The State of Online and Remote Work of Academic Librarians in Virginia

Growth of Teleworking in the United States

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that about 20 million people, or 15% of people, worked from home for part of each work week in 2001.¹ Most people doing job-related work at home did not get paid for it. A much smaller percentage had a formal arrangement to get paid for working from home. Interestingly, 80% of people working from home, paid or unpaid, used a computer, and 63% used the internet and email. Almost 20 years later, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported in 2019 that about 42 million, or 25% of people, worked from home part of each week, and 21 million, or about 15% of all workers, worked exclusively from home one to five days per week.² Telework increased from about 22% in 2019 to 42% in 2020, largely due to COVID-19.³ Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed that the percentage of people working from home due to COVID-19 dramatically decreased from 35.4% in May 2020 to 7.7% in April 2022 due to people returning to normal work locations.⁴

Academic Librarians Working Remotely Prior to 2020

The increase in academic librarians working from home was tied to technology development, access to electronic resources, virtual reference services, and instruction for distance learners. Prior to COVID-19, the amount of work done by academic librarians online and remotely had already increased.⁵ Working with programs, software, and activities that required an internet connection and videoconferencing for reference services in universities was described by Balas in 2001, noting the possibility of reaching distance learners.⁶ Broughton, also in 2001, discussed piloting a program to provide chat services from the reference desk at the Jerome Library at Bowling Green State University in Ohio.⁷ Casado described how difficult it was in the early 1990s to provide instruction and access to electronic resources to distance learners, noting the lack of computers and access to a modem by distance learners.⁸ By 2001, Casado described teaching using videoconferencing, answering reference questions using chat, teaching students to search databases and online catalogs, and using the Blackboard learning management system.

Maxwell, in 2002 reported moving from traditional, in-person reference services to online live reference.⁹ She noted that remote reference services in the past included helping patrons by telephone and email. However, recent technological developments and specific websites such as the Virtual Reference Desk (www.vrd.org) created an opportunity for real-time responses. Maxwell made a connection between offering virtual reference and the ability for academic librarians to work from home.¹⁰ Mansfield University, Pennsylvania, allowed full-time librarians to work from home while answering virtual reference questions and hired additional part-time librarians for the same task. Pace, in 2004 predicted that future librarians would take a class called “Pajama Reference.”¹¹ His main argument for working from home was that virtual reference could be done from a virtual office. He also noted that while working from home, he felt more productive.

Calzonetti and deChambeau, in 2006, described the transition of virtual reference at the University of Akron, Ohio, from a pilot program to joining a consortium called OhioLINK and virtual reference provided by an academic librarian working from home two nights a week.¹² Duncan described her experience telecommuting as an electronic resources librarian with Utah State University for six months.¹³ She noted the disadvantages of working from home included difficulty maintaining the necessary technology, supplies such as printer ink, and boundaries between home and work. After six months, she concluded that, although she felt highly productive, telecommuting was not tenable long-term due to the lack of interactions with library faculty. A few years later, in 2013, Uzwyshyn et al. described a team of online librarians working from geographically dispersed locations for the American Public University System, which was physically located in Charles Town, West Virginia, but provided only online courses.¹⁴

A study of Association of Research Libraries members and their flexible work arrangements by Hosoi et al. found that prior to COVID-19, 52% sometimes worked remotely, and 35% had a flexible work schedule.¹⁵ However, not all library work was conducive to working from home. Tosaka and Weng surveyed technical services librarians and found that before COVID-19, only 22% worked from home with special arrangements or limited times.¹⁶ Because technical services librarians often work with physical materials and library systems that may be unavailable online, this study showed that not all jobs within academic libraries could be done at home.

Growth of Online Education and Distance Learning

Before COVID-19, the number of students enrolled in hybrid or exclusively online postsecondary education increased, although enrollment in postsecondary institutions continued to decline. According to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), total postsecondary student enrollment dropped by almost a million from about 20 million in 2018 to about 19 million in 2022.¹⁷ Virginia’s total postsecondary enrollment dropped by more than five thousand from 554,920 in 2018 to 549,385 in 2021. The number of students enrolled in distance education or online courses before COVID-19 increased from 35% in 2018 to 36% in 2019.¹⁸ There was a record high online enrollment due to COVID-19 in 2020 at 73%. Although the enrollment percentage dropped considerably for 2021, it remained high at 59%. The number of students in Virginia taking online courses was higher than the national percentage. NCES reported for Virginia 40% in 2018, 42% in 2019, 80% in 2020, and 63% in 2021.¹⁹

Teleworking During the Pandemic

COVID-19 lockdowns and stay-at-home mandates compelled academic librarians to shift almost all work activities to the online environment suddenly. On March 11, 2020, academic librarians Hinchcliffe and Eisenberg issued a survey to determine the response of academic libraries around the United States.²⁰ Between March 11 and March 26, the percentage of fully closed academic libraries increased to 8%, with 75% significantly reducing access and hours.²¹ During the same time, the number of academic libraries allowing or requiring working from home rose to 68%. This data coincided with the timeline of closures in Virginia. On March 13, 2020, all K-12 schools were closed for two weeks, and Governor Ralph Northam declared a state of emergency for the Commonwealth.²² By March 23, 2020, the Governor announced that schools would remain closed for the rest of the school year through June 2020.²³ The first stay-at-home order, which included Virginia’s colleges and universities, occurred on March 30, 2020.

Rise of Teleworking in Virginia’s State-Funded Colleges and Universities

According to the Virginia Department of Human Resource Management, teleworking state employees increased between 2019 and 2022.²⁴ The report listed 45 state-funded colleges, universities, and community colleges. Although academic librarians were not explicitly identified in the report, the information indicated the rise in the acceptance of teleworking prior to and following the pandemic. In 2019, 52 employees were teleworking full-time, 134 were hybrid teleworkers (32 hours or more a month but less than full-time), and 227 were teleworking on a limited basis (less than 32 hours per month).²⁵ Similar numbers were reported for 2020, but the report mentioned that the numbers were probably incorrect due to the pandemic. By 2021, the number of employees at state-funded universities or colleges teleworking full time increased to 137, hybrid workers increased to 244, and limited teleworkers increased to 218. The 2022 report was formatted differently and showed that of the 11,324 state-funded college and university employees, more than half (5,890) were eligible for teleworking. Of those, only 429 worked from home five days per week, indicating that 2.79% of total employees and 7.28% of eligible employees work remotely full-time. Teleworking data for private universities were not available.

Academic Librarians During the Pandemic

Academic librarians experienced many difficulties due to COVID-19 lockdowns, closures, and work-from-home mandates. They then returned to work environments with conditions such as masking, extra cleaning, and social distancing. Although not exhaustive, the following literature discussed the myriad ways work continued. Wheeler and Kyprianou captured the feelings of many when they said, “We’re all distance learners now” (p. 84).²⁶ They described their process of changing instructional strategies, learning to use new technology to work with students, and successfully collaborating with a senior library assistant. Virtual reference services through chat, email, video conferencing, and tools like “remote desktop” were used by many academic librarians. Although many universities had virtual chat before COVID, as Cohn and Hymans described, some shifted to virtual chat without time to do training, resulting in some online etiquette issues.²⁷ They surveyed library faculty and staff involved with remote reference and found that most participants felt virtual reference was harder than in-person. Almost equal numbers of participants felt that the reference workload increased, stayed the same, or decreased. Other challenges with virtual reference included scheduling issues, people forgetting or arriving late, rude behavior of students, and students asking questions unrelated to the library or research. Overall, participants felt their efforts to continue reference services benefitted the students.

Many librarians used Zoom or video conferencing software to continue information literacy instruction. Bennett found that faculty and students agreed that virtual instruction was more beneficial than watching videos.²⁸ Students reported on the survey that being able to ask questions and make a connection with a librarian were the most critical differences between modes of instruction. Budhai and Williams reported that humanizing virtual instruction kept the students engaged.²⁹ Faculty feedback was also positive.

There were many negative experiences during COVID. Todorinova discussed inequities related to some librarians not being allowed to work from home alongside those who were, as well as communication gaps and budget cuts.³⁰ Participants in the study also reported personal stress and a lack of job satisfaction. Nash et al. surveyed academic librarians and found that more than 50% felt less connected to their coworkers, despite the increased meeting frequency.³¹ Reed et al. reported that online librarians experienced increased workloads and changes in their duties.³² Retirements, resignations, faculty lay-offs due to low enrollment, and, sadly, the death of a coworker affected online librarians’ workloads. Tosaka and Weng reported that, although 70% of technical services librarians reported being able to continue their regular job duties, they experienced challenges such as lacking access to physical materials.³³ Approximately 64% shifted to e-resources, and 62% reported budget cuts. About half of the participants reported that their libraries had an emergency plan, but one-third reported that it was not helpful. About one-third reported not knowing if their library had an emergency plan. About one-third reported that their library was designated as an “essential service,” staying open with limited services, social distancing, and extra cleaning.

Despite the challenges, there were positive outcomes from changes during the pandemic. Decker stated that processes established during COVID helped to “streamline and improve” access services, which were planned to continue post-COVID.³⁴ Howes et al. reported that creating video tutorials, using new technology tools to reach students, and expanding e-resources benefited their work as Medical School Librarians post-COVID.³⁵ They also reported that many interlibrary loan requests could not be filled, which prompted their investment in more e-resources. Todorinova explained that expanded services and improved communication through collaborative tools among library faculty were positive results.³⁶ McClure et al. found that finding online solutions for every aspect of library services resulted in increased marketing of library services to faculty, greater involvement in faculty training, and improved embedded librarianship.³⁷

Advantages and Disadvantages of Working from Home

The advantages and disadvantages of working from home were documented before the pandemic. According to Greer and Payne’s 2014 study, the advantages of working from home included shorter commutes, positive work-life balance, the ability to take care of family, fewer interruptions, job satisfaction, a flexible schedule, and the ability to continue working despite bad weather or other conditions.³⁸ Some disadvantages to remote work included a lack of teamwork and communication with coworkers or teams, managers worried about availability, a home environment not conducive to work, and a lack of boundaries between home and work life. Felstead and Henseke in 2017 reported that, while working remotely, participants felt greater organizational commitment and more positive attitudes toward their employers and described their jobs as “pleasurable and stimulating” (p.205).³⁹ Disadvantages were reported as harder work and more hours. Participants also reported the difficulties of blending work and home life boundaries, including “switching off” and “unwinding at the end of the day” (p. 207).⁴⁰ Barber et al. conducted a study in 2019 on “telepressure,” defined as “the preoccupation and urge to respond to messages from work” (p. 350).⁴¹ They found that although the technology was an effective communication tool while working remotely, the negative effect was the inability to “unplug,” which hindered their work-life balance.

Hosoi et al. studied academic librarians’ perspectives on working from home during the pandemic.⁴² Participants reported improved productivity, greater ability to work on projects, better use of technological tools such as Zoom and Microsoft Teams, more inclusive meetings, and improved management communication. Other advantages of working from home were collaboration and caregiving. Although using technology was reported as an advantage, it was also reported as a disadvantage, such as lack of internet speed, Zoom fatigue, expenses, and lack of equipment and supplies. Caregiving was also mentioned as a positive and a negative experience. Notably, some librarians reported that the nature of their work could not be accomplished at home. Others reported feelings of isolation and the lack of casual contact.

Albro and McElfresh conducted a study on job engagement and organizational commitment twice during the pandemic and found that many participants changed their responses on the second survey.⁴³ Early in the pandemic and the onset of working from home, the amount of information received from organizations was sufficient and organizational commitment remained high for mid-career librarians. Levels of frustration were notably higher for librarians early in their careers. On the second survey, administered when opening and closing were in flux, job engagement dropped across all career levels.

Tosaka and Weng surveyed technical services librarians in academic libraries.⁴⁴ They found that participants reported similar advantages to working from home as previous studies, such as saving money commuting, controlling the work environment, having more personal or family time. Unique disadvantages included changing duties due to unavailable physical materials, lacking computer or technology support, and using personal leave or sick time when unable to work from home. Overall, the positive experiences outweighed the negative.

Research Questions

What percentage of academic librarians in Virginia are working remotely and online? What are the advantages and disadvantages of working at library locations and remotely from home for academic librarians?

Working at a Main Campus or Satellite Location

138 out of 141 responses, or 98%, reported working at a library location such as a main campus or satellite campus library. The average number of days working at a library location was four out of a possible five-day workweek. A total of 137 participants answered this question (See Table 1).

While working at library locations, librarians performed many job duties online. The average amount of time per workday spent online was 5.5 hours (See Table 2).

Academic librarians reported spending more time on email activities, with an average of 2.5 hours per day (See Table 3). Text responses for “other” activities were research, collection development, acquisitions, interlibrary loan, remote reference, reports, administration tasks, digital preservation, electronic resources, event planning, human resources tasks, learning management system, projects, purchasing, scheduling, statistics, system administration, and troubleshooting systems.

The top three advantages of working at a library location were teamwork with library faculty and staff 16%, teaching in person 14%, and attending or hosting special events in person 12% (See Table 4). An additional 21 responses entered for “other” were related to access to materials or equipment, notably printers; connecting with people, faculty, and students; and boundaries between work and personal life.

The top three disadvantages to working at a library location were transportation issues, such as gas money, traffic, parking, and time on the road 23%; issues related to COVID 21%; and lack of flexibility to take care of family 14% (See Table 5). Responses in the “other” category were the lack of flexibility to do things for family and self, take breaks, and fix healthy meals. Problems related to the work environment were noise, lighting, sharing offices, comfort, and specific health concerns related to mental health or other illnesses.

Working Remotely

67% or 94 participants reported working remotely at home. The average number of days working from home was 1.9 out of a possible five-day workweek. 90 participants answered this question (See Table 6).

The average time spent online while working from home was 7.2 hours (See Table 7).

Academic librarians reported spending more time on email activities, with an average of 2.5 hours daily. Responses in the “other” category accounted for an average of 2.9 hours (See Table 8). A variety of online activities were reported through 36 text responses, including activities related to library services such as interlibrary loans, systems administration, acquisitions, collection development, and managing digital resources, responses related to research, creating reports, technical support or troubleshooting, writing, projects, teaching activities such as grading and posting, and budget work, creating content, and planning. One participant responded, “All of my work is online.”

The top three advantages of working remotely were reported as saving time and money on transportation 14%, wearing comfortable clothes 13%, and having the flexibility to work at different times 13% (See Table 9). An additional 25 text responses were related to health, including eating healthier meals, exercising, and staying away from COVID, and related to the work environment: desk location, comfort, ability to listen to music and proximity to the bathroom and kitchen, and related to taking breaks, being able to do household chores or run errands, social interaction, caring for family, and better internet.

The top three disadvantages of working remotely were reported as lack of connections with library faculty and staff 19%, lack of connections with students and faculty 15%, and mental strain related to work-life balance 12% (See Table 10). Additional text responses were related to working too much, work-life balance, the perception that one is not working enough, technology expenses and access, and teaching with Zoom was not as effective.

Job Titles

Out of 22 choices offered, 11% of participants chose “other” as their job title. The most significant oversight was not including “subject or liaison librarian” as a choice. Another obvious choice omitted from the list was “librarian or college librarian.” Although some of the text responses for job titles seemed similar enough to the listed choices, the long list may have been confusing, or the exact wording was important for the participant.

Days Worked at library and Remote Locations

The average number of days working at a library location was reported as four out of a five-day workweek. Logically, the average number of days working remotely should be one day. However, participants reported the average number of days working remotely as 1.9. One reason for the discrepancy could be that participants have flexibility in the number of days spent in library and remote locations. Therefore, they did not report remote days as a number that would total five days when added to their previously reported library location days. The other interpretation of this data is that these two questions were not located side-by-side due to the skip logic of the survey. As a result, participants forgot their previous responses. Regardless, the data showed that librarians continued to work remotely with some flexibility, but the majority, 74%, were working at a library location four or five days a week.

Online Activities at Library and Remote Locations

Working online increased from an average of 5.5 hours at library locations to 7.2 hours at remote locations. There was an increase in the average amount of time spent on all online activities except email, which stayed consistent at 2.5 hours. The most significant increase was in the amount of time spent in online meetings, which rose from an average of 2 hours to 2.5 hours. This increase was understandable because all in-person activities, such as teaching and meetings, had to be done online from remote locations.

Advantages of Working at Library and Remote Locations

The top four advantages of working at a library location were related to in-person interactions with library faculty, library staff, faculty, and students. Interactions included teaching, meeting, assisting, and attending events. Attending meetings and meeting with students using Zoom or other video services was reported as an advantage of working remotely by some librarians. Only a few responses mentioned less social interaction and avoiding COVID as advantages of working remotely. Related to social interaction, one participant commented that an advantage of working remotely was “not feeling watched.” Another participant mentioned that less travel helped the environment.

Attending professional development in person was not mentioned as an advantage of being at a library location, whereas attending professional development online, thus saving time and money on travel, was in the top five advantages of working remotely. One of the top advantages of working at a library location was access to technology, internet connection, specific technology programs, computer hardware, and printers. Only one response mentioned access to a better internet connection while working remotely. Staying focused on work with fewer distractions from family and maintaining a clear boundary between work and personal life were reported as advantages of working at a library location. Conversely, with similar percentages, fewer distractions and taking care of family and pets were reported advantages of working remotely.

More advantages to working remotely were reported. The highest reported advantage was that less travel saved time and money and was good for the environment. Responses related to the work environment, such as comfortable clothes, desk location, music, and convenience of bathroom and kitchen, were highly rated advantages. Responses related to flexible work times included the ability to run errands, take breaks, complete household chores, exercise, and eat healthy meals. Although this study did not evaluate productivity, working remotely appears to have many advantages that cannot be compared to working at library locations. Further inquiry is needed to determine if the advantages of library locations outweigh those of remote locations.

Disadvantages of Working at Library and Remote Locations

Transportation issues such as gas money, traffic, parking, and time driving were reported as disadvantages of working at library locations by 23% of participants, the highest percentage of responses given to any of the advantages or disadvantages. Although there may be a few unreported cases of those who enjoy their commute by listening to audiobooks or using commute time to establish a boundary between work and home life, the negative aspects of travel are significant factors in working at library locations.

Possible exposure to and getting ill from COVID was the second highest reported disadvantage at 21%. Exposure to other illnesses, an unhealthy work environment, and physical requirements such as walking or standing were also disadvantages. The only physical-related disadvantage reported working remotely was eye strain.

Lack of connections with library faculty and staff was the highest reported disadvantage of working remotely at 19%, followed closely by lack of connections with students and faculty at 15% and lack of student engagement at 11%. The lack of connections and feelings of isolation at remote locations were reported as disadvantages at much higher percentages than difficult faculty, staff, and students, which were reported as disadvantages at library locations.

Mental strain related to work-life balance was among the top three disadvantages of working remotely, with a few additional text responses related to working too much and fear of being perceived as not working enough. A lower percentage reported unrealistic workloads as a disadvantage of working at library locations, and one participant reported concerns related to mental health. One of the top disadvantages of working at library locations was a lack of flexibility in caring for family. Similar issues were also reported, such as the inability to do things for family or themselves, such as taking breaks or fixing healthy meals.

Distractions related to the home environment and family were reported at higher percentages as disadvantages to working remotely than those who reported distractions related to coworkers and students at library locations. Other distractions reported at library locations were related to noise, lighting, shared offices, and uncomfortable desks or chairs. Technology problems, expenses, and access were reported as disadvantages of working remotely, including one comment that teaching with Zoom was not as effective. Conversely, technology was not mentioned as a disadvantage at library locations. Notable comments were “working from home is great” and (paraphrased) [we are staying isolated in campus offices, so I might as well be at home].

Advantages v. Disadvantages

Since participants were asked to report advantages and disadvantages that they had experienced themselves, it was significant that the top two highest percentages were disadvantages reported at library locations: transportation at 23% and issues related to COVID at 21%. The response with the third highest percentage, a lack of connections with library faculty and staff at remote locations, was 19%. Closely following was a lack of connections with students and faculty at 15% and a lack of student engagement at 11%. These percentages were significant compared to the much lower reported disadvantage of working at library locations and experiencing difficult faculty and staff at 6% or difficult students at only 2%. Working remotely and caring for family and pets was reported as an advantage by 16% of participants compared to 17% who reported distractions related to home environments and family as disadvantages.

Greer and Payne suggested using technology to overcome a lack of communication and cohesion with coworkers or teams.⁴⁷ Based on responses from highly-effective teleworkers, they also suggested minimizing distractions at home while working, actively creating a work mindset, avoiding emails or phone calls after established work hours, and staying away from the home office after work hours. Barber et al. suggested overcoming “telepressure” and problems with work-life balance by openly discussing these issues with managers.⁴⁸ Hosoi et al. suggested that managers should be prepared for flexible work arrangements to be successful.⁴⁹ Managers need to understand that flexible work can improve productivity. They should also consider using collaborative tools to prevent long Zoom meetings, acknowledge mental health and anxiety issues and encourage breaks, communicate clear expectations of workload and responsibilities, and communicate to the university administration the library’s contributions. Studies from the past and present can help academic librarians understand the advantages and disadvantages of working remotely.

Limitations

The reported data were not cross-referenced based on job title, self-identified ethnicity, age, or gender. Results cross-referenced by job title were interesting but provided too much data to share in one report. Reference and instruction issues may have received more attention based on the researcher’s position in that field of librarianship.

Implications for the Future of Remote and Online Work

Trembach and Deng suggested that challenges from COVID-19 can help libraries prepare for remote work in the future.⁵⁰ They recommended “transparent communication, resilient employees, proactive decision-making, and adaptive organizational culture” (p. 1).⁵¹ Their study surveyed library directors who highlighted the need to have emergency or disaster response plans that are updated and clearly defined for all employees. The pandemic, therefore, created a “window of opportunity” for institutions to proactively prepare for the future. Appleton identified trends likely to continue following the pandemic.⁵² The need to provide more e-resources and virtual options for all services is likely to continue. Open access and “open” education policies will continue to expand to address inequity and accessibility in education. Other likely trends include data management and curation, personalized services to users, supporting student mental health, addressing climate change and sustainability, diversity and inclusion, and leadership development. Falcone and McCartin recommended flexible work hours and locations to attract and retain academic librarians following many post-pandemic resignations and retirements.⁵³ They also suggested that additional critical factors included increased salary, compassionate managers, professional development opportunities, and updated policies.

This study brought to attention issues related to specific types of work that could be completed online and remotely. Future studies should consider changes in workflow or duties due to working online or remotely. Understanding librarians’ preference to work remotely should also be studied further.

In conclusion, remote and online work helped academic librarians to continue working and serving their academic institutions under adverse conditions. Trends identified in this study have indicated that job duties requiring online work will continue to increase. Opportunities for academic librarians to work remotely part-time or full-time will also likely increase in Virginia’s colleges and universities.