[WEB4LIB] RE: What's wrong with virtual reference?

[Oberg, Steve]

Hmmmm....Strong reactions, true.  I guess I wasn't as bothered about the authors' viewpoint and didn't really think carefully enough about their central argument (as I suggested in an off-list response to Thomas Dowling).  I still believe, though, that there is truth in the article regarding our sometime slavish, jump-on-the-bandwagon approach to new stuff, and about the high value of in-person reference.  As has been pointed out, virtual reference won't replace in-person reference; instead it gives us a tool to reach online users.

By the way, virtual reference here has meant a 20% increase in overall reference hours and no reduction at all in in-person reference.

Steve

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Steve Oberg -- Electronic Resources Librarian
Taylor University -- Zondervan Library
http://www.tayloru.edu/library/


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roy Tennant [mailto:roy.tennant at ucop.edu]
> Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 10:17 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: [WEB4LIB] RE: What's wrong with virtual reference?
> 
> 
> One of the things I found interesting about that piece is that it is 
> the most over-stated, hyperbolic piece I've ever read on digital 
> reference. Frankly, I don't know where the author or authors found 
> articles that advocated the death of the reference desk or of 
> telephone 
> reference, and no citations help us out there. I suspect that 
> like many 
> people who are uncomfortable with a new technology, he assumes that 
> those who advocate a new tool are by default advocating the death of 
> the old tool. From what I've seen, that's far, far from the truth, 
> although anecdotal reports of libraries cutting back on desk hours is 
> disturbing.
> 
> By some odd coincidence, I had planned on revisiting digital 
> reference 
> in my "Digital Libraries" column in Library Journal for the 
> last couple 
> months, and just last night submitted the column to my editor. Here's 
> the last paragraph (the rest to appear on the web and in print in 
> mid-January):
> 
> "Will digital reference become an essential part of standard library 
> service?
> It's clearly too early to tell. That makes it all the more 
> disturbing to
> hear tales of libraries cutting back on reference desk hours as a 
> result of
> offering digital reference. No matter how successful digital reference
> proves to be, in-person and telephone reference services will remain
> important. As with any new technology or potential service, the 
> essential
> question must be "does it provide better service to our 
> clientele?" If 
> it
> doesn't, then no technology-no matter how new and shiny-will be worth 
> our
> time and that of our patrons. It should come as no surprise that 
> answering
> such an essential question will take time, will be accompanied by a 
> number
> of false starts, and will be debated with inflated rhetoric on both 
> sides."
> 
> Three guesses which specific source I had in mind when 
> writing the last 
> sentence. And thank you, Bernie, for providing a timely citation to 
> this list!
> Roy
> 
> On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 06:41  AM, Oberg, Steve wrote:
> 
> > Bernie,
> >
> > I wholeheartedly concur with the authors' viewpoint.  At first I 
> > thought that it would be an article that simply bashed virtual 
> > reference as the latest librarian fad -- which to some 
> extent, virtual 
> > reference is.  But as I read the article, it was clear that the 
> > authors were not arguing against virtual reference as a whole but 
> > rather against the idea that virtual reference can/should replace 
> > traditional in-person reference interaction.  They argue for 
> > moderation.  I think that is a very instructive point and 
> it is a good 
> > one for us to remember.
> >
> > I work with QuestionPoint at Taylor and pushed for us to 
> get involved 
> > in that collaborative effort as a way to "get our feet wet" in this 
> > area.  Overall I think it has been a worthwhile experience and I'm 
> > glad we're doing it.  However, virtual reference can never fully 
> > replace in-person reference, nor should it, in my view.  It 
> is one of 
> > many tools at our disposal to help provide good service to 
> our users.  
> > One example that wasn't mentioned in this op-ed piece was 
> provision of 
> > reference service to distance education students.  While not ideal, 
> > virtual reference is better than nothing for these students!  We at 
> > Taylor have a College of Adult and Lifelong Learning that enrolls 
> > approximately 900 part-time students and provision of a virtual 
> > reference service has been of value to them.  It was one of 
> the main 
> > reasons we wanted to get our feet wet in the first place.  And what 
> > about the increasing number of on-campus users who do not regularly 
> > come in to the library yet heavily r!
> >  ely on library resources via the Internet?  Virtual reference is 
> > worth trying if only to try to reach that population.
> >
> > One additional point that might be worth mentioning:  The authors 
> > refer to the U of I study and the finding in that study 
> that virtual 
> > reference transactions were averaging about 10 minutes, longer than 
> > what it would take in-person.  It's important to remember that that 
> > article, if I remember correctly, was written based on a 
> trial period 
> > experience.  Librarians using the new service were in a learning 
> > process, still getting used to the new service and technology, so 
> > perhaps it is a little unfair to generalize on the statement that 
> > virtual reference transactions take longer than in-person reference 
> > transactions.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > Steve Oberg -- Electronic Resources Librarian
> > Taylor University -- Zondervan Library
> > http://www.tayloru.edu/library/
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Sloan, Bernie [mailto:bernies at uillinois.edu]
> >> Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 5:57 PM
> >> To: Multiple recipients of list
> >> Subject: [WEB4LIB] What's wrong with virtual reference?
> >>
> >>
> >> There's been a discussion on the DIG_REF list today about the
> >> following
> >> Op-Ed piece:
> >>
> >> McKinzie, Steve. Virtual reference: overrated, inflated, 
> and not real.
> >> Charleston Advisor, 4(2). October 2002.
> >> http://www.charlestonco.com/features.cfm?id=112&type=ed
> >>
> >> I know that there are a number of Web4Lib folks who are
> >> interested in this
> >> topic, but who are not on the DIG_REF list. I'm curious to
> >> hear what you all
> >> think of this article.
> >>
> >> Bernie Sloan
> >> Senior Library Information Systems Consultant, ILCSO
> >> University of Illinois Office for Planning and Budgeting
> >> 616 E. Green Street, Suite 213
> >> Champaign, IL  61820
> >>
> >> Phone: (217) 333-4895
> >> Fax:   (217) 265-0454
> >> E-mail: bernies at uillinois.edu
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> 
> 
>