Co-Browsing

While browsing in Emerald Libraries for articles on IM reference, I came across this article on the use of co-browsing in chat/virtual reference by Chris Desai and Stephanie Graves, from the Morris Library at Southern Illinois University. Although a couple of blog posts came out a few hundred days ago, this article set off debate on the us of co-browsing, some of it even-handed, some not so much. Seems like the consensus is that co-browsing is a long way from ideal.

The two biggest bones of contention:
1. The software is difficult to use, logistically.
2. It undercuts instruction if it is only used by the librarian to "show" the student what to do.

Here's the rundown on the blogs, courtesy of LBR:

Rikhei Harris posted her own reflections about the session and co-browsing in general under the title "Co-browsing's diminishing returns" on her blog, Lethal Librarian,

Sarah Houghton followed with "How much is co-browsing helping our users" at Librarian in Black,

Jessamyn West added "Co-browsing: Why use software that you can’t use and patrons don’t like?" at librarian.net, and

Caleb Tucker-Raymond added a tremendously detailed piece called "Is co-browsing dead? 3 out of 5 librarians agree" at the L-Net Staff Information Blog. This blog includes a comment by Chris Desai and Stephanie Graves, which is enlightening:

"However, all of that said, we do not wish to imply that we are unreservedly in favor of co-browse. Much improvement is needed. The diversity of browsers and settings and concerns with security make it hard to design a one-size-fits-all product. As with any new technology, the early days are bumpy. From our limited data, all we wished to point out is that of those patrons who experienced co-browse sessions, the vast majority were very happy with it and that in both studies patrons reported that they want instruction. They might or might not ask for it directly or even indirectly, but a very high percentage wants to learn. Co-browsing does offer hands-on learning and “leading” and we believe it is less confusing than asking users to open separate windows. It’s easier for the patron to follow in co-browse and less confusing for us too—we can see where they are and what they are doing and where they are getting off on the wrong track. And patrons are more “in charge” since they can do the typing and clicking themselves, while the librarian can catch mistakes or wrong turns and offer timely suggestions. Librarians can also better gauge patron interest and satisfaction because they can see whether the patron continues to be involved in the process."

Technorati Tags:
University+of+Denver IM+Reference CoBrowsing