one with the com­ ment, “Only if it is well known across cam­ pus that this is done.”). FIGURE 6 Importance of Instructional Methods to Librarians Librarians: Please rate the importance we should be placing on each of the instructional methods below. Use a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is "not important" and 5 is "essential." 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 1 2 3 4 5 1=Not Important 5=Essential Credit classes Web-based tutorials Single s ess ion Works hops Written guides/as sgns. One-on-one at the Ref Desk Library Offers Credit Classes Library Reim bursed Academ ic Faculty/Course Developm ent Inform ation Literacy Standards Other Lib/Research Credit Classes Faculty and Student Attitudes toward Credit Courses for Library Skills 161 Although reference librarians find FTE), services and supplies at $700 (pri­ written guides and/or assignments and marily copying/printing costs and online one-on-one instruction at the reference search charges where necessary), capital desk to be among the least useful (20% expense is negligible, and no revenue is rated two where one is “not important” generated for the library. Total yearly cost and five is “essential”), they also consider is $22,650 for the five courses taught. one-on-one instruction at the reference desk the single most essential teaching The team’s ultimate recommenda­ method (60% rated this “essential”), fol- tion, however, is that credit-bearing lowed closely by written guides (50%) courses do provide an important and/or assignments and Web-based tu­ method for teaching library and research skills and that a strongtorials (see figure 6). Credit classes are instructional program shouldclearly considered as a viable option (80% provide this opportunity. rated this at four or better), although per­ haps not as important as other methods. Only 23 percent of the reference staff felt Comparison with Other Institutions it was necessary for other staff to make The results from the phone survey of peer up time for librarians teaching credit institutions and from the BI-L survey are classes, whereas none of the managers considered together (see figure 7). A sig­ thought this was necessary. nificant majority of institutions respond- The estimated yearly cost for the credit ing offer credit classes. Libraries are sel­ courses provided by Oregon State Uni- dom reimbursed for the costs incurred in versity Libraries in 1997–1998 included: offering the classes (only 13% receive personnel at $21,950 (primarily faculty funding). Library faculty develop their salaries based on one credit hour = 0.10 courses with very little involvement from FIGURE 7 Comparison with Other Libraries, Survey Results 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Yes No Don’t know 162 College & Research Libraries other academic faculty as evidenced by the fact that only 19 percent indicated that other academic faculty are involved in course development. In addition, credit- bearing courses focusing on library and research skills are taught primarily by li­ brary faculty, as only 27 percent of the institutions responding indicated that other courses with this emphasis exist on campus. Information literacy standards are in place in only 35 percent of the in­ stitutions responding, although several others indicated they were in the process of developing them. Oregon State Univer­ sity fits with the majority in all catego­ ries. The library offers credit courses for which it receives no reimbursement, li­ brary faculty develop their own courses, no other courses on campus focus directly on library or research skills, and informa­ tion literacy standards are still in the de­ velopmental stages. Final Recommendation Based on the information gathered from this variety of sources, a range of viable alternatives for instruction exists, includ­ ing integrating instruction into existing courses, Web-based tutorials, handouts, workshops, and so on. The team’s ulti­ mate recommendation, however, is that credit-bearing courses do provide an im­ portant method for teaching library and research skills and that a strong instruc­ tional program should provide this op­ portunity. The final recommendations to the IS managers included: • Continue to offer Chemistry 507 and English 200. Explore ways that the academic departments may be able to help the library defray costs and continue to offer the courses. • Honor commitments made for the remainder of the 1997–1998 academic year and for 1998–1999. If enrollment for the electives does not meet an agreed-upon benchmark, discontinue the course. • Refer this report and the informa­ tion gathered by the review group to work groups in reference and instruction for follow-up. They should develop a March 2001 plan for marketing the courses and assess­ ing effectiveness and should identify ways to reach more students. • Because of its university-wide na­ ture, explore possibilities for receiving revenue generated by student FTE in ALS 112 course, if enrollment warrants course continuation. Discussion and Conclusion Students and faculty consider instruction in library and research skills important. This study confirmed the need for a vari­ ety of instructional methods, including credit courses. Although credit courses were the least preferred method for stu­ dents, nearly two-thirds would consider a credit course, especially if its relevance to their curricular needs is clear. The library’s challenge lies in helping students to recognize the relevance of the credit courses offered. For courses that are not required, students often rely on sub­ ject area faculty members’ recommenda­ tions. Department chairs and head advi­ sors were largely aware of the library’s classes, but this awareness clearly did not “trickle down” to the faculty as a whole. Nearly a third of faculty who did not rec­ ommend the courses did not due to a lack of awareness of the courses’ existence. In addition, the 45 percent of faculty who did not consider the courses relevant to what they taught suggests that faculty may need additional information on the content of the courses to make the rel­ evance apparent. There is a clear need to market the library’s credit-bearing classes to aca­ demic faculty as well as to students. A faculty member ’s recommendation to a student to take a course is critical to pro­ moting these courses successfully. Higher enrollments tend to be found in those departments where courses are actively recommended or required (such as chemistry and English, respectively). Those courses for entire colleges, such as engineering and agriculture, had less overall faculty awareness of the courses as well as less knowledge of the course content. Faculty and Student Attitudes toward Credit Courses for Library Skills 163 The classes taught for departments (as opposed to colleges) were less inclined to let the class disappear. The departments felt that the expertise of the librarian was an important aspect of the quality of the course. They did not feel the department had faculty equally qualified to teach the courses. The process of assessing the ser­ vice itself served as a marketing tool. Enrollment in CH 507 and Engr 485/ 585 increased markedly during the term following the assessment. Fac­ ulty gained knowledge of relevant courses offered through other depart­ m e n t s . F o r e x a m p l e , t h e C H 5 0 7 course had added enrollment from students in the School of Pharmacy during the term following the assess­ ment. Notes 1. Linda Shirato and Joseph Badics, “Library Instruction in the 1990’s: A Comparison with Trends in Two Earlier LOEX Surveys,” Research Strategies 15, no. 4 (1997): 223–37. 2. Ibid., 234. 3. See, for example, Richard J. Wood, “The Impact of a Library Research Course on Students at Slippery Rock University,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 10, no. 5 (Nov. 1984): 278–84; Vir­ ginia Frank McQuistion, “The Credit Course: Reaffirmation from Two University Libraries. Mea­ surement: Millikin University,” Research Strategies 2, no. 4 (fall 1984): 166–71. 4. For example, Tom Gilson, “Library Instruction for Credit: A Technology Driven Need,” Research Strategies 15, no. 4 (1997): 279–86. 5. Barbara Wittkopf, “A Look at the State of BI Credit Courses in the ARL-Member Librar­ ies,” Research Strategies 9, no. 4 (fall 1991): 162–63. 6. Information Services at OSU includes the OSU Libraries, Telecommunications, Comput­ ing Services, and the Communications Media Center.