图书馆使用研究:如何和做什么:对中型研究型图书馆空间使用情况的调查

IF 0.4 Q4 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Aaron Nichols, Paul Philbin
{"title":"图书馆使用研究:如何和做什么:对中型研究型图书馆空间使用情况的调查","authors":"Aaron Nichols, Paul Philbin","doi":"10.18438/eblip30103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective – The research was conducted to understand better how and what spaces are used in a mid-size academic library. Also, the authors were interested in their users' spatial likes and dislikes and why they gravitated to or avoided specific spaces or floors. The authors also found an opportunity to examine recent renovations that added a connector bridge to a first-year student dorm and the subsequent increase in foot traffic to evaluate its success in meeting users' needs for varied and productive study spaces across the building.\nMethods – The study used a survey to gauge user satisfaction with the library's space and environment for research, study, and collaborative work. The authors hand-distributed a survey with five multiple-choice and three open-response questions to users over three days (Monday-Wednesday) between 10 am - 4 pm, the busiest days and times in a typical week. The collected surveys were sorted and coded in an Excel spreadsheet and uploaded and analyzed in JMP Pro.\n Results – The 298 completed responses came from undergraduate students (n=281) who visited the first floor, identified as a collaborative study space (n=144). Respondents showed that they visit the library daily (58%, n=173) and weekly (34%, n=104). Most of the survey participants (98%, n=293) indicated that they pursued academic work in quiet spaces they occupied (75%, n=224). Interestingly enough, the noisiest and quietest floors are the areas most avoided, the first floor-collaborative, noisiest space (54%, n=161) and the third floor-designated as quiet space (18%, n=55). The final survey question invited the respondents to \"sound off,\" with 135 responding; 107 (79%) of them opined on improvements to existing study spaces within the library.\n Conclusion – This research demonstrated that students value the library as a place to study but are critical of excessive noise and overcrowding in the designated collaborative study areas. Academic libraries should consider balance when designing library study spaces. Librarians and space designers should strive to strike an appropriate balance between seating quality and quantity, acceptable noise levels in designated collaborative and quiet study spaces, and the impacts of environmental factors such as printers, food services, exhibits, art displays, restrooms, and walkways through library study spaces within the library.","PeriodicalId":45227,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Library Usage Study, the How and What: A Survey of Space Usage at a Mid-Sized Research Library\",\"authors\":\"Aaron Nichols, Paul Philbin\",\"doi\":\"10.18438/eblip30103\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective – The research was conducted to understand better how and what spaces are used in a mid-size academic library. Also, the authors were interested in their users' spatial likes and dislikes and why they gravitated to or avoided specific spaces or floors. The authors also found an opportunity to examine recent renovations that added a connector bridge to a first-year student dorm and the subsequent increase in foot traffic to evaluate its success in meeting users' needs for varied and productive study spaces across the building.\\nMethods – The study used a survey to gauge user satisfaction with the library's space and environment for research, study, and collaborative work. The authors hand-distributed a survey with five multiple-choice and three open-response questions to users over three days (Monday-Wednesday) between 10 am - 4 pm, the busiest days and times in a typical week. The collected surveys were sorted and coded in an Excel spreadsheet and uploaded and analyzed in JMP Pro.\\n Results – The 298 completed responses came from undergraduate students (n=281) who visited the first floor, identified as a collaborative study space (n=144). Respondents showed that they visit the library daily (58%, n=173) and weekly (34%, n=104). Most of the survey participants (98%, n=293) indicated that they pursued academic work in quiet spaces they occupied (75%, n=224). Interestingly enough, the noisiest and quietest floors are the areas most avoided, the first floor-collaborative, noisiest space (54%, n=161) and the third floor-designated as quiet space (18%, n=55). The final survey question invited the respondents to \\\"sound off,\\\" with 135 responding; 107 (79%) of them opined on improvements to existing study spaces within the library.\\n Conclusion – This research demonstrated that students value the library as a place to study but are critical of excessive noise and overcrowding in the designated collaborative study areas. Academic libraries should consider balance when designing library study spaces. Librarians and space designers should strive to strike an appropriate balance between seating quality and quantity, acceptable noise levels in designated collaborative and quiet study spaces, and the impacts of environmental factors such as printers, food services, exhibits, art displays, restrooms, and walkways through library study spaces within the library.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45227,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30103\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence Based Library and Information Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip30103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的——本研究旨在更好地了解中型学术图书馆的使用方式和空间。此外,作者对用户的空间好恶感兴趣,以及他们为什么会被特定空间或楼层吸引或避开。作者还发现了一个机会来检查最近为一年级学生宿舍增加了一座连接桥的翻修工程,以及随后行人流量的增加,以评估其在满足用户对整个建筑多样化和富有成效的学习空间的需求方面的成功性。方法——该研究使用了一项调查来衡量用户对图书馆研究、学习和协作空间和环境的满意度。作者在三天内(周一至周三)上午10点至下午4点,即一周中最繁忙的日子和时间,向用户手工分发了一份包含五个选择题和三个开放回答问题的调查。收集的调查在Excel电子表格中进行排序和编码,并在JMP Pro中上传和分析。结果——298份完整的回复来自本科生(n=281),他们参观了一楼,被确定为合作学习空间(n=144)。受访者表示,他们每天(58%,n=173)和每周(34%,n=104)都会去图书馆。大多数调查参与者(98%,n=293)表示,他们在自己占据的安静空间里从事学术工作(75%,n=224)。有趣的是,噪音最大和最安静的楼层是最避免的区域,一楼是协作、噪音最大的空间(54%,n=161),三楼是指定为安静空间(18%,n=55)。最后一个调查问题邀请受访者“发声”,135人回答;其中107人(79%)对图书馆现有学习空间的改善提出意见。结论——这项研究表明,学生们重视图书馆作为一个学习场所,但对指定合作学习区域的过度噪音和过度拥挤持批评态度。高校图书馆在设计图书馆学习空间时应考虑平衡问题。图书馆员和空间设计师应努力在座位质量和数量、指定的协作和安静学习空间的可接受噪音水平以及环境因素的影响之间取得适当的平衡,如打印机、食品服务、展览、艺术展示、洗手间和穿过图书馆学习空间的走道。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Library Usage Study, the How and What: A Survey of Space Usage at a Mid-Sized Research Library
Objective – The research was conducted to understand better how and what spaces are used in a mid-size academic library. Also, the authors were interested in their users' spatial likes and dislikes and why they gravitated to or avoided specific spaces or floors. The authors also found an opportunity to examine recent renovations that added a connector bridge to a first-year student dorm and the subsequent increase in foot traffic to evaluate its success in meeting users' needs for varied and productive study spaces across the building. Methods – The study used a survey to gauge user satisfaction with the library's space and environment for research, study, and collaborative work. The authors hand-distributed a survey with five multiple-choice and three open-response questions to users over three days (Monday-Wednesday) between 10 am - 4 pm, the busiest days and times in a typical week. The collected surveys were sorted and coded in an Excel spreadsheet and uploaded and analyzed in JMP Pro.  Results – The 298 completed responses came from undergraduate students (n=281) who visited the first floor, identified as a collaborative study space (n=144). Respondents showed that they visit the library daily (58%, n=173) and weekly (34%, n=104). Most of the survey participants (98%, n=293) indicated that they pursued academic work in quiet spaces they occupied (75%, n=224). Interestingly enough, the noisiest and quietest floors are the areas most avoided, the first floor-collaborative, noisiest space (54%, n=161) and the third floor-designated as quiet space (18%, n=55). The final survey question invited the respondents to "sound off," with 135 responding; 107 (79%) of them opined on improvements to existing study spaces within the library.  Conclusion – This research demonstrated that students value the library as a place to study but are critical of excessive noise and overcrowding in the designated collaborative study areas. Academic libraries should consider balance when designing library study spaces. Librarians and space designers should strive to strike an appropriate balance between seating quality and quantity, acceptable noise levels in designated collaborative and quiet study spaces, and the impacts of environmental factors such as printers, food services, exhibits, art displays, restrooms, and walkways through library study spaces within the library.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Evidence Based Library and Information Practice
Evidence Based Library and Information Practice INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
44
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信