|
Reference and Information Service Section Conference and Exhibition 1999Collaborating to a Higher DegreePeter Macauley and Jenny Addie, Deakin University Library |
Abstract
While Deakin University has been a successful distance education provider, findings from student studies, changes to government funding patterns and a greater focus on research within the University, have culminated in the need to develop new strategies for success. In one such strategy, Deakin University has embarked on a pilot study to enhance Library support for higher degree by research students and their academic supervisors. The pilot study establishes collaborative models of support between the student, the supervisor and the librarian. Proposed outcomes of the study include stronger partnerships, improved research skills, better retention rates, increased completion rates and faster completion rates.
Introduction
Providing proactive library support to students and academic staff is a top priority for Deakin University Library. The cornerstone of this service is the Library’s existing liaison program in which individual liaison librarians are designated as a contact point for each Deakin University student and staff member (see Lingham's paper from this conference). The liaison focus for academic staff and higher degree students is based on developing a one-to-one relationship in which individual needs can be met at the time of need. Developing this relationship is not always easy with higher degree students who may be isolated as a result of their part-time or off-campus status. In addition, these students must come to terms with a proliferation of scholarly publishing and electronic resources. This paper describes an enhanced model for aligning the liaison program with the strategic initiative of Deakin University to attract and retain higher degree students. The new model is based on extending the role of the liaison librarian to be a stronger partner in the triumvirate of higher degree student, academic supervisor and librarian. A pilot study was established to implement and evaluate the effectiveness of the enhanced model.
The challenges of information literacy for research students in the electronic age
Scholarly communication has certainly changed in the 1990s and, in many ways, the 1990s appear to have been the decade of ‘do it yourself’ or ‘self service’. Consistent with this trend, end-user searching of bibliographic databases has increased significantly. End-user searching refers to the direct access to databases by researchers in contrast to the mediated searching normally carried out by a librarian or information specialist. Among information workers the term 'disintermediation' is used to describe the diminishing role of the intermediary associated with the electronic information environment (Edwards, Day & Walton, 1996, p. 357). Access to online public access catalogues (OPACS) from desktops also became possible and then commonplace in the last decade. This enabled researchers to check from the convenience of their desk, laboratory or home, their own library’s holdings and in some cases, to electronically order materials to be sent directly to them. It also allowed an interface to hundreds of library catalogues globally. This electronic browsing could enable serendipitous discoveries to be made and represents a source of intellectual empowerment for online researchers. The 1990s brought networked full-text databases; making not just abstracts but whole journal articles available to the desktops of researchers. This has been a boon to all students and academics with appropriate access, but especially for research students studying off-campus. Access to copies of papers within seconds of them being published electronically has significantly enhanced the usefulness of end-user searching. This has dramatically changed the way in which bibliographic searching is carried out as librarians rarely undertake searches for researchers. This has a number of implications for information literacy training.
The superimposing of the World Wide Web on scholarly communication places a heavy emphasis on the need for information skills from the earliest stages of the research. This is especially so as the Internet is a huge and unstructured mass of information (Small, 1997, p. 41). As Newby (1997, p. 215) stated ‘Internet search engines – are not able to distinguish the relative scholarly value of, for example, a 12-year-old’s page of favourite television shows and a media scholar’s critique of the state of network broadcasts’. As university libraries exist to serve the needs of their scholarly communities, they must adjust those needs as they change. As the proliferation of information continues unabated, researchers will, even more, require access to relevant information; this is the qualitative aspect of information literacy that academics, research students and librarians must be conversant with.
Problematic encounters in a complex environment
Some researchers, especially inexperienced ones, can fall into a common trap explained by Manoff (1996, p. 221): ‘Many users believe that if they have searched an electronic index they have searched the entire world of information. If it’s not in the computer, they assume that it must not exist’. This view is echoed by Herrington (1998, p. 383) who commented that ‘library users attribute much authority to information obtained from a computer; if it was created on a computer, exists in a computer, or came out of a computer, some will view it as more valid, up-to-date, and credible that a print format’. Reinforcing this argument, Simpson (1998, p. 8) says:
People who extract some useful bibliographic entries from a database may easily be able to persuade themselves that they have exhausted the resources of the available universe. If this point has relevance to use of the computerized library catalog, it must be even more germane to the vastness of the Internet, where even the most inept of searches usually produces an embarrassment of riches.
This has implications for information literacy. Firstly, often only mainstream literature is generally accessible from electronic databases. Secondly, whilst technology can produce greater access to information, especially for students at a distance, it can also restrict access to relevant information. That is, with the trend toward large multi-disciplinary commercial database producers, if something does not make money such as some ‘fringe’ material, it does not get published (Manoff, 1997, n.p.). Put another way you cannot get virtually everything via the virtual library, and if you do not pay, you get virtually nothing. Specialist knowledge of marginal literature is crucial for research students, and librarians are well placed to disseminate such information. The attractiveness of the virtual library, especially for off-campus students, places an unrealistic over-confidence in what may be delivered. Disintermediation can actually be a disservice to virtual library users. It lacks the human interaction and spontaneity of a real conversion or reference interview with an information professional and discourages users from seeking professional advice. The provision of pre-prepared answers to FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions) on a virtual library Web site is of limited use to a research student undertaking specialised research.
Developing competencies for information skills development
Coinciding with the massive changes in technology and growth in information in the past decade is the changing demographic characteristics of the candidates, who are often returning to university and may be accustomed only to traditional information seeking techniques. As Fabiano (1996, p. 160) has stated ‘their status as returning students results in a gap in their knowledge of the information gathering process, a gap that widens far more rapidly in this era of continuous technological advancement’. The information skills gap of research students has been borne out by the research of Alire (1984, p. 93) who found that more than one-half of the doctoral students in education she surveyed thought they were deficient in library research techniques and that they needed information skills training. In another survey with education doctoral students, Fabiano (1996, p. 167) found clear evidence that the methods and resources used by students in conducting research reflected inadequate information skills. At times, some supervisors may be guilty of putting their heads in the sand, judging by the comments of Madland (1985, p. 163), who stated ‘while many teachers assume that graduate students have mastered the art of using the library, there is evidence that graduate students do not know how to find the information they need’.
Richard Dreifuss (1981) has written about the gap between the student library skills expected by academics and the student skills observed by librarians. It can be argued there is also a skills gap between the academic’s perceived library skills and the academic’s library skills observed by librarians. Librarians know that many academics do not use anywhere near the number of information services available to them, nor do they all have the necessary skills or techniques to use those resources. In her frequently cited doctoral thesis, The dissertation literature review: how faculty advisors prepare their doctoral candidates, Zaporozhetz (1987, p. 54) interviewed academics about their library knowledge. She found ‘all knew sources, but may not have been able to recall specific titles at the time of the interview. They can remember colors of binding, thickness (the fat red books) or location (by the windows) of reference sources they found useful in advising’. As far as advising off-campus students, such vague descriptions of information resources is totally unacceptable. No matter how user-friendly a library database may be, searching via color, thickness or location to windows, is normally not available, or warranted!
As Barry (1997, p. 227) postulates ‘the skills required of an academic in an electronic age appear to be of a different magnitude from those that were required in a wholly traditional information age … As we continue to make the transition from a traditional to an electronic age, the need for information skills intensifies’. Later in the same paper, Barry (1997, p. 236) goes on to say ‘we cannot expect academics to train new researchers in skills they have not yet achieved themselves’. Supervisors tend to pass on their own library techniques to their students, techniques they have often learnt from their own supervisors, sometimes many years ago. The passing down of old skills and outmoded techniques by supervisors, according to Delmanont, Parry and Atkinson (1997) is what is called ‘pedagogic continuity’. They argue that pedagogic continuity ‘is a key to understanding the inter-generational transmission of knowledge and skills’ (Delmanont, Parry & Atkinson, 1997, n.p.). Of course, pedagogic continuity is not always a negative concept; supervisors can pass on their positive traits as well.
In reality supervisors often lack the necessary information skills and this bears out Bruce’s findings that ‘whilst exhortations to students and supervisors focus on the importance of reviewing the literature in research, in practice, candidates appear to receive little assistance from their supervisors’. She further states ‘research candidates, apart from the assistance they receive from their library, fend for themselves’ (Bruce 1991, p. 103). The comments of Bruce have been backed up by Macauley’s study on distance education research students. He found only 26 per cent of respondents were given any guidance on how to carry out a research project as an off-campus student from their supervisor when they began their thesis (Macauley 1997, p. 191). The lack of guidance given has implications for others including library staff who must then fill in some of the gaps left by the lack of consultation by supervisors. These studies support the contention that the research student population is often ill prepared to conduct advanced library or information research and may require assistance additional to that which is currently being provided by supervisors.
A strategy to enhance the information literacy skills of research candidates and their supervisors
Looking at distance students from a totally different perspective, respected American researcher on library reference services Anne Lipow (1999, n.p.) says ‘rather than thinking of our users as remote, we should instead recognise that it is we who are remote from our users’. She put an interesting twist on how librarians should approach information literacy, especially in today’s electronic age. Librarians should make the first move and approach the students, rather than waiting for the phone to ring. Lipow calls this ‘in-your-face reference service’. In this model, the librarian doesn’t wait to be asked; instead, having heard what the students are working on, goes ahead and supplies them with what they believe is needed; and inaugurates new services back in the library that efficiently addresses the repetitive needs that they have been dealing with on an ad hoc basis (Lipow, 1999, n.p.). What stands out here is the importance of the face-to-face human element, something that is even more difficult when dealing with students at a distance. A three-way collaboration between candidates, supervisors and librarians may be one way to overcome the reluctance of many students who do not ask for assistance. The librarian becomes a partner in their work, and most importantly, is viewed by the student (or academic) as a partner in their work.
The Deakin University pilot study model
A similar model to the one suggested by Lipow is already being piloted at Deakin University. The model involves an experienced librarian being allocated to supervisory teams early in a student’s candidature. The scheme is seen as a way of improving information literacy by formally collaborating with researchers and information professionals, and endeavours to assist researchers with their methods of scholarly communication in a period of rapid information growth (Macauley & McKnight, 1998). Research candidates probably have the greatest information requirements of all students; consequently they have the greatest need for information literacy skills. A prime example is that the review of relevant literature is nearly always a standard chapter of a thesis or dissertation. It is often one of the chapters that causes considerable anguish, especially as the literature review is supposed to be undertaken very early in a student’s candidature.
The objectives of the pilot study include:
Librarians will also benefit from the closer collaboration. There will be:
Typical duties of a librarian on a supervisory team vary, but include:
The pilot study involves Deakin University's five Faculty Liaison Librarians plus two other librarians (the authors) who oversee the project. Faculty Liaison Librarians liaise with, on average, two higher degree by research students, normally with different supervisors. Of course, their liaison role encompasses many more research students, but not at such an intensive collaborative level. The students involved include PhD, professional doctorate (EdD), and masters by research candidates. Students were nominated by supervisors to take part and most are in the very early stages of candidature. Candidates include full-time, part-time, on-campus, and off-campus including overseas students; some are new to research whilst others already have research degrees and published their work. Supervisors were suggested by Heads of Schools and include relatively new academics to those at professorial level. The pilot study has been voluntary for students and supervisors taking part.
Support and competencies
The Deakin University Library's web based Research Skills Module supports the pilot study. In addition to information links to assist researchers, the web site also provides information on thesis writing and on the literature review process. The module has proven to be a great adjunct to the personal relationships and direct assistance of the pilot program.
To maintain consistency of service, standard IT, bibliographic management, requesting service, and information retrieval competencies were identified. A checklist of competencies for higher degree students and their supervisors was developed to ascertain the information literacy competencies of each student and supervisor involved in the pilot study. The primary purpose of the checklist is to establish the specific training requirements of each individual in order to tailor and deliver relevant and personalised tuition. After training is completed, there is subsequent self-assessment of competencies levels. The process is predicated on improving competencies in the defined areas.
An expectation of the scheme is the development of information literacy skills, not only for the candidates, but also for the supervisors. It is hoped those new found skills will be transferred to new generations of students and academics through pedagogic continuity.
Evaluation of the pilot study
Formal ongoing evaluation of the pilot project is an integral part of the process. At this early stage feedback has been informal, yet very useful. Without doubt, the students involved greatly appreciate the one-to-one relationship with one doctoral candidate stating 'you’re the only one that cares about me'. The student found the individual contact a 'lifesaver' which is a mixed blessing; it is positive feedback for the Library but it reinforces the contention that some supervisors do not appear to be as supportive as the candidates would like. Another student said 'this should be done by everyone' and added 'it has made me reflect on my [lack of] information skills'. Referring to the wealth of knowledge being disseminated in a one-to-one information literacy session, a professional doctorate student exclaimed 'why don't we know all about this stuff?' Further investigation found that much of the information she didn't know about was actually provided in various formats such as in published guides sent directly to students or accessible via the web. Quite simply, students often do not read what they are sent, a theory backed up by an earlier study on off-campus research students (Macauley, 1996, p.58). Feedback from academic staff so far has been positive, although some academics feel it only the students who need the information skills training and not themselves. Interestingly, the majority of the academics involved in the project admitted to having information skills gaps at the initial briefing sessions, but when it comes to actually undertaking any training, they can rarely be pinned down to do it!
At this early stage, the librarians involved have found the program to be a success, but acknowledge building the relationship with the students and to a lesser extent the academics, can be a slow process. Once the participants experience the benefits of the collaboration the relationship tends to blossom. One librarian had concerns about taking on some of roles that should realistically be in the supervisor's domain. Certainly the approachability of librarians may influence this. Another librarian concerned about one of his students undertaking a PhD in education who had not heard of the ERIC database, exclaimed 'they don't know what they don't know!' The overwhelming issue was that personal communication was the key, especially when dealing with the specialised interests of research students and their supervisors.
Other issues and future possibilities
There is certainly the question of spoon-feeding research students with this model. While some may question the degree of the librarian’s involvement in the research process, as Cavanagh and Lingham (1994, p. 119) have stated ‘the student, in the end, is the one who must put the material together and write the thesis’.
There are a number of other issues and considerations to be taken into account before adopting this model. For instance, are librarians appropriately trained and have they the necessary experience to add value to the supervisory process? Are libraries sufficiently resourced to take on these additional responsibilities? Are research candidates, academics and librarians willing to take on this new model of supervision?
The challenge ahead is in mainstreaming the model in a period of contracting staffing resources, increasing options for flexible course delivery and possible increase in numbers of higher degree students. The dilemma is that the success of the pilot study to attract and retain students, may result in increased demand for places and untenable workloads to meet the demand on liaison services.
Conclusions
Although librarians often point to the academic staff as obstacles to information literacy, citing the academics inexperience in library use and their reluctance to change their pedagogical styles, librarians in many cases are not doing their part either (Bodi, 1992, p. 72). Despite what librarians have to offer academic staff and students says Bodi (1992, p. 72) ‘they have managed to keep their expertise largely a secret’. Collaboration between researchers and librarians can assist candidates and supervisors to stay informed in specific fields and can assist in filtering the proliferation of information in a controlled and structured manner. Most importantly, librarians are trained in interpreting how library users can make better use of the library and its services. In addition to this, librarians can help academics and students keep abreast of new developments, especially in information science. Librarians, as the experts in electronic (and print) bibliographic fields, have a role to play by adding value to the information. One of the challenges for librarians is to keep distance education students and their supervisors up to date with technological developments whilst they are researching and train them to have an open mind about what will continue to be rapidly changing future.
The proliferation of information, combined with increased accessibility to electronic scholarly communication for research students, especially those at a distance, has led to a situation where researchers may suffocate in an informational morass. Instead of enhancing access to information, disintermediation may actually reduce access to relevant, comprehensive and quality information. Disintermediation may also lull both doctoral candidates and their supervisors into a false sense of security regarding their levels of information literacy. In some instances the information skills gap is perpetuated via pedagogic continuity and it is hoped the program mentioned in this paper may assist in reversing this contention. The major strategy suggested to overcome these problems is to form a three-way partnership between the doctoral candidate, their supervisor(s) and an experienced librarian that combines the various talents and strengths that only disparate experts can achieve.
Initial feedback regarding the Deakin University collaborative pilot study indicates the program is successful. In the medium term, further evaluation will establish any increase in the information skills of research students and their supervisors. Only in the longer term will a full evaluation be possible, including the crucial objectives of more and faster higher degree by research completions and higher standards of research. It is another way of librarians collaborating to a higher degree.
Bibliography
Alire, C. A. (1984) A nationwide survey of education doctoral students' attitudes regarding the importance of the library and the need for bibliographic instruction. EdD Thesis, University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, Colorado.
Barry, C. A. (1997) 'Information skills for an electronic world: training doctoral research students', Journal of Information Science, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 225-238.
Bodi, S. (1992) 'Collaborating with faculty in teaching critical thinking: the role of librarians', Research Strategies, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 69-76.
Bruce, C. S. (1991) 'Postgraduate response to an information retrieval credit course', Australian Academic & Research Libraries, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 103-110.
Cavanagh, A. & Lingham, B. (1994) 'Library services for external postgraduate and overseas students', Distance Education, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 112-127.
Delamont, S., Parry, O., & Atkinson, P. (1997) 'Critical mass and pedagogic continuity: studies in academic habitus', British Journal of Sociology of Education, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 533-549.
Dreifuss, R. A. (1981) 'Library instruction and graduate students: more work for George', RQ, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 121-123.
Edwards, C., Day, J. & Walton, G. (1996) ‘Disintermediation in the Year 2010: using scenarios to identify key issues and relevance of IMPEL2 eLib Project’, in Online Information 96: proceedings of the International Online Information Meeting, London. pp. 357-361.
Fabiano, E. (1996) 'Casting the 'net: reaching out to doctoral students in education', Research Strategies, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 159-168.
Herrington, V. J. (1998) 'Way beyond BI: a look to the future', The Journal of Academic Librarianship, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 381-386.
Lipow, A. G. (1999) 'Serving the remote user: reference service in the digital environment', in Proceedings of the Ninth Australasian Information Online & On Disc Conference and Exhibition, Sydney. http://www.csu.edu.au/special/online99/proceedings99/200.htm.
Macauley, P. (1997) 'Distance education research students and their library use', Australian Academic & Research Libraries, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 188-197.
Macauley, P. (1996) Is the home institution library needed? The information needs of Deakin University distance education higher degree by research students: a user-centred approach. MAppSc Thesis, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga.
Macauley, P. & McKnight, S. (1998) 'A new model of library support for off-campus postgraduate research students', in Quality in Postgraduate Research: Managing the New Agenda: Proceedings of the 1998 Quality in Postgraduate Research Conference, The Advisory Centre for University Education, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide. pp. 95-106.
Madland, D. (1985) 'Library instruction for graduate students’, College Teaching, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 163-164.
Manoff, M. (1997) 'Cyberhope of cyberhype? Computers and scholarly research' http://libraries.mit.edu/humanities/manoff.html.
Manoff, M. (1996) 'Revolutionary or regressive? The politics of electronic collection development', in. R. P. Peek, and G. B. Newby (eds), Scholarly Publishing: The electronic frontier. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 215-229.
Newby, G. B. (1997) 'A prognosis for continued disarray in electronic scholarly communication', Canadian Journal of Communication, vol. 22, no. 3/4, pp. 213-225.
Simpson, A. E. (1998) 'Information-finding and the education of scholars: teaching electronic access in disciplinary context', Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 1-18.
Small, M. (1997) 'Virtual universities and their libraries: a comparison of Australian and North American Experiences', Advances in Librarianship, vol. 21, no. 25-46.
Zaporozhetz, L. E. (1987) The dissertation literature review: how faculty advisors prepare their doctoral candidates. PhD Thesis, University of Oregon.