W hen CD-ROMs were relatively new, students seemed interested in leaming about this unfamiliar technology. However, in recent years students have

appeared less en~usiastic about attending search demons~a- tions required by their professors, and fewer are voluntarily signing-up for instruction. Now that CD-ROM technology is available at more libraries as well as in homes, perhaps the tech- nology has become so familiar that most students no longer need training in its use.

At the B. Davis Schwartz Memorial Library of C.W. Post College the reference dep~ent offers two types of CD-ROM instruction. Faculty can bring classes to the library for a CD- ROM demonstration or students can sign up as individuals for training. Interest in individual training has diminished to a few students a year, yet many faculty are still requesting CD-ROM instmction for their classes. Although these faculty insist that their students need training, when these classes are informally polled at the time of ins~ction, most students say they are already familiar with using CD-ROMs.

Students often complain that CD-ROMs are so easy to use that instruction is unnecessary, or that they have had to sit through CD-ROM instruction several times with different classes. Even though the bibliographic ins~ction (BI) sessions are tailored to the specific class or assignment at hand, students who already are familiar with CD-ROMs see no added benefit. In theory, a focused subject approach makes BI more relevant, but really how different is it showing the use of CD-ROMs for one assignment versus another? Although it could be viewed as good public relations for the library to offer as many services as possible, perhaps CD-ROM instruction is no longer of suffi- cient value to be an efficient use of librarian resources. The first assumption being tested in this study is that CD-ROM BI is no longer necessary or desirable because students find CD-ROMs easy to use without inst~c~on~ and, that when ins~ction is necessary students prefer to learn on their own and ask ques- tions rather than attend formal instruction.

CD-ROM instruction places a fairly large demand on avail- ability of public service librarians at C.W. Post. During the Spring 1997 semester the reference depa~ment gave 43 CD- ROM demonstrations. In addition to time spent teaching, the coordination of these classes requires a significant amount of

Laura tvlanzari, Associate Professor, B. Davis Schwartz memorial Library, C. W. Post College, Northern Boulevard, Brookville, New York 7 7548.

time since there is no centralized BI librariau and there are five other public service departments where BI cart be offered in conjunction with a CD-ROM demonstration. Another problem is that since there is no separate BI classroom, the same termi- nals that patrons use for searching are the ones being occupied during CD-ROM demons~ations. As a result, while a class is being taught, other patrons are prohibited from using those ter- minals. Since there are only four terminals where this instruc- tion occurs, this ~~gement precludes any hands-on time for large classes.

Current CD-ROM ins~ction emphasizes search techniques such as use of Boolean logic or search limitations. Perhaps, librarians treat this as an important skill because it was once the sole domain of librarians doing per-minute cost online DIALOG and BRS searches. As more people are using the Internet, they are ~co~ng more f~liar with using search techniques. Also, many students are finding information they consider relevant to their topic by doing simple searches. An additions assumption being tested is that most students do not make use of advanced search techniques emphasized in inst~ction; and those that do are not more satisfied with their search results.

Tom Eadie questioned user education and his conclusions spawned much comments and rebuttal. ‘*Students attending user education activities are not motivated by an immediate question. They may not even have much confidence in the gen- eral utility of information about libraries.“’ He reiterated his position several years later: “To my knowledge, it has not been established that a BI class transfers any significant skills to those who attend, or that they retain much information to their advantage.“2 Proponents of BI insist that when it is course related its effectiveness is increased,’ but, Eadie regards even assignment related BI as problematic: “(S)tudents will prefer to get the instruction when they’re actually working on the assign- ments, and they’ll probably show up at the reference desk whether they’ve had BI or not, topic in hand.“4

Several studies have evaluated CD-ROM instruction and the effects of training in advanced search techniques. Iu a study of CD-ROM use patterns, Bruce A. Leach found that most stu- dents become short-term database users who should be offered only the most basic instruction. Workshops, he determined, should be only for users who want sophisticated search skills and should consume only a small portion of time available for user instruction and assistance. As a result of his findings, work- shops at the Biological Science Library at The Ohio State Uni-

November 1998 481

versity were reduced by half and were not aggressively pro- moted.” According to Judy Anderson, even with exposure to more advanced search techniques, patrons still relied on simple subject searching to locate needed materia1.6 Domenica A. Bar- buto and Elena E. Cevallos suggested that students do not use the advanced search techniques emphasized in instruction and they prefer hands-on training. Barbuto and Cevallos predicted that when CD-ROMs were networked at Hofstra University’s Axinn Library, usage would increase and users would have an expectation of being able to use them without training; hence, training sessions should be eliminated. “ln essence end-user training will revert to the one-to-one point of use instruction for- mat.“7 Trudi E. Jacobson and Janice G. Newkirk concluded that there was not a strong association between CD-ROM instmc- tion and skills of student users. They speculated that perhaps a high level of student search satisfaction prevented an apprecia- tion of the value of instruction.’ Ramona J. Steffey and Nikki Meyer found that most patrons learned to use the CD-ROM sys- tem from the library staff; trail and error was the next most fre- quently used method.9 Frances Wood et al., found a positive correlation between previous corn uter information service use and the use of Boolean operators. PO

Markel D. Tumlin, who evaluated CD-ROM ins~ction, found that the best searchers are those who seek individual assistance and some time one-to-one. He discussed that the classroom is less than ideal for teaching search techniques and that any classroom instruction should be minimal and not emphasize advanced search tec~iques: *‘Most patrons do not need or want to become world-class searchers.“*’ This senti- ment was echoed by Michael Gorman: “It is felt that the hapless user, uncared as she or he is in the intricate “strategies’ involved in online searching, will do incomplete or otherwise flawed searches. In short, the hoi polloi cannot be trusted to know what they want or ought to want. There is something ter- ribly nannyish about that attitude.“‘2 Rebecca Bostonian and and Anne Robbins studied CD-ROM instruction and deter- mined that “you can talk about computer searching from now until the cows come home, and the students won’t know much more than when they started.“13

Reference dep~ent patrons using CD-ROMs were surveyed during the summer and fall sessions of 1996. To use the termi- nals, patrons had to leave an identification card at the reference desk proving they were associated with the university. Refer- ence staff were instructed to give all searchers a questionnaire upon return of their identification. Completion of the question- naire was volun~ and patrons were asked to submit only one copy no matter how many searches they performed. Survey responses were coded and analyzed using SPSS statistical soft- ware. About 200 questionnai~s were dist~buted, although an exact count was not kept, and 66 were returned. No previous survey of the demography of CD-ROM users at the Schwartz Library has been done, so it is not certain how representative this survey is; however, the gender ratio of respondents is the same as that of the overall student population. The results may not be gener~izable given the low response rate of about 33%; yet, they are interesting and worthy of discussion, as well as fur- ther research.

%JRVEY RESLJLTS

Characteristics of CD-ROM Users

Forty-three graduate students comprised 66% of those responding to the survey, 21 (32%) were undergraduate stn- dents, and 1 (1%) was faculty or staff. Respondents were divided into 49 (75%) female and 16 (25%) male. Fifty-six (87%) had previous experience using computers.

The survey revealed a gender difference in searching styles of respondents. The most frequent response chosen by male respondents to rate the system was “very easy to use” (11 res~ndents, 69%), whereas most female respondents chose “fairly easy to use” (28 respondents, 61%). A majority of males completed their searches in under 15 minutes (9 respondents, 56%), while a rnajo~~ of females (32 res~ndents, 68%) took over 15 minutes to complete their searches.

There was no difference in knowledge of how to use Boolean operators, but a significant difference in the use of them with most male respondents not using any Boolean operators in their search, while most female respondents did use them (chi- square, 7.182, df=l, pc.05); however, Cramer’s V was ,006, thus in~ca~g a weak ass~iation, There was also a significant difference in knowledge of how to use a database thesaurus between male and female respondents with more women know- ing how to use the thesaurus (chi-square, 5.200, df=l, pc.05); however, Cramer’s V was .008, thus indicating a weak associa- tion.

Has the popul~ty of the Internet affected CD-ROM use? When asked about using the Internet in addition to CD-ROMs, 29 (43%) said they would use both for their search. The most commonly used Internet source listed by students was America Online. It is unclear whether students are using America Online to access the Internet or using the sources available exclusively to AOL subscribers. Other Internet sources listed by students included ERIC as well as several different search engines. Patrons who also used the Internet to find material on their topic showed no significant difference in ease of use, time taken to search, nor in use of boolean operators or search limitations. Ad~tionally, prior computer use made no significant difference in ease of use.

There was a wide array in the number of times students had used the system: 13 (20%) had never used it before, 19 (29%) had used it l-5 times, 14 (21%) had used it 6-10 times, 4 (6%) had used it 1 l-15 times, and 16 (24%) had used it over 15 times, Users were asked to circle all databases used. ERIC was the most frequent response, used by 40 (61%), PsycLtir and &&rac were each used by 23 (35%), and MedEine was used by 13 (20%). All other databases were used by 3% or less of the ~sponden~.

Students were asked about their use of print indexes in con- junction with CD-ROM use. This showed that 45 (70%) did not use print indexes before beginning their CD-ROM search and 32 (50%) did not plan to use print indexes after their search to find info~ation on their topic. In total, 25 (39%) used only the CD-ROMs for their search and did not plan to use print indexes at all.

E~al~ti~g Searches

To evaluate searches the respondents were asked about their satisfaction with search results, as well as the time taken to search, the amount of info~ation found, and the num~r of citations found. A large majority of 55 (90%) responded that they were “somewhat satisfied” or “very satisfied” with their

482 The Journal of Academic Lib~anship

search. Fifty-one (77%) replied that they found a “satisfactory amount of information” or “more than a satisfactory mOWIt Of info~ation.” No one responded that he or she found no infor- mation on their topic. For those who found less than they needed, it is not clear whether it was due to poor search tech- niques or whether noting existed on the topic in the database.

The time taken to complete the search, not inclu~ng printing varied greatly: 7 (11%) took under 5 minutes, 20 (30%) took 5- 15 minutes, 21 (32%) took 16-30 minutes, and 18 (27%) took over 30 minutes. When asked about the number of citations found no one said none, 31(48%,) said l-25,13 (20%) said 26- 50,7 (11%) said 51-100, and 14 (22%) over 100. Most students rated at least half of the citations as relevant and everyone found relevant documents.

Advanced Search Techniques Students were questioned about their use of advanced search

techniques such as use of Boolean operators, a thesaurus, or search limitations. Most students (45 respondents, 74%) said they knew how to use Boolean operators; however, 13 (20%) were aware of how to use Boolean operators yet did not use them in their search. The use of Boolean operators had no sig- nificant effect on search satisfaction, ease of use, time taken to search, amount of information found, total citations found, or relevance of citations.

A majority (37 res~nden~, 62%) did not know how to use either the online or print thesaurus. Of those who used a thesau- rus, 10 (45%) used it online and 5 (23%) used it in print, and 7 (32%) used both. Knowledge of thesaurus use did not signifi- cantly increase search satisfaction. In fact, 19 (76%) of those who did not know how to use a thesaurus rated the CD-ROM system as very easy to use versus 6 (24%) of those who did know how to use it.

Just over half of the students (33 respondents, 55%) knew how to use search limitations. Of those who used search limita- tions, title was the most frequently used limitation. Awareness of how to use search limitations had no significant effect on search satisfaction, ease of use, time taken to search, amount of info~ation found, total citations found, or relevance of cita- tions. These results support the assumption that most students do not make use of advanced search techniques and those that do are not more satisfied with their search results.

Learning and Using the System

Since students were not signing-up for the CD-ROM classes, an attempt was made to find out the reasons. Most students (41 respondents, 68%) said they would not be interested in attend- ing one of these sessions. When asked “Why not?” the most fre- quent responses were “too busy with other work,” (21 respon- dents, 5 1%) and “achieved satisfactory results without instruction.” (20 respondents, 49%).

When asked what type of CD-ROM instruction they would prefer, the most popular responses were “brief individu~ instruction on demand,” (25 respondents, 45%) and “no instmc- tion needed” (8 respondents, 14%). Most students either needed no ins~ction or wanted in~vidu~ instmction on demand, sup- porting the assumption that students prefer to learn on their own and ask questions when necessary rather than attend formal training.

A resounding 65 (98%) said the system was easy to learn. This calls into question the need for training. Most students (40 respondents, 6 1%) learned by asking a librarian for help. Eigh- teen (27%) said they learned by trial and error, 14 (21%) said

they learned from the demonstrations given during one of their subject classes, and only 2 (3%) said they learned from the vol- untary ins~ction sessions.

Interestingly, learning from the library staff had a negative effect. A majority of students responding that they learned from the library staff found less than half of their citations were rele- vant while a majority of students who learned by other methods responded that they found more than half their citations were relevant @hi-square, 4.944, df=l, pg.05); however, Cramer’s V was .018, thus indicating a weak association.

Comparing search times of respondents who learned from the library staff with those who learned by other methods, a majority of students who finished their search in under five min- utes, not including punting, did not learn from the library staff. (5 respondents, 7 1%) Of students completing their search in five to 15 minutes most learned from the library staff, (16 respondent, 80%) and most of those taking over 30 minutes to search also learned from a member of the library staff (12 respondents, 67%).

An ove~hel~~ majority of the res~ndents found the CD- ROM system easy to use: 29 (45%) found it very easy to use, 33 (52%) found it fairly easy to use, only 2 (3%) said it was some- what dif~cult, and no one responded that it was very dif~cult to use. These results support the assumption being tested that stu- dents find CD-ROMs easy to use and, therefore, little formal ins~ction is needed.

Most students, 35 (60%), needed no assistance during their search. Of novice CD-ROM users 5 (45.5%) needed assistance while 6 (54.5%) did not, For the highest surveyed category of uses, over 15 times, 6 (40%) still needed assistance. Repeat use does not seem to diminish requests for assistance. What type of assistance was requested? As for those that needed help, most of those students, 17 (63%), asked for libr~~‘s assistance. Only 8 (30%) used the help screens, 2 (7.5%) used printed materials such as manuals and handouts, and no one said he or she used the computer tutors or asked a friend. Increased usage did not decrease the need for librarian’s help. Of those who had used the CD-ROMs over 15 times, 5 (83%) still asked a librarian for assistance.

CHUGS IN CD-ROM USERS FROM x992-1996

IIave CD-ROM use patterns changed over time? Users of the reference dep~ment CD-ROMs were surveyed in 1992 (56 respondents), 1994 (55 res~ndents~, and 1996 (66 respon- dents). The demographics of the students responding to the questionn~re remained relatively similar over the three surveys: the number of graduate students over the three surveys were 66%, 76%, and 66% respectively; females were consistently the larger percentage of users (71%, 85%, and 75%); and the num- ber of patrons resending they were somewhat or very satisfied with their search results were 91%, 87%, and 90%. Yet with these consistencies, users appear to be becoming more sophisti- cated and requiring less assistance. The “Yes” responses to the question “Did you require assistance during your search?” decreased over the years (63%, 5i%, 40%). The number of res~nden~ finding the system easy to learn increased (90%, 92.5%, 98.5%) and interest in small group training decreased (42%, 36%, 32%). This may indicate a trend towards more self- sufficiency and less instruction being required.

CONCLUSION

Most students found the CD-ROM system easy to learn and use, needed no assistance, and were satisfied with their searches.

~ovem~r 1998 483

Not only were they satisfied with their searches, they were sat- isfied with the amount of info~atio~ they found, and its rele- vance to their topic. Most students that needed training preferred instruction on demand. Most student that needed assistance asked a library staff member. Not very many were interested in attending CD-ROM training sessions, nor did many learn from them when they did take them. A~~ough the resuits support the ~s~rnp~o~s being tested, a higher return rate would have allowed generalization to the popula~on.

In view of these rest&s libraries may need to revaluate if BI sessions on CD-ROMs are still a wo~while service. Libraries may want to consider dropping CD-ROM I31 classes and mak- ing instruction on demand a priority. This can be time consum- ing, but it is students’ preferred way of learning and using CD- ROMs. Librarians will need to provide assistance to CD-ROM users anyway since repeat use did not diminish the need for assistance. Removing librarians from reference duty to provide BI sessions may not be the most effective use of available per- sonnel. The time spent teaching advanced search techniques to classes showed little positive results. Most students did not make use of advanced search techniques and those that did were not more satisfied with their search results, nor did they show any other significant improvements in their searches.

Since not many students are signing up for CD-ROM instmction of their own volition, it is possible that forcing them to attend a CD-ROM demons~ation with their class may make them resent coming to the library. Student may also take a dim view of the skilis of librarians if they are lecturing on something most students find easy to learn and use. Perhaps CD-ROM demonstrations continue because librarians with faculty status have the impression that teaching classes is more valuable in the eyes of the rest of the faculty than one-on-one instruction. Also, it may be difficult to say “no” to faculty members who requests that their classes come to the library for a CD-ROM demonstra- tion.

NOTES AND ~FE~NCES 1. Tom Eadie, ~‘Imm~est Proposals: User Instruction for Students Does Not Work,” Library Journal1 15 (October 15, 1990): 41-45,44. 2. Tom Eadie, “Beyond amnesty: Questioning the Benefits of BI,” Research Strategies 10 (Summer 1992): 105-l 10, 106. 3. See, for example, Hannelore B. Rader, “Adapting BI to Changing Info~a~on Needs,” Research S~~~eg~es 10 (Summer 1992): 120-121; ACRL’s Community and Junior College Libraries Section ~~biio~aphi~ Committee Members, “Imm~est Rebuttal: Communi~ College Perspective,” Research Stmtegies 11 (Spring 1993): 10% 105. 4. Tom Eadie, “Beyond Immodesty,” p.107. 5. Bruce A Leach, “Research Notes: Identifying CD-ROM Use Patters as a Tool for Ev~uating User Inst~ction,” ColtJege & ~eseu~~ Libraries 55 (July 1994): 365-371. 6. Judy Anderson, “Have Users Changed Their Style? A Survey of CD-ROM v. GPAC Product Usage,” RQ 34 (Spring 1995): 362-68. 7. Domenica M. Barbuto & Elena E. Cevallos, “End-User Searching: Program Review an Future Prospects,” Re 31 (Winter 1991): 214-227, 225. 8. Trudi E. Jacobson & Janice G, Newkirk, “The Effect of CD-ROM Ins~ction on Search Operator Use,” College & Research L~brarjes 57 (January 1996): 68-76. 9. Ramona J. Stefey & Nikki Meyer, “Evaluating User Success and Satisfaction with CD-ROM,” Lmkerdisk P~fessiona~ 2 {September 1989): 35-45. 10. Frances Wood, Nigel Ford, David Miller, Gill Sobczyk, & Robert Duffin, “Information Skills, Searching Behaviour and Cognitive Styles for Student-Centered Learning: A Computer-Assisted Learning Approach,” Joust of info~tio~ Science 22 (1996): 79-92. II. Markel D. Tumhn, “Time M~agement Considerations for Balancing Optical Disc Point-of-Use Insertion with Other Reference Services,” ~i~~co~~~te~s for ~~f~~~tion ~a~~ge~e~~ 10 (September 1993): 215226,220. 12. Michael Gormau, “Send for a Child of Four! Or Creating the BI- less Academic Library.‘* Library Tremis 39 (Winter 1991): 354-362, 355. i3. Rebecca Bostonian & Anne Robbins, “Effective Instruction For Searching CD-ROM Indexes,” Laserdisk Profess~o~l 3 (January 1990): 14-17,17.

484 The Journal of Academic Librarianship