http://www.jistap.

org RESEARCH PAPER

Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice J Inf Sci Theory Pract 12(3): 1-13, 2024

eISSN : 2287-4577 pISSN : 2287-9099 https://doi.org/10.1633/JISTaP.2024.12.3.1

Exploring the Possibility of Using Chatbots as

Educational Tools for School Libraries
Seong-Kwan Lim*
Educational School Librarianship, Graduate School of Education,
Kyonggi University, Suwon, Korea
E-mail: [email protected]

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study is to investigate the possibility of using chatbots as a school library educational tool. In order to achieve
the purpose of the study, 116 librarian teachers first investigated the types and contents of education conducted in the school
library setting and the perception of chatbots there. In addition, 15 librarians (five elementary, five middle, and five high school)
were asked to complete a structured questionnaire after using Google’s Bard, Microsoft’s Bing, and OpenAI’s Nova to find out if it is
possible to use chatbots in school library education. As a result, user and reading education chatbots were found to be common in
school libraries, and 99% of librarians knew about them in some detail. However, the average chatbot performance by area was 2.9
out of 5 (2.6 points being the lowest). Nevertheless, chatbots are being developed utilizing deep learning methodologies and have
excellent performance, and are very effective for content-based library education through problem-solving activities.
Keywords: school library, school library education, educational tools, chatbots, teacher-librarians

Received: August 29, 2023 Revised: February 7, 2024 All JISTaP content is Open Access, meaning it is accessible online
to everyone, without fee and authors’ permission. Open Access
Accepted: April 9, 2024 Published: September 30, 2024 articles are automatically archived in the Korea Institute of Science
and Technology Information (KISTI)’s Open Access repository (AccessON). All JISTaP
*Corresponding Author: Seong-Kwan Lim content is published and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Under this
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9735-1717 license, the authors retain full ownership of their work, while permitting anyone to
E-mail: [email protected] use, distribute, and reproduce the content in any medium, as long as the original
authors and source are cited. For any reuse, redistribution, or reproduction of a
work, users must clarify the license terms under which the work was produced.

© 2024 [Seong-Kwan Lim] This article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY), allowing unrestricted use,
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. It is published by the Korea Institute of
Science and Technology Information (KISTI). 1
 Vol.12 No.3

1. INTRODUCTION school libraries has not yet been published. Therefore, the
purpose of this study is to explore the possibility of the
Interest in chatbots is strong all over the world. A ever-increasing general use of chatbot technology as an
chatbot is a representative model of Generative artificial educational tool in school libraries, and to seek and pro-
intelligence (AI), the world’s most popular IT technology, pose appropriate measures for its evolution.
and is based on generative pre-trained transformer (GPT)
technology, which is a transformer technology that can 2. LITERATURE REVIEW
generate answers based on self-learning and process a
large amount of data and context. ChatGPT, an interactive 2.1. School Library Education
AI chatbot developed by Open AI in the U.S., has been In 1999, the International Federation of Library Asso-
at the center of discussion since the GPT-3.5 version was ciations and Institutions/United Nations Educational, Sci-
released in November 2022. Naturally, some countries are entific and Cultural Organization’s School Library Mani-
actively discussing regulations, such as temporarily ban- festo defined the role of a school library as “to develop
ning their use from the perspective of privacy, and there students’ enjoyment of reading and learning, habits and
are many concerns about the side effects of active use, but attitudes to use the library throughout their lives, and to
this attitude is rapidly changing. guide them to evaluate and utilize information containing
Chatbots are a representative example of the Large various materials” (International Federation of Library As-
Language Model, which is a super-large AI model that sociations and Institutions & United Nations Educational,
generates sentences similar to humans. The strength of Scientific and Cultural Organization, 1999).
chatbots is natural language processing (NLP) technology The Role of the School Library (American Associa-
(the language that humans use on a daily basis), and chat- tion of School Librarians, 2019) released in 2019 stated
bots learn, understand, and generate answers as appropri- that the school library is an essential component of the
ate. In other words, chatbots help users perform tasks in educational environment, because it is a dynamic learning
various fields, especially regarding translation, document environment that bridges the gap between access and op-
writing, and coding, because they give answers accord- portunities for all students. In addition, the education and
ingly when users enter text in the chat window. Predictive services provided through school libraries are developed
models using existing AI have difficulty communicating through the following six essential sharing bases, listed as
with people even if they have good performance. Howev- “Inquire,” “Include,” “Collaborate,” “Curate,” “Exploration,”
er, chatbots naturally connect people and AI because they and “Engage.”
can create text as if they were talking, based NLP. Song (2018) stated that school library education is an
Generative AI technology led by chatbots is connected educational information service performed by school
to various fields and leads to tangible results. Among libraries to achieve school education goals. As the role of
them, because questions are standardized, AI is already school libraries in school education increases, library use
replacing tasks normally performed in places such as call and reading education, which were previously operated
centers where answers are repeated, and in the field of as informal curricula, are expanding to information lit-
education, where more and more attempts are being made eracy instruction. In addition, school library education is
to use chatbots as a tool to assist classes. divided into education on school libraries and education
The use of chatbots in Korean libraries is gradually in- using school libraries. Education on school libraries aims
creasing, and services are being operated as a homepage- to increase ability toward self-directed production of new
based platform or a social network service platform, de- information, and knowledge based on the ability to utilize
pending on the type and size of the service. According to various learning materials owned by school libraries. In
Min (2021), there were 15 university libraries that applied addition, school library-based education is an activity that
chatbot services as of 2021, and among public libraries, enhances learning ability by allowing students to self-di-
Anyang city and Yongin city in Gyeonggi province, Geoje rectedly solve the subject’s learning topics by using various
city in Gyeongsangnam province, and the Seodaemun, learning tools owned by school libraries.
Seongdong, and Eunpyeong districts in the Metropolis However, there are many school libraries in Korea
of Seoul were providing chatbot services by integrating where librarians do not work. Even if one is working,
public libraries in their districts. However, a study that there may not be any assistant, and so many tasks other
synthesizes and analyzes the use of chatbot services in than training must be handled alone. Therefore, if there

2 https://doi.org/10.1633/JISTaP.2024.12.3.1
 Seong-Kwan Lim, Chabots as Educational Tools for School Libraries

is a way to reduce workload and focus on education, it as not being able to make practical comments on what it
should be seriously investigated. means or relevant topics. In addition, ChatGPT can be
Song (2019) suggests that librarians should be in charge helpful for some tasks, but it is also necessary to use it
of school libraries, which are physical and digital learn- with caution because it has ethical problems, such as those
ing spaces that perform teaching/learning activities based associated with plagiarism, privacy, and cyber security.
on reading, exploration, research, thinking, imagination, Rouse (2024) said that some schools have completely
and creativity. To help or aid librarians with their ever- banned the use of ChatGPT, but instead of this, teachers
increasing workload, ChatGPT should be used. ChatGPT need to teach students how to use this type of AI ethically
is expected to be an essential element as a future learning so that they can develop critical thinking skills.
tool. Dilmegani (2024) cited the advantages of using ChatG-
Hence, what activities can librarians at school libraries PT in education as three categories: speed, availability, and
do using ChatGPT? According to Yorio (2023), who re- personalized learning, and presented seven different cases
ceived and organized the answers to this question from a from the perspective of teachers and students, respectively,
chatbot: “Providing reference assistance,” “Recommending as summarized in Table 1.
books and other materials,” “Helping with writing assign- In Korea, measures to utilize ChatGPT for education
ments,” “Providing digital resources and online tutorials,” are also being actively sought, and in July 2023, the Ul-
“Creating interactive learning experiences,” and “Providing san Metropolitan Office of Education developed a class
language assistance for non-native speakers” were pos- resource book using ChatGPT for English teachers and
sible. distributed it to schools. The data collection includes in-
structional design using ChatGPT, project class cases, and
2.2. Chatbot Education Use evaluation methods, and includes how to organize and
ChatGPT is attracting attention as an educational tool utilize prompts, reconstruct or produce dialogues pre-
that realizes ‘learning initiative,’ which is emphasized in sented in textbooks at various levels, and create role-play
the current curriculum and future educational settings or scripted theater class materials.
direction (Shin et al., 2023). Additionally, Jeong and Shin (2023) developed an AI
Hetler (2024) stated that because ChatGPT is versatile, chatbot that can be used in elementary school science
it can be used to solve math problems or find keywords classes. It was applied to sixth grade students and results
optimized for search engines when people code computer confirmed that using it improved scientific academic
programs or compose music. However, because it does achievement and science positivity.
not fully understand the complexity of language used by As previously stated, research on the use of chatbots
humans, the answers may be inaccurate. Various statistics and specific measures for school library education in
can be cited and provided, but there are limitations, such Korea has not yet been published. Nevertheless, cases

Table 1. Top 7 ChatGPT education use cases

Target Case Detail
For teachers Content creation Use ChatGPT to create or select educational materials to suit students’ needs,
such as presentations, worksheets, and quizzes
Grammar and writing check Leverage AI’s natural language understanding capabilities to help evaluate and
improve the quality of writing (spelling, grammar, punctuation, and syntax errors)
Grading Review and score students’ essays by analyzing the content, structure, and
consistency of the text
Designing syllabus outlines Create and structure lesson plans in a consistent and effective manner
For students Help with homework Ask questions about a particular topic or concept, and improve the quality of a
report or writing assignment
Research Supports research processes on academic projects, tasks, and personal interests
Language learning ChatGPT helps improve language skills because it provides translation, grammar
description, vocabulary practice, and conversation simulation
AI, artificial intelligence.

http://www.jistap.org 3
 Vol.12 No.3

are being introduced for training of librarian teachers RQ2. Do you think it is necessary to use chatbots for
with magazines such as school library journals and In- school library education?
ternet newspapers. Among them, according to the case RQ3. What would be the most effective school library
of Seoul Sinlim High School, published in the Internet education if you used a chatbot?
Newspaper Education Plus (Woo, 2023), ChatGPT was RQ4. What preparations are needed to use chatbots for
used as an auxiliary or complementary tool in coopera- school library education?
tion with classes with chemistry subjects. At this time, the RQ5. How does each chatbot perform in terms of edu-
chemistry teacher selected the keywords “medicine,” “new cational usability?
material,” “biochemistry,” and “cosmetics/fashion,” and the
librarian teacher recommended a book suitable for each 4. RESEARCH METHOD
topic. Afterwards, students selected a topic to read and
discuss from these books, and they had the opportunity to 4.1. Chatbot Selections
ask and correct whether it was appropriate as a topic and Chatbot service can play the following roles in improv-
whether the arguments for or against were valid. ing the learning experience by connecting educational in-
The above literature review results show that there are stitutions and students. First, the chatbot can improve the
several issues not only in the use of AI chatbots them- curriculum and adjust the learning path according to the
selves, but also in their use in school education. If they can progress of the student. Secondly, it is possible to provide
be used positively while diminishing any possible negative an appropriate learning experience to each student. Third-
aspect associated with this technology, it raises expecta- ly, students can receive answers to solve tasks through the
tions that the effectiveness of education can be increased. chatbot. Fourthly, student progress data generated by the
chatbot can be used to track performance and provide im-
3. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES provement measures or study pathways. Fifthly, since the
chatbot provides a conversation-based experience, it can
The purpose of this study is to investigate the percep- increase interest in learning. Sixthly, learning support can
tions of librarian teachers regarding the possibility of us- be received whenever desired.
ing chatbots as a school library educational tool. Recogni- However, since the learning effect may vary depending
tion is knowing things accurately and understanding their on which chatbot is selected, it is necessary to first explore
meaning correctly, and in this study it means knowledge the possible viability of each as an educational tool. The
of the meaning and function of chatbots. The research following Table 2 summarizes the characteristics of the
question set chosen to achieve the research purpose are as three chatbots selected to explore possibilities for use in
follows. school libraries.

RQ1. Do you know about chatbots?

Table 2. Chatbots analyzed

Chatbot Development company Characteristic
Bard Google Bard is an artificial intelligence chatbot released in March 2023, and opened to 180 countries
around the world on May 10. Bard features Google’s latest large-scale language model, Palm2
(PALM), an upgraded version of Farm, introduced in April 2022, which supports more than 100
languages and enables reasoning and coding in science and mathematics, based on 530 billion
parameters
Bing Microsoft Bing is a search service launched by Microsoft on June 1, 2009, which combines live search and
power search technology acquired in 2008. On February 7, 2023, ‘the new Bing’ premiered, based
on OpenAI’s large language model, including chatbot functionality
Nova OpenAI Nova is a smart AI Chatbot with the latest ChatGPT technology from OpenAI GPT-4, released
in March 2023 to answer unlimited questions. The industry’s first cross-compatible platform,
ChatGPT-based application, supports more than 140 multilingual applications and can help with
anything, including writing and composing
AI, artificial intelligence; GPT, generative pre-trained transformer.

4 https://doi.org/10.1633/JISTaP.2024.12.3.1
 Seong-Kwan Lim, Chabots as Educational Tools for School Libraries

4.2. Survey summarizes the survey questions.

The main premise of this study is to investigate the
possibility of using chatbots as educational tools for 4.3. Structured Questionnaire
school libraries. In order to achieve the research objec- Next, in order to practically evaluate whether each
tives, a survey questionnaire was developed from the chatbot could be used as a school library educational tool,
librarian teacher recognition study (Kim et al., 2023) on a structured questionnaire was created to ask questions
the introduction of ChatGPT in school libraries and the directly and check the answers. The structured question-
librarian recognition study using metaverse in university naire was composed of the following Table 4 materials
libraries (Oh & Lee, 2022). Subsequently, an online survey by applying “social dialogue ability,” “information provi-
was conducted for five days from August 17 to August sion ability in various fields,” “language command ability,”
21, 2023, composed of questions in the form provided “creative ability,” and “moral discernment,” which were
by the Naver Office. The survey used a snow sampling developed by Shin et al. (2023) to explore the possibility of
method that asks some librarian teachers working in the using ChatGPT.
Metropolis of Seoul and Gyeonggi province to participate The performance missions assessment for each chatbot
by sending links, and then gradually expanding them to evaluation summarized in Table 3 includes five different
recruit samples. Instead of predicting the number of sam- areas with a total of 15 detailed questions. Among them,
ples, only the results of the number of responses during the “social conversation ability” area was included for pri-
the survey period were set as analysis targets. The reason ority evaluation because chatbots generally focus on topics
the survey target area was limited to Seoul and Gyeonggi of daily conversation. The performance mission of “ability
province is because Gyeonggi province has the largest to provide information in various fields” and “creative abil-
number of school libraries in the country and Seoul is the ity” were evaluated by chatbots and was a choice that took
capital of Korea and also the center of education. Table 3 into account its function. Next, “moral discernment” took

Table 3. Survey items

No. Question content Selection
1 What school do you work for? ① Elementary school
② Middle school
③ High school
2 What education is being conducted in the school library ① User education
where you are working? (multiple responses) ② Reading education
③ Information utilization education
④ Curriculum cooperation classes
⑤ Etc.
3 Do you know about chatbots? ① I know
② I don’t know
4 Do you think it is necessary to use chatbots for school ① They need to be used
library education? ② There is no need to use them
4-1 Why did you respond that you don’t need to use one? ① I don’t know how to use one
(multiple responses) ② Because of the problems that an incorrect answer will cause
③ On account of ethical issues
④ Because of privacy issues
⑤ I wasn’t ready
⑥ Etc.
5 What would be the most effective school library education ① User education
if you used a chatbot? ② Reading education
③ Information utilization education
④ Curriculum cooperation classes
⑤ Etc.
6 What preparations are needed to use chatbots for school A subjective response
library education?

http://www.jistap.org 5
 Vol.12 No.3

Table 4. Chatbot assessment area performance mission

Area Performance mission
Social conversation skills 1. Say hello, ask your name, ask about your hobbies and job
2. Seeking advice on personal matters
Understanding of the library 3. Ask what the library does
4. Find the world’s first library
5. Learn how to use the library
6. Learn about the library’s resources
Ability to provide information 7. Learn how to study well
in a variety of fields 8. Find out when humans first landed on the moon
9. Find out the world’s most famous sports players
10. Find out the different types of coffee
11. Learn about the Korean War
12. Learn about Beethoven, a musician
13. Learn about the Nobel Prize in Literature
Creative ability 14. S
 olving learning tasks for each subject (e.g., how do I make war disappear? / What should I do to
protect the Earth from environmental pollution? / How can I draw the most beautiful picture in the
world?)
Moral discernment 15. A
 sking morally sensitive questions (e.g. what do you think of the death penalty? / What do you think
about abortion? / What do you think about euthanasia?)

Table 5. Chatbot performance evaluation paper by area

Area 1. Very inadequate 2. Insufficient 3. Usually 4. Good 5. Excellent
Social conversation skills
Understanding of the library
Ability to provide information in
a variety of fields
Creative ability
Moral discernment
Educational applicability

into account the controversy swirling over the unethicality Table 6. Demographic characteristics of survey respondents
of chatbots. Finally, “ability to understand libraries” was set Area Category No. of participants (%)
as an implementation mission in terms of exploring the
Gender Female 113 (97.4)
possibility of using it in school library education.
In addition, Table 5 is a performance evaluation paper Male 3 (2.6)
for chatbots by area, and “educational utilization possibil- Age range 20s 4 (3.5)
ity” is included in the five areas presented in Table 3. The 30s 47 (40.5)
level for each area was composed of a five-point scale 40s 44 (37.9)
ranging from insufficient to excellent.
50s 21 (18.1)

5. ANALYSIS

5.1. Analysis of Survey Results line survey, conducted for five days from August 17 to Au-
gust 21, 2023. This number corresponds to approximately
5.1.1. Demographic Characteristics of Survey 26.4% of the 228 librarian teachers based in Seoul (1,307
Respondents school libraries) and 212 librarian teachers in Gyeonggi
A total of 116 librarian teachers participated in the on- province (2,469 school libraries) based on 2023 education

6 https://doi.org/10.1633/JISTaP.2024.12.3.1
 Seong-Kwan Lim, Chabots as Educational Tools for School Libraries

Table 7. Preparation necessary to use chatbots for school library education

Answer Category Subject
Chatbots are useful for information utilization education. What students need when talking to Training and ethics on Appropriate
AIs is questioning and discernment. The two abilities presented should be developed through chatbots education
education
The librarian teacher should accurately identify the pros and cons of using chatbots, and
education is needed to determine whether the information used by students during class is
correct
Correct information ethics education
Information literacy education should be provided to students in advance to develop the ability
to critically verify information, including the contents provided by chatbots
Humanities reading education that can generate necessary questions using chatbots
Education on how to use chatbots in class
Need for training to fact-check information provided by chatbots
Teacher-librarian training
The teacher-librarian must be professionally aware of the chatbot
Writing education and information ethics education
Copyright education, AI ethics education, privacy education, flexible application of reading and
writing programs
Training librarian teachers for accurate information, artificial intelligence use education for
students, and continuous information ethics education
Utilization and ethics education for teachers
Familiarization with how to use a chatbot, pay for it, and train media literacy
Training on how to use chatbots, including pros and cons
Parallel education on the risk of chatbots
Ability to verify answers; appropriate comparative screening capabilities through web searches Ability to assess and
utilize accuracy of
information
Ability to grasp the accuracy of information
Ensuring that feedback is well applied to students’ levels and ethical issues
Accuracy of information
Fact checking of information presented in chatbot
Accurate understanding of the purpose of use and awareness of negative consequences
Checking for incorrect answers
Thinking about how to use the strengths of chatbots for education
Literacy ability to evaluate the accuracy of information calculated through chatbots and use it
in the right place
Ability to judge inaccuracies
In elementary schools, it is necessary to establish a system that can play an auxiliary role Building a chatbot Environmental
in tasks such as answering questions about billing symbols and book location, reading utilization construction
education and curriculum cooperation classes, information utilization education, loans, environment
returns, overdue loans, etc.
Information devices to be used and comparable reference book materials must be prepared
Information ethics education and devices that enable individual student use
Establishing a library system and producing educational materials

http://www.jistap.org 7
 Vol.12 No.3

Table 7. Continued
Answer Category Subject
Purchasing books that fit the purpose of the library
Utilization manual
Sufficient understanding of chatbots by librarians, and establishing an environment where
chatbots can be used
Education for teacher-librarians, utilizing available devices and spaces
Personal media devices or beam projectors
Building a seamless internet system
In order to study various previous studies through chatbots and apply them to school libraries,
it is necessary to share cases through professional learning communities with those in the
field
AI, artificial intelligence.

statistics (Korean Education Statistics Service, 2023). Table 5.1.5. The Necessity of Using Chatbots for School
6 summarizes the demographic characteristics of survey Library Education
respondents. When asked whether chatbots need to be used in
It should be pointed out that according to the results school library education, 81% of librarian teachers re-
summarized in Table 6, 97.4% of survey respondents were sponded that there was a need to use chatbots in school
women, and people in their 30s and 40s accounted for library education.
78.4% of the total.
5.1.6. Reasons for Responding That There is No Need
5.1.2. Survey Participation Status to Use Chatbots for School Library Education
Regarding the schools where the librarian teachers The biggest reason why librarians do not think they
who participated in the survey are working, there were a need to use chatbots for school library education was
total of 60 participating librarian teachers working in el- because they were not ready for this technology (17.6%).
ementary schools, accounting for 51.7% of the total. Next The “preparation” referred to here includes everything
were middle schools with 32 teachers or 27.6%, and high from the facility aspect of the school library to what edu-
schools contributed to 24 teachers or 20.7%. cation to use and how to use it, and even the personal
readiness of librarian teachers. In addition, 16.2% of the
5.1.3. Education in the School Library respondents said they did not need to use chatbot answers
“User education” (40.9%) was provided the most in because they were not accurate at all moments – the tech-
school libraries. Usually, school libraries provide user edu- nology is not mature enough.
cation for all students at the beginning of the school year,
so this can be said to be a natural result. The reason why 5.1.7. Type of School Library Education That Will Be
the response rate to “curricular cooperation classes” was Most Effective When Using Chatbots
relatively small is because cooperation with teachers by Librarian teachers cited the “information utilization
grade is necessary for education. In other words, it can be education” (70.7%) category as the most effective form
impossible to implement – it is only up to the will of the of school library education when using chatbots. Since
librarian teacher. chatbots also use information and communication tech-
nology, it can be analyzed that they intend to use it to
5.1.4. Teacher-Librarians’ Perception of Chatbots develop students’ abilities to effectively find and utilize the
When librarian teachers were asked about their aware- information they need. Furthermore, this result also gave
ness of chatbots, 96.6% answered that they knew about implications for this study to explore the possibility of us-
chatbots to varying degrees, so it can be surmised that ing chatbots as an educational tool for school libraries.
almost all librarian teachers know of chatbots. The following Table 7 shows librarian teachers’ free
answers to the question about what preparations are

8 https://doi.org/10.1633/JISTaP.2024.12.3.1
 Seong-Kwan Lim, Chabots as Educational Tools for School Libraries

Table 8. Key points of study participants needed if chatbots are to be used in school library educa-
School library at work Teacher-librarian Work experience (yr) tion, using open coding among the grounded theories
presented by Morgan and Scannell (1998). The analysis
Elementary school A 12
was conducted to find overarching themes and categories.
B 10 In other words, the work was done to name and categorize
C 17 concepts with similar content.
D 8 According to the results summarized in Table 7, librar-
E 14 ians responded that “environmental construction” and “ap-
propriate education (training)” are needed first in order to
Middle school F 9
use chatbots for school library education. “Environmental
G 11 construction” includes an Internet environment and de-
H 12 vices that can access spaces and chatbots in the school
I 15 library, and “appropriate education” was considered neces-
sary for librarians and students, respectively. In addition,
J 8
the educational content needs to address the advantages
High school K 6
and weaknesses of chatbots, copyright laws and informa-
L 5 tion ethics, and use case manuals in school libraries.
M 13
N 9 5.2. Analysis of Structured Questionnaire
As shown in Table 4, the structured questionnaire
O 10
contains missions by area of “social conversation ability,”
“information provision ability in various fields,” “language
command ability,” “creative ability,” and “moral discern-

Table 9. Evaluation of Bard

Category
Teacher- Ability to provide
librarian Social conversation Understanding of Educational
information in a Creative ability Moral discernment
skills the library applicability
variety of fields
A 3 3 3 2 3 3
B 4 3 4 3 3 3
C 3 3 3 3 3 3
D 3 2 3 3 3 2
E 4 3 3 3 3 2
F 4 2 3 2 2 2
G 3 3 4 3 3 2
H 3 2 3 2 3 2
I 4 3 3 3 3 2
J 3 3 3 3 3 3
K 3 2 3 3 3 3
L 3 2 3 2 2 2
M 3 2 3 3 3 2
N 3 3 3 3 2 2
O 4 3 3 3 3 3
Average 3.3 2.6 3.1 2.7 2.8 2.4

http://www.jistap.org 9
 Vol.12 No.3

Table 10. Evaluation of Bing

Category
Teacher- Ability to provide
librarian Social conversation Understanding of Educational
information in a Creative ability Moral discernment
skills the library applicability
variety of fields
A 3 2 3 2 3 2
B 3 3 3 3 3 3
C 3 2 3 3 3 2
D 3 2 4 3 3 2
E 3 2 3 3 3 2
F 3 2 3 2 2 2
G 3 2 3 3 3 2
H 3 3 3 2 3 2
I 3 3 3 3 2 2
J 3 3 3 3 3 3
K 3 3 3 3 3 3
L 3 2 4 3 2 2
M 3 2 3 3 3 2
N 3 3 3 3 2 3
O 3 3 3 3 3 3
Average 3 2.5 3.1 2.8 2.7 2.3

ment.” This questionnaire was delivered to 15 librarians In the evaluation results of the chatbot Bard summa-
working in elementary, middle, and high school libraries rized in Table 9, the area with the highest average score
to carry out missions through Google’s Bard, Microsoft’s was “social conversation ability,” and the area with the low-
Bing, and OpenAI’s Nova, and to reflect the performance est score was “educational usability.” Since “library under-
evaluation scores of Table 4. Table 8 summarizes the mix standing ability” ranks 5th out of 6 areas, the possibility of
of work experience levels for librarian teachers who par- using it as a school library educational tool can be said to
ticipated in the structured questionnaire. be low.
According to the results summarized in Table 8, a to- In the evaluation results of the chatbot Bing summa-
tal of 15 librarians participated in missions by area using rized in Table 10, the area with the highest average score
chatbots, including five elementary schools, five middle was “ability to provide information in various fields,” and
schools, and five high schools. Among those who accepted the area with the lowest score was “educational usability.”
participation in the study were students of the researcher In addition, since “library understanding ability” ranks 5th
or those who met at conferences and made friends, and out of 6 areas, the possibility of using it as a school library
the criteria for selection included librarian teachers with educational tool can also be said to be low.
at least five years of experience working in the school li- In the evaluation results of the chatbot Nova sum-
brary. The selection criteria were librarians with at least marized in Table 11, the area with the highest average
five years of experience working in school libraries. As a score was “ability to provide information in various fields,”
result, the average work experience of the librarians who and the areas with the lowest were “ability to understand
participated in answering the structured questionnaire in libraries” and “moral discernment.” However, since “edu-
this study was 12.2 years in elementary school, 11 years in cational usability” ranks 3rd out of 6 areas, it can be said
middle school, and 8.6 years in high school. that it has the highest possibility of being used as an edu-
Tables 9-11 are summarized by analyzing the evalua- cational tool.
tion results for Bard, Bing, and Nova, respectively. Finally, Table 12 summarizes the results from Tables

10 https://doi.org/10.1633/JISTaP.2024.12.3.1
 Seong-Kwan Lim, Chabots as Educational Tools for School Libraries

Table 11. Evaluation of Nova

Category
Teacher- Ability to provide
librarian Social conversation Understanding of Educational appli-
information in a Creative ability Moral discernment
skills the library cability
variety of fields
A 4 3 4 3 3 3
B 4 3 4 3 3 3
C 3 3 3 3 3 3
D 4 3 4 3 3 4
E 4 3 4 3 3 3
F 3 3 3 4 3 3
G 4 3 4 3 3 3
H 4 3 4 4 3 4
I 4 3 4 3 3 3
J 3 3 3 3 3 3
K 3 3 3 3 3 3
L 4 3 4 4 3 4
M 4 3 4 3 3 3
N 3 3 4 3 3 3
O 4 3 4 3 3 4
Average 3.6 3 3.7 3.2 3 3.3

Table 12. Results of chatbot performance evaluation by area

Chatbot
Area
Bard Bing Nova Average
Social conversation skills 3.3 3 3.6 3.3
Understanding of the library 2.6 2.5 3 2.7
Ability to provide information in a variety of 3.1 3.1 3.7 3.3
fields
Creative ability 2.7 2.8 3.2 2.9
Moral discernment 2.8 2.7 3 2.8
Educational applicability 2.4 2.3 3.3 2.6
Average 2.8 2.7 3.3 2.9

9-11. ated that while chatbots are still insufficient in other areas,
According to the results summarized in Table 12, they are higher than average in “social conversation abil-
among the three chatbots that were subject to perfor- ity” or “information provision ability in various fields,” so
mance evaluation, Nova received the highest score in the it is possible to use them as an educational tool in school
entire performance for each of the six areas. However, the libraries. Although it is clear that these results were evalu-
overall average score was usually less than 2.9 points, and ated by librarian teachers working in elementary schools,
in particular, the “educational use possibility” was the low- middle schools, and high schools, they do not take into
est at 2.6 points. From the above results, librarians evalu- account all differences in the context of information or

http://www.jistap.org 11
 Vol.12 No.3

4.0 However, in order to use chatbots as educational tools

3.5 in school libraries, the following tasks must be addressed
Performance evaluation

3.0 or solved first. First, the ability to understand the library

2.5 should be improved. Chatbots that can only be used pro-
2.0 fessionally in the library field have not yet been developed.
1.5 Therefore, since there is no chatbot with sufficient under-
1.0
Bard standing of the school library, it is necessary to develop a
Bing
Nova chatbot specializing in the library in the future. Second,
0.5
Average we need to increase moral discernment. The biggest prob-
0
lem that chatbots currently have is ethical issues, such as

e
y

y
ill

ry

re ie ld in

en
privacy issues, misinformation issues, and social impacts.
lit

ilit

ag
sk

ra

f n
s

bi

nm

ab
o f io

er
lib
n

a
t
io

Av
lic
ty a

It is important to develop and use AI chatbots more ethi-

er
e
e

rie rm
at

iv

pp
th

sc
at
rs

va fo

la
di
of
ve

cally in the context that responsibility should increase as

a e in

na
al
ng

C
on

or

io
id
di
lc

technology develops.
M

at
ov
n
ia

ta

uc
pr
c

rs
So

Ed
to
de

y
un

ilit

Area
7. CONCLUSION
Ab
An

Fig. 1. Results of chatbot performance evaluation by area.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the pos-
sibility of using chatbots as a school library education
educational levels required or expected by each school. tool. Therefore, an online survey was conducted with
Fig. 1 is a graph of the results of Table 12. 116 librarians working in elementary, middle, and high
schools to investigate the types and contents of education
6. DISCUSSION implemented in school libraries and their perceptions of
chatbots. In addition, a structured questionnaire contain-
When I asked Google’s Bard, “Can chatbots be used ing missions for each area was delivered to 15 librarians
in school library education?”, I received an answer that working in elementary, middle, and high school libraries
chatbots could be a useful tool to increase the efficiency of to perform missions through Google’s Bard, Microsoft’s
school library education and encourage student participa- Bing, and OpenAI’s Nova. The results are as follows.
tion. However, the chatbot system must have the functions First, the most common types of education in school
and performance to provide students with the information libraries were “user education,” “reading education,” “infor-
they need accurately and quickly. The educational content mation utilization education,” and “curricular cooperation
to be provided in the chatbot system must be developed to classes.”
suit the level and learning style of the students, and must Second, most librarian teachers knew about chatbots
be designed so that students can use it easily. Another ma- and responded that there was a need to use chatbots in
jor consideration that must be designed and implemented school library education. Next, “information utilization
in chatbot systems involves the safe protection of students’ education” was selected as the most effective form of
personal information collected through or by the system. school library education when using chatbots.
Nevertheless, if the chatbot system can be introduced and Third, librarians said that in order to use chatbots for
used effectively, librarians can provide a better learning school library education, “establishment of an environ-
experience to students. ment” such as Internet environments and devices that can
The purpose of this study is to investigate the possibil- access chatbots, and “appropriate education” are needed.
ity of using chatbots as a school library educational tool. Fourth, as a result of evaluating the performance in
Chatbots are becoming more sophisticated, so they will six areas, the chatbot that received the highest score was
gradually be able to support many of the tasks that school Nova. However, the overall average score was below aver-
library librarians are now in charge of. In particular, chat- age, and in particular, “educational usability” was the low-
bots will demonstrate more creative and strategic skills est for Nova. Accordingly, librarians say that chatbots are
with simple tasks such as library usage guidance, curricu- demonstrating above-average abilities in “social conversa-
lum design for reading education and curriculum coop- tion skills” and “ability to provide information in various
eration classes, and students’ reading evaluation. fields,” but because they are still lacking in skills in other

12 https://doi.org/10.1633/JISTaP.2024.12.3.1
 Seong-Kwan Lim, Chabots as Educational Tools for School Libraries

areas, the possibility of them being used as an educational https://doi.org/10.23279/eer.38.2.202306.103

tool in school libraries is evaluated as low. Kim, J. S., Kang, S. J., & Kwon, S. Y. (2023). A Study on the rec-
Chatbots are gradually becoming a tool that plays an ognition of teacher librarians on the introduction of Chat-
important role in various fields. Therefore, if moral dis- GPT in school library. Journal of the Korean Society for
cernment, ability to understand libraries, creative ability, Library and Information Science , 57(2), 349-377. https://
and possibility of educational use increase in the future are doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2023.57.2.349
better refined, they can be used as an educational tool in Korean Education Statistics Service. (2023). Educational statis-
school libraries. To this end, this study conducted a survey tics: Teachers by position . https://kess.kedi.re.kr/eng/stats/sc
of 116 librarian teachers working in Seoul and Gyeonggi hool?menuCd=0101&cd=6815&survSeq=2023&itemCode
province, and the structured survey was limited to 15 =01&menuId=m_010109&uppCd1=010109&uppCd2=01
people. In the future, the scope of study will be expanded 0109&flag=B
to librarian teachers across Korea using actual chatbots. It Min, Y. T. (2021). A comparative study on the usability by the
is necessary to analyze use cases, analyze the strengths and platfrom of artificial intelligence chatbot service in library
weaknesses of the school library as an educational tool, (master’s thesis). Chungnam National University, Daejeon,
and find ways to improve it utilizing this quickly develop- Korea.
ing technology. Morgan, D. L., & Scannell, A. U. (1998). Planning focus groups .
Sage.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Oh, J. R., & Lee, S. S. (2022). A study on the current status of
metaverse utilization in university libraries and librarian
No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article perceptions. Journal of the Korean BIBLIA Society for Li-
was reported. brary and Information Science, 33(4), 159-180. https://doi.
org/10.14699/KBIBLIA.2022.33.4.159
REFERENCES Rouse, M. (2024). ChatGPT . https://www.techopedia.com/defi-
nition/34933/chatgpt
American Association of School Librarians. (2019). Role of the Shin, D., Jung, H., & Lee, Y. (2023). Exploring the potential
school library . https://www.ala.org/aasl/sites/ala.org.aasl/ of using ChatGPT as a content-based English learning
files/content/advocacy/statements/docs/AASL_Role_of_ and teaching tool. Journal of the Korea English Educa-
the_School_Library.pdf tion Society , 22(1), 171-192. https://doi.org/10.18649/
Dilmegani, C. (2024). ChatGPT education use cases, benefits & jkees.2023.22.1.171
challenges in 2024 . https://research.aimultiple.com/chatgpt- Song, G. H. (2018). School library education and collaborative
education/#top-7-chatgpt-education-use-cases teaching . Korean Library Association.
Hetler, A. (2024). What is ChatGPT? https://www.techtarget. Song, G. H. (2019). An analysis of teacher librarians’ role rec-
com/whatis/definition/ChatGPT ognition. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and
International Federation of Library Associations and Institu- Information Science , 53(4), 5-22. https://doi.org/10.4275/
tions (IFLA), & United Nations Educational, Scientific and KSLIS.2019.53.4.005
Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (1999). IFLA/UNESCO Woo, DK. (2023). Librarian teacher’s information utilization
school library manifesto 1999 . https://www.ifla.org/publica- class ⑨ Chemistry department meets ChatGPT, blossoms
tions/ifla-unesco-school-library-manifesto-1999/ through library collaboration classes . https://www.edpl.
Jeong, Y. S., & Shin, D. H. (2023). The effects of learning using co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=9817
artificial intelligence chatbot on science academic achieve- Yorio, K. (2023). School librarians explore possibilities of Chat-
ment and positive experiences of science: Focusing on GPT. https://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/story/School-
‘structure and function of our body’ unit for the 6th grade. Librarians-Explore-Possibilities-of-ChatGPT
The Journal of Elementary Education , 38(2), 103-123.

http://www.jistap.org 13