The Library and My Learning Community: First Year Students' Impressions of Library Services

Abstract

During the 2002-03 academic year a team of reference librarians at the Kent State University main library began working with two freshman learning communities as part of initiative to learn more about the needs of first-year students. This article reports on the outreach to one of those, the Science Learning Community, and on the results of a focus group undertaken with members of that group. The study found that the students valued the library instruction offered and were even inclined to request that more library-related instruction be incorporated in the future. Students revealed apprehensions about using the library and also offered suggestions for new services, including the idea that all freshmen should have the same learning opportunity. The community program director was very pleased with the library's contributions to the students' learning experience. The initial outreach was considered a success by all involved and it was decided that the Main Library continue to develop the services and to further integrate library components into the students' curriculum for future semesters. In the spring of 2002, a team of four reference librarians at the Kent State University (KSU) main library began thinking of new ways to market the library's services and information resources. Most traditional marketing plans begin with an investigation of needs in a given market, together with analysis of organizational talent and resources to determine which needs the organization is best fitted to satisfy. (1) The selection of a target market, or a subgroup of customers, upon which to concentrate ones' efforts is the next step. (2) Early in the process, several key patron groups were identified, of which the team hoped to gain a better understanding. First-year students were one of the identified groups. The quickly changing information environment was making it increasingly difficult to make assumptions about their experiences, skills, and needs, as well as their expectations from the libraries. The team's first task, therefore, was to devise a means of learning more about the freshman class. An article in a university-wide faculty-staff newsletter made the team aware of several new learning communities beginning on campus in fall semester 2002. The article also highlighted a few communities that had been ongoing for several years, none of which had had any with the libraries. Lippincott confirmed involvement in learning communities can provide academic librarians with a window into the thinking of students who have grown up with technology and who regularly use the Web to locate all kinds of information. (3) The team immediately recognized the potential inherent in belonging to such a community and began brainstorming about ways to become involved and what could be offered to the community. Learning communities vary greatly in their organization, goals, and activities. At its simplest, a learning community may be defined as an intentionally developed community that will promote and maximize learning. (4) Each of the communities on the KSU campus had a unique focus and drew on different criteria for forming the community. Some were based on academic major, others on lifestyle (healthy living, fitness), and others on interests (community service). Each community promoted and maximized learning from a unique perspective. However, none had yet tapped into the resources of the library. The librarian team believed that the library had a unique role to play in enhancing the first-year experience for these students. Becoming involved with learning communities could be opportunity for librarians to provide additional guidance and nurturing of students' information literacy skills, and to discover new and creative ways to interact with students. This would coincide with KSU libraries and Media Services' mission to find new and effective ways to infuse information literacy instruction into the curriculum. …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 18 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.