4B: Addressing User Vulnerability in Information Search Models

Sorting through my collective experiences conducting the reference interactions, I remembered just how tenuous my perception was of an entire store or organization based on the single interaction I had with a staff member. One off-putting answer is enough to shake the confidence of any customer or patron that is invested in a particular store or organization. So I found it no surprise when the readings this week focused on how people act and feel while asking a difficult question and the sort of existential crisis that Jones refers to when discussing changing reference processes and the effect on the library. The fact that Jones admits that ready reference may no longer be a major component in the work of future librarians [1] demonstrates that the profession must be prepared to tackle user inquiries that cannot be resolved through a Google search. And the more complicated a question becomes, the more vulnerable a user feels for asking it, as I discovered in my reference interactions.

The separate models that Taylor and Kuhlthau propose are useful in assessing and addressing this vulnerability. I thought it was interesting that Taylor, when explaining the question filters in which librarians gather data, highlighted that dialogue was crucial in subject determination. Taylor specifies that “for the librarian, the important thing is this awareness of the fact that you will need feedback in order to make sure of what you’ve got.” [2] The importance of the back and forth in a reference interaction runs parallel with my experiences, as the initial follow-up questions were essential in articulating the need I was expressing. Yet, if a user is feeling vulnerable in this interaction, they may fail to articulate the question they truly need to ask in order to accomplish their reference goal. That is where Kuhlthau’s findings come in handy. The development of information search process models is fruitful in determining how a user might feel during a stage like question formation, or in Kuhlthau’s case, topic selection. [3] If a user is experiencing anxiety and confusion when approaching a reference professional like a librarian, who might be able to address their complex query, it becomes imperative that these feelings are assuaged during the interaction. The ability to demonstrate confidence in a reference interaction, therefore, becomes a means of satisfying the concerns of a user while moving the dialogue to a place where the librarian and user can negotiate the information that can be provided.

A recurring question keeps appearing at the forefront of my mind each week: how do we convince people that the library is a place worth going to? While Smith and Wong can argue that reference librarians are sorely needed [4], how can we articulate that need to our users? How do we position ourselves as the next step in research when a search algorithm cannot solve the problem alone? I believe the reference interaction is the best start. By demonstrating the capabilities in solving and alleviating users’ concerns during the question process, we as information professionals can embark on the process of solidifying ourselves even further in our communities so as to be ever-more relevant in the ongoing digital age.

--

[1] Janes, J. (2003). “What is reference for?” Reference Services Review, 31(1), p. 24.

[2] Taylor, R. S. (1968). “Question-negotiation and information seeking in libraries.” College and Research Libraries, 29, p. 185.

[3] Kuhlthau, C. C. (2004). “The Information Search Process” in Seeking Meaning: A Process Approach to Library and Information Services (2nd Ed). (Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited): p. 46.  

[4] Smith, Linda C., and Melissa Autumn Wong. (2017). Reference and Information Services: An Introduction. 5th edition. Santa Barbara, CA. ABC-CLIO.

4A: Connecting Old Ideas with New Toolkits

The overlying centerpiece of discussion this past week’s class was the pitches we gave detailing the virtues and setbacks of various websites and databases that offered a dizzying amount of information. I, personally, had fun scouring through the Congress.gov website and searching for either famous pieces of legislation or important committees that senators and representatives served on. Watching the different pitches, and then performing the pitch with my group, I observed that so many of these different sites accomplished similar goals despite having differing audiences. While Infobits and Congress.gov might seem entirely different in their intentions, they both provide vital information for the audience they are targeting. The ability to interact with information on user-friendly interfaces provides an opportunity for audiences to easily locate the data they need. Above all, the insights from these pitches and the tools they showcased demonstrated that the core concepts of “personal assistance” that Samuel Green espoused are still highly relevant to reference and the growing number of digital patrons that utilize these information access tools today. 

Indeed, the “freedom of intercourse between librarian and reader” [1] is still a virtue that applies to these reference tools, as the ability to navigate and access information relies upon a librarian ethos to facilitate the exchange of ideas on a designed platform. Infobits and other sites under the Gale umbrella serve as examples of the potential for digital accessibility, with built-in functions that read aloud texts or allow users to “write on” or highlight texts. Allowing for “personal assistance,” no matter the constraints or abilities of the user, depends upon designing a system in place that not necessarily replaces all the capabilities of a reference librarian, but produces the core capabilities that are necessary when the circumstances (the physical absence of a professional) demand it. Thus, sites like Congress.gov reciprocate the grand ideals of early thinkers like Green and Melville Dewey in a more contemporary fashion, as users gain the ability to build upon a “core toolkit” (as Shevon would say) that allows them break away from librarian dependence [2]. Yet, I wished our conversation in class had steered its way in this direction, particularly on the subject of accessibility and its relevance to Green and Dewey’s pronouncements, especially Dewey’s idea that a library should be  “an aggressive, educating force in the community” and the librarian should “[occupy] a field of active usefulness second to none.” [3]  However, we focused more on acquisitions and their relevance in this current era of reference, which absolutely has its merits, but it did not center the readings in a more substantial way. I remain optimistic that although these ideas have not been discussed at length as of yet, their relevance will be proven time and time again we all delve into deeper questions on reference work and librarianship. 

—

[1]  Green, S.S. (1876). “Personal Relations between Librarians and Readers.” American Library Journal 1: p. 79.

[2] Green, “Personal Relations between Librarians and Readers,” p. 80.

[3] Dewey, M. (1888). “Libraries as Related to the Educational Work of the State,” p. 3.

3B: Dewey and Green's Guide to the Roles and Appearances of Librarians

Reading the foundational texts of both Green and Dewey on the yet-to-be named “reference services,” it illuminated for me how the original hopes for reference librarianship truly transformed our understandings of information access. The rhetoric of Green definitely demonstrated his belief that “personal assistance” was fundamental to the profession, as he gave example after example of situations where a patron needed help securing an obscure, or quite ordinary, source that pertained to both random curiosities as well as vocational queries. I found it interesting that Green admits that librarians are not all-knowing, yet he implies they must give the appearance that they are! He mentions a personal experience where he remembers “slyly consulting a dictionary to find out what a ‘cam’ is…” [1] This clandestine method of approaching and guiding patrons also applies to finding books when patrons ask for help, as the librarian (or the library assistant in this case) must not consult with patrons all the time, but they must appear as if their help is incidental and given freely, not because of a requirement. [2]

Another aspect of this essay that I found interesting is that Green desires for the librarian to be a neutral force, yet at the same time the librarian is also supposed to bestow some sort of enlightenment upon the patron.  Beyond directing patrons to their sources, Green’s ideal librarian also imparts some wisdom in a both scholarly and paternal way. For instance, one of Green’s illustrations depicts a young man engaging in a debate society, where not only does the librarian direct him to resources, the librarian also reminds the young man that “in order to become a successful debater he must also consider both sides of a question, and weigh the arguments of opponents.” [3] This situation of a librarian giving advice not related to the reference search seemed so strange and out of place to me. The concept of the enlightened librarian imparting wisdom though, fit into Green’s ideals precisely because he saw it was the librarian’s duty to place their patrons “on a footing of equality” [4] with themselves when confronted with what they perceived as ignorance. This idea related to Dewey’s fixation in his essay that public education and the library were intertwined. The contribution of the library to lifelong learning was paramount, in Dewey’s eyes, and the librarian facilitated this learning. As Dewey states, “When a bright boy or girl has been once found and interested and started, he is almost sure to continue under these influences all his life.” [5] I agree with Dewey and Green’s aspirations that libraries and librarians can greatly influence the education of a growing mind, yet I am unsure if I agree with the notion that the librarian must play some sort of paternalistic, enlightened role in achieving this goal.

--

[1] Green, S.S. (1876). “Personal relations between librarians and readers.” American Library Journal 1: p. 77.

[2] Green, “Personal relations between librarians and readers,” p. 79.

[3] Green, “Personal relations between librarians and readers,” p. 76.

[4] Green, “Personal relations between librarians and readers,” p. 80.

[5] Dewey, M. (1888). “Libraries as Related to the Educational Work of the State.”

3A: Print Isn't Dead!! and Other Reflections

I really enjoyed delving into my natural environment — the library — during class last week. Actually being in the physical space, surrounded by a vast array of books and electronic resources, made me reexamine the debate on the future of reference services. Considering the complexity of M Library and its multitude of collections, I cannot really see why a random human being wandering through one of nineteen library locations on campus would not need OR want a reference librarian to help them as they sort through the millions and millions of materials at their fingertips. The effort alone in maintaining this giant collection of information is remarkable. I remember one moment in the reading room of Hatcher where I was looking at the reference books and I realized just how much detail must be involved in organizing and displaying these sources that are full of specific information and guidelines for researchers. Who knew my appreciation for libraries and librarians could rise even more?

Later on, as I worked with my group members Alyssa and Sarah on identifying and utilizing reference sources, I came to another important conclusion: PRINT ISN’T DEAD!1!!1! Print sources are still useful and necessary, especially pertaining to topics that require a great deal of specificity. For researchers that only need a basic assessment of a given field (i.e., most undergrads and the average patron), online reference is still the way to go. Indeed, a few of the web tools we were using left me awestruck, like the Proquest Statistical Abstracts for example, and rendered the print versions archaic in comparison. Still, other web tools left much to be desired, with information that was either indistinguishable from the printed text or hard to access (the American National Biography comes to mind). Although, I learned much more from this exercise than simply the advantages and disadvantages of print and web reference tools. I also learned about my group members, Alyssa and Sarah, as they talked about how the subjects we were researching related to them. The class objectives we were supposed to be adhering to sometimes drifted into a social event, and that was honestly one of the best parts of this learning experience. Yes, bonding in class leads to better group projects later on in SI, but I think this activity was also a great model of how librarians build professional relationships. By weaving our personal lives into this professional context, we were able to demonstrate how building trust and collaboration skills truly benefit the field of librarianship.

2B: Between Needing and Wanting Reference Librarians

Cracking open my first library textbook*, I was a little excited to see what style and perspective Smith and Wong would take in addressing the status of reference services in the new information age. And color me surprised! (/sarcasm) The authors of the textbook on library and reference services defended the utility of reference librarians! Beginning with the history of public libraries being established in the United States, Smith and Wong describe the boom of reference services in response to a paper written by Samuel Green that called for “personal assistance” [1] to be a fixture in library settings. Next, Smith and Wong narrate the trajectory of reference and the work it provides as the profession is transformed by various technological and demographic shifts in the past 140 years. Lastly, the authors close the chapter by highlighting the debates over the past few decades about the future of reference services and the library itself. The main consensus resulting from these debates appears to be, according to Smith and Wong, that reference librarians are definitely still needed in order to sort through the complexity and vastness of available information as well as continuing “to provide direct personal service to members of the community.” [2]

I definitely agree with the authors’ main point – reference librarians are needed to overcome the multitude of shortcomings that search engines like Google and sources like Wikipedia contain in abundance. But I think the real question that we need to confront in the information age is this – are reference librarians wanted? Are they even spared a passing thought? Sure, reference librarians provide a variety of services that go beyond simply answering a question or finding a source for a patron, but those actions are still the popular conceptions of what a reference librarian is for. Much like the model of tiered reference service at certain research libraries [3], the routine reference transaction in the information age has shifted to where Google is the primary point of reference and the basic reference librarian is a more “high-level” expert. The problem with this arrangement is the same as the aforementioned reference model, which Smith and Wong demonstrate: “many users simply accept the information provided at the first level of service and do not follow through with a referral.” [4] When the average Googler is searching for the causes of the American Civil War, they will not check out  the repositories of primary sources or the varied perspectives of scholars that a reference librarian would know of firsthand; They will click on the first link on the first page that gives a broad summary of the conflict. When the average Googler is typing “Sandy Hook” and the first result is “Sandy Hook hoax”, they do not immediately consult a reference librarian to determine if the sources from said search are verifiable and accurate. They will make their own determination.

And often times, that determination is wrong. The existence of websites that peddle conspiracy theories and false information is in no short supply. Yet, despite the best talents of our current generation of reference librarians, these websites are extremely popular. One may only look to the current state of affairs in the 2016 U.S. presidential race to see the evidence laid bare, as the upper echelons of presidential politics become increasingly susceptible to conspiracies and falsehoods. The continued relevance of reference librarians depends on combatting the universal lie that sustains the World Wide Web: Because if it’s on the Internet, and it feels true, then it must be true!

A clip from The Rachel Maddow Show exploring the site Infowars and its founder Alex Jones, whose conspiracy theories have enticed the Donald Trump campaign and its followers.

--

* Not literally. My own personal copy has yet to be shipped.

[1] Smith, Linda C., and Melissa Autumn Wong. 2017. Reference and Information Services: An Introduction. 5th edition. Santa Barbara, CA. ABC-CLIO. p. 8.

[2] Smith and Wong, Reference and Information Services, p. 22.

[3] Smith and Wong, Reference and Information Services, pp. 18-19.

[4] Smith and Wong, Reference and Information Services, p. 19.

2A: The Librarian Persona and Uncompromising Service

When I initially came to class last Tuesday, I saw little resemblance between reference librarianship and the Zingerman’s business practices. Like Zoë, I felt uncomfortable comparing a profit-driven venture like Zingerman’s with a “public good” like libraries. Of course, libraries emerge in all sorts of formats and settings, not just in public. Yet, this sense of discomfort remained because I firmly kept this binary mindset: public vs. profit. I saw the value in applying a lot of the best practices that Weinzweig highlighted, but I was still skeptical in what I saw was appeasing bad customer behavior. “Why should library professionals concede to ridiculous demands!?” I asked myself. I agreed with Nicco when he mentioned being both impressed and frustrated with how Weinzweig explained how to handle “off-the-wall” demands. [1] On the one hand, I agree that it is important to acknowledge a customer’s strange request rather than belittle them for it. The way Weinzweig details approaching these requests like a complaint led me to appreciate a service practice that went above and beyond to show respect towards the customer. However, I was also frustrated because I saw this as being incompatible in a library setting. How could we even entertain these demands when we have neither the resources nor the mindset of a business?

My perception changed when Kristin brought up the idea of the persona of librarians. The all-knowing, yet cold and unwelcoming librarian is seared into the cultural psyche of almost every patron that comes through a library’s doors. Yes, the patron’s demands might be ridiculous, but as librarians, we are supposed to have the answers! The cold and unwelcoming stereotype might further dissuade patrons from asking any type of question, so why should we meet these unfavorable expectations when we react negatively to one “off-the-wall” demand? The idea of a library persona becomes even more useful when considering how to handle angry patrons. When a patron brings their frustrations to the reference desk (that frustration possibly being a fine or a technical conundrum), the librarian persona helps to shield that anger from landing on you personally. Whether we like it or not, we are considered the embodiment of the library, so we become the sites of protest against unjust policies (perceived or actual) or uncompromising machines. Utilizing the library persona as a forcefield maintains the distance needed to resolve patron complaints in a way that reestablishes respect between the two parties.

Yet, a few lingering questions that I did not address at the end of class continue to plague me. I kept thinking of instances when the customer/patron turns abusive and the persona is forcibly stripped away. In particular, I found Weinzweig’s response to customer harassment [2] to be wholly inadequate as the needs of the customer are STILL addressed at the expense of the servicer. While Weinzweig considers a painless exit of a harassment situation the highest priority, he does not consider the impact this has on the servicer. For example, would the Zingerman way work in instances of sexual harassment? When a servicer’s persona AND personhood is stripped away? I find it frustrating that Weinzweig fails to consider this type of situation, which I believe goes beyond the bounds of typical harassment and deserves some degree of “setting the customer straight.” [3] In a library setting, the safety and dignity of librarians and all patrons is paramount, so how do we maintain that in the face of harassment? And does that have to be balanced against providing good service? At what point do we determine that a customer/patron relationship must end and that good service is no longer possible? Ultimately, when is the persona not enough?

--
[1] Weinzweig, Ari. 2004. Zingerman's Guide to Giving Great Service. New York: Hyperion, p. 73.
[2] Weinzweig, Zingerman’s Guide, pp. 75-77.
[3] Ibid, p. 76.

An Introduction

Hi there!

My name is Russel and I am a first-year UMSI student, specializing in Library and Information Science. Before I start this blog, I want to give an introduction as to what inspired me to pursue this field in the first place. 

I grew up in a small town in rural Minnesota, where my first exposure to the wonderful world of librarianship was the local library down the road! It was a very small, cramped space with a very limited number of computers to meet the rising demand, but for me as a kid, this tiny place meant everything (Fun Fact: it was originally the town bank, which meant the library had a huge vault!). I saw the library as a place to make friends and explore new ideas that simply weren't being discussed in my community. After I turned 16, I decided the next best step to support an institution I loved was to work for it! My work as a shelver, and the amazing mentors I gained as a result, was truly the impetus to seeking out a career in libraries in college and beyond!

During my undergrad years, I attended Carleton College and worked toward earning my B.A. in History with a concentration in Latin American Studies. My studies led me to interacting with an academic library for the first time, and I became fascinated with the reference librarians in particular, whose vast knowledge of databases and journal sources always seemed to rescue a project on the precipice of despair. I began working at Carleton’s library my sophomore year, and after a two-year stint as an RA, I returned after graduation to work as a circulation supervisor. My emerging goal of academic librarianship was never far from my mind as I formed relationships and developed skills both inside and outside the confines of Carleton.

I am delighted to forge on with this professional journey at UMSI and have such talented peers at my side! Besides offering infinite wisdom on how to survive the hellscape that is an upper-Midwestern winter, I hope you all see my dedication, inquisitiveness, and critical empathy as worthy traits for a classmate! I look forward to engaging with you all on important library and reference issues!