Susan Gardner and Susanna Eng
405
portal: Libraries and the Academy, Vol. 5, No. 3 (2005), pp. 405–420.
Copyright © 2005 by The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD 21218.
What Students Want:
Generation Y and the
Changing Function of the
Academic Library
Susan Gardner and Susanna Eng
abstract: This article presents the results of a 2003 undergraduate library user survey as a case
study of Generation Y. Survey data support four main traits attributed to Generation Y, which are
discussed within the context of library use and satisfaction. Implications for future directions in
academic library services based on the new ways Generation Y learn and use the library are
explored.
Background
T
oday’s undergraduates are pushing the academic library to rethink the ways in
which it presents its most basic services. The majority of college students are
now part of a new generation born in or after 1982 and most often labeled “Gen-
eration Y” but also sometimes referred to as the Net Generation, the Digital Generation,
the Echo Boom Generation, or the Millennials. As profiled in Neil Howe and William
Strauss’ watershed 2000 book, Millennials Rising: the Next Great Generation, the new gen-
eration is unique because they are more ambitious and optimistic than Generation X,
are the most ethnically diverse (35 percent are nonwhite), and favor different values
and learning styles than their predecessors.
1
They are the largest child generation in
American history, currently making up 34 percent of the country’s population, and they
are the most technologically savvy.
2
The implications of the Howe and Strauss study for higher education continue to
stimulate discussion, some of which touches on the implications for academic librar-
ies.
3
There is a growing perception that the physical library is no longer so essential to
5.3gardner. 5/19/05, 1:36 PM405
What Students Want: Generation Y and the Changing Function of the Academic Library
406
the educational experience since students increasingly rely on the Internet and technol-
ogy for their learning and communication.
4
A survey conducted among college stu-
dents in 2002 suggests that technology’s mobility is diverting Generation Y away from
physically using the library in the same way students used it in the past. The survey
found that 73 percent of the respondents were more likely to conduct research by using
the Internet than by going to the library.
5
Recent library statistics appear to reflect this
shift. In many academic libraries, gate counts are declining.
6
Furthermore, ARL statis-
tics show that there was a 10 percent decline in circulation rates between1991–2002 and
a 37 percent decline in in-house use.
7
A longitudinal study of undergraduate libraries
found that between 1974 and 1994 circulation figures for monographs decreased by 66
percent, and it seems this trend is continuing into the next millennium with Generation
Y.
8
When faced with statistics like these, how can academic libraries appeal to this new,
smart, internet-savvy generation and avoid becoming irrelevant?
This article reports the results of a 2003 library user survey conducted at an under-
graduate library. Most of the undergraduate respondents were representative of Gen-
eration Y students, being less than or equal to 21 years of age and also having the ethnic
diversity characteristic of that generation (42 percent of the enrolled students are of
Asian, Black, Hispanic, or Native American origin).
9
Therefore, the survey results will
be used as a case study of Generation Y and analyzed within the context of four pro-
posed characteristics often attributed to Generation Y to test whether our data support
these traits. There are four attributes discussed within the context of student library use
and satisfaction:
1. They have great expectations.
2. They expect customization.
3. They are technology veterans.
4. They utilize new communication modes.
Because the survey was nonscientific and sampled only a small number of stu-
dents, the survey research has limitations that prevent definitive conclusions. It serves
as a launching point, however, for the discussion of important critical issues facing the
modern undergraduate library of tomorrow.
Methodology
The focus of our survey was to determine in what ways the Thomas and Dorothy Leavey
Library at the University of Southern California (USC) has been successful in its quest
to be an innovative, user-oriented library and computing center. Leavey is the under-
graduate and teaching library on a campus of 30,000 students and one of over a dozen
different libraries and collections. At the time of its inception 10 years ago, Leavey was
considered thoroughly modern because it was one of the first libraries to merge tech-
nology, computing, and library services in an Information Commons. Now that the
highly anticipated Generation Y has arrived on campus, we wanted to reassess our
services and find out why students come to the library. Is it true that they use us only as
a computing facility and study hall? Are we meeting their unique new learning needs?
What do they like and dislike?
5.3gardner. 5/19/05, 1:36 PM406
Susan Gardner and Susanna Eng
407
The survey (see appendix A) was a paper-based instrument consisting of eight ques-
tions on one sheet of paper (front and back). Two of the eight questions were free re-
sponse; the rest were multiple-choice. Of the six multiple-choice questions, two were
not limited to only one answer; students were told to circle all that apply. Questions
were a combination of performance-based (asking for the behavior of the patron re-
garding specific services) and perceptions-based (asking for personal satisfaction levels
or opinions) and were designed with the assistance of other library surveys already
published in the literature through March 2003. Specifically, questions asked students
about their status, the frequency and duration of their library visits, their use of and
satisfaction with various library services, and suggestions for improvement. Questions
were pre-tested on a group of students and revised before implementation. The survey
administrators recorded the hour each survey was completed by the participant. For
more details about the execution of the survey, please see the authors’ article in Ameri-
can Libraries.
10
We implemented the survey during one continuous 36-hour period. Participation
was on a voluntary basis and included only patrons who were physically in the library
during the survey period. We chose two consecutive days of the week in the hopes of
capturing a greater diversity of students. The total number of responses was 1,982—of
which 1,267 were undergraduates (approximately 64 percent). For this article, since we
are examining the results in the context of Generation Y, we are only focusing on the 64
percent who are undergraduates. We recognize that this is a small sample but are con-
sidering the data only in the context of a case study. Since we did not ask for the age of
the participants, it is unknown how many are actually part of Generation Y; but we do
know from the fall 2002–spring 2003 university enrollment student profile data that
only 20 percent of all enrolled degree-seeking undergraduates at USC were over 21
(and thus outside the scope of Generation Y).
11
Furthermore, only 25.9 percent of all the
undergraduates sampled in our survey were seniors. This is the group that would least
likely belong to Generation Y. Since there is nothing to indicate that the undergraduates
we sampled from the overall USC student population are not representative of the “typi-
cal” undergraduate at USC, we feel comfortable interpreting our results as applicable
to a larger pool of students.
We collected the completed surveys, coded them, and input the data into Excel
spreadsheets. Then we entered the information in Statistical Package for the Social Sci-
ences (SPSS) to produce the raw percentages for each question, along with cross-tabula-
tions of other significant variables. We recorded and tabulated data for the two free-
response questions by hand. For general data on the characteristics of Generation Y, we
consulted the library and education literature through May 2004.
Discussion and Results
Great Expectations
Today’s students are both high achievers and ambitious. Howe and Strauss point out
that higher standards for schools have been moving to the top of the American political
agenda since the 1980s. Generation Y students face parental and self-pressure to study
5.3gardner. 5/19/05, 1:36 PM407
What Students Want: Generation Y and the Changing Function of the Academic Library
408
hard and excel, and they have been up to the challenge.
12
During the 1990s, aptitude
test scores rose, and a record number of students are now taking advanced placement
exams in high school.
13
Eight out of 10 teenagers say it is “cool to be smart.”
14
Our library user survey corroborates this notion of ambition. When asked in ques-
tion 3 “Why do you visit Leavey Library?” and told to circle all reasons applicable, the
top three responses were all related to academic achievement (see table 1). The number
one response among undergraduates was to study alone (80.6 percent), followed by
use a computer for class work (61.3 percent), and study with a group (55.2 percent).
These study-related functions usurped other less academic functions like using a com-
puter for personal reasons (51.1 percent) and socializing (8.8 percent).
Furthermore, when asked how satisfied they are with various Leavey services on a
four-point scale in question 7, the service that ranked the second lowest—with a 2.9 out
of 4.0—was study space (see table 2). Students clearly use the library as a place to study,
and they would like to see the facilities improve in this regard. Of the 514 undergradu-
ates who responded to question 8, asking for free response suggestions for improve-
ment of services, 63 noted a lack of enough individual and group study space, while
another 66 complained that the noise level is too high (probably because they are trying
to study).
Millennials received more attention as children than Generation X. The 1980s was
the era of the “wanted child,” and the well being of children dominated national de-
bate.
15
The youth safety movement increased; children were shielded from harm be-
cause they were “vital to the nation and to their parents’ sense of purpose.”
16
According
to Howe and Strauss, today’s college students “expect to be protected.”
17
Only eight
students complained about the need for more security in Leavey Library in the free
response suggestions for improvement question. This response was low despite the
fact that there were 62 security incidents in and around Leavey Library during the fall
2002 and spring 2003 semesters—including theft, battery, and vandalism.
18
Students’
expectations of protection may lead them to an unwarranted sense of complacency
about their safety.
Generation Y kids were, on average, part of the smallest families in history, which
meant they received more parental time and resources.
19
The notion that they are “spe-
cial” has been with them since birth—and with it a sense of entitlement. College stu-
dents today expect the same kind of attention their parents gave them.
20
One could
argue that students have expectations bordering on the unrealistic, as evidenced in a
1999 survey that revealed 62 percent of the 12–17 year olds believed they could be elected
president.
21
According to Stephen Merritt, they want specialized housing and food ser-
vice. Furthermore, they expect access to global information 24/7.
22
In the Leavey library survey, 23 undergraduates wrote that Leavey should allow
food and drink in the library, which lends support to Merritt’s special food service
claim. In addition, students ranked their satisfaction with the hours of operation as 3.67
out of 4.0 (see table 2)—the highest of all the services—implying that students are happy
Leavey Library is open nearly 24 hours daily during the academic year.
23
As happy as
they were, however, 27 students wrote in that they wanted to see Leavey open even
more hours when asked for suggestions for improvement. This strongly suggests that,
indeed, students “expect that services will be available 24/7 in a variety of modes.”
24
5.3gardner. 5/19/05, 1:36 PM408
Susan Gardner and Susanna Eng
409
1. Hours of operation 3.67
2. Circulation/Reserves Desk service 3.14
3. Range of materials in library 3.11
3. Computer workstations 3.11
5. Research assistance 3.03
6. Library Instruction 2.99
7. Computing assistance 2.91
8. Study space 2.90
9. Print center 2.82
Table 2
Undergraduate satisfaction with Library Services
(4-point scale)
Ranking Service Rating
1. Study Alone 80.6%
2. Use a computer for class work 61.3%
3. Study with a group 55.2%
4. Use a computer for personal reasons 51.1%
5. Check out a book 36.3%
6. Printing 35.5%
7. Use a collaborative workroom 30.5%
8. Return a book 20%
9. Check out reserve materials 19.5%
10. View DVDs or videos 12.7%
11. Get research assistance 12.6%
12. Use print journals or magazines 12%
13. Socialize 8.8%
14. Attend a classroom or auditorium session 7.2%
15. Get computing assistance 2.1%
Table 1
Percentage of all undergraduates doing each activity
(in order of frequency)
Rank Activity Percentage
5.3gardner. 5/19/05, 1:36 PM409
