[WEB4LIB] Re: Patron Technophobia

[Webmaster]

Whoa, HOLD IT RIGHT THERE--I did **NOT** write that, Kim!

Please check posts before you go quoting people, PLEASE!

The person who wrote that was Joe Schallan (4/2/99).

This is NOT my attitude, NOT AT ALL.  I am committed to
public service.  Please be more careful in the future.

Robert Tiess
rjtiess at warwick.net


Kim Lord wrote:
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> With all due respect I need to take exception to some of this,
> 
> At 09:57 AM 4/2/99 -0800, you wrote:
> >Robert Tiess wrote:
> >snip
> 
> >
> >I am unaware of any large-scale human factors research
> >that was conducted *prior* to the deployment of our automated
> >catalogs and systems.  We librarians seem to have decided
> >they were a good deal and we just did it, the public be
> >damned.
> 
> Any library staff worker that would actually have a "public be damned"
> attitude would not or at least should not have a job for long.  At our
> small to mid sized library, better access to our library's collection as
> well the other libraries in the area was the issue.  Our circulation and
> ill figures have increased steadily since we went to an automated PAC
> system.  Surely not everyone has been thrilled with it....including some
> staff, but a 50%+ increase in statistics must mean somebody's happy.
> 
> snip
> 
> >Now we must provide after-the-fact remedies, and
> >besides patron training via workshops -- which many
> >of us are doing -- I would strongly urge the provision
> >of alternate modes of access.
> >
> >How about printed guides and pathfinders?  Floor
> >plans?  What would be so terribly wrong with
> >maintaining a subject-only card file?  Many patrons
> >simply want the Dewey or LC number for a
> >subject area.  This wouldn't be a high-maintenance
> >item and would reap much good will from the
> >patrons.
> 
> The card catalog...honestly any form of the card catalog, is just too high
> maintenance for reasonable consideration. Hours a week were spent filing
> cards into cabinets that not many people used. We do have the Dewey system
> displayed near the PACs for the folks that really just want to browse.
> >
> snip
> 
> >Donald A. Norman, in The Invisible Computer --
> >Why Good Products Can Fail, the Personal Computer
> >Is So Complex, and Information Appliances are the
> >Solution (MIT Press, 1998) makes the point that
> >the operation of a device shouldn't be more complex
> >than the task it was designed to perform.
> >
> >Seems to me our automated catalogs (the device)
> >are much more complex than the task (following a
> 
> >number to a shelf and plucking a book off it).
> >A somewhat disingenuous analogy, I agree,
> >but nevertheless the flipping of cards with fingers is
> >an intuitive mode of operation of hundreds of years
> >standing, whereas pushing a bar of Dove soap around
> >a pad to operate a pointer on a TV screen is pretty
> >bizarre and not intuitive at all.
> >
> >No offense to Doug Engelbart, the inventor of the
> >mouse.  I *like* a mouse, but then I'm not everyone
> >and that's exactly the point.
> 
> This is an old concern and I certainly don't want to start a war here, but
> in our small to mid size public library we had many patrons who were
> confused by the card catalog and I'm certain were embarrassed to ask for
> help or except help when it was offered because after all this was supposed
> to be a skill learned in grade school...right?   The major problem with the
> card catalog, beyond the volume of staff hours that were spent to maintain
> it, was that many people, especially students would come across the first
> Dewey number they could find and then would assume all the material on that
> subject was all at that number.  Every so often I would get a complaint
> that we had so little on, for example AIDS, only to find that the patron
> had found the books on the medical aspects of but had completely missed the
> social aspects of, which would be cataloged in a different location.  A
> patron now can type AIDS into the PAC and find the 50+ books that we have
> and would be forced to narrow the search down a bit and would be much more
> inclined to ask for help.   I would absolutely shudder at the prospect of
> bringing back any part of the card catalog if for the only reason that it
> was a substantial amount of work to maintain....time that is now being
> spent dealing with people directly...helping them to narrow their focus if
> needed, and make the material in this building and other libraries all that
> more accessible to them.
> 
> Human nature being what it is, there is no perfect solution that is going
> to make everybody happy.  But this is where the human element is so
> important.  Computer interfaces that are friendly and make sense are
> paramount, but really the staff of a library is the first "interface" with
> which the public sees.  Listening skills, really understanding what a
> person is asking..good old fashioned reference skills...that's what we
> still need to focus on.
> 
> Kim Lord
> Assistant Director
> Kent Library
> Suffield CT
> 
> All the usual disclaimers apply......