College and Research Libraries Research Notes CONTENTS COLLEGE & RESEARCH LIBRARIES julia F. Baldwin and RobertS. Rudolph 78 Improving Student Recall of Library Information from Slide/Tape Programs ]anell Rudolph and Kit Byunn 80 Academic Library Newspaper Collections: Developing Policy JULIA F. BALDWIN AND ROBERTS. RUDOLPH Improving Student Recall of Library Information From Slide/Tape Programs For library instruction, slide/tape pro- grams offer several advantages. They are flexible, lending themselves to easy updating of information and correction of errors. They are suitable for point-of-use applications or for showing to class-size audiences. It is possi- ble to get close-up shots of pages, individual index entries, and catalog cards as well as on-site shots and pictures of graphics. In ad- dition, slide/tape programs are relatively simple to make, at least in comparison to vid- eotape. The film "crew" can be a single per- son, thus minimizing problems of scheduling the filming and of disrupting normal library operations. The narrator does not have to memorize the script or use specially prepared prompter cards. This simplicity makes creat- ing a slide/tape program relatively inexpen- sive. However, as an instructional tool, the slide/tape program has the drawback of be- ing an inherently static medium. The pic- tures do not move. There is no eye contact with the narrator. In a slide/tape setup, the presentation advances according to a prede- termined pace, irrespective of the needs of particular audiences. In classroom showings, the lights are often turned off. As a result, Julia F. Baldwin is documents librarian, and Ro- bertS. Rudolph is professor of English, the Univer- sity of Toledo, Toledo, Ohio. 78 I students' attention may wander and impor- tant points may not get across. This article offers librarians a technique that improves the effectiveness of the slide/ tape program as an instructional tool. The technique involves a kind of programmed in- struction in which selected material is period- ically reviewed in question-and-answer slides. Our findings from a year-long study demonstrate conclusively that this kind of in- teractive feature does improve immediate re- call of library information. 1 TEST SAMPLE Our findings are based on a sample of 569 students enrolled in a business-report-writing course during the 1978-79 academic year. An introduction to the library is a regular part of the course since students are required to write a library research paper. Our slide/tape pro- gram is designed to provide this introduction. To assure a random sample, we used odd and even section numbers as a basis for plac- ing students in the experimental (odd- numbered sections) or the control (even- numbered sections) group. This odd/even grouping eliminated bias due to variations in student alertness during different times of day since sections of the course are scheduled by odd/even pairs at the same hour but on different days. Differences in motivation and maturity between night- and day-school sec- tions were also thereby avoided. Bias due to differences in teachers' abilities was elimi- nated by having teachers exclude all library instruction from the course until students were able to see the slide/tape presentation. This sampling procedure produced 564 scorable answer sheets (268 in the experimen- tal group and 296 in the control group). TESTING PROCEDURE Two versions of the presentation were cre- ated for the purpose of testing the effective- ness of the interactive feature. The experi- mental group (called QIA in table 1 below) saw a version containing 12 additional slides (for a total of 102) and appropriate accompa- nying script raising and then answering ques- tions about important bits of information. The question/ answer feature was introduced at four important places- after presentations on books, periodicals, microfilm holdings, and government documents. Each question/ answer period contained two or three ques- tions. Each question or pair of questions was followed by an average 2.6-second pause and then slides and audio giving the answers. A total of ten questions and their answers were given. The control group (called No QIA in table 1) saw a version of the presentation that lacked the interactive feature. Since we were interested in the effect of this interactive feature on immediate recall, testing was done immediately after the pre- sentation was seen. The testing was prefaced by a set of standardized instructions. Eight of the fourteen questions covered material in- cluded in the interactive feature. FINDINGS To determine the effectiveness of the inter- active feature on improving immediate recall of library information, we ran three t-tests on student scores: one (A in table 1) on the scores for all questions; one (Bin table 1) on scores for questions about just those points covered by the interactive feature; one (C in table 1) on scores for questions about points not in- cluded in the interactive feature. Table 1 presents the results of these three t-tests. The favorable impact of the interactive feature on immediate recall is dramatized by comparing the results oft-tests Band C. The t-test C value of 1.35 shows no significant difference between the scores of both groups Research Notes I 79 TABLE 1 CaMPARA TIVE RESuLTS OF T-TESTS t-testA t-testB t-test C QIA Group• N 268 268 268 Mean 9.91 6.26 2.74 S.D. 2.57 1.62 1.22 No QIA Groupl N 296 296 296 Mean 8.42 5.14 2.61 S.D. 2.77 1.79 1.20 t-test value 6.60** 7.83** 1.35 {df = 562} •QfA Group's slide/tape presentation contained the interactive feature . tNo QIA Group's slide/tape presentation lacked the interactive feature. ••p>.05 for questions on material not covered by the interactive feature. The t-test B value of 7 .83, on the other hand, shows that for questions on material included in the interactive fea- ture, the experimental group's recall was far superior to the control group's. This finding would be statistically significant even at the .0005 level of probability (critical value- 3.29). CoNcLusioNs This study shows that material reviewed in an interactive feature improves immediate recall of library information presented in a slide/tape program. Two factors may ac- count for this result: the greater emphasis given to those details included in the interac- tive feature; and the improved attentiveness produced by questioning students about ma- terial just presented. The positive results of the study and its fairly narrow scope invite further research on the impact of the interactive feature. Our program highlights only ten details from an eighteen-minute presentation. Would our results have been altered if, given the same test, the experimental group had been ex- posed to a higher number of question and answer slides? Intuition suggests that there must be a point at which the addition of fur- ther question-and-answer slides becomes counterproductive. But as yet we do not know when that point is reached. Another unanswered question concerns the durability of the effect. Does the use of an interactive feature assure better retention of learning over several weeks?