Just One More Question

I’m on sabbatical for the spring and early summer, working on a study of undergraduate attitudes and practices around their course reading that should complement our research on students’ lived experiences at CUNY. I’m interested in how our students get access to what they need to read, their process while reading (for example, do they take notes? where do they find space and time to read?), how they prioritize the task of reading, and where they encounter frustration and success.

This is not a post about the results of my research — while I’ve finished up interviews, transcriptions, and coding, I’ve yet to dig into writing up. But I wanted to take some time to write and think about my research practice while the interviewing, transcribing, and coding process is still relatively fresh in my mind. In particular I’d like to consider one specific question I asked during my semi-structured interviews with students:

Are there any questions you thought I would ask that I didn’t?

This question closed out most of my 30 interviews with students and elicited a variety of responses. It’s not a question I’ve asked of research participants before this study, though it seemed like a potentially useful twist on the “is there anything else you’d like to share?” question that I’ve often used at the end of interviews.

Let’s start with the flyers I hung up at BMCC, Brooklyn College, and City Tech to recruit students. Here’s what they said:

BMCC* Students: I’m a City Tech professor doing a study on college students and course reading, and I’d like to interview you.

*or Brooklyn College or City Tech

Underneath that was a bit of text about participant incentives, my name, and the email address to use to contact me for more information or to join the study. When students emailed me I responded briefly with information that was mostly logistical: participants must be at least 18 years old, interviews will take about 30 minutes and be audio-recorded, the Metrocard/Amazon giftcard is for $10.

When students came meet me for an interview, the first thing I did was ask them to read and sign the consent form, as required by CUNY’s Institutional Review Board. The form is 1 1/2 pages long, and while there is a brief summary of my project, it’s predominantly required text about potential risks and benefits, confidentiality, participant rights, and non-participation or withdrawal. In my experience most students read through consent forms fairly quickly; I always ask students if they have any questions before signing, and most don’t.

Looking back at students’ responses to my new last interview question has been fascinating. Most students replied with “no” or some variation on no, like this student from BMCC: “You actually asked all the right questions.” And this somewhat humorous response from a City Tech student: “I think you’ve asked a sufficient amount of questions” (laugh).

A Brooklyn College student thought I would ask about their prior experiences and background with reading, because “a lot of college students hate reading and, like, dread it.” They further speculated on the source of students’ reading struggles: “maybe because they just don’t have really good foundations in reading.” Since I did ask students about their experiences with reading in high school or educational settings before college, as well as about their struggles with reading, I was glad to hear that this student’s expectations matched the interview’s reality.

A couple of students replied that they thought I would ask them to read during the interview, like this Brooklyn College student: “I thought I would come here to read something and you would get my opinion on that.” This student also shared that “I really like that it was specified towards me.” In prior rounds of research we’ve heard from students that mapping their days and considering their research process offered an opportunity for self-reflection that they found valuable, and I think this student’s response hints at that kind of reflection as well.

Several students across all three colleges told me that they thought I would ask whether their reading was difficult or interesting, or about specific topics for reading “like, for English classes” (City Tech). A BMCC student expected me to ask about their process for writing papers, which makes sense given that a paper is often the end result of reading that students are required to do.

A few students responded to my question by asking for more specific information on my study, including what I planned to do with the results of the research. Some students had asked this question when they initially emailed me (and one student mentioned that my email had answered all of her questions). In response to the students who asked for more details I shared a bit about my role as a library faculty member and wanting to learn more about what kinds of course materials students need and where they encounter barriers accessing or reading them. I also let students know that I’ll be sharing the results of my research both within CUNY and more broadly via conferences and publications.

Looking back at all of these student responses makes me think that I should add a sentence or two about the purpose of the research to my email with students when signing them up for the study. I also wonder whether I’ve been clear enough about the purpose of my research on the consent form, though it’s unavoidable that some of the required language on the consent form is quite dry (and with its length it’s easy for participants to treat it like terms & conditions and just read quickly and sign). Overall I think this new twist on my final question is a good one, and I’m inclined to keep it for the future.

“The Campus Doesn’t have a Refrigerator”

Many thanks to our colleagues at Hunter College Libraries for inviting us to present today at the Hunter College Library Faculty Teaching & Research Forum. It was great to have the opportunity to share some of our the data from our student and faculty interviews at Hunter and to discuss our results. Thanks to all who came to the program!

I’ve just uploaded our slides under Results & Findings.

Project Design

Data collection during our 2018-2019 research cycle included:

Students enrolled in English Composition II were invited to provide feedback on their
experiences doing research for their course assignments throughout the semester, to
investigate the kinds of information literacy, library, and other supports that students find

Download our protocol

Data collection during our 2017-2018 research cycle included:

Find information on and the protocol for this sub-study, Undergraduate Reading Attitudes and Practices, on Maura’s website.

Methods of data collection during our 2015-2016 research cycle included:

1. Student SMS Mapping Diaries: Twenty students at each college were asked to chart their movements during one academic day by replying via their cellphones to text message prompts sent every 75 minutes. The research team geocoded the data to create a map of each participant’s day, then the student was interviewed and asked to narrate the events of the day while examining the map with the researcher.

Protocol included as the appendix of A Day in the Life: Practical Strategies for Understanding Student Space-Use Practices, in the proceedings of the 2016 Library Assessment Conference

2. Student In-Person Technology Surveys: Between 10-15 students at each college participated in a brief interview about their technology ownership, access, and use for their academic work. Researchers set up a table in high-traffic areas on campus and recruited students as they walked by the table.

Download our protocol

3. Student Online Questionnaire: Students in hybrid and online courses were asked to complete an online questionnaire on their technology access and use, focusing on the technologies they use to participate in these courses.

Download our protocol

4. Faculty Online Questionnaire: Faculty teaching hybrid and online courses were recruited to complete a questionnaire about their and their students’ experiences with technology in their hybrid and online courses.

Download our protocol

Methods of data collection during our 2009-2011 research cycle included:

1. Faculty Interviews: 10-14 faculty members at each college were interviewed in-person for 30 minutes each. The interviews explored faculty expectations for and experiences with their students’ work on research-based assignments.

Download our protocol

2. Mapping Diaries: Ten students at each college were asked to record and sketch their activities, including location and time, over the course of a typical school day. When the diaries were complete, each student was interviewed individually to explain and comment on the maps and sketches.

Download our protocol

3. Photo Surveys: Ten students at each college were given a disposable camera/asked to use their own camera or phone and a list of 20 objects and locations related to student scholarly habits to photograph. After the photos were developed or downloaded, each student was interviewed individually for 30 minutes and asked to explain the content of the pictures and offer comments.

Download our protocol

4. Research Process Interview: Ten students at each college were interviewed individually for 45 minutes. Each student was asked to describe in detail how they completed a research assignment from start to finish. Students were encouraged to draw or sketch the process while describing it.

Download our protocol