Reference model presentation

Here's the handout and my presentation notes...



HANDOUT


Why have a new reference model at all?

-The Information Commons
(University of Indiana Bloomington, Brigham Young University)

-Tiered Services
-Separate Information and Reference Desks (Johns-Hopkins)
-Joint Information/Reference Desk (Syracuse)
-Information Desk with an On-Call System/Office for Consultation (University of Texas Austin)

-Roving and Floating
(University of Nevada Las Vegas)

-Thoughts.
Collaboration, engagement, human potential, creative expression, innovation

For More Information, go to penrosegta.blogspot.com



Further reading:

Information Commons:

Michael J. Whitchurch, C. Jeffrey Belliston, and William Baer. Information commons at Brigham Young University: past, present, and future. Reference Services Review. Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 261-278

Allison Cowgill, Joan Beam, and Lindsey Wess. Implementing an Information Commons in a University Library. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Volume 27, Number 6, pages 432–439

Diane Dallis and Carolyn Walters. Reference services in the commons environment. Reference Services Review Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 248-260

Donald Beagle. Conceptualizing the Information Commons. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Volume 25, Number 2, pages 82-89


Tiered Service/Information Desks:

Virginia Massey-Burizo. From the other side of the reference desk: A focus group study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Volume 24, Number 3, pages 208-215

Virginia Massey-Burizo. Reference encounters of a different kind: A Symposium
The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Volume 18, Number 5, pages 276-286

William L. Whitson. Differentiated Service: A new reference model. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Volume 21, Number 2, pages 103-110

Lori Goetsch ... [et al.]. Information desks in academic research libraries. Z675.U5 I546 1995


Roving/Floating:

Victoria Nozero and Priscilla Finley. Research and Information Services at Lied Library: Restructured, revitalized and planning for the future. Library Hi-Tech, Volume 23, Number 1, pages 66-74





PRESENTATION


Why have a new reference model?
-Decrease in on-desk reference questions.
-Increase in liaison/subject reference work.
-Increase and impact of library instruction.
-Potential addition of IM reference service.

-Despite the amount of off-desk work being done, bringing more onto the desk is not seen as a solution.
-Putting more than one librarian on the desk at a time does not seem like a good use of time.
-Informational and directional questions being answered by Circulation.

Information Commons
-Information commons usually take the form of a shared space and mission between reference and technology services, although at DU, the writing center is another possible partner.
-Designed to provide point-of-need assistance at any stage in the research process.
-Designed to contain all resources needed to complete projects, including assistance in reference, research, writing, and technology, hardware and software, digital and print sources, individual and group workstations.

Beagle (UNCarolina, Belmont Abbey College), Conceptualizing the Information Commons:
“….while services retain their identities; the information commons creates an environment where old boundaries are blurred and many constituent activities flow across old boundaries.”
-IC does not separate print and digital sources, so the services overlap as well
-Subsequently, as Chris Ferguson (Director, Integrated Member Research ) points out: “an important dimension of integrated information service onsite is efficient and effective referral to the next level of expertise” (Shaking the Conceptual Foundations).

Who is doing IC well?
University of Indiana (Diane Dallis and Carolyn Walters, IC undergrad serv. Dept.)
-Gate count has gone up, although reference interactions are still going down
-Information Commons staff is seeing an increase in requests for one-on-one instruction at the reference desk.
-More questions are concerned with aspects of research
-There are as many requests for quiet places to study as there are for group spaces
-Heavy investment in the physical plant
-Consolidation of several small libraries on campus
-Integrated desks require high levels of co-operation and referrals. The sign above the main desk just reads: “Ask Questions Here.”




“The nature of reference has also changed. Librarians have seen a trend that students have become more skilled at navigating library resources. The ICULS librarians concur that they encounter more students who have independently had success with an online library resource and who are requesting help with the next level of research…..Librarians and library staff find that they are spending more time than they had just three years ago on questions because they are more advanced and require more discussion.”
-Dallis and Walters, “Reference Services in the Commons Environment”


Brigham Young University (Michael J. Whitchurch, C. Jeffrey Belliston, and William Baer, BYU and Dixie State College of Utah)

-Intense focus on raising the technological competencies of the reference staff as opposed to raising the library competencies of technology staff.
-Use separate offices for reference consultations.
-“There is little doubt that the trend in higher education is moving toward more group work for projects. Due to this change, the information commons is expected to continue on the same path toward providing more and better facilities for groups, including an evolving support structure.”
-Depended a lot on pattern of use studies and advisory groups, especially student government.
-Because of need for space and reliance on the use of online resources by reference staff, the print reference collection has been dramatically reduced.

Pros/Cons-Discussion
-Blurring of roles?
-Transition between media/parts of the process?
-Need for more staffing/training?
-Impact on space use, including print sources?
-Budgetary issues?
-Is there a demonstrated need?
-Too many referrals to deliver seamless services?



Tiered Services

Styles:

Separate Information and Reference Desks—Johns-Hopkins (JAL, 1992 & 1998)
-Designed to alleviate time pressure on reference staff
-Information desk seen as poor in quality by students
-Confusion as to what to ask where
-Reference staff seen as more helpful to students, Information desk skipped over

Joint Information/Reference Desk--Syracuse (Info Desks in Acd.Libs. ACRL,1995)
-Despite confusion, problems are made up for by co-operation and referrals, accomplished task of properly answering the right levels of questions at each station
-Allowed for flexible use of on-desk time by staff
-Flexible arrangement of desk coverage


On-Call System/Office for Consultation—UTex-Austin (Ibid.)
-Does a good job as long as referrals are made properly
-One-on-one consultations by librarians can be done in private areas
-Potential for lots of waiting by a patron


Pros/Cons Discussion:
-Training of “Information Staff”
-Dependency on referrals
-Forced waits
-Flexibility of staffing
-Clear delineation of roles
-Alleviate empty desk issue
-Scheduling issues

Roving
-Combined Tech/Ref desk, with cross training
-2 reference staff, one at the desk, the other either at the desk or roving.
-Generally bombed.


What is the Reference Staff’s Mission?
How does it fit into DU’s larger mission?
-Key concepts in DU’s mission: Collaboration, engagement, human potential, creative expression, innovation.
How do you see our role at DU?
-Consultation?
-Instruction?
-Integrated into other services?
-Business as usual?

Updates!

After a long while, I have finally been able to set up a time to make my presentation to the reference staff on reference models, slated for the 1st of next month.

Jenny Bowers is working on getting me some on desk time (four hours per week).

The initial Google Books/PEAK Catalog project was interesting enough that I will be revisiting it, this time being more consistent in collecting samples of data, and then crunching it through SPSS. The goal is to use the material to produce a publishable journal article on the possible impacts of the Google Books project. In the meantime, my initial list of 80-odd titles that are in PEAK and Google Books will be going into the MARC records soonish, I think.

Zotero, Google Books, and Research

As of late, I've been trying to figure out if it is worth our while to put Google Books links in our catalog records. First, I ran a search on all of the books in our stacks from 1850-1923, and then sampled them randomly, first three per every other page, and then one every ten pages. I got a sample of around 250 or so titles.

I copied the bibliographic information from PEAK using the Firefox 2.0 extension Zotero, which automatically detects and pulls bibliographic data off most websites. Currently I am checking how many in my sample are in Google Books, and double-checking them against the catalog, thanks to tabbed browsing.

So far, Google Books has matched Peak to the tune of 39%.

UPDATE:
The final count is 88 out of 243, or 37%.

new year

there are now 40-odd little links to the Southern Methodist University's collection of WW II documents from the PEAK catalog records. A lot of weird stuff, to say the least.

The easiest way to find all of them is to run a keyword search in PEAK for "digitallibrary.smu.edu".