Setting
Bellarmine
University Library provides services and support to the University’s roughly
3,200 FTE students (approximately half living on-campus). Undergraduates are
about 2,500 of the student body with graduate programs contributing about 700
students. Bellarmine University is a private, Catholic university located in
Louisville, KY. Over 80% of Bellarmine’s
undergraduate students attend full-time and are under 25 years of age. The
library building is not home to only the library; Other units located in the
building include The Thomas Merton Center,
Information
Technology, the Student Success Center, Disability Services, and the
President’s Office. The four-floor building is heavily used with a gate count
of almost 300,000 (297,572) during the 2017-18 academic year. In 2014-15, the
first floor was renovated to create the Lansing Learning Commons, which was
intended to provide a student-centered collaborative learning space with
technology support. At the same time, staff space on the second floor—the quiet
study floor—was reduced, doubling the individual seating, and old-style,
individual study carrels from the first floor were repurposed on this quiet
floor.
Problem
In
2017-18, the President’s Office and boardroom, on the second floor, were slated
to move out of the building, resulting in the availability of boardroom space
to be reassigned for new functions. At the university, space is always in high
demand. Given that the University had conducted a major renovation of the
library specifically to address student needs, it was now looking to address
the space needs of a number of programs and projects, such as creating more
classrooms, faculty development space, or the veterans affairs office among
others. Not all proposed uses would be compatible with the quiet nature of the
floor, and this was a major concern of the library. The library desired to
convert the space into a modern quiet study space. The library had some
anecdotal indications that the students would use more quiet space, but the
library needed to be able to convey that this plan was the best use of the space.
Evidence
To
address the problem, the library needed to demonstrate that there was an
ongoing student desire for quiet space. Anecdotal staff observations would not
be sufficient; more compelling evidence of student demand would need to be
identified or collected. The library reviewed the data from two sources that
could convey student opinion on the question of quiet space. We used data
collected through a library satisfaction survey and from the headcount data
routinely collected by the library. The survey was concerned with three primary
guiding questions:
·
What
is the perceived student satisfaction level of library services?
·
In
what ways is the library most used?
·
What
library services are most valuable for student stakeholders?
A
total of 574 (n = 574) participants
completed the survey. Participants were asked
various questions related to their perceptions of the institution’s library.
Pertinent questions are included below however, to aid in clarity, tables have
been created for responses to negate narrative representations of the results
and hopefully increase clarity.
Students were asked to select reasons why they came to
the library. Students could select more than one answer. Results are in Table 1.
Table
1
Reasons You Come to the Library
|
Options
|
Count
|
Percentage
|
|
To
check out books
|
167
|
29%
|
|
To
check out media
|
96
|
17%
|
|
To
locate journal/newspaper articles
|
125
|
22%
|
|
To
get help with research papers or other course assignments
|
197
|
34%
|
|
To
read newspapers or current magazines
|
19
|
3%
|
|
To
use items placed on reserve by your professor
|
111
|
19%
|
|
To
use media equipment
|
37
|
6%
|
|
To
study alone*
|
473
|
82%
|
|
To
study with a group*
|
367
|
64%
|
|
To
use the group study rooms*
|
367
|
64%
|
|
To
use the second-floor quiet study area*
|
279
|
49%
|
|
To
use a printer, photocopier
|
433
|
75%
|
|
To
use the computers for academic purposes
|
359
|
63%
|
|
To
use the computers for recreational/personal use
|
60
|
10%
|
|
To
use a Mac computer
|
64
|
11%
|
|
To
visit the “Ask Us” Desk for research assistance
|
82
|
14%
|
|
To
visit the Technology Support Center
|
141
|
25%
|
|
To
visit the Student Success Center for writing assistance
|
97
|
17%
|
|
To
visit the Student Success Center for advising
|
139
|
24%
|
|
To
visit the Student Success Center for tutoring
|
202
|
35%
|
|
To
visit Disability Services
|
46
|
8%
|
|
To
visit the Merton Center
|
55
|
10%
|
|
To
meet friends
|
207
|
36%
|
|
To
look for information in online databases
|
197
|
34%
|
|
I
have class in the library
|
142
|
25%
|
|
To
use the library as a “late night” study place
|
233
|
41%
|
|
To
browse the popular fiction collection
|
23
|
4%
|
|
To
browse the DVD collection
|
78
|
14%
|
|
To
use the Smartboard
|
33
|
6%
|
For purposes of this study, four components (indicated
by * in Table 1) stand above the rest: the number of people who want to study
with a group, use group study rooms, study alone, and use the quiet study area.
Table 2 illustrates how often participants use the library in person.
Table
2
On Average, How Often Do You Use the Library in
Person?
|
Options
|
Count
|
Percentage
|
|
Daily
|
103
|
17.98%
|
|
2
to 4 times a week
|
206
|
35.95%
|
|
Once
a week
|
94
|
16.40%
|
|
2
to 3 times a month
|
74
|
12.91%
|
|
Once
a month or less
|
76
|
13.26%
|
|
Never
|
20
|
3.49%
|
Students were also asked how often they complete or
perform certain tasks during the school year. Responses are in Table 3.
Table
3
Library Related Tasks
|
Library Use
|
Never
|
Occasionally
|
Often
|
Very Often
|
|
Used
the library as a place to study alone
|
14%
|
26%
|
26%
|
34%
|
|
Used
the library as a place to study in a group
|
18%
|
40%
|
24%
|
18%
|
Students were asked to evaluate various library areas
in terms of their importance from 1 (least important) to 5 (most important).
DK, or don’t know, was also an option. Students were asked to rank the
importance of several areas, and the most relevant are included in Table 4.
Table
4
Evaluate
Importance of Library Areas
|
Library
Areas
|
1
(Least Important)
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
(Most Important)
|
DK
|
|
Rank the importance of … Group
Study Rooms
|
4%
|
2%
|
6%
|
21%
|
60%
|
7%
|
|
Rank the importance of … Quiet
Study Rooms
|
4%
|
3%
|
9%
|
15%
|
62%
|
7%
|
Researchers asked students to share their opinions
regarding various aspects of library services on a scale of Strongly Disagree
to Strongly Agree. In addition, Don’t Know was also an option. The most
relevant responses for this study are in Table 5.
Table
5
Opinion
of Library Services
|
Services
|
Strongly Disagree
|
Disagree
|
Agree
|
Strongly Agree
|
Don’t Know
|
|
I can find a quiet place to
study in the library
|
2%
|
7%
|
47%
|
37%
|
7%
|
|
I can find areas to work in
groups in the library
|
1%
|
8%
|
45%
|
37%
|
9%
|
Students were also asked to rate the library’s renovation and creation
of the Lansing Learning Commons and its value as a work space. In two
questions, the students broke down roughly into a two-thirds and one-third
split. Most students clearly see the renovated collaborative space as valuable
work space. However, a sizable minority of students, about one-third indicated
that the space was too noisy or busy to work in effectively. On a
scale from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree, 223 (39.26%) said Agree, and
163 (28.70%) responded Strongly Agree. Also, 145 (25.53%) responded Don’t Know.
In addition, when asked if the Lansing Learning Commons is too noisy or busy
for me to work effectively, 114 (20.04%) said Agree, and 81 (14.24%) responded
Strongly Agree. Also, 142 (24.96%) responded Don’t Know.
Finally, students were asked to provide their general
rating of the library. Responses are included in Table 6.
Table
6
In General, How Would You Rate the Library?
|
Options
|
Count
|
Percentage
|
|
Excellent
|
187
|
33.45%
|
|
Very
good
|
311
|
55.64%
|
|
Average
|
58
|
10.38
|
|
Below
average
|
3
|
.54%
|
|
Poor
|
0
|
0%
|
|
|
|
|
In
addition to the numeric responses, the survey also provided students with the
opportunity to provide feedback to open-ended questions. The survey asked, “If
we could improve one thing about the library for you, what would it be?” We
received 367 written responses. The results were categorized and tabulated to
identify areas that could use attention. The top three improvement requests
follow:
1.
Space: 34.6%
2.
Quiet Study: 9.54%
3.
Resources: 7.9%
The overwhelming “one thing” students
requested was more space in some way—more
study rooms, more seating, more tables, or a bigger library. However, the
desire for quiet study space is a demand for a significant number of our
students.
A
comparative analysis of responses in 2012 to 2018 showed an interesting
connection. Table 7 below outlines survey differences regarding suggested
improvements for the library. One chronological note, the responses from 2012
were collected prior to the renovation, and the responses from 2018 were
collected after the renovation was completed. Also, all student responses are
not listed below, only the most relevant for this study.
Table
7
Suggested Improvements
|
Improve One Thing
|
2012
|
2018
|
|
Furnishings
|
.45%
|
6%
|
|
Hours
|
11%
|
6%
|
|
Quiet
Study
|
8%
|
10%
|
|
Resources
|
19%
|
8%
|
|
Space
|
26%
|
35%
|
|
Technology
(Computers)
Technology
(Printers)
24
Hours Study Room (Larger Size)
|
7%
3%
2%
|
2%
2%
N/A
|
Post renovation and the significant increase in the
number of individual study spaces on the quiet floor, student demand for quiet
study space continued to increase. In addition, these survey responses were
supported by the headcount data. While overall use of the library increased
about 23% from pre-renovation (13-14) to post-renovation (16-17). The largest
increase was for the quiet, second floor, which saw a 27% increase. Students
were not just saying they wanted more quiet space; when provided with more
seating, they used it.
Implementation
As the University considered how to allocate the
recently freed up Presidential space in the library, we were able to present data
that demonstrated student desire for quiet space beyond the recently renovated
learning commons collaborative space. Over 60% percent of the students rated
the quiet study spaces as very important. About 1/3 of the respondents
indicated that the learning commons area was too loud or busy to work
effectively. This is a significant number of students who were looking for
something other than collaborative work space. In looking at the trend of
student responses, we were able to demonstrate that this was in fact an ongoing
and increasing desire of the students. Finally, we were able to verify these
user survey results with observed data in our headcounts. Students were using
the library’s quiet space more. As a result, the University moved Veteran’s and
International Student recruitment into other available spaces on the campus,
but designated the large open spaces to be library quiet study space.
Outcome
The use of the new study spaces has been strong. The
addition of the boardroom as a more relaxing quiet study space has also been
well received. In the Fall of 2018, the boardroom study space was 23% of the
use of the quiet floor. Unexpectedly, when the University was looking for a
more centralized location for a meditation, prayer, or reflection space, the
library’s quiet floor was selected, and additional space was provided so as not
to cut into student study space.
Reflection
Faced with a potential space
vacancy that would attract many programs, it was important to be able to go to
the University administration with evidence of the need for quiet student
space. The first step in this process was acknowledging that anecdotal staff
observation was not going to be sufficient to maintain the quiet space in the
library. University priorities had to be considered and empirical evidence was
needed to make a compelling case that quiet study space would meet a
significant student demand.
The student user survey is
conducted regularly, so the next step was to review it for data that would
support the library’s contention that more quiet study space was an outcome
desired by students. It was fortunate for us that a number of questions
addressed the quiet space concern, and we were even more fortunate that the
answers all consistently pointed in the same direction—a significant part of
the student respondents wanted quiet library space and not just collaborative
library space. Realizing that the historical trends also supported the
library’s point of view was a surprising discovery. Finally, having two
complementary data sets, student responses on the survey and student actions
from the headcounts collected, contributed to making a compelling case.
Taken together, the results
reveal necessary truths about library functionality and physical space design.
Libraries today are central features on campus (Head, 2016). In some ways
the library has become a cultural icon. It must satisfy several dimensions of
campus needs. The ability and necessity of the library to become a chameleon
campus service are well known (Oliveira, 2018). As
universities attempt to re-design the library to reach all student stakeholders
uniquely, an emphasis on space to achieve individual learning mixed with
collaborative design techniques is appropriate (Spencer & Watstein, 2017).
The results from this study
should encourage library staff and university administrators to consider
library design from two perspectives. While libraries continue to explore ways
to develop open concept physical space design, individual study rooms and, more
importantly, quiet study spaces are still a desirable feature (Diller, 2015).
We would be remiss to sacrifice
all features of the traditional library, including quiet study rooms or study
spaces in order to develop more high-tech collaborative open-space design. Students still appreciate the opportunity and
ability to study alone and to separate themselves from distraction. Library
services would do well to remember what Goodnight and Jeitner
reminded us of in 2017: “They [students] come to the library searching for
spaces that are quiet, where they can settle down to read and study and write
papers in silence, without distractions they find everywhere else in their
lives” (p. 100). Collaborative space is necessary, but remember to offer
students a place for silence in this noisy world.
References
Diller,
K. R. (2015, March 25-28). Reflective practices: Library study spaces in
support of learning. Paper presented at the Association of College and Research
Libraries, Portland, OR.
Goodnight,
C., & Jeitner, E. (2016). Sending out an SOS:
Being mindful of students’ need for quiet study spaces. In S. S. Hines & K.
M. Crowe (Eds.), The future of library space (pp. 217-234). United
Kingdom: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Head,
A. J. (2016). Planning and designing academic library learning spaces:
Expert perspectives of architects, librarians, and library consultants.
Project Information Literacy Research Report. The Practitioner Series.
Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=2885471
Oliveira,
S. M. (2018). Trends in Academic Library Space: From book boxes to learning
commons. Open Information Science, 2(1), 59-74. https://doi.org/10.1515/opis-2018-0005
Spencer,
M. E., & Watstein, S. B. (2017). Academic library
spaces: advancing student success and helping students thrive. portal:
Libraries and the Academy, 17(2), 389-402. https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2017.0024
2019 Stemmer
and Strawser. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons‐Attribution‐Noncommercial‐Share
Alike License 4.0 International (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/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.