lombardo.p65 6 College & Research Libraries January 2003 Caught in the Web: The Impact of Library Instruction on Business Students’ Perceptions and Use of Print and Online Resources Shawn V. Lombardo and Cynthia E. Miree Many business students rely heavily on the Web for research, in part because of their unfamiliarity with the breadth of their library’s business resources (online and in print). This study sought to determine whether library instruction could impact undergraduate business students’ atti­ tudes and use of three information formats: print materials, library data­ bases, and Web resources. Over the course of a semester, pre-/ postinstruction questionnaires were collected from ninety students en­ rolled in a business capstone course. Results indicate that after library instruction, students held more favorable attitudes toward print resources and used them in their research more than they had initially expected. n today’s fast-paced world, the students to the full array of research tools desire for expediency has at their disposal. Past research has dem­ prompted undergraduate stu- onstrated that library instruction can in­ dents to place a premium on fluence students’ general attitudes toward information that can be found quickly and easily. To this end, many students limit their research to electronic resources, choosing format over substance and con­ venience over accuracy. In particular, re­ liance on the World Wide Web as a pri­ mary—and often sole—research tool has impacted the quality and rigor of student projects and reduced students’ familiar­ ity with more traditional print resources and bibliographic databases in their university’s library collection. Given this trend, more than ever it is imperative that librarians, in collaboration with academic faculty, take a central role in introducing the library and its resources; more work must be done, however, to measure the impact of library instruction on students’ perceptions of specific information for­ mats. Equally important, librarians must fully examine how library instruction impacts students’ use of these resources. The current study was designed to measure business students’ initial percep­ tions and use of three information for­ mats: the Web, online bibliographic and full-text databases, and print reference resources. Further, the authors wanted to explore the impact of library instruction on students’ attitudes about and use of Shawn V. Lombardo is an Assistant Professor and Business Librarian in the Kresge Library at Oakland University; e-mail: lombardo@oakland.edu. Cynthia E. Miree is an Assistant Professor of Management at Oakland University; e-mail: miree@oakland.edu. 6 mailto:miree@oakland.edu mailto:lombardo@oakland.edu Caught in the Web 7 these research tools. The study was guided by the following research ques­ tions: • Can library instruction impact un­ dergraduate business students’ percep­ tions of the Web, online databases, and print resources? • Can library instruction affect stu­ dents’ use of these resources in complet­ ing a business-related research project? The development of more compre­ hensive, relevant, and easily search­ able subject directories and search engines (e.g., Yahoo, Google) and the ubiquity of the Web have resulted in a generation of students who now perceive the Internet as the most familiar, convenient, and expedient source of information. Literature Review Studies on research behavior have dem­ onstrated that students are drawn to in­ formation sources that allow them to com­ plete their research, as Barbara Valentine wrote, in the “easiest, least painful way,” choosing research tools based on ease of use and favoring convenience of access over quality of information.1 Valentine’s research revealed that students tend to avoid resources they are unfamiliar with or believe are difficult to use, returning to tools they have used successfully in the past.2 As a result, many students turn to electronic resources for their research needs. Peggy Seiden, Kris Szymborski, and Barbara Norelli found that students favor electronic resources primarily for their convenience and efficiency and in­ dicated a strong preference for full-text access to information.3 In a separate study conducted by Debbie Malone and Carol Videon, students most frequently cited ease of use as their reason for selecting electronic resources over print materials.4 Until recently, students were enamored of subscription-based library databases for their convenience and ease of use as com­ pared with the library’s paper indexes and other print materials. In a 1996 study of incoming students at St. Olaf College, Bryn Geffert and Beth Christensen found that more students had used an electronic pe­ riodical index than had used the Web.5 And a 1998 study by Brad MacDonald and Robert Dunkelberger revealed that stu­ dents first turned to Searchbank—more frequently than even the Web—when be­ ginning their research. Unfortunately, these students also tended to limit their search in the database to just those articles that were available full-text.6 The development of more comprehen­ sive, relevant, and easily searchable sub­ ject directories and search engines (e.g., Yahoo, Google) and the ubiquity of the Web have resulted in a generation of stu­ dents who now perceive the Internet as the most familiar, convenient, and expedient source of information. In a study of fresh­ man English students at the University of Louisiana, Bradley P. Tolppanen found that one-half of those surveyed turned to the Web first for information.7 And Wen- Hua Ren’s 1999 study at Rutgers Univer­ sity revealed that 45 percent of the under­ graduates surveyed used the Internet daily. In contrast, one-half of the students used the library’s databases only occasion­ ally and 40 percent had never used them at all.8 Citation analyses of student bibli­ ographies further demonstrate students’ dependence on the Web. In a longitudinal study of the bibliographies of undergradu­ ate student term papers from 1996 to 1999, Philip M. Davis and Suzanne A. Cohen observed that, although the total number of citations remained unchanged over time, there was a significant decline in the number of books cited, with a concurrent increase in the number of Web site cita­ tions.9 An update to this study revealed that, compared with previous years, a majority of student bibliographies in 2000 included more citations to Web sites than to other information formats.10 This trend toward exclusive use of the Web for research has raised concerns among academic and library faculty. Su­ san Davis Herring found that although faculty accept the Web as a valid research tool, they nevertheless question their stu­ dents’ ability to think critically about the http:formats.10 8 College & Research Libraries January 2003 information they find—and with good reason.11 Deborah J. Grimes and Carl H. Boening observed that students often fail to evaluate Web-based information for authorship, currency, and bias.12 And Tolppanen reported that a discouraging 92.5 percent of students surveyed be­ lieved that the information they find on the Web is accurate.13 Other studies have demonstrated clearly that students do not comprehend this new digital environ­ ment. They do not understand the con­ tent of the Web nor can they distinguish between a Web site and a bibliographic database that is accessed via the Internet.14,15 Yet, many students are confi­ dent—perhaps overconfident—using the Web, believing that the Internet has made them self-sufficient researchers.16 Worse still, Grimes and Boening found that stu­ dents do not perceive librarians as a re­ source to turn to for assistance in search­ ing the Web and, as a result, often search on their own, inexpertly and ineffi­ ciently.17 Finally, Davis and Cohen sug­ gested that students’ work has become less rigorous, in part, because they restrict the type and range of scholarship they use in their research activities, neglecting other potentially valuable information sources.18 Unfortunately, although the Internet opens the door to a wealth of business-related data, reliance on the Web also can result in the neglect of important information housed in traditional print resources and online databases. Many students avoid print resources at all costs because of their inconvenience and perceived difficulty. The students experience real frustration in accessing print materials and often are unaware of the purpose, scope, and content of an aca­ demic library’s reference collection.19,20 In a study of students enrolled in a fresh­ man-level writing course, Shawn V. Lombardo and Kristine S. Condic found that more than 35 percent of undergradu­ ates ignored citations to articles available in the library in print format in favor of citations to online articles.21 Further, one- quarter of the library users surveyed at the University of North Carolina indi­ cated that they would never use print re­ sources under any circumstances.22 Stu­ dents want to complete their research with a minimum of time and effort and, for many of them, the library’s electronic resources are the only answer. Unfortu­ nately for these students, print resources are replete with valuable information (both current and historical) that often cannot be found on the Web. With such a strong bias among stu­ dents toward using the Web as their pri­ mary research tool, library instruction should be considered a crucial means of introducing students to print materials and electronic resources besides the Web. Numerous researchers have used a pre-/ posttest methodology to demonstrate positive change in students’ research skills and knowledge of the library and its resources after library instruction.23 Other researchers have used surveys and qualitative methods such as focus groups to measure changes in students’ attitudes as outcomes of library instruction. These studies demonstrate that library instruc­ tion can positively impact such percep­ tions as students’ confidence in their re­ search skills, self-efficacy in searching electronic resources, and satisfaction with the library.24–26 Fewer studies have shown that library instruction can influence stu­ dents’ actual use of research tools.27 How­ ever, most of these studies do not address student use of print resources—still a valuable format for much business data. How well do business students fit into the research patterns and attitudes of other students? In a study that used both sur­ vey and observation methods to investi­ gate business students’ research behaviors and attitudes toward information re­ sources, Joseph D. Atkinson III and Miguel Figueroa observed that a majority of busi­ ness students favored electronic resources over print materials, primarily for their convenience, ease of use, and speed. In fact, many of these students assumed that elec­ http:tools.27 http:instruction.23 http:circumstances.22 http:articles.21 http:sources.18 http:ciently.17 http:researchers.16 http:accurate.13 http:reason.11 Caught in the Web 9 tronic resources would provide answers quickly and were surprised when they lo­ cated information in print resources more easily. When asked to identify information resources with which they were familiar, subjects identified Internet resources about as often as library databases but cited print resources much less frequently.28 The study also indicates that business students val­ ued their time, seeking “immediate trade­ offs in their allocation of time versus the amount of relevant information retrieved” and going so far as to end their research when the time they allotted themselves to complete the research was finished, rather than when their information needs were filled.29 Similarly, Thomas R. Mirkovich, in a study of the library use patterns of un­ dergraduate business and MBA students, found that library use by business students was very light. These students were un­ aware of the types of business resources available to them and received little guid­ ance from their faculty.30 Atkinson and Figueroa further asserted that business stu­ dents, by the nature of their academic dis­ cipline, are predisposed to these percep­ tions.31 Business students and profession­ als alike see the value of time (“Time is money”) and the importance of keeping current with new technologies to maintain a competitive advantage; thus, it seems likely that they would turn most often to the Web for their information needs. Unfortunately, although the Internet opens the door to a wealth of business-re­ lated data, reliance on the Web also can result in the neglect of important informa­ tion housed in traditional print resources and online databases. Further, the Web (at least the portion that is available freely) is not necessarily the most efficient place to begin looking for discrete business data and statistics (such as industry ratios), es­ pecially for inexperienced searchers. Busi­ ness information on the Web is often frag­ mented, making thorough searches for information on a particular company or industry difficult and time-consuming. To combat business students’ percep­ tions, Atkinson and Figueroa suggested that library instruction for these students should emphasize “cost-effectiveness and time-efficiency when retrieving print re­ sources versus electronic resources.”32 But given that business students are predis­ posed to think favorably about online re­ sources and that a plethora of company and industry data is available on the Web (without respect to the accuracy and ob­ jectivity of that information), how suc­ cessful can a librarian and a management professor be in persuading students to use a full range of business information re­ sources, including print resources and subscription-based databases, to complete a major research assignment? The authors of this study attempted to address this question by exploring whether under­ graduate business students at Oakland University shared similar attitudes to­ ward online and print business resources as those demonstrated in the literature and by investigating whether library in­ struction could affect students’ percep­ tions, biases, and use of information re­ sources in completing a research project. Methodology Preceodres The study sample was drawn from three sections of a required business class dur­ ing the fall of 2001. This class, known as Strategic Management, requires students to study how companies position them­ selves to compete in various industries. Although the class was mandatory, par­ ticipation in the study was voluntary and those students who chose to participate were given extra credit. The study was conducted in three phases. Phase one: On the first day of class, af­ ter the instructor described the research project required for the class, the business librarian explained the study and solic­ ited subjects. The students who enrolled in the study then completed a question­ naire designed to capture their knowl­ edge of, attitudes about, and experiences using three information formats: library print resources, library databases and Web resources.33 In addition, students were asked to assess their ability to com­ plete the research required for the class http:resources.33 http:tions.31 http:faculty.30 http:filled.29 http:frequently.28 10 College & Research Libraries January 2003 and to predict which types of resources they expected to rely on most heavily to complete the project. Phase two: Approximately five weeks into the semester, the business librarian in­ troduced students to business research tools available at or through the library. The librarian began the session with a dis­ cussion of the benefits and problems of the three resource types and solicited student opinions about each resource type. In ad­ dition, she emphasized the importance of using a variety of resources when conduct­ ing research. This discussion was followed by a demonstration of individual re­ sources. Finally, the librarian provided stu­ dents with an extensive handout that cat­ egorized different types of Web, database, and print business resources along with their location in the library or online. For those resources available in both electronic and print formats, both locations were given. After the formal instruction, stu­ dents completed a brief exercise that re­ quired them to answer business-related questions using the resources presented to them during the session. Phase three: Phase three consisted of two parts. During the last week of class, students returned to the library for a fol­ low-up session wherein the librarian provided instruction on proper citation format for Web, database, and print re­ sources. On the last day of class, partici­ pants handed in their research projects and completed a second questionnaire that was designed to capture their knowledge, attitudes, and experiences regarding the different information for­ mats, as well as their perceptions of the research project and their library use during the course of the semester. To maintain confidentiality, all of the instru­ ments used in this study had an identi­ fying number linking them to each other, but not directly to individual students. The resulting data were analyzed using the SPSS statistical package. Sample At the beginning of the semester, 102 subjects enrolled in the study. Subjects were required to attend two library ses­ sions, complete two exercises, and fill out two questionnaires in order to be in­ cluded in the study. Students who did not complete all three phases of the study were automatically dropped from the sample. By the end of the semester, twelve subjects either withdrew or were elimi­ nated based on their inability to complete the study. The final sample consisted of ninety students. The average age of the students was 24 years, and the average GPA was 3.10. Table 1 summarizes other relevant demo­ graphic information. Because the re­ searchers were interested in prior re­ search behavior, they tried to determine how the students had used the library in the past and where they preferred to con­ duct their research (table 2). At the begin­ ning of the study, 63 percent of the stu- TABLE 1 Sample Demographics Major Frequency Percent MIS 39 43.3 Marketing 15 16.7 General management 11 12.2 Human resource management 10 11.1 Accounting 9 10.0 Finance 4 4.4 Other 2 2.2 Work Status Percent Works part-time 42 46.7 Works full-time 41 45.6 Does not work 7 7.8 Academic Status Percent Part-time student 13 84.4 Full-time student 76 14.4 Gender Percent Female 54 60.0 Male 36 40.0 Average Age 24.3 (min. = 19; max. = 48) Average GPA 3.1(min. = 2.6; max. = 3.8) Caught in the Web 11 TABLE 2 Preinstruction Library Use and Research Preferences Reason Student Uses the Library Most Often Frequency Percent To use computers or for group meetings 30 33.3 As a place to study 27 30.0 To do individual or group research 26 28.9 Student never goes to the library 7 7.8 Number of Visits to the Library in a Semester Student never goes to the library 8 8.9 1-4 times per semester 35 38.9 1-4 times per month 27 30.0 1-4 times per week 17 18.9 About once a day 3 3.3 Location Used Most Often for Research Computer at home 43 47.8 Other computer labs at the university (besides the library) 19 21.1 University library 17 18.9 Computer at work 5 5.6 Another university's library 2 2.2 Library at place of employment 1 1.1 Preferred Resource at Preferred Location Web resources 74 82.2 Library databases 15 16.7 Library print resources 1 1.1 Type of Resource Typically Used First Web resources 75 83.3 Library databases 14 15.6 Library print resources 1 1.1 Type of Resource Used Most Often Web resources 75 83.3 Library databases 14 15.6 Library print resources 1 1.1 Number of Business-related Research Projects in the Past Two Years 0-3 projects 36 40.0 4-6 projects 31 34.4 7 or more projects 21 23.3 dents use the library primarily as a place to study, use the school’s computers, or attend group meetings. Approximately 48 percent of the students historically had visited the library four times or less in a given semester, compared with 52 percent who visited the library once a month or more. Taken together, these numbers sug­ gest that the students who had visited the library most often probably used it for activities other than doing research. More than half the students at the beginning of 12 College & Research Libraries January 2003 the study also preferred to do their re­ search on a computer (either at work or at home). Finally, students indicated that they used the Web first and more often than library databases or print resources to complete research projects. Measures To measure familiarity with different re­ source types, students were given a list of ten frequently used print resources, ten library databases, and ten Web sites com­ monly used for business and economic research (e.g., Standard and Poor’s Indus­ try Surveys, ABI/Inform, the Securities and Exchange Commission Web site) and asked to indicate, on a five-point likert scale, the extent to which they had used those resources (1 = I have never heard of this resource; 5 = I have used the resource to a great extent). Their responses were averaged for each resource type and as­ signed a “familiarity score” ranging from 1 to 5 for each resource type. Paired t-tests were performed to measure differences in the students’ familiarity with the three information formats. In an effort to understand students’ at­ titudes about, and actual use of, the three types of information resources, the re­ searchers looked at the following attitu­ dinal variables: convenience of using the resource, perceived reliability of informa­ tion contained in the resource, perceived ability to find information quickly using the resource, ease of use, frustration us­ ing the resource, perceived currency of in­ formation contained in the resource, and ability to use only that resource to find all necessary information. Students were asked to express the extent of their agree­ ment with statements about each of the different resource types using a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). Table 3 provides ex­ amples of these statements for library databases; the statements on print and Web resources used the same question stem. Because the researchers were inter­ ested in determining whether instruction could influence students’ attitudes, the same questions were used on the final questionnaire completed at the end of the semester. Results RindingsAonAStudents'A ttitudes The researchers found, not surprisingly, that the students were most familiar with Web resources; interestingly, though, they were more familiar with the library’s print resources than its online databases (mean = 2.67, mean = 2.09, web print mean = 1.82). Their level of famil­ databases iarity with each type of resource varied significantly (mean -m = .23, print databases TABLE 3 Attitudinal Questions (about library databases) In general, the business-related infornation found in LIBRARY DATABASES is reliable. LIBRARY DATABASES are easy to use. LIBRARY DATABASES are convenient to use. In general, I think that I can find all the infornation I need to conplete business-related research using only LIBRARY DATABASES. In general, business-related infornation can be found quickly using LIBRARY DATA- BASES. Current business-related infornation can be found on LIBRARY DATABASES. Business-related infornation for the past five years can be found on LIBRARY DATA- BASES. I find using LIBRARY DATABASES to be very frustrating. *** *** *** *** *** ** ** *** *** *** *** *** *** ** *** *** *** "V oo *** Caught in the Web 13 p<.01, mean -mean = -.85, databases web p<.001, mean -mean = -.57, print web p<.0001). In keeping with Atkinson and Figueroa’s assertion that busi­ ness students are predisposed to think favorably about electronic resources,34 an attempt was made to measure subjects’ atti­ tudes toward t he three differ­ ent resource types—Web re­ sources, library databases, and library print materials—prior to instruction. The researchers were interested particularly in those perceptions that could be influenced by instruction. In ad­ dition to the list above, the re­ searchers also examined each of the resources in regard to the following two variables: confi­ dence in information obtained from the resource, and perceived difficulty finding information using the resource. The data were analyzed using paired t-tests; table 4 contains the results of this statistical analysis. Prior to library instruction, stu­ dents felt that Web resources were much easier to use and more convenient than either print resources or library data­ bases. In addition, they ex­ pressed more frustration with print resources than with the other two resources. And al­ though the students believed that the information retrieved from the three resources was equally reliable, they also thought they would have a lot more difficulty finding this in­ formation in print resources and databases than on the Web. Also notable is their perception of the comprehensiveness of Web re­ sources: the students believed they were more likely to find all of the information they needed using only Web resources than using the other two resource 14 College & Research Libraries January 2003 TABLE 5 Com[arison of Means: Web Resources Variables Mean Mean Significance of (Pre- (Post- Difference instruction) instruction) in Means' (1 = strongly disagree-5 = strongly agree) Convenience of using the Web 4.68 4.63 n.s. Reliability of infornation found on the Web 3.86 3.99 n.s. Ease of use (The Web is easy to use.) 4.24 4.46 * Can find necessary infornation using the Web only 3.32 2.91 ** Infornation can be found quickly on the Web 4.17 3.82 ** Infornation on the Web is current 4.13 4.11 n.s. Infornation for the past five years can be found on the Web 3.50 3.51 n.s. Using the Web is frustrating 1.93 2.19 * a n.s. (not significant) * p<.05. **p<.01. ***p<.OOI. types. In fact, they perceived no differ­ ence in the comprehensiveness of print resources and library databases. These findings lend support to Atkinson and Figueroa’s assertion that business stu­ dents favor electronic resources. The find­ ings also suggest that, without interven­ tion, students would probably use the Web extensively—perhaps exclusively— for their research needs. Next, the data were examined for each individual resource type to determine whether library instruction had any im­ pact on student attitudes. Tables 5, 6, and 7 list the results of this analysis. Column 1 of each table contains the variables of interest; column 2 contains the mean stu­ dent attitude before instruction; column 3 contains the mean student attitude at the end of the study; and column 4 shows the level of significance of the difference in means. Each table is reviewed below in more depth. Post-Instruction Attitudes toward Web Resources: In general, Web resources were perceived to be extremely convenient and easy to use both before and after instruc­ tion (table 5). Although instruction did not have any impact on the perceived con­ venience of the Web, students found that the Web was even easier to use after in­ struction, suggesting that students—even those familiar with the Web—can still benefit from directed instruction in using appropriate Web resources. Nonetheless, students felt that they were less able to locate information quickly using the Web than they were at the beginning of the study, a finding that may be rooted in both the requirements of the research project and the instruction that students received. Specifically, students were asked to in­ clude detailed economic-, industry-, and company-related statistics and financial ratios to support their analysis. Although much (though not all) of this information can be found freely on the Web, the frag­ mented nature of the Internet can make it difficult to isolate. Similarly, the format of a particular data source on the Web, such as the Statistical Abstract of the United States, can make it more difficult to find a particular piece of information than if the student used the same resource in a print format. That students felt they were less able to locate information quickly using the Web may indicate their realization that the Web is indeed fragmented and re­ quires more effort to search effectively. Equally important, students’ percep­ tion of the comprehensiveness of the Web also was affected during the course of the study. After instruction, students believed they could not find all of the information Caught in the Web 15 TABLE 6 Com[arison of Means: Library Databases Variables Mean Mean Significance of (Pre- (Post- Difference instruction) instruction) in Means' (1 = strongly disagree-5 = strongly agree) Convenience of using library databases 3.32 3.46 n.s. Reliability of infornation found on library databases 3.92 4.01 n.s. Ease of use (Library databases are easy to use.) 3.32 3.37 n.s. Can find necessary infornation using library databases only 2.80 2.78 n.s. Infornation can be found quickly on library databases 3.12 3.11 n.s. Infornation on library databases is current 3.46 3.38 n.s. Infornation for the past five years can be found on library databases 3.64 3.73 n.s. Using library databases is frustrating 2.92 2.79 n.s. a n.s. (not significant) * p<.OS. **p<.01. ***p<.OOl. they needed to complete their research using only Web resources. And although the Web was still viewed as easy to use, the study results suggest that students did experience increased frustration using the Web after instruction. Given these find­ ings, it may be that those students who tried to use the Web exclusively for their information needs experienced more frus­ tration than those who chose to move on to other resource types. Or, perhaps stu­ dents simply began to think critically about the information they found on the Web. Post-Instruction Attitudes toward Li­ brary Databases: Instruction appeared to TABLE 7 Com[arison of Means: Print Resources Variables Mean Mean Significance of (Pre- (Post- Difference instruction) instruction) in Means' (1 = strongly disagree-5 = strongly agree) Convenience of using print resources 2.69 3.07 ** Reliability of infornation found in print resources 3.97 4.08 n.s. Ease of use (print resources are easy to use.) 2.92 3.28 ** Can find necessary infornation using print resources only 2.62 2.83 n.s. Infornation can be found quickly in print resources 2.34 2.86 *** Infornation in print resources is current 3.21 3.12 n.s. Infornation for the past five years can be found in print resources 3.79 4.01 * Using print resources is frustrating 3.40 3.00 ** a n.s. (not significant) * p<.OS. **p<.01. ***p<.OOl. 16 College & Research Libraries January 2003 *** *** ** 0 0 0 *** *** 0 0 0 0 *** *** 0 0 0 *** *** 0 0 0 ** *** ** fv °°° ,° *** have little impact on students’ attitudes toward library data­ bases (table 6). Although there was some decrease in frustra­ tion using library databases and an increased perception that these resources were con­ venient and reliable, these changes were not statistically significant. In general, stu­ d e n t s p e rc e i v e d t h e s e re ­ sources as vastly different fro m t h e Web. The conve­ nience of full-text access to in­ formation through business databases such as ABI/Inform suggests that students should respond enthusiastically to these resources. Yet, students simply seemed to disregard li­ brary databases in favor of the Web. It may be that students find library databases to be su­ perfluous; in other words, they may still believe (even af­ ter instruction) that all of the information found in these da­ tabases also can be found on the Web. Perhaps, too, stu­ dents find it more difficult to search a library database that requires users to adhere to specific searching rules, as op­ posed to the free-form search­ ing that can be performed on most search engines. In either case, students’ attitudes to­ w a rd l i b r a r y d a t a b a s e s i n comparison to the Web merits further exploration, perhaps through more qualitative re­ search methods, to discern subtle differences in percep­ tions. Postinstruction Attitudes to­ ward Print Resources: Library instruction appears to have had the most pronounced im­ pact on students’ attitudes to­ ward library print resources (table 7). The study findings in­ dicate that at the end of the Caught in the Web 17 study, students perceived print resources to be significantly more convenient and easier to use than before instruction. Stu­ dents also thought they were able to find information more quickly using print re­ sources than they could before instruc­ tion. Moreover, students seemed more convinced that they could find histori­ cal information using print resources. Perhaps most important, a significant de­ crease was noted in the frustration that students felt using print resources, per­ haps because of the design of the library instruction session, which provided stu­ dents with the chance to apply their newfound knowledge by completing an in-class exercise. In addition, the hand­ out that students received allowed them to focus on learning about the informa­ tion contained in various print reference materials, as opposed to where the re­ sources were located, thereby reducing the cognitive load required to use these print resources. (Anecdotally, through­ out the semester students were often seen in the library carrying these handouts with them as they conducted their re­ search.) These results suggest that effec­ tive library instruction can positively in­ fluence business students’ attitudes about research tools and, more specifi­ cally, can impact students’ attitudes about print resources. Comparison of Student Attitudes across Resources after Instruction: Finally, stu­ dents’ attitudes about the three informa­ tion formats were compared to determine changes in the attitudinal variables as a result of instruction (table 8). In general, students continued to show more favorable attitudes toward Web re­ sources, although library instruction minimized many of the differences that students perceived between print re­ sources and library databases. For ex­ ample, there was little difference in stu­ dents’ frustration using either print re­ sources or library databases, even though they reported significantly less frustration using Web resources. And although stu­ dents found Web resources to be easier to use, more convenient, and faster than ei­ ther of the other two resource types, they no longer saw a difference in the ease of use or quickness of library databases and print resources. That students still found library databases more convenient to use than print materials, even after instruc­ tion, seems natural, given their ability to access databases remotely. Most important, by the end of the study students seemed less inclined to think they could find all of the informa­ tion they needed using only one type of resource, in sharp contrast to their ini­ tial assertion that they could rely exclu­ sively on Web resources for all of their information needs. This finding suggests that, over the course of the study, stu­ dents may have gained a greater under­ standing of the content and scope of the Web. TABLE 9 Com[arison of Means for Actual Use of Resources Variables Mean Mean Significance of (Pre- (Post- Difference instruction) instruction) in Means' (1 = completely accurate-4 = completely inaccurate) Expect to rely/relied heavily on Web resources 3.53 4.42 *** Expect to rely/relied heavily on library databases 2.46 3.21 ** Expect to rely/relied heavily on library print resources 2.02 2.76 *** a * p<.05. **p<.Ol. ***p<.OOl. 18 College & Research Libraries January 2003 TABLE 10 Postinstruction Library Use and Research Preferences Type of Resource Used First to Complete Project Frequency Percent Web resources Library databases Library print resources 63 16 10 70.0 17.8 11.1 Type of Resource Used Most Often to Complete Project Web resources Library print resources Library databases 58 17 14 64.4 18.9 15.6 Number of Visits to the Library during the Semester Student never goes to the library 1-4 times per semester 1-4 times per month 1-4 times per week About once a day 2 32 30 25 1 2.2 35.6 33.3 27.8 1.1 Location Used Most Often to Do Research for Project Computer at home University library Other computer labs at the university Computer at work Another university's library 41 30 9 4 1 45.6 33.3 10.0 4.4 1.1 Preferred Resource at Preferred Location Web resources Library print resources Library databases 62 15 10 68.9 16.7 11.1 Findings on Use At the beginning of the study, students were asked to predict how heavily they expected to rely on a particular resource type to complete the research project; at the end of the study, they were asked to report the extent to which they actually used each resource type in their research. For example, students were asked to as­ sess the accuracy of statements such as the following: “I expect to rely heavily on Web resources to do the research needed to complete the final project in MGT 435” and “I relied heavily on Web resources to do the research needed to complete the final project in MGT 435” (1 = completely inac­ curate; 4 = completely accurate). T-tests then were performed to detect any differ­ ences between the students’ expectations of use and actual use (table 9). In general, students used more of each type of re­ source to complete the final project than they had expected, although they still re­ lied most heavily on Web resources, fol­ lowed by library databases and print re­ sources. When asked if they used more of one specific type of resource as a result of the library instruction, 80 percent of stu­ dents reported using new print resources, 74 percent used new Web resources, and 65 percent used new library databases. Perhaps the most dramatic difference is seen when the data on “preferred resource at preferred location” in table 2 are com­ pared with the frequencies listed in table 10. At the beginning of the study, only one Caught in the Web 19 student reported print resources as a pre­ ferred resource. By the end of the study, fif­ teen students cited print resources as their preferred resource at their preferred re­ search location. Further, the number of stu­ dents who reported using the university’s library most often to do research almost doubled, suggesting that as students in­ crease their level of comfort with library print resources, they will be more inclined to come to the library to complete their re­ search. In sum, students not only used print resources to complete their projects, but some also developed a preference for them. Conclusion This study indicates that changes did in­ deed occur in the business students’ atti­ tudes about, and research behaviors to­ ward, information resources. Their perceptions of the Web as a convenient, easy-to-use, comprehensive research tool were not so ingrained and inflexible as to blind them to the benefits of using other resource types to complete their research projects. This study represents another im­ portant step in understanding why stu­ dents choose the research tools they do to complete assignments. More research must be generated, however, that compares stu­ dents’ perceptions and use of different in­ formation resource types. In particular, dif­ ferences in students’ attitudes about library full-text databases and the Web is an area requiring further exploration. The researchers believe that the changes in student attitudes and behaviors resulted from a number of factors over the course of the semester, including the structure and content of the instruction session and the nature of the students’ assignment. Dur­ ing the instruction session, the research­ ers focused not only on the purpose and use of a variety of information sources but also acknowledged students’ perceptions of those resources. In addition, the formal demonstration was reinforced both by in- class exercises and through the students’ own research experiences as they com­ pleted their final projects. Perhaps most important, a strong collaborative effort be­ tween the librarian and the management professor ensured that the instruction ses­ sion was geared directly toward the stu­ dents’ research project. In fact, the re­ searchers worked closely to design the in­ struction to reflect the requirements of the research project. This close collaboration was based not only on a shared desire to have the business students explore the full range of information resources available to them, but also on an understanding of the increasing importance of interdiscipli­ nary work between library and business faculty. Many students who participated in the study also echoed the importance of this collaboration. At the end of the in­ struction session, a number of students indicated that they wished this instruc­ tion had occurred earlier in the business curriculum. Although business faculty agree that information literacy is an im­ portant goal for their students, many as­ sume that students are already well versed in business research tools and methods. Others feel that there is not enough room in the business curriculum to address these issues. However, if we are to develop business leaders who are critical and independent thinkers, it is crucial that academic faculty and librar­ ians work together to introduce today’s business students to the structure and content of their information environment throughout their academic program so that they will be well prepared to gather the data they need to make effective busi­ ness decisions upon graduation. It is hoped that this study will provide the needed impetus to expand information literacy efforts in the business school. Notes 1. Barbara Valentine, “Undergraduate Research Behavior: Using Focus Groups to Generate Theory,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 19 (Nov. 1993): 302. 2. Ibid., 300–304. 20 College & Research Libraries January 2003 3. Peggy Seiden, Kris Szymborski, and Barbara Norelli, “Undergraduate Students in the Digi­ tal Library: Information-seeking Behavior in an Heterogeneous Environment.” Available online from http://www.ala.org/acrl/paperhtm/c26.html. 4. Debbie Malone and Carol Videon, “Assessing Undergraduate Use of Electronic Resources: A Quantitative Analysis of Works Cited,” Research Strategies 15 (1997): 156. 5. Bryn Geffert and Beth Christensen, “Things They Carry: Attitudes toward, Opinions about, and Knowledge of Libraries and Research among Incoming College Students,” Reference & User Services Quarterly 37 (spring 1998): 281. 6. Brad MacDonald and Robert Dunkelberger, “Full-Text Database Dependency: An Emerg­ ing Trend among Undergraduate Library Users?” Research Strategies 16 (1998): 304–5. 7. Bradley P. Tolppanen, “A Survey of World Wide Web Use by Freshman English Students: Results and Implications for Bibliographic Instruction,” Internet Reference Services Quarterly 4 (1999): 47. 8. Wen-Hua Ren, “Library Instruction and College Student Self-efficacy in Electronic Infor­ mation Searching,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 26 (Sept. 2000): 326. 9. Philip M. Davis and Suzanne A. Cohen, “The Effect of the Web on Undergraduate Citation Behavior 1996–1999,” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 52 (2001): 309–14. 10. Philip M. Davis, “The Effect of the Web on Undergraduate Citation Behavior: A 2000 Up­ date,” College & Research Libraries 63 (Jan. 2002): 53–60. 11. Susan Davis Herring, “Faculty Acceptance of the World Wide Web for Student Research,” College & Research Libraries 62 (May 2001): 251–58. 12. Deborah J. Grimes and Carl H. Boening, “Worries with the Web: A Look at Student Use of Web Resources,” College & Research Libraries 62 (Jan. 2001): 11–23. 13. Tolppanen, “A Survey of World Wide Web Use by Freshman English Students,” 47. 14. Seiden, Szymborski, and Norelli, “Undergraduate Students in the Digital Library.” 15. Joann E. D’Esposito and Rachel M. Gardner, “University Students’ Perceptions of the Internet: An Exploratory Study,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 25 (Nov. 1999): 460. 16. Ibid., 459; see also Nancy J. Young and Marilyn Von Seggern, “General Information Seek­ ing in Changing Times: A Focus Group Study,” Reference & User Services Quarterly 41 (winter 2001): 159–69. 17. Grimes and Boening, “Worries with the Web,” 11–23. 18. Davis and Cohen, “The Effect of the Web on Undergraduate Citation Behavior 1996–1999,” 309–14. 19. Leo Clougherty et al., “The University of Iowa Libraries’ Undergraduate User Needs As­ sessment,” College & Research Libraries 59 (Nov. 1998): 580–81. 20. Sandra Jenkins, “Undergraduate Perceptions of the Reference Collection and the Refer­ ence Librarian in an Academic Library,” Reference Librarian 73 (2001): 229–41. 21. Shawn V. Lombardo and Kristine S. Condic, “Convenience or Content: A Study of Under­ graduate Periodical Use,” Reference Services Review 29 (2001): 334. 22. Tim Bucknall and Rikki Mangrum, “U-Search: A User Study of the CD-ROM Service at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,” RQ 31 (summer 1992): 542–53. 23. For examples of studies that measure changes in student knowledge after bibliographic instruction, see Godfrey Franklin and Ronald C. Toifel, “The Effects of BI on Library Knowledge and Skills among Education Students,” Research Strategies 12 (fall 1994): 224–37; and Mollie D. Lawson, “Assessment of a College Freshman Course in Information Resources,” Library Review 48 (1999): 73–78. 24. Bryn Geffert and Robert Bruce, “Whither BI? Assessing Perceptions of Research Skills over an Undergraduate Career,” RQ 36 (spring 1997): 409–17. 25. Ren, “Library Instruction and College Student Self-efficacy in Electronic Information Search­ ing,” 323–28. 26. See Anthony Stamatoplos and Robert Mackoy, “Effects of Library Instruction on Univer­ sity Students’ Satisfaction with the Library: A Longitudinal Study,” College & Research Libraries 59 (Jul. 1998): 323–34; and Timothy K. Daugherty and Elizabeth M. Carter, “Assessment of Outcome Focused Library Instruction in Psychology.” Journal of Instructional Psychology 24 (Mar. 1997): 29­ 33. 27. See Suzanne E. Holler, Phyllis L. Ruscella, and Meg K. Scharf, “We Mean Business: A BI Session for Business Case Analysis Students,” Research Strategies 9 (spring 1991): 95–100; Karen Hovde, “Check the Citation: Library Instruction and Student Paper Bibliographies,” Research Strategies 17 (2000): 3–9; and Maurita Peterson Holland and Christina Kelleher Powell, “A Longi­ tudinal Survey of the Information-seeking and Use Habits of Some Engineers,” College & Research Libraries 56 (Jan. 1995): 7–15. 28. Joseph D. Atkinson III and Miguel Figueroa, “Information-seeking Behavior of Business http://www.ala.org/acrl/paperhtm/c26.html Caught in the Web 21 Students: A Research Study,” Reference Librarian 58 (1997): 59–73. 29. Ibid., 66. 30. Thomas R. Mirkovich, “Investment Information in Academic Libraries: Undergraduate and MBA Students,” RQ 35 (spring 1996): 382–87. 31. Atkinson and Figueroa, “Information-seeking Behavior of Business Students,” 69. 32. Ibid., 72. 33. The authors pretested the questionnaire during the spring and summer semesters of 2001 and revised it based on the feedback they received and the results of pilot statistical tests, as appropriate. 34. Atkinson and Figueroa, “Information-seeking Behavior of Business Students.”