+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant...

Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant...

Date post: 11-Nov-2014
Category:
Upload: nina-mchale
View: 2,137 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
Description:
Concurrent session from the first (2008) Reference Renaissance conference in Denver. With Lorrie Evans and Karen Sobel.
Popular Tags:
25
KAREN SOBEL, LORRIE EVANS & NINA MCHALE AURARIA LIBRARY DENVER, COLORADO Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services
Transcript
Page 1: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

KAREN SOBEL, LORRIE EVANS & NINA MCHALE

AURARIA LIBRARY DENVER, COLORADO

Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software

Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

Page 2: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

Proprietary Chat vs. IM

Definitions: Proprietary chat software products/services:

Tutor.com, LivePerson, QuestionPoint, etc. Regional consortia such as AskColorado and the

Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities that typically use this software

Free IM products/services: libraryh3lp, meebo, AIM, Yahoo!, etc.

Are they mutually exclusive?Should libraries offer both?

Page 3: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

What We’ll Cover

Karen: user/provider perspectives and concerns Student users Staff providers

Lorrie: the public services perspective History of both proprietary and IM services at Auraria Detailed comparison of AskColorado and AskAuraria!

(libraryh3lp)Nina: the technical stuff

Display, implementation, tech support

Page 4: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

Two User Populations

Students using the chat servicesLibrary faculty and staff operating the

services

…each with different needs and concerns

Page 5: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

Students at Auraria

Auraria Library serves a student body of 40,000, comprised of three populations: Community College of Denver: two-year community college Metropolitan State College of Denver: four-year college University of Colorado Denver: university

Many students are from other nations and cultures

Mostly commuting populationMany low incomeSplit between traditional and non-traditional

Average student age: 28

Page 6: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

Faculty and Staff Concerns

“But I’ve never used IM or other chat…”“What if I can’t keep up with the students?

Will they get impatient with me?”“Will we ever get prank chats or time

wasters?”“Would our patrons be comfortable with

this?”“We already have so much to do…”

Page 7: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

Staffing Questions

Should we provide chat/IM service the entire time the desk is staffed?

Is it appropriate to have paraprofessionals staff a chat/IM service?

Should the person on back-up provide chat/IM reference service?

What is the “triage” procedure when the desk/phone/chat are all busy?

Page 8: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

AskColorado at Auraria Library

AskColorado began in 2003 as a regional and consortial program offering chat reference service to Colorado residents.

With our large and diverse student population, we felt the need to provide a flexible form of reference service.

AskColorado would provide just that, with excellent support from the Colorado State Library

Proprietary software used is Tutor.com

Page 9: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

Auraria Library Participation in AskColorado

2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/080

2

4

6

8

10

12

Auraria Library Staff Hours

Page 10: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

AskColorado Use Statistics

2005/2006 2006/2007 2007/2008

Number of questions answered for Auraria Campus students

297 341 486

Page 11: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

History of IM Chat at Auraria Library

2006/2007: started experimenting with chat boxes in class pages (Meebo) Very little activity and participation

Spring 2008: Services Task Group recommended investigating possibilities for adding IM chat service

Summer 2008: Testing and use of IM from the Library’s home page, branded AskAuraria! (libraryh3lp) Extremely active 16 chat sessions in the first 6 hours

Page 12: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

Interface Comparison

AskColorado AskAuraria!

Great functionality and high level of detail

User view is very simple; slightly more cluttered for the librarian, but still a simple box

Screen sharing (co-browsing) is possible

URLs can be pasted and shared

Page 13: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

Access/Integration into Library Web Space

AskColorado AskAuraria!

Access point is down one or more levels from the Library home page

Access point is a box on the home page

Students must fill out a form prior to asking a question

No information to fill out; user is anonymous

24/7 access thanks to consortial staffing agreement

Access available only during times we can staff the service; currently, no set hours

Page 14: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

Policies and Behavior

AskColorado AskAuraria!

Separate queue for academic users

Anyone can post a question

Acceptable behavior and policies are posted

No posted policies; any behavioral issues must be addressed at the time of a transgression

Page 15: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

Psychological Aspects

AskColorado AskAuraria!

The demographic information and the navigation required to reach the chat box may inhibit spontaneous questions

Simple screen and high visibility appeals to spontaneous questions

Demographic information can be a help to the librarian in answering the questions

Some students will quickly write in a chat box that’s in front of them, but not want to click through a page and fill out a form

Page 16: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

Display: AskColorado Login Screen

Page 17: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

AskColorado Chat Interface

Page 18: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

AskAuraria! Patron View: Chat On

Page 19: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

AskAuraria! Patron View: Chat Off

Page 20: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

AskAuraria! Librarian View: Pidgin Client

Page 21: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

Implementation: AskColorado

Tutor.com software needs to be installed with extensive configurations on staff workstations to support all features

Day-long training sessions are offered at library sites throughout the state through the State Library AskColorado coordinator We heart Kris Johnson!

Minimum staffing commitment: 2-10 hours/week

Cost: $300-$1500 annuallyEasy to integrate (link) to; no customization

Page 22: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

Implementation Process: AskAuraria!

Create account, queues, and operators on libraryh3lp server (libraryh3lp.com)

Integrate code into Library’s web site Web Librarian set up account, queues, operators, and code on

Library home page in one eveningInstall Pidgin chat client on staff workstationsTraining approach has been more piecemeal: “Hey, do

you guys want to try this?”Four staff members volunteered to monitor the queues

initially; seven others have since volunteered to joinInternal training is being offered and plannedNew web page templates will include chat on all pagesFree!!!

Page 23: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

Technical Support

AskColorado AskAuraria!

Excellent tech support and training (in person, webinars, etc.) through the Colorado State Library

Excellent support through the libraryh3lp Google Group; some tech support required in-house to set up and maintain service

Established best practices for providing and branding service (magnets, posters, etc.)

libraryh3lp still in b3ta, but very promising; any branding is done in-house

Page 24: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

The Benefits of Both

Including chat box on the Library’s home page provides immediate access to Auraria Library staff

When a staff member is online, chat box with simple instructions is displayed

When no one is monitoring the queue, a list of all other reference options is displayed

For the most part, the pros and cons of both kinds of chat service are cancelled out when implementing both

Page 25: Apples and Oranges: A Comparison of Proprietary Chat Reference Software Versus Free Instant Messaging Services

Questions? AskAuraria!

Karen Sobel: Reference & Instruction Librarian [email protected]

Lorrie Evans: Head of Library Instruction [email protected]

Nina McHale: Web Librarian [email protected]

Slides available: http://library.auraria.edu/~nmchale/presentations/refren2008/


Recommended