Examining undergraduate student perceptions and engagement during the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to understand undergraduate students' overall experiences with the transition to remote learning and understand students' level of involvement with online and in-person campus programs at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper presents the findings from a series of library focus groups conducted with undergraduate students in the summer 2021. Findings showed that students experienced parallel benefits and challenges to that of remote learning when attending online campus programs. Based on these findings this paper provides student-driven recommendations for library programming. Understanding the levels of student involvement across different types of engagement and different campus stakeholders allows for articulation of the greater implications for developing library student engagement efforts.

Introduction

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic much was required of students, staff, faculty, and administrators at college campuses globally. Campuses had to abruptly shift and rethink what it meant to learn, teach, and engage with one another online. This adjustment was no different at the University of Illinois Chicago. In March of 2020, the university took numerous actions to assist students in the transition to emergency remote learning. They provided access to wi-fi hotspots, laptops, and ultimately switched from WebEx to Zoom as the primary telecommuting method for campus related instruction, meetings, and other educational activities.

For the University Library, the shift to immediate remote learning meant purchasing additional online content like books and films, providing student and faculty resource guides to publishers offering free access to textbook materials, and creating new online content for synchronous and asynchronous information literacy sessions. Since the University Library buildings were closed the University Library's Undergraduate Engagement Program (UEP) had to cancel all in-person programming and the closure allowed the coordinators to re-envision how to best provide support to undergraduate students in an online landscape.

The Undergraduate Engagement Program was developed in the fall of 2018 as a “program that centers the UIC campus community by employing a holistic approach to the definition of student success rooted in social justice frameworks” (Moreno & Jackson, 2020). Prior to the pandemic, “programming efforts were organized in three areas:

• •Library-led programming: initiatives started and managed by the UIC Library
• •Library collaborations: long-term relationships built into existing curricular models
• •Campus collaborations: initiatives led by other campus entities in which the library plays a support or outreach role” (Moreno & Jackson, 2020).

Examples of prior programming include the Culture & Heritage Film Series, which featured documentary films that highlighted the specific culture or heritage celebrated each month on campus; research check-ins at the Writing Center, which had librarians available in the campus Writing Center 1 to 2 h a week; and programming series like Remembering Toni Morrison, a campus collaboration which was a five-part series featuring documentary screenings, readings, and a roundtable discussion on the life and work of writer Toni Morrison.

Though the pandemic presented an unprecedented challenge, by exploring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has on student engagement, the Undergraduate Engagement Program could begin to understand hybrid undergraduate student experiences — existing with both in person and remote environments. Hybrid experiences will be likely be the future if not a mainstay of the college experience. It is important to understand what impact this will have on library student engagement. The role of libraries and their relationship to students is continually evolving and as such by determining students' level of engagement in this landscape will help libraries make the needed adaptations to engagement efforts across all types of student engagement. For the context of this research the following terms are used to define different types of engagement:

• •Curricular Engagement: activities, programs or events that are a part of student courses, this would encompass what is done in relation to instruction. Examples include course or credit-based instruction or one-shot library instruction sessions.
• •Co-curricular Engagement: activities, programs or events that are done outside of student courses but assist in supporting the student curriculum. This would be inclusive of the academic support networks, writing centers and tutoring centers, or other discipline specific initiatives that are related to courses, but not a course.
• •Extra-curricular Engagement: activities, programs or events that are done outside of student courses and do not support the student curriculum or instruction. This would be inclusive of student organizations or clubs, departmental lectures or events, or campus wide events like convocation or homecoming.
• •Relational Engagement: activities, programs or events based on intentional relationship building with students with a focus on promoting services and spaces (not tied to courses). This would be inclusive of tabling events or promotional events that are meant to inform students of departments, colleges, programs, or organizations.
• •Socio-emotional Engagement: activities, programs or events that showcase campus environments as a support to students' social or emotional well-being. This would be inclusive of events that support and uplift mental health and wellness, and individual and community-focused connections for students, with peers, staff, and faculty.

It is important to clarify these forms of student engagement as it provides background to the research study and to the student experiences at the start of the pandemic. These definitions in were in part based on the proceeding literature review. However, it is important to note that the context of each definition could be defined differently depending on the institution. It may also be possible for a program, department, college, or library to participate in multiple forms of engagement at the same time. Though this list of definitions is not exhaustive and the discussions around how to best define student engagement will be ongoing, it is important to clarify the types of engagement to illustrate their connections to the student experience. Given the scope of student engagement, the recommendations and findings of this research are not centered in one area of student engagement but are presented with a comprehensive lens.

Literature review

While there continues to be new publications on the COVID-19 pandemic and the student experience within libraries, there is limited qualitative research on remote or hybrid student engagement programming at the campus level or within libraries. Given the investigators approach to explore students' involvement and engagement to inform library programming it was important to situate the research findings by incorporating a wide spectrum of literature. The literature review examines the fullness of student engagement before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in relation to academic libraries, while also contextualizing the students current experience with remote learning and programming efforts. Highlighting the scope of student engagement and the relationship between engagement types can illustrate how intrinsically linked each type of engagement is to the student experience. To that end, the literature is divided into three parts: Student Engagement with Libraries, Library and Campus Programming During COVID-19, and Student Experiences with Remote Learning During COVID-19.

Student engagement within libraries

As noted by the proceeding definitions student engagement within libraries can take various forms. Frequently explored is co-curricular engagement via student learning. This includes the heavily cited work of prominent student engagement researcher George Kuh. In Kuh and Gonyea (2003), their research study examined the nature and value of students' experiences with the academic library. Its aim was to discover the unique contributions of library experiences (including contact with librarians) (Kuh & Gonyea, 2003, pp. 361). Students engagement was surveyed in range of eight frequency scale questions examining how students engaged with library spaces, librarians, and resources while also identifying how they integrated these resources with specific assignments or tasks (Kuh & Gonyea, 2003, pp. 376–379). The data gathered from the College Student Experiences Questionnaire from 1984 to 2002 was significant because these results indicated that student use of the library had changed over time (Kuh & Gonyea, 2003, pp. 369).

The findings of this study laid the framework for future research utilizing standardize surveys to articulate the value of libraries and its impact on student engagement. Numerous quantitative studies include Mark and Boruff-Jones (2003) whose article showed how to use the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) for more effective benchmarking within Carnegie peer groups in order to compare student learning (pp. 481).

Research in the area of relational engagement is predominately seen the use of library spaces. May and Swabey's (2015) research explore the actual use of physical space in academic libraries serving three distinct types of Canadian institutions: community colleges, undergraduate universities, and a technical institute (pp. 773). Their findings show that there are similarities across the different types of academic libraries in how students use library spaces while also highlighting the important role that library design plays in how a library is perceived (pp. 789, May & Swabey, 2015).

Taking a qualitative approach, Fargo and Mastrangelo (2021) article investigates student engagement experiences through interviews with undergraduate students. Using a journey map technique, students reflect on different engagement opportunities ranging from community-based learning, peer mentoring and volunteering. Most of the engagement opportunities had no direct relationship to libraries but allowed the researchers to understand how libraries can be better integrated in student engagement experiences.

With the review of the approaches to student engagement, it also necessary to provide a context to the larger landscape. Through contextualizing these forms of student engagement there is also an understanding as to how the library can support and evaluate these forms. The literature review by Appleton (2020) Academic Libraries and Student Engagement is a comprehensive overview of student engagement exploring various topics in relation to academic libraries. This summarization of student engagement thoroughly explores the complexity of how student engagement is defined and applied within academic librarianship. Appleton first establishes student engagement in higher education. Noting, Kuh as he articulated student engagement as “the time and effort students devote to activities that are empirically linked to desired outcomes of college and what institutions do to induce students to participate in these activities” (Kuh, 2009, p. 683). Research on student engagement has found that there's a complex relationship between these two parts of the definition and as Appleton explains that student engagement can take many forms in and outside of the classroom, “teaching and learning, with research or with extra-curricular activities. Often these can be associated with educational and enhancement outcomes (e.g., attainment, learning gain)” (Appleton, 2020, pp. 191–192).

A parallel literature review on student engagement and libraries from Schlak (2018) provides the initial foundational context for how student engagement can be categorized within library literature. The five categories of engagement include (1) student learning, (2) citizenship & service-based learning, (3) the library as engaging place and space, (4) engagement through technology & programmatic learning experiences and (5) relational engagement. Relational engagement “can be pursued through more intentional relationship building” (Schlak, 2018, p. 136). Schlak (2018) establishes relational engagement as “the mutuality created between provider and consumer in the framework of customer engagement produces library users who are so invested in their libraries (and presumably research and teaching) that they create reciprocal exchanges that change library offerings to suit their needs” (p. 136). As Appleton (2020) states, “relational engagement can be used to obtain feedback, measure performance, and potentially lead to service enhancements.” (p. 194) “An engagement culture needs to happen inside, as well as outside, the classroom. In this way it extends beyond design and into the living curriculum to become distinguishing feature of the learning and assessment strategy” (Appleton, 2020, p. 193).

When examining the landscape of student engagement, it is important to also appraise social emotional engagement. Social emotional engagement is often an underlying aspect of student engagement but is infrequently examined within library literature. As Eshbach (2020) examined the importance of academic libraries' communicating the social aspects of the student experience. She states “what is meant by these terms and consider the unique role of the library in each of these dimensions” (p. 2). “Social events in the library can provide opportunities for informative, relevant, and authentic learning experiences as well as activities that are purely social, for the purpose of having fun and connecting with others.” (Eshbach, 2020, p. 3).

Library and campus programming during COVID-19

Over the last few years of the COVID-19 pandemic there is limited qualitative research regarding library or campus programs that utilized focuses groups to examine student engagement efforts, but there have been several case studies within library literature that have examined various virtual programming during the pandemic to support undergraduate students. Of note is Riehman-Murphy, Holloway, and Mattson's (2022) article on the Great Rare Books Bake Off which discussed an international library collaboration effort between the Penn State and Monash University Libraries, which blended historical recipes from special collections, social media, and the appeal of popular reality cooking shows. Other examples include the various virtual outreach initiatives from the University of New Mexico Libraries. Initiatives included expanded social media outreach and a virtual event series, that involved a virtual book discussion and trivia event, and pivoting social media content to be reflective of social justice movements of the summer of 2020 (Surbaugh, 2021). The University of South Alabama's Marx Library took their previously established “Poetry and Pizza” open mic events online with a stay-at-home edition (Ard, 2022). Other studies highlighted events such as Banned Books Week, and the transition to virtual book clubs (Palmer & Browning, 2021; Szempruch & Hinds, 2022). The range of case studies illustrated academic libraries' ability to pivot quickly and provide creative programming midst the pandemic.

A similar range of campus activities program literature currently exist in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. Through the campus programs lens, the research highlights specific populations. Burge and Klein-Boonschate (2021) examined efforts made within residence life during the pandemic and pivoting to programming that focused mental health and wellness. An important caveat to that research was that a formal evaluation was completed to determine in-person campus life experiences quantitative student feedback was captured regarding COVID safety measures and risks. The other area of interest in campus programs was that of new student orientation. A case study from New Student & Family Programs staff at Florida State University, identified the considerations that were made to shift new student orientation from in-person to virtual orientation, discussing the implementation of virtual programming like small groups and ask the experts panel, and family webinars (Hughes et al., 2021).

Student experiences with remote learning during COVID-19

Much of the current literature investigating undergraduate student engagement and the pandemic focuses on student learning or curricular engagement from an instructor perspective. Given the student-centered approach of the research study it was important to reviewed student-centered articles on emergency remote learning. With this focused approach the literature explores a wider academic landscape with the inclusion of libraries. Abou-Khalil et al. (2021) applied a mix method study utilizing both student questionnaires and interviews to determine the most appropriate engagement strategies for online learning in low (or limited) resource settings. They concluded with a student driven 10-level guide for student engagement strategies for emergency online learning.

A complementary article to the preceding article, is that of Wester et al. (2021). While this research also examined student engagement using quantitative methods this article explored the shift in behavioral, cognitive, and emotional engagement within classroom instruction. The findings of this research identify student recommendations for curricular engagement.

When examining student experiences with remote learning, Heriyanto and Prasetyawan (2021) conducted student interviews to determine the information literacy experience of undergraduate students with remote learning (distance learning). Findings from this study identified four themes related to students' information literacy experience (1) understanding distance learning, (2) platform literacy, (3) learning strategy, and (4) learning resources. The core focus of each publication articulates the impact of the pandemic on classroom instruction; identifying student-driven methods and practices to improve student engagement with remote learning.

Based on the range of literature that currently exists in relation to student engagement and the COVID-19 pandemic the fundamental questions that guided the scope of the research was:

• •How can librarians better understand undergraduate students' programming needs in a hybrid educational environment?
• •What type of support do undergraduate students need from libraries and library programming?
• •What changes need to be implemented with library programming to meet the needs of students participating in hybrid learning environments?

Methodology

This study aimed to understand undergraduate students' overall experiences with the transition to remote learning, as well as students' level of involvement with online and in-person campus programs at the beginning of COVID-19 pandemic.

To address the specific research questions above the investigators implemented focus groups. As previous studies have highlighted focus groups are widely used and are most suitable when obtaining feedback from a homogenous group that has similar experiences and interests (Acocella, 2012 & Walden, 2006). Due to the pandemic all focus groups were conducted online. Prior to conducting the focus groups, the authors obtained the University Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval Research Protocol # 2021-0412).

Recruitment

A call for student participants was shared via an email advertisement to UEP campus partners via email and on the University Library's Instagram account. Included in the email to campus partners was the online recruitment survey and supporting text to interested student participants. Several campus partners were targeted to attract a range of potential undergraduate participants. These stakeholders included the network of cultural centers and student support networks -- the Centers for Cultural Understanding and Social Change; academic support networks such as the Native American Support Program (NASP), Latin American Recruitment and Educational Services Program (LARES), and African American Academic Network (AAAN); the Honors College; and Student Leadership and Civic Engagement.

Prior to participating in the focus group session, participants were invited to complete an online interest survey developed by the investigators to determine whether participants were UIC undergraduate students and 18 years-of-age or older. This survey also aimed to determine participants level of involvement with undergraduate engagement programming and events, and to determine the participants scheduling availability for focus group sessions.

Focus group interview sessions

Because of the immediate remote environment due to the pandemic, the investigators facilitated each of the one-hour focus group sessions via Zoom in June 2021. All ten sessions were audio-recorded after obtaining participants' verbal consent. At the beginning of each session, participants were informed of the goals of the research project and how their feedback will be used by following the interview protocol (See Appendix A). They were asked a set of six questions regarding their experiences with remote learning, program involvement in the library and on campus before and during the pandemic, and their preferences for communication with UIC colleges and departments. To review the full interview protocol, please refer to Appendix A. Eligible participants who completed the focus group received monetary compensation for their participation in the amount of $25 e-gift card.

Data analysis

To protect student confidentiality, participants were assigned participant numbers. Utilizing this method ensured that the data was not identifiable within the research process (see Appendix A) and with the professional transcription of the audio recordings. Students were informed of this information at the beginning of each focus group session. Given that there was a total of ten transcripts the principal investigator opted for open coding of each transcript as this method allowed for essential concepts and patterns to emerge from the onset of the data, while also allowing for open reading and reflection of the transcripts (Mills et al., 2010).

For the first iteration of coding each transcript was reviewed by the principal investigator to identify common themes and associated feelings as described by each participant. The principal investigator then conferred with the other investigators to determine any agreement or discrepancy from the first round of coding. Four additional iterations of coding were completed with selected transcripts, to ensure agreement with selected themes. For the final three iterations of coding all transcripts were reviewed by two of the three investigators and a codebook was developed identifying the common themes relevant to the student experience; specifically, how the students identified their transition to remote learning and campus programs with specific interest to any articulated benefits and disadvantages. Additionally, the first and second author reviewed the benefits and disadvantages of online programs, and the sponsor or host of the type of programs attended. Representative quotes were also selected and agreed upon by the investigators. During this process, the investigators ensured the selected quotes best represented identified themes and best reflected broader student experiences.

Findings

Participants

A total of 10 focus group sessions (40 participants) were offered between June 7 and 11, 2021.1 Based on the total number of participants 12 students were incoming/rising sophomores, 12 incoming/rising juniors, 11 incoming/rising seniors, and 1 graduating senior.

Of the 40 students who participated in the focus group, 36 of the 40 students were from the following colleges: 61 % were from the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, 11 % were from Applied Health Science, 8 % were from the College of Education, 5 % were from the College of Art, Design and Architecture and 1 % were from the College of Business. For four of the participants though their assent was recorded because they were late to the initial start of their assigned focus group, their major was not recorded.

Themes

The themes from the students' comments were (1) benefits of remote learning, (2) challenges of remote learning, (3) benefits of campus programs, (4) challenges of campus programs. These themes align with initial questions that guided the research project (see Appendix A) and the parallels among the findings are explained in detail in the forthcoming sections. Please note that for theme 1 and 2, given that the literature shows that in online and distance learning education, there are several typical challenges to this mode of learning. Many of these challenges are also articulated in literature around the challenges related to online education during COVID-19. As such, the codes were divided into online learning related and pandemic related. This allows seeing what challenges students have in the medium of online education versus the unique challenges related to COVID-19 pandemic.

Benefits to remote curricular engagement

A total of 62 comments were made in relation to the benefits of remote learning. The most substantial benefits for students were lack of commute, classroom flexibility and scheduling flexibility. Less time commuting was a considerable benefit for students given that the university defines “a commuter student as any student living in non-university-owned housing” (University of Illinois Chicago, 2022a). As many as 80 % total student population would be identified as commuter students according to university data (University of Illinois Chicago, 2022b). Numerous comments highlighted an appreciation for the flexibility the transition to remote learning provided.

“I have time to do school and other things. When I had in-person, it was hard for me to do multiple things because the time it was taking for transportation and then being in class at that time. So yeah, so the benefit was I have more time for leisure activities. And I was able to focus on what I wanted to do with the classes. And that's why I think it made a huge difference in my grades because I have more time and more flexibility.”

(Participant 1, Focus Group 5)

As Table 1 illustrates nearly 21 % of participants commented on having a reduced commute. Though this comment is reflective in part because of the pandemic the percentage of designated commuter students existed at the institution prior to COVID-19, as there is a history of campus resources designated to support this student population.

Table 1.

Benefits to remote curricular engagement.

Benefits are defined as the perceived advantages or gains associated to the participants' education, engagement, and general student experiences.

	Type of benefit	Percentage of comments
Online learning related	Reduced commute	20.9 %
	Classroom flexibility/access	19.3 %
	Scheduling flexibility	17.7 %
	Personal space/comfort	6.9 %
	Learning style/pace	6.4 %
	Responsibility/accountability	6.4 %
	General accessibility	6.4 %
	Social involvement	4.8 %
	Health/wellness	4.8 %
	Access to resources	1.6 %
	Financial savings	1.6 %
Pandemic related	Disability accommodations	1.6 %

The other notable benefit to remote curricular engagement was in the area of flexibility. According to Table 1 a combined 37 % of students comments reflected on either classroom flexibility or scheduling flexibility allowing participants to have more manageable schedules. Students commented on how they were able to easily attend classes they would not have attended in person and were also able to more access class components such as office hours or class materials.

“One nice thing was the flexibility of timing, because I could sign up for a class that was an 8:00 am but I could do the lesson at my own pace and watch the videos whenever I wanted. And all that mattered was that I had to get everything done by the end of the week. And I appreciated that level of flexibility, especially because it's a lot harder to focus online so it was nice that I could kind of pause the video if I needed to and go grab a snack or whatever.”

(Participant 3, Focus Group 5)

Though there were a range of remote learning benefits featured in Table 1, it should be noted, that a single comment highlighted how the transition to remote learning made classes more accessible for students with disabilities (see Table 1).

“Because to be honest, I didn't know before remote learning that it was available. I only knew it through my friend, who's also disabled that told me about it. And so, I think that it was really good that there was more visibility to it.”

(Participant 1, Focus Group 4)

This comment speaks to an identity group where further research and the impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic is needed. As academic institutions establish hybrid services for college and university students the impact of students with disabilities will likely be broad and varied.

Challenges to remote curricular engagement

Among the 40 student participants a total of 71 comments were made in relation to the challenges of remote learning. The most significant comments in relation to challenges were lack of social interaction, engagement, and community at 16.9 % and, lack of classroom experience and time management at 11.2 % (see Table 2 ). Based on the comments the in-person engagement opportunities that could have occurred within the classroom setting did not translate to remote learning. Opportunities such as asking questions of classmates, or even speaking with classmates before or after the start of the class. Not being able to have those interaction impacts not only a student's ability to socially engage but can also impact how they potentially understand and process information as one student expressed.

Table 2.

Challenges to remote curricular engagement.

Challenges are defined as the perceived disadvantages or negative impacts associated to the participants' education, engagement, and student experiences.

	Types of challenge	Percentage of comments
Online learning related	lack of social interaction/engagement/community	16.9 %
	lack of classroom experience (peer-to-peer engagement)	11.2 %
	time management	8.4 %
	inability to focus	8.4 %
	technology difficulties/adjustments	8.4 %
	lack of motivation	7 %
	lack of classroom experience (faculty engagement)	7 %
	reflective/adaptive of learning style or learning environment	5.6 %
Pandemic related	family situations/distractions	7 %
	lack of variation/Zoom fatigue	5.6 %
	feelings of uncertainty/adjustment	5.6 %
	feelings of isolation	4.2 %

“The biggest challenge was, especially as a new semester started, and I didn't know everyone who was in my class, it was hard to talk to people to kind of be like hey, do you understand this? So, it was harder to find someone to study with because you don't really talk outside of class.”

(Participant 7, Focus Group 9)

Data analysis of campus programs illustrated a significant increase in the total number of respondents comments as a total of 137 comments were made. Participants' comments on campus programs depicted parallel themes similar those noted within remote curricular engagement. Similarities included the flexibility in attending events, creating community, or increased social interactions as well as struggle or lack of connections and Zoom fatigue. Zoom fatigue refers the tiredness, anxiety, or worry resulting from overusing virtual videoconferencing platforms (Wiederhold, 2020) These parallels between remote learning and remote engagement with campus programs begin to illustrate the connections in the student experience.

Benefits of remote engagement with campus programs

Flexibility was again mentioned by participants when discussing remote engagement with campus programs. Being able to interact online in some instances gave students the opportunity to meet or learn from individuals that they would not otherwise interact with in person. The proceeding comment show how the start of the pandemic created the opportunity to engage with others in other countries.

“For me, something that I enjoyed was the flexibility of other people around the world helping with events. I'm part of Las Ganas and we did a conchas cooking class online. It's just Mexican sweet bread. And the event was hosted from a chef in Mexico City, which was super cool. So that's something I enjoy about online programming is that you could bring different people from different states and stuff.”

(Participant 7, Focus Group 10)

As highlighted in Table 3 , 25 % of the student comments identified the opportunity to create community or have increased social interactions during the pandemic. As was shared by a participant regarding a speed friending event.

Table 3.

Benefit of attending remote campus engagement events.

Type of benefit	Percentage of comments
Access or flexibility in attending the event	35 %
Creating community, increased social interactions	25 %
Exposure to resources or information	20 %
Feelings in relation to happiness or positivity	10 %
Lessened performance anxiety	5 %
Variety of attendees	5 %

“One of my favorite events that I attended was in a different platform. It was still online but it wasn't Zoom event. There was this platform called Wonder. And it was pretty much Zoom but it was pretty fun because you would create an avatar and you would be able to move around… when the two avatars met, you would be able to see each other immediately… [there would be] different that questions and then people would choose, like oh I prefer this and this, and then people would talk, like oh why do you prefer these… it was really fun, I really liked it.”

(Participant 3, Focus Group 7)

Challenges of remote engagement with campus programs

Though most students participated in campus programs, several students commented that they did not attend campus programming because either they were not motivated to attend, while two students were uncertain as to what programs or events to attend or struggled to be involved while adapting to the college experience as first-year students in a completely remote setting. The struggle or lack of connections or social connections or social interactions was the most noted challenge of student participants at 47 % (see Table 4 ).

Table 4.

Challenges of attending remote campus engagement events.

Type of challenge	Percentage of comments
Struggle or lack of connections or social interactions	47 %
Zoom fatigue	23.5 %
Feelings in relation to being overwhelmed	11.7 %
Technology difficulties or challenges	11.7 %
Time management	5.8 %

It is likely that the lack of motivation though not explicitly stated was a contributing factor to the struggle or lack of connections or social interactions. The lack of motivation coupled with Zoom fatigue at 23.5 % (see Table 2) made it challenging for students to participate in events. Greater insight as to why this challenge occurred came from the participants themselves who in some cases were actively involved in student organizations and had firsthand knowledge as to what it took to plan an event.

“I actually organized, tried organizing a lot of events for the organizations I'm a part of. And something I found was that it's very, well not very, it's just, it was difficult getting people to attend your events, just because I think most people, especially in the spring semester, we're just very Zoom fatigued and prefer not to join an event online.”

(Participant 6, Focus Group 9)

Community through communication

In relation to struggle or lack of connections, community was underlying theme to what many students shared. Sense of community or lack thereof was often alluded to in when speaking to social interactions. To that end one participant did explicitly state the importance of community with the following quote:

“One challenge I will say has been kind of [sic] finding community and just kind of trying to be there for my classmates and stuff because when you can't really be as personable online when you can't really see the face of your classmates and stuff. Definitely community is still as important as it's always been.”

(Participant 9, Focus Group 9)

Given the importance of community, many participants made significant effort to connect to campus programs or was actively involved with student organizations. Participants were able to make these connections with the use of communication tools. When asked if they followed any university social media accounts related to campus programs or events and if they found that to be an effective way to find out about upcoming programming, communication preferences were often split. Though there was mention by participants of Facebook and Twitter, the most mentioned social media platform was Instagram.

Several students commented on the visuals Instagram provided, as well as the use of Instagram stories and Instagram takeovers to find out about related organizations or events as one student reflected.

“But I think the biggest way that I find events is definitely Instagram. And not only the post, because a post can sometimes get really lost. So even if I save it, I kind of forget. But what reminds me a lot of events, like the stories that the accounts post, like oh there's two days for these events or one day for these events or sign up. Like the stories, I do watch them. So, I think that's really helpful.”

(Participant 3, Focus Group 7)

For students who were not frequent users of social media, students found out about events from email, either specific listservs like Honors College or the Latino Cultural Center or from emails from a department major, or course professor. When speaking about receiving emails, students found it accessible because students check email every day. Most students stated that they preferred to receive email no more than once a week unless it was in relation to an event and in those instances, they preferred reminders either the day before or the day of the event. Additionally, several students mentioned finding out about discipline specific programs through, Blackboard announcements (the classroom management system).

“I think where the email is coming from is important because sometimes if it's a pre-health email, I'll check it. If it's a Honors College announcement email, I'll check it. So, it depends what platform the email is coming from as well as what social media, what platform you're advertising on.”

(Participant 2, Focus Group 7)

Remote engagement student suggestions

When asking student participants about the campus programs attended and what could be improved the following suggestions were provided:

• •Sending out event information in advance of the event; including any event and image descriptions, or relevant event links regardless of platform via social media, email listserv, or digital bulletin board
• •Facilitating organized, well-planned events, that were mindful of the time allotted for the event
• •Ice breakers or brief introductions so that attendees can connect with others
• •Creating smaller opportunities for attendees to briefly engage turn on their cameras to connect with a smaller group of individuals in breakout rooms
• •Utilizing the communication features such as chat or microphone so that people have an opportunity to comment
• •Ensuring that all online events are accessible (closed captioning, image descriptions, etc.) to be inclusive of students of varying abilities.

These suggestions highlight the importance of creating opportunities for social connections while also being inclusive of the specific student needs. Though these suggestions are applicable for various types of student engagement whether campus or library centered. It is necessary to articulate these suggestions as often program suggestions are not always expressly provided within library literature when and if discussing the planning of engagement events.

Discussion

Understanding remote learning

During the analysis, a larger discussion occurred among the investigators as to whether the benefits and challenges articulated were a result of the pandemic or relative to the experiences of online learning. The benefits and challenges of remote learning that participants reflected upon aligned with other studies that have examined student perceptions to remote learning in the pandemic (Mucci-Ferris et al., 2021; Wu and Teets, 2021).

It is likely that for most of students in the focus groups, the pandemic was their initial introduction to online learning, which lead to a conflated understanding or awareness of the benefits and challenges of online education as being pandemic related. In reviewing the commonalities among online education literature prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, what emerged was that the benefits and challenges, while impacted by the pandemic, were well-established articulations of online education generally (Arkorful and Abaidoo, 2015).

Due to the pandemic, most educators and students have shifted teaching and learning practices to adapt to remote means. This shift in the larger collective has sparked conversations, think pieces and additional research into remote learning. While there have certainly been long-standing conversations and research about online and distance learning programs prior to the pandemic, the collective transition to online and remote options has forced educators to be in direct conversation with pedagogical concerns around remote and online education. This is a notable shift in that the collective has established a new foundation and moment within education, one in which, for a period, every educator was navigating online education simultaneously (Keser & Sarı, 2021; Khatoon et al., 2021).

As educators continue to examine curricular engagement, it is important to document the long-standing impact the pandemic has on the student experience. Specific to librarianship this should be reflective of the design and implementation of online information literacy sessions or online workshops. The findings of this study underscore the need to further explore online and remote education to better understand student engagement needs and how to better support challenges attributed to remote learning.

Flexibility

Based on the participants comments, students value and appreciate the need for in-person interaction, but they also appreciate having more control and more options as to how they manage their time. The pandemic emphasized many challenges and difficulties to remote engagement, but it is important that library professionals not see this as an unsurmountable barrier. It is important recognize the value of remote engagement. For some students remote engagement provides the flexibility to attend a variety of events and give students the opportunity to easily connect, learn and manage their time without the need to commute or travel. Remote engagement may also reach student populations who may have had limited involvement with library programs such as commuter students or students with disabilities.

As remote library programming continues to develop, being mindful about flexibility will allow for creative possibilities. Programming can be offered at times more convenient to students, or programming efforts like speakers' series, or workshops could be recorded. If there are physical materials required for arts and craft or relaxation efforts, items may be mailed, or libraries can work with campus partners for alternate pickup locations when distributing materials. As the student participants comments highlight, when remote engagement is structured, opportunities for student involvement will exist and can be effective.

Developing community

Developing a sense of community and the lack thereof in the pandemic is a significant aspect of the student experience. Though it is understandable as to why students should have some level of autonomy in how they choose to present and engage in online spaces, the findings illustrate many students struggled to maintain involvement or often did not have active engagement in their classes or campus programs due to the option of having their camera turned off. For facilitators of online spaces, it is important to create moments for students to interact and engage with one another. This may be introductions in breakout rooms, or question and answer sessions in chat. These moments may be brief, but these moment matter.

It is likely that the lack of social connections in the first three years of the pandemic will have longstanding ramifications on how students interact and build relationships with others. That coupled with the variety of issues students faced during this time (mental health, unemployment, social unrest, food insecurities etc.) it is important that, as library professionals, there is an intentional effort to support the social emotional well-being of students, as a means to foster a sense of community. Libraries have provided students a space to gather, learn and study, but it is important to investigate how library programming can create active opportunities to foster and support a sense of community.

Recommendations for library student engagement programming

Examining the range of student engagement experiences at year two of the pandemic and understanding how students prefer to find out about events equips libraries with the knowledge to promote events with the methods students are using. For the Undergraduate Engagement Program the insights gained from these focus groups allowed for programmatic changes including hybrid-based programming so that students who are taking classes remotely or who need to commute and are unable to participate in events can engage with the library, and better acclimate with the library whether it is with spaces, resources, collections or library employees.

The pandemic and the current environment also provide libraries the possibility to create social media content that increases engagement with students. Moreover, with the current functions of social media there is the prospect of collaborations with campus partners. Research reveals that pathways exist for the academic libraries to collaborate and share information with departments, colleges, course instructors and student organizations as represented in Szempruch and Hinds (2022). Recognizing that students have preferences to how the receive information also allows libraries to create targeted communication like undergraduate-focused listserv to share library programs or events.

For the Undergraduate Engagement Program, student participants were generally interested in learning and participating in library events and programming but were often unaware that they were occurring. Students also expressed an interesting in learning more about the library as several students were not exposed to the library because of pandemic restrictions. This is an important point that the library professionals at UIC, as well as other academic institutions, must be aware of, as there may be a class (or classes) of students who due to the pandemic, may have not interacted with library or other parts of campus. This group of students may need different means to learn about library spaces, services and resources as this opportunity was likely missed at campus orientation due to the pandemic lockdown.

Future research

Given that the current study was conducted at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, this study illustrates that students' needs and challenges have evolved and are quickly adapting to the new hybrid environment. Nevertheless, this research provided valuable insights into undergraduate students' voices that can be used to develop student engagement programming for hybrid environments and present future research opportunities.

Additionally, continued efforts should be made to explore undergraduate student engagement programming and library programming. Examining student involvement with programs through qualitative approaches, can further library professionals' consideration of student involvement and the relationship to library use, whether remotely, in-person or hybrid. Student engagement occurs in and out of classrooms and as the profession aims to be inclusive of its users this research can allow libraries to further illustrate their value.

It should also be noted that though this research paper focuses on the involvement and engagement of undergraduate students it is important that similar efforts be made examining the engagement and involvement of graduate and professional students. Many aspects make their experiences different, but there are still unique cultures within academia that need to be explored.

Conclusion

It is the role of academic library professionals to participate in the engagement and success of students. As the pandemic continues to require the development of a new normal in the educational landscape, it is pivotal to think collectively about the ways in which engagement can and should take place with students. The more we understand that the benefits and challenges students experienced are reflective of remote environments and not the pandemic itself the more reflective we can be in developing programming that can better address student success and specific student needs. As we address these needs it is also important to be thoughtful and inclusive of the entirety of the students experience, balancing the different types of engagement with building a sense community and belonging.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Jennifer M. Jackson: Supervision, Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Teresa Helena Moreno: Methodology, Investigation, Data curation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Jung Mi Scoulas: Investigation, Writing – review & editing.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declared no conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Appendix A. Focus group script

Once all students have arrived at the Zoom meeting space the following script will be used for the Focus Group Facilitator (FGF).

FGF: We will start the session in a few minutes. Before we start a few housekeeping items. You should have received directions to rename your account please rename your account now. If during this session, you would like to respond to question please signal with the Raise Hand icon at the bottom of the screen. Once you have been called upon, state your assigned number before responding to the question. When not speaking please make sure you are set to mute so that we can hear everyone clearly, as this session is being recorded.

Before recording:

A facilitator will go over (or read out loud) the verbal informed consent to the participants.

Recording and interview begin:

A facilitator will obtain the participant's verbal consent (recording begins).

FGF: Before we begin with the questions, let's start with introductions. Please state your pronouns, year in school and major.

FGF: [Q1] How would describe your transition to remote learning? What has been a challenge transitioning to remote learning? What has been a benefit transitioning to remote learning?

FGF: [Q2] Since moving to remote learning, have you attended any university online programming or events, outside of classroom instruction?

FGF: [Q3] If you have attended any online programming or events what did you enjoy about the event? What could have been improved about the event?

FGF: [Q4] Prior to the COVID-19 Pandemic did you attend any in-person campus programming or events what did you enjoy about the event? What could have been improved about the event?

FGF: [Q5] Prior to the COVID-19 Pandemic did you attend any in-person library programming or events what did you enjoy about the event? What could have been improved about the event?

FGF: [Q6] Do you follow or visit any university social media accounts related to campus programming or events? Do you find that to be an effective way to find out about upcoming campus programming?

FGF: [Q7] As an undergraduate student what would you like the Library to do to help you be successful?

FGF: [Q8] The last question before we depart, can you think of anything else that we have not covered that you would like to comment on?

FGF: Thank you to everyone for participating in the focus group. You will receive a $25 e-gift card for participating on [date]. This now concludes the recording of the session.