Purpose & Goals

Our purpose and goals for this project were centered around understanding and enhancing the research experience of FGGS at the library. By conducting 1:1 interviews and journey mapping activities, the project aimed to delve into the unique experiences, challenges, and needs of FGGS throughout their research processes. The project sought to address the critical question of how the identities of first-generation students influenced their research journey and how the library could adapt its services to better meet their needs. The overarching goal was to refine both online and in-person library services to create a more inclusive and supportive research environment, specifically tailored to accommodate the nuances of FGGS experiences and to integrate library resources seamlessly into their natural research pathways. This initiative not only aimed to improve the immediate research experience for FGGS but also contributed to a broader understanding of how university libraries can empower and serve historically underserved student populations more effectively.

 Methodology

Our project aimed to enhance the research experience for FGGS at the library through a systematic approach involving four main stages:

1. Participant Selection and Recruitment: From 66 interested individuals, we selected 12 participants based on departmental affiliations, study mode (online or in-person), and program level (Masters or PhD), resulting in a diverse group of five PhD and seven master's students
2. Data Collection: We conducted six interviews and six journey mapping sessions over the course of two weeks, in both remote and in-person formats, to deeply understand the research journeys, challenges, and needs of FGGS, as well as accommodate the modality that participants felt most comfortable with.
3. Qualitative Analysis: Using the Dovetail qualitative coding software, our analysis began with a collaborative coding of three participants, followed by individual analyses and team reviews of all transcripts to ensure consistency and reliability.
4. Synthesis and Ideation: We concluded with design thinking sessions with various stakeholders, including cross-departmental librarians and student employees, using affinity mapping and "How Might We" questions to distill key insights. This informed actionable recommendations for improving FGGS research support at the library.

Findings

Our qualitative coding of the interviews and journey mapping revealed several key themes. Participants faced difficulty in using and accessing resources, including issues with source reliability and delays. Many students relied on platforms like Google Scholar instead of starting on the library’s website, viewing the libraries as gateways to articles rather than comprehensive resource hubs. Mentoring, advising, and peer support played a primary and vital role in their research journey. Furthermore, participants observed that their peers appeared more confident in research and lab spaces, suggesting a potential lack of library self-confidence among some students. Some participants also felt the need to be independent and proactive in their learning due to their peers' perceived greater support from their families. In the design thinking meetings, stakeholders highlighted participants' preferences for familiar tools like Google and Zotero, frustration towards material access, motivations for finding resources, and perceptions of the Libraries' impact on their motivations. Centering versus de-centering the library came up frequently in the conversations, emphasizing the need to prioritize users and enhance the library’s position as a stop in the research journey. The importance of reframing research and library resources for broader student engagement was highlighted. Our analysis revealed opportunities in library perception, resource outreach, sources of support, student goals, and subject-specific help. These opportunities include centering student needs, partnering with other campus organizations, building awareness of library resources, leveraging student-advisor relationships, understanding diverse student goals, curating existing resources, and exploring community-centered models. Additionally, it is important to assess the needs of non-research-focused students, redefine how “research” is presented on the website, and collaborate with departments and subject librarians for FGGS support. Further research and assessment is recommended in these areas to better understand the needs and themes brought up in this exploratory project.

Practical Implications & Value

From viewing our poster, we hope attendees will gain understanding of…

1. Inclusive Practices: Recognition of the importance of developing inclusive, equitable, and empathetic assessments and services that account for the diverse experiences of FGGS. Inclusive UX research practices include ethnographic research methods, participatory design, and design thinking methods.
2. Strategies for Support: Knowledge of practical strategies and actionable recommendations for enhancing library support to FGGS, such as improving resource accessibility, fostering academic partnerships, and creating targeted outreach initiatives.
3. Assessment: Better understanding of how to assess user needs in a large academic institution’s library.
4. Rapport: How to leverage your own diverse identities and backgrounds to develop rapport and understanding of participant storytelling and experiences. We were able to leverage our experiences as students to connect and empathize with participants.
5. Mixed Research Methods: Using mixed research methods, we were able to have different types of conversations and insights. Journey mapping offered a more visual way for participants to communicate their process, while interviews offered participants a chance to go into more detail about their process and foster more of a back-and-forth dialogue. Stakeholders in design thinking meetings brought in their own perspectives as librarians with various interests and backgrounds.