Published at : 16 Dec 2019
Volume : IJtech
Vol 10, No 8 (2019)
DOI : https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v10i8.3440
Aisyah Larasati | 1. Department of Industrial Engineering, Universitas Negeri Malang, Jl. Semarang No.5, Malang 65145, Indonesia 2. PUI-PT Disruptive Learning Innovation (DLI) Universitas Negeri Malang, Jl. Semarang N |
Apif Miftahul Hajji | 1. Department of Civil Engineering, Universitas Negeri Malang, Jl. Semarang No.5, Malang 65145, Indonesia 2. PUI-PT Disruptive Learning Innovation (DLI) Universitas Negeri Malang, Jl. Semarang No.5, |
Anik Nur Handayani | Department of Electrical Engineering, Universitas Negeri Malang, Jl. Semarang No.5, Malang 65145, Indonesia |
Nabila Azzahra | Department of Industrial Engineering, Universitas Negeri Malang, Jl. Semarang No.5, Malang 65145, Indonesia |
Muhammad Farhan | Department of Industrial Engineering, Universitas Negeri Malang, Jl. Semarang No.5, Malang 65145, Indonesia |
Puji Rahmawati | Department of Industrial Engineering, Universitas Negeri Malang, Jl. Semarang No.5, Malang 65145, Indonesia |
Information technology is now used very often,
especially by individuals born between 1982 and 2002 (the Millennial
generation). The academic library, which from its beginnings has been a
storehouse for information through collections, is becoming less attractive for
Millennials because of the influence of information technology. This study
aimed to use k-means and x-means clustering algorithms to identify the
characteristics of academic library patrons, particularly Millennial patrons.
K-means is a well-known algorithm due to its simplicity, while x-means is a
relatively new algorithm for performing clustering and provides the capability
to determine an optimal number of clusters, the number of cluster that
minimizes differences within each cluster and maximizes differences between
clusters. In this study, data were collected using questionnaires, both in
online and offline forms. A total of 935 responses were collected. The results
show that k-means performs better than x-means since it results in a lower
Davies-Bouldin index value. However, x-means provides better descriptions of
the patrons’ behavior on each cluster. Both k-means and x-means clustering
methods create five clusters based on the behavior of academic library patrons.
One of the clusters resulting from k-means and x-means also confirms that not
all patrons come to the academic library for the book collection; they come
because of invitations from friends or to use internet services.
Academic library; Clustering; K-means; X-means
The Millennial generation (also known as Generation
Y) is the group of individuals born between 1982 and 2002 (Kotz, 2016). Members of this generation have unique characteristics. For example, many Millennials do not wear watches because their
cell phones display the time. Furthermore, rather than using physical
photograph albums, Millennials store their photographs on Facebook, Instagram, and other social media platforms. Millennials enjoy using technology. Indeed, they are the
first generation to have become dependent on technology (Smith & Nichols, 2015). They live in an age when they can instantly
access whatever information they want, for
In this age, information technology is one of the most
frequently used tools in life, including for academic libraries because most
have chosen to integrate technology into their information content (Walton, 2014). Many academic library patrons surveyed for the study
reported that obtaining information from the internet is easier than having to
search in a library. It is also easier because not everything patrons need is
available in libraries. Moreover, technology is one
of the most commonly used communication tools, and the majority of users who
use it to communicate are Millennials (Maiers, 2017).
Learning
methods must continually adapt to engage and educate this generation (Nicholas, 2008). Millennials tend to have a different learning method
than previous generations. Millennials prefer to have skills and creativity in
arts, games, video lectures, field trips, and other activities that do not
depend only on books and theories. They tend to work beyond required working
hours and have less social time (DeVaney, 2015). Moreover, Millennials are fluent in the uses of
technology or perhaps even dependent on it (Nicholas, 2008).
To keep
pace with and adjust to evolutions in Millennials’ learning methods, academic
libraries must be able to convert some of their traditional services into
digital services. Academic libraries are transitioning from a collections-based
model to a broader services-based model (Gleason, 2018). Library services, most of which are printed books,
must be converted into digital services augmented by free internet services and
other offerings to accommodate Millennials’ needs. Fulfilling users’ needs may
increase customer satisfaction and affect an institution’s success. User
satisfaction may be achieved by identifying service quality attributes and
their effects on user satisfaction (Zuna et al., 2016).
As mentioned above, Millennials often
look for academic references on the internet rather than physically searching
in a library. In one study, 79.5% of college students reported that they are
experts at using the internet to search for information efficiently and
effectively, but only 56.4% said that they are skilled in using the college
library (Lippincott, 2012). Thus, academic libraries must
understand the characteristics of Millennials in order to create an environment
that is attractive to them; for example, in providing books Millennials need
and promoting such services, libraries can attract the attention of patrons to
persuade them to continue using books (Lippincott, 2012). Each customer may have a different
perspective on the attributes that affect his preferences since customer
preferences can be influenced by the completeness of the product/service
attributes and the transaction process (Suzianti et al., 2015).
At the present time, academic libraries
are providing number of services that Millennials would find attractive and may
not able to find in online sources such as data management, information about
digital scholarship, copyright management, citation management, open
educational resources, and others (Dempsey & Malpas, 2018).
Millennials students exhibit a number of
common characteristics: They are more focused on achievement, they prefer to question
everything and use all means available to get information, and they use
technology not only to find information on the internet but also for typing
notes in class (Freeman et al., 2014). Currently, data integration and analysis are still
rarely used to support decision-making, although many academic libraries have applied
technology to obtain various reader information. Tremendous amounts of
collected data remain to be analyzed in a simple analysis such as correlation (Wang et al., 2011). Thus, in the present study, in order to obtain
information about the characteristics of students who use the library often,
the most suitable method was clustering because it can be used to identify
unique distributions or patterns in data and discover groups of data (Halkidi et al., 2001).
Table 1 Changes in the function
of the library
Terms |
Collection-Based Library |
Services-Based Library |
Library |
Explained as library collection, reference |
Explained as users’ needs, such as lecturer and
student research |
Organization |
The system used is a bureaucracy that prioritizes the
production of the facilities offered by the library. |
The system used is enterprising, which is focused on
changing its goals. |
Ability |
Process and subject |
Focused on learning, research, skills, etc. |
Systems |
Back office |
Shared system with workflow systems (scholarship
information and e-books) |
Space |
Focused on collection of books |
Focused on service or user experience |
Collection |
Based on consumption from users |
The facilities already exist and between one facility and
another are collective. |
Source:
(Dempsey & Malpas, 2018)
Clustering methods are unsupervised classification methods aimed at facilitating the discovery process by combining a set of objects to create a collection of data subjects that have homogenous groups (Bader et al., 2006; Padmaja et al., 2008). The cluster members in one group have maximum similarities but minimum similarities with other cluster group members. Clustering is different from classification. Clustering is the segmenting of data into a group, while classification segments some data by assigning it into groups (Chen & Chen, 2006). The quality of clustering data depends on how high the intra-class similarities are and how low the inter-class similarities are. A common measure of cluster accuracy is the Euclidean distance. Computational time may also be used as a measure of cluster performance (Aparna & Mydhili, 2016).
By using a data mining method such as clustering, it
is possible to discover different behaviors of patrons and possibly use those
behaviors to determine whether a library’s service and collection match
Millennials’ learning methods. Two methods used to conduct the data integration
are k-means and x-means clustering. K-means clustering is a data mining
algorithm that divides n objects into k clusters so that the members of one
cluster have high similar characteristics while the members of different
clusters are dissimilar (Ahmar et al., 2018). X-means clustering is an extension of k-means
clustering that refines the clustering by continuously splitting the cluster
until the selection criterion is reached.
The aim of the present study was to profile the
behavior of academic library patrons, particularly patrons who are categorized
as members of the Millennial generation, by comparing the clusters resulting
from the k-means and x-means clustering methods.
Based
on the Davies-Bouldin index parameter, the k-means produced a value of 4.831
and the x-means produced a value of 4.882. Thus, this study demonstrates that k-means
performs better at clustering academic library patrons’ behavior than the
x-means since the value of the Davies-Bouldin index is smaller than that of the
x-means. However, although the x-means has a higher Davies-Bouldin index value,
it is better able to provide detailed information about the characteristics of
the respondents in each cluster.
This study has a limitation in the number of
iterations used to compare the k-means and x-means clustering. Further research
is needed to deepen the analysis of the research findings.
The authors would like to acknowledge
Universitas Negeri Malang (UM) and PUI-PT Disruptive Learning Innovation (DLI)
Universitas Negeri Malang for their
funding of this research through an Islamic Development Bank (IsDB)-UM Research
Grant No. 26.3.34/UN32.14.1/LT/2019.
Ahmar, A.S., Napitupulu, D., Rahim, R., Hidayat,
R., Sonatha, Y., Azmi, M., 2018. Using K-Means Clustering to Cluster Provinces
in Indonesia. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, Volume 1028, pp. 1–6
Aparna, K., Mydhili, K.N., 2016.
Incorporating Stability and Error-based Constraints for a Novel Partitional
Clustering Algorithm. International Journal of
Technology,
Volume 7(4), pp. 691–700
Bader, S., Urfer, W., Baumbach, J.I., 2006.
Reduction of Ion Mobility Spectrometry Data by Clustering Characteristic Peak
Structures. Journal of Chemometrics: A Journal of the Chemometrics Society,
Volume 20(3–4), pp. 128–135
Chen, A.-P., Chen, C.-C., 2006. A New
Efficient Approach for Data Clustering in Electronic Library using Ant Colony
Clustering Algorithm. The Electronic Library, Volume 24(4), pp. 548–559
Dempsey, L., Malpas, C., 2018. Academic Library Futures in a Diversified
University System. Higher
Education in the Era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Springer, pp.
65–89
DeVaney, S.A., 2015. Understanding the Millennial
Generation. Journal of Financial Service Professionals, Volume 69(6),
pp. 11–14
Dubey, A.K., Gupta, U., Jain, S., 2018.
Comparative Study of K-means and Fuzzy C-means Algorithms on the Breast Cancer
Data. International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information
Technology, Volume 8(1), pp. 18–29
Freeman, S., Eddy, S.L., McDonough, M.,
Smith, M.K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., Wenderoth, M. P., 2014. Active Learning
Increases Student Performance in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences, Volume 111(23), pp. 8410–8415
Gleason, N.W., 2018. Higher Education in
the Era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Springer
Halkidi, M., Batistakis, Y., Vazirgiannis,
M., 2001. On Clustering Validation Techniques. Journal of Intelligent
Information Systems, Volume 17(2–3), pp. 107–145
Kotz, P.E., 2016. Reaching the Millennial
Generation in the Classroom. Universal Journal of Educational Research,
Volume 4(5), pp. 1163–1166
Kryszczuk, K., Hurley, P., 2010. Estimation
of the Number of Clusters using Multiple Clustering Validity Indices. In: International Workshop on Multiple Classifier Systems, Springer,
pp. 114–123
Lippincott, J.K., 2012. Information Commons: Meeting
Millennials’ Needs. Journal of Library Administration, Volume 52(6–7),
pp. 538–548
Maiers, M., 2017. Our Future in the Hands of
Millennials. The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association,
Volume 61(3), pp. 212–217
Nicholas, A., 2008. Preferred Learning Methods of the Millennial Generation. Faculty
and Staff - Articles & Papers. 18. Available Online at https://digitalcommons.salve.edu/fac_staff_pub/18
Padmaja, P., Vikkurty, S., Siddiqui, N.I.,
Dasari, P., Ambica, B., Rao, V.V., Rudraraju, V.J.P.R., 2008. Characteristic Evaluation
of Diabetes Data using Clustering Techniques. IJCSNS, Volume 8(11), pp. 244–251
Pelleg, D., Moore, A.W., 2000. X-means: Extending
K-means with Efficient Estimation of the Number of Clusters. In:
Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Machine Learning,
Volume 1, pp. 727–734
Smith, T.J., Nichols, T., 2015. Understanding
the Millennial Generation. The Journal of Business Diversity, Volume
15(1), pp. 39–47
Suzianti, A., Faradilla, N.D.P., Anjani, S.,
2015. Customer Preference Analysis on Fashion Online Shops using the Kano Model
and Conjoint Analysis. International Journal of Technology, Volume 6(5),
pp. 881–885
Tan, P.-N., Steinbach, M., Kumar, V., 2005.
Chapter 8: Cluster Analysis: Basic Concepts and Algorithms. In:
Introduction to Data Mining. Available Online at: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-4405(81)90007-8
Walton, E.W., 2014. Why Undergraduate
Students Choose to use E-books. Journal of Librarianship and Information
Science, Volume 46(4), pp. 263–270
Wang, R., Tang, Y., Liu, G., Li, Y., 2011. K-means Clustering Algorithm Application in University Libraries. In: IEEE 10th International Conference on Cognitive Informatics and Cognitive Computing (ICCI-CC’11), IEEE, pp. 419–422
Zuna, H.T., Hadiwardoyo, S.P., Rahadian, H., 2016. Developing a Model of Toll Road Service Quality using an Artificial Neural Network Approach. International Journal of Technology, Volume 7(4), pp. 562–570