Integrated rough draft E and J 3-9-07

As part of our research into the information use and users of the LGBTCC, we want to find out more about how the center collects and disseminates its information, what kind of information it values, and which agencies it feels are important to partner with on campus, and in the larger community.

We would also like to find out who the users of the center are, and whether they are served adequately by the center.

We would like to explore the history of the center and how it has evolved over time, and to find out if joining the GLS has influenced center use, identity, and importance within the organization and in the campus community as a whole.

We would also like to compare the literature we have encountered on LGBT information needs of college students, and whether this center is addressing those needs currently.

We will also inquire about the populations they seek to serve, and whether they have target groups for their services. It is also important for us to address the recent changes that have taken place in the organization of the agency, with special regard to any changes in user groups or methods of distribution.

We visited the center, unobtrusively, to observe the collection, the physical layout of the center, and the information on display in the public areas of the center. Several of our group attended the LGBTCC Open House, a semester kick-off meeting designed to provide information on the center and its activities to the general public and prospective users of the center’s resources.
The first approach to our research was the observation of the LGBTQ center during their open house, held in the Wisconsin Memorial Union at the beginning of the 2007 spring semester. Attending the open house allowed us to note the resources available and observe the patrons who participate with and use the center, while not disclosing our identities with this research project to avoid the danger of tainting our first contact with the director of the center, as well as possibly affecting our information gathering procedures. Disclosing our identities would have had possible negative implications in the research process, such as disrupting our first contact methodologies and guidelines.
The note taking process at the LGBT center gave us the opportunity to create an inventory list of all the resources available, including the physical environment that the center creates. This process also allowed us to collect materials the center made available to the public, such as pamphlets, a reference manual that contains the other organizations the LGBT center coordinates with, and the activities staff members post in the manual and on bulletins.
Additionally, we conducted two interviews with student staff members, remaining anonymous within the observation process, to validate the notes and inventory list data collected. Additional data was obtained from the interviews, including administrative policies, outreach programs and a description of the types of users who visit the center. The interviews also established the type of environment and services the center offers. The interviewees were eager to answer questions, to give us a tour of the center, and to point out the available resources.
Also, as the center promotes itself as a safe physical space for the university community to visit, study and use, we launched inquires as to how the center develops and maintains the environment of a safe physical space, and whether this environment influences the information needs and information seeking of its users.
The observation process allowed the researchers to begin inquiring if the users or target audience of the LGBT center have special needs when seeking information. Other inquires developed from the observation process included quantifying the benefits of LGBT center’s organization and distribution of information, and the sensitivity of confidentiality of the users’ identities. The observation process gave us a collection of information data to begin researching the multiple resources the LGBT center offers the users.
We also conducted a detailed analysis of the group’s extensive website, looking for the information needs the website attempts to answer through its extensive links and provisions for answering the needs of the campus LGBT community.
Next, our group interviewed the director of the LGBTCC to find information, including their involvement/affiliation with other campus and community groups, whether or not they share resources with those groups, and their selection process for choosing a given group.

We also explored the changing needs of center users over time with the director. That is, is there a difference between the expressed needs of younger, undergraduate users of the center’s information and the needs of older users? How is the center focusing on these differing needs? Also, we asked how much contact and interaction the center has with the community outside of the university.
We asked the director about the differences he perceives in the responses to the center’s collection since it has been integrated into the General Library System of the University.

Finally, we compared the research we conducted on the LGBTCC center at the University of Wisconsin with the literature we have collected concerning the general needs of LGBT students, and their perception of how campus resources like the LGBTCC influence their college choices and experience.