Library and information science study program through the eyes of students: Preliminary findings

2.1 Student satisfaction in higher education

In the area of higher education, student satisfaction has become an important element in considering the success and image of the institution of higher education. It is also often used as a measure of HE’s performance (Jereb et al., 2018), or one of the means by which resources are being distributed across HE institutions (Australian Department of Education, Skills and Employment, 2020). In addition, student satisfaction with their chosen program has been linked to academic achievement, retention and student motivation (Duque, 2014; Mihanović et al., 2016; Nastasić et al., 2019).

Student satisfaction, however, is a multifaceted concept. Studies show that students’ perceptions of the program quality (quality of teaching, feedback provided by instructors, teaching styles of instructors, quality of learning experiences and class sizes) are the most important factors that influence satisfaction (Gruber et al., 2010; Jereb et al., 2018; Nastasić et al., 2019; Paul & Pradhan, 2019; Thomas & Galambos, 2004; Weerasinghe et al., 2017), but there are also other, institution-related factors, such as ease of access to student services as well as the facilities it offers (e.g. e.g. teaching facilities, IT facilities, study areas, etc.) (Hanssen & Solvoll, 2015; Jereb et al., 2018; Weerasinghe et al., 2017). Other, less prominent factors, may include, among others, institution’s reputation (Hanssen & Solvoll, 2015; Jereb et al., 2018) and students’ own life experiences while at college (Mihanović et al., 2016; Nastasić et al., 2019; Weerasinghe et al., 2017). Beyond the aforementioned factors, the recent studies have brought to limelight students’ interpersonal interactions in HE as important predictors of student satisfaction. HE students recognize the importance of interactions with their colleagues and the faculty on academic-related matters (Burgess et al., 2018; Hurst et al., 2013). Recent lockdown measures and suspension of in-class education due to the COVID-19 outbreak had a negative impact on student social interaction aspect of HE (UNESCO International Institute for Higher Education in Latin America and the Caribbean, 2020) and emphasized further the importance of this factor for the overall student satisfaction levels.

In addition, several studies found that general satisfaction tends to decline as students move through their programs (Cherry et al., 2011; Gruber et al., 2010). Finally, a strong correlation was found between satisfaction with employment opportunities and program satisfaction more generally (Krehbiel & McClure, 1998).

However, the HE institutions must be very careful when considering the student satisfaction as an only, or at least, a dominant measure because students’ motivation may not be to pursue the service excellence and sometimes, giving students’ what they want may result in negative effects on students as well as on institutions (Wong & Chapman, 2022).

2.2 Student motivation, satisfaction and perception of LIS programs

Interest, educational talent and scientific ability are among the most important factors that influence the choice of the field of study – these factors also help prevent later problems such as drop-outs or student dissatisfaction (Enayati Novinfar et al., 2013). A meta-analysis of 45 papers on reasons for enrolling the LIS programs (Moniarou-Papaconstantinou et al., 2015) revealed that intrinsic reasons (love of books and reading, nature of library work, desire to help people) dominate. Extrinsic reasons such as employment opportunities or career prospects, although mentioned in some studies (Hallam & Partridge, 2005; Moniarou-Papaconstantinou et al., 2010), are not that frequently named. However, students that choose to study LIS (even though motivated by the love of books and reading) find out that the study encompasses much more than just books and reading. A good LIS curriculum should provide students with required knowledge, skills and competences, guide students as they move through the program, interest them further for the profession and be strongly connected with the work environment and future employers so that the learning outcomes can be constantly reevaluated and modified.

Therefore, as LIS educational institutions plan and design new educational programs and curricula it is necessary to bear in mind that those programs constantly need to be evaluated, and consequently changed and modified to address the needs of contemporary stakeholders (policy makers, professional bodies, but most important ones among them being students and employers). A number of studies were conducted on the required competences and skills for the new graduates. A wide range of technical and soft skills seem to be among the most highlighted skills (Chaka, 2020; Saunders, 2015; Saunders, 2019). Fraser-Arnott (2017) grouped the competences into the following five categories: (1) collaboration, client service and communication; (2) organizational understanding and strategic alignment; (3) program and service delivery and management; (4) records, information and knowledge management technical competencies; and (5) personal qualities. ALA (2021) grouped competences that should be possessed by library professionals around nine areas: gateway knowledge, information resources, lifelong learning and continuing education, management and administration, organization of recorded knowledge and information, reference and user services, research and evidence-based practice, social justice, and technological knowledge and skills. Those competences might be roughly categorized into professional competences (that include all aspects of professional expertise, including technical and soft skills) on one hand, and lifelong learning and civic competences (such as social justice and technological skills) on the other. IFLA Guidelines for Professional Library and Information Science (LIS) Education Programmes (2022) lists various LIS areas that need to be included in the curricula, but includes also ICT knowledge, multiliteracies and life-long learning. These non-professional knowledge and skills align with the key competences for life-long learning: literacy competence; multilingual competence; mathematical competence and competence in science, technology and engineering; digital competence; personal, social and learning to learn competence; citizenship competence; entrepreneurship competence; and cultural awareness and expression competence (The Council of the European Union, 2018).

Although there are quite a number of papers on student motivation for enrolling LIS programs of study (Ard et al., 2006; Dukić, 2019; Hands, 2018; Lo et al., 2016; Oguz et al., 2015; Sibiya & Shongwe, 2021), the papers on student perception of and satisfaction with their LIS study programs are not that common. Canadian authors, however, found this to be an important topic and produced a number of papers that contain data on students’ perceptions of LIS program quality. One of the major criticisms to LIS programs is that they do not prepare students for the subsequent employment. A 2006 Canadian study found that only 37% of students believed that their graduate LIS program provided them with an understanding of a career as a librarian or in a related profession. Although the areas such as evaluation of management, leadership, and business skills taught in MLIS programs were considered to have slightly improved in comparison to earlier studies, a good share of both recent graduates (22%) and institutional representatives (35%) believed that these areas still needed improvement. (Canadian Association of Research Libraries, 2015). Cherry et al. (2011) conducted a four-year study of master’s students enrolled in the Master of Information program at the University of Toronto and found out that only 34.1% rated the overall quality of the academic program as excellent or very good whereas 55.6% agreed or strongly agreed that the program was preparing them for a professional career. Students in this study wanted a practically and professionally oriented program that would prepare them for subsequent employment in the field. This was visible through their strong desire (90% respondents) that in future a stronger emphasis be placed on professional work (e.g. internships). Besides a stronger emphasis on practical skills, the students in this study believed that, in future, the graduate LIS program should be modified to accommodate more joint and collaborative programs with other departments (78%), and to put greater emphasis on technology and computing (70%). Putting a stronger emphasis on theory was the least desired direction of development (41%). In the follow-up research conducted at six Canadian universities (Cherry et al., 2013), the authors found that 90% of respondents believed that the program they attended provided them with education that facilitated growth and development and the mean satisfaction rating for the education received in the program was 6.6 (on a 10-point scale). The quality of faculty members received the highest percentage of positive ratings (86.6%), followed by the satisfaction with their fellow students (77.5%), academic standards (77.2%) and relationship between faculty and students (71.8%). While researching LIS experience of students enrolled in the School of Library and Information Science at Louisiana State University Dow (2011) found that students with different educational backgrounds had different views of their LIS programs. In the study conducted among first and final year LIS students at three LIS undergraduate schools in South African Republic it was found that 73% of first year and 82% of final year students were satisfied with the scholarly content of LIS programs. The reasons for satisfaction were: the availability of job opportunities in LIS field in their country, perception changes about LIS (by the program), students’ love of books and reading, the ease of the subject and a love for helping others find required information. Students’ satisfaction with their program was strengthened by the fact that 70% of first year and 82% of final year students would recommend LIS program to other, potential, students (Sibiya & Shongwe, 2021). The students in Thailand think that LIS curriculum should put more emphasis on digital technology (83%), followed by professional and practical experience (78%) (Ammarukleart et al., 2021). A Latvian research on student perceptions of program quality at the Department of Information and Library Studies of the University of Latvia (Holma & Pakalna, 2007) found that the mean course quality rating was 8 (on a 10-point scale) and that 78% of respondents would recommend others to enroll into the program. In their research of undergraduate student perceptions of LIS programs in Croatia and Turkey Faletar Tanacković et al. (2018) discovered that the highest level of satisfaction both for Croatian and Turkish students was with the student-faculty relationship (Croatian students – mean 4.09; Turkish students – 3.87). The lowest level of satisfaction for Croatian students was measured for the range and number of elective subjects (mean 2.96), but almost equally dissatisfied were they with the amount of practical training included in the program. This dissatisfaction was also shared by Turkish students – majority of respondents (65% for Croatian and 57% for Turkish students) thought that the LIS training should include more practical training than the classroom instruction. A request for more practice-oriented LIS curriculum and development of practical skills seems to be universal to LIS students across the world – this desire was also expressed by Canadian (Cherry et al., 2011; Canadian Association of Research Libraries, 2015), Thai (Ammarukleart et al., 2021) and Israeli students (Aharony & Raban, 2008). The tension between theory and practice is present everywhere and it is quite worrying that LIS students, in general, fail to see the value of theoretical components of their academic LIS program (Cherry et al., 2011).

Regardless of possible misgivings about the LIS programs, students still seem pretty satisfied with their choice of study and majority plans to seek employment in the LIS field upon graduation. In Canadian study 73.5% of LIS students wanted to find employment in the field of study (Cherry et al., 2011), in Croatia it was 71.4% (Faletar Tanacković et al., 2018), in Latvia 65% (Holma & Pakalna, 2007). The lowest scores were measured for Turkish students (56.8%) (Faletar Tanacković et al., 2018).

A number of studies bring results of alumni perspectives of their LIS program. In India 50.9% were moderately satisfied and 32.1% very satisfied with their LIS curriculum (Yadav, 2022). The study found that the alumni believed that computing skills, library automation and library digitization were absolutely essential for the library profession. ‘Soft skills’ (combination of personal, communication, social and behavioral skills) were also found to be quite important. This study found that the alumni were satisfied with the practicum module (mean 4), whereas their levels of satisfaction with LIS curriculum and how it prepares students for work environment was lower (mean 3). LIS alumni students from Zimbabwe were relatively satisfied with the program but they recommended improvements to the information and communication technology (ICT) and knowledge management courses (Mugwisi & Hikwa, 2015). Alumni from Punjab in Pakistan thought the LIS curriculum needed improvements in the area of teaching methods and recommended recruitment of trained teachers who were up to speed with the changing trends (Mahmood & Shafique, 2012)

This paper presents a portion of findings obtained in the study that focused on LIS graduate students’ satisfaction with and perceptions of their graduate program at the Department of Information Sciences of the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences at the University of Osijek, Croatia.

Table 2 illustrates Mean values for respondents’ satisfaction with the following attributes of LIS study program: alignment of learning outcomes with job market demands, provision of core LIS content and competences, provision of generic competences (communication, presentation skills, problem solving, teamwork, leadership), amount of practical work, organization of practical work, international internship or study abroad opportunities, number and choice of elective courses, availability of exam literature, teachers’ expertise, relationship with teachers (availability, support etc.), and opportunities for participation in extracurricular activities (research and community based projects, conferences etc.). Students were asked to indicate their satisfaction with listed attributes on a Likert-type scale (1 – Not satisfied at all, 5 – Very satisfied).

Findings show that respondents are moderately satisfied with all studied attributes and aspects of the study program except for the amount of practical work (Mean 3.17) and its organization (Mean 3.38), and the number and quality of elective courses (Mean 2.30). As far as the practical work is concerned, it is offered only at the second year of the graduate study (a total of 45 hours, or six working days, carrying 4 ECTS) and is organized as a project-based work in a library or any other information-related institution, with supervisors from both academic and host institution. Although the study program aims to offer a fair number of elective courses, the offering of elective courses has always been a weak point at the Department caused by insufficient number of teachers and/or formal restrictions. In practice this usually means that there is not a list of available elective courses from which students can choose those they prefer but that they have to take those that are offered from year to year. In addition, even when the Department was in position to offer more electives, the Faculty administration banned courses that enrolled less than 10 students. Findings also show that respondents are satisfied to the largest degree with the teachers’ expertise (Mean 4.24), their relationship with the teachers (Mean 4. 64) and opportunities for extracurricular activities (Mean 4.21). This is not surprising because the study groups usually do not exceed 25 students and there is in general a very good student teacher ratio at the Department (8 : 1). Also, teachers work hard to promote extracurricular activities among students and include them in as many activities as possible (summer schools, participation in research projects, volunteering and community work, conferences, publishing etc.).

OPEN IN VIEWER

While findings show that currently enrolled students are more critical on all accounts toward the study program than the respondents who have already graduated (Fig. 1), statistically significant differences have been identified only in relation to some of the variables (marked with * in the table). Current students are less satisfied with the share and quality of core LIS content ( p = 0.004), share and quality of generic competences ( p = 0.008), hours ( p = 0.015) and organization of practical work ( p = 0.005), elective courses ( p = 0.000), teachers’ expertise ( p = 0.002) and relationship with teachers ( p = 0.005). It is difficult to explain reasons behind these differences in respondents’ satisfaction. On the one hand, lower level of satisfaction of currently enrolled students might be the result of online teaching during COVID-19 lockdown in 2020, which these students experienced in the period before the survey. On the other hand, it might be argued that the higher level of satisfaction with the study program exhibited by graduated students might indicate the quality of the curriculum because respondents with actual working experience (in libraries or information-related institutions) are in a better position to make an objective judgement regarding the quality of study program because they have had the opportunity to test their knowledge, competences and skills against the needs of the real-life work placement. Nevertheless, these findings ask for a deeper study.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Findings also show that single major students (those studying only LIS) are in general more satisfied with all characteristics of the study program than the double major students (those studying LIS and IT or Publishing) (Fig. 2). However, statistically significant differences have been identified only in relation to the following variables (marked with * in Table 3): the share and quality of core LIS competences ( p = 0.012), amount of practical work ( p = 0.043), the choice of elective courses ( p = 0.000), and teachers’ expertise ( p = 0.006). Since single major students devote all their study time and learning effort on LIS studies, and take more LIS courses were LIS topics are studied in depth than is the case with the double major students who have yet another study track to pursue), it does not surprise that they are more satisfied with the study program.

Table 4 illustrates Mean values for respondents’ satisfaction with the LIS-related professional competences and the following generic or lifelong learning competences they acquired during their studies: communication, digital competence, learning to learn, and civic competence. Communication competence was defined as successful communication (written or oral) in mother tongue and foreign languages. Digital competence referred to a high level of ICT application and its responsible use. Learning to learn competence was described as skills for independent, team and lifelong learning, time and task management. Civic competence was identified as a recognition of professional social responsibility and importance of free access to knowledge and information literacy as a precondition for democracy, plurality of thought and active citizenship. Students were asked to indicate their satisfaction with listed variables on a Likert-type scale (1 – Not satisfied at all, 5 – Very satisfied).

The largest level of satisfaction was reported for communication (Mean 4.44) and learning competences (Mean 4.17) and respondents are least satisfied with the professional competences (Mean 3.71). While findings show that currently enrolled students are again less satisfied with all acquired competences than respondents who have already graduated (Fig. 3), statistically significant differences have been identified only in relation to professional ( p = 0.048), digital ( p = 0.047) and learning ( p = 0.040) competences. On the other hand, no statistically significant differences have been identified between single and double major students.

OPEN IN VIEWER

When asked in an open-ended question to list three competences, either generic or professional, that they found in particular useful at their workplace, respondents as a rule indicated generic competences such as information literacy, digital and communication competences, collaboration and team work, problem-solving, creative thinking, social competences, leadership and organizational skills. Although quantitative findings show that respondents were in general least satisfied with professional competences, when asked in an open-ended question to list competences and skills, either professional or generic, which they lacked most at their workplace, respondents reported most frequently that they lacked communication skills (and in particular written communication in foreign language), social competences, organizational and pedagogical skills. When referring to the lack of professional skills, respondents listed cataloguing, bibliometrics and coding. One respondent (R676) noted: “I do not think that I lacked any generic skills. We received a good knowledge base at university and we can easily make up for competences which we did not acquire during studies. I think that we have been very well prepared for lifelong learning.” Another respondent (R697) reported: “Generic skills are very important because one can use them at any workplace.”

While only 5.4% of graduated students are not satisfied how the study program prepared them for the job market, 75% would enroll in the same program if they had to do it again. A total of 84.7% of all respondents (both current and graduated students) would like to work in LIS-related field, whereas only 8.5% would like to earn their living by working in the field unrelated to LIS. It is interesting to note that 30.5% would like to start their own business. It would be very interesting to look into this issue in some future study and learn what kind of work, unrelated to libraries, would students like to pursue, and what ideas they have for their own businesses.

In the open-ended questions in the final section of the questionnaire, respondents were asked to comment on the strengths and weaknesses of their study program. On one hand, respondents listed the following strengths: good communication with teachers, extracurricular activities (conferences, projects, mobility), small groups, project and team work, independent work, good atmosphere, wide employment possibilities, interdisciplinarity and development of critical thinking through practical project work.

“I find that this interdisciplinary study program, with different courses aimed at developing professional and generic competences, perfectly meets the needs of a current job market and offers us wide opportunities for employment.” (R1058) We have a lot of opportunities to work in teams but also to build our skills for independent work. Also, teachers are very professional and always available for questions regarding university or other matters.” (R1017) “Some of the teachers really go out of their way to motivate us to participate in different projects, conferences. Sometimes this can help a lot in finding a job.” (R1005) “It was good to learn how to adapt to different situations and obtain organizational and communication skills. Today, one cannot do without them.” (R1031)

On the other hand, respondents indicated the following weaknesses: not enough practical work, project-based practical work, too many theoretical courses, too many assignments/quizzes/essays, lack of elective courses, lack of pedagogical courses which would equip students to work in educational institutions, and repetition of content from undergraduate study.

“We have too much to learn by heart. There are too many assignments and tasks to hand in.” (R1070) “There are too many courses. We are exhausted from running from one course to another. I am really good in time management but there are just too many things to do.” (R1071) “I think that we a losing our precious time on learning theoretical things. I do not see the point of it. I think that some of these things are made up just for the sake of teaching. I have never encountered these things in real life … The emphasis should be on preparing a student for practical work in particular institution or business.” (R1080) “In my opinion, courses should be updated more often. Sometimes we learn about things that are outdated … Everything in our field changes so quickly.” (R1089) “We have too many small-size courses which fragment the topic. And this is why we often have the feeling that there is a lot of repetition.” (R111)