Library Data
ANALYSIS
FOCUS GROUP REVEALS RETICENCE ABOUT MOVE TO DIGITAL CONTENT
A recent focus group of postgraduate students has given publishers insight into how these students use digital and print resources, writes Jenny Kedros
I
n spite of constant media attention around new forms of technology and especially e-books, students still appear to be reticent about embracing new technologies in their studies.
Postgraduate students at a recent launch event for The London Viewing Room, a new viewing room facility in Islington, London, spent a 90-minute session discussing university and course choice and experience, and their use of digital and non-digital resources. This focus group, moderated by Jane Powell, managing director of education market research company Shift Learning, was
viewed through a one-way mirror
from the client room by representatives from seven publishing companies. These publishers – Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press, Sage, Emerald Insight, Cengage Learning, Taylor & Francis and Hodder Education – had provided some questions for the focus group guide in the run up to the event.
The students in the group, who studied a range of subjects at universities in and around London, felt there was a constant push for them to move to digital but they were resisting it. Although respondents were seeing increasingly more iPads and e-readers at university and they expected more use of e-books in the future, they were unanimous in the hope that this wouldn’t come at the expense of face-to-face time and hard-copy texts.
The students in the focus group said that they used a wide range of online sources and databases (mentions included JSTOR, Project MUSE, Oxford Dictionary of
National Biography, Athens, Emerald
journals, LexisLibrary, Westlaw UK, ISI Web of Knowledge and Inspiration). They also used search resources including Google Scholar and Wikipedia. However, it was startling (and distinctly disheartening to the publishers watching the group) how little the students bought digital study resources and e-books.
No student in the group had purchased
www.researchinformation.info
The focus group revealed a ongoing desire for hard-copy texts, in spite of the advent of tablets and e-readers
a digital-only book. Two students had purchased a textbook with a code for online access that was recommended by a tutor, but students were unsure that they had ever accessed a companion site before. Added to this, when choosing books from a reading list, students admitted they opted for the shortest book, the first book they come across, or (in the case of the medical students) the one with the most images.
In spite of the lack of e-book purchases, the students did identify some benefits. They concurred that the advantages of e-books lay in their being a good alternative to heaving bulky textbooks around. They also admitted
to the value of keyword searches and the ability for the author and publisher to update the text more frequently than with print editions. However, this did not translate into an impact on their buying behaviour. Perhaps unsurprisingly, then, none of the students would consider personal purchases of journal articles that were not available to them through the library.
Medical students had by far the greatest use of apps for their studies, but overall students in our group used very few apps, apart from iTunesU, YouTube and some podcasts. Two of the students did not have smartphones and were in fact quite proud of this. The
APR/MAY 2012 Research Information 11
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36