Title: Mobile learning in Academic Libraries
Author Name: Leslie Drost
1. Introduction
Information literacy is important for all first-year students in higher education. For those students who cannot attend an in-person or synchronous virtual information literacy class, because of their own choices or the restrictions brought about by world events, the library must offer an alternative. This article will focus on a Mobile-Learning approach to an asynchronous information literacy orientation.
Mobile Learning, or M-Learning, occurs when the learner uses his mobile device to access and interact with a learning tool. In 2018, 96 percent of Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 owned a smartphone, with 20 percent getting all their internet from their phone (Demographics, 2019). In higher education, students are already comfortable using mobile phones for educational activities and as educational tools (Ahmad, 2020), including in the library (Vasantha and Dhanamiaya). They are already pursuing education through these devises outside of a typical instructional setting when it is convenient for them (Farley et al., 2015).
2. Overview of the Case
In this case study, the librarians at a large Southeast public university with a first year full-time equivalent student body of 8,000, designed a mobile learning information literacy orientation, Library Experience Asynchronous Programming (LEAP), to acquaint this cohort with the services and resources of the library. Orientations prior to Fall 2020 have been in-person through a synchronous webinar platform sent out to their university classrooms. With the new paradigm compelled by the COVID-19 pandemic of all students learning at a distance, the librarians designed an online tutorial which is mobile phone enabled for the students’ ease of use. Students find it beneficial to connect with the library “on the go” (Mullins, 2017). They feel that “self-marking quizzes” had a high impact on their connection with the material (Farley, et al., 2015). Because the majority of students attending in Fall 2020 was entirely off-campus, a mobile-friendly orientation was chosen because students would not have access to the library’s computers and internet connection. The orientation was also made modular to allow the students to work in short bursts. The librarians hoped that this simplicity of use would result in follow through by the students.
3. Solutions Implemented
The librarians began the design process by identifying their audience, the first-year students, with a learning needs assessment, a behavior needs assessment, and a faculty needs assessment. While traditional students are the majority, students who may need extra help because of their non-traditional status, including country of origin, dual-enrollment, veteran status, marriage, first-generation status and age, comprise over 30 percent of those accepted into the Fall 2020 semester at the university. For context, we found that of the students accepted, almost 96 percent had previously chosen traditional on-campus learning and were forced to participate in online classes against their personal choice. For those non-traditional students who already face challenges, such as time constraints, other responsibilities, such as work and family, lack of familial support, in both time and finances, and absence of institutional knowledge of higher education, learning online creates further obstacles to success (Tieman & Black 2017). We discovered that some further obstacles to success that these students may face include technological ignorance, lack of technology, and library anxiety.
To ameliorate these obstacles, our design was created so that the students would become comfortable with the library through a first contact page and include ease of access through the Learning Management System and their personal mobile phones. In addition, we strove to design a visually attractive interface with clear and accessible text, and user-friendly navigation with limited content and short sections to avoid user fatigue. We included images and GIFs to break up the text and offer visual interest. We also sought to minimize scrolling through limited page length. Students don’t like to scroll down a page and prefer that information is on the visible part of the page (Azadbakht and Schultz, 2020). We used expandable bulleted text to offer more information without cluttering up the pages. These expandable bullets are Americans with Disability Act compliant. In addition to being mobile-friendly, we ensured that the tutorial was accessible on other technology platforms, such as tablets and laptop computers so that the small percentage of students who don’t have access to mobile phones would still have a friendly user experience.
Because the students would access these modules by way of their instructors, we completed a faculty needs assessment to ensure that the faculty would not face barriers to using these learning objects, either through technology issues or perceived lack of utility. We noted that the faculty may be resistant to change, including through technology. Additionally, because these faculty can shape a student’s perceptions of the library, we had to confirm that they had accurate knowledge of the services and resources of the library. Within the program, we offered faculty the ability to embed the modules themselves or allow a librarian to do it for them. Within the marketing plan, we visited faculty committee meetings to present the program and discuss the library’s services and resources. Additionally, we broadcast an email to our target faculty audience reminding them of the program with sign-up links and email addresses to request more information.
Next, the designers created learning outcomes and goal tutorial topics for the modules. These goals and topics were ranked in importance because the designers did not want to overburden the users with too much information. The goals and topics were narrowed down to twelve, with four considered the basic orientation. These four learning outcomes included teaching how and why the students could and would want to get help with “Why the Library?” and “Getting Research Help” and how to access resources with “Find Sources at KSU” and “Find Books at KSU.” The “Why the Library?” tutorial, the first to be taken, introduces the users to two “students,” one who uses the library and one who doesn’t. The learning outcome for this module include identifying how the library can support the students’ success. “Getting Research Help” expands upon this knowledge with students understanding how they can access the help of a librarian. The two “Find” modules require students to identify, understand, and explore the resource portals. The quizzes included closed and open-ended questions. In all the modules, formative help is offered when students choose the wrong answer.
The team met to discuss the content outline and tutorial delivery style, such as tone. A smart-casual tone, with natural language and humor was chosen to demonstrate that the librarians were regular people who could be approached for help.
The overall goal of these four modules is for the students to get a grounding knowledge in what support and resources they can expect of the library and librarians. Additionally, projecting a friendly face can help relieve library anxiety resulting in greater use of the library (Mellon 2015).
4. Outcomes
At the end of the Fall 2020 semester, the four LEAP tutorials were assessed for number of students who completed all components of the modules, their average scores, and how helpful they found the program. A total of 608 unique users took at least one of the four modules. The rate of completion was very high across the four modules. See Table 1.
Table 1
| Module | Unique Users | Completed All Components | Percent Completed |
| Why the Library? | 608 | 607 | 99.8% |
| Getting Research Help | 543 | 542 | 99.8% |
| Find Books at KSU | 558 | 558 | 100% |
| Find Sources at KSU | 578 | 574 | 99.3% |
The quizzes included in the tutorials were designed to introduce the students to the library, rather than generate a grade for the instructors’ use. The quiz questions immediately followed text information that contained the information needed to answer correctly. Throughout all four modules, the students averaged in the mid-to-high 90th percentile which demonstrates that that they read and absorbed the information. See Table 2.
Table 2
| Module | Average Score |
| Why the Library? | 97.76 |
| Getting Research Help | 97.58 |
| Find Books at KSU | 96.08 |
| Find Sources at KSU | 95.79 |
For each of the four modules, the students were required to rate the individual module, evaluating the question, “Did you find this module helpful?” The rating was a 5-Star Scale at the end of the module. The student overwhelmingly rated the modules with either four or five stars. See Table 3.
Table 3
| Module | 5 Stars | 4 Stars | 3 Stars | 2 Stars | 1 Star | % of 4s and 5s |
| Why the Library? | 469 | 91 | 31 | 9 | 8 | 92.1% |
| Getting Research Help | 431 | 71 | 27 | 6 | 8 | 92.4% |
| Find Books at KSU | 436 | 74 | 33 | 4 | 11 | 91.4% |
| Find Sources at KSU | 454 | 86 | 25 | 4 | 9 | 93.4% |
5. Implications
The four modules touched lightly on the information literacy that these students will need to be successful in academia. Students who participate in information literacy library instruction will see a statistically higher grade point average than those students who do not (Gaha, et al., 2018). The high positive response rate from the students that they found the modules helpful demonstrates that these students need more information literacy in their first year.
The high percentage of components completed in all four modules shows that the brevity of each minimized user fatigue. Throughout the open-ended questions, only one student responded with a nonsensical answer, demonstrating that the students considered their answers seriously.
An orientation created with thorough attention is crucial to increase first-year students’ preparation for college-level research work. While the program was successful for the first-year students who accessed it, we reached less than one percent of those students with the orientation. For the program to succeed comprehensively, we need significantly more instructors to assign the modules. The Covid-19 pandemic caused turmoil in the targeted classes with instructors unclear of their modalities until very close to the start of the semester. Additionally, the LEAP orientation was started after the pandemic lock-down and finished only weeks before the start of the semester. Marketing began two weeks before the first day of classes. Earlier marketing with recommendations from directors, in addition to personal outreach to those that did participate the first year may boost instructor participation which will boost student learning.
References
Ahmad, T. (2020). Student perceptions on using cell phones as learning tools: Implications for mobile technology usage in Caribbean higher education institutions. PSU Research Review, 4(1), 25-43. doi:10.1108/PRR-03-2018-0007. Retrieved from: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=edsemr&AN=edsemr.10.1108.PRR.03.2018.0007&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=ken1
Azadbakht, E., & Schultz, T. (2020). At the click of a button: Assessing the user experience of open access finding tools. Information Technology & Libraries, 39(2), 1. doi:10.6017/ital.v39i2.12041. Retrieved from: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=lxh&AN=143882441&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=ken1
Demographics of mobile device ownership and adoption in the United States. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/mobile/
Farley, H., Murphy, A., Johnson, C., Carter, B., Lane, M., Midgley, W., . . . Koronios, A. (2015). How do students use their mobile devices to support learning? A case study from an Australian regional university. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2015(1) Retrieved from https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=eric&AN=EJ1085217&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=ken1
Gaha, U., Hinnefeld, S., & Pellegrino, C. (2018). The academic library’s contribution to student success: Library instruction and GPA. College & Research Libraries, 79(6), 737-746. doi:10.5860/crl.79.6.737. Retrieved from: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=eue&AN=131698466&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=ken1
Mellon, C. A. (2015). Library anxiety: A grounded theory and its development. College & Research Libraries, 76(3), 276-282. doi:10.5860/crl.76.3.276. Retrieved from: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=eue&AN=101619430&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=ken1
Mullins, K. (2017). Research plus™ mobile app: Information literacy “On the go”. Reference Services Review, 45(1), 38-53. doi:10.1108/RSR-03-2016-0020. Retrie3ved from: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=edsemr&AN=edsemr.10.1108.RSR.03.2016.0020&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=ken1
Tieman, A. L., & Black, M. E. (2017). Exploration of library outreach to nontraditional students. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 3, 198. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=edsggo&AN=edsgcl.491136995&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=ken1
Vasantha, B., & Dhanamjaya, M. (2018). Usage of mobile phones for library services by students of REVA university, bangalore: A study. Asian Journal of Information Science & Technology (AJIST), 8(2), 29. Retrieved from https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=edb&AN=132692331&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=gsu1