Student Feedback on Federated Search Use, Satisfaction, and Web Presence: Qualitative Findings of Focus Groups

All focus group sessions were conducted in a library conference room. As participants arrived, they were invited to help themselves to refreshments and asked to complete a consent form in accordance with IUS’s Institutional Review Board requirements. One committee member served as the moderator for all of the sessions. The moderator started each session with a standard introduction and then used the prepared questions to guide the discussion. The discussion was audio recorded, and one or two committee members also took notes. The moderator concluded each session by thanking the participants, and the participants were compensated for their time with a giftcard to their choice of one of three restaurants.

This study used a note-based analysis. The note takers captured as much of the discussion as possible during the sessions and, as necessary, referred to the audio recordings to fill in gaps and verify quotations. After each session, the note takers submitted electronic copies of their notes to the moderator, who transferred the notes to a spreadsheet. The spreadsheet had a separate worksheet for each question. Each worksheet entry represented one participant response, and each response was coded to help reveal which responses were most common and were mentioned in multiple sessions.

Two rounds of focus groups were conducted. Three sessions were held in June 2007, and two sessions were held in September 2007. Eighteen students participated in these five sessions, with two to six participants per session. The participants were almost evenly divided between genders and disciplines, although the humanities were not well represented. Participants also were almost evenly divided between undergraduate and graduate students. While the committee would have liked more participants, the participants in the last sessions shared no new viewpoints or ideas. According to Krueger and Casey, a sufficient number of focus groups have been conducted when researchers no longer receive new comments from participants.¹⁶

Results

In the following results, specific numbers are not given because focus groups provide qualitative, rather than quantitative, information.

Use

Most of the participants had used Search It often, including a majority of the graduate students. The remaining participants had each used Search It a few times. When asked how they learned about Search It, most responded that they had discovered it on their own. This response was given in all five sessions. Only a few responded that they had learned about Search It from a librarian; one mentioned learning about it from a professor and another from a speech coach.

Many participants said they used Search It because it is faster, easier, and less confusing to use. All participants who said this were graduate students. After two years on campus, one graduate student still does not understand “the different database thing.” Search It also serves as a good beginning point for a few participants. One uses it as “a tool to get started.”

The participants had a variety of responses to how they use Search It for their research. Some of the responses included using it to research unfamiliar topics, to find specific items, for thesis research, as a starting point, after other searches have been unsuccessful, and at the last minute.

A majority of the participants use only the Advanced Search or use both the Quick Search and the Advanced Search. Figure 2 shows the Advanced Search page, and the Quick Search box can be seen in figure 1. Those who use only the Advanced Search said they tend to start there because in the past they have not found what they are looking for with the Quick Search. Some use the Quick Search for less familiar topics and the Advanced Search for familiar topics. One participant said, “I’ve used both. It just depends on how much you know about a topic you’re researching.” Others use the Quick Search first, and if that is not successful they switch to the Advanced Search. For example, one participant said, “I start with that [Quick Search] and then if it doesn’t pull up what I’m looking for then I’ll go to the Advanced.” Only a couple of participants rely solely on the Quick Search, although they are frequent Search It users. They simply like the Quick Search.

The availability of Search It has had mixed effects on the participants’ research process. Several participants stated that it had not significantly changed their research process; they continued to use native interfaces as their primary research tools. Search It was not a first-choice research tool. The most common reason was that they preferred the tools with which they were already familiar. This reason was mentioned in four sessions. One participant said, “I still like to go with what I was taught as a freshman.” Other participants noted that they still use traditional library resources (i.e., catalog, databases) before Search It because those resources are simply more obvious on the library homepage.

Participants who had changed their research process after trying Search It cited a variety of reasons, but two were most common. A few participants said that Search It broadened their horizons; they found information in resources that they never would have searched on their own. Others said that Search It provided them with an easier way to find reliable information. Notably, a couple of graduate students mentioned that they do not give up on library research as quickly now because Search It serves as a springboard for them:

I really like that [Google Scholar] because it gave you a lot of academic articles, but that was kind of a pain because you had to kind of dig through all of the resources or databases that were available in the library just to find that one article you couldn’t access from Google Scholar.

I think that for incoming college freshmen, their high schools focus on Google and Internet searches. This whole concept of Search It is like their equivalent Academic Google.

Before I was just using individual databases, and as a matter of fact it sort of increased my searching for articles and books. Before I think I’d just give up on them because sometimes you don’t really go to the right database. As I said before, I really don’t understand what all the databases are. …

I think I used social sciences databases. I gave up a lot, too. I couldn’t find things in the databases that were listed. A lot of the articles I find now are actually from the ERIC database, so it’s broadened my perspective on what articles I can find in what databases.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7