College and Research Libraries PETER HERNON and MAUREEN PASTINE Student Perceptions of Acaden1ic Librarians Questionnaire and interview techniques were used at the University of Nebraska at Omaha to study full-time student perceptions of the educational role of academic librarians. The results of the study em- phasize the existence of vague, contradictory, and erroneous percep- tions held about academic librarianship. Effective outreach programs and library services must be employed in the attempt to alter such views which not only affect relations between librarian and student but which also cause students to underutilize the librarian. STUDIES HAVE FOCUSED on faculty at- titudes regarding librarian-faculty rela- tionships and faculty lack of awareness about the services librarians offer.1 Li- brarians are often more aware of fac- ulty than of student perceptions. In regard to student utilization of librar- ies, library literature reveals that the following points are repeatedly exam- ined and/ or questioned: ( 1) student assessment of their ability to use librar- ies; ( 2) how often and why students enter libraries; ( 3) ·what type of materi- als students utilize; and ( 4) whether students feel library use affects their Peter Hernon is a doctoral student in the Graduate Library School, Indiana U ni- versity, and was a reference librarian at the University of Nebraska at Omaha when the study was conducted. Maureen Pastine is a reference librarian at the University af Nebraska at Omaha. The authors express their gratitude to the following faculty members at the University of Nebraska at Omaha for their assistance: Clemm C. Kess- ler, Erwin H. Thormahlen, Rao Aluri, Sara Lou Williams, and John M. Christ. The Faculty Research Committee at the univer- sity provickd financial assistance, and Da- vid 0. Williams assisted with some of the statistical tests and their interpretation. scholastic achievement. This article pre- sents a study of an area neglected by re- search: student perceptions about the roles, duties, and functions of academic librarians. A 1963 study by Line is one of the more important surveys on perceptions, even though it has shortcomings. He stated that <'There is a general impres- sion that students use libraries far less than they ought to," and before -librar- ians can change this they need to find out why. However, the study did not employ interviews due to "considera- tions of time and cost."2 The question- naire did not explore perceptions with any great depth or accuracy. No differ- entiation was made between profession- al librarians and clerical help as both were grouped together under the term "library staff." A 1971 survey of users of Brown Uni- versity Library classified students who requested reference assistance by subject major. It was found that 46 percent of these users were humanities majors, al- though these majors comprised only 32 percent of the total student body.s Swope and Katzer interviewed 119 per- sons using the Syracuse University li- brary to determine if they had refer- / 129 130 I College & Research Libraries • March 1977 ence questions. Of those who would not ask for reference assistance, most felt their questions were too elementary, were hesitant to disturb librarians, or had had an unsatisfactory previous ex- perience in seeking assistance. 4 Little has been done to discern the perceptions of nonusers. A nonuser may be defined as a person who spends two hours or less in the library per week and who uses it only for social, study-hall, or reserve reading purposes. Lubans, study of nonusers at Rensselaer Poly- technic Institute, although commonly cited as the major study of nonusers, assumes that students distinguish among library staff as to roles and duties. For example, students are asked: ccDo you know any librarians?" A ccmajor find- ing,, is that library usage is primarily course-related, but such a conclusion is overly general. Course-related activities encompass reserve readings, study-hall, and research purposes. Lubans, however, makes a significant point: Non-use has not been adequately treated in the literature nor has there been research in this area. Essentially, most studies of library users are based on people who happen to come into the library or are book borrowers. The studies concentrate on what the users do in the library, not how well, or for that matter for what purpose they use it, or how successful they are. Quite often the reports related the number of books borrowed versus the students' academic standing. 5 The existing research reflects a lack of an in-depth discerning of student per- ceptions and conceptualizations of the role of academic librarians. Most studies of student use of libraries have included questionnaire items pertaining to perceptions toward librarians. How- ever, these particular questions repeat the same points without describing those perceptions. One of the more commonly asked questions is ''Have you ever con- sulted a librarian?" The expected re- sponse is either affirmative or negative. No further explanation of the response is required. It is assumed that students know who the librarians are, and there is no indication whether questions asked required professional assistance or were of a directional nature. Similar questions concentrate on how many times a librarian is asked a question, the correlation between familiarity with li- brarians and student willingness to ask questions, and the need for better rap- port between librarians and the library staff. STATEMENT OF THE PRoBLEM Librarians do not completely compre- hend the nature and extent of student perceptions about them and their role in the educational process. With the trend toward independent study, out- reach librarianship, and the application of psychology to reference desk service, precise knowledge of student percep- tions and receptiveness to librarians is needed. The extent and types of mis- perceptions must be realized before the image of librarianship can be upgraded with regard to students. The findings of the studies previously described illustrate the need for sophis- ticated research methodologies aimed at more than just actual library users. Sur- veys should not rehash the same points but seek a deeper understanding of ba- sic student perceptions.6 Line sums up the need for in-depth research when he states: . . . the use of attitude scales instead of rather crude categories is clearly de- sirable. Again, more satisfactory cri- teria of adequate or successful use of the library are required if librarians are to discover how far the barriers and difficulties they know to exist af- fect library use. A more sophisticated study could tell us much more about the library as the student sees it, and possibly help the librarian to see it with different eyes.7 With this in mind, the researchers' primary objective was to delineate and codify by type those perceptions as they were uncovered through this research project. AssuMPTIONS In order to acquire more information about student perceptions, the research- ers studied the following research ques- tions: 1. Do students perceive the role of librarians, clerical, or student as- sistants as being the same? The ob- jective was to study the ability to distinguish among jobs. 2. Do students perceive librarians as service rather than teaching orient- ed? The researchers were interested in major accountabilities. 3. Do students believe that librarians do less than they actually do in terms of duties? The researchers were interested in an awareness and extent of job duties. Each of these questions was examined by variables of age ( those students thir- ty years old and younger and those over thirty), undergraduate class level, sub- . ject area (humanities, social sciences, and physical sciences), sex, student pur- pose for using the library and number of hours spent each week in using the library, and whether students received a library lecture conducted through the classroom or a library orientation. METHOD The sample for the study consisted of full-time students carrying at least twelve semester credit hours at the Uni- versity of Nebraska at Omaha during the second semester of 1975. The Uni- versity's Omaha Computing Facility per- sonnel provided a computer program that randomly selected 700 names and addresses from current enrollment lists based on a proportionate percentage of names from each freshmen, sophomore, junior, senior, special, and graduate stu- dent file. Student Perceptions I 131 Two data collection devices were employed in the investigation: ( 1) ques- tionnaire and (2) interview. The ques- tionnaire contained thirty-eight multi- ple choice and short answer items. Interviews served as a cross check on the questionnaire findings, as interview questions were taken directly from the questionnaire. Beyond this, interview data are not presented in the results. Questionnaire reliability was de- termined by using the test-retest proce- dure. The test and retest, separated by one week, were administered to a class of thirty upper division undergradu- ates. Analysis of the data using the Spearman Rank Order Correlation yielded a reliability coefficient of .897. Interscore reliability, which is the per- centage of coincidental item scoring by different scorers, was .910. The question- naire, therefore, is reliable over time and can be scored consistently by inde- pendent scorers. Validity was determined by investigat- ing contrasted groups. Contrasted groups were used because it was expect- ed that perceptions between librarians and student nonusers would be quite different. The researchers tested and found that there was indeed a differ- ence. The Mann-Whitney U Test, which shows whether two independent groups were drawn from the same population, was used. The questionnaire was given to ten university students who used the library less than two hours per week and to ten university librarians selected by a table of random numbers. Total scores were found to have a critical value of U = 10. Critical values of U for a one-tailed test are at a = .001. Therefore, the questionnaire distinguished between the two groups, where one would expect to find differences. This lends support to its ability to measure the characteristics which it was designed to measure. In addition, interview findings were correlated with _ questionnaire responses. 132 I College & Research Libraries • March 1977 Twenty students randomly selected from those who returned the question- naire were interviewed. Results are as follows for the Spearman Rank Order Correlation Coefficient: Students per- ceive librarians as service rather than teaching oriented (r2 = 81.9 percent), students believe that librarians do less than they really do in terms of duties ( r2 = 91.3 percent.), and students per- ceive the role of librarians, clerical, or stu- dent assistants as being the same ( r2 = 86.5 percent). The statistics indicate an extremely high correlation and again confirm the quality of the survey instru- ment. Mter testing and determination that it was of acceptable quality, question- naires were mailed to the sample in March 1975 and accompanied with stamped self-addressed envelopes. One week later, students received postcards reminding them to return question- naires. RESULTS Of the questionnaires mailed 51.7 percent ( 362) were returned. Chi square analysis shows that distributions under each class level are significantly differ- ent. Phi analysis indicates age and class level do not vary systemically together. Thus, in this return sample, some vari- able other than age was responsible for class assignment. This result is contra- dictory to what might be expected, and possibly the reason is that the sample was based on a proportionate percentage in each class and that juniors and se- niors responded better than lower divi- sion undergraduates. Data represent the views of users and nonusers, and they were found to have responded similarly. Twenty students were randomly selected from those who did not return questionnaires and twen- ty from those who did. They were inter- viewed, and the Mann-Whitney U Test was used to determine whether they were drawn from the same population. Results indicate that there is no signifi- cant difference between the perceptions of both groups as to roles ( p > .05), du- ties (p > .05), and teaching-service orientation ( p > .05). Another forty of those not returning questionnaires were randomly selected and telephoned as to their reasons for not participating. They stressed that, as they did not use the library, librarians would neither be interested in their comments nor find them beneficial. These students lacked time to complete questionnaires because they held full- time or part-time jobs while attending the university. Nonusers who returned question- naires were careful to point out their lack of need for the library but were still willing, in many cases, to express their opinions. One hundred and thirty- seven of the respondents ( 37.8 percent) answered the final item on the question- naire, which invited additional com- ments. Of these seventy-seven ( 56.2 percent) were users, and sixty ( 43.8 per- cent) either did not use the library or used it for social, study-hall, or reserve reading purposes. Definition of Librarians Librarians were generally defined in terms of a reference function. As li- brarians are familiar with the library and its resources, they can assist students in finding needed sources. Only thirteen ( 3.6 percent) of the responses suggested a cataloging and organizational func- tion and ten ( 2.8 percent) an acquisi- tion role. Librarians were also viewed as library administrators and as individ- uals who work in a library. More often than not the librarian is cctrained" or .08). Mann-Whitney analy- sis indicated that sex was significant for teaching -service orientation ( p.0026). The difference in statistical accounts is probably explained by the fact that these scales assessed data from different perspectives; one considered an ordinal scale and the other an interval/ ratio scale. Definitely, the unexpected and un- explained variable of sex merits further analysis. Analysis of Individual Questions by Users-Nonusers Questionnaires for fifty library users (library used at least two hours per week and primarily for research) and fifty nonusers (either not using the li- brary or using it for social, study-hall, or reserve reading purposes) were ran- domly selected and individual questions compared by chi square to determine whether perceptions differed. Users and nonusers responded in the same way for all considerations except whether librar- ians were regarded as performing a teaching function ( p < .05), and whether students ask queries in the pro- fessional language of a subject field (p < .05). DISCUSSION The Three Research Questions Under Study Based on the results of the study, stu- · dents generally confuse the functions and qualifications of library staff and perceive librarians as service oriented and as having less variety of duties than they actually have. The One and Two Way Analysis of Variance considered 136 I College & Research Libraries • March 1977 primarily status factors relating to the educational role and teaching activities of librarians. It may be hypothesized that if the factors of roles, duties, and teaching-service orientation are related to status, then librarians are low status people. Perhaps librarians are not considered as teachers unless they are engaged in classroom activities or the verbal inter- change in the reference room involves research related queries. Future studies need to probe student definitions of teaching as this study shows contradic- tory impressions. Many students stated that librarians had not played an im- portant role in their college education and were not involved in an educational role. Yet some of these same students did consider the kind of activity refer- ence librarians perform as teaching. Users and nonusers do not differ in their understanding of librarianship, the nature of librarians' duties, educa- tional background, and required litera- ture search skills. They are interested in obtaining the answer to their queries and also in having librarians educate them to find information for them- selves. Students have difficulty in differentiat- ing among library staff as to roles. A p- parently as long as their needs are met, they are indifferent as to whether the person is actually a librarian. The vagueness· of many replies underscores the lack of awareness of the roles and duties of librarians. On questions such as librarians' having subject specialties ( 59.3 percent, yes; 20.8 percent, no; 19.9 percent, unsure), students probably have insufficient insight to actually know and are guessing. Respondents have admitted that they had not previ- ously thought about librarians in the context of the questions asked. Outreach Programs and Library Services While this study showed diffocences between those who did and did not par- ticipate in library lectures, even those who did were not highly sophisticated. Students are, to a great extent, unaware of educational requirements and capa- bilities of librarians as well as of tradi- tional reference services and innovative outreach programs designed to further the role of librarians in the educational process. The effectiveness of publicity for such services and programs is ques- tionable when promotion and advertise- ment are not making an impact on many full-time students. Alternatives and reinforcements merit examination and should incorporate insights from subject areas such as business adminis- tration, advertising, and marketing. At the same time, public service li- brarians need expertise in the areas of psychology, sociology, education, inter- personal relations, and non-verbal com- munication. Programs not confined to small group instruction should be de- vised to reach large numbers of poten- tial users, alter misperceptions, increase student/ librarian contact, and promote a learning environment. Acquiring the necessary expertise for these services and programs is not the sole responsibil- ity of individual librarians or library programs. Input, direction, and research should also come from library schools and professional library organizations, state, regional, and national. The or- ganizations should be actively involved in promotional and educational tech- niques to raise the level of awareness in library users, current and potential. Recognition of Professional Librarians Many students, not just nonusers, do not fully utilize the services, knowledge, and expertise provided by librarians. Students explained their reasons for this in various ways. .One major com- plaint was that librarians are unavail- able or unrecognizable, partially due to lack of identification through use of name tags or plates, and partially be- cause librarians are often alienated from the student populace by adherence to administrative duties and little close contact with students except at the ref- erence desk. Many students have become acclimated not to expect librarians to be available. Some felt that only stu- dents staff service desks, and many thought that anyone staffing a desk is a librarian. Librarians need to emphasize their subject expertise and the reasons why students should differentiate among li- brary staff. Service desks staffed by pro- fessionals should be clearly marked and apparent. Outreach programs should promote and instruct about not only li- brary collections and research methodol- ogies but also the role and abilities of librarians as educators. Interpersonal Relations with Students Research is needed to discover wheth- er, and how much, interpersonal com- munication between librarian and student is affected by student percep- tions. The objective is to make students willing to approach librarians, verbalize their needs, and return for further as- sistance when necessary. Many students wanted librarians available both at a central desk and also in other areas of the library to give as- sistance at point of need. They usually wanted assistance on an individual basis and thought a desk hindered this. Con- trary to replies ( 70.1 percent, never; 20.1 percent, sometimes), the reference desk was perceived as a barrier. To save time and minimize frustrations, the librari- an, it was felt, should leave the desk to assist. In this way the librarian is seen to exhibit more genuine interest, is more attentive to student needs, and is better able to more effectively demonstrate the use of tools. Questions are then regard- ed with importance rather than annoy- ance. The librarian not seated at a desk is less likely to be distracted. As one stu- Student Perceptions I 137 dent commented, cWhen sitting behind a desk the librarian is often distracted by the phone, other parties, and assorted items on the desk, in addition to his or her own personal work.'' Statements per- taining to the unwillingness to disturb or bother a busy librarian were numer- ous. A common complaint was: "I hate to feel I'm putting someone out if that person is sitting behind a desk and is obviously busy." Preoccupied, rude, inconsiderate, and discourteous service were common com- plaints causing resentment toward those working in libraries. Most of these were directed at personnel who did not voluntarily leave the desk to assist. Stu- dents preferred informality and atten- tiveness, wanted the librarian's complete attention so that their request would be fully understood and the research sources adequately explained, did not want to appear ccstupid" or "dumb" in front of others, and were often em- barrassed by their ignorance or lack of knowledge about the library. Responses, therefore, do suggest that many students desire closer personal contact and dis- like it if the librarian is reluctant to leave a service desk for assistance. I mage of the Preoccupied Librarian All activities and work carried out at the reference desk that might distract the librarian from giving full attention to reference requests or keep the patron from requesting assistance need exam- ination and modification. As Swope and Katzer suggest, Library administrators must recognize the necessity for circulating the library staff among users. A librarian cannot afford to be chained to a reference or information desk. If he is required to file a certain number of catalog cards, prepare book orders, or check invoices while manning the desk, he will never be able to change the image of the preoccupied librarian. s This image of the preoccupied librarian 138 I College & Research Libraries • March 1977 is counter to the purpose of reference service and instructional outreach pro- grams. The objective is to encourage, not discourage, students to seek profes- sional assistance. Professional librarians should be available to receive and en- courage in-depth reference questions. When clerical and student assistants are given simple reference requests, every precaution should be taken so that they do not further damage the image of academic librarianship, convert users into nonusers, or inhibit the willingness of users to seek assistance. Courteous or Discourteous Service Responses indicated that service desk personnel, including those at the refer- ence desk, may belittle and intimidate users. This is especially true of a stu- dent asking for assistance a second time from the same individual. It seems that library personnel reinforce a self-image of inadequacy or ignorance. Students appreciate being encouraged to return for further assistance if needed. If the librarian periodically checks on students to see if they require further assistance perhaps those individuals will not be hesitant to approach a service desk the next time. Generally students assumed that all reference assistance given is either good or bad depending on the past assistance they have received. For example, if a student was treated discourteously once, that student either assumes that every- one is treated in such a manner or completely avoids the offending staff member. But if given competent, extensive ser- vice by a friendly, polite librarian, the student assumes that this is a standard policy. Even though a majority of stu- dents felt that reference service was competent and librarians friendly and helpful, the few who have had bad ex- periences project such experiences, and the reflection is adverse to the image that librarians want to convey. It is in- teresting to note that students suggested certain traits which they appreciated in a librarian. These included, among oth- ers, friendliness and politeness. The question of courtesy or discour- tesy warrants further research. What is considered discourtesy, and why, needs determination. In some cases, frustration might be caused by the fact that librar- ians, for various reasons, are unwilling to retrieve a specific book or information or that students are directed to look up a call number or check the card catalog for a specific book. Awareness of student perceptions of librarians should affect scheduling dur- ing peak time periods, location of pro- fessional personnel at strategic service points, functions performed by librari- ans staffing service desks, and interper- sonal relations. Librarians must try to prevent misunderstandings from aris- ing. Several students, for example, com- mented: "What few times I have sought assistance and did locate someone, that person knew less about the library than l-and I know very little." QuALIFICATIONS OF THE STUDY As this university is primarily under- graduate oriented, no attempts were made to systemically discern the percep- tions of graduate or special students. Generalizations cannot be made about students in this or other states or, for that matter, on this campus beyond the categories already ·presented. The re- searchers cannot generalize about part- time students. Still this study makes a beginning in an area in need of research and illustrates the value of sur- vey instruments being tested for reli- ability and validity. Future studies can work with a set of hypotheses, ascertain why students hold particular percep- tions or impressions, and experiment with methods to increase return rates. The status factors, discussed above in the section on results, lack statistical documentation, as factor analysis was not applied. However, results of the analysis of variance demonstrate that the response pattern among the three re- search questions did not differ signifi- cantly and, therefore, lends support to their grouping as a single factor defin- ing status. Hopefully, the researchers have taken necessary precautions to insure that their findings did not come from a self- selected group. An initial impression might be that the survey results repre- sent a biased sample in that library users were more likely to return question- naires. However, fifty-four ( 14.9 per- Student Perceptions I 139 cent) returned questionnaires came from students who did not use the li- brary at all. There were sixty-seven re- sponses ( 18.5 percent) from students who used the library only for social, study-hall, and reserve reading purposes. One reason for participation of these students might be that they think it is important for librarians to do research on libraries and their users. Future studies must further persuade nonusers that although they are not currently utilizing the library, librarians still benefit from their comments. REFERENCES 1. Lawrence E. Leonard, Joan M. Maier, and Richard M. Dougherty, "Library User Atti- tude Survey,'' Centralized Book Processing (Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow, 1969), p.211- 43. Samuel H. Cameron and Karlyn W. Messinger, "Face the Faculty: Prevalent At- titudes Regarding Librarian-Faculty Rela- tionships," Pennsylvania Library Association Bulletin 30:23-26 (March 1975) and 30:48- 51 (May 1975). 2. Maurice B. Line, .. Student Attitudes to the University Library: A Survey at Southamp- ton University," Journal of Documentation 19:100-17 (Sept. 1963). 3. Connie F. Evrand and Charles C. Wadding- ton, "The Undergraduate Survey: Its Role in Changing Patterns of Reference Service," Drexel Library Quarterly 7:351-56 (July- Oct. 1971). 4. Mary Jane Swope and Jeffrey Katzer, "The Silent Majority: Why Don't They Ask Ques- tions?" RQ 12:161-66 (Winter 1972). 5. John Lubans, Jr., "A Survey of the Non- Users of a Technological University Li- brary," in International Association of Technological University Libraries, Educat- ing the Library User; Proceedings of the Fourth Triennial Meeting, 1970, edited by C. M. Lincoln ( Loughborough: Laugh- borough Univ. of Technology Library, 1970), p.J--4. 6. A bibliography based on a literature search has been prepared by the authors and can be supplied on request. 7. Line, "Student Attitudes to the University Library," p.116-17. 8. Swope and Katzer, "The Silent Majority: Why Don't They Ask Questions?'' p.164-65.