Do you work here?

“Are Reference Desks Dying Out?” An article from the Chronicle of Higher Education dated 20 April 2007. What a great opener to this blog about reference service. It speaks of virtual reference and other Web 2.0 concepts, perceptions of, need for, and the role of reference librarians, the desk itself, the role of reference services within the library, the use of paraprofessionals, the reference interview, and the librarian’s view of his/her own place. These ideas are dealt with in a rather summary fashion, not having pages and pages to go into detail on all of them, but certainly a great awareness piece to some of the major issues in reference librarianship, for both librarians and non-librarians. Let me state my understand and a few of my opinions on these various topics:

1. Virtual Reference and Web 2.0
   The article starts off describing an example of reference work that one of the librarians at the University of California experiences: getting text message reference questions on her cellphone while at a conference. Very 2.0 indeed. What an excellent image of technology working well and allowing the librarian work well too. I have always thought that libraries, if not always the first on the bandwagon behind a new technology, frequently are, and really should be. We are intelligent professionals in an inherently technology-dependent field — we can and should try to exploit every tool that we can find to improve and expand our abilities. Virtual reference and all these other new social/communication tools that are sprouting up everywhere are exactly the kinds of tools that can fit into our business. What is reference service if it is not social and communicative? But we have to remember too that all the tools of the past are techy solutions to many of our problems and may still be required to do our job efficiently and effectively. When implementing virtual reference it can often be added to face to face (f2f), telephone, email, regular mail, or other ways we have invited our users to come to us. It’s not an either-or situation.
2. The Reference Librarian
   There are many questions and issues swirling around us librarians at that desk: How do others view us? How should they? Why do they need us? Do they need us? Which ones need us the most? Where do we belong? What do we do? What should we do? What shouldn’t we do? Just as with all librarians, there are problems with the image of the reference librarian, perhaps more or less so, since we are out there sitting in the middle of it all, under the gaze of any who set foot inside our walls. (I’m not going to talk much about perceptions about librarianship here, unless they deal directly with reference librarians and reference service. Please check out my other blog Buns & Shushings for coverage of perceptions.) The reference librarian’s role and usefulness is a very interesting subject to get into, being both straightforward and complex, attacked and valued, narrow and all-encompassing, overlooked and unachieved, depending on the time, the environment, the audience and the point of view. We are the center of the library, in my mind but we have a lot of work to do too.
3. The Desk
   Sometimes an island in shark-infested waters, and sometimes a safe haven protecting one from too much, the reference desk is often a classic icon of librarianship. To do away with it seems both sacrilegious and tempting. I don’t believe it’s lost it’s value, but it is true that we need to break the chains that bind us to it conceptually. I think that we don’t use it to it’s full potential, and that we can also very often bring it with us, in a metaphorical sense.
4. Reference Services
   The practice itself. What do we mean by it? What does it encompass? Where does reference services stop and the other parts of the library begin, such as information literacy? Or is it separate at all? I’m tempted to give simple one word descriptions of the idea — helping, answering, searching, teaching, etc. — but I think it’s more than any of them alone, or even the combination of them. And when do we get to discussing the theory, the framework, the goals, the ideals of reference services? Too often we just sit at the desk letting the service operate through us like we’re channeling the spirit of reference when we should be taking the wheel.
5. Paraprofessionals
   I don’t know about you but the idea of letting non-librarians sit at the reference desk or even be the primary guide, funneling the users to the desk sends shivers up my spine. Is it real professional concern about the quality of the resulting service, or am I just afraid for my job? What are the pros and cons of taking us off the front lines and sending the amateurs (?) in first?
6. The Reference Interview
   The art of “gentle prodding” and discovery and guidanc of the customer by the librarian, not to the answer, but to the question first and foremost. Are we really doing something special here? I think so. But we really should be trained and learning more about teaching skills, communication skills, and psychology to really push the envelope of “interviewing” the searcher.
7. Self-perceptions
   It all comes back to how we feel about our own abilities, image, role, responsibilities, necessity, requirements and tools. Although apparently improving, librarians tend to have a lot of issues concerning their own view of the field they are in. Oh, you may hide it well under a protective shield of bravado, enthusiasm, and professionalism, but we are constantly being questioned (and not in a good, this-is-my-job way! LOL), doubted, threatened, and ignored, by others and by ourselves, with new technology, new laws, and old prejudices. It’s not fun and it’s not good for our health. LOL

I started this blog because I was interested in the topic and thought there really wasn’t enough discussion of the part of librarianship. I’m now starting to think that I’ve bitten off more than I can… look up. But it’s too late now, isn’t it? Here we go…