Posts tagged with qualitative in Blog Tiny Studies

Assessment and research activities focused on the U-M Library faculty, staff, and student experiences are happening regularly, and often the Library Human Resources (LHR) team is contributing to these activities if not leading the research. This work can focus on quantitative data, qualitative data, or take a hybrid approach, and can involve surveys, interviews, and/or some general number-crunching. This post looks over some recent HR assessment projects.

When planning an assessment project in the Library, one important step is to consider whether your project should be vetted by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at U-M, a committee that ensures studies with human subjects are ethical, that subjects are protected from unnecessary psychological or physical risks, and that subjects are participating in a fully informed, voluntary manner. This post details when your data collection may be subject to a full IRB application and review process.

Assessing library impact on student learning is essential for demonstrating libraries’ integrated value and commitment to higher education. In 2018 the author investigated faculty perceptions of student learning in library instruction sessions, and as a result, revealed that faculty observe enhanced learning when their students participate in library instruction opportunities.

The first post ("Personas: A Classic User Experience Design Technique") in this 2-part series described what personas are and, generally, how to create them. I closed with some cautions about ways personas might come out less than helpful – creating flat, overloaded, or fake (unresearched) personas. The second post presents our persona development for a specific website project.

Personas are employed in user experience design work to help design teams create or improve systems, spaces, and services with targeted populations in mind. Libraries use personas as archetypes to maximize effective library user experiences. This is the first of two posts about the creation and use of personas in the U-M Library.

When developing or reconsidering a library service, sometimes you can get stuck in your head. You go back and forth with your colleagues proposing different ways of doing things. You model out different scenarios, do an environmental scan, read the literature, weigh pros and cons but you still can’t decide how to proceed. A great way to figure out how to move forward is to go to your users for feedback by employing intercept interviews.

Continuing the discussion about survey design (see Let's Talk about Surveys, Part 1), you’ve decided a survey is an appropriate methodology for what you want to find out and are thinking about what questions you want to ask. But how you ask these questions and structure them within the survey itself, as well as the question formats and options you give people for responding all require careful consideration.

Doing a survey is often the default research method thought of when you need to answer questions about what people like, expect, or want, among other things. While surveys are likely to be considered the easiest option, you can’t conflate “easy to create” with “easy to create well.” Even if a survey is an appropriate methodology for the question you’re looking to answer, the questions you ask, the way you ask them, and the options you give people for responding all require a thoughtful approach.

“Learning from Advanced Student Staff Experiences” was a University of Michigan Library study conducted in 2017, integrating methodologies of user­-centered design and critical librarianship.

In this study, engineering librarians Leena Lalwani, Jamie Niehof, and Paul Grochowski sought to learn from graduate students in the College of Engineering (CoE) how these students could benefit from more instruction on U-M Library resources.