Influence of Preferences on the Use of Information Resources by the Library and Information Science Undergraduate Students in South-South, Nigeria

Learning Preferences and Utilisation of Resources

Authors

  • Achugbue Iroroeavwo Federal Polytechnic Orogun,Delta State,Nigeria
  • Lawrence Arumuru Delta State University, Abraka-Nigeria
  • Ikediashi Anthony Chidi Delta State University, Abraka, Delta State, Nigeria
  • Fauziah Adinda Kusuma Telkom University, Bandung, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33701/ijolib.v5i2.4645

Keywords:

Learning Preferences, Library and Information Science, Nigerian Universities, Educational Materials

Abstract

Background: The use of information resources by the Library and Information Science (LIS) undergraduate students in Delta State, Nigeria, was addressed based on diverse learning preferences, a critical factor potentially influencing academic success. Purpose: This research aimed to explore learning preferences among LIS undergraduate students and assess the influence on the use of information resources. Method: A correlational research design was applied, including 325 students selected through multi-stage sampling from seven state-owned universities in Delta, Edo, and Rivers states. Furthermore, data were collected through questionnaires, with 268 valid responses at an 82% retrieval rate. These were analyzed with descriptive statistics (frequency, percentage, and mean) as well as inferential statistics (Pearson’s product-moment coefficient, and ANOVA), with a criterion mean of 2.50 and an alpha level of 0.05. Result: The results showed that the students had varied learning preferences, including verbal presentations (68%), physical interaction with materials (66%), and watching educational videos (64%). Preferences significantly influenced the use of information resources (Agg. x̄ = 2.83), with a positive correlation between these two variables (r = .907, p < 0.05). Additionally, a significant difference was observed between the education level of students and learning preferences (F = 2,265 = 1189.172, p < 0.05). Conclusion: The students were found to benefit majorly from the combination of traditional and modern teaching methods. Mutual collaboration between university librarians and coordinators of information resources with the faculty was recommended to ensure the correspondence of educational materials to learning preferences.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ainsworth, S. (2014). The educational value of multiple-representations: Learning from visual and verbal models. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(4), 751–765. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5267-5_9

Alzahrani, S., Ali, S., & Ahmad, N. (2020). The impact of digital resources on student learning preferences: A case study in university libraries. Journal of Information and Knowledge Management, 19(3), 205–219.

Annetta, L. A., Minogue, J., Holmes, S. Y., & Cheng, M. T. (2009). Investigating the impact of video games on high school students' engagement and learning about genetics. Computers & Education, 53(1), 74-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.12.020

Booth, C. (2018). Reflecting on the role of librarians in addressing students' diverse learning preferences. Library Trends, 66(3), 345–359.

Chen, K., & Huang, S. (2017). Investigating the impact of information literacy instruction on the learning outcomes of university students in Taiwan. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 43(1), 17-28.

Chu, F. T. (2018). Library information resources and services: Understanding user needs in the digital age. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 44(1), 14–24.

Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-Learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.

Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2014). Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: A systematic and critical review. Learning and Skills Research Centre.

Dulle, F. W., Minish-Majanja, M. K., & Cloete, L. M. (2010). Factors influencing the adoption of open access scholarly communication in Tanzanian public universities. World Library and Information Congress: 76th IFLA General Conference and Assembly, 10-15 August 2010, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Ellis, R., & Haugan, J. (2018). Learning preferences and information-seeking behaviors among university students. Studies in Higher Education, 43(6), 1013–1025.

Gikas, J., & Grant, M. M. (2013). Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with cellphones, smartphones & social media. The Internet and Higher Education, 19, 18-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.06.002

Grinnell, R. M., & Unrau, Y. A. (2016). Social work research and evaluation: Foundations of evidence-based practice (10th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Haak, D. C., HilleRisLambers, J., Pitre, E., & Freeman, S. (2011). Increased structure and active learning reduce the achievement gap in introductory biology. Science, 332 (6034), 1213-1216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1204820

Jackson, L., Snyder, C., & Bradshaw, A. (2019). Promoting information literacy in the digital age: The role of university libraries. College & Research Libraries, 80(2), 173–186.

Jansen, S. C., & Tenopir, C. (2017). Librarians and the adoption of new technologies: Implications for information literacy. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68 (2), 305-314.

Jones, M. (2018). The evolving role of universities in the 21st century. Educational Research and Reviews, 13(15), 582–590.

Llewellyn, A. (2019). Innovations in learning and teaching in academic libraries: A literature review. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 25(2-4), 129-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614533.2019.1678494

Mayer, R. E. (2014). Incorporating cognitive load theory into multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 60 (2), 124-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.04.003

Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2019). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105-119. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x

Popoola, S. O., & Haliso, Y. (2009). Use of library information resources and services as predictor of the teaching effectiveness of social scientists in Nigerian universities. African Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science, 19(1), 65–77. https://www.ajol.info/index.php/ajlais/article/view/42887

Schweppe, J., & Rummer, R. (2016). Attention, working memory, and long-term memory in multimedia learning: An integrated perspective based on process models of working memory. Educational Psychology Review, 28(4), 603-641. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9242-2

Shenton, A. K., & Hay-Gibson, N. V. (2020). Supporting diverse learning preferences in university libraries: A review of strategies and practices. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 52(3), 472–486.

Slater, J. A., Lujan, H. L., & DiCarlo, S. E. (2017). Does gender influence learning style preferences of first-year medical students? Advances in Physiology Education, 31(4), 336-342. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00010.2007

Stull, A. T., & Mayer, R. E. (2019). Learning by doing versus learning by viewing: Three experimental comparisons of learner-generated versus author-provided graphic organizers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(4), 553-564. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-0663.99.4.808

Wong, L. H. (2015). Exploring the affordances of mobile-assisted language learning in higher education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(4), 857-874.

Downloads

Published

Dec 1, 2024