Essential Academic Journals Tend to Be of Universal Importance, While Many Journals Available on For-Profit Platforms Appear to Be Ancillary

A Review of: Mongeon, P., Siler, K., Archambault, A., Sugimoto, C. R., & Larivière, V. (2021). Collection development in the era of big deals. College & Research Libraries, 82(2), 219–236. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.82.2.219 Abstract Objective – (1) Present a method of journal appraisal that combines reference list, article download, and survey data. (2) Gauge journal usage patterns across selected universities. Design – Analysis of reference lists, article downloads, and survey data. Setting – 28 Canadian universities. Subjects – 47,012 distinct academic journal titles. Methods – Download data for the 2011-2015 period was sourced from standard Journal Report 1 (JR1) usage reports as supplied by the vendors. Download figures were summed for journals that were available through multiple platforms. Reference list data (i.e., the number of times documents published in each journal were cited by authors affiliated with a participating institution) was sourced from Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science, limiting for the years 2011-2015. An unknown number of researchers at 23 of the 28 participating universities were invited by email to complete a survey. The survey asked respondents to list the scholarly journals they considered essential for their research and teaching (up to 10 journals for each purpose). The three datasets (download, reference list, and survey data) were then merged. Duplicates and non-academic journals were removed. Journals were then grouped into broad discipline areas. A list of “core journals” (p. 228) was created for each institution. These journals produce 80% of downloads, 80% of citations, or 80% of survey mentions at each institution. A journal only had to reach the threshold in one category (i.e., in either downloads, citations, or mentions) to make it onto the core journals list. A “low” (p. 228) survey response rate meant “one mention [was] generally enough" (p. 228) for a journal to be classified as core. Main results – Fewer than 500 titles (n=484, ~1%) made it to the core journals list at all 28 universities. Two thirds (66%, n unknown) of journals did not make it onto the core list of any university. Of the journals deemed to be core, most (60%, n unknown) were shared across all institutions. On average, platforms from not-for-profit organizations and scientific societies contain a higher proportion of core journals than for-profit platforms. Notably, 63.6% of Springer journals, 58.9% of Taylor & Francis journals, and 45.8% of Elsevier’s journals do not appear on the core journal list of any university. Conclusion – Libraries should consider ways to share resources and work more cooperatively in their negotiations with publishers. Further, libraries may be able to cancel entire journal bundles without this having a “sizable” (p. 233) impact on resource access.

Generation 1.5 and Academic Libraries: Strategies for Supporting English Learners (ELs) in Reference and Instruction

Background – Compared to native English speakers, English Learners (ELs) often face additional barriers to academic success. Though typically competent in social English, Generation 1.5 ELs struggle with academic English at the postsecondary level and are still considered to be in the process of learning English. As colleges become increasingly linguistically diverse, academic librarians must adapt to support the growing numbers of ELs in the campus community. Objective – This paper aims to provide academic librarians with information on the scope of English Learners in K-12 through postsecondary education, academic challenges of Generation 1.5 students at the postsecondary level, and strategies that librarians can employ to support English learners in the contexts of reference and instruction. Methods – The author searched journals in the disciplines of academic libraries, higher education, Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL), and linguistics. Additional resources searched include education data and statistics, research institute publications, and English as a New Language (ENL) teaching resources. These sources were explored in regard to the topics of EL educational statistics, K-12 ENL programs, ENL pedagogy, ELs in postsecondary education, Generation 1.5 students, ELs’ academic challenges and educational needs, and academic libraries and ELs. Results – A review of the literature on ELs in academic libraries, particularly Generation 1.5 students, reveals that Generation 1.5 is a population that is in need of support at the postsecondary level. Because Generation 1.5 students often hold strong social English skills, they may enter college without an EL designation or specialized academic support. However, research shows that Generation 1.5 students struggle with college-level academic English, specifically in grammar and vocabulary. These challenges impact students’ communicative success both in college classroom and library environments. Conclusion – Academic librarians may adopt pedagogical strategies commonly employed in ENL classrooms to use in reference and instruction environments. Techniques include themes such as awareness of language use and reinforcement of content, and require low-stakes implementation into library practice. Though librarians may be unaware of the language learning needs of their students, such strategies have shown to be useful for all students. Because techniques that are helpful to ELs also typically benefit all students, these strategies are also applicable to native English speakers.

Public Libraries Help Patrons of Color to Bridge the Digital Divide, but Barriers Remain

A Review of: Pun, R. (2021). Understanding the roles of public libraries and digital exclusion through critical race theory: An exploratory study of people of color in California affected by the digital divide and the pandemic. Urban Library Journal, 26(2). https://academicworks.cuny.edu/ulj/vol26/iss2/1/ Abstract Objective – This study explored the role of the public library in the support of patrons of color who experience digital exclusion. Design – In-person and telephone interviews, grounded theory, and critical race theory. Setting – Public libraries in California. Subjects – Persons of color who were active public library technology resource users due to experiencing the digital divide. Methods – In-person, 60- to 90-minute interviews were conducted with participants referred to the author by public librarians at select libraries in California. Sixteen open-ended questions were asked, relating to demographics, access to technology at home, library technology access and use, technology skills, and thoughts on how libraries could change or improve technology services. A 20- to 30-minute follow-up interview was conducted during the phase of the Covid-19 pandemic when public libraries were closed. Interview transcripts were analyzed by the author, who created a codebook of common themes. Responses were analyzed through the lens of grounded theory and critical race theory. Main Results – Nine participants were recruited; six consented to the first interview and two of the six consented to the second interview. Four of the participants self-reported as Asian, one as Black/African American, and one as Hispanic/Latino American. None of the participants had internet access in their homes, though some reported having laptops or inconsistent cellular service. Common uses of library technology included job search activities (resume building, job searching, applications); schoolwork; research and skill development; and legal or housing form finding. Leisure activities including social media and YouTube were also mentioned. Access limitations included inconvenient library hours, particularly for those attending college or holding a job with daytime hours, and physical distance from the library. A common complaint was the time limit on computer access set by the library; “the concept of time” was mentioned “over 70 times collectively by all participants” (p. 14). Language was another barrier to access, mentioned by three of the participants. Most reported being more likely to ask for help from a library staff person who shared their language or had a similar background. Participants also reported wishing more technology workshops were offered, especially workshops in languages other than English. The two participants who took part in the second interview “expressed frustration and sadness” about the lack of library access during the Covid-19 pandemic (p. 16). One participant reported having to get internet access at her home for her children to attend school. The second participant expressed her difficulty in conducting research or printing information with only the small screen of her phone to provide access. Conclusion – Library patrons of color living within the digital divide make use of public library technology but experience multiple barriers. Libraries can alleviate these barriers by examining their hours, policies, and staffing models to be more accessible to patrons of color lacking internet access at home.

It’s What’s on the Inside That Counts: Analyzing Student Use of Sources in Composition Research Papers

Objective – This study is designed to discover what kinds of sources are cited by composition students in the text of their papers and to determine what types of sources are used most frequently. It also examines the relationship of bibliographies to in-text citations to determine whether students “pad” their bibliographies with traditional academic sources not used in the text of their papers. Methods – The study employs a novel method grounded in multidisciplinary research, which the authors used to tally 1,652 in-text citations from a sample of 71 student papers gathered from English Composition II courses at three universities in the United States. These data were then compared against the papers’ bibliographic references, which had previously been categorized using the WHY Method. Results – The results indicate that students rely primarily on traditional academic and journalistic sources in their writing, but also incorporate a significant and diverse array of other kinds of source material. The findings identify a strong institutional effect on student source use, as well as the average number and type of in-text citations, which demographic characteristics do not explain. Additionally, the study demonstrates that student bibliographies are highly predictive of in-text source selection, and that students do not exhibit a pattern of “padding” bibliographies with academic sources. Conclusion – The data warrant the conclusions that an understanding of one’s own institution is vitally important for effective work with students regarding their source selection, and that close analysis of student bibliographies gives an unexpectedly reliable picture of the types and proportions of sources cited in student writing.

Relationship Between Academic Library Workers’ Outlooks on Life, Personality, and Goal-Setting Behavior and Achievement

A Review of: Lo, L.S. & Anderson, A.M. (2020). Personal goal setting behavior and professional outlooks of academic library employees. Journal of New Librarianship, 5, 204-236. https://doi.org/10.33011/newlibs/9/21 Abstract Objective – To identify a correlation between academic library employees who set New Year’s resolutions and goal-setting behavior in professional contexts, and to explore practices, personal attitudes, and outlooks that influence goal-setting and goal-achievement Design – Non-experimental multiple choice questionnaire Setting – Online Subjects – 308 adult participants (over 21 years old) who work in academic library settings including staff, librarians, and administration Methods – The authors designed an online, non-experimental multiple choice questionnaire through Qualtrics. The authors distributed study invitations to multiple professional library listservs, though it is unclear which listservs were included and what geographic location was covered. The survey was available for roughly a month from February 1-26, 2016. The survey screened participant demographics to omit those under 21 years of age and all identifying information was removed in order to protect participant privacy. All participation was voluntary and participants who were interested in contributing to a follow-up research study were asked to share their contact emails. Main Results – Most participants (n=182, 59%) set no New Year's resolutions in 2015 and half (n=155, 50%) set no resolutions in 2016. When asked to explain, 23% noted that they hadn't considered setting resolutions in 2016, 9% did not prioritize setting goals, and 5% felt that they could not achieve their goals. Additionally, over 50% articulated other reasons including not prioritizing goal-setting for New Year’s, noting that setting goals around the academic year was timelier, and that some participants already had enough goals to achieve. In 2016, half of participants (n=153, 50%) set New Year’s resolutions. By far the most common resolution was physical fitness and healthy eating (n=64, 42%). About 19% set occupational goals including skill building, and 15% set emotional goals including cultivating optimism and mindfulness. When asked about goal-setting practices, 36% of the 2016 resolution setters described writing or typing out their goals, 59% shared their goals with others, and nearly 90% enacted changes in their daily routines in order to achieve their goals. 26 participants used all of the goal setting practices above. This group prioritized their top goals and felt confident about reaching those goals. Four participants did not practice goal-setting techniques, and also felt less confident about achieving their goals. 49% of 2016 resolution setters had somewhat optimistic outlooks, and 24% had very optimistic life outlooks. Of those with pessimistic life outlooks, nearly all believed it would be difficult to accomplish goals. Respondents who claimed to be very ambitious were likely to set occupational goals as their top goal. 81% of those in dean and director positions reported being very ambitious and 85% also reported being optimistic. All deans and directors felt confident about accomplishing their goals. For middle managers, 75% felt ambitious and 72% felt optimistic. Professional librarians were 66% ambitious and 72% optimistic. Conclusions – This study's findings align closely with United States national averages about the percentage of Americans who set New Year’s resolutions and achieve their goals. Data suggests some relationship between academic library workers’ outlooks on life and confidence in achieving their goals, as well as a correlation between goal setting strategies and achieving goals. The authors express optimism that 20% of participants who set New Year's resolutions chose to list occupational goals as their top goals, especially considering that resolution-setting comprises an incredibly broad array of options. The authors suggest that data can be used by academic library administrators to increase worker job performance, improve worker wellness, establish mentorship programs, and train workers to set attainable goals.

Library Staff Need More Support in Order to Alleviate Teaching Anxiety

A Review of: Lundstrom, K., Fagerheim, B. & Van Geem, S. (2021). Library teaching anxiety: Understanding and supporting a persistent issue in librarianship. College & Research Libraries, 82(3), 389-409. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.82.3.389 Abstract Objective – To determine academic librarians’ attitudes towards their teaching, how teaching anxiety manifests itself, and how teaching anxiety affects these attitudes. Design – Online Survey. Setting – The survey was distributed through various library science listservs. Subjects – Any library staff with a teaching component in their role were invited to respond. There was a total of 1,035 initial responses. Methods – The survey questions were based on a previously published survey about teaching anxiety by Davis (2007). However, the survey for this study added questions about formal and self-diagnosis of other types of anxieties, physical and psychological anxiety symptoms, and how teaching anxiety impacts other areas of the respondents’ lives. There were also questions on potential supports to reduce teaching anxiety, as well as potential barriers to these supports. Main Results – It was found that approximately 65% of respondents experience teaching anxiety. Approximately 40% of those respondents were formally diagnosed with anxiety, and approximately 42% were self-diagnosed. There was a significant association between a formal diagnosis of anxiety, and teaching anxiety. There were also significant associations between past training, preparation, and teaching anxiety, with anxiety occurring less with increased training and preparation. Conclusion – Teaching anxiety is a significant issue among library staff. Supports in the form of workshops on teaching as well as coping with anxiety can possibly help to reduce this phenomenon.