The Impact of New Student Housing onLibrary Usage: A Case Studyby Jon RitterbushAvailable online 2 June 2009

A quantitative analysis of campus housingfigures and library usage statistics suggests

a stronger correlation than library usagecompared to other enrollment figures. New

residents on a university campus weresurveyed on their frequency and reasons for

utilizing the library's physical and onlineresources, before and after moving in.

Jon Ritterbush is Associate Professor andElectronic Resources Librarian,

University of Nebraska at Kearney,Kearney, Nebraska, USA

<ritterbushjr@unk.edu>.

360 The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Volume 35, Number 4, pages

INTRODUCTIONThe objective of this case study was to assess thequantitative impact of a new campus housing unit onlibrary usage at Regent University in Virginia Beach,Virginia. Statistics of library usage over a four-yearperiod were analyzed to determine whether anycorrelation existed with the opening of a new housingcomplex. This study also surveyed resident studentswithin the new housing complex and asked participantsto self-report the frequency and purposes of theirlibrary visits and usage in addition to other demo-graphic factors.

“If more users entering the library yieldmore questions, searches and circulations,how then might the introduction of a newhousing complex affect library gate counts

and usage statistics?”

Using a four-year period of usage statistics at South-east Missouri State University, Julie Banks identified astrong correlation between library patron traffic andthree other variables: material circulations, onlinecatalog searches, and reference transactions.1 Theresults of Banks' study indicated a very strong, positivecorrelation between these figures, with r values rangingfrom 0.9998 to 0.81. If more users entering the libraryyield more questions, searches and circulations, howthen might the introduction of a new housing complexaffect library gate counts and usage statistics?

Recent literature has also addressed changing usagepatterns within academic libraries, juxtaposed againstthe growing volume of electronic resources and thedifferences in learning styles amongMillennial studentsversus their predecessors. Gardner and Eng surveyedundergraduates at the University of Southern Californiaas to their reasons for visiting the library.2 The top threeresponses among undergraduates entering the librarywere as follows:

• To study alone (80.6%)• To use a computer for class work (61.3%)• To study with a group (55.2%)3

360–366

Other responses from Gardner and Eng's surveyindicated a much lower frequency of the followingactivities:

• To check out a book (36.3%)• To get research assistance (12.6%)• To socialize (8.8%)4

Shill and Tonner reported that the quality of studyspaces was a significant factor affecting library usage,noting:

“Somewhat unexpectedly, the presence of cafes andsnack bars was not associated with increases in usage,despite their current popularity in library design.…There may be good reasons for including variousnonlibrary facilities in a project, but there is noindication from this study that their presence has asignificant impact, either positive or negative, on facilityusage.”5

Based on the findings of Shill and Tonner, Gaytonstates that “because nonlibrary functions do notmeaningfully increase library use, and because thepresence of quality study spaces does, it would bemore fruitful for academic libraries to devote theirlimited resources to improving and expanding com-munal study space.”6

Shill and Tonner recommend additional research onlibrary usage including the question of how commutingand residential students use a library's physical facil-ities.7 If a new housing complex is built today on auniversity campus, howmight library usage statistics beaffected? What qualities or services will draw residen-tial students to visit the library, especially when somany information resources are accessible online?

CASE STUDY BACKGROUND

Regent University was founded in 1978 in VirginiaBeach, Virginia and originally comprised of five gradu-ate programs including Business, Communication andArts, Divinity, Education and Government. The univer-sity has since grown to include Schools of Law,Psychology and Counseling, and Leadership Studies,and undergraduate programs. Regent University is alsoa leading provider of online graduate and under-graduate education with many instructors utilizingBlackboard to teach their courses. In 2007–2008, RegentUniversity had 4494 students, of which 43.5% livedinside the 757 area code, which includes the cities ofChesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Ports-mouth, Suffolk and Virginia Beach, Virginia.

The University Library and Law Library share acommon building on the Virginia Beach campus. RegentUniversity Library is housed on the first two floors ofthis building and serves the majority of academicprograms on-campus and online. The University Librarymaintains a collection of over 270,000 print volumes,70,000 electronic books, and over 120 article databases.The Law Library is on the third floor of this building, andmaintained a separate entrance via stairwell andelevator through the duration of this case study untilAugust 2008. The Law Library is administered indepen-dently of the University Library and primarily serves the

School of Law, which is accredited by the American BarAssociation.

“To better serve the housing needs ofRegent's growing undergraduate

population and graduate students withoutchildren, a new apartment complex namedRegent Commons was opened on-campus in

August 2007.”

Given its early emphasis on graduate education, theRegent University campus did not become a residentialcampus until 1985 when the Regent University Villagewas built. This complexwas built one-half mile from thecampus and provides 224 unfurnished apartment unitsto graduate students and their families. To better servethe housing needs of Regent's growing undergraduatepopulation and graduate students without children, anew apartment complex named Regent Commons wasopened on-campus in August 2007. Regent Commonshas a total capacity of 296 beds arranged in studio andone-bedroom apartments, as well as 4-bedroom suites.

METHODOLOGY

Using SPSS, enrollment and student housing figureswere compared to the following usage statistics atRegent University Library from a four-year period todetermine the strength of correlation (see Supplemen-tary Data):

• Gate attendance counts• Total circulations• Total interlibrary loan borrowing requests (filled orunfilled)

• Reference transactions

This study also utilized an online questionnaire ofstudents residing in Regent Commons, which wasenabled between March 27 and April 27, 2008, thespring semester following the August 2007 opening ofthis housing complex. During this one-month period,invitations to participate in this survey were sent twiceby mass e-mail to all students residing in RegentCommons, and a printed survey invitation was alsodistributed to each unit in that facility. Participationwasanonymous, but survey participants were informed thatthey could enter a drawing for a $50 Visa gift card if theysubmitted a separate online entry form, linked from thelast page of the survey. The survey was 20 questionslong, andmost questions were multiple-choice or basedon a Likert-scale. Of the 250 residents living in RegentCommons, 77 (30.8%) responded to this online survey.The complete survey questions and results are availablein Supplementary Data.

STUDY LIMITATIONS

The number of online catalog searches at Regent acrossthis four-year period was not available to the author,

July 2009 361

although this statistic could have proved a valuablebarometer of library usage, similar to Banks' 1999 study.

Regent University's newest student housing com-plex, Regent Commons, opened at the beginning of the2007–2008 academic year. Thus, only one completeacademic year of statistics is available for comparison. Afollow-up study in three or four years might be useful,to provide a longitudinal examination of the impact ofthis new student housing complex on library usage.Also, a new 1000-bed student housing complex isexpected to open at Regent University in 2010, whichmay further impact library usage statistics.

During the summer of 2007, Regent UniversityLibrary's reference desk was physically relocated to alocation closer to the library's entrance. It was expectedthat this relocation would result in a larger number ofreference transactions, particularly in-person transac-tions, independent of whether new student housinghad opened that fall. Due to related renovations at thelibrary, gate counts were unavailable for a two-weekperiod in late August 2007. Gate counts from the sametwo-week period from August 2006 were thereforeutilized in this study to adjust the overall trafficestimates for the 2007–2008 academic year.

“…the correlation between increases inlibrary usage statistics and the number ofstudents residing on-campus is stronger

than the correlation to overall enrollment.”

ANALYSIS

As Table 1 illustrates the Pearson r value for sixmeasures of library usage indicates a very strongcorrelation with the number of students residing on-

TableIncreases and correlations between student enrollment, stu

Variable

Percentageincrease in2004–2008

Pecorto

enr

Total enrollment 30.6%

Students residing in 757 area code 69.4%

Students residing on-campus 41.5%

Library gate counts 35.7% 0

Library circulation totals 21.4% 0

Total ILL requests 25.4% 0

ILL requests by ‘local’ students 52.7% 0

Total reference transactions 29.3% 0

Reference transactions in person 23.3% 0

362 The Journal of Academic Librarianship

campus. In four of these six measures, the correla-tion appeared to strengthen as the scope ofproximity narrowed. In other words, the correlationbetween increases in library usage statistics and thenumber of students residing on-campus is strongerthan the correlation to overall enrollment (residentstudents+ local commuters+distance educationstudents).

Interestingly, one statistic where this correlationseemed to slip as the scope narrowed was in librarycirculation. This study found only a moderate correla-tion between the number of students residing on-campus and library circulation figures. The correlationbetween increases in total enrollment and circulationfigures was far stronger.

In addition to identifying the quantitative linksbetween new student housing and library usage, asurvey was conducted of students living in RegentCommons to better understand how and why theseusers utilize the library's resources and facilities (seeSupplementary Data). Of the 77 respondents, two-thirds reported they were graduate students; one-thirdas undergraduates. These students were not generallymorning-time library users. Only 12.5% reported typi-cally visiting the Library in-person before noon, whilethe 4 p.m.–8 p.m. and 8 p.m.–midnight time segmentswere reportedly more popular (73.6% and 65.3%,respectively).

These resident students also answered survey ques-tions about why they visited the Regent Library (seeQuestion 13, Supplementary Data). The largest numberof respondents, 72%, indicated that they visit “forindividual reading or studying.” The next three highestresponses were from students who use the library forgroup studyormeetings (41.3%), to use the computer lab(38.7%), or to prepare for a class presentation (36.0%).Only 13.3% reported they visited the library to socialize.In a separate question, only 37.4% of respondentsreported checking out a book from the libraries more

1dent residence population and library usage statistics

arson rrelationtotal

ollment

Pearson rcorrelation tonumber of

students residingin 757 area code

Pearson rcorrelation tonumber of

students residingon-campus

.542 0.804 0.822

.949 0.997 0.490

.535 0.676 0.974

.782 0.859 0.854

.390 0.695 0.775

.272 0.595 0.817

Figure 3Ex-Commuters: Before and after moving into

Regent Commons, how often did you checkout abook from the Regent Libraries.

Figure 2Ex-Commuters: Before and after moving intoRegent Commons, how often did you visit the

Regent Libraries in person.

Figure 1Ex-Commuters: Before and after moving into

Regent Commons, how often did you access theRegent Libraries website, databases or online

catalog (from anywhere).

than once a month; 28% said they had not checked out abook after moving into Regent Commons (see Supple-mentary Data, Question 17). The number of residentsreporting they had never contacted the library forresearch assistance, checked out a video, or utilizedinterlibrary loan was over 50%. These survey results arestrikingly similar to the results reported by Gardner andEng in their 2005 survey of undergraduate studentswhovisited the libraryat theUniversityof SouthernCalifornia.

The importance of library as a place for individual orgroup study was also examined in this survey (seeQuestions 14–15, Supplementary Data). Of the residentswho responded, 56% reported they most preferred toread and study alone in their residence room. Another28% reported they preferred the University Library orLaw Library for such individual study. When asked

Figure 4Ex-Commuters: Before and after moving into

Regent Commons, howoften did you contact theRegent Libraries for research assistance? (N=9)

July 2009 363

where they most prefer to read or study with a group offriends and/or classmates, however, 46.7% reported theUniversity Library or Law Library. The next closestresponses were each tied at 18.7% between studentswho preferred group study in another classroombuilding on-campus and those who preferred some-where off-campus. Group study in a residence roomcame in fourth at 16%.

Twenty-three respondents (29.9%) reported theyhad been taking classes at Regent University prior tomoving into Regent Commons, of which only 3 (3.9%)reported they had lived in student housing (RegentVillage) before moving into Regent Commons. Theother 20 students represent an interesting subset of“pre-existing” library users who would have lived off-

.

Figure 7Ex-Distance Students: Before and after movinginto Regent Commons, how often did you access

the Regent Libraries website, databases oronline catalog (from any computer).

Figure 6Ex-Distance Students: Before and after movinginto Regent Commons, how often did you visit

the Regent Libraries in person?

Figure 5Ex-Commuters: Before and after moving into

Regent Commons, how often did you request anitem through interlibrary loan.

364 The Journal of Academic Librarianship

campus, either commuting to class or attending onlineclasses.

EX-COMMUTER STUDENTSThis group of residents (N=11) who will be referred toas “ex-commuters” represent those students whoreported having lived off-campus within the 757 areacode prior to moving into Regent Commons. Thesestudents also reported having been enrolled in classesat Regent University, either online or on-campus, beforemoving into Regent Commons. Before moving intoRegent Commons, 27.3% of these 11 students indicatedthey accessed the library's online resources less thanthree times a semester; after moving on-campus, thisfigure dropped to 10% (see Fig. 1). However, ex-commuters reported visiting the library in person no

Figure 8Ex-Distance Students: Before and after moving

into Regent Commons, how often did youcheckout a book from the Regent Libraries.

more frequently after moving into student housing (seeFig. 2). While ex-commuters reported that they checkedout books slightly more frequently after moving on-campus (see Fig. 3), they also reported not utilizingreference services with any greater frequency (see Fig.4), and reported they utilized interlibrary loan withslightly less frequency (see Fig. 5).

EX-DISTANCE STUDENTSThis group of residents (N=9) who will be referred toas “ex-distance students” represent those students whoreported having lived outside the 757 area code prior tomoving into Regent Commons, while enrolled in classesat Regent University. Not surprisingly, the ex-distancestudents reported visiting the library in greater fre-

Figure 10Ex-Distance Students: Before and after moving

into Regent Commons, how often did youcontact the Regent Libraries for research

assistance.

quency after moving on-campus than when they hadlived a greater distance away (see Fig. 6). Interestingly,these ex-distance students also reported utilizing thelibrary's online resources in greater frequency thanbefore (see Fig. 7). Ex-distance students also reportedchecking out books much more frequently than before(see Fig. 8), but they reported using interlibrary loanslightly less often (Fig. 9). This group reported that theyasked for research assistance only slightly more oftenthan before moving to campus (see Fig. 10).

CONCLUSIONS

This case study suggests a significant positive correla-tion between resident student populations and libraryusage statistics, particularly with regard to library gatecounts, ILL requests, and in-person reference transac-tions. Determining whether there is an actual cause andeffect relationship requires further study, however, asthese results are based on four years of data at a singlemedium-sized, private university. A follow-up study atRegent University may be conducted in three or fouryears, to determine the longitudinal effects of newstudent housing on library usage, and to assess whetherfuture housing construction boosts usage still further.

“This case study suggests a significantpositive correlation between residentstudent populations and library usage

statistics, particularly with regard to librarygate counts, ILL requests, and in-person

reference transactions.”

Of those new residents who responded to the survey,results would indicate a significant increase in visits to

Figure 9Ex-Distance Students: Before and after moving

into Regent Commons, how often did yourequest an item through interlibrary loan.

July 2009 365

the library usage of its resources. More than half of therespondents indicated they accessed the library's onlineresources at least once a week, and nearly two-thirdsreported visiting the library at least as frequently. Whilethese figures do include newly-enrolled students atRegent University, the fact that all of these new studentsare living on-campus rather than taking classes onlinefrom other locales should not be underplayed. Otherresearch indicates the demand for physical resources(i.e. study spaces, computers, books, etc.) by on-campusstudents are significantly greater than those of online/distance students.8 Of particular note in this survey washow many ex-distance students reported increasedusage of the library's online resources, visits to thelibrary in person, and checking out of books, aftermoving on-campus. The changes in library usagereported by ex-commuter students, on the other hand,were somewhat muted even though these studentsnow lived within easy walking distance of the library.Because the subsets of these ex-commuter and ex-distance students were relatively small, further analysisis warranted to better understand the library usagepatterns of resident students, commuters, and distancestudents.

APPENDIX A. SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

Supplementary data associated with this article can befound, in the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2009.04.006.

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1. Julie Banks, “Does building traffic affect circulation, OPACsearching, or reference desk activity?,” Library Computing 18(1999): 327–333.

2. Susan Gardner & Susanna Eng, “What students want,”portal: Libraries and the Academy 5 (2005): 405–420.

3. Ibid., pp. 409.4. Ibid., pp. 409.

5.Harold B. Shill & Shawn Tonner, “Does the building stillmatter? Usage patterns in new, expanded, and renovatedlibraries, 1995–2002,” College & Research Libraries 65(2004): 143.

6. Jeffrey T. Gayton, “Academic libraries: ‘social’ or ‘com-munal?’ The nature and future of academic libraries,”

366 The Journal of Academic Librarianship

The Journal of Academic Librarianship 34 (January 2008):64.

7. Shill and Tonner, “Does the building still matter?” pp.150.8. Kimberly B. Kelley & Gloria H. Orr, “Trends in distant studentuse of electronic resources: A Survey,” College & ResearchLibraries 64 (May 2003): 188.