Literature Review

Evolution of Library Instruction to Embedded Librarianship In the 1870s, the modern American system of higher education evolved to include college subjects and specialties that were eventually grouped into what are now academic departments (Hopkins, 1982). Hopkins explained that during this educational revolution, library professionals also began offering bibliographic instruction to provide help for the growing number of students doing research in subject areas that were much more focused than before. Since then, librarians have continuously expanded library instruction programs to teach information literacy and help students use library resources for their research needs. Many librarians have improved their instruction model by becoming familiar with the research assignment, adding different teaching methods and activities to appeal to various students’ learning styles, and ultimately becoming embedded in courses and departments.

Researchers recommend that librarians become facilitators of information literacy by creating curriculum-integrated programs, one form of embedded librarianship (Dewey, 2004; Lechtenberg & Donovan, 2022). Lechtenberg and Donovan (2022) described library instruction as going beyond one-shot sessions to create “intentionally designed and sequenced information literacy interventions across the curriculum” (p 838). They provided examples of what this integration of library instruction could look like: learning modules, research-based assignments, ready-made activities, and prepared lesson plans. At Athens State University, librarians have been growing a campus-wide embedded librarianship service since 2007 (Aquila & Wolfe, 2023), in which they offer a range of levels of integration, from sharing library resources in learning management systems to offering library instruction sessions to collaborating with faculty to create new assignments. Key to their success has been fostering relationships and collaborations between librarians and faculty, as well as being strategic about the types of courses and embedded work performed.

Embedded librarianship does not always entail librarians’ physical presence in other departments or instruction throughout an entire semester course. Rempel and Cossarini (2013) wrote about improving undergraduate research skills and information literacy by using active learning to enhance student engagement and employing problem-based learning to help students connect information literacy skills to real-world scenarios. They also recommended conducting an assessment to evaluate the efficacy of library instruction methods. It is only by working collaboratively with faculty and students and building embedded relationships that librarians can help improve undergraduate research and information literacy skills through new models of library instruction (Rempel & Cossarini, 2013).

Strittmatter (2012) developed a library instruction module for a core undergraduate business course. The module consisted of three library instruction sessions, each with an accompanying graded online exercise and an assigned research memo. Strittmatter (2012) evaluated effectiveness of the instruction by comparing scores from the online exercises and research memos of those who attended the session with corresponding assignment scores of those who did not. The results indicated a statistically significant difference in online exercise scores between students who attended the session and those who were absent (Strittmatter, 2012).

Instruction Methods and Models Library instruction is a core part of academic business librarian work, and might range from a one-time lecture, or “one-shot” to an in-depth, semester-long, credit-bearing course. Researchers have successfully implemented a variety of delivery methods, including one-shots, flipped classrooms, and video technology, strategies which may be used independently or in concert with efforts to embed librarians into courses, departments, and disciplines through consistent communication and relationship-building. We discuss each here.

One-Shot. Nicholson (2016) described the one-shot as a librarian’s response to an invitation from a faculty member to provide a single class period of instruction on using library tools so that students are equipped to complete a related research assignment. Despite many discussions of the one-shot model’s pedagogical weaknesses and practical constraints, Nicholson (2016) stated that it remains the dominant model used in higher education, partly because of time constraints faced by all involved. However, it does create tension as librarians balance fitting in needed content with avoiding information overload. This leads to one of the main weaknesses of the one-shot—namely, that it focuses on skills such as demonstrating how to use and search library databases instead of helping students develop critical skills (Nicholson, 2016).

Conversely, some studies have found that the one-shot model can be an effective choice. Research on one-shot sessions has found that students who attend them are more likely to use library databases and resources in the process of selecting and evaluating sources for their assignments (Lieberthal, 2009; Spievak & Hayes-Bohanan, 2013). Additionally, one-shot instruction allows librarians to meet with faculty and build relationships (Lieberthal, 2009). Hollister and Coe (2003) reported that traditional library instruction models, such as a one-shot class, utilizing the lecture and demonstration teaching method, can be helpful, effective, and necessary.

The default instruction mode for class sessions in both one-shots and semester-long courses is lecturing (Asarta, 2024). In library instruction one-shots, lecturing also encompasses demonstration (Gareau-Brennan & Kung, 2022). While students have reported that traditional lectures are less engaging and more overwhelming than active learning strategies (Klein et al., 2023), lectures and demonstrations are important parts of the learning process (Harrington & Zakrajsek, 2017). One-shots do not necessarily consist solely of lectures and demonstrations, they can also use active learning strategies to engage students. Both lecturing and active learning strategies have been shown to effectively help students learn (Klein et al., 2023). Active learning strategies, such as hands-on application, reflection, discussion, and gamification, have added benefits of optimizing use of in-class time and maintaining students’ attention (Gareau-Brennan & Kung, 2022; Klein et al., 2023). A mix of both traditional lecture and demonstration with active learning allows instructors to draw on the strengths of each method (Harrington & Zakrajsek, 2017).

Flipped Classroom. One strategy for enhancing the effectiveness of the one-shot library session is to utilize a flipped classroom approach. Researchers have defined his approach as one where the order of learning activities is reversed, with students completing some activities before they enter the classroom (Wozny, Balser, & Ives, 2018). Instead of students attending class and subsequently completing homework based on the content of the in-class lecture, they assimilate the material ahead of time and come prepared to “engage in teacher-guided problem solving, analysis and discussions” in the ensuing class periods (Nouri, 2016, p. 2). This approach eliminates the need to spend valuable classroom time lecturing or demonstrating; class time is instead used to engage students “in a variety of active-learning activities” (Berg, 2018, p. 373). Active learning strategies might take the form of collaborative discussions, interactive activities, practice time, and reflection (Parramore, 2019). Flipping the classroom is an approach that can be effective in both face-to-face and online library sessions.

Librarians at Eastern Washington University successfully implemented a flipped one-shot library session in a face-to-face classroom setting (Stellwagen et al., 2022). They discovered that learning outcomes were best met when students accessed information literacy concepts via thoughtfully crafted pre-class assignments. The following one-shot class utilized a brief review of pre-class content, with time for active learning, especially research practice. Librarians at the University of Wisconsin La Crosse took the flipped classroom model a step further and designed an information literacy curriculum for use in an online learning environment. Humrickhouse (2021) wrote about the experience of scaling the “collaboration with faculty … to build five online modules designed to introduce students to threshold information literacy concepts” (p. 3). In a revision of this model, the classroom component of library instruction was replaced with higher-quality, point-of-need reference desk transactions, and later the model was scaled up so that library content could be adjusted to apply to all students in classes with any information literacy component. In these studies, the success of flipping the classroom depended on relationships and collaboration between instructors and librarians (Stellwagen et al., 2022) and available technology (Humrickhouse, 2021).

Videos as Enabling Technology. The importance of library instruction videos in teaching basic research concepts and enhancing and improving library instruction is well established (Berg, 2018; Tomaszewski, 2021). Tomaszewski (2021) provided an extensive list of the advantages and disadvantages of asynchronous one-shot library instruction in the form of online video content, including increased accessibility, reusability, customizability, and marketability. Students exhibited greater confidence in information literacy skills when they could watch and rewatch videos based on their needs and schedules (Obradovich et al., 2015; Tomaszewski, 2021). While asynchronous videos might be difficult to create and time-consuming to maintain (Camacho, 2018), when done well, they can be an important resource for teaching information literacy concepts and skills.

Each of these strategies, from one-shots to flipped classroom and asynchronous technology, was implemented in this case study about embedded, curriculum-integrated librarianship in the advanced business communication course at Brigham Young University.

Embedded Library Instruction at Brigham Young University

Brigham Young University (BYU) is a large R1 university located in Provo, Utah. It is home to the Marriott School of Business, which enrolls 2,800 undergraduate and 1,000 graduate students. The School of Business offers nine competitive undergraduate and two graduate programs for which limited enrollment restrictions apply. In a typical academic year, over 1,500 students enter the business school’s undergraduate programs as juniors. All required business classes for business majors are offered in a single building on campus – the Tanner Building. This self-contained unit is intended to provide business students with nearly everything they need to succeed academically. In 2000, the business library was relocated from the Tanner Building to the main campus library, leaving the business school without a physical library presence. Librarians must continually seek innovative ways to remain visible to business school faculty and students. Library instruction has proven to be the most effective avenue for outreach.

For business school students, the management communication (MCOM) course fulfills a general education advanced writing requirement and plays an instrumental role in helping students prepare for career success. It accommodates approximately 2,000 students annually, the majority of whom are business students. MCOM is offered in a variety of formats to meet student needs, including traditional in-person, hybrid, and remote asynchronous. As shown in Table 1, learning outcomes for the course align with university advanced writing general education requirements, covering areas of research, disciplinary writing, grammar, editing and formatting, and oral communication.

The relationship between MCOM and the library began in 2001 when a newly hired business librarian looked for ways to connect with the business school. As she reviewed courses, she found a required business communication course that included a research assignment. The librarian contacted the course coordinator, who had also written the course textbook, and asked for a five-minute appointment. During the meeting, the librarian offered to teach a mock library instruction session to the course coordinator to give him an idea of what students could gain from the instruction. After the appointment, the course coordinator invited the librarian to teach a one-shot in his section and advertised the service to other faculty teaching the same course. As a result of this brief interaction, the library instruction session was delivered in five classes in 2001.

For over 20 years, one business librarian provided the sole library support for all MCOM classes; in 2023 two additional librarians were enlisted to support what had become a massive effort entailing over 100 instructional sessions per year. By 2024, increased course enrollment and uptake by instructors meant the number of library instruction sessions had increased to 117, with over 1,800 students attending. In 2004, about 64% of students taking MCOM interacted with the business librarians; by 2024, this percentage had increased to about 98%, see Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Enrollment for Business Communications Course and Library Session Attendance, 2004–2024

Many different methods and models have been used to embed the library into MCOM since those first one-shots in 2001. Figure 2 illustrates the course changes over time, including new course coordinators, textbooks, and learning outcomes, along with the timing of the library instructional models used to adapt to changes as the library continued to integrate with the curriculum. Model iterations are described later in this paper.

Figure 2.

Management Communications Course Changes Over Time, 2001–2024

Criteria for Evaluating Instruction Models

As we iteratively adjusted and improved library instruction for business communication over the years, we recognized important elements of successful instruction. These elements are as follows:

• Student preparation and attendance

• Student engagement during the session

• Positive working relationships between course instructors and librarians

• Time investment for business librarians

• The ability and flexibility to adapt to changes and student needs

While we did not consciously articulate these elements as we adapted our approach to embedded librarianship over the years, these needs and concepts were on our minds. For example, throughout the years of embedded librarianship, the librarians gathered feedback from students on what they learned and what was helpful. This data was collected for the purpose of improving teaching, not for research. As we faced another need for change and adaptation, we looked back to previous instruction models to learn from them, identify strengths and weaknesses, and inform future models. In the following sections, Model 1 through Model 6, we describe the basic structure of each model of embedded librarianship within MCOM. We retrospectively rate how well each model incorporated elements in our evaluation matrix (see Table 2).

Student preparation and attendance was based on whether there was a required or optional assignment for students to prepare ahead of class and on the number of students in library sessions compared to total course enrollment. Collecting statistics on library instruction sessions over time enabled us to evaluate this data looking backward. Student engagement during the session was measured by the number of questions and active participation in hands-on portions of the session. Instruction modes that allowed for application time ranked higher. Positive working relationships between course instructors and librarians was ranked by the level of collaboration on course curriculum, planning before class, and instructor attendance and participation during library sessions. This measure was based on librarian recollection and tangible evidence like collaboration on projects like the open textbook. Time investment for business librarians was measured based on the number of sessions taught per librarian, which data was collected at the time instruction was given. The ability and flexibility to adapt to changes and student needs was based on the length of the instruction session and the amount of content that needed to be covered during that time, informed by librarian recollection and internal records. We recognize that a limitation to the evaluation methodology is this retrospective approach and the potential for faulty memory. For librarians implementing a new program, we recommend collecting data early and consistently.

The evaluation of each model according to these criteria helped us recognize the advantages and disadvantages of each model. It also allowed us to identify a future recommended model (Model 7), which combines the strengths of previous models with new advances in technology. While there is not one ideal solution that will work forever, the framework allows us to see areas for targeted improvement. It also helps us understand how we can balance different elements to create the best possible embedded library instruction program given constraints on time and resources.

Model 1 One-Shot Instruction with Solo Librarian Teaching an Average of 50 Sessions/Year (2001–2011)

In Model 1, the course coordinator required each professor to meet with the business librarian. Instructors brought their classes to the library during regularly scheduled class times, for a 40-minute demonstration of business resources, search strategies, and online information sources and showed students how to cite business resources. This one-shot occurred in the library during the regularly scheduled class period, with the professor accompanying the class. For most classes, the librarian used the first 40 minutes, and the professor used the remaining 50 minutes for their regular lecture. A handout of library resources and librarian contact information was distributed at the beginning of class.

Advantages. Attendance was high because library instruction took place during class time. The professors’ presence during the instruction allowed them to become familiar with library resources and realize the benefit to students of attending the session. The professor could add to the discussion of reliable resources and application to the specific assignment. In a survey conducted during the fall semester of 2007, “44.5% of students responded that the most critical knowledge they had gained from the instruction was about what business databases were available. Other responses indicated that students had learned how to find articles or specific journals and how to use the bibliography utility RefWorks” (Spackman & Camacho, 2008, p. 2).

Disadvantages. Even though library instruction focused on a specific assignment, there was a tendency for the library instructor to cover too much material. For many students, the library visit was their first introduction to using library resources, so the amount of information presented to them could be overwhelming. Deciding what information was most crucial to share with students required honest communication between the librarian and the teaching faculty to establish realistic expectations.

Evaluation

Student preparation and attendance (3/5): Attendance was high because the session was conducted during regular class time. Preparation was low because students were not given any research-related assignments or readings before attending library instruction.

Level of student engagement (1/5): Engagement was low because there was not time for students to practice or apply what they learned during the session.

Relationship with instructors (4/5): Instructors attended class with students and collaborated with the librarian by answering questions related to the research assignments, building a strong working relationship.

Time investment for library instructors (3/5): Significant time investment was required because a solo librarian was teaching all the classes.

Flexibility to adapt to changes and needs (4/5): Due to the collaboration and communication between librarian and professor, there was room for flexibility to adapt to changes and needs.

Model 2 One-Shot Instruction Including “Hands-On” Time with Solo Librarian Teaching an Average of 60 Sessions/Year (2011–2014)

The second edition of the MCOM textbook was introduced in 2011, spurring an update to the library instruction model. Professors continued to be required to invite the business librarian to give a presentation. The instruction was conducted in the library to facilitate students’ use of library computers and free printing. The demonstration lasted 20 minutes and was followed by a 20-minute hands-on session. The presentation was targeted to support a short paper assignment on a current business topic that required 10 reliable sources. At least one of the sources had to be a peer-reviewed article. The handout used in Model 1 was updated to reflect specific resources to complete the assignment and to provide information on other resources and literacy skills not covered in class.

Advantages. The hands-on session after the short presentation engaged students in critical thinking and allowed them to practice what they learned by applying it to a specific assignment and topic. The librarian’s access to the research assignment and requirements helped the librarian focus on the best resources to complete the assignment. During the hands-on portion, the professor answered questions related to the assignment while the librarian answered research-related questions.

Disadvantages. The session included only the skills and resources needed to complete a specific assignment. As a result of this intense focus, the session did not address students’ needs beyond the scope of the assignment. The hands-on time was not long enough to allow the librarian to address gaps in research skills and lack of preparation. Additionally, the workload related to offering 60 sessions per year created an intense demand on the librarian’s time.

Evaluation

Student preparation and attendance (4/5): Attendance was high because the session continued to be conducted during regular class time. Preparation was low, but the hands-on time allowed the librarian to address the gaps.

Level of student engagement (4/5): Engagement was high for both the librarian and students because both were familiar with the assignments and resources needed to complete them. Students also had time to apply what they learned during the session.

Relationship with instructors (5/5): The librarian’s relationship with instructors grew stronger because many faculty had collaborated with the librarian for a few years and were familiar with the instruction.

Time investment for library instructors (4/5): The time investment was high, as one librarian continued to teach all sessions, and more sessions were added.

Flexibility to adapt to changes and needs (2/5): The librarian’s presentation was short and without any flexibility because of the limited time to cover the specific resources, and the hands-on time did not allow much flexibility because the librarian needed to maintain a strict schedule to be able to talk to each student.

Model 3 Flipped Classroom Instruction with Solo Librarian Teaching an Average of 70 Sessions/Year (2015–2020)

In 2015, a new course coordinator was hired, prompting changes to MCOM and how the library was embedded within it. One of the main changes was that course instructors were required to follow a uniform schedule. This change was problematic for the librarian, who could not teach all sessions in a single week. To adapt to the uniform schedule, the librarian offered sign-up library workshops outside of class time and requested the help of part-time student library workers to assist during hands-on time with students. Five library instruction videos were created to teach students fundamental concepts and research skills before the library one-shot. The students were expected to watch the videos, take a five-question quiz before the workshop, and come prepared to discuss their topic.

The students registered for the 30-minute, extra-credit library instruction session on their own time. Sign-ups were limited to 20 students per session. The librarian introduced herself and displayed a slide with instructions for starting their research. The remainder of the session time was entirely interactive and hands-on. In lieu of a presentation, the librarian consulted with each student for a few minutes to discuss their research. All students were at different levels of preparation, so the librarian worked with them where they were in the research process. Students were invited to email the librarian or schedule an appointment for additional assistance.

A new open, online textbook was also introduced, with the research section coauthored by the business librarian. This combined effort between the business communications program and the library. It facilitated easier adaptation to future advancements in technology and changes to the curriculum (Spackman, 2017).

Advantages. Using videos to teach basic business research concepts prepared students for the library instruction session and allowed the librarian to spend most of her time working individually with each student, providing a tailored instruction experience. Students who had already selected a topic usually found more than enough sources for their paper. Students who did not have a topic used the time to explore possible topics.

Students applied research skills and practiced using the library resources, enabling them to better retain the information and develop familiarity with the databases. A study conducted in 2018 demonstrated that based on the quiz performance, the instructional videos prepared students for the library instruction session by teaching basic business research concepts. The results showed that 97% of the students watched the videos and benefitted from the content (Camacho, 2018). The videos allowed the librarian to spend the library session working individually with each student.

Disadvantages. Not all faculty members followed the schedule, and some students were unaware of the videos, quizzes, or research assignment. Due to this information breakdown, some students did not come to the library session with a topic, so the application time was not as effective. Instead of researching to prepare for their paper, they spent their time looking for possible topics and learning about the assignment, which was not as useful for learning critical thinking skills. Even though the sessions were reduced to 30 minutes each, with approximately 70 sessions offered per year, this model began to be unsustainable for one business librarian to support alone.

Evaluation

Student preparation and attendance (5/5): Attendance was high because students received extra credit for completing the library session. Preparation was high because students had to watch library instruction videos and take a research-related quiz.

Level of student engagement (5/5): Engagement was high because students were ready to discuss their topic and had time to research during the session.

Relationship with instructors (3/5): The librarian’s relationship with instructors continued to be strong. However, the instructors no longer attended the class and communicated with the librarian only via email, resulting in some communication breakdowns about student preparation for sessions.

Time investment for library instructors (5/5): The librarian’s time investment was high, as one librarian continued to teach all sessions, and even more sessions were added.

Flexibility to adapt to changes and needs (1/5): The library session was short and without any flexibility because the librarian had only 30 minutes to talk to between 5 and 20 students.

Model 4 Remote Flipped Classroom Instruction with Solo Librarian Teaching an Average of Over 100 Online Sessions/Year (2020–2021)

Model 3 was adapted during the COVID-19 pandemic. 30-minute library sessions were conducted via Zoom; students who could not attend the session communicated with the librarian and received instruction via email. Classes were limited to 20 students each. This smaller session size resulted in a large spike in the number of library sessions offered, which jumped from 85 sessions in 2019 to 176 sessions in 2021. Students received extra credit for viewing the videos and attending the library session. The quiz associated with the library instruction videos was no longer required. Student library workers were no longer available to assist the librarian during sessions. The librarian conducted a short presentation to direct students to the course guide and databases to find articles. She encouraged students to start working on their research and used three students’ topics to demonstrate using library resources to find sources.

Advantages. The librarian could continue teaching and assisting students despite in-person restrictions. The librarian showed students the course guide and the resources available to find articles and data for their business papers. She gave students her email address and offered help after the session. About 30% of the students reached out via email.

Disadvantages. The need to instruct 20 students in 30 minutes without the assistance of student library workers did not allow personalization or the opportunity to address every student’s needs and questions. The librarian observed that some students were engaged in other activities while attending online library instruction (e.g., driving, eating, exercising). Other students would leave their cameras off, making it difficult to determine the level of engagement. The students seemed to be more interested in obtaining extra credit than in learning to apply the skills and using the resources to find articles for their paper. Without the incentivizing quiz, students did not watch the videos and were unprepared for the session. Because the sessions were offered for extra credit, and due to other pressures on students, instructors, librarians, and universities during the COVID-19 pandemic, attendance at library sessions plunged to only 27% of students enrolled in MCOM in 2020.

Evaluation

Student preparation and attendance (2/5):

Attendance was low despite students receiving extra credit for their attendance. Preparation was low despite the request for students to watch videos and take a quiz as many did not complete the assignment.

Level of student engagement (2/5): Engagement was low, and students were often distracted during Zoom sessions.

Relationship with instructors (4/5): The librarian’s relationship with instructors continued to be strong; faculty members were grateful for support during this stressful time.

Time investment for library instructors (5/5): A significant amount of time was invested as one librarian taught all sessions and responded to a high volume of emails after each session.

Flexibility to adapt to changes and needs (1/5): The session continued to be 30 minutes long with no room for flexibility.

Model 5 Remote One-Shot Instruction with Solo Librarian Teaching an Average of Over 100 Sessions/Year (2021–2023)

As librarians, instructors, and students alike learned the strengths and weaknesses of online education during COVID, the online sessions were adapted to make them more manageable and provide more individual support to students. Classes were extended to 45 minutes, and the number of students per session was reduced to 10. Students were required to turn on their camera during the session and encouraged to participate and ask questions. Videos and quizzes were no longer required, and extra credit for the session was eliminated. Instead, instructors included a graded assignment, requiring students to write an essay describing the library instruction experience. Following the remote, synchronous workshops, email instruction continued.

In 2023, the coordinator for MCOM attended training on information literacy with the information literacy librarian. This training spurred a renewed focus on information literacy and research in the course. As shown in Table 1, academic research was added as a learning outcome for the course at that time, solidifying the need for librarians to be embedded in the curriculum.

Advantages. Reducing the sessions to 10 students allowed the librarian to have more control of the class. Being more comfortable with technology allowed the librarian to engage with students. The requirement to report on the library instruction experience incentivized students to attend, ask questions, and engage with the librarian. The commitment to embed the library within the curriculum increased attendance, with the percentage of enrolled students attending library sessions back to pre-COVID levels by 2021. With the renewed focus in the learning outcomes on the general education requirement of academic research, the library integration in the course supported not just the students but also the mission of the university.

Disadvantages. The large number of students and online sessions for one librarian created a heavy workload, leading to burnout. Some students still struggled to focus and participate during online sessions. Students also still refused to turn on their cameras or claimed their cameras did not work, making it difficult for the librarian to assess student comprehension and engagement.

Evaluation

Student preparation and attendance (4/5): Students were required to complete a reflection assignment after the library session, which resulted in questions for the librarian during the session and higher attendance.

Level of student engagement (3/5): Engagement was higher as students understood that they needed to complete the reflection assignment. However, gauging student engagement and interaction over Zoom continued to be difficult.

Relationship with instructors (4/5): The librarian’s relationship with instructors continued to be strong, particularly with the course coordinator, who became a champion of information literacy. The main form of communication continued to be through email as library sessions were held via Zoom.

Time investment for library instructors (5/5): A significant amount of time was invested as more sessions were added and the session length was extended.

Flexibility to adapt to changes and needs (5/5): Reducing the number of students in each session and increasing session length led to high flexibility for addressing individual student questions.

Model 6 Hybrid One-Shot Instruction Including “Hands-On” Time with Three Librarians Teaching an Average of Over 100 Sessions/Year (2023–Present)

The unsustainable workload from Model 5 helped justify the hire of another business librarian. This new hire, along with the reallocation of assignments, now allowed three business librarians to support the business communication course. Together they took this as an opportunity to revamp the instruction model. At the same time, the textbook was revised, and the author, the MCOM course coordinator, worked closely with the librarians to complete the chapters on information and data literacy. The course guide was updated to mirror the textbook and highlight library resources within each part of the course. In Model 6, librarians are invited to provide faculty training before the semester, allowing them to further cultivate working relationships. The MCOM sections are distributed among the three librarians, with each librarian contacting their assigned faculty and arranging the best approach for the library session in each class.

Library sessions occur both in person and online. For the online courses, 45-minute online sessions continue. One-shot instruction sessions include both lecture and demonstration and hands-on work time. However, the hands-on time is often limited as two new topics were added to the content librarians teach: data literacy and source evaluation using the SIFT Method (Caulfield, 2019). Students are encouraged to watch instructional videos in preparation for the library session.

Advantages. Librarians have the support of the course coordinator; during training, they can answer faculty questions and offer support. The course guide information is given to students, and the tabs align with the textbook chapters, adding familiarity to the experience. Librarians share the workload, which helps prevent burnout. Librarians meet faculty expectations by customizing their library presentations to class needs. Faculty members attend library instruction with their class so they can become familiar with library services and resources. Students become comfortable with librarians, and many reach out via email or visit in person with one of the librarians. These changes have enabled the librarians to reach more students than ever, with the percentage of students enrolled in MCOM who attend library sessions reaching over 97%.

Disadvantages. Despite the resources available for student preparation, many students continue to come to the library session unprepared. Librarians still cover too much content during the session and do not have enough time to truly personalize the learning experience for students, leaving less time for the hands-on component. Because many more people are involved in the teaching and learning process, there are challenges with scaling the program. To deliver a uniform experience for students, there must be buy-in and cooperation from many individuals with varying levels of experience and expertise. The business librarians have their own teaching styles and personalities, so they must learn how to balance the benefits of drawing upon differing strengths while striving to provide a uniform experience for students.

Evaluation

Student preparation and attendance (3/5): Attendance is high because library instruction sessions are held during regular class times. Preparation is high for in-person sessions because the faculty prepares students for the visit and covers the assignment requirements before the session. For online classes, preparation is lower because students attend at different times, so faculty cannot adequately prepare students.

Level of student engagement (4/5): Engagement is high because faculty attend the session and support the librarian’s presentation, giving input and comments during sessions. Students also have time to apply what they learned.

Relationship with instructors (5/5): The librarians’ relationships with instructors continue to grow stronger as faculty are divided between three librarians that have more time to collaborate and plan the instruction.

Time investment for library instructors (3/5): The librarians’ time investment is high as they teach library sessions and provide training for faculty. However, this load is now divided between three librarians, easing the burden formerly held by one librarian.

Flexibility to adapt to changes and needs (5/5): Each librarian works with fewer faculty and has plenty of flexibility to adapt to changes and individual needs.

Model 7 Hybrid Flipped Classroom Instruction with Three Librarians (Future Model)

The weakest area of the current model (Model 6) is student preparation. It is inconsistent across course sections, particularly for online sections. Our proposed future model builds on the strengths of Model 6 while using technology to enhance the consistency and efficacy of student preparation. It also draws on our understanding of student behavior and workloads. Key to this process will be the relationship between the MCOM course coordinator and the librarians. This relationship will allow for a good return on the time investment to create additional content because it can be integrated into the curriculum and all instructors will be on board. While this increase in consistency slightly limits flexibility, overall it will result in a better experience for students, librarians, and instructors.

This recommended future model also leverages advances in technology to connect and instruct students in various ways, making hybrid, flipped library instruction possible. The librarians will work with the MCOM course coordinator to create modules for each textbook chapter, which will be hosted on the library’s information literacy website. Students will be required to develop information literacy skills through the modules before attending library sessions. The five library instruction videos will be reduced to one video, and some of the concepts will be taught via infographics and other interactive visual aids, making the session preparation less overwhelming and more interactive. Three new videos on data literacy will be created. Librarians will continue to be assigned MCOM sections, and their library presentations will consist of a short demonstration, with the rest of the session being primarily hands-on and interactive for students. The mode of library instruction will match the mode for the section overall, whether in person, online synchronous, or fully remote. Librarians will bring student assistants to the sessions to ensure each student gets individualized help.

Just as innovations about data contributed to adaptations in Model 6, the rapid emergence of artificial intelligence and large language models and their implications for information literacy will need to be addressed in our future model. For example, we plan to provide sample prompts to guide student brainstorming with AI chatbots as a partner. We will also prepare to address questions on ethical and responsible use of AI in research and writing.

Advantages. Students will learn the basics of information and data literacy before attending the library session. Librarians will keep their presentations short and work individually with students. This model fosters collaboration with the teaching faculty during module creation, introduction, and implementation. Students will apply what they have learned through the module activities, and working individually with the librarians will help them address specific questions and fill gaps in understanding.

Disadvantages. Creating the modules will require an intensive time investment. The program needs to be introduced to faculty and requires advanced preparation for training and implementation. Librarians will need additional faculty buy-in to require students to complete the preparation work and improve the effectiveness of the flipped classroom teaching model.

Evaluation

Student preparation and attendance (5/5): We expect attendance to be high because the library instruction will be scheduled during class time. Preparation will be high because students will need to complete assignments for each module.

Level of student engagement (5/5): Engagement will be high because students will attend the session after completing assignments and will be prepared with questions for librarians.

Relationship with instructors (5/5): The librarians’ relationships with faculty will be strong as they work hand in hand with each faculty member and provide training and support throughout the semester, not just in one session.

Time investment for library instructors (4/5): The librarians’ time investment will be high, as they will need to prepare the module, provide faculty training, and work with individual students.

Flexibility to adapt to changes and needs (4/5): The module will provide plenty of flexibility and time to make changes because it will not consist of one session but will entail continued collaboration between faculty and librarians throughout the semester. However, creating consistency across all course sections will decrease some flexibility.

Conclusion

We understand that utilizing the time and strengths of three business librarians is not feasible for every library. Our proposed future model with three business librarians supporting the library embedded business communication course is based on unique circumstances at Brigham Young University and its Marriott School of Business. However, several factors are common across universities in the United States. Business is the most popular major for undergraduates (National Center for Education Statistics, 2023), so business schools often have high enrollment. This is true at Brigham Young University. With recent conversations about hiring additional business librarians and the burden of solo business librarianship (Price & Schubert, 2024), this is a common struggle that we understand and hope to provide insight to mitigate.

Business librarians at Brigham Young University have been on a 20-plus-year journey to meet the needs of students by embedding in an advanced business communications course. Through this journey, the librarians have observed that allowing students time and space to practice and use research tools is more effective than having students sit through a demonstration. They have also learned that while flipped classroom models can be effective in preparing and engaging students, watching many videos is exhausting. By experimenting with various methods and technologies, they are learning the best way to instruct and prepare students. Library literature supports the idea of providing different methods and activities as the best substitution for the traditional one-shot lecture, in which not much is retained. Clifton and Jo (2016) expressed it best when they wrote, “Hybrid models can enhance widespread one-shot instruction and provide an environment for librarians to spread their creative wings and identify the most appropriate delivery method and effective tools for a wide variety of learners” (p. 318).

Another important lesson learned through this journey is to be flexible and able to adapt to changes in the curriculum and leadership styles. Over the years, the course had three different coordinators, requiring the librarians to be alert to changes in the assignments and schedules, and to move quickly to develop a relationship with the new coordinator to preserve the library’s role in the course. The original course textbook was updated multiple times, and the latest open, online textbook has been revised numerous times, providing opportunities for librarians to contribute and collaborate with instructors and maintain integration with the course. The course content has changed, with more emphasis on writing and career skills and less on oral presentations. Artificial intelligence tools, source evaluation, and data literacy are current trends incorporated into the new model, and librarians need to develop those skills and quickly adapt to the latest developments to provide support. While the future model will require a continued commitment of time and effort on the part of everyone involved, these sustained efforts will yield better prepared students and more fulfilled librarians and instructors.

The purpose of this article was to focus on the benefits and drawbacks of a variety of instruction strategies and methods for teaching research and information literacy principles. Future research can extend upon this by looking at embedded business librarianship across multiple institutions and finding commonalities and new approaches. While it was out of scope in this article to include student data, our collective understanding of embedded librarianship best practices will be strengthened by incorporating student feedback and performance data in future assessments. Future research could also look at changes to student or course instructor understanding following implementation of new embedded librarianship practices.