Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 28


A Research Design for Declining Usage at Public Libraries

Team 4 Ashley Swan Stephanie Whitehead April 26, 2012

Emporia State University LI810XR


Research Problem
The most visible change to librarianship in the past generations is maybe the simplest: librarians have left the building. Waiting behind the reference desk for patrons to approach is old-fashioned. Passive is pass (Johnson, 2010, p. 105). The role of the librarian has been rapidly changing over the last decade and will continue to evolve.! In order to remain relevant as information experts to the public, they must nd new ways to reach their users and draw in those who dont nd signicant value in a brick-andmortar library. The goal of this study is to investigate non-traditional methods that libraries are using to draw patrons into the physical library, and how they market their services as a tool. It is becoming more di"cult to draw new patrons in and libraries have to come up with new, innovative ways to reach them. In the past decade, libraries have made a digital leap forward in order to keep up with public demand.! Users want to be able to access the library catalog online and place holds on the books they want to borrow, from home. They seek out book reviews through various social networks (whether it be Amazon.com reviews or even asking for recommendations from their friends on Facebook), rather than rely on professional reviews. They expect their library to make databases searchable from home, instead of being forced to use a


computer in the libraries own network. These are just a few examples of the changing expectations of the public library by its users. The previous research we drew upon for our literature review showed that librarians are not only concerned with bringing patrons into the building, but to get them to interact with the library in a more social, digital sense. Our study will try to identify which of these methods, identied in the literature review, that librarians across the country are trying in their own libraries and the impact they have made to their local library systems. This study will use qualitative and quantitative research to gather this data. The quantitative approach will be administered through a web-based self-completion questionnaire. To gather more insight on the answers provided in these questionnaires we will take a qualitative approach to that data collection and follow it up with a phone interview to willing candidates.

Research Paradigm
This project will use qualitative and quantitative research framework to investigate because it follows a research strategy of inductivist, constructionist and interpretivist features. Both a qualitative and quantitative framework will provide the best set of data for this research design because they will focus on how libraries have examined the behavior of their patrons and come up with solutions to change those behaviors (bring them into the library).


An inductivist approach will explore the relationship between nontraditional methods to bring in patrons that we have identied in our literature review, versus the research from our study that will provide us with general conclusions about the e#ectiveness of these methods. Many libraries are taking a constructionist approach to bringing in patrons by changing the culture of the library itself.! They are working hard to make it known that the physical library is not just a repository for books any more.! Its an evolving, useful, interactive, social place for people. They have a hard task in getting people to think about the library as a tool, not just a place to borrow books. Finally, an interpretivist approach is also necessary because hermeneutics reect the clash between an emphasis on the explanation of human behavior versus the understanding of human behavior (Bryman, 2008, p. 15). In other words, librarians seek to interpret patrons behavior through their actions to determine why they view the library in the social world the way they do, versus what the library actually o#ers them in the natural world. How do we change societys perception of the library that a#ects the way people view it? We hope to answer this question in our follow-up phone interviews. While the main focus of our research will be centered on an inductivist approach, we will be utilizing both quantitative and qualitative data to form our conclusions and to validate the results we obtained from our original literature review. We believe the phone interviews will provide more insight into our data


to obtain meanings behind simple multiple choice answers from the questionnaire.

Qualitative Data Collection & Analysis Procedure

! Our study uses qualitative data collection from participants at 30

libraries, based on their geographical location in the United States. We will distribute an online self-completion questionnaire to the various libraries, and will then conduct follow-up interviews based on the responses to the initial surveys. All of the participants will be public librarians in the United States. Our study divides the United States into ve separate segments (Appendix F); each of the geographical regions will have three libraries contacted. These three librarians are to be based in three di#erent sized towns, or markets: small, medium, and large (Appendix F). Since these libraries have to fall into specic categories, our selection style will be non-random, and will be chosen from search results on Google (Appendix G). We will then contact the selected libraries by email to give them the chance to respond to the survey online. If we receive no response within 30 days, we shall contact a backup library in the same size market, and same region. $ Our method of data gathering is twofold. We rst will create a self-

completion questionnaire using the survey creation website surveymonkey.com. These surveys will be distributed to all of the libraries we choose for the study, and will ask for permission to follow-up with further questions. These follow-


up questions will be given through telephone interviews within thirty to sixty days of the original surveys being returned. Participants have the capability of declining to participate in these follow-up telephone interviews. We chose to use both data collection methods for this survey because they complement each other in providing responses to our research topic, and because they allow us to easily answer our research question in a straightforward manner. $ Our study is limited by a few basic issues. To begin with, as graduate

students our resources for this study are limited, and our credibility is less than it would be for professional researchers. However this is mitigated by the fact that we do have university resources behind us, and we will be receiving Ethics Board approval to conduct our study. In addition, we are limited by our scal resources. In response to that we have chosen data collection methods that balance our resources in gathering information on the current actions of libraries in response to a drop in patron numbers, and our ability to interview enough participants. Additionally, our research design addresses another aw in that if an original library selected does not respond to the initial survey; we have a library waiting to replace it, of commensurate terms as far as size and geographical locality. $ Our self-completion questionnaire was created based upon the results of

our research in our literature review. The questions are a mix of open ended questions to garner extra information on our library subjects procedures, and


closed questions for general information gathering. The phone interview questions were designed based on both the results of the literature review research, and the questions of the self-completion questionnaire. Our selfcompletion questionnaire will be pre-tested by some of our classmates that currently work in public libraries; they will provide feedback on the survey, which will then allow us to rene both the survey and the phone interview. $ For this research study we will need to receive Ethics Board approval (See

Appendix X) as an external permission. For the participants, their participation with the questionnaire is entirely optional, as is participation in the telephone interview portion. Our research design is set up to determine how libraries are responding to their declining usage in the physical building, This study is set up to determine the answer to this question, but not to create a how-to guide for how libraries can x the problem at their own library. Not all ideas will work at all libraries; di#erences in library size, market size, geographic location, and other factors will a#ect how libraries are responding.

Ethical Considerations
Prior to engaging in our study we will obtain approval from the Emporia State Institutional Review Board for Treatment of Human Subjects (Appendix C). We will ask all participants to ll out an Informed Consent form via email and return it to us prior to the questionnaire being completed. We will not be using pseudonyms because the information is not classied as personal. We will not


use library names specically in the nal report; we will refer to them as the Size of Library in their Geographical Zone. Only qualied M.L.S or M.L.I.S. librarians will be accepted for the questionnaire and interview. We will not be interviewing any un-qualied library sta# members. Participants are given the option to provide consent for the phone interview portion of our study.



Bryman, A. (2008). Social research methods. (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Johnson, M. (2010). This book is overdue! : How librarians and cybrarians can save us all. New York: Harper.



Appendix A: Introduction to Research Study Letter

Philadelphia Public Library Central Library 1901 Vine Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 April 10, 2012 Dear Ms. Gray: Emporia State University: School of Library and Information Management is conducting research regarding how public libraries are counteracting against declining usage and new and innovative ways they are reaching out to their patrons. Your name has been selected as a potential participant in a webbased, self-completion questionnaire. The purpose of our research is to help determine some of the following information: What new digital methods are libraries using to bring patrons to their physical space? What non-digital, non-traditional methods are libraries using to bring patrons to their physical space? How are libraries reaching out to non-users to bring them into the library? What marketing techniques are being used to bring library patrons in? We would like to invite you to take part in our SurveyMonkey questionnaire. It will be sent to your library email address, where you can click through to the questionnaire. The questionnaire will consist of 10 questions and takes approximately 3-4 minutes to complete. All personal information provided is condential and will not be published in the nal report. Your input and opinions are important to us. The feedback we receive will help us to determine how libraries are coping with declining patron usage and ways they combat that decline. A member of our research team will be sending you an email with a link to the questionnaire within the next week. Your participation will be of benet to the library, and we hope to make it an interesting and enjoyable experience. If we have further questions, we will also be conducting a follow-up phone interview to willing participants. You can include your phone number contact information at the end of the questionnaire. Please feel free to contact us with any questions or concerns you may have. One member of our team is available Monday-Friday from 9:00-5:00 and



Saturdays from 9:00-12:00, at (913) 209-7984. We can also be reached by email: aswan1@emporia.edu & swhitehe@emporia.edu. Thanks again. We will be looking forward to reading your submissions. Emporia State University Research Team: Ashley Swan & Stephanie Whitehead



Appendix B: Self-Completion Questionnaire



Appendix C: Phone Interview Script

Hello, this is Ashley Swan/Stephanie Whitehead calling from Emporia State University, School of Library and Information Science and we would like to know if you have time to complete a short Phone Interview regarding the results of the web-based questionnaire you completed for us three weeks ago regarding declining usage at public libraries.
$ (If no). When would be a good time for me to call back?

$ (If yes). Lets start with your comment regarding library usage going [up/down]. How much has it changed (# of people) in the past year? Two years? Five years? $ Do you know how many people use the following services you selected as being used in your library in a given year? (choose only services they selected): o o E-books Expanded Internet services ! o What services does your library o#er?

Web 2.0 Tools ! ! What Web 2.0 tools do you use? Do you nd them e#ective or do people interact with them regularly?

What marketing tactics do you use to engage people to use your library services or to come into the library? What other technological services do you provide to your patrons that we have not discussed? What other methods are you using to bring patrons in or to engage with them that could considered non-traditional? Do you have any other suggestions or tools you would like other libraries to know about that have worked for your library?



Thank you for your time. Your answers have been very valuable to our study and it has been a pleasure speaking with you. When the nal report from this study is published, we will notify all parties that have participated that they can review it at their leisure.



Appendix D: Emporia State University Institutional Review Board

For R&G Use Only$ $ Date approved %%%%%$ $ Approved by %%%%%$ Expedited Review ________ $ $ Exempted

Protocol No. ___________ $ Full Review %%%%%$ Review ________$

APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL TO USE HUMAN SUBJECTS This application should be submitted, along with the Informed Consent Document and supplemental material, to the Institutional Review Board for Treatment of Human Subjects, Research and Grants Center, Plumb Hall 313F, Campus Box 4003. Before approval can be given to use human subjects, applicants must review the Human Subjects Training Module and achieve at least 80% on the Human Subjects Training Quiz. Instructions for the Training Module and Quiz are available at http://www.emporia.edu/research/irb.htm. Human Subjects Training Quiz was taken on: Date 4/15/2012 $ Score (will be entered by Research and Grants Center): $$ 1. Name of Principal Investigator(s) (Individual(s) administering the procedures): Ashley Swan & Stephanie Whitehead$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 2. Departmental A"liation: School of Library and Information Management$ $ $ 3. Person to whom notication should be sent: Ashley Swan$ $ $ $ $ Mailing Address: 12526 S. Clinton Olathe, KS 66061$ $ $ $ $ $ Telephone: 913.209.7984$ $ aswanderson@gmail.com$ $ Email address: $

4. Title of Project: A Research Design for Declining Usage at Public Libraries$ $ $



5. Funding Agency (if applicable): none$ $ $ $ $ $ 6. This is a: $

$ $ $ $ X$ $ $ study dissertation $ thesis$$ class project other research

$ $

7. Time period for which you are requesting approval (maximum one year): from 4/15/2012 to 7/15/2012. If the research project extends past the end date requested, you will need to submit a request for a time extension or an annual update. This form is available at www.emporia.edu/research/docs/ irbmod.doc. 8. Project Purpose (please be specic): We will be studying how public librarians are ghting$ the declining use of public libraries and the methods they nd successful to engage and $ draw patrons into the library.$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 9. Describe the proposed subjects: (age, sex, race, expected number of participants, or other special characteristics, such as students in a specic class, etc.) Professional public librarians, approximately age 22 + up, M.L.S. degree holding only$ $ $ $ $ $ 10. Describe how the subjects are to be selected. If you are using archival information, you must submit documentation of authorization from applicable organization or entity. We will$ be selecting libraries from ve geographical segments across the United States at random,$ using Google search. Search will be further narrowed by selecting two libraries from each$ of the following population markets listed here: Small = > 99,999 people, Medium = 100,000 $ to 499,999 people, Large = < 500,000 people. Therefore, we will be sending questionnaires$ to 30 libraries total. If we do not here from a library within 30 days, we will select another$ library of the same population market, same geographical region.$ $ $ $ 11. Describe in detail the proposed procedures and benet(s) of the project. This must be clear and detailed enough so that the IRB can assure that the University policy relative to research with human subjects is appropriately implemented. Any proposed experimental activities that are included in evaluation, research, development, demonstration, instruction, study, treatments, debrieng, questionnaires, and similar projects must be



described here. Copies of questionnaires, survey instruments, or tests should be attached. See attached Research Design Proposal.$ $ $ $ $ 12. Will questionnaires, tests, or related research instruments not explained in question #11 be used?$ Yes X No (If yes, attach a copy to this application.) 13. Will electrical or mechanical devices be applied to the subjects? Yes X No (If yes, attach a detailed description of the device(s) used and precautions and safeguards that will be taken.) 14. Do the benets of the research outweigh the risks to human subjects? $ Yes X No (If no, this information should be outlined here.)

15. Are there any possible emergencies which might arise in utilization of human subjects in this project? Yes provided here.) X No (If yes, details of these emergencies should be

16. What provisions will you take for keeping research data private/secure? (Be specic refer to the section Safeguarding Information in the IRB Policies.) Libraries and librarian names$ will not be recorded when this data is published. Libraries will only be referred to based on$ their geographical segment and population market. No private information will be recorded$ or made public from this study.$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 17. Attach a copy of the informed consent document, as it will be used for your subjects. INVESTIGATORS ASSURANCE: I certify that the information provided in this request is complete and accurate. I understand that as Principal Investigator I have ultimate responsibility for the protection of the rights and welfare of human subjects and the ethical conduct of this research protocol. I agree to comply with all of ESUs policies and procedures, as well as with all applicable federal, state, and local laws regarding the protection of human subjects in research, including, but not limited to, the following: The project will be performed by qualied personnel according to the research protocol, I will maintain a copy of all questionnaires, survey instruments, interview questions, data collection instruments, and information sheets for human subjects,



I will promptly request approval from ESUs IRB if any changes are made to the research protocol, I will report any adverse events that occur during the course of conducting the research to the IRB within 10 working days of the date of occurrence.

$ $ $ $ Date

Signature of Principal Investigator$

FACULTY ADVISORS/INSTRUCTORS ASSURANCE: By my signature on this research application, I certify that the student investigator is knowledgeable about the regulations and policies governing research with human subjects and has su"cient training and experience to conduct this particular study in accord with the approved protocol. In addition, I agree to meet with the student investigator on a regular basis to monitor study progress, Should problems arise during the course of this study, I agree to be available, personally, to supervise the principal investigator in solving them, I understand that as the faculty advisor/instructor on this project, I will be responsible for the performance of this research project.

$ $ Date

Faculty advisor/instructor on project (if applicable)$



Appendix E: Informed Consent Form INFORMED CONSENT DOCUMENT

The Department of the School of Library and Information Science at Emporia State University supports the practice of protection for human subjects participating in research and related activities. The following information is provided so that you can decide whether you wish to participate in the present study. You should be aware that even if you agree to participate, you are free to withdraw at any time, and that if you do withdraw from the study, you will not be subjected to reprimand or any other form of reproach. Likewise, if you choose not to participate, you will not be subjected to reprimand or any other form of reproach. We are distributing web-based self-completion questionnaires to librarians from various-sized libraries across the United States on ways they are bringing patrons into the library and what tools they are using to do so. The questionnaire will be emailed to your main library account and should take approximately 3-4 minutes to ll out. No registration with the questionnaire tool is needed. We will be asking you to think about ways you have found to be e#ective in your own library to bring in patrons or to engage them. We hope to use this information to get an overall glance at how di#erent libraries are reaching out to their patron. This information will be made public and available to any library that wants to see the results and outcomes of that data. We hope that the initial questionnaire will lead us to more questions that we might follow up with a short phone interview, at your convenience. You are under no obligation to participate in both the questionnaire or phone interview. Both are at your discretion and we will only contact you for a follow-up interview if you provide your phone number at the end of the questionnaire. We will not be publishing the names of any libraries or individuals participating in this study. All personal information (name, phone number, email, place of employment) will be kept condential. If you have any inquiries concerning the procedures or outcomes of this study, or in the event that you might have questions later, please contact any member of the research team or Dr. Rajesh Singh at the contact information below.

"I have read the above statement and have been fully advised of the procedures to be used in this project. I have been given su"cient opportunity to ask any questions I had concerning the procedures and possible risks involved. I understand the potential risks involved and I assume them voluntarily. I likewise understand that I can withdraw from the study at any time without being subjected to reproach." ____________________________________ ___________________________





Research Team: $ Ashley Swan $ $ (913) 209-7984 $ aswan1@emporia.edu $ $ $ Stephanie Whitehead (785) 978-0910 $ swhitehe@emporia.edu Instructor: $ $ Dr. Rajesh Singh$ (620) 341-5181 $ rsingh1@emporia.edu

Appendix F: Geographical Segments and Library Population Markets

We have selected ve geographical regions to choose from. Two libraries from each library population market will be selected; therefore a total of 30 libraries will be selected from the regions below (six each). They are broken down as follows:


1. Northeast Region: a. Maine b. Connecticut c. Massachuset ts d. New Hampshire e. Rhode Island f. Vermont g. Delaware h. Maryland i. New Jersey j. New York k. Pennsylvania 2. Southeast Region: a. Alabama b. Arkansas$ c. Florida d. Georgia e. Kentucky f. Louisiana

g. Mississippi h. North Carolina i. South Carolina j. Tennessee k. Virginia l. West Virginia 3. Midwest Region: a. Illinois b. Indiana c. Iowa d. Kansas e. Michigan f. Minnesota g. Missouri h. Nebraska i. North Dakota j. Ohio k. South Dakota l. Wisconsin

4. Northwest Region: a. Idaho b. Montana c. Utah d. Wyoming e. Alaska f. California g. Hawaii h. Oregon i. Washington 5. Southwest Region: a. Arizona b. New Mexico c. Oklahoma d. Texas e. Colorado f. Nevada

We have selected three library population-size markets. Two libraries will be selected from each library population market. The population markets are broken down as follows:

Small = Under 100,000

Med = 100,000 499,999

Large = 500,000 and up


Appendix G: Google Results Showing Top Search Results for Library Population Markets

1. Search query: population 500,000 united states a. http://www.demographia.com/db-uscity98.htm b. Select every seventh city, starting at #3, until each geographic region has two large cities selected.$ c. Results: i. NE: Baltimore: New York

ii. SE: Nashville: Memphis iii. MW: Chicago: Detroit iv. NW: Los Angeles: Seattle v. SW: Denver: San Antonio 2. Search query: population 100,000 499,999 united states a. http://www.demographia.com/db-uscity98.htm b. Select every seventh city, starting at #3, until each geographic region has two medium cities selected.$ c. Results: i. NE: Springeld, MA: Paterson, NJ

ii. SE: Atlanta: Miami iii. MW: Cincinnati: Naperville, IL iv. NW: Spokane, WA: Garden Grove, CA v. SW: Las Vegas: Aurora, CO 3. Search query: population under 100,000 united states a. http://www.demographia.com/db-uscity98.htm


b. Select every seventh city, starting at #3, until each geographic region has two small cities selected. $ c. Results: i. NE: Brockton, MA: Lynn, MA

ii. SE: Gainesville, FL: Miami Beach, FL iii. MW: Dearborn, MI: Fargo, ND iv. NW: Santa Barbara, CA: Hillsboro, OR

v. SW: Thornton, CO: West Jordan, UT

Project Summary Report

Team 4 Ashley Swan Stephanie Whitehead April 26, 2012

Emporia State University LI810XR



Evolution of Our Research Project !

When we rst met in class, the three of us had a hard time nailing down a research topic for study. We talked about researching how people are using genealogy sources online, but we couldnt nail down a specic enough research question that we all liked. We eventually settled on researching how libraries are bringing in patrons through non-traditional methods. Once we started doing our research, we found both digital and non-digital methods libraries are using to engage their patrons and to bring them in the building and learn to use the library as a tool. Marketing $ The rst theme we noticed in our literature was that libraries are starting to think from a marketing mindset. They are using more business-like tactics to get people to notice their services and to engage people. They are using Web 2.0 tools to have a moving conversation with their patrons and to create a dialogue about the patrons needs and expectations about services they want from their library. They are also using these tools to promote the library and its services. Libraries are aware of their competition (Google, etc.) and they are aware that they have to reach the Net Generation in a quick and timely manner. People seek out the library to get information about it and expect the reciprocation of timely information in return. Research of Evolving Library in Digital Age $ The second theme we found was that interest in our very research topic is critical and much-needed information. The Pew Research Center is undertaking a massive study to understand how the role of public libraries and patrons needs and expectations are shifting in the digital age. Digital Patrons $ Digital patrons are a big trending topic. People that tend to use e-books and mobile apps tend to use other library services a lot more than normal patrons. It seems that their knowledge of digital tools makes it easy for them to reach out to the library to nd information quickly and that the library needs to be prepared to have this information ready for them perhaps, even, before they know they want to search for it. This has resulted in a trend called the virtual library where the website is considered its own branch. It can operate 24/7 and bring access to information right into a patrons home through their computer or mobile device. Saving Costs & Sharing Information


$ Libraries are seeking ways to reduce costs as their budgets are slashed. But, this has also resulted in some positive changes for the patron. Library consortiums are being founded in order to share resources with other libraries in the same region. Third-party software developers are also bringing libraries opportunities to buy robust software they normally wouldnt have been able to a#ord if they were developing it independently for only their library.

Meeting Minutes
Research Team #4 Meeting Face-to-Face February 25, 2012 afternoon ! Members Present: Stephanie Whitehead, Ashley Swan, Holly Patton ! Discussion Topics Project Facilitator - Holly Note-taker - Ashley Potential topic for the research project: o Impact of how libraries are bringing in patrons through non-traditional ways ! YA/Teens ! Seniors ! Kids ! Non-library users o Research Problem: Libraries are having di"culty bringing in new patrons. What are they doing to correct this? We will use Qualitative Research ! Action Items: We each nd 5-6 articles" Post articles to wiki by March 12th with a summary of each Also on wiki discuss research minis for next class section Select time to meet on Adobe Connect for 2nd meeting, March 10th @ 11 a.m. ! Agenda for 2nd Meeting: Discuss Research Questions for Literature Review (8-12 pgs) ! 3rd Follow up meeting: March 24th (Saturday) on Adobe Connect

Meeting Minutes Research Team #4 Meeting Adobe Connect Monday, March 12, 2012 " Members Present: Stephanie Whitehead, Ashley Swan & Holly Patton Discussion Topics:


Research Problem: Libraries are having di"culty bringing in new patrons. What non traditional methods are being used to draw patrons into the physical library space? Breaking out the various parts of the assignment #1 (later): o Title Page (Holly) o Introduction (Stephanie) o Research Problem (Ashley) o Review of relevant literature (Holly) o Research question (Ashley) o Research Hypothesis (Stephanie) o Denitions (Holly)

Agenda for next meeting: Discuss Research minis Ashley will come up with 1-2 research questions specic things we were looking for (i.e. Holly how its marketed) ! !Next Meeting: Sunday, March 18, 2012 @ 5 p.m. Meeting Minutes Research Team #4 Meeting Adobe Connect Sunday, March 18, 2012 " Members Present: Stephanie Whitehead, Ashley Swan & Holly Patton Discussion Topics: 3rd Connect Meeting: Sunday, March 25, 2012 @ 11 a.m. Lit Review Finalized by Wednesday, March 28, 2012 Holly will submit to BB Everyone is going to add their APA References/Citations to BB Wiki by March 25 so we can edit each others work between March 25 28. Holly will add pages to the Lit Review on the BB Wiki Sub sections (both are non-traditional methods): o Technology Outreach o Non-technology Outreach We will discuss the research minis after completion of the Lit review. Meeting time TBD on March 25th meeting. We can discuss Title at next meeting pull from Research Problem Agenda for next meeting: Title Add Denitions if necessary Any potential issues or questions/concerns ! Next Meeting: Sunday, March 25, 2012 @ 11 a.m.

Meeting Minutes Research Team #4 Meeting Adobe Connect Sunday, March 25, 2012

A RESEARCH DESIGN FOR DECLINING USAGE AT PUBLIC LIBRARIES " Members Present: Stephanie Whitehead & Ashley Swan Discussion Topics: Holly dropped the class and did not write her Literature Review section o Ashley will write it and share with Stephanie by Monday night via email Stephanie and Ashley have submitted their APA References/Citations to BB Wiki Remaining meeting times will be editing paper via email between Ashley and Stephanie Next meeting will be in person to discuss Research Design ! Next Meeting: TBD, will set time via email

Meeting Minutes Research Team #4 Meeting In-Person Sunday, April 15, 2012 " Members Present: Stephanie Whitehead & Ashley Swan Discussion Topics: Revise Research Problem (Ashley) Write Research Paradigm (Ashley) Write Qualitative and Quantitative Data Collection & Analysis Procedure (Stephanie) o Outlined this section in meeting Write Ethical Considerations (Ashley) Create Appendices (Ashley & Stephanie) Put together Project Summary Report (Ashley) Create PowerPoint Presentation (Stephanie) Ashley will submit nal Research Design to BB Stephanie will submit nal PPT presentation to BB We are both editing paper and PPT ! Next Meeting: we will communicate further through email