library anxiety among undergraduates: a study of israeli b.ed students

PERSPECTIVES ON. . .● Library Anxiety among Undergraduates:

A Study of Israeli B.Ed Studentsby Snunith Shoham and Diane Mizrachi

● Partnerships between Library Instruction Unitsand Campus Teaching Centersby Trudi E. Jacobson

● Integration of Information Resources andCollection Development Strategyby Sam Brooks

Library Anxiety among Undergraduates:A Study of Israeli B.Ed Studentsby Snunith Shoham and Diane Mizrachi

Over the past 30 years academic libraries have under-gone computerization processes that encompass allareas of their activity. Since the online public ac-

cess catalog (OPAC) became available to users during the1980s, user encounters with library resources have alsochanged and now occur in a different environment, which, inturn, constantly changes with technological developments. Atthe same time, students who come to these libraries have notalways become acquainted in high school with the new li-brary environment and many lack the library skills that arenecessary to cope with and use the library’s resources.

Although basic library skills now require computer liter-acy, studies show that one third of the college students inthe United States suffer from technophobia and computeranxiety.1 This situation has created, for many library users, asort of culture shock, “anxiety that results from losing allour familiar signs and symbols.”2

In her groundbreaking study, Constance Mellon3 foundthat 75–85% of first-year college students suffer from whatshe termed “library anxiety.” Thus, “just when students mostneed to become competent users of information technology,anxieties can cause them to avoid the library all together.”4

The purpose of this study was to build on previous re-

search on library anxiety, to explore this condition amongIsraeli B.Ed. students, and, in particular, to discover whichgroups of students experience more library anxiety. Specifi-cally, the study addresses the following questions:

● What is the level of library anxiety among Israeli B.Ed.students?

● What are the effects of age, gender, year of study, nativelanguage, and computer usage on library anxiety?

Several independent variables that have been studied asfactors affecting library anxiety were also examined in thisstudy, although the results have often been mixed (see Table1). This is the first study to measure the effects of English-language resource anxiety on college students whose nativelanguage is not English.

SURVEY OF THE L ITERATURE

Mellon first used the term “library anxiety” in her seminalstudy in which she analyzed student journal entries wherethey recorded their search process for their term paper as-signment and their feelings as they searched. “Library anxi-ety” refers to an uncomfortable feeling or emotional disposi-tion characterized by tension, fear, feelings of uncertaintyand helplessness, negative and self-defeating thoughts, andmental disorganization that appear only when students are inor contemplating a visit to the library.5

Recurrent themes were traced, and by using qualitativemethods, Mellon developed a well grounded theory of li-brary anxiety.6 As an academic librarian, she had observedthat students enter college with minimal, if any, basic libraryskills, yet faculty and administration expect them to be fullycompetent in library use.7 She identified four sources for thestudents’ anxiety: (1) the physical size of the library; (2) alack of knowledge about where things are located; (3) a lack

Snunith Shoham is Chair, Department of Information Science,Faculty of Humanities, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan,, Israel52900 ,[email protected].; Diane Mizrachi is a graduateof the Department of Information Science, Bar-Ilan University,Ramat Gan, Israel 52900.

The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Volume 27, Number 4, pages 305–319 July 2001305

of knowledge about what to do; and (4) a lack of knowledgeabout how to begin a search.

Before her study, various papers had touched on differentaspects of anxiety and dissatisfaction with the library. PeterHernon and Maureen Pastine8 pointed out that academic li-brarians and staff do not fully understand the students’ per-ceptions of them. They used both an attitude scale and inter-views to measure students’ perceptions of the staff at aMidwestern university library. Their conclusions stressed thestudents’ complaints of “preoccupied, rude, inconsiderate,and discourteous service;” their fear of belittlement; andtheir desire for closer personal contact with the library staff.Tefko Saracevic and William Shaw summarized research onlibrary user satisfaction, noting that “40 to 50% of the pa-trons trying to obtain a book in a library eventually leavewithout having achieved satisfaction.”9

Robert Taylor and Sara Fine discussed different aspectsof the psychology of the information search process. Taylorstudied reference librarian-client interviews and suggestedthat librarians’ education place more emphasis on communi-cation and interpersonal skills.10 Fine noted a significantlack of user studies and stated that there is virtually no un-derstanding of how people interact with information and li-braries.11 Fine argued that:

as information becomes more complex, more available and more cru-cial, it is also becoming more apparent that people react to informationin ways that are more complicated than just ‘getting it’ or ‘having it’ or‘using it,’ thus the need to research this behavior has become impera-tive.11

After the publication of Mellon’s theory of library anxi-ety, there were numerous discussions and studies of this phe-nomenon. Quantitative studies most often used the LibraryAnxiety Scale (LAS) developed by Sharon Bostick.12 TheLAS consists of 43 Likert-type statements that test an ade-quate internal consistency of 0.80 by using Cronbach’sacoefficient. Bostick found five factors of library anxiety thatshe labeled as barriers with staff, affective barriers, comfortwith library, knowledge of the library, and mechanical barri-ers.

Qun G. Jiao et al.,13 Jiao and Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie,14

Onwuegbuzie,15 Jiao and Onwuegbuzie,16 and Onwuegbuzieand Jiao17 have showed the validity of Bostick’s LAS and ofeach of the separate factors. Onwuegbuzie added a sixth fac-

tor that he called a resource barrier, an anxiety resultingfrom a perceived lack of desired material in the library.18

Jiao et al.19 called library anxiety a situation-specific anx-iety, meaning that the negative emotions and mental disorga-nization that characterize this condition appear only whenthe student is using or contemplating using the library.

PROCEDURES

The instrument used in this study was a survey based on theLAS developed by Bostick,28 which was translated into He-brew and modified to reflect cultural differences. Referred tohere as the H-LAS, it is a Likert-type survey with five possi-ble responses to 35 statements.

The H-LAS was applied to seven factors, namely:

● The Staff factor refers to the students’ attitudes towardthe librarians and library staff and their perceived acces-sibility. It scored a Cronbach’sa of 0.75.

● The Knowledge factor concerns how the students ratetheir own library expertise. It scored a Cronbach’sa of0.77.

● Language is the factor indicating the extent to which us-ing English-language searches and materials induces dis-comfort. It scored a Cronbach’sa of 0.76.

● The Physical Comfort factor measures how much thephysical facility affects the students’ enjoyment of thelibrary. It scored a Cronbach’sa of 0.60.

● The Library Computer Comfort factor deals with the per-ceived reliability of library computer facilities and thequality of directions for using them. It scored a Cron-bach’sa of 0.51.

● The Library Policies/Hours factor assesses the students’attitudes toward library regulations and operating hours.It scored a Cronbach’sa of 0.45.

● The Resources factor involves the perceived availabilityof the desired material in the library collection. Its Pear-son’s score was 0.52.

All were shown to have adequate reliability, except for thePolicies/Hours factor, which was included in the additionalchecks because of its theoretical importance to library anxi-ety.

Table 1Summary of Independent Variables of Undergraduate Library Anxiety

Study Age Gender Native Language Year of Study

Jacobson, 199120 N/A Men more anxious N/A N/A

Bostick, 199221 501 more anxious No difference N/A No difference

Mech & Brooks, 199522 No difference No difference N/A Linear decline

Jiao et al., 199623 Linear decline Men more anxious Non-native more anxious Linear decline

Onwuegbuzie & Jiao, 199724 N/A N/A Non-native more anxious N/A

Jiao & Onwuegbuzie, 199725 Linear decline Men more anxious Non-native more anxious Linear decline

Liu & Redfern, 199726 N/A N/A Non-native more anxious N/A

Mech & Brooks, 199727 N/A No difference N/A N/A

306 The Journal of Academic Librarianship

Additionally, students were asked to provide demographicinformation including their age, gender, year of study, andnative language. They were also asked to state their amountof computer usage at home, amount of computer usage atwork, and their different types of computer usage.

The questionnaire was first distributed among 339 stu-dents in their classrooms at Beit Berl teachers college. Toenhance the study’s reliability, it was decided to expand it toinclude 325 additional students from seven other teacherscolleges throughout the country. Eighty-eight percent of the664 students who participated in the study were women;82.0% specified Hebrew as their mother tongue, whereas12.0% specified Arabic. Thirty-seven percent of the studentssurveyed were in their first year of studies, 24.0% in theirsecond year, 20.0% in their third year, and 19.0% in theirfourth year.

RESULTS

Because the data were collected in two stages, first in theBeit Berl teachers college and subsequently in the otherseven, a factor analysis was performed. No significant differ-ences (p 5 .05) were found in the structure of the factors;hence the two groups were combined, and a common factoranalysis was performed.

Levels of Library Anxiety among Israeli B.Ed. Students

The general level of library anxiety among Israeli B.Ed.students can be assessed by examining the over-all and fac-tor averages, as illustrated in Table 2 and Figure 1.

Because the instrument that was used requires self-evalua-

tion by the students and is of a subjective nature, it is diffi-cult to give a precise quantitative definition of the level oflibrary anxiety among Israeli B.Ed students. However, byusing a scale of 1–5 with a higher score showing more anxi-ety, several assumptions can be made.

The over-all average for library anxiety of 2.51 is almostin the precise center of the scoring range. From this, one canassume that although library anxiety is not an overwhelmingphenomenon, it certainly does exist and should be recog-nized as a potential barrier to the scholastic achievement ofthe B.Ed. students.

When looking at the factor averages of library anxiety,the most outstanding feature was the dominance of the Lan-guage factor over all the others. It scored a total average of3.63, a range of averages among the variables from 3.33 to3.87, and was the only factor that showed significant rela-tionships with all independent variables. It also presented asatisfactory internal consistency score of 0.76 and significantdifferences from all other library anxiety factors. This showsthat for Israeli B.Ed. students the most debilitating librarytask is searching and using English-language materials andresources.

The factor with the next highest average was Library Pol-icies/Hours. It seems that many students find these regula-tions inconvenient even though they are deemed necessaryby the library staff and administration. This factor scored aCronbach’saof 0.45, the only one not considered satisfac-tory, but the factor was included in the rest of the study be-cause of the theoretical importance of its contents.

The Staff and the Knowledge factors showed relativelylow averages of 2.25 and 2.24, respectively. This can beinterpreted to mean that Israeli B.Ed students perceive fewerdifficulties with these two aspects of their library encountersthan with all the other factors except Resources. These twoscored satisfactory internal consistencies of 0.75 and 0.77,respectively, by using Cronbach’sa, and, as will be detailedbelow, were the factors containing the most significant rela-tionships with the independent variables besides the Lan-guage factor.

Independent Variables and Their Relationshipto Library Anxiety

To check the differences between the various independentvariables and library anxiety, a multivariate analysis(MANOVA) was performed once for each comparison. Ifsignificant differences were found, a univariate analysis(ANOVA) was then performed to find the source of the dif-ference.

Relationship between Gender and Library Anxiety

Table 3 shows individual variable analysis, averages, andstandard deviations of each factor by gender group. Womenstudents scored more library anxiety on the Staff, Language,and Resources factors than did their male counterparts. Noother significant relationships were found.

Library Anxiety and Age

Because of the complexity of the various age groupings,the total range was divided into two groups using 24 years,the median, as the dividing point and the age variable as adichotomous rather than sequential variable.

Table 4 lists the averages and standard deviations for

Table 2Over-all Averages and SD of Library Anxiety and

Its Factors

Factor Average SD

Staff 2.25 0.64

Knowledge 2.24 0.73

Language 3.63 1.08

Physical comfort 2.41 0.89

Library computer comfort 2.52 0.71

Library policies/hours 2.81 0.79

Resources 2.13 0.81

Over-all 2.51 0.47

Figure 1Library Anxiety Factor Averages

July 2001 307

each factor of library anxiety according to the two agegroups. It emerges that younger students (age 18–24 years)had more library anxiety in the Knowledge, Language, Poli-cies/Hours, and Resources factors. The other factors showedno significant correlations. Computerization of libraries doesnot seem to affect this relationship in favor of younger stu-dents, who still show more anxiety about their perceivedlack of library expertise. Both groups scored relatively highon the Language factor (3.71 for those 18–24 years and 3.5for those over 24 years), with a lower score for the olderstudents.

Library Anxiety and Native Language

The vast majority of the sample population in this studywere native Hebrew speakers. Because only a small minority(1%) were native English speakers or others (5%), it wasdecided to compare the Hebrew-speaking group with thenative Arabic-speaking group, who formed 12% of the sam-ple population.

Table 5 shows the individual factors of library anxietywith their averages and standard deviations according to na-tive-language grouping. There are mixed results in the sig-

nificant relationships between native language and libraryanxiety. A higher level of library anxiety for Arabic speakersemerged in the Knowledge factor, and a higher level of li-brary anxiety for Hebrew speakers emerged in the EnglishLanguage factor. Because the language of instruction at allof the institutions surveyed is Hebrew, the former result isconsistent with the previous studies of non-native Englishspeakers at American universities.

Library Anxiety and Year of Study

To check the general differences between years of studyregarding library anxiety, a MANOVA analysis was per-formed. The individual variables (i.e., each year of study)were then tested for each factor. When significant differ-ences were discovered, a post-hoc analysis was performed tofind the source of these differences.

Table 6 displays the averages, standard deviations, andvariable analysis for each of the library anxiety factors.Three significant relationships were found between year ofstudy and library anxiety. These relationships were in theStaff, Knowledge, and Language factors. Most theories andprevious studies of library anxiety describe linear declines inwhich first-year students show the greatest anxiety with sig-nificant decreases in each subsequent year. The current studyreflects this basic pattern in the Staff and Knowledge factors.The Staff factor decreased from an average of 2.35 in thefirst year to 2.15 in the fourth year. This is significant andshows greater comfort with the library staff as familiarityincreases. The Knowledge factor showed a dramatic decreasefrom a 2.44 average in the first year to 2.15 in the fourthyear. There is, however, a slightincreaseof 0.08 betweenthe third and the fourth year. This may reflect the increas-ingly advanced skills required of these students, as illustratedby Jiao and Onwuegbuzie29 who found that computer in-dexes and online facilities raise anxiety levels among stu-dents.

The English Language scores do not follow the abovepatterns, but instead display a bell-shaped curve with first-year students showing theleastamount of Language anxiety.From an average of 3.42 in the first year there was an in-crease of 0.43 in the second year, another slight increase of0.02 in the third, and a drop of 0.31 in the fourth year. The

Table 3Relationship between Library Anxiety and Gender

Factor

Men Women

F(1,647)Avg SD Avg SD

Staff 2.08 0.58 2.28 0.65 6.23*

Knowledge 2.21 0.71 2.24 0.73 insignificant

Language 3.33 1.04 3.67 1.08 6.80**

Physical comfort 2.33 0.92 2.43 0.88 insignificant

Library policies/hours 2.74 0.83 2.83 0.78 insignificant

Library computercomfort 2.55 0.75 2.52 0.7 insignificant

Resources 1.94 0.74 2.15 0.81 4.33*

Notes: * p , .05.** p , .01.

Table 4Library Anxiety According to Age Group

Factor

18–24 yrsn 5 395

25–55 yrsn 5 269


Staff 2.29 0.63 2.19 0.66 insignificant

Knowledge 2.31 0.74 2.14 0.72 8.71**

Language 3.71 1.06 3.50 1.10 5.51*


Policies/hours 2.87 0.80 2.73 0.76 4.43*

Computer comfort 2.53 0.70 2.51 0.72 insignificant

Resources 2.18 0.81 2.05 0.81 3.97*

Notes: * p , .05.** p , .01.

Table 5Effect of Native Language on Library Anxiety

Factor

Hebrewn 5 538

Arabicn 5 77


Staff 2.26 0.66 2.28 0.50 insignificant

Knowledge 2.16 0.69 2.82 0.65 62.12**

Language 3.69 1.07 3.42 0.99 4.38*


Policies/hours 2.81 0.79 2.80 0.72 insignificant

Computer comfort 2.55 0.71 2.43 0.65 insignificant

Resources 2.12 0.82 2.24 0.77 insignificant

Notes: * p , .05.** p , .01.


difference between the fourth- and first-year scores was notsignificant. This pattern may reflect the rising demand to useEnglish-language texts in the second and third years, withfourth-year students already feeling more proficient.

Library Anxiety and Computer Usage

The seven factors of library anxiety were checked againstseven types and applications of computer usage by using thePearson correlation coefficient. Out of a possible 49 relation-ships, 19 were significant. These were all negative, meaningthat library anxiety decreases with more computer usage.

Using 0.20 or greater to define a strong relationship, wefound that the amount of computer usage had the greatesteffect on the Knowledge factor. More computer usage andexperience raises computer confidence, and this may spillover into a general higher level of confidence and perceivedknowledge of the library.

Table 7 shows the correlations between library anxietyfactors and the various types of computer usage. All types ofusage, except word processing and games, affected the Lan-guage factor. Because students do most of their word pro-cessing in their native language, it did not affect their feel-ings toward English-language searches and material, and thelevel of English required for most games is lower than foracademic studies. Table 8 summarizes the relationships ofthe independent variables with library anxiety.

DISCUSSION

Two important points that emerged from this study, relatedto the first research question (concerning the level of libraryanxiety among Israeli B.Ed. students), should be addressed:

● There is library anxiety among students, although not toan overwhelming extent; and

● Anxiety over using English-language searches and re-sources is the strongest factor of library anxiety amongIsraeli B.Ed. students.

The over-all average for library anxiety among B.Ed stu-dents of 2.51 was almost precisely at the center of the scor-ing range. This indicates that, although library anxiety is notan overwhelming phenomenon, it certainly exists and shouldbe recognized as a potential barrier to the scholastic achieve-ment of B.Ed students. When the Language factor is re-moved from the configuration, the over-all average decreasesto 2.38, somewhat below the midway point of the scoringrange but high enough to require attention and correction.This shows a fair consistency of library anxiety and furthervalidates Mellon’s original theory of library anxiety.30 It alsoshows a substantial constituency for the content of SharonBostick’s LAS and points to its potential use as a basis forlibrary anxiety studies outside the United States and the En-glish-speaking world.31

Table 6Library Anxiety and Year of Study

Factor

1st yr 2nd yr 3rd yr 4th yr

F(3,627)Avg SD Avg SD Avg SD Avg SD

Staff 2.35 0.64 2.22 0.59 2.23 0.73 2.15 0.61 3.11*

Knowledge 2.44 0.73 2.12 0.69 2.07 0.68 2.15 0.76 10.16**

Language 3.42 1.14 3.85 0.94 3.87 0.99 3.56 1.13 7.49**

Physical comfort 2.32 0.85 2.44 0.89 2.48 0.89 2.47 0.94 Not sig.

Policies/hours 2.82 0.74 2.88 0.85 2.81 0.81 2.71 0.73 Not sig.

Computer comfort 2.58 0.70 2.48 0.73 2.54 0.72 2.48 0.70 Not sig.

Resources 2.19 0.84 2.20 0.87 2.03 0.70 2.07 0.76 Not sig.

Notes: * p , .05.** p , .01.

Table 7Correlation between Computer Usage and Library Anxiety

Factor Home usage Work usage Word process Spread sheet Games Internet Prog. Lang.

Staff 20.11** 20.1* Not sig. Not sig. 20.12** 20.08* Not sig.

Knowledge 20.33** 20.22** 20.34** 20.1* 20.14** 20.25** Not sig.

Language 20.13** 20.20** Not sig. 20.19** Not sig. 20.19** 20.19**

Physical comfort Not sig. Not sig. Not sig. Not sig. 20.19** Not sig. Not sig.

Policies/Hours 20.12** Not sig. Not sig. Not sig. Not sig. Not sig. Not sig.

Computer comfort 20.12** Not sig. 20.1** Not sig. 20.13** Not sig. Not sig.

Resources Not sig. Not sig. Not sig. Not sig. Not sig. Not sig. Not sig.

Notes: * p , .05.** p , .01.

July 2001 309

When looking at the factor averages of library anxiety inthis study, the most outstanding feature is the dominance ofthe Language factor over all others. It scored a total averageof 3.63 and was the only factor that displayed significantrelationships with all independent variables. This shows thatfor Israeli B.Ed students the most debilitating library task issearching and using English-language materials and re-sources. The solution to this problem is two-pronged: (1)more emphasis must be placed on improving English-lan-guage skills so that the need to use them will not create anaffective barrier, and (2) more Hebrew-language materialmust be made available at the college and research level.Israeli researchers receive professional credit for publishinginternationally, and this usually means publishing in English.If additional credit could also be given for translations ofthese publications into Hebrew, a richer variety of materialswould be made available to the Hebrew-speaking public.

The factor with the next highest average was Library Pol-icies/Hours. It seems that many students find these regula-tions inconvenient even though they are deemed necessaryby the library staff and administration. On the other hand,the students perceive fewer difficulties with the Staff andKnowledge factors than with all other factors except Re-sources.

As for the effects on library anxiety of age, gender, yearof study, native language, and computer usage, several inter-esting findings emerged:

● Women evinced more library anxiety than did men. Thisis the first study to arrive at this result. It may be thatIsraeli men are less intimidated by the predominately fe-male library staff at their colleges than are American menor feel they must show a more confident attitude in alibrary culture described as “female.”32 The fact that no

significant differences were found in the Knowledge andthe Library Computer Comfort factors suggests that thecomputerization of libraries is not an important aspect ofthis greater anxiety in women.

● The younger age group (18–24 years) displayed moreanxiety than the older age group (251 years), apparentlybecause of less library experience. The older students’lower score in the Language factor may reflect more fa-miliarity and comfort with the English language and per-haps more worldliness and experience. Older students arealso likely to be more mature and to show more under-standing for rules and regulations than younger studentswho are just completing their teenage years. They mayalso be more patient or have better alternatives when un-able to find the desired materials and resources in thelibrary.

● The higher Language anxiety that was found among na-tive Hebrew speakers than among native Arabic speakers,with no difference between them being found in the Stafffactor, is surprising. Trying to conceptualize and commu-nicate in a second language would presumably inhibitmany students from approaching library staff with ques-tions and requests. Yet that did not prove to be the casein this study. This may be because even though the Arabstudents are numerically a minority, they are not foreignto the Israeli culture. It may also indicate a high level ofcompetence and confidence in the Hebrew languageamong these Arab students.

● The fact that of these two groups the Hebrew speakersshowed a higher anxiety level when using English-lan-guage searches and resources is also unexpected.Whereas for them English is only the second languagerequired for their studies, for the Arabic-speaking stu-dents at Israeli colleges it is their third, and one wouldexpect a linear decrease of mastery with each additionallanguage. One can only speculate that the Arabic-speak-ing students accepted into the B.Ed. programs at thesecolleges have a higher level of English-language profi-ciency than that of their Hebrew-speaking counterparts.

● The decrease in library anxiety with increase in year ofstudy that was found in this study is logical. However,the increase in the Language factor in the second andthird years followed by a slight decrease in the fourthyear may reflect the rising demand to use English-lan-guage texts in the second and third years, with fourth-year students already feeling more proficient. As noted,this is the first study to measure the effects of English-language resource anxiety on college students.

● The relationship that was found between computer usageand library anxiety reflects the central role that the com-puter plays in the academic library of today.

CONCLUSION

Although school and public libraries, which are intended toprepare students for university study in terms of the use oflibraries and information resources, have come a long way,there is still a problem of library anxiety among undergradu-ates in their encounter with the academic libraries. The pub-lic libraries, and particularly the school libraries, must under-

Table 8Effects of Independent Variables on

Library Anxiety

Variable Relationship

Gender Women show more anxiety in Staff, Englishlanguage, and Resources factors.

Age Students age 18–24 years show more anxiety inthe Knowledge, English language, andPolicies factors.

Year of study Staff and Knowledge factors showed significantdifferences with a lessening of anxiety bysequential year of study. The Englishlanguage factor showed a bell-shaped curvewith 2nd and 3rd-year students showing themost anxiety.

Native language Arabic speakers show more anxiety in theKnowledge factor and Hebrew speakers in theEnglish language factor.

Computer usage More computer usage shows less library anxietyexcept in the resources factor. Especiallystrong connections are apparent with theKnowledge, English language, Staff, andLibrary Computer Comfort factors.


stand that it is up to them to construct a program aimed atinstilling the necessary skills for coping with the informationworld of today. The academic libraries, for their part, needto prepare an instruction program for students and shouldalso be more flexible in their policy toward students and inthe rules and procedures that they establish for library use.

The fact that the English language has been found to be acentral factor in library anxiety requires the attention of theacademic system and points to the need for an additionalseries of studies to examine the issue of the English lan-guage among students whose native language is not English.

The importance of the English language in today’s aca-demic community is clear. Most databases are in English,the language of the Internet is English, and a great deal ofscientific information in other formats is published in En-glish. All of this has the potential to harm the scholasticachievements of students whose native language is not En-glish and of students in countries throughout the worldwhere English is not the language of daily discourse.

The educational systems in countries where English is notthe native language must devote greater thought and re-sources to strengthening the knowledge of English in thisworld of universal information.

Acknowledgment: We thank Sharon Bostick for granting per-mission to use her Library Anxiety Scale.

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1. Beth Mark & Trudi Jacobson, “Teaching Anxious Students Skillsfor the Electronic Library,”College Teaching43 (1995): 28–31.

2. Irene Sever, “Electronic Information Retrieval as Culture Shock:An Anthropological Exploration,”RQ 33 (1994): 336–341.

3. Constance Mellon, “Library Anxiety: A Grounded Theory and ItsDevelopment,”College & Research Libraries47 (1986): 160–165.

4. Mark & Jacobson, “Teaching Anxious Students,” p. 28.5. Qun G. Jiao, Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie, & Art A. Lichtenstein,

“Library Anxiety: Characteristics of ‘at Risk’ College Students,”Library & Information Science Research18 (1996): 151–163.

6. Mellon, “Library Anxiety.”7. Constance Mellon, “Attitudes: The Forgotten Dimension in Li-

brary Instruction,”Library Journal 113 (1998): 137–139.8. Peter Hernon & Maureen Pastine, “Students’ Perceptions of Ac-

ademic Librarians,”College & Research Libraries38 (1977):129–139.

9. Tefko Saracevic & William M. Shaw, Jr., “Causes and Dynamicsof User Frustration in an Academic Library,”RQ 33 (1994):336–341.

10. Robert Saxton Taylor, “Question-Negotiation and InformationSeeking in Libraries,”College & Research Libraries29 (1968):178–194.

11. Sara Fine, “Research and the Psychology of Information Use,”Library Trends32 (1984): 441–460.

12. Sharon L. Bostick, “The Development and Validation of theLibrary Anxiety Scale,” PhD Dissertation. (Detroit, MI: WayneState University, 1992).

13. Jiao, et al., “Library Anxiety: Characteristics.”14. Qun G. Jiao & Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie, “Antecedents of Library

Anxiety,” Library Quarterly 67 (1997): 372–389.15. Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie, “Writing a Research Proposal: The

Role of Library Anxiety, Statistics Anxiety, and CompositionAnxiety,” Library & Information Science Research19 (1977):5–33.

16. Qun G. Jiao & Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie, “Perfectionism and

Library Anxiety among Graduate Students,”Journal of AcademicLibrarianship 24 (1998): 365–371.

17. Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie & Qun G. Jiao, “I’ll Go to the LibraryLater: The Relationship Between Academic Procrastination andLibrary Anxiety,” College & Research Libraries61 (2000): 45–54.

18. Onwuegbuzie, “Writing a Research Proposal.”19. Jiao, et al., “Library Anxiety.”20. Frances F. Jacobson, “Gender Differences in Attitudes toward

Using Computers in Libraries: An Exploratory Study,”Library &Information Science Research13 (1991): 267–279.

21. Bostick, “The Development and Validation of the Library Anx-iety Scale.”

22. Terrence F. Mech & Charles I. Brooks, “Library Anxiety amongCollege Students: An Exploratory Study,” inProceedings of theACRL 7th National Conference(Chicago, IL: Association ofCollege and Research Libraries, 1995) pp. 173–179.

23. Jiao, et al., “Library Anxiety.”24. Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie & Qun G. Jiao, “Academic Library

Usage: A Comparison of Native and Non-Native English Speak-ing Students,”Australian Library Journal(August 1997): 258–269.

25. Jiao &. Onwuegbuzie, “Antecedents of Library Anxiety.”26. Mengxiong Liu & Bernice Redfern, “Information Seeking Be-

havior of Multicultural Students: A Case Study at San Jose StateUniversity,” College & Research Libraries58 (1997): 348–354.

27. Terrence F. Mech & Charles I. Brooks, “Anxiety and Confidencein Using a Library by College Freshmen and Seniors,”Psycho-logical Reports81 (1997): 929–930.

28. Bostick, “The Development and Validation of the Library Anx-iety Scale.”

29. Jiao & Onwuegbuzie, “Antecedents of Library Anxiety”; Jiao &Onwuegbuzie, “Perfectionism and Library Anxiety.”

30. Mellon, “Library Anxiety.”31. Bostick, “The Development and Validation of the Library Anx-

iety Scale.”32. Jacobson, “Gender Differences in Attitudes.”

Partnerships between LibraryInstruction Units and CampusTeaching Centersby Trudi E. Jacobson

M any universities and colleges have units on cam-pus dedicated to helping faculty members improvetheir teaching skills. These centers exist under

such monikers as Center for Teaching, Center for Excellencein Teaching and Learning, or Center for Teaching Excel-lence. Some institutions have more than one unit, such asthe University of Wisconsin-Madison, which has a TeachingAcademy (consisting of faculty and academic staff memberswho have been nominated and selected as fellows), and aCenter for Creating a Collaborative Academic Environment,which operates out of the associate vice chancellor’s office.

Most older teaching centers were only established in the1980s, “although an early generation of programs came intobeing in the 1970s, when several foundations were awarding

Trudi E. Jacobson is Coordinator of User Education Programs,University Libraries, University at Albany, SUNY, 1400Washington Avenue, Albany, New York12222,[email protected]..

July 2001 311

library anxiety among undergraduates: a study of israeli b.ed students

Documents