Evidence Summary
Promoting the
Library to Distance Education Students and Faculty Can Increase Use and
Awareness, but Libraries Should Assess their Efforts
A Review of:
Bonella, L., Pitts, J., & Coleman, J. (2017). How
do we market to distance populations, and does it work?:
Results from a longitudinal study and a survey of the profession. Journal of
Library Administration, 57(1), 69–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2016.1202720
Reviewed by:
Judith
Logan
Assistant Head, User Services
John P. Robarts Library
University of Toronto Libraries
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Email: judith.logan@utoronto.ca
Received: 13 Aug. 2019 Accepted: 18 Oct. 2019
2019 Logan.
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.
DOI: 10.18438/eblip29637
Abstract
Objective –
To determine if library promotion efforts targeted at distance education
students and instructors were successful and in line with similar activities at
other institutions
Design – Mixed:
longitudinal and survey questionnaire
Setting – Large
publicly-funded, doctoral-granting university in the midwestern United States
Subjects – 494
distance education students and instructors in 2014 compared to 544 in 2011 and “more than 300” (Bonella, Pitts, & Coleman, 2017, p. 77) professionals
at American academic libraries.
Methods – In the
longitudinal study, the researchers invited all distance education students and
instructors who were active in the 2010-2011 academic year (n = 8,793)
and the spring 2014 semester (n = 4,922) to complete an online
questionnaire about their awareness and use of library’s services. Questions
were formatted as multiple choice or Likert scale with optional qualitative
comments. The researchers used descriptive statistics to compare the responses.
Then,
the researchers invited library professionals via relevant distance-education
and academic library listservs to complete an online questionnaire about how
distance education is supported, promoted, and assessed. Free text questions
comprised the majority of the questionnaire.
The researchers categorized these and summarized them textually. The
researchers used descriptive statistics to collate the responses to the
multiple-choice questions.
Main results – The researchers observed an increase in awareness of all
the library services about which they asked undergraduates. Off campus access
to databases (92%, n = 55), an online course in the learning management
system (78%, n = 47), and online help pages (71%, n = 43) had the
highest awareness in 2014 as compared to 2011 when off campus access to
databases (73%, n = 74), research guides (43%, n = 44), and
online help pages (42%, n = 43) were the top three most visible items.
Fewer undergraduates said they do not use the library at all between 2011 (54%,
n = 56) and 2014 (30%, n = 18).
More
graduate students reported that they were very satisfied with the library in
2014 (45%, n = 12) than in 2011 (27%, n = 10).
Faculty
members were more aware of library services, especially research guides, which
had 79% awareness in 2014 (n = 56) up from 60% (n = 55) in 2011.
Almost half (46%) of faculty member respondents had recommended them to
students in 2014 as compared to 27% in 2011.
The
library professionals who responded indicated that their institutions did not
evaluate the success of distance educators and students’ awareness of the
library’s services and resources (54%, n = 97) nor the success of any
promotional campaigns they may have undertaken (84%, n = 151). Both the
respondents (37%, n = 54) and the authors recommended partnering with
faculty members as a best practice to promote the library.
Conclusion – More libraries
should be marketing specifically and regularly to distance education students
by leveraging existing communication and organizational structures. Assessing
these efforts is important to understanding their effectiveness.
Commentary
The
Association of College & Research Libraries’ (ACRL) Standards for Distance
Learning Library Services begin by espousing that everyone at an academic
institution is “entitled to the library services and resources of that
institution…regardless of ...the modality by which they take courses” (para.
1). This frames services and resources for distance education students and
instructors as an equity matter. Promotional efforts targeting this community
like email campaigns or embedded content within the institution’s Learning
Management System (LMS) are designed to increase awareness and use of the
library, but how do we know if they are effective? As the results of the
authors’ longitudinal survey indicate, it is rare for libraries to assess their
promotional efforts, but those promotions could be an individual’s only contact
with their library.
The
results of the longitudinal study suggest that the promotional interventions
employed at the institution were successful. However, the authors rely heavily
on face validity and miss the opportunity to perform a more thorough analysis
(Glynn, 2006). The descriptive statistics presented in this survey are
interesting and suggestive, but without statistical analyses we are unable to
determine if they are significant. Similarly designed studies have used t-tests for this purpose (England, Lo,
& Breaux, 2018).
In
surveying library professionals, the authors added value to their longitudinal
study by contextualizing their promotional interventions and assessment efforts
in common practice. These responses and the authors’ experiences were used to
create a list of “best practices” in supporting distance learners and
instructors. These suggestions were all sensible and helpful, though it seems
curious that the authors chose to call them best practices considering
their survey showed that little formal assessment had been done. More research
like the longitudinal survey presented could help validate these suggestions as
evidence-based best practice.
Practitioners
can make use of this mixed methods study in two ways. Firstly, the longitudinal
survey presented a realistic and replicable model for assessing the
effectiveness of library promotions. It could be implemented with distance
learners or any other distinct population within the library community.
Analyzed statistically, results could indicate where gains have been made.
Secondly, the emerging best practices presented provide library professionals
working with distance populations some suggested activities and approaches to
service and promotion design.
References
Association
of College & Research Libraries (ACRL). (2016, June). Standards for
distance learning library services. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/guidelinesdistancelearning
England,
E., Lo, L. S., & Breaux, A. P. (2018). The librarian BFF: A case study of a
cohort-based personal librarian program. Journal of Library &
Information Services in Distance Learning, 12(1-2), 3-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/1533290X.2018.1467810
Glynn,
L. (2006). A critical appraisal tool for library and information research. Library
Hi Tech, 24(3), 387–399. https://doi.org/10.1108/07378830610692154