Teen Video Editing Lab in a Public Library: A Research Proposal By Tricia Kannegieter Texas Womans University LS 5753 Dr.

Keith Swigger December 4, 2012

Kannegieter 1 Teen Video Editing Lab in a Public Library: A Research Proposal Introduction Research Problem In the spring of 2012, the Teen Librarian at the Cascade branch of Kent District Library (KDL) was struggling to develop new ideas for getting teens to physically visit the library. Teen attendance had lowered significantly at teen library programs and the circulation of teen materials was dwindling. He hypothesized that teen attendance at the library was decreasing because teens were becoming increasingly independently technology savvy, Google dependent, and preoccupied with social media. In the interest of finding a way to appeal to Millennials at their generational level in order to get them to frequent the library, the Teen Librarian decided to implement a video-editing lab in the library. In order to finance the video-editing lab, the Teen Librarian applied for and received a $6000 grant from the Best Buy Childrens Fund. The monies were used to purchase two new Apple computers equipped with state-of-the art professional video editing software, a commodity that most teenagers cannot afford (Holst, 2012). It is hope of the Teen Librarian that reaching the YouTube generation via their own interest in creating videos will get them to physically enter the library, attend library programs, utilize library services, and check out library materials. Research Objectives Implementing a program such as this for teens in a public library is something that few libraries have ever done in the past, so it is difficult to theorize if the library will be successful or not from the beginning of implementation because there is no evidence

Kannegieter 2 of whether or not it has been successful for public libraries in the past. The purpose of this research will be to determine if implementing a teen video-editing suite is an effective approach to increasing teen patronage at the Cascade Branch of the Kent District Library. The first objective of the research for the video-editing suite is to determine if the new editing suite attracts previous patrons, people who have not ever been to the library before, or both. The Teen Librarian hopes that the new suite attracts teen patrons who already frequent the library in order to better serve them, but he is most interested in discovering if new teens, especially new teens from far-away districts, are frequenting the library. The second objective of the research is to see if circulation increases on teen materials. The teen librarian hypothesizes that by having more teens frequent the library to utilize the editing suite, circulation on audio/visual and print materials in the teen section will increase. The third objective of the research is to determine if the implementation of the video-editing suite increases the attendance of teens at library programs. One such program that had abysmal attendance in previous years was the Kent County Teen Film Festival, where teens were asked to submit their own movies and watch them on the big screen at the local movie theater with a panel of judges present to award the best films. Hopefully with the addition of a public editing station, teens that do not have the expensive software will have access to editing software and be able to enter the contest. The Teen Librarian also hopes that teens who begin frequent the library in

Kannegieter 3 order to utilize the editing station will find other library programs that they would be interested in attending. Literature Review While there is a handful of video editing or digital media labs that public libraries in the United States have implemented in previous years, there is no research published about how these labs impacted library attendance and/or circulation. The majority of literature published that pertains to this research proposal are either about using technology with teenagers in the library or discovering methods of attracting teens to public libraries. The first topic covered by many of the literature already published is how to use technology with teenagers in a library setting. There are actually a few studies that discuss libraries that are doing video projects with teenagers. In one article, the author instructs librarians who do not consider themselves to be tech savvy how to host video production workshop (Vieau, 2011). The author talks about basic video-recording techniques like storyboarding and scriptwriting with the teens and encourages librarians to ensure that they have video editing software on their library computers or at the very least, be familiar with some of the online video editing websites. In relating to this research proposal, the author also discusses the possibility of increasing attendance to the workshop by aligning it with any local film festivals that may be going on. Many of the articles about using technology with teens focused on using gaming as a means of connecting with teens of the Millennial generation. Numerous articles talked about the benefits of American Idol Karaoke, Guitar Hero, Rock Band, Mario Kart, Super Smash Brothers Brawl, and Just Dance in connecting with teens (Barack

Kannegieter 4 2008). While these articles stated that video games were a great way to connect with teenagers, they did not give evidence as to how providing video games was beneficial to the library with circulation, attendance, or survey data. One article stressed that the important thing for teen librarians to remember when implementing video games is that they must communicate with the teens about which games they are going to use in their programs (Goodstein, 2008). One such way of doing this is to have a Teen Advisory Board (TAB) meeting where the librarian discusses video game options with interested teens in order to see what they are interested in and which games they would like to see in their library programs (Peowski, 2010). Goodstein discussed the idea that todays teens are multitaskers with short attention spans who prefer their interactions and entertainment to be digitized and online. She emphasizes the importance of providing them with way of connecting with the library with Web 2.0 tools such as social media, blogs, wikis, and texts. Not only is it important to utilize these tools with the teens, but it is equally important to include them and give them ownership by enlisting them to manage and contribute to these tools (Goodstein, 2008). The second subject covered heavily by the literature was the suggestion of solutions for getting teens to physically visit the library. Much of the literature suggested utilizing the new media that the library was using in order to get teens to the library, much like the library in this research proposal. For example, the Flemington Free Public Library created a space for teens that were bored with their community and thought that their town had nothing to offer them (Barack, 2011). The space included multiple video game consoles that teens could play their own games or library games on with kids their

Kannegieter 5 own age. The room also provided iPads, guitars, teen computers, spaces for laptops, comfortable places to sit and talk, and eating areas. The mere ability of teens to have a place to meet to play video games, be loud, experiment with technology, and have a good time with their friends was enough to entice them to visit the library on a regular basis. Most of the articles stressed the importance of using Web 2.0 tools to connect with teens, promote teen programs, and encourage teens to use and participate with the library. Like with choosing video games, much of the literature suggested talking with teens either online or with a TAB program to determine which method of communicating online was best for developing a web presence for teens that use the library. For some libraries, Facebook is an efficient tool, while others rely on text messages, email, blogs, wikis, or Twitter (Hannan, 2011). The most important thing to consider when planning programs for teens is to have program that interest them, to remember that teen interests change from year to year, and that teens must be involved in the planning process for programs, or they will not be interested (Hannan, 2011). Lastly, some articles stressed the importance of marketing within the library. Utilizing displays and booklists within the actual library encourages teens who are already visiting the library to come back again for reasons other than to return books. Marketing within the library is the best possible way to promote programs to teens that are already interested in the library but may not be up-to-date on what programs are offered (Campbell, 2008). However, regardless of how the programs are marketed, it is important to have programs that reach to teens on their level, much like the Cascade

Kannegieter 6 Video Editing lab, in order for them to have enough incentive to physically visit the library. Methodology Explanation of Methodology and Definition of Variables The methodology behind the setup of public library implementation of the video suite is pivotal to understanding the methodology of the research design. Because of the nature of the Best Buy Childrens Foundation teen technology grant, we want to make sure the computers are being used exclusively for video editing, so we will require patrons to check out a tub containing the keyboard, mouse, and headphones for the editing suite with a librarian. The librarian will first be responsible for making sure that the patron will be using the computers exclusively to edit videos. After that is established, the patron must fill out a short form, including their name, library card number, and time of sign in. They must also indicate if they have utilized the Cascade branch of the Kent District Library before, or if it is their first time on site. Afterwards, the librarian will log the patron into the computer and when they are finished they will check their hardware back in and indicate their time out. The research will be experimental in design and will take place over the course of 2013. The researcher will be required to compare the results of the independent variable, the Cascade branch, against that of two controlled variables that do not have video editing labs. Because the research is being done in a large library system with eighteen branches, access to similar libraries to use as controlled variables will not be a difficult issue. For the purposes of this project, the researcher will utilize the Kentwood branch and the East Grand Rapids branch of KDL, two similarly sized libraries within a

Kannegieter 7 10-mile vicinity that serve similar demographics and utilize identical marketing techniques for teens, as control variables. Data Collection Procedures In order to achieve the three research objectives, the researcher must follow a certain methodology for each objective while collecting data. Objective One The first object of this research project is to determine if the new editing suite attracts previous patrons, people who have not ever been to the library before, or both. Because of the methodology for implementation and the process of checkout the hardware, this data for this objective will not be difficult for the researcher. The data from the information cards indicates each patrons library card number. Once we have this information, we can determine if the patron is from the Cascade area, or if they traveled in order to utilize the editing lab. We can also determine if they have used the Cascade library before because they will indicate on the form if they have or not. The control libraries will not be needed for this objective as it depends completely on the patronage of the Cascade branch. Once the researcher has this information, he can determine if the library is drawing a significant percentage (at least 30%) of people that have never been to that branch before. He can also determine how many people outside of the KDL service area are traveling to utilize the technology; with this information he can determine if the editing suite is serving the community it resides in or if it is better suited to a different district.

Kannegieter 8 Objective Two The second objective of the research is to see if circulation increases on teen materials after the implementation of the editing suite. The editing suite The methodology of research for this objective will include utilizing the two control libraries. Because all three of these libraries use identical marketing strategies for teens, they are all within 10 miles of each other, and all serve similar demographics, the researcher can compare the results of the Cascade librarys circulation number fluctuations with those of the control libraries. First, the researcher must record the circulation numbers for teen audio visual and print materials each individual quarter of the 2012 year. These numbers will be compared to the numbers for each quarter of the 2013 year when it is complete. When the numbers for 2012 are put against those for 2013, the researcher will be able to tell if there was a significant increase in teen circulation after the implementation of the teen editing suites. In the case that there was a significant increase or decrease in similar libraries without editing stations, the researcher will compare the Cascade percentages to those of East Grand Rapids and Kentwood. If the differences are substantial, the researcher will know that the implementation of the editing suite was successful in promoting the circulation of teen materials. Objective Three The third objective of the research is to determine if the implementation of the video-editing suite increases the attendance of teens at library programs, particularly the Kent County Teen Film Festival. Last year, the total number of submitted films for the entire county was eleven, and the total number of films that were actually

Kannegieter 9 acceptable for a public film festival was even lower. The Teen Librarian hopes that with the addition of a video-editing suite, more films will be submitted to the Teen Film Festival. This will be an easy determination for the researcher to make because he must simply compare the numbers submitted in 2012 to those submitted in 2013, assuming that the marketing for submissions remains the same. If the marketing is substantially different between the two years, the researcher must take this into account. One way of breaking through the marketing differences is to simply ask each teenager who submits a film if they used the Cascade video editing lab while they were producing their film. If the numbers of teens who say that they used the lab is significant, the researcher will know that the lab was successful in encouraging teens to submit their films to the Teen Film Festival. In order to determine if the potential increase of teens visiting the library impacts the attendance at other teen library programs via marketing for these programs within the library, the researcher will use a similar method to that of the second objective. He will simply measure the 2012 quarterly attendance to teen library programs at each library to that of the 2013 quarterly attendance to each program. Having the two control groups with identical programs and marketing will account for and changes in marketing and quality of programs. If the difference in attendance between Cascade and the other branches is significant, the researcher will know if the implementation of a video-editing lab was successful at raising teen attendance at library programs. Limitations Primarily, the limitation to research for this project is the fact that there is only one independent variable. Ideally, at least two libraries, each with their own editing labs,

Kannegieter 10 would be independent variables for this research. But because only one branch was awarded the Best Buy Childrens Foundation grant for a video-editing lab, only one branch can be used as an independent variable. The results of the data collection would be much more satisfying to a researcher if more than one independent variable were tested. An additional limitation to the research is the fact that the quality and marketing of library programs fluctuates from year to year and from branch to branch, so it is difficult to ascertain if it is the video lab that is affecting teen attendance or an outside factor, such as social media marketing and promotion placement at area schools. With these exceptions, the limitations of this research are small and indistinguishable at this time. Significance One of the primary goals for librarians is to serve all members of society, including teenagers. Librarians are not effectively doing their jobs if they are not appeal enough to teenagers to get them to visit the library and utilize the services that are offered to them as members of the community. The data collected from this research project will determine if adding a video-editing lab is an effective way of getting teens into the library, perhaps for the first time, utilizing library services, circulating materials, and attending library programs. If the video-editing lab is successful at attracting teens for these purposes, the Teen Librarian will know that he is on the right track to connecting to teens at their generational level.

Kannegieter 11 Bibliography Barack, Lauren. 2011. "Game Station." School Library Journal 57, no. 8: 30-32. Professional Development Collection, EBSCOhost. Barack, Lauren. 2008. "Tuned-in Teenagers." School Library Journal 54, no. 4 (April 2008): 20-21. Professional Development Collection, EBSCOhost. Campbell, Sarah and Dunn, Lindsey C. 2008. "Marketing Teen Read Week." Young Adult Library Services 6, no. 4: 24-26. Professional Development Collection, EBSCOhost. Goodstein, Anastasia. 2008. "What Would Madison Avenue Do? (cover story)." School Library Journal 54, no. 5: 40-43. Professional Development Collection, EBSCOhost. Hannan, Adrienne. 2011. "Communication 101: We Have Made Contact with Teens." Aplis 24, no. 1: 32-38. Professional Development Collection, EBSCOhost. Holst, Jan. "Video Editing Software Gives Kids One More Reason to Come to Cascade Library." Cadence Newspaper (Ada-Cascade), November 29, 2012. Kent District Library. "Strategic Plan: 2013-2014." November 2012. http://www.kdl.org/kdl/pdf/2013-2014StrategicPlan.pdf. Peowski, Laura. 2010. "Where Are All the Teens? Engaging and Empowering Them Online." Young Adult Library Services 8, no. 2: 26-28. Professional Development Collection, EBSCOhost. Vieau, Jesse. 2011. "Short Filmmakers." Young Adult Library Services 9, no. 2: 28-30. Professional Development Collection, EBSCOhost.