AARL

Reconsidering services for the postmodern student

Connie Koh

Abstract: The effect of postmodern culture on some of today's students has been linked to the ways in which they use services offered by academic libraries. With attitudes characterised by consumerism, knowledge fragmentation and superficiality, these students, particularly those using the library's online services, could benefit from libraries evaluating and altering their services based on students' information-seeking behaviour.

As universities offer more courses taught in online delivery mode, academic libraries must provide services to help support the students of these courses. Examined in a postmodern context, the needs and expectations of these students differ from those of students studying in the more traditional on-campus mode. Unsurprisingly, library services for students enrolled in online delivery courses also differ, although many of these services and those for on-campus students are beginning to overlap. While these services meet some student needs, they may not do enough to help students perform better searches or become independent searchers.

The postmodern context and why it is relevant

In recent years, the somewhat slippery term 'postmodern' has been a label that has found application in philosophy, art, cultural criticism and fiction. As Umberto Eco comments,

Unfortunately, 'postmodern' is a term bon à tout faire. I have the impression that it is applied today to anything the user of the term happens to like. [1]

The Oxford English Dictionary defines it as 'Subsequent to, later than, what is "modern" specifically in the arts, especially in architecture, applied to a movement in reaction against that designated "modern"',[2] which perhaps serves as a starting point for understanding the term. Harley, Dreger and Knobloch highlight the key contrast between modernism and postmodernism as

Whereas modernism espouses universal truths and a fixed reality, postmodernism questions these ideas and instead asserts that there is no universal truth or single version of reality.[3]

Harley et al take the idea further, seeing postmodern culture as possessing a strong influence on some contemporary students, asserting that exposure to rapid technological change in communications has led to students expecting similar changes in all aspects of their lives, in turn affecting their use of academic library services.[4] Characterised by consumerism, superficiality and knowledge fragmentation,[5] students' attitudes signal a change in the academic environment, a change to which many libraries have responded.

While Harley et al apply the concept of 'postmodern' to students and their negotiations with the web, the idea can also be applied to students in online delivery courses. Here, 'online delivery course' entails the use of the internet and a web browser for receiving and delivering instruction, and is synonymous with 'web-based learning/teaching'.[6] Since libraries cannot expect online delivery students ever to set foot on campus, much less the library, many of their services to these students must take place online. And it is these online negotiations with information that should make libraries reconsider their services.

Consumerism

Students as consumers choose information that costs the least and is the most convenient to obtain.[7] Computer-literate students value computer-based resources the most highly, for their sheer efficiency and 'one-stop shopping' aspect.[8] Online resources become information ATMs that dispense answers easily and quickly.

For those students who consult library resources, there is some evidence that library users search only one or two databases that they have found useful previously.[9] There is little inherently wrong with searching familiar databases; it can be argued that being accustomed to the search interface and the quality of results can make searching easier and faster. But limiting a search to only one or two databases, especially when some results might point to the same material, is certainly not casting a wide enough net.

Unfortunately, users are often satisfied with the returned results.[10] Being satisfied with results must surely quell any motivation to conduct further searches. Searching on databases will inevitably return results, but there is no guarantee that the results contain the best information. Students might believe they have found the best information, or worse, they do not care about the quality of the information. Again, the consumer attitude of 'I want it and I want it now' creates an expectation that obtaining information should not require more than a minimal investment of time and energy.

Because academic libraries' offerings to online delivery students generally comprise online resources, this idea of students as consumers should be considered when designing services. The Australian Academic and Research Library Network (AARLIN) project is one example of libraries taking positive steps to get around the issue of users searching on only one or two databases. With an interface as seemingly easy to use as an internet search engine, AARLIN's customisable portal allows users to search multiple databases using a uniform search syntax.[11]

Libraries should determine whether their current offerings appeal to students' preference for convenient services and investigate new ways in which to make the search for information simpler.

Superficiality

The characteristic of superficiality relates to placing more importance on outward appearance over underlying mechanisms or meaning.[12] In the context of the library, students tend not take the time to learn how a particular database is structured; they are more focused on the search results and how that information relates to their assignment. Because they think they understand the interface, they do not question how the underlying search process operates. As a result, the search terms they use may not return the most relevant information for which they are searching.

Compounding this problem is the finding that students tend not to read search instructions.[13] This finding suggests that students may not even suspect that they do not know how best to construct searches. Research has shown that students' search strategies can often become too restrictive or they rely too heavily on natural language for their search terms,[14] which in turn affects the quality of returned results.

For online delivery students, bibliographic instruction might comprise online tutorials. As tutorials are most effective at the point of need,[15] being in an online format might seem ideal: the student recognises that they do not know how to find information for an assignment, they then complete the tutorial and finally emerge from the experience informed. If only it was this simple. McPherson writes of information skills training programs used by some Australian universities, but admits 'they do require students to be prepared to take time out to work through them.'[16] And the size of this impediment should not be underestimated. In an online environment, what will make students want to complete the training program, given that many do not even read search instructions? Ideally, users should not have to complete a tutorial to access information through a database effectively; they should be able to find the results they are looking for without having to understand the database's underlying structure.

Knowledge fragmentation

Knowledge fragmentation occurs when students accumulate small portions of, often subjective, information but fail to integrate them into knowledge.[17] To postmodernists, there is no universal truth, but many truths that have emerged from various contexts, and as a result, accumulated knowledge exists in fragments that are not pieced together to form a single reality.[18]

As an example, there can be several personal web pages on the same subject, each one with a different point of view. Some students might see each of the perspectives as equally valid, making it difficult to process the information into knowledge objectively.[19] This is not to say that time devoted to learning different perspectives is misspent; exposure to differing perspectives can lead to a deeper understanding of a topic. The risk, however, is that some may accept a perspective without critically evaluating the source and why the source may have a particular perspective. Websites are often organised in such a way that the information can be dispersed among several pages. Without some investigation of a website, therefore, it can be difficult for students to determine the overall context of the information, or if the source is reliable. To illustrate, Block points to a survey that found that 22% of the surveyed students believed that 80-100% of what they found on the internet was truthful.[20] What this unsettling statistic suggests is a lack of understanding of how to evaluate information, or perhaps why evaluation is imperative.

Connected to this idea is the reliance on the web as a valid information source. As Schwartz notes, 'The perception... is that the web is user friendly and can supply the answers to any information need.'[21] Yet the answers are not critically evaluated; they appear to fulfil an information need and many students can fail to gather further information to support or expand what they find.

A shift in thinking

The postmodern characteristics discussed thus far paint a fairly grim picture, although admittedly using broad strokes, of some of today's students. Reasons why some students display some or all of these characteristics, though an important part of the picture, and certainly worthwhile researching, will not be addressed in this paper.

The findings noted earlier are not intended to point the blame at students for less-than-optimal search behaviour. They are instead intended as an illustration of how some students conduct information searches, from which libraries might gain some understanding on how better to evaluate and customise their services. There are, of course, students who bear no resemblance to the picture; they consciously invest their time and energy into improving their research skills and perform thorough information searches. And they are not the ones who should cause librarians to worry.

Perhaps what is required is a shift in thinking. Many students expect learning to be fun and easy.[22] And while learning can be fun, and at times easy, it is the expectation that it should be that can be problematic. While students want to be able to conduct searches quickly, librarians should stress that creating a search strategy can actually save the student time. Some students will slog through 300 hits instead of refining their search to reflect what they really want.[23] Obviously it is not as if the students are lazy in their searching; it seems more likely that they are unaware that their search habits are ineffective or that creating a search strategy requires planning.

Similarly, students need to be exposed to the idea that in designing search strategies they need to consider, as Weaver states, the two key questions of, 'What am I actually looking for?' and 'Who is likely to have the information?'[24] instead of just plugging in terms they think might return relevant results.

But these ideas seem easier to disseminate on a face-to-face basis, which can conflict with the virtual nature of online delivery services. Libraries and librarians, therefore, must explore ways in which they can develop relationships with students in an online environment.

What can libraries do?

Coaching

Perrone discusses some success with the practice of 'information coaching'.[25] In her experience, librarians, who adopted the term 'coaches', participated in online courses. One of the more successful practices involved students submitting outlines or plans of their work, to which the coach would then suggest ways for the student to find and identify relevant information. Delivered via e-mail, the feedback is personalised to each student's submitted plans.

Coaches also took part in online course discussions. In this way, any misconceptions that arose, such as a student stating the lack of information on a particular topic, could be addressed more directly. One coach, for example, suggested rephrasing the search phrase and consulting the ERIC thesaurus for descriptors.[26]

Coaching obviously requires developing a close working relationship with the course instructor, which may not suit the style of some instructors.[27] It can also involve a considerable time commitment, depending on class size and student abilities.[28] Coaching can, however, serve as an ideal opportunity for librarians to gain a better understanding of course requirements, while building relationships with students and academic staff.

Technological developments

Libraries could also investigate technological possibilities for improving communication with online delivery students. Suggestions of throwing technology at problems should generally be approached with caution. Digital (also known as virtual, remote or electronic) reference services have become standard for more libraries recently, in either asynchronous, such as e-mail, or synchronous, like 'chat', formats. Since chat services appear to be an area many libraries are keen to explore,[29] they will be the focus of this section.

Some universities have had success in introducing chat services,[30] but that is not to say that adopting chat services is without challenges. As Janes reports, some librarians find that 'because of perceived time pressures, little of what typically makes up a traditional reference interview might take place.'[31] Stormont echoes this sentiment, finding that chatting requires shorter, more direct responses and that some librarians feel stressed about the possibility of users getting tired of waiting for a response from the librarian and then logging off.[32] In addition to the effort required for librarians to become adept at communicating in this format, there are issues relating to staffing levels, staff training, staff workloads, software cost, hours of operation and technical support that need to be addressed prior to undertaking a real-time online reference service.[33]

The issue of workloads for asynchronous and synchronous services may be helped by automated systems. Janes outlines four such systems, Questions Point service, MULDER, QABuilder Software and the National Science Digital Library Question Triage system, which support digital reference by receiving, routing and/or answering reference questions.[34] These systems may hold the key to making online reference much more manageable.

With technology's potential to change rapidly and in turn bring about advances in online reference, librarians must continually explore the ways in which technology can support more effective communication with users.

Learn from students

Librarians and lecturers need to get a better idea of how their students conduct information searches. Reading the results of others' research can provide an indication of how students might search for information, but it should only serve as a starting point. It is necessary for librarians to find out more about their library users, what databases they use and how they develop search strategies. As Lippincott notes, after learning more about students' search methods, librarians can 'discover a whole range of information needs in a course and opportunistically introduce students to new sources, new search techniques and critical ways to evaluate information.'[35]

Recognise that students are individuals

While the overall goal may be to help students become effective and independent learners,[36] there are different ways of reaching this goal. Some students may respond well to some techniques or services, but others may not. Even the same student may prefer different services for different purposes, or on different occasions.[37] Today a student may want to telephone a reference librarian for help, while tomorrow he/she may prefer to e-mail a query to the 'Ask A' service.

And as individuals, students may not seek help from librarians at all.[38] Librarians need to accept this possibility. The old saying about leading a horse to water comes to mind. But in recognising the limitations in search methods of some students, it is important that librarians and educators not assume that they are powerless or that poor searching habits cannot be changed. A wide variety of types of assistance must be offered to meet students' variable needs.

The UC Library: a starting point

Last year, the University of Canberra Library undertook a preliminary survey of students who were enrolled in online delivery courses offered by the University's Divisions of Science and Design, and Communication and Education. The library wanted to know whether students were aware of its services and how they assessed them, in order to determine which of its services were working effectively and which needed retooling. While this survey represented the first of, ideally, many steps toward clarifying the needs of the library's online delivery users, more important to the purpose of this discussion, the survey results underscore some of the ideas presented thus far.

One of the main findings of the survey reveals the importance of website design. Eighty-eight percent of respondents valued easy website navigation, making it one of the most important characteristics of services the library offers. As a comparison, it rated just slightly higher than being able to access the library's services without having to come to campus and having access to necessary reading materials.

That easy navigation is important is no surprise, of course. If a student has to access a library's services online, having an easily navigable website is essential to finding materials. The concept seems obvious, yet it can be difficult to put into practice. What makes good design sense to one person may be confusing to another.

Adding to the challenge for website designers is that the postmodern condition suggests that some students are not necessarily going to search for the library's services, even if they stand to benefit. The survey showed that despite having a clear description of the library's services on its website, about 50% of respondents were unaware of the library's document delivery service, and roughly the same number did not know about its online reference service. It cannot be assumed that the postmodern student will look for a description of a library's services, much less invest the time and effort necessary to actually read the description. As one student respondent commented, 'I feel I am only now beginning to be aware of and use the library services effectively... I wish I had known about the online journals and databases last semester!'

While this lack of awareness of services may indicate a shortcoming in the library's promotion of its services, it emphasises the need for the library (and academic libraries in general) to approach its website from the perspective of someone who does not know what they are looking for. Rather than focusing on which web pages need links to the document delivery service, for example, perhaps assume that the student does not know what 'document delivery' means and is not terribly interested in finding out.

The UC library offers two services that respond particularly well to simplifying the location of relevant materials: information access guides (IAGs) and the course material(s) database (CMD). Over 80% of the survey respondents valued these services, which in many ways fits the characteristics of the postmodern student. The IAGs, organised by course subject, quickly lead the user to potentially relevant databases, electronic journals and websites, acting as a gateway to reliable sources the user might find useful.

The CMD, as its name implies, gives students direct access to materials prescribed by a course lecturer. Rather than having to locate several items via potentially multiple search interfaces, students can simply enter the CMD to locate readings for the relevant subject they are studying and download the materials.

While some may argue that services like IAGs and, in particular, the CMD mollycoddle students, it is important to consider the possible alternatives. By not providing services like these, which simplify access to materials, is there a risk that some students will not attempt or be able to access the materials at all? For the postmodern student, services like these seem to eliminate much of the confusion that may arise in beginning the research process.

Conclusion

Although the term 'postmodern' has been used to describe a wide variety of things, nearly to the point of rendering the term meaningless, it has been used here to characterise some students' attitudes as embodying consumerism, superficiality and knowledge fragmentation. Online delivery students particularly, because of their assumed online relationship with the library, potentially display these characteristics. Bearing these characteristics in mind, academic librarians should evaluate their library's services to online delivery students, as well as all those who use the library in an online environment. Worth exploring are practices that may lead to improving students' habits, including: information coaching, keeping current with technological developments in electronic reference, and learning from students.

The results of a recent survey of online delivery students undertaken by the UC library emphasise the importance of good website design, especially how the content and its organisation help a student access information. The library's information access guides and course materials databases have been well received by surveyed online delivery students, suggesting that these students have a need for services that will help guide them more directly to relevant materials.

As students' online habits change, libraries must continually evaluate their services and determine whether they truly are meeting the needs of their student users. Assuming the main objective is to support students in being able to develop search strategies effectively and independently (and perhaps this should not be assumed), libraries need to strive to introduce new services and/or develop 'smarter' systems that will make information searching more straightforward. Librarians' roles will inevitably change as a result of these new services and systems, becoming, in a sense, postmodern in their own way.

Notes

1. U Eco Reflections on The Name of the Rose London Secker & Warburg 1985 p65
2. Oxford English Dictionary 2nd ed Oxford Clarendon Press 1991
3. B Harley M Dreger & P Knobloch 'The Postmodern Condition: Students, the Web and Academic Library Services' Reference Services Review vol 29 no 1 2001 pp23-32
4. Ibid p24
5. Ibid
6. J Fletcher & D Stewart 'The Library: An Active Partner in Online Learning and Teaching' Australian Academic & Research Libraries vol 32 no 3 2001 pp213-221
7. Harley et al p24
8. T Mann in J Schwartz 'Internet Access and End-User Needs' Reference & User Services Quarterly vol 41 no 3 2002 pp253-263
9. G McMillan 'The Digital Library: Without a Soul Can It Be a Library' in Books and Bytes: Technologies for the Hybrid Library: 10th VALA Biennial Conference and Exhibition Conference Proceedings Victorian Association for Library Automation Inc 2000 pp255-271
10. T Mann in J Schwartz 'Internet access and end-user needs' p254
11. 'The AARLIN Project: A National Virtual Research Library System' inCite at Harley et al p25
12. C Tenopir 'Common End User Errors' Library Journal 1 May 1997 pp31-32
13. Sievert and McKinin in P Seiden, K Szymborski and B Norelli 'Undergraduate Students and the Digital Library: Information Seeking Behavior in an Heterogeneous Environment' Choosing Our Futures, ACRL 1997 Annual Conference Papers at http://www.ala.org/acrl/paperhtm/c26.html [accessed 15 March 2003]
14. H Drew W Abbott and D Orr 'What a Web We Weave: Evaluating the Flexible Delivery of Information Literacy Education' Information Online 2001 Tenth Exhibition & Conference at http://www.cu.edu.au/special/online2001/papers/information_literacy_strategiesb.htm [accessed 7 June 2002]
15. M McPherson 'Position or Purpose: Situating the Library in a Webbed World' Australian Academic & Research Libraries vol 32 no 3 2001 pp165-176
16. Harley et al p25
17. Ibid
18. Ibid
19. M Block 'Gullible's Travels: Marylaine Block Shows How to Teach Students to Guard against Misinformation, Disinformation and Spin on the Net' Library Journal 15 April 2002, pp12-14
20. Schwartz 'Internet Access and End-User Needs' p260
21. J Olson and M Clough 'Technology's Tendency to Undermine Serious Study: A Cautionary Note' The Clearing House vol 75 no 1 pp8+
22. Tenopir 'Common End User Errors' p32
23. B Weaver 'Making the Most of the Web' ALIA at http://conferences.alia.org.au/alia2000/proceedings/belinda.weaver.html [accessed 31 March 2003]
24. VG Perrone 'The Changing Role of Librarians and the Online Learning Environment' University of South Australia at http://www.com.unisa.edu.au/cccc/papers/refereed/paper34/Paper34-1.htm [accessed 31 March 2003]
25. Ibid
26. Ibid
27. Ibid
28. J Kibbee, D Ward and W Ma 'Virtual Service, Real Data: Results of a Pilot Study' Reference Services Review vol 30 no 1 2002 pp25-36
29. Kibbee et al; J Boyer 'Virtual Reference at North Carolina State: The First One Hundred Days' Information Technology and Libraries September 2001 pp122-128
30. J Janes 'Question Negotiation and the Technological Environment' D-Lib Magazine vol 9 no 2 at http://www.dlib.org/dlib/february03/janes/02janes.html [accessed 20 April 2003]
31. S Stormont 'Going Where the Users Are: Live Digital Reference' Information Technology and Libraries September 2001 pp129-134
32. Stormont, 'Going Where the Users Are: Live Digital Reference' pp130-133; S McKinzie and J Lauer 'Virtual Reference: Overrated, Inflated and Not Even Real' The Charleston Advisor vol 4 no 2 October 2002 at http://www.charlestonco.com/features.cfm?id=112&type=ed [accessed 20 April 2003]
33. Janes 'Question Negotiation and the Technological Environment'
34. J Lippincott 'Developing Collaborative Relationships' College & Research Libraries News March 2002 pp190-192
35. A Wolpert 'Services to Remote Users: Marketing the Library's Role' Library Trends vol 47 no 1 1998 pp21+
36. Schwartz 'Internet Access and End-User Needs' p260
37. Ibid

Connie Koh is a graduate student at the University of Canberra. E-mail connie@beehivesystems.com.nospam (please remove '.nospam' from address).