Alan W. AldrichI. D. Weeks Library

University of South Dakota

Analysis of different models of referenceDesign of a collaborative workstation◦Easily implemented◦Inexpensive◦Appreciated by patrons and librarians◦Multiple uses

Access AccuracyAuthority IndividualismInstruction KnowledgeTimeliness Thoroughness

Structure +

Values =

Outcomes

Traditional Reference Desk/StationTeaching Library ModelRoving Reference

Physical desk or stationComputer workstation(s)Synchronous in locationSynchronous in time

Access Accuracy Individualism Knowledge Timeliness

Instruction is deemphasizedThoroughness is deemphasizedReference librarian as expertPatron is dependent (Doherty, 2006).Lack of co-browsing or collaborationLack of socially constructed knowledgeLack of active learning

Computer equipped classroomOne workstation per studentMaster workstation under control of

librarianSynchronous in timeSynchronous in place (physically)Asynchronous in the search space

AuthorityCritical ThinkingKnowledgeInstructionThoroughness

Values of accuracy, timeliness, and individualism deemphasized

Control/expertise paradigm reinforced

Lack of socially constructed knowledge ala Vygotsky

Lack of active learning

Lack of a fixed desk or supplements a traditional reference point

Mobile devices to extend the reach of reference

Devices located near the stacksDedicated staffing

AccessAccuracyIndividualizationKnowledgeTimeliness

Meeting patrons at the point of needMeeting patrons at the place of needOpportunities for collaboration i.e., co-

browsingVery short interactionsNeed to pass patron off to a traditional

reference desk Instruction is deemphasized

Email referenceInstant Messenger (IM) referenceChat reference

Asynchronous for locationAsynchronous for timeLoss of most communication

channelsLoss of question negotiation

(Pomerantz, 2005)

AccessAccuracyIndividualismTimeliness

Can be a long delayGood for questionsNot as good for detailed help due to

asynchronous response timesInstruction not valued due to

timeliness concernsThoroughness not always valued

Freeware or commercial softwareAsynchronous for locationSynchronous for timeLoss of most communication channels

AccessAccuracyIndividualismTimeliness

Immediate and real time interaction Good for quick questions/short answers Uses the tools younger patrons are familiar

with Interaction limited to only text, hypertext

links, files, and emoticons Question negotiation (Pomerantz, 2005) is

limited Instruction deemphasized

Asynchronous locationSynchronous communicationSome to many communication channels

availableShared interface

AccessAccuracy Individualism Instruction(facilitated by the structure)Thoroughness

Can enable co-browsing Immediate and real time interaction Potential for real collaboration and

interactive learningHigh costs of software and trainingDual staffing - need to have chat ref

separate from the physical reference desk (Pomerantz, 2005).

to facilitate instruction?that is simple?that is inexpensive?that is practical?that supports the values of reference?

Doherty, J. (2006). Reference interview or reference dialog? Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 11(3), 97-109.

Pomerantz, J.(2005). A conceptual framework and open research questions for chat-based reference service. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(12), 1288-1302.

Tyckoson, D. A. (2001). What is the best model of reference service? Library Trends, 50(2), 183-196.