Student Focus Group & Interviews Reading List Project: The Student VoiceLinda Jones, University of Portsmouth

Staff Interviews & Feedback from Discussions at Strategic Buying Workshop: The Academic VoiceLinda Jones, University of Portsmouth

Students saw reading lists as:Tools to use in their work

Aids to studyGuides to texts that made them think

However they did feel the need for motivation.In particular they felt effort in reading was not

explicitly monitored.

They felt interacting over reading with discussion was worthwhile and helped them understand and

think issues through.

Academic talked about reading

• Ensuring reading takes place – in class if necessary – exercise with pile of books in seminar

• Essential reading needed for seminars• In unit assessment expect to see readings listed

and hope for some use of extra readings • Balance required between indicative and

prescriptive reading – how we encourage independent research

Students had views on formatsThey listed why they prefer

books – as initial information sources for detailed study and for revisionchapters and articles - for seminars and essay writing.

They identified the advantages of electronic resources in terms of availability and ease of access.

However for concentrated study of text of any length they still expressed a preference for hard copy print books.

They did mention seeking out and crediting images for presentations but had little interest in journals per se, specifically they appreciated photocopies

or scans of print articles and chapters provided in class or through the VLE.

Academics talked about formats• Books or chapters (not photocopies or library scans in

the majority of cases)• Articles (again mainly sourced direct from e or print

journals)• Audiovisual resources• Good quality web resourcesIn particular the usefulness of e-resources to provide

access to larger numbers of students.There was also recognition that a variety of texts and

resources catered for varied learning styles.

Students’ reading was purposefulThey had specific views on the type of reading which was useful for:

essaysconclusions

examsprojectsseminars

They thought the reading list was where they started but felt wider reading (off list) was noticed as extra and scored a point or two.

However where and how they might find relevant and related material varied widely

between students.

Academics talked about types of information

• NSS survey and students in general talk specifically about books

• Academics see journals as key resources for the introducing new ideas and research

• Need to source appropriate coverage of syllabus• Priorities and types of sources vary for different subject

areasThis has key impact on information literacy strategy for

libraryStudents need to break some habits acquired in school

Levels of reading

Students spoke about their reading in terms of level and saw textbooks as the place they started

and laid foundations for further study.

Articles were seen as more academic or learned and useful for the particular and specific.

However their language could confuse and books offered easier ways into difficult subjects.

Academics were concerned about

Tailored information literacy for subjectsDeveloping independent learners with skills in

evaluation of sourcesThere were real concerns that digitised reading

lists would amount to spoon feedingInteresting to compare practice in printed lists

where often first year reading lists are short whereas some masters’ lists run to several hundred items

Places

There was some recognition that off-campus access away from the university site could present problems.

The library and library website were seen as vital to the use of reading lists the former as an area offering varied

study spaces and the latter as a gateway to material.

Some students were confused as to which desk or floor they needed if they required assistance.

Academics talked about the library

• As the main if not only supplier of print material to students

• Repository for classic texts which conserves seminal works• There was a general feeling that students were not buying

books due to pressure on finances• There is no single recognised route by which lists are sent

to the library in some cases we only have access to indicative reading [TUD]

• Some lecturers reluctant to supply full lists as seen as spoon feeding

ProblemsStudents were concerned about what was expected of them.In some cases they had difficulty identifying what was their

reading list (terminology varied seminar readings, bibliography, unit reference list).

Several found off campus access complicated and did not understand why sites sometimes appeared to charge for access.

Available resources are the ones which get used and students do not necessarily understand how to reserve items.

Students were mainly selective in what they bought but appreciate clear guidance on this.

Academic identified problems with

• The mismatch between ordering cycle and academic cycle

• Predicting and monitoring demand• Tracking new editions and sourcing & selecting

new titles• Students responses on book supply in NSSBut did not generally register problems withe-access nor show an awareness of library reviewservices

Time

Students spoke about time and what they felt was reasonable in terms of reading this varied between

individuals and some felt reading lists setunreasonable expectations

This was influenced by their understanding of the loan periods (hours, days, week or a month) for print

materials.There also appeared to be no discernable

structure/progression in terms of independent research through each year from foundation to post graduate

degrees.

Academics were concerned

• About students last minute approach which meant needs were always urgent

• Numbers and availability• About conflict in timing of orders and start of

courses• Communication between library and faculty: is

there a need to review working of library committeesand library liaison posts

People

Students value personal input - any individual notation in a reading list by their lecturer heavily

influences their reading choices.

Librarians were specifically mentioned as helpful because they know where to look and can tell

students how to go about finding specific items or material on specific subjects answering all sorts of

queries.

People

• Academics recognised Faculty and departmental policy on lists as key

• They also saw Library liaison officers as important in issuing reminders and co-ordinating

• They mentioned peer influence amongst students • Librarians were seldom mentioned without

prompting• Personal influence of individual academics was

also probably underestimated

SourcesStudents did not mention a need to use databases unless they had

received a library session on them or a lecturer had recommended one.

They all used Google and most used Google-scholar to look for sources

They did mention the library website as a starting point particularly for a new or different subject area.

They did not spontaneously mention evaluating usefulness or purpose of websites or web sources in the same way they talked

about books and articles.

Sources

• Stressed favoured the importance of journals over books but did not accordingly give importance to databases or value training on these without prompting

• Mentions of Google were dismissive in terms of students lack of discrimination (digital literacy) in its use and no mentions of Google Scholar were recorded

Length and formatStudents recognised different practice across different units and

courses.

On large cohorts they appreciated the provision of alternatives to aid access.

They valued the provision of readings for each option offered but as this made some reading lists long felt clear structuring was

vital.

Their interpretation of some basic vocabulary varied considerably e.g. essential, core, additional supplementary, background.

Structure and vocabulary

• Structure and vocabulary were discussed in abstract both within – individual lists: essential, background, reference– across courses as a whole building in help and staging

content so that level one course lists are more detailed with explicit recommendations gradually ensuring students start to take responsibility for choices (with appropriate training) so that at level three and post graduate courses lists leave room for more independent research

– There is only patchy evidence of this happening in practice

Bombshell Books

How hard can they work?

33 copies held across 5 editions including 2 different e-editions which have serviced

32,103 section requests in the last

year.

On 45 reading lists.

78 copies held across

3 editions.

On 38 reading lists.

.

131 copies held across 4 editions

including 2 different e- editions which

have in the last year serviced 15,061

section requests.

On 24 reading lists.

47 copies held across

2 editions.

On 8 reading lists.