Research Paper (LSC 522)

(professor's comments are in red)

Are students comfortable with the idea of academic libraries using social networking sites?

Over the last several years, members of the library profession have been watching with keen interest (some might even call it jealousy) as social networking sites have exploded in popularity across the online landscape. Sites like Facebook and MySpace – the former now much more so than the latter – are some of the most visited destinations on the internet, as millions of online users spend countless hours interacting with friends and fulfilling their information needs via these outlets.

Librarians, meanwhile, see traffic to their respective institutions' web sites dwindling, as formerly established information retrieval systems like the OPAC experience their relevancy within the virtual landscape being challenged more and more; after all, why seek out the answers to one's questions via an "old fashioned" and "impersonal" model like the online catalog, when one can simply ask their Facebook friends for help? As such, many within the profession look at the popularity of these social networking sites and envision them as tools that can be used to reach out to their patrons, as well as stamp out those stereotypes which portray libraries as "out of touch" and no longer providing their users with the tools necessary to collect/process information in today's world.

Also, since many college-age users seem to make up the bulk of these social-networking sites' audience, it would seem only natural for academic libraries (with their patron population comprised mostly of students) to be the ones to benefit most from adopting these tools within their "community outreach" plans. Indeed, several proponents within the professional literature call for their colleagues to familiarize themselves with these tools, updating their library's Facebook "walls" and sending out "tweets" in order to capture students' attention and remind them that their libraries can provide much more accurate/reliable information than what they can find elsewhere.

For example, Kroski identifies social networking sites as tools which can "offer infinite networking opportunities" (2007, p. 2019) to academic libraries with their students. She goes on to claim that, in terms of the potential for self-promotion and community outreach, sites like MySpace and Facebook "offer libraries a unique opportunity to interact with patrons in their own space (emphasis mine) ... due to their enormous popularity" (2007, p. 2019). This seems to be a recurring theme within the literature, i.e. a lot of students use social networking sites, so academic libraries need to inhabit these spaces in order to be seen/noticed.

Chu echoes these sentiments when she encourages academic libraries to use social networking sites because it would mean "going where the students are at, rather then [sic] expecting them to come to us" (2008, p. 74). Once again, the popularity of these sites is the driving force behind the call for the creation of MySpace and Facebook profiles as "yet another technology added to librarians' repertoire" (2008, p. 74) for interacting with students. In other words, since students are frequent users of these types of sites, academic libraries should ingratiate themselves into this aspect of their users' online experience.

Sachs also encourages academic libraries to "go to the students," and – since social networking sites have "become an integral part of the student culture of most American colleges and universities" – they can accomplish this by offering "resources and services in the media most commonly used by students" (2011, p. 35). She observes that more and more academic libraries are "embracing social networking sites" in order to "promote and market library resources and services" (2011, p. 36), and endorses this strategy as a means of interacting with students in an environment that they are comfortable with. Therefore (by Sachs' way of thinking), since students enjoy interactions within the social-networking world, then academic libraries should join in and become a part of that world.

Sodt examines "several technologies under the Web 2.0 umbrella" that can be used "in the library setting to help the library reach all users [and remain] relevant in today's information society" (2009, p. 99), including the creation of MySpace profiles to entice library patrons (2009, p. 101) and Facebook applications designed to "search across [one's] library holdings" (2009, p. 100). In terms of social networking sites specifically, she points out their ability to serve as "a valuable tool for libraries to ... reach out to an external audience" of potential patrons (2009, p. 103). In other words, by adopting these tools into the library's overall strategy for providing information to its users, Sodt contends that the profession is giving the patrons what they want, i.e. a collaborative and participatory environment more akin to what they are receiving via other outlets on the web.

In her concluding remarks, Sodt states that the mission of academic libraries is to "serve the needs of students," and that "libraries can adopt ... technologies [like social networking sites] to better serve their customers and create a more open and collaborative workplace" (2009, p. 107). So, once again, the idea is for academic libraries to provide students with an "open and collaborative" online environment, emulating the types of interactions that they experience via their social networking site of choice. Therefore, if academic libraries reach out to their patrons through outlets such as MySpace and Facebook, they will be giving their students "what they want" by assuming a more "social" presence within their lives.

Unfortunately, with all this positive talk concerning the adoption of social networking sites into the academic library's outreach strategy, many of the proponents seem to be taking the students' actual participation in such endeavors for granted. In point of fact, there is no guarantee that students will accept librarians into their individual social networks with open arms; it's just as likely that potential patrons will see such actions as an invasion into "their own space" (as Kroski described it), and resent such attempts by academic librarians to encroach upon their online activities. Cassidy calls this the "we don't want parents at the party attitude" (2011, p. 389) - whereby students use these sites for more personal interactions while being distrustful of any authority figures who attempt to take part - and it has the potential to derail any attempts by academic libraries to gain a foothold with students in the social networking world before they even have a chance to get started.

For example, individuals like Chu point out the wide gap between the usage statistics for a library's home page versus those of incredibly popular social networking sites like Facebook, and cite this as a "compelling reason why to meet students at their technology of choice, their choice is not the library's website" (2008, p. 70). However, she takes a bit of a leap in attempting to justify the use of social networking sites by academic libraries when pointing to these types of numbers; just because usage of library websites is low (comparatively speaking) when put up against social networking sites, this does not mean that students will automatically flock to the library's online presence once they attempt to "piggyback" off the success of sites like Facebook. The simple truth of the matter is that students might be looking for a different type of online experience from their social networking activities when compared to what they might expect from a librarian (i.e. the "social" experience might be separate and distinct from the "educational" needs they look to fulfill when visiting the library's web site).

Excellent point!

Nevertheless, Chu uses data from a web-based survey of 89 first-year undergraduate students at California State University San Marcos to argue that "computer-mediated communications" (like those found within social networking sites) can strengthen "strong ties" between librarians and students, as well as provide an opportunity to establish "new, weak ties" between the library and potential users (2008, p. 74). She takes this theoretical solution for strengthening existing relationships with library users – while also luring in new ones – as an argument that "librarians have an appropriate role and opportunity as a weak tie and MySpace/Facebook could possibly be a venue to do this" (2008, p. 75). However, the findings from her survey seem to discourage this line of reasoning; a large percentage of the respondents spoke of using MySpace/Facebook to discuss "school professors or courses," and yet several comments from these same students indicate that they "weren't particularly interested in using [social networking sites] to communicate directly with professors" (2008, p. 77). This indicates to me that students are fine with using their social networks to talk about school figures of authority in their lives (like professors and librarians), but are not necessarily as enthused about talking directly to them via those same means.

Not only that, but Chu points to findings from a later focus group taken at the same school, where the majority of students agreed that "it would be a good thing" if on-campus access to MySpace/Facebook was blocked by the administration (2008, p. 79)! This is certainly an interesting attitude taken by the age group that supposedly considers these sites to be "their own space"; perhaps we can infer that they don't consider it "their space" when it comes to academic pursuits, and that these findings demonstrate the distinction students make between their social and educational lives (i.e. they will not automatically accept academic figures like librarians into their social networking circles).

Chu does acknowledge this seeming contradiction in her argument for the use of social networking sites by academic librarians, questioning whether or not adult authority figures "have an appropriate place in social networking, or if this is an intrusion of a student-centered forum" (2008, p. 80). She tries to dance around the issue by claiming that adult "supervision" on sites like Facebook could be seen as a positive, whereby the presence of faculty and/or librarians "might prompt students to take caution and accountability for their online actions" (2008, p. 80); in other words, if librarians are using social networking sites, they are providing a service to their patrons by making sure that the students are "behaving" themselves. Wow, I'll have to take a look at her research. Talk about making the data fit your hypothesis. It's an interesting theory, although not one that I think the students themselves would agree with; rather, it could just as easily discourage students from using Facebook altogether and instead seek out other online social venues free from authority "infestation" (i.e. the parents have ruined the party, so it's time to move on and find something else that's "cooler").

Connell also attempts to gauge student opinions on the matter, citing several schools within the professional literature who have written about their own experiences while traversing the social networking world. For example, she cites one librarian at the Georgia Institute of Technology who sent out more than 1,500 Facebook messages to students – in an apparent attempt to spread the word about the library's collection – but received only a paltry 48 responses (2009, p. 27). Amazing, considering it was only a 3 percent return rate. The librarian actually had the temerity to claim that his venture was a "success," but the more logical conclusion would be that students were not interested in dealing with such an interloper (especially since this person was in a position of authority at their school).

Connell also mentions another librarian who had her staff sift through MySpace profiles in order to find "4,000 Brooklyn College students, faculty, and graduates" (2009, p. 27). Aside from the fact that such actions could be construed by some as "stalking" Hmmm, I think your reaction here is a bit extreme. This is using publicly available information for marketing purposes. The person is in control of whether or not they respond unlike telemarketers who really do invade your privacy. More importantly, I wonder if she received IRB approval to conduct this research. (and thus having the potential to negatively affect these students' view of the library and drive them away), the librarian sent "friend requests" to her designated targets and "seven months later had approximately 2,350 friends" (2009, p. 27). Actually, a 58 percent return rate is quite high for a "survet." On the surface, this story appears to be a success, but what about the other 2,000-odd students who ignored the request? Were they "turned off" by the obtrusive nature of this "friending" campaign? In addition, there is no indication that any of these new friends of the library had actually come from the original 4,000 targeted; the article is ambiguous on the subject, so for all we know, a majority of those "friends" could have been nothing more than MySpace spam accounts! OK, I haven't read this article yet, but it sounds like you are losing your objectivity here. If she sent them "friend" requests, she should be able to tell that they were responding to the request.

However, not all student opinion on the matter recorded within the literature has been as ambiguous (with the authors extrapolating favorable outcomes against questionable results) or outright negative ("we don't want parents at the party") as the above examples. Cassidy reports that, in a survey of 6,240 students at Sam Houston State University in East Texas, 48 percent of those who responded indicated "an interest in seeing library services in social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace" (2011, p. 386). Although this is still less than half of the respondents surveyed, the percentage was nevertheless "higher than expected", and she attributes this to "changes to Facebook configuration over the years [that] may have helped to change [students'] attitudes" (2011, p. 389), whereby patrons can now "like" a library's fan page – rather than "friend" a library's page – so that "a user's personal profile remains inaccessible to the organization operating the fan page" (2011, p. 389). This allows students the opportunity to maintain some "distance" between themselves and the academic library, rather than placing them on equal footing with the user's regular friends and family members (and thus still somewhat maintaining Facebook as "their own space" rather than a haven for authority figures). Yes, this is a much better way to go.

Sachs refers to a survey of 136 users at Western Michigan University, in which over 90 percent of undergraduate students reacted positively to the idea of the library using Facebook to stay in touch with the campus community (2011, p. 42). In addition, she found that over two-thirds of those who were "friends" of the library's Facebook page had initiated the friend relationship, and "only 31 percent indicated that they received the friend request from Waldo Library first" (2011, p. 41); this is in stark contrast to the examples given by Connell of the librarians at the Georgia Institute of Technology and Brooklyn College, who "spammed" social network users about their respective libraries (only to get back a meager number of responses as a result). It could also be related to the 2 year difference in the studies. Rather than trying to force the issue, the librarians at Western Michigan University seemed to truly let the students come to them first, and Sachs takes this as a sign that "the majority of our friends are actively interested in establishing a relationship with Waldo Library ... [rather than being] uncomfortable with librarians on Facebook" (2011, p. 41).

Connell even moves beyond the negative examples found within her literature review, and points out a survey she conducted with 366 Valparaiso University students It sounds like the literature review was just the background for her own study, which, I'm guessing, was the point of this report of her own research. Was she conducting this research to see if she would get the same results as the earlier studies? This is commonly the case. where "the majority of [users] were willing to accept a friend request from the library" (2009, p. 34); 57.7 percent of the respondents indicated that they "would not be proactive about [a friend request from the library but would still] accept the invitation," while 17.2 percent were "very open to the idea [and would] invite the library to be their friend if they knew about the account" (2009, p. 31). Of course, not all students considered Facebook to be a "school related" activity that librarians should be getting involved with – one went so far as to claim that academic libraries on Facebook were nothing more than "a spy tool [for the administration] to observe our lives" (2009, p. 33)! - and yet a number of respondents identified these "communication efforts" as a welcome addition to their social networking worlds.

In the end, these examples of varying opinions within the student population itself (with some users willing to accept librarians into their social networks and others decrying such endeavors as an intrusion into "their own space") would seem to indicate that the adoption of social networking sites by academic libraries is not some "magic formula" that will draw in 100 percent of an institution's user population. Does anything? Instead, Cassidy encourages other libraries to "focus on extending [their] services into a few popular platforms where the greatest interest [from students] lies but try not to extend comprehensively into all possible technological venues" (2011, p. 390); in other words, just because sites like Facebook are popular with students, don't assume that creating a Facebook page for one's library will automatically make it popular as well. She warns that her fellow librarians cannot start "blindly adapting the most visible emerging technologies touted by popular media ... [but instead] must tailor library service delivery options to the distinct needs and preferences of their particular user population" (2011, p. 380).

Always a good idea!

As such, the problem with adopting social networking sites into the academic library's outreach strategy is that this is not a "one-size-fits-all" type of scenario; people who laud the benefits that can be extracted from these sites seem to discount the fact that their presence within this domain might not work for everyone (particularly those students who consider it to be "their own space" and not a place where they want to interact with librarians). It is certainly true that academic libraries should explore all possible venues in order to remain relevant within their campus community, but that does not mean that they should forego their own particular users' desires and "jump on the bandwagon" just to say that they're part of the latest online fad; Cassidy says as much when she states that "[academic] libraries cannot necessarily follow popular trends without studying the local population" (2011, p. 390). Instead, academic libraries must be willing to investigate what it is that their own individual user groups expect from them in any type of "social initiative", before embarking on an endeavor which might wind up doing more harm (as in a majority of their users ignoring the library's efforts and considering those actions to be an assault on "their own space") than good.

True!

References
Cassidy, E.D. (2011). Higher education and emerging technologies: student usage, preferences, and lessons for library services. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 50 (4), 380-391.

Chu, M. (2008). The problems and potential of MySpace and Facebook usage in academic libraries. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 13 (1), 69-85.

Connell, R.S. (2009). Academic libraries, Facebook and MySpace, and student outreach: a survey of student opinion. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 9 (1), 25-36.

Kroski, E. (2007). The social tools of Web 2.0: opportunities for academic libraries. Choice, 44 (12), 2011-2021.

Sachs, D.E. (2011). Striking a balance: effective use of Facebook in an academic library. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 16 (1-2), 35-54.

Sodt, J.M. (2009). Beyond the library's walls: using Library 2.0 tools to reach out to all users. Journal of Library Administration, 49, 97-109.

Final Grade: A

Very good work! You have explored the literature in detail and integrated your own interpretations. It shows critical thinking on your part, which is good.

You should be more objective in your analysis, though; at times your language reveals your own bias, which is as much conjecture as what you are criticizing.