An analysis of patterns in librarian services, 2017-2021
Ashley Wisor, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, apw1005@sru.edu
Introduction

Results

Results

Bailey Library staff provide services to students at Slippery Rock University in multiple
ways. Specifically, staff collect information from students who participate in library-based
instruction, students who use the chat function to ask questions of librarians, and students
that make appointments to obtain assistance on specific research projects.

Question
Comfort Level
BEFORE Session
(n=671)
Comfort Level
AFTER Session
(n=665)

In order to assess the quality of their services, Bailey Library staff asked the Statistical
Consultation Center to analyze the data collected between August 2017 and December
2021. I have conducted a thorough data analysis of librarian data in hopes to determine
whether the services offered at the Bailey Library are of benefit to the students that use the
services.
The specific research questions provided by the library are:
1. Are students using the academic services provided by the library?
2. How many students are utilizing the different academic services?
3. When are the services being utilized?
4. Are particular student populations using the academic services at different rates?
5. How do student feel about the services they have used?

Materials & Methods
Data were analyzed using SAS and R.

Results
1. Are students using the academic services provided by the library?
2. How many students are utilizing the difference academic services?
Data were collected from 666 students related to the libarian instruction between
August 2017 and December 2021. This is an underestimate as to how many students
utilize this service because some librarians are not utilizing a student survey at the
end of their lesson(s).
Data were collected on a total of 1,626 chats between August 2017 and December
2021.
Research assistance was provided a total of 2,110 times between August 2017 and
December 2021.
3. When are the services being utilized?
Timing of library instruction was not provided in the dataset.
Timing of chats was provided in the dataset and can be seen in Table 1 and Figure 1.
In Table 1, we see that Tuesday and Wednesday seems to be the busiest days for
students asking questions using the chat services. In Figure 1, we see that chat
services are being used the most in September/October and March/April each year,
which is around midterms. It also seems that students have been utilizing the
services more within recent years.
Status
Answered
Missed
Totals

Mon
360
(22%)
21
(17%)
381
(22%)

Tue
381
(23%)
30
(25%)
411
(24%)

Wed
389
(24%)
24
(20%)
413
(24%)

Thu
270
(17%)
23
(19%)
293
(17%)

Fri
205
(13%)
22
(18%)
227
(13%)

Sat
1
(0%)
0
(0%)
1
(0%)

Table 1: Chat usage by day of the week between August 2017 and December 2021. Source: 2017-2021 Student Satisfaction Survey Database.

Sun
20
(1%)
1
(1%)
21
(1%)

Total
1,626
(100%)
121
(100%)
1,747
(100%)

Anxious
(1)

Somewhat
Comfortable
(2)

Comfortable
(3)

Confident
(4)

Very
Confident (5)

91
(13.6%)

259
(38.6%)

244
(36.4%)

56
(8.4%)

21
(3.1%)

2.49

1
(0.2%)

36
(5.4%)

243
(36.5%)

289
(43.5%)

96
(14.4%)

3.67

Average

Table 4: Student Comfort Level Before and After Library Instruction. Source: 2017-2021 Student Satisfaction Survey Database.

Figure 1: Chat usage by month between August 2017 and December 2021. Source: 2017-2021 Student Satisfaction Survey Database.

4. Are particular student populations using the academic services at different rates?

Year
2017-2018
2018-2019
2019-2020
2020-2021
2021

1
0
0
0
0
1

2
0
1
3
1
0

Ratings (1-4)

3
1
6
14
15
8

4
1
28
195
128
58

Average Rating
3.500
3.771
3.679
3.555
3.836

Table 5: Rating of Chat Experience. Source: 2017-2021 Student Satisfaction Survey Database.

The only data available on which student populations were using library services was for
the librarian instruction. As can be seen, the largest group utilizing library instruction is the
freshman; however, because it is the faculty that are choosing to assign library instruction,
these proportions cannot be assumed to be repeated in the other data provided.
Class Level*
Frequency
Percent
Freshman
273
41.2%
Sophomore
117
17.7%
Junior
149
22.5%
Senior
118
17.8%
Other
6
0.9%
Total
663
100.0%
*Combined Freshman and Freshman; n/a, Sophomore and Sophomore (1st year transfer),
Junior and between Junior and Senior, Senior and Sixth Year, and changed post
baccalaureate, faculty, non-degree and other all into other.
Table 2: Frequency of Students Participating in Library Instruction by Class Level. Source: 2017-2021 Student Satisfaction Survey Database.

Data are available both on the library instruction and on the chats. The results for the
library instruction indicate a high level of satisfaction among students, with the vast
majority of students agreeing on positive statements about the instruction. Similarly, there
is an increase in comfort level after instruction that is statistically significant (p< 0.0001).
For the chat statistics, the majority of students report high levels of satisfaction.

Question
The purpose of this library
3
instruction session was clear.
(0.5%)
(n=663)
I now feel confident that I
1
can use the resources
(0.2%)
covered today. (n=666)
The resources demonstrated
2
today will be helpful in
(0.3%)
future assignments. (n=669)
I found this instruction
2
session to be informative.
(0.3%)
(n=667)
This class exceeded my
3
expectations.
(0.5%)
(n=668)
The class did not meet my
212
expectations. (n=662)
(32.0%)

Disagree
(2)

Neutral
(3)

Agree (4)

Strongly
Agree (5)

1
(0.2%)

18
(2.7%)

253
(38.2%)

388
(58.5%)

3.5

2
(0.3%)

40
(6.0%)

339
(50.9%)

284
(42.6%)

3.8

1
(0.2%)

16
(2.4%)

260
(38.9%)

390
(58.3%)

3.9

1
(0.2%)

23
(3.5%)

283
(42.4%)

358
(53.7%)

3.9

-

365
(54.6%)

166
(24.9%)

3.8

-

25
(3.8%)

14
(2.1%)

3.9

34
(5.1%)
309
(46.7%)

Table 3: Student Opinions on Library Instruction. Source: 2017-2021 Student Satisfaction Survey Database.

Table 6: Prior Experience with Library Instruction by Class Level. Source: 2017-2021 Student Satisfaction Survey Database.

Table 6 shows that as students mature they are more likely to have already seen library
instruction. Levels of satisfaction with library instruction might be affected by previous
experiences.

Discussion

5. How do students feel about the services they have used?

Strongly
Disagree
(1)

Before today, have you attended a library instruction session at Bailey Library?
Class Level (n=650)*
No
Yes
Proportion Yes
Freshman (n=269)
181 (67%)
88 (33%)
0.33
Sophomore (n=116)
68 (59%)
48 (41%)
0.41
Junior (n=145)
59 (41%)
86 (59%)
0.59
Senior (n=114)
52 (46%)
62 (54%)
0.54
Other (n=1)
0 (0%)
1 (100%)
1.00
*Combined Freshman and Freshman; n/a, Sophomore and Sophomore (1st year transfer), Junior and
between Junior and Senior, Senior and Sixth Year, and changed post baccalaureate, faculty, non-degree
and other all into other.

Average

Overall, the data from the Library study suggest high levels of usage and satisfaction with
library services. For all questions asked of students after library instruction, the median
score is “Agree (4)” for positive questions and “Disagree (2)” for the single negative
question. In addition, a statistically significant increase in comfort level with library
services occurs after library instruction. For chat services, the average rating by students is
higher than 3.5/4.0 for all years.
We can also see a spike in students using the chat services for the library in April of 2020,
which may be a result of going online because of Covid-19. In other years, the spikes in
usage are around September for the Fall semester and February-March for the spring
semester. Note that usage of chat services was already higher for the 2019-2020 year than
in previous years before the Covid-19 pandemic began.
These results represent a fraction of the data available from the library. Future work will
include analysis of variance on tables to determine statistical significance and time series
analysis.

Acknowledgements
Thank you to Jana Asher, Amanda Goodrick, and Alison Brungard for their guidance
during this project.