Research Article
Swimming Upstream in the
Academic Library: Exploring Faculty Needs for Library Streaming Media
Collections
Elsa Loftis
Humanities and Acquisitions
Librarian, Assistant Professor
Portland State University
Portland, Oregon, United States
of America
Email: eloftis@pdx.edu
Carly Lamphere
Science Librarian
Reed College
Portland, Oregon, United States
of America
Email: lampherec@reed.edu
Received: 2 Feb. 2023 Accepted: 23 Aug. 2023
2023 Loftis and Lamphere. This is an Open Access article
distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons‐Attribution‐Noncommercial‐Share Alike License 4.0
International (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial
purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the
same or similar license to this one.
DOI: 10.18438/eblip30317
Abstract
Objective
- To compare Portland State University’s (PSU) local
experience of using streaming media to national and international trends identified
in a large qualitative study by Ithaka S+R. This comparison will help
librarians better understand if the PSU Library is meeting the needs of faculty
with its streaming media collection through a series of faculty interviews.
Methods
and Intervention - Two librarians from PSU participated in a large,
collaborative, two-part study conducted by Ithaka S+R in 2022, with 23 other
academic institutions in the United States, Canada, and Germany As part of this
study, the authors conducted a series of interviews with faculty from PSU’s
Social Work and Film Studies departments to gather qualitative data about their
use, expectations, and priorities relating to streaming media in their
teaching. Ithaka S+R provided guided interview questions, and librarians at PSU
conducted interviews with departmental faculty. Local interview responses were
compared to the interviews from the other 23 institutions.
Results
- PSU Library had a higher rate of faculty
satisfaction than in the larger survey. Discussions raised concerns around
accessibility of content, which was novel to PSU, and did not meaningfully
emerge in the broader study. Local findings did line up with broader trends in
the form of concerns about cost, discoverability, and lack of diverse
content.
Conclusions - The data collected by Ithaka S+R’s survey, which was the first
part of their two-part study, is useful as it highlights the trends and
attitudes of the greater academic library community. However, the second
portion of the study’s guided interviews with campus faculty reinforced the
importance of accessibility, the Library’s provision of resources, and the
relationships between subject liaisons and departmental instructors. It
emphasized that Portland State University’s Library has built a good foundation
with faculty related to this area but has not been able to provide for every
streaming instructional need. Reasons for this include limited acquisitions
budgets, constraints of staff time, and market factors.
Introduction
In 2021 and 2022, two librarians from Portland State’s University’s Millar
Library participated in a study facilitated by Ithaka S+R “Making Streaming
Media Sustainable for Academic Libraries” to identify emerging streaming media
trends and needs on academic campuses. Portland State University (PSU) is a
public urban university in Oregon, with approximately 23,000 enrolled students,
and is an R2 Doctoral University with 201 degree programs. PSU employs 1,690
research and instructional faculty (Portland State University, 2022). Ithaka
S+R is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to helping academic and cultural
communities navigate issues in higher education. Their research projects are
designed to “generate action-oriented research for institutional
decision-making and act as a hub to promote and guide collaboration across the
communities we serve” (Ithaka S+R, 2022).
Ithaka S+R’s
project consisted of two phases focused on making streaming media more
sustainable for academic libraries. The first phase was a U.S. and Canada-wide
survey sent to 1,493 individuals by invitation from Ithaka S+R. This survey
assessed and evaluated the competitive landscape of streaming media licensing
for libraries. The results of that survey were shared with the investigators
from the 24 participating libraries at the cohort-wide meeting in Fall 2021,
and then published widely (Cooper et al., 2022).
Phase two of the
research project was a series of interviews conducted by librarians from the 24
college campuses. This article focuses on interview findings from Portland
State University’s faculty. Two investigators from PSU’s Millar Library
conducted 10 interviews with faculty in the Film Studies and Social Work
departments in the Winter/Spring of 2022.
Ithaka S+R’s collaborative research project was an opportunity to survey
faculty at PSU about streaming media preferences in instruction to better
understand how the Library was meeting service and support needs. In turn, PSU
also contributed to developing strategies for libraries as they continue to
navigate the complex landscape of streaming media in higher education. Broadly,
the survey reinforced the preliminary assumption that streaming media is
increasingly important in academic library collections, both before and during
the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey feedback also revealed how faculty across
different institutions incorporated streaming media into instruction. Reviewing
PSU faculty’s interviews provided the Library with information regarding how to
tailor outreach and other services to better assist faculty and students
accessing streaming media in their courses.
PSU’s Library was awarded the ReImagine PSU Grant to participate in the
Ithaka S+R project. The grant emerged as an effort to transform campus services
to better serve students during a time of pandemic transition. Streaming
services in instruction and access during the pandemic continues to be an
equity issue, as many students do not have reliable high-speed internet or the
devices required to access content in this way. Learning more about the needs
of our faculty and students will inform the Library on how to better meet those
challenges.
Literature Review
Streaming media usage has risen on campuses nationwide, as documented in
recent library literature and demonstrated on PSU’s campus (Wang & Loftis,
2020). More recently, according to a survey by Tanasse (2021), 96.7% of
responding libraries offer streaming media. Academic libraries grew accustomed
to incorporating streaming films into their selection, acquisition, cataloging,
and budgetary workflows for several years, albeit with variations in a climate
of consistent change.
During the public health crisis of COVID-19, many libraries restricted
access to physical collections and universities rapidly shifted toward remote
learning where possible (Grove, 2021). This exacerbated the already growing
demand for the streaming format that outpaced library acquisitions budgets
(Lear, 2022). Regardless of whether libraries can afford continued subscription
and license renewals indefinitely, it became clear that a “preference” for
streaming media has evolved into “necessity,” based on trends in media
consumption (Lear, 2022), as well as instructors’ pedagogical aims and
instructional realities. In addition to the growth of online courses, reasons
for the new dominance of streaming include use of film to accommodate multiple
learning styles, instructors adopting “flipped classroom models,” and physical
media players becoming increasingly obsolete (Adams & Holland, 2017).
In addition to budgetary hardships and workflow complications for
libraries, students experience a variety of difficulties with accessing and
utilizing streaming media. COVID-19 further underscored the problems of the
digital divide in the United States, which is particularly significant for
rural residents who struggle with readily available speedy internet service
that can keep pace with these resources (Lai & Widmar, 2020). Other
variables for student access depend upon video quality, presence or absence of
subtitles, closed captions, or audio description (Peacock & Vecchione,
2019).
In addition to
addressing the digital divide exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, librarians
and faculty members recognize the importance of developing and expanding their
accessibility standards for streaming media collections. Some libraries have
begun to adopt policies of Universal Design for Learning to increase digital
equity and inclusion in collection access. This ranges from lending Wi-Fi
hotspots, expanding library remote services, and most importantly, purchasing
library materials that are accessible for all users (Frank et al., 2021). While
there are outlined recommendations for these practices from the National
Digital Inclusion Alliance (NDIA), there are few recommendations for streaming
media specifically beyond encouraging libraries to ensure streaming titles are
closed captioned and offer transcripts. A last recommendation is relying on
campus/institution accessibility services to help caption and make other media
accessible when licensed content does not include closed captions or transcripts
(Frank et al., 2021).
It can be
challenging to procure films that have accessibility features if they are not
available on the market. The authors
otherwise found a paucity of studies regarding specific streaming accessibility
best practices, a gap which should be further explored in library literature.
In addition to
exploring more specific accessibility needs for streaming media, libraries also
noted the importance of surveying their faculty and students when making
streaming media collection decisions. There have been several focus group
research studies in recent years to assess and inform librarians making
streaming media collection decisions such as developing collection decision
workflows (VanUllen et al., 2018) and usability preferences (Hill &
Ingram-Monteiro, 2021). Once assessed, libraries strive to make collection
decisions that inform their unique user populations and preferences for
streaming media and share these focus group/survey models for future research.
In a study by Beisler et al. (2019) it is evident that students express a need
for “streaming content that was credible and appropriate for academic
purposes,” while faculty generally are concerned with content being
discoverable, and reliable. While strides towards best practices have been made
for accessibility, there are still gaps in universal best practices to collect
this format. In the meantime, libraries must create boutique policies and
approaches to try to satisfy the needs of their unique user populations.
In 2021, Ithaka S+R launched a survey of academic libraries and released
its report in June of 2022, which reinforced the importance of streaming media
in library collections. A total of 96% of librarians surveyed said the “impact
on instruction is the number one factor shaping library decision making in
purchasing and renewing streaming licenses” above even cost considerations.
Another notable finding from the survey is that academic institutions were
already heading this direction before the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the
immediate need for streaming media (Cooper et al., 2022). The study goes on to
reveal that nearly half of the librarians surveyed (42%) strongly agree that
demand for streaming media has increased since March of 2020, yet only 23% of
librarians at doctoral institutions strongly agree that their library’s
strategy around streaming media licensing has changed (2022). In summary, while
costs and demand rise, the collective profession has not made a meaningful
response in terms of reimagining how we select and acquire this format.
Methodology
Prior to conducting the interviews with faculty, both investigators
participated in two training sessions with staff from Ithaka S+R and the other
project participants. The training consisted of sharing the interview materials
such as the script (Appendix A) with questions and tips on how to conduct a
research interview, and built-in time to practice with other participants. The
investigators submitted paperwork for IRB approval for participation in the
project and were granted Human Research Protection Program (HRPP) Exemption
prior to the faculty interviews.
The
investigators chose to select faculty from Film Studies and Social Work
departments due to their consistent need for streaming services in their
instruction. A total of 10 faculty participants were recruited, five from each
department. An initial call for volunteers was sent to the departments via
email, and the librarians selected faculty that they knew were frequent
requestors for media content. Of the faculty approached, there was a 90%
acceptance rate to participate in the interviews. Of these, 50% had indefinite
tenure at the institution, while the remaining participants were either at the
rank of assistant professor, adjunct faculty, or at the rank of instructor. The
anonymity of the conversations enabled the faculty to be candid in their
remarks, and the researchers believe that this is why adjunct faculty did not
appreciably respond much differently than full professors, for example. Future
studies should include other disciplines, but the librarians felt that Social
Work and Film Studies were excellent choices due to their high use of streaming
content, and their similarities and differences incorporating streaming media
into their instruction.
Each interview
was conducted and recorded over Zoom with auto transcription enabled to provide
a starting point for packaging the final transcript sent to Ithaka S+R in the
Spring of 2022 for analysis and inclusion in their final report. Investigators
reviewed the auto-generated transcript to make any necessary corrections, and
de-identified the faculty to ensure anonymity in the broader study. Researchers
at Ithaka S+R did the final coding and analysis as they compiled interviews
from all 24 participating academic institutions (MacDougall & Ruediger,
2023).
PSU’s interviews were reviewed by the librarians and put into a spreadsheet
for general comparative analysis (Appendix B). This provided faculty reactions
at a glance, which enabled easier comparison between PSU’s experience and the
findings from the larger collected survey, which included 244 total interviews
from faculty in a wide range of disciplines.
Results
The interviews
illustrate how PSU’s faculty view and utilize streaming media and library
services in their teaching practice. Faculty were able to express their
frustration and satisfaction with the current model of streaming services at
Millar Library. Some feedback varied between disciplines, and yet there were
also commonalities across both Social Work and Film Departments.
Social Work
faculty utilized streaming media in their instruction as supplemental material,
a practical demonstration tool for concepts introduced in their courses, and as
instruction materials for clinical practice courses. Film faculty utilize
streaming content as their base text for analysis and demonstrate properly
executed technical production skills. Faculty in both disciplines taught in
different environments: online, hybrid, and in person.
The themes from
the Portland State University interviews are discussed below and are separated
into the following sections: Accessibility Challenges, Discovery, and Cost
Containment. The valuable insight they offered also underscores the importance
of faculty/librarian relationships, which was also spoken about in many
interviews.
Accessibility Challenges
One of the most
surprising insights offered during the faculty interviews was a heightened
awareness of student accessibility. This concern was more pronounced among the
PSU faculty in comparison with the broader national study from other
participating institutions, where these concerns were not meaningfully
explored. Accessibility is often conflated with discoverability and whether a
film ‘can be accessed’, not specific concerns around usability. While generally
satisfied with captioning services, faculty are interested in reimagining the
current model of captioning services within the Disability Resources Center
(DRC) department at PSU. Faculty want captioning as a basic feature of
streaming media content and not only for students who have formal disability
accommodations. Many students who do not formally meet the requirements for
submitting accessibility requests still benefit from captions due to a variety
of different learning styles. As one
faculty member expressed: “I think it addresses a lot of learning styles when
you have captioning and it shouldn’t be where we have to have a person that has
to get an accommodation that you know, maybe 50% of a class would benefit from,
but they don’t have accommodations. It's just that it works better to have the
audio and the captioning at the same time.” Faculty expressed how using
streaming services helped to support different learning styles and increased
focus on accessibility challenges would naturally follow suit. The Library has
built this concern into all of its purchasing, but gaps occur when faculty use
streaming media that is not licensed by the Library.
Some faculty caption media themselves because they cannot rely on the auto
captioning offered by some platforms. This includes media clips created by
faculty members themselves to support instruction: One faculty member stated:
“Sometimes it’ll take me like 45 minutes to make two small clips…so you finally
have these two clips. It’s like 10 minutes of content you share and then you
find out ‘oh this doesn’t need to be captioned because it’s a foreign film it’s
subtitled’ and I’m like ‘Oh, but it's not like captioned-captioned.’” It is a
time-intensive endeavor for faculty members already stretched thin with
teaching and research.
Due to the
number of streaming platforms, it is common to encounter a variety of delivery
options. A film might be viewed on a vendor platform, emailed in the form of an
mp4 file to host on the Library’s local platform, or mailed as a DVD that staff
are to digitize. This can lead to complications in workflow for Acquisitions
and Cataloging staff, but the important disparity is the lack of uniformity in
accessibility options.
Some vendors
consistently offer closed captioning and transcripts with their films. Some
vendors supply the Library with different versions of the film with audio
descriptions for visually impaired viewers, but this is rare. Non-English
dialog is sometimes subtitled, but not always, and the variety of available
languages of subtitle options is limited. The Library is often limited by what
is available since any given film is commonly only available for institutional
purchase by one vendor. As noted by Beisler et al. (2019), captions are a great
pedagogical value to faculty for these reasons, as well as supplementing poor
audio quality, and for students who might be viewing films in loud
environments.
Ultimately, when discussing whether a streaming film
is ‘accessible’ the conversation is normally about whether closed captions are
provided. This overlooks audio description services that assist learners with
visual impairments, which is a rarity on the market, and therefore not often library
provided. Another aspect of accessibility is whether transcripts are provided,
which again varies by vendor. Also of concern is the relative accessibility of
the hosting site where viewers may be searching for and accessing films,
libraries should ensure that they are user friendly, able to be read by a
screen reader, and so forth.
The fact that the Library is sometimes pressed to
refer students and researchers to outside streaming services (commercial, open
web) means that it is not always able to assess or control the accessibility
standards of the content students consume. The Library only controls its own
provisions, in compliance with the University’s Standard for Accessible Digital
Procurement, (Portland State University, 2023), ensuring acceptable
accessibility levels. Ultimately, the Library’s ability to provide quality resources
that are accessible and desirable to faculty and students hinges on whether our
community is indeed utilizing Library resources. When instructors and students
are compelled to use sources not provided by the Library, important
considerations such as these can potentially be unaddressed.
Discovery
PSU faculty’s interview responses echoed that of
faculty at the other 23 institutions represented in the Ithaka S+R study.
Issues around discoverability were raised, as busy faculty often use the open
web to find films before going to the Library catalog or databases. The
findings from Ithaka suggest that YouTube is the most common source of
streaming films utilized by faculty. PSU’s faculty disputed this to some
extent, with 50% of surveyed faculty naming YouTube or Google specifically when
asked where they search for content, whereas 80% cited the Library’s catalog or
subscription databases.
Many faculty in
the national study described library catalogs and databases as “confusing”,
“unreliable”, and “impossible to navigate”. The Ithaka report conveys “Personal
connections with librarians were fundamental to faculty satisfaction with
library resources” (MacDougall & Ruediger, 2023). This was also the case
with PSU’s faculty, who consulted a combination of subject librarian, the
catalog, and alternative discovery routes to locate resources and help
facilitate access for their students. Throughout all interviews, the subject
librarian played a crucial role in helping navigate streaming media access and
discovery. On PSU’s campus, a study by Wang and Loftis (2020) was conducted to
determine how streaming media was discovered, and the results reinforce the
validity of that perception; faculty use the catalog, but also search other
vendor platforms, finding those discovery systems more intuitive. In support of
this, Beisler et al. (2019), state in their study that “Faculty expressed very
clearly that having content available is not enough; streaming video must be
easy to find and use and be reliable, or the content will not be used”.
Cost Containment
Ithaka’s study
revealed that keeping costs low for students is a major priority for
instructors. Local interviews also reinforced this, with 60% of interviewees
responding that students should not have to pay additional rental fees or
individual subscriptions for streaming films in courses. 40% of the faculty
stated that they would reluctantly require students to pay for content, but
none were pleased by the prospect. The interviewees who suggested that they
would require students to pay out of pocket for film rentals indicated a
ceiling of around $5 to $10 as the limit they would expect to burden students.
Keeping costs low for the Library and individual students was understood as a
necessity. This is reinforced in Dotson and Olivera’s 2020 case study about the
affordability of course materials in general, and how faculty often try to
mitigate students’ burdensome costs by increasingly using non-textual resources
such as streaming media and Open Educational Resources.
Streaming media
budgets have been a consistent concern on PSU’s campus for several years as
rising demand quickly outpaced the ability to contain costs. Strategies ranged
from using Patron Driven Acquisitions (PDA) models, exploring options via a
consortia subscription, and requesting individual titles from filmmakers, for
example. Despite the various methods of streaming acquisition types available,
a unified, cost-conscious strategy for the Library is strongly desired and
would benefit students and faculty.
Local Needs and Strategies
Information about streaming media appears in Portland State University Library General Collection Guidebook,
which acts as the Library’s outward-facing collection development policy (Emery
& Loftis, 2020). The Acquisitions Librarian created a companion Library
Guide dedicated to using films in courses, with information about the Library’s
decision-making process in licensing among other topics such as copyright,
public performance rights, and other relevant information. It also outlines
current criteria for purchasing single streaming licenses.
The interviews revealed that faculty have questions about how streaming
media is paid for and understand that it is expensive to supply and sustain.
Funding is not always the key issue, however. In the case of some feature
films, historical films, and foreign language content, institutional licensing
is not always available to libraries, and what is available in collections that
the Library subscribes to is not always satisfactory. The Library purchases
educational streaming licenses for popular feature films when affordable and
available. However, some content is simply not possible to license. These
difficulties are captured in an article by Lear (2022 p. 7) which discusses
barriers in filling streaming requests: “because vendors did not have streaming
rights in order to provide a license, or the distributor of the video did not
provide institutional streaming licenses. And, of course, requests from
streaming services such as Netflix and Hulu had a 0.0% success rate”. Similar
frustrations are felt in the PSU Library, where barriers such as these are
encountered with requested titles, with a similarly dismal success rate for
television series. In summary, there are varying levels of availability
depending on the titles being sought.
Conclusion
The results of the local faculty interviews were
analogous to key findings in the broader survey, notably: how streaming is
increasingly being used in instruction, keeping costs down for students as a
high priority, and that this media is being accessed both from within the
library and on commercial platforms in a patchwork.
That PSU faculty were aware of and concerned about
accessibility issues puts them ahead of the national trend in considering these
issues as central. The Library will play a role in advocacy in this area as we
demand improvements from our vendors in this realm.
Portland State University both reinforced and slightly
diverged from the collected findings in that Millar Library has generated
positive feedback in its ability to communicate and liaise with departmental
faculty. The broader survey likewise found that faculty were happy with
librarians and library services, however they indicated some general
dissatisfaction with library subscriptions and ability to deliver content. The
faculty answered a question that is crucial to the Library, which is “to what
extent are your current needs for incorporating video content in your courses
being adequately met?” Each PSU interviewee answered that, to some degree, they
felt well-supported. They each identified some frustrations, certainly, mostly
due to availability of certain titles, and the ephemeral nature of many
licenses, but it was largely positive and indicated goodwill towards the
library staff and the Library in general.
In the interviews, faculty were asked “what kinds of
resources or other support would help you identify and assess opportunities for
including video content in your classes?” The answers to this varied again by
department. Film studies faculty, nearly unanimously, answered that they would
like to know more about the Library budget, and what it could specifically
support. Social Work faculty, on the other hand, were far more interested in
learning about the Library’s existing resources and how best to discover and
utilize them. Faculty from Social Work suggested workshops for faculty to learn where best to find resources, and
they asked for more support from instructional designers with experience in
online learning. Social Work faculty also discussed the locally
created content that they or their students produced, either with
lecture-capture or social media clips, and wondered how those types of
streaming items could be housed and disseminated.
Ultimately, Portland State University’s Library built a
good foundation with faculty related to its provision of streaming media, but
more outreach can be done to offer support. Some factors are simply out of the
Library’s control, such as limited acquisitions budgets, constraints of staff
time, and market factors that render some content difficult to find and
license.
Streaming media is ubiquitous on Portland State
University’s campus just as it is on campuses across the globe. Libraries must
understand their faculty’s use, priorities, and barriers to making effective use
of this technology. As a trusted provider of streaming media to faculty and
students, a library ensures its relevance and stays true to its mission. If
faculty are not adequately provided for in this area, they are obliged to seek
content elsewhere, and this throws into question the quality, cost, copyright
compliance, and accessibility of the materials they use in class.
Author Contributions
Elsa Loftis and Carly Lamphere were equally
responsible for Investigation,
Data curation, Writing—Original draft, Writing—Review & editing
References
Adams, T. M., & Holland, C. C. (2018). Streaming media in an uncertain
legal environment: A model policy and best practices for academic libraries. Journal
of Copyright in Education & Librarianship, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.17161/jcel.v1i2.6550
Beisler, A., Bucy, R., & Medaille, A. (2019). Streaming video database
features: What do faculty and students really want? Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship, 31(1), 14–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/1941126X.2018.1562602
Cooper, D. M., Ruediger, D., & Skinner, M. (2022, June 9). Streaming
media licensing and purchasing practices at academic libraries: Survey results.
https://doi.org/10.18665/sr.316793
Dixon, J. A. (2017, September 7). The
Academic Mainstream | Streaming Video. Library Journal. Retrieved November
3, 2022, from https://www.libraryjournal.com/story/academic-mainstream-streaming-video
Dotson, D. S., & Olivera, A. (2020). Affordability of course
materials: Reactive and proactive measures at The Ohio State University
Libraries. Journal of Access Services, 17(3), 144–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/15367967.2020.1755674
Emery, J., & Loftis, E. (2020). Portland State University Library
General Collections Guidebook. https://pdx.pressbooks.pub/librarycollectionsguide/
farrelly, d (2016). Digital Video -
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily wading into the stream. Information
Today, Inc. Retrieved November 3, 2022, from https://www.infotoday.com/cilmag/nov16/farrelly--Digital-Video--Merrily-Merrily,-Merrily-Merrily-Wading-Into-the-Stream.shtml
farrelly, d., & Hutchison, J. (2014). ATG special report: Academic
library streaming video: Key findings from the national survey. Against the Grain, 26(5). https://doi.org/10.7771/2380-176X.6852
Grove, T. M. (2021). Academic library video services: Charting a post-COVID
course. Pennsylvania Libraries, 9(2). 101–110. https://doi.org/10.5195/palrap.2021.262
Hill, K., & Ingram-Monteiro, N. (2021). What patrons really want (in
their streaming media): Using focus groups to better understand emerging
collections use. The Serials Librarian, 80(1–4), 30–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2021.1873701
Ithaka S+R. (2023). About. https://sr.ithaka.org/about/
Keenan, T. M. (2018). Collaborating to improve access of video for all. Reference Services Review, 46(3), 414–424. https://doi.org/10.1108/RSR-03-2018-0028
Lai, J., & Widmar, N. O. (2021). Revisiting the digital divide in the
COVID ‐19 era. Applied Economic
Perspectives and Policy, 43(1),
458–464. https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13104
Lear, C. (2022). Controlled digital lending of video resources: Ensuring
the provision of streaming access to videos for pedagogical purposes in
academic libraries. Journal of Copyright
in Education and Librarianship, 5(1),
1-19. https://doi.org/10.17161/jcel.v5i1.14807
Loftis, E. (n.d.). Streaming Media
Overview. Retrieved November 9, 2022, from https://pdx.pressbooks.pub/librarycollectionsguide/chapter/streaming-media-overview/
Loftis, E., & Keyes, J. (2019).
Navigating the Sustainable Stream. Timberline Acquisitions Institute, Mt.
Hood, OR, United States.
MacDougall, R., & Ruediger, D. (2023). Teaching with Streaming
Video: Understanding Instructional Practices, Challenges, and Support Needs.
Ithaka S+R. https://doi.org/10.18665/sr.318216
Peacock, R., & Vecchione, A. (2020). Accessibility best practices,
procedures, and policies in Northwest United States academic libraries. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 46(1), 102095. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2019.102095
Portland State University. (2022). Facts: PSU By the
Numbers. Portland State University. Retrieved
November 8, 2022, from https://www.pdx.edu/portland-state-university-facts
Portland State University. (2023). Standard for Accessible Digital
Procurement. Portland State University. Retrieved November 8, 2022, from https://www.pdx.edu/technology/standard-accessible-digital-procurement
Rapold, N. (2014, February 14). Even good films may go to purgatory. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/16/movies/old-films-fall-into-public-domain-under-copyright-law.html
Rodgers, W. (2018). Buy, borrow, or steal? Film access for film studies
students. College & Research
Libraries, 79(4). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.4.568
Tanasse, G. (2021). Choice White
Paper: Implementing and Managing Streaming Media Services in Academic Libraries.
Choice360. http://choice360.org/ librarianship/whitepaper
VanUllen, M.K., Mock, E., & Rogers, E. (2018). Streaming video at
the University at Albany Libraries. Collection and Curation, 37(1), 26–29.
https://doi.org/10.1108/CC-01-2018-004
Wang, J., & Loftis, E. (2020). The library has infinite streaming
content, but are users infinitely content? The library catalog vs. vendor
platform discovery. Journal of Electronic
Resources Librarianship, 32(2),
71–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/1941126X.2020.1739818
Whitten, S. (2019). The death of the
DVD: Why sales dropped more than 86% in 13 years. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/08/the-death-of-the-dvd-why-sales-dropped-more-than-86percent-in-13-years.html
Appendix A
Semi-Structured Interview Guide
Semi-Structured
Interview Guide
Introduction
The ways that instructors can work with video content is evolving rapidly
with the ascendancy of streaming platforms, including those the library
licenses or are made freely available, over older formats like VHS and DVD.
Within this context, the library is conducting a study to understand the
possibilities for fostering instructional use of video content at our
university. I’d like to ask you questions about your current use, preferences,
and future plans for incorporating video content in your teaching, and
perspectives on the role that the library can play towards that.
Before we begin, I’d also like to acknowledge that the landscape of
available video content for educational use can be incredibly complicated,
especially in terms of copyright terms and pricing models. Those complexities
are not the focus of our conversation, but of course they cannot be divorced
from how we can use video content in our teaching. As we go please feel free to
request we pause at any point if you’d like further explanation or
clarification about video content in the context of the broader educational
media landscape or any other aspect of our discussion.
Current Practices
I’d like to begin by exploring how you teach with video content, including
VHS, DVD, and the content provided through streaming platforms.
- Do you currently use any video content in your
classes?
»
If yes, Briefly walk me
through what kinds of content you are using, and in what format/platform and
length?
▪
For which classes
do you use this content in?
▪
How does the
content contribute to the pedagogical goals of the class?
»
If no, why is that? [and
if they have never used video content in their classes, skip to question 3]
- How do you determine which video content you use in
your classes?
»
At what point in
developing a course do you identify opportunities to include this content? Do
you typically have very specific titles in mind?
»
Where do you
typically look for content?
»
To what extent do
delivery affordances determine whether you incorporate a specific video
offering into your course? (e.g., delivery platform, accessibility options)
»
Do you consult with
any other people to identify opportunities to incorporate video content into
your class offerings?
- To what extent are your current needs for
incorporating video content into your courses being adequately met?
»
Has the pandemic
changed your needs for incorporating video content into your courses in any
way?
»
Are there any
recent examples where you encountered barriers to incorporating specific
content into your class? [e.g., unavailability of specific titles, copyright
complexities]
»
If yes, What were the
barriers, and how did you work around them?
▪
Did you work with
any others to mitigate those barriers?
▪
Is there anything
else that could have been done to alleviate these challenges?
Next, I’d like to learn more about how your expectations are evolving
around how video content can be incorporated in your classes.
- Has the availability of streaming content changed
how you integrate video content into your teaching?
»
What do you see as
the greatest affordances of streaming content for your teaching?
»
Are they any
downsides to incorporating streaming content into your teaching?
»
Is there anything
that could be improved about streaming content offerings and/or functionalities
to maximize the opportunities to incorporate it into your teaching?
- Has the availability of streaming content changed
your expectations about how the costs of the video content should be
covered?
»
Are there any
instances where it is acceptable to require students to pay directly to access
video content for educational purposes?
»
How do your
expectations with video relate to your expectations for how other forms of
course content are paid for? E.g., textbooks, journal articles.
»
What are the top
factors that you think are important for determining the extent to which the
university covers the costs of video content? Which part(s) of the university
should cover those costs?
- What kinds of resources or other supports would help
you identify and assess opportunities for including video content into
your classes?
»
Would additional
information about pricing structures, available titles, or format types affect
your decision-making about what content to assign?
»
Ideally, how would
you like to get this information and from whom?
Wrapping Up
I’d like to finish up with a few questions that put your perspectives into
the broader context of your field and look towards future developments and
needs.
- How does your use of video content in your teaching
compare to the practices of your peers?
»
Are there any kinds
of video content or functionality that you would like to see more of?
»
Are there any
developments in the areas that you teach that may affect how you or your peers
would like to teach with video content in the next five years?
- Is there anything else that is important for me to
know about how you or your peers incorporate video content into teaching?
