REFERENCE SERVICES EVALUATION 1

REFERENCE SERVICES EVALUATION 1 Reference Services Evaluation Cammi Carpenter April 26, 2011 Library 210-15 Intro to Reference: Professor Steven Tash San José State University

REFERENCE SERVICES EVALUATION 2 Abstract This paper describes my experiences observing face-to-face reference interviews as well as experiences using digital reference interview services. The observations were conducted at a university library reference and computing help desk. The Instant Message interview was conducted through an IM service at a university library. The e-mail reference interview was also conducted through a university library. This paper discusses each interaction in depth, evaluates the interactions and discusses the similarities and difference between face-to-face and digital reference services.

REFERENCE SERVICES EVALUATION 3 Analysis of Reference Desk Experience Observing a reference desk was an interesting experience. I found that after the hour was up I did not want to leave; I wanted to stay and observe more. During my one and a half hour observation of the Research and Computing Help desk (on the research side), I was lucky enough to get to observe two different reference librarians. My lunch hour was that only time I had available during the day; I also thought it might be a busy time at the reference desk. Although it would have been preferable to visit a library beside the one I work at, my schedule required that I conducted my observation at my place of employment. Fortunately it worked out really well. Since the librarians already knew me, I felt like they were more willing to show and tell me things about working at the desk than a librarian who had just met me would have. I also got to see the e-mail reference service from the librarian s view. I want to explain a little about how the library I observed at is set up. We have three public service desks on the main floor. When you first walk in the door, you are initially greeted with the Information Kiosk. Through the security gates and to the right is the Research and Computing Help (RCH) Desk and all that way in the back is the Library Services Desk. I felt like the RCH desk was kind of shoved off to the side. It is not very prominent; this probably explains why we get a good number of reference questions at the Library Services desk instead. The library is new and well equipped with nice computers and comfortable desks. Overall it is a pleasant place to be. The first day I observed the RCH desk was a Wednesday at noon. It was a pretty busy hour but unfortunately it was not busy with traditional reference questions. I was observing the

REFERENCE SERVICES EVALUATION 4 Director of Information Services, for this paper I will refer to her as Librarian one. Her subject specialties are chemistry, physics, and psychology, but as every reference librarian must be, she is skilled in answering a wide range of questions. I used the Face-to-Face Model Reference Behaviors Checklist to keep track of how the interactions were going. Librarian One was checking her e-mail while waiting for a patron to approach the desk. She saw the patron and immediately looked away from the computer screen, smiled, and greeted them. The desk is set up so that the librarian is at eye level with the patrons even though they are sitting and people approaching the desk are standing; I really like the set-up because it puts the librarian and the patron on the same level. I could tell that the librarian gave her full attention to the patron asking a question even though it was a computer question rather than a library reference question. This patron was having trouble with his NetID (the username and password used for authentication). She went to the online NetID manager and reset his password. I was very impressed that Librarian one then accompanied the patron to a nearby computer and helped him log in and change his password from the default. During the time where the librarian was waiting for another patron to ask a question she showed me the e-reference program and how it works. This library uses a program called Footprints to manage e-mail reference. Librarian one told me that she thought this program was a little clunky and was maybe not the best way to manage the e-mail reference. This made me think about other possible ways to provide an e-mail reference service. I though one nice feature of the program was being able to see all the e-mails sent from patrons to the e-ref service. This made it pretty easy to refer the patron to a different librarian if needed. I am really glad she thought to show me this aspect of reference services, because it helped me better understand the librarian s view of e-mail reference.

REFERENCE SERVICES EVALUATION 5 I observed at the same desk (the RCH Desk) the next day, Thursday at noon. This day was definitely busier and there were several questions that did not involve computer help. There was a different librarian at the desk; we will call him Librarian two. This librarian is the @One Administrator. The @One floor is the bottom floor of our library dedicated to computing and all the services that accompany it. This librarian is essentially in charge of the floor. Although he works on the computer floor he is still well versed in traditional reference services. The first thing that Librarian Two told me was his favorite phrase to say to patrons, I don t know let s find out. He admitted that he often does not know that answer to the question and likes to be straightforward with the patron. He seemed very excited to be working at the desk helping people and getting to teach me things about working at a reference desk. I arrived at the desk and right away two patrons walked up. They were students from a local High School. Librarian Two is very approachable; he smiled and greeted the patrons. The students were looking for information on Yucca Mountain. The librarian was able to draw out what kind of information they needed; it turned out they were looking for information about the Yucca Mountain controversy. Librarian Two started out using Google Scholar since the students did not have access to our databases. However, they do have access if the librarian looks articles up for them and prints or saves them. I do not know why Librarian two chose not to use the databases. I did not have a chance to ask him as the entire hour was very busy. At this point another patron walked up to the desk and the librarian asked the two students he was helping if they minded waiting just a few seconds while he found out what the next patron needed; they did not mind. I think this was a smart move on the librarian s part. If the second patron had been waiting to get help with something that the computing help desk or

REFERENCE SERVICES EVALUATION 6 library circulation desk could have answered, he could have easily re-directed them. However, the patron needed reference help as well. The librarian went back to helping the two High School students and found them several good articles from reliable sources on the first try. As he was working with the patrons, I was occasionally looking at the Model Reference Behaviors Checklist: Face-to-face. This librarian exhibited many of the good behaviors on the checklist. It was great to get to see a librarian that works at a reference desk on a regular schedule exhibit the behaviors that we have been talking about in class. This librarian displayed interest in the topic, listened well, and searched very effectively. The only item on the list he did not do well was following through. He asked the patrons if they had enough information but did not offer for them to come back or provide contact information. High School students are not exactly the target demographic for a University library, but if we serve these patrons they should be extended the offer of more help. As this librarian was very thorough in every other aspect I suspect he forgot. Maybe he was feeling pressure because of the forming line. Overall, observing this reference desk was a very beneficial activity for me. I think I am going to see if the librarians that work at the Research and Computing Help desk would mind if I occasionally observe in the future. I feel like I learned many useful skills doing this assignment and I want to learn more. Analysis of Digital Reference Services The two digital reference services I choose to evaluate are instant messaging and e-mail. I took advantage of both of these services through the San Jose State University King Library website. I found that they were both easy to locate on the website.

REFERENCE SERVICES EVALUATION 7 I love the instant messaging service! It was so convenient and easy to use. The most difficult part was coming up with a fake question to ask. I decided to use a similar question to the mock face to face reference interview question I did for the group presentation. Here is a link to the Google Doc that contains the transcript of my Instant Message conversation with the librarian: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iuzh5gapmhu297a0irqpy6xzvqjyreckrtgwj1vljti /edit?hl=en&authkey=cp3--m4k I logged into the IM service and typed in my question. I only had to wait about thirty seconds before a librarian logged in to help me. She acknowledged that I was there and that she was reading my question. I had never used a reference Instant Message service before so I was not really sure what to expect. I kept the Model Reference Behaviors Checklist for Remote Services next to me during the interaction. I felt like this librarian was a great example of someone who provides excellent service. The entire time I felt like she was giving our interaction her full attention. The checklist says that you should let the patron know what you are doing at least every minute so they do not think you forgot about them. She got back to me in under a minute every time. The librarian provided me with good links to databases and even a PBS website in a very short amount of time. In my opinion she did everything correctly, she used my name, did not provide any yes/no responses, and explained what she was doing. If I need reference help I will definitely use this service. I think this is something every library should provide, because it seems to me that students would love it.

REFERENCE SERVICES EVALUATION 8 The other digital reference service I used was an e-mail to a librarian, also through the SJSU library website. Unfortunately, I did not have as positive an experience with the e-mail reference service. Below is an overview of the e-mail transaction: Patron: I need biographical information about the composer George Crumb. I'm not sure where to look. Thank you Librarian 1: Try this search in Google: "GEORGE CRUMB" BIOGRAPHY SITE:EDU The limiter SITE:EDU ensures that your results are in educational web sites rather than just commercial (.COM) sites. You could also use library subscription databases. For assistance with databases it may be better to call or visit reference librarians at King Library, (408)808-2100. I hope this helps. Thanks for using our email reference service. As you can see the librarian did not provide me with very much information. I do think part of that is my fault because I did not explain what I wanted very well. They did provide contact information for me if I wanted additional information, so that is a plus. Frankly, I was surprised that I was told to use Google. It is useful, but I am sure there is a database out there that would provide better information. I went to Google and did the search that was suggested and it returned some useful information. The first hit was the Naxos Classical Music website that the librarian in the IM interview had also suggested. Other than that there were many websites that looked questionable. I did learn more about limiting searches in Google by asking this question. I realize now that I should have specified that I wanted scholarly or peer review articles.

REFERENCE SERVICES EVALUATION 9 Face to Face Reference Services vs. Digital Reference Services In thinking about how to analyze and compare the three different types of reference services that I observed or took part in I decided that there are several different levels of service and expectations. These levels of service and expectations are both on the patron and the librarian s side. The top level of service provided and service expected is in person. Here the patron and the librarian are taking their time to go to a central place to meet. Here the patrons expect to get the best service and from my experiences I feel like librarians know what is expected and provide that level of service. There would be an even higher expectation if the patron and librarian were meeting in the librarian s office. The next tier of service and expectation is the Instant Message service. Both the librarian and the patron are taking their time to meet at the same time over a distance. When using the IM service it is expected that the speed in which the questions is answered may be a little slower than in person. I feel like the bottom tier of service is e-mail reference. This is still an effective way to provide reference help, but it is the most non-committal on the patron s part. It is a great way for a librarian to provide the patron with many resources as well as other information since there is no pressure to produce something immediately. As far as in person vs. digital reference, I think they are both essential services to provide. When I observed the reference desk and the librarian showed me the library s e-mail reference queue, I was surprised at how many e-mails they receive. It is obvious that students

REFERENCE SERVICES EVALUATION 10 like the e-mail reference. There were a large number of questions that were computer or circulation related but they also had several true reference questions. There are similarities and difference in face-to-face and digital reference services. Many of the differences can be attributed purely to the medium in which the service is provided. The similarities are all based on good customer service. In both face-to-face and digital services the very first interaction with the patron should be positive and engaging. When I observed the reference desk, the librarians were always aware of patrons coming to the desk. They made eye contact and greeted them. The same thing happened in the digital IM reference interview; the first thing the librarian did was say hi to me and use my name. Another large similarity in face-to-face and digital reference interviews is the follow up. In both situations the librarian should ask if enough information was provided. The reference experiences I had for this assignment almost all ended with the librarian giving out contact information or simply inviting the patron back. As discussed in the article by Ronan, chat or IM reference services can be challenging because you cannot read body language or tone of voice (pp. 43). I can see how this would be true. In the IM reference interview it was easy to pretend that I was a student really looking for the information and not a Library Science student reviewing the service. The fact that the librarian and patron cannot see each other is definitely the biggest difference between face-toface and digital reference services. It was a good experience to observe and partake in different types of reference interviews. It was interesting to follow the checklists and see librarians exhibiting the model

REFERENCE SERVICES EVALUATION 11 behaviors. This experience really gave me an inside look at reference work as well as a look at it from the patron s viewpoint.

REFERENCE SERVICES EVALUATION 12 References ORE (2005). Module Three, Model Reference Behaviors Checklist. Retrieved April 15, 2011 from http://www.olc.org/ore/3checklist.htm Ronan, J. (2003). The reference interview online. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 43(1), 43-47. RUSA (2004). Guidelines for behavioral performance of reference and information service providers. Retrieved April 15, 2011 from http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/rusa/resources/guidelines/guidelinesbehavioral.cfm