Introduction
In the last class session of the semester, my discussion group responded to the question, “A GSLIS student is thinking about taking this course and wants to know what to expect. What are the three most notable things they will learn or should expect from the class?” My classmates agreed with these suggested answers: 1. How to conduct the reference interview; 2. How to use excellent reference sources in print and online; and 3. Search strategies for best results. That summary encapsulates my own learning experience this semester.
Conducting the Reference Interview
The reference interview process follows many principles I had previously learned, that were refreshed by this course. I freely admit my bias but, in my mind, librarianship begins at the reference desk. This is why I signed up for this course early in my curriculum plan.
Our text is truly “a how-to-do-it manual for librarians”, as the publisher’s trademark states at the top of the cover. I plan to use this manual throughout my library career and refer back to it frequently. It is chock-full of examples, detailed instruction and step-by-step approaches on how to respond to patrons in reference transactions. I have already been putting that learning to use, but obviously more practice is needed to get it right.
The Readers’ Advisory situations are especially difficult for me. Upon hearing my first RA question in the library, I froze. I didn’t know the author, the genre or anything else, I was totally lost, and forgot to ask questions to get the patron to tell me those things. Instead, I thought maybe I should access a reference source (Novelist) and try to respond. By the time I got the application open and entered the author’s name, the patron lost interest in waiting for the “rookie librarian” to figure it out, and had moved on. Failure, in my first opportunity! Following the suggestions of Joyce Saricks, quoted in our text, I have reminded myself since this experience to be a better listener and get a conversation going with the patron that reveals interests. Saricks calls it having a fun conversation about books. What could be better than that? My next RA opportunities yielded better results.
Reference Sources
The source assignments were exceptionally well crafted to force me to use some sources I had never used before. While I retain a healthy admiration for Google and Wikipedia, I have learned that they are rarely the “perfect” sources for serious information-seeking. Learning about MedlinePlus, the Statistical Abstract for the United States, Books in Print, the Gale Learning Center resources has been a significant milestone for me. These are sources I had never used, certainly not online anyway, and this was a major revelation that so much detailed information is at our fingertips, on authoritative databases.
The assignments also took me to the physical collection in a way I had never experienced. I discovered new encyclopedias, such as the Gale medical encyclopedias, which were completely unknown to me previously. Also, I learned for the first time how to use certain Quotations and Dictionary sources, like the McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific and Technical terms. The diversity of encyclopedias was also a new experience. I had used large sets, like Britannica and Americana. Through the assignments, however, I was introduced to single or fewer volume encyclopedias that provided excellent articles on specific topics, such as The New Century Cyclopedia of Names, The Concise Encyclopedia of Psychology, The Columbia Encyclopedia and several others including the print editions of some of the online sources mentioned in the previous paragraph.
The geographic sources were used in a more in-depth manner than I had ever experienced. In particular, I found the CIA Factbook and The Columbia Gazetteer very useful.
Search Strategies
A third key lesson for me this semester was learning how to combine terms to make a database search effective and efficient. Through the Campbell and Fyfe article, I also learned that teaching others how to use the available information tools goes hand-in-hand with reference desk work. Knowing how to search is good, but knowing how to teach others how to search is even better.
This class has helped me to understand the importance of teaching during sort interactions, like using the OPAC or a database to find information. This is the very point of taking this class. For me, it is all about helping others become “information literate”. The information is available, but only if one knows how to retrieve it.
Further, I have learned to keep searching until the question is completely answered. An additional source may provide information not found in the first source. “Special topic” sources may give insights not available elsewhere, but still not contain the broad view of a more general source. At times, both are needed. It is also important to keep searching and verify the information in multiple sources in order to avoid biased or dated information.
Conclusion
Articles and statements from several contributing authors of the many works assigned for reading this semester, such as Catherine Ross and Marie Radford, have encouraged me that the future remains bright for reference librarians. They have eloquently articulated the point that information seekers will continue to need assistance and that the librarians who learn the basic techniques and skills and who are open to adopting new technology and methods, will be preeminently positioned to offer that assistance. It is exciting to hear experienced veterans express such enthusiasm for the profession and instills in me a deeper desire to be a part of it. I feel that my decision to take this reference class at the start of my study of Library and Information Sciences has been validated as an excellent choice, and I would encourage others with similar goals to do the same. In the spirit of Billie Walker at Penn State University (Radford article), I expect to enjoy being a “library dude” on campus someday!
Cited Works:
Ross, Catherine Sheldrick, Kristi Nilsen and Dewdney. Conducting the Reference Interview: A How-To-Do-It Manual for Librarians. New York: Neal-Schuman, 2009.
Campbell, Susan and Debbie Fyfe. “Teaching at the Computer: Best practices for One-on-One Instructions in Reference.” Feliciter 1 (2002): 26-8
Radford, Marie L. “A Personal Choice: Reference Service Excellence.” Reference & User Services Quarterly 48:2 (Winter 2008): 108-15.
Showing posts with label LIS 504 Assignment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label LIS 504 Assignment. Show all posts
Friday, December 11, 2009
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Reference Interview Analysis
This paper will identify and discuss five reference transactions through a variety of modes between a library and information sciences student (me) and multiple information centers providing reference services. The personal interactions will be reported from the student’s point of view and the services rendered will be analyzed in terms of the LIS literature studied in the LIS 504 class at the Graduate School of Library and Information Sciences at the University of Illinois. In some transactions, the specific points recommended in the literature on the reference interview were present and obvious. In others, they were obviously missing. This paper will attempt to make that connection between the transactions and the LIS literature.
The Information Centers and Reference Providers:
Four different centers or reference services were accessed. They include the Crystal Lake Public Library in Crystal Lake, Illinois, (my closest public library relationship), the Arlington Heights Memorial Library in Arlington Heights, Illinois, the University Library at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign campus, and the online resource “Yahoo! Answers” at http://answers.yahoo.com/.
The transaction at the UIUC University Library was conducted via instant messaging through their AIM connection on the website home page and of course, the Yahoo!Answers transaction was conducted online through their website. All other transactions were face to face.
The Transactions:
Transaction #1 - On September 6, 2009, the on-duty reference desk librarian at Crystal Lake Public Library (CLPL) was asked about dictionaries and their usage. The original question was, “Where are the dictionaries located?” A specific question was asked later of the same librarian about a quotation, the source of which had eluded the student.
Transaction #2 - On September 29, 2009 in regard to geographic sources a different librarian at the CLPL reference desk was asked if she knew what an atoll is and where one might find information about any atolls that belong to the United States.
Transaction #3 - On September 26, 2009, a visit to the Arlington Heights Memorial Library (AHML) was made in an effort to access a larger (than CLPL) reference section of print sources to support a project in the LIS 501 class centered on the development of a digital collection. My introductory question of the reference librarian on duty was, “Do you have any sources that would assist me in a project in one of my LIS classes to develop a digital collection?”
Transaction #4 - On October 14 an instant message transaction was undertaken with the main library at the University of Illinois on the Urbana-Champaign campus. My initial question was, “Can you help me request a book to be picked up this weekend?”
Transaction #5 - The questions submitted were, “What can be done to stop North Korea from further developing nuclear weapons?” and “What is an “Illini” and why is that the mascot of the University of Illinois athletic teams?”
The Analysis:
Transaction #1 - As I approached the reference desk from the corridor directly before the desk, the librarian didn’t see me coming as she was engaged with the computer screen in front of her, which takes her gaze away from the corridor. When I arrived, however, she immediately looked up, smiled and acknowledged me. (I volunteer at this library, so she knew me by name.) When I explained my assignment and asked about dictionaries, she asked if I wanted to look for something specific, or just a tour of the section. At that point, I had no specific questions and asked for the tour.
She guided me to the section and identified all of the various types of dictionaries. She did not show me, and I did not notice, that the section extended past the end of the stacks we were viewing and continued on the next stack behind us. I’m not sure if she was aware of that physical attribute of the section and I think she thought she had shown me the entire collection of dictionaries. However, I came back later and was stumped that there were not more books on quotations. The answer was found online through an unfamiliar source. A classmate was consulted to see if she had found the answer. She identified a source. When I came back to the reference desk a week later, I asked specifically for that source and was told that it was in the collection. That’s when I looked past the end of the first set of shelves and found additional sources on the next section and specifically the very source that held my answer.
In the first week’s encounter, I had returned to the desk and asked where I might find the specific quotation. The librarian immediately started an online search and had to ask a few times for the quote. She asked me to repeat it so many times that I had it memorized for several weeks thereafter. She never did find the answer, but asked me several times before my departure that day if I had because she was now interested in knowing who had said it.
The librarian did not think to recommend some excellent quotations books in the collection, but conducted a cursory search online and then indicated that she could not find an answer for me. The librarian seemed sure that it could be found online (which it was), but when she was unable to do so, didn’t finish the reference interview and became too engrossed in the actual search to be of service to me any longer. She lost focus of the interview by not following through to figure out what I really needed. See Ross, Chapter 3 information.
Transaction #2 - During my sources assignment on geographical sources, I found the print versions of atlases, gazetteers and other sources without assistance and had answered most of the questions. Thinking of this assignment I decided to ask another librarian at the reference desk to assist me on finding information about atolls belonging to the United States. She asked, “What is an atoll?”, which is perfectly understandable – after all; not everyone in the Midwestern United States has heard of an atoll. After explaining to her what it is, she indicated she wasn’t sure where to look for such a source. She was aware of what I had been doing with the atlases and gazetteers and asked if I had reviewed all of them. I hadn’t yet, so I went back to an atlas still on the shelf (I had most of the books of the section on my table) and found that it was an excellent source for the specific subject. I later found the World Fact Book to be quite helpful as well.
I think this librarian felt a little uncomfortable trying to help when she hadn’t known what an atoll is and she held back from assisting any further. Truthfully, I may not have needed her assistance and it was probably appropriate for her to send me back to the sources and refrain from doing it for me. The information in chapter 1 of Ross suggests that not bothering with the interview leads to a failed transaction. That seems applicable here. The librarian did not follow the interview through to a close. However, once again, maybe that’s exactly what I needed in this case – to be sent back to my own search.
Transaction #3 - After entering the AHML (which was somewhat unfamiliar to me), I found signs leading to a reference desk, which was called the “Questions and Answers Desk”. That seemed an apt place to start. Two librarians were seated there, one male and the other female. The female was engaged in a project at her computer and the male was on the phone. As I approached the desk the male librarian was just finishing his transaction on the phone and asked if he could help me.
I asked my question on digital collection development. He thought for a moment and then said, “Okay, just a moment,” and turned to his computer. He typed in a few key words and I assumed by his actions and apparent thinking process that he was checking for call numbers to identify a section where such books might be found. As it turns out, that’s exactly what he was doing. I know he asked me a couple of questions to confirm some things about the assignment, but the specifics now escape me. But suffice it to say, he was narrowing things down in his search for answers to my question.
Once he had a location, he took me to several shelves filled with a large variety of books on digitization, digital library collections, online library services, etc. Some of the collection was specifically related to my needs and much of it was not. He started identifying options and quickly pulled two likely suspects from the shelves. I suddenly had in my hands Cataloging and Organizing Digital Resources and Developing Library and Information Center Collections. He then suggested I look through the section, gave me some instructions and indicated he would be right back.
No other books met my needs. When the librarian returned he asked if anything else had been found, and was told not yet. He had in his hands a copy of The Whole Digital Library Handbook, with a colored slip of paper inserted into its pages, with “Checkout 7 Days Only” printed on it. He explained that this book might be useful, but it was part of their reference office collection and did not normally circulate. He indicated I could take it for a week and review it.
He then offered to assist further if I needed it and as he prepared to excuse himself from me, he encouraged me to stop up at the desk later if there was more he could do for me.
This librarian immediately acknowledged my arrival at the reference desk, listened carefully to my question, confirmed my needs with an encourager, “Oaky, just a moment”, and then took me to the sources and identified several options that matched exactly what I had requested. He verified my satisfaction with these results and offered more assistance if needed in his closing statement with me. In short, he practically delivered a text book response to my request as outlined in Ross, chapter 3.
Transaction #4 - The instant messaging service was new to me and it took some time to figure out how to use it. There were some instructions about downloading the AIM service onto my computer and at first I thought I would have to do that. After starting that process, I noticed it was not required and I started over. My initial request drew a response in about 5 minutes. The whole transaction was running smoothly, until I accidentally pressed a wrong key on the keyboard and then had to connect all over again. Thus, the simple question about how to request a book from the library online took almost 30 minutes to complete.
A more complex question may have taken longer, and then again, a more complex question may have been more difficult to figure out on one’s own. All in all, IM was a good experience, as I did get the answer and accomplished a remote book request, which I had wanted to do for some time, but never quite figured it out on my own, as I had lost my patience in previous attempts.
However, my experience supports the claims made by Sam Stormont that technical reference must become simpler and more convenient in order for it to become more widely used.
Transaction #5 – Two questions were asked on the Yahoo! Answers site on October 10, 2009. I did not consider this a normal “reference” transaction, since there was no collection attached to it, and was unsure of formulating appropriate questions. Although, I did review the site and read many of the thousands of questions that were already solved and found that they were focused on various cities, people and things. Nonetheless, my feelings were to ask broad questions and see what came of it.
The answers started arriving within minutes and by the second day there were about a dozen responses to my question on North Korea and just three responses to my Illini question. It was interesting that most answers were strongly held opinions and given in that manner, at least on North Korea. Also, the answers slowed down and stopped just as abruptly as they had started, even though the question remained open for four days. It appeared to me that once a perceived “best” answer was given, other potential respondents stopped.
On the Illini question, for instance, the third posting included a link to Wikipedia’s entry on Chief Illiniwek, which must have seemed sufficient because there were no more answers delivered.
It became apparent that this service could be useful in the right setting and for the right information seeking need. It was prompt in delivering answers, from which the questioner may select a “best” answer. Anonymity is maintained, if desired, and no harm is done in the asking. If the question is not asked perfectly to elicit desired responses, it may be rephrased and resubmitted for a fresh round of answers. It is really quite simple, and more useful than I at first thought it could be.
Conclusions:
In transaction #3, almost all prescribed attributes of the reference interview were demonstrated by the librarian. In transactions #1 and #2, the librarians were pleasant, inviting of the questions, but slightly less than supportive of the process. In each case, they did not pinpoint exactly what was needed and why. Thus, they did not guide me to an answer and didn’t close the interview positively. They knew me personally before my arrival at their desk, and my questions were not complex. Both conditions may have factored into their responses. But, in both cases, the reference interviews were somewhat lacking, in comparison to the recommended methods in the LIS Literature, and as a result, the outcomes fell somewhat short of desirable.
The IM transaction, #4, with the University Library went well from the perspective of the librarian’s interviewing skills. Through IM questions and responses, the librarian confirmed what I needed, where I was in the process already and then guided me to the next step and then the next, until I had accomplished the purpose of my service request. The interview was closed with confirmation that I was satisfied and had no other needs, and was finally ended with an invitation to come back to the librarian if I needed anything in the future. Only the mechanics of the transaction caused some dissatisfaction.
Transaction #5 surprised me in its promptness and efficiency and is encouraging to see that such a simple approach can deliver good and mostly satisfactory answers to a multitude of questions. Authoritative answers were not expected and many of the answers I reviewed to other questions on this site were ridiculous, opinionated and lacked any authority whatsoever.
As is pointed out in the literature, attributes of the information seeker weigh heavily on the outcome of the interview. The better questions are articulated, the better chance of getting a satisfactory answer. However, much of the success of the interview rests on the librarian’s ability to draw this information from the seeker through an effective interview.
References:
Ross, Catherine Sheldrick; Nilsen, Kristi; and Radford, Marie L. Conducting the Reference Interview, Second Edition. 2009. Neal-Schuman Publishers, Inc.
Stormont, Sam. “Looking to Connect: Technical Challenges that Impede the Growth of Virtual Reference.” Reference & User Services Quarterly 47:2 (Winter 2007): 114-9
The Information Centers and Reference Providers:
Four different centers or reference services were accessed. They include the Crystal Lake Public Library in Crystal Lake, Illinois, (my closest public library relationship), the Arlington Heights Memorial Library in Arlington Heights, Illinois, the University Library at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign campus, and the online resource “Yahoo! Answers” at http://answers.yahoo.com/.
The transaction at the UIUC University Library was conducted via instant messaging through their AIM connection on the website home page and of course, the Yahoo!Answers transaction was conducted online through their website. All other transactions were face to face.
The Transactions:
Transaction #1 - On September 6, 2009, the on-duty reference desk librarian at Crystal Lake Public Library (CLPL) was asked about dictionaries and their usage. The original question was, “Where are the dictionaries located?” A specific question was asked later of the same librarian about a quotation, the source of which had eluded the student.
Transaction #2 - On September 29, 2009 in regard to geographic sources a different librarian at the CLPL reference desk was asked if she knew what an atoll is and where one might find information about any atolls that belong to the United States.
Transaction #3 - On September 26, 2009, a visit to the Arlington Heights Memorial Library (AHML) was made in an effort to access a larger (than CLPL) reference section of print sources to support a project in the LIS 501 class centered on the development of a digital collection. My introductory question of the reference librarian on duty was, “Do you have any sources that would assist me in a project in one of my LIS classes to develop a digital collection?”
Transaction #4 - On October 14 an instant message transaction was undertaken with the main library at the University of Illinois on the Urbana-Champaign campus. My initial question was, “Can you help me request a book to be picked up this weekend?”
Transaction #5 - The questions submitted were, “What can be done to stop North Korea from further developing nuclear weapons?” and “What is an “Illini” and why is that the mascot of the University of Illinois athletic teams?”
The Analysis:
Transaction #1 - As I approached the reference desk from the corridor directly before the desk, the librarian didn’t see me coming as she was engaged with the computer screen in front of her, which takes her gaze away from the corridor. When I arrived, however, she immediately looked up, smiled and acknowledged me. (I volunteer at this library, so she knew me by name.) When I explained my assignment and asked about dictionaries, she asked if I wanted to look for something specific, or just a tour of the section. At that point, I had no specific questions and asked for the tour.
She guided me to the section and identified all of the various types of dictionaries. She did not show me, and I did not notice, that the section extended past the end of the stacks we were viewing and continued on the next stack behind us. I’m not sure if she was aware of that physical attribute of the section and I think she thought she had shown me the entire collection of dictionaries. However, I came back later and was stumped that there were not more books on quotations. The answer was found online through an unfamiliar source. A classmate was consulted to see if she had found the answer. She identified a source. When I came back to the reference desk a week later, I asked specifically for that source and was told that it was in the collection. That’s when I looked past the end of the first set of shelves and found additional sources on the next section and specifically the very source that held my answer.
In the first week’s encounter, I had returned to the desk and asked where I might find the specific quotation. The librarian immediately started an online search and had to ask a few times for the quote. She asked me to repeat it so many times that I had it memorized for several weeks thereafter. She never did find the answer, but asked me several times before my departure that day if I had because she was now interested in knowing who had said it.
The librarian did not think to recommend some excellent quotations books in the collection, but conducted a cursory search online and then indicated that she could not find an answer for me. The librarian seemed sure that it could be found online (which it was), but when she was unable to do so, didn’t finish the reference interview and became too engrossed in the actual search to be of service to me any longer. She lost focus of the interview by not following through to figure out what I really needed. See Ross, Chapter 3 information.
Transaction #2 - During my sources assignment on geographical sources, I found the print versions of atlases, gazetteers and other sources without assistance and had answered most of the questions. Thinking of this assignment I decided to ask another librarian at the reference desk to assist me on finding information about atolls belonging to the United States. She asked, “What is an atoll?”, which is perfectly understandable – after all; not everyone in the Midwestern United States has heard of an atoll. After explaining to her what it is, she indicated she wasn’t sure where to look for such a source. She was aware of what I had been doing with the atlases and gazetteers and asked if I had reviewed all of them. I hadn’t yet, so I went back to an atlas still on the shelf (I had most of the books of the section on my table) and found that it was an excellent source for the specific subject. I later found the World Fact Book to be quite helpful as well.
I think this librarian felt a little uncomfortable trying to help when she hadn’t known what an atoll is and she held back from assisting any further. Truthfully, I may not have needed her assistance and it was probably appropriate for her to send me back to the sources and refrain from doing it for me. The information in chapter 1 of Ross suggests that not bothering with the interview leads to a failed transaction. That seems applicable here. The librarian did not follow the interview through to a close. However, once again, maybe that’s exactly what I needed in this case – to be sent back to my own search.
Transaction #3 - After entering the AHML (which was somewhat unfamiliar to me), I found signs leading to a reference desk, which was called the “Questions and Answers Desk”. That seemed an apt place to start. Two librarians were seated there, one male and the other female. The female was engaged in a project at her computer and the male was on the phone. As I approached the desk the male librarian was just finishing his transaction on the phone and asked if he could help me.
I asked my question on digital collection development. He thought for a moment and then said, “Okay, just a moment,” and turned to his computer. He typed in a few key words and I assumed by his actions and apparent thinking process that he was checking for call numbers to identify a section where such books might be found. As it turns out, that’s exactly what he was doing. I know he asked me a couple of questions to confirm some things about the assignment, but the specifics now escape me. But suffice it to say, he was narrowing things down in his search for answers to my question.
Once he had a location, he took me to several shelves filled with a large variety of books on digitization, digital library collections, online library services, etc. Some of the collection was specifically related to my needs and much of it was not. He started identifying options and quickly pulled two likely suspects from the shelves. I suddenly had in my hands Cataloging and Organizing Digital Resources and Developing Library and Information Center Collections. He then suggested I look through the section, gave me some instructions and indicated he would be right back.
No other books met my needs. When the librarian returned he asked if anything else had been found, and was told not yet. He had in his hands a copy of The Whole Digital Library Handbook, with a colored slip of paper inserted into its pages, with “Checkout 7 Days Only” printed on it. He explained that this book might be useful, but it was part of their reference office collection and did not normally circulate. He indicated I could take it for a week and review it.
He then offered to assist further if I needed it and as he prepared to excuse himself from me, he encouraged me to stop up at the desk later if there was more he could do for me.
This librarian immediately acknowledged my arrival at the reference desk, listened carefully to my question, confirmed my needs with an encourager, “Oaky, just a moment”, and then took me to the sources and identified several options that matched exactly what I had requested. He verified my satisfaction with these results and offered more assistance if needed in his closing statement with me. In short, he practically delivered a text book response to my request as outlined in Ross, chapter 3.
Transaction #4 - The instant messaging service was new to me and it took some time to figure out how to use it. There were some instructions about downloading the AIM service onto my computer and at first I thought I would have to do that. After starting that process, I noticed it was not required and I started over. My initial request drew a response in about 5 minutes. The whole transaction was running smoothly, until I accidentally pressed a wrong key on the keyboard and then had to connect all over again. Thus, the simple question about how to request a book from the library online took almost 30 minutes to complete.
A more complex question may have taken longer, and then again, a more complex question may have been more difficult to figure out on one’s own. All in all, IM was a good experience, as I did get the answer and accomplished a remote book request, which I had wanted to do for some time, but never quite figured it out on my own, as I had lost my patience in previous attempts.
However, my experience supports the claims made by Sam Stormont that technical reference must become simpler and more convenient in order for it to become more widely used.
Transaction #5 – Two questions were asked on the Yahoo! Answers site on October 10, 2009. I did not consider this a normal “reference” transaction, since there was no collection attached to it, and was unsure of formulating appropriate questions. Although, I did review the site and read many of the thousands of questions that were already solved and found that they were focused on various cities, people and things. Nonetheless, my feelings were to ask broad questions and see what came of it.
The answers started arriving within minutes and by the second day there were about a dozen responses to my question on North Korea and just three responses to my Illini question. It was interesting that most answers were strongly held opinions and given in that manner, at least on North Korea. Also, the answers slowed down and stopped just as abruptly as they had started, even though the question remained open for four days. It appeared to me that once a perceived “best” answer was given, other potential respondents stopped.
On the Illini question, for instance, the third posting included a link to Wikipedia’s entry on Chief Illiniwek, which must have seemed sufficient because there were no more answers delivered.
It became apparent that this service could be useful in the right setting and for the right information seeking need. It was prompt in delivering answers, from which the questioner may select a “best” answer. Anonymity is maintained, if desired, and no harm is done in the asking. If the question is not asked perfectly to elicit desired responses, it may be rephrased and resubmitted for a fresh round of answers. It is really quite simple, and more useful than I at first thought it could be.
Conclusions:
In transaction #3, almost all prescribed attributes of the reference interview were demonstrated by the librarian. In transactions #1 and #2, the librarians were pleasant, inviting of the questions, but slightly less than supportive of the process. In each case, they did not pinpoint exactly what was needed and why. Thus, they did not guide me to an answer and didn’t close the interview positively. They knew me personally before my arrival at their desk, and my questions were not complex. Both conditions may have factored into their responses. But, in both cases, the reference interviews were somewhat lacking, in comparison to the recommended methods in the LIS Literature, and as a result, the outcomes fell somewhat short of desirable.
The IM transaction, #4, with the University Library went well from the perspective of the librarian’s interviewing skills. Through IM questions and responses, the librarian confirmed what I needed, where I was in the process already and then guided me to the next step and then the next, until I had accomplished the purpose of my service request. The interview was closed with confirmation that I was satisfied and had no other needs, and was finally ended with an invitation to come back to the librarian if I needed anything in the future. Only the mechanics of the transaction caused some dissatisfaction.
Transaction #5 surprised me in its promptness and efficiency and is encouraging to see that such a simple approach can deliver good and mostly satisfactory answers to a multitude of questions. Authoritative answers were not expected and many of the answers I reviewed to other questions on this site were ridiculous, opinionated and lacked any authority whatsoever.
As is pointed out in the literature, attributes of the information seeker weigh heavily on the outcome of the interview. The better questions are articulated, the better chance of getting a satisfactory answer. However, much of the success of the interview rests on the librarian’s ability to draw this information from the seeker through an effective interview.
References:
Ross, Catherine Sheldrick; Nilsen, Kristi; and Radford, Marie L. Conducting the Reference Interview, Second Edition. 2009. Neal-Schuman Publishers, Inc.
Stormont, Sam. “Looking to Connect: Technical Challenges that Impede the Growth of Virtual Reference.” Reference & User Services Quarterly 47:2 (Winter 2007): 114-9
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)