Let's move onto our next topic, "Redefining Reference Services," which was suggested by our guest editor, Fred Milstein. Fred has a B.A. from Brandeis University and an M.L.S. from the University of Denver. He has been teaching information skills to students at Sacramento City College since 1965. A veteran of the "old" world of Dewey, card catalogs, ink, print, and microforms, in the last 15 years he has reinvented himself as an enthusiastic citizen of the new universe of online access, hi-tech tools and electronic formats and multimedia.
For most of Fred's career -- including the present -- he has been an officer of the Los Rios College Federation of Teachers. In various capacities, including membership on several bargaining teams and a term as chief grievance officer, he has worked for faculty rights in general, but is especially proud of his role in defining and defending the faculty status and instructional function of librarians. He believes that the Los Rios Community College District contract was the first in California to stop using terms such as "non-instructional -- or even non-educational -- support staff" and to eliminate the special ghetto section where librarians have traditionally been segregated along with counselors and others. Fred also takes credit for the fact that the Los Rios contract was the first to recognize that the work of librarians is instructional and differs from their classroom colleagues in mode, but not in substance. Currently he is focusing on producing multimedia and internet projects both for practical use and inspirational examples to others.
Please join our discussion on "Redefining Reference Services."
You are beginning to feel more and more like a helpless, hopeless victim when, out of the blue, you are presented with an opportunity for action and, perhaps, to become a hero. Your equally frustrated and beleaguered dean (or library director) invites you to come up with ideas and strategies for finessing the problem out of existence -- or at least down to a manageable size. You are given total freedom to redefine and reorganize the content, means of delivery and image of "reference services." You are not free to make major new financial resources a factor in your formula for change.
The overall goal is to develop a magical new paradigm for accomplishing more with less.
Some of your more specific goals might be:
Alternatively, feel free to just brainstorm and fantasize if you are still waiting for your invitation to be a hero and your license to redefine and reorganize with total freedom.
The goal of this discussion is to learn from each other's practical experiences and to be cross-fertilized with each other's visions of an ideal -- or at least better -- professional world.
I must report, however, that I've considerable difficulty sorting out what to do with the model you've laid out. The given imperative is to design a "magical new paradigm for performing more with less."
If this means "doing the same thing faster" (or even more efficiently or effectively), I don't see how to proceed. If the same work has to be processed, then one has to define what this work is -- it may be that the work load has increased and you're already at the limit of "more with less." Perhaps the work itself can be revised, but one suspects that students bring much the same "general knowledge" limitations as they had twenty years ago (plus, in many cases a facility at using particular software products).
If the work to be done is based on a need to help students overcome their knowledge limitations, then it may be that the "need" is stable (excepting as their are more subject areas where they may need help, in which case it may be growing). If the work is to provide search tools, irrespective of the ability of folks to use them, then the issue is one of bringing in hardware and dismissing librarians.
The need, it seems to me, is a human one -- knowledge limitations in a particular setting. The correct approach, I think, is to appeal to the experts in developmental and cognitive psychology for input on what librarian expertise students need from a particular library in order to use a given set of tools. But note that this model assumes that the use of the library is solely to support classwork -- which may not be the case.
So, why no response? Everybody was away at ALA? Nobody understood what I was asking for? Well, ALA is over now, and here is an explanation of the introduction.
The one person to respond so far said:
"...I've had considerable difficulty sorting out what to do with the model you've laid out. The given imperative is design a 'magical new paradigm for performing more with less.'"
In a nutshell, what that reference to a new paradigm means is a redeployment of resources and priorities -- both personnel and material -- that will enable a LESS than adequate number of librarians to serve MORE students than they could reasonably and effectively handle under traditional staffing and assignment patterns defined as: reference desk service by professional librarians 100 percent of the hours the library is open.
What I would like you all to share and discuss are:
REPORTS -- of experiments and programs to do "more with less" -- as defined above -- that have been implemented, successfully or unsuccessfully, in your libraries.
IDEAS -- for redefining and reorganizing the content, means of delivery and image of reference services in ways that will enable us to meet growing demands with static or declining resources without undue sacrifice of quality.
Some starter topics and questions for your consideration:
Because the methods to fulfill the evolving needs of the users are also ever-changing, there is no extended "steady state" of professional activities; rather, we have to adapt to the development. This can be done in two alternative ways: By continuous "organization development" or more abrupt "business reengineering."
ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT
It means first of all personnel development. Coworkers have to be motivated to improve their qualifications. Only well trained personnel can execute new, efficient techniques and procedures. Concomitantly, the authorities must be persuaded that investment in continuing education of staff is, on the long term, a bargaining investment.
Introducing new procedures under cost-neutral conditions means at the same time to limit or even eliminate certain services delivered to date. Consequently, it is compulsory to set up priorities and to define quality criteria. It is irrevocable to reveal to the financial decision makers that a specific degree of quality has its price; it must become transparent what budget cut causes what type of quality loss.
BUSINESS REENGINEERING
Whereas organization development is a general approach, business reengineering is possible only under special premises. Of primordial importance are a willingness to a joined effort among the involved groups; a vision and a team able to put the planned fundamental restructurization into practice.
Let us spotlight the following case study:
A couple of research groups or institutes, devoted to one common broad research topic (e.g., cell biology), are about to be transferred into the same reconstructed or new building (for instance a cell biology center). Each team or institute is equipped with an own small library. This constellation gives rise to integrate the small libraries, together with the personnel, in one library and to locate the unit in the mentioned building; it may be advantageous if the central university library participates, too. With more or less the same budget as the precursor-libraries had together, the emerging larger library reaches synergy: More comprehensive collections by avoiding unnecessary copy acquisitions as well as more facilities and services become possible.
In similar settings as sketched above, librarians have the opportunity to promote and coordinate library reengineering processes.
These same library assistants also have teaching responsibilities for remedial and lower division classes, and library orientations and tours. Reference work and library instruction complement each other nicely. Of course, you need people who can teach and have a high level of intelligence.
We are fortunate in having a committed and intelligent group of library assistants in reference and Instruction. Without them, we could do far less. Our librarians serve as bibliographers for subject disciplines. As faculty they are on university committees and have to meet the requirements of promotion and tenure.
Getting rid of the Reference Desk is not the answer for many university libraries. Over 75 percent (at least) of our students come with nearly no knowledge of basic library skills. They need instruction and general reference service. Our desk statistics support the value of this service. State Universities are not elite schools catering to those from elite high schools. Our mission to serve everyone, regardless of preparation. So -- we find creative ways to work with the Reference Desk concept because it works!
"General reference at the reference desk, reference by appointment with subject specialists, and referral to subject specialist from the reference desk."
As a consequence of personnel budget restrictions, we do not maintain a formal post of a general reference librarian. But, knowing about the extraordinary importance of the general reference service, we recruit a lot of volunteers from almost all sections (acquisitions, cataloging, document delivery, collection developers, subject specialists) willing to stay at least one our per week at the reference desk during their working time; the library manager participates, too. On saturdays, reference work is assured by a member of the subject specialist team. This sort of general reference service is offered during the opening ours of the circulation (10.00 to 18.00, Sa 10.00 to 12.00). From 08.00 to 10.00, the circulation personnel can sporadically be asked for general reference information. In the evening, a person for general reference is at the desk from 18.00 till 21.00. To keep abreast with innovations, the head of the user department releases from time to time an information sheet or organizes brief brush up courses for this vast group of general reference personnel.
The obvious advantage of this model is that nearly everybody capable of doing general reference work gets into contact with users. Knowing customers' needs first hand is a very valuable source of information for the staff and has a strong motivating effect.
The Oboler Library at Idaho State University is currently experimenting with a unique way of engaging paraprofessionals in the reference area. We are testing a new program where library tutors are present in the reference area during busy times of the day. The students tutors are trained in helping library patrons search the catalog and various periodical databases available on our computers in the reference area. Tutors were given a document that defines the parameters of their activity. They are supposed to target students who have never used the technology or feel insecure with the search engines. They are to refer patrons to the reference librarian for specific reference questions or if they recognize other possible resources that could help the patron. The tutors do not go behind the reference desk and they wear tags identifying them as student tutors.
There is a considerable body of literature that supports the effectiveness of peer tutors in various subject fields. Idaho State University has an extended tutorial program and the library receives funds from that program. The program is in its second week. The response from the reference librarians and from the tutors has been positive so far. We do not have feedback from the patrons yet. The real question of course is whether this program improves our service to students or whether it imposes limitations that cannot easily be recognized. I leave that up for discussion.
 Home |
 Discussion |