scholarly journals The Librarian’s Guide to Homelessness: An Empathy-Driven Approach to Solving Problems, Preventing Conflict, and Serving Everyone by Ryan J. Dowd

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 37
Author(s):  
Megan Young

Every public librarian, or library staff member, has interacted with a patron suffering from homelessness. Some of the interactions are favorable, while others are less than savory, and some might even be down-right dangerous and involve the police. Dowd, as a lawyer and director of Hesed House, a shelter for the homeless, takes his experience and presents the reader with tools and suggestions to build a more amiable relationship with the homeless population who attend the library. The style of this book is more storytime-esque rather than being a dry how-to guide. At the beginning of each section Dowd gives the reader personal experience, or a story about a coworker, which shows his investment and dedication, making the book a more enjoyable, and credible, read.

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 88-90
Author(s):  
Ruby Warren

A Review of: McKeever, C., Bates, J., & Reilly, J. (2017). School library staff perspectives on teacher information literacy and collaboration. Journal of Information Literacy, 11(2), 51-68. https://doi.org/10.11645/11.2.2187 Abstract Objective – Researchers sought to determine school library staff perspectives on the information literacy knowledge held by secondary school teachers, and teacher relationships with the library. Design – Interviews analyzed with thematic and axial coding. Setting – Secondary schools in Northern Ireland. Subjects – 21 schools across Northern Ireland were selected as a sample, including urban, rural, integrated, grammar, and secondary schools. 16 schools ultimately participated. Methods – Semi-structured interviews were conducted with one library staff member at each selected secondary school. Interview audio and notes were transcribed and coded thematically both manually by the researchers and using NVivo. Categories were identified by open coding, then relationships identified via axial coding. Main Results – The majority (10 of 16) of library staff members interviewed expressed that they had not been asked about information literacy by teachers, and only one library staff member described a truly collaborative instructional relationship with teaching staff. The majority of staff expressed either that teachers were familiar with concepts related to information literacy but did not know the name for them, or, that they thought information literacy was entirely unfamiliar to teachers at their school. Staff frequently cited competing priorities (for example, standardized testing) and limited class time as potential causes for teachers not focusing on information literacy concepts. Conclusion – Both cultural and policy changes need to be made in schools to prioritize information literacy as a core competency for both students and teachers. The researchers call for greater intra-school collaboration as a means to achieve this cultural change.


2010 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 105
Author(s):  
Annie M. Hughes

Objective – To evaluate the quality of academic libraries’ virtual reference services and measure compliance to the Reference & User Services Association’s (RUSA’s) Guidelines for Virtual Reference & User Services. Design – Qualitative research study evaluating virtual reference chat sessions using RUSA’s Guidelines for Virtual Reference & User Services. Setting – Virtual reference environments in public academic libraries in the United States. Subjects – Twenty virtual reference providers from public academic libraries. Methods – Initially researchers selected 1 academic library out of each of the 50 states to evaluate for quality virtual chat reference services, however because of factors including time and availability of virtual chat services to unaffiliated institutions; the sample included only 20 academic libraries. After selecting the 20 academic libraries for evaluation, researchers posed as virtual chat reference patrons using emails and aliases that had no affiliation to any particular institution. Researchers then asked the librarian or library staff a two-part question making sure to leave out any library jargon or anything that would lead the virtual chat reference operator to recognize that they are also affiliated with a library or library school. Using the RUSA Guidelines for Virtual Reference & User Services, researchers then evaluated their virtual chat reference experience for the following: Approachability; Interest; Listening/Inquiring; Searching; Follow-Up; Suggests patron call or visit the library. Main Results – When evaluated for jargon-free websites and overall usability in finding all types of reference services, 80% of the library’s websites were easy to use and jargon free, reflecting overall high usability. Evaluation of library staff’s ability to maintain “word contact” by writing prompts to convey interest in the patron’s question left some room for improvement. Sixty percent of researchers coding their virtual reference experience thought the level of contact was below expected. Information regarding question and answering procedures, question scope, types of answers provided and expected turnaround time for questions was only available in 30% of examined websites. Thirty-five percent of researchers felt that library staff members gathered enough information to answer the question without compromising privacy, however, 25% thought that staff members gathered a very small amount of information on the patron’s need, although privacy never felt compromised. When researchers evaluated the library staff member on their ability to explain how to utilize resources properly, 50% thought the instruction provided was below average. Although 15% believed they received “superior instruction.” Seventy-five percent of the researchers were not asked by a library staff member if the question received an adequate answer, 50% of reference transactions library staff did not consult a librarian or expert, and in 55% of transactions the staff member did not suggest that the patron visit or call the library. Conclusion – While the researchers received some valuable information about the need to improve virtual reference services in academic libraries, there were some flaws in their research. The question they developed was almost too clear and made it difficult for the individual answering the chat reference to adequately perform a reference interview or ask probing questions. It is possible that because researchers carefully planned out their question they set themselves up to create an interaction that would not normally occur in a virtual chat reference environment. Also, because researchers were unable to evaluate what was occurring in the environment surrounding the virtual chat reference providers it was impossible to make a judgment on the speed or length of the interaction. The researchers did come away from the study with results that point to a need to utilize the RUSA guidelines in order to conduct effective reference interviews, maintain appropriate contact with the user when engaging in chat reference, provide instruction and point patrons to quality resources as well as consult an expert on the topic if needed. They surmised that if libraries utilized these guidelines, virtual chat reference services would be improved.


2006 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorie Andrea Kloda

A review of: Curry, Ann and Deborah Copeman. “Reference Service to International Students: A Field Stimulation Research Study.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 31.5 (Sep. 2005): 409-20. Objective – To evaluate the quality of reference service provided to non-native, English-speaking international students in academic libraries. Design – Field stimulation (unobtrusive testing). Setting – Eleven college and university libraries in the lower mainland of British Columbia, Canada, in the fall of 2003. Subjects – Library staff offering reference service at one of the participating libraries. Methods – The study utilized field stimulation, whereby an individual, or “proxy,” posed as a library user and initiated a reference encounter with library staff at each institution. In each case the proxy asked the same question to the library staff member. After the interaction was completed the proxy recorded all observed behaviours. Data were collected using a checklist of actions; a narrative record written by the proxy; and several evaluative questions. Each library was visited by the same proxy on two separate occasions for a total of 22 visits, of which 20 instances resulted in usable data. The narrative recordings of the reference encounters were analyzed using an open coding process. Main results – In 75% of the cases, the proxy was “‘satisfied” or “very satisfied” with help received from the library staff member and was “likely to” or “definitely would return to the staff member” in the future. The reference encounters lasted between a few minutes to half an hour in length, with most lasting between 5 and 15 minutes. Encounters that were brief (less than 5 minutes) resulted in an evaluation of “dissatisfied” or “very dissatisfied” and “not likely to” or “definitely would not return.” Encounters where the library staff member extended an invitation to the proxy to return in the future were all rated with “high satisfaction” and “willingness to return.” The following reference service actions were observed in at least half of the encounters: • Asked questions for clarification (20) • Avoided overwhelming the user with information (19) • Provided instruction on how to use information sources (18) • Explained what he / she was doing at every stage (17) • Demonstrated awareness of language barriers and modified his / her behaviour accordingly (16) • Had a respectful attitude toward the user and her question (16) • Looked approachable (15) • Used library jargon (12) The remaining reference service actions from the checklist were observed in less than half the encounters: • Accompanied the user to information sources (9) • Invited the user to return if she needed more help (6) • Asked the user if she had found what she needed (4) • Referred the user to someone else (2) The data collected from the narrative recordings of the reference encounters resulted in the identification of 17 themes. Most of these themes corresponded with the literature reviewed as important qualities for positive reference interactions. Nine of these themes were found to correlate with the proxy’s positive evaluation of the reference encounter: approachability, awareness of language barriers, asking questions, rephrasing, explanation, library jargon, instruction, early termination of interview, patience, and follow up. Conclusion – This preliminary study documents the actions of reference staff in academic libraries when answering a question from an international student. The researchers found a relationship between some library staff behaviours and the user’s level of satisfaction and likelihood to return to the staff member in the future. The research suggests that reference staff pay special attention to the needs of non-native English speakers in order to provide a positive reference encounter.


2018 ◽  
Vol 79 (1) ◽  
pp. 20
Author(s):  
Marcel LaFlamme ◽  
Shannon Kipphut-Smith

Academic library professionals increasingly see student workers as full coparticipants in the design and delivery of library resources and services. For some librarians, this perspective grows out of a commitment to critical and feminist pedagogy,1 while for others, greater reliance on student workers in the face of flat or contracting budgets has led to the pragmatic realization that the “skills of student workers could be leveraged to advance the library in unexpected and invaluable ways.”2 This article examines how collaboration with students can take librarian-initiated research in new directions, drawing on the experiences of the coauthors (a library staff member and a graduate student) as part of the Fondren Fellows program at Rice University’s Fondren Library.


2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca E. Kason ◽  
Grace Akinrinade ◽  
Rebekah Halpert ◽  
Thomas P. Demaria

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document