Date post: | 27-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | gordon-harmon |
View: | 216 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Literature Review
VR Librarian hesitating to instruct (Lee, 2004)
Students willing to be instructed (Desai and Graves, 2006)
92% - receptive8% - “unreachable”
The Theoretical Framework
Critical Literacy Theory Critical Information Literacy
Social Constructivist Theory
David Ward measured session completeness by whether the librarian:
1. Asked student about number of sources,
2. Showed student a useful source,3. Recommended search terms,4. Checked that the student found
the needed information
Summary of the Literature Students are open to
instruction. Librarians want to provide
instruction. Students want to become
independent learners. VR environments are conducive
to power-sharing relationships.
The main contribution of this paper is to examine
the activities and behaviors of the student and the librarian in the negotiation of questions and answers in a virtual reference session.
Research Questions in Two Parts
Examination of Balance in Participation and
Discourse Models - where they align, diverge and intersect
Question Two
Does the number of questions asked during a session by the librarian, the student, or both parties combined affect the length of the transaction?
Question Three
Does the intensity of the student- librarian engagement predict the librarian’s assessment of the quality of the session?
Research Design
Data Source – 250 transcripts
Sampling – selected based on completeness of the transcripts and the demographics of the participants.
Research Design: Variables Length of each session, Librarian’s session-
assessment “Participation” variables,
i.e. turns taken, questions asked, emoticons used.
Research Design: Technique
Analyses of descriptive statistics
Scatter plots, and Tests for correlations and
predictions.
Question OneTable 1. Descriptive Statistics for 7 variables
Participation variables
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
DeviationSession Length 250 1.68 58.17 16.20 10.87
Librarian turns 250 1 124 18.06 15.69
Librarian questions
250 0 23 4.00 3.80
Librarian emoticons
250 0 14 1.28 2.10
Student turns 250 1 80 12.56 11.40
Student questions 250 0 10 1.47 1.67
Student emoticons 250 0 25 1.11 2.88
Findings: Question OneTable 2. Number of Instances of Librarian and Student Activities.
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Librarian Activities
250 1.00 148.00 23.3440 19.63159
Student Activities
250 1.00 87.00 15.1400 13.63996
Question Two: More questions shorter sessions?
Number of Question the Patron Asks
Number of Question the Librarian Asks
Length of Session in Minutes and
Seconds
Num
ber
of
Ques
tion the
Pat
ron A
sks
Num
ber
of
Ques
tion the
Lib
rari
an A
sks
Len
gth
of Ses
sion
in M
inute
s an
d
Sec
onds
Scatter Plot
Question Three: Parity and Session Assessment
Librarian Session
Assessment
Emoticons the Student
Uses
Emoticons the
Librarian Uses
Questions the Student
Asks
Questions the
Librarian Asks
Turns the Student Takes
Turns the Librarian
Takes
Lib
rari
an
Ses
sion
Ass
essm
ent
Em
otico
ns
the
Stu
den
t U
ses
Em
otico
ns
the
Lib
rari
an
Use
s
Ques
tions
the
Stu
den
t A
sks
Ques
tions
the
Lib
rari
an
Ask
s
Turn
s th
e S
tuden
t Tak
es
Turn
s th
e Lib
rari
an
Tak
es
What criteria do librarians use to evaluate a virtual reference session?1. The amount of time spent?2. The number of questions asked? 3. Emoticons used?4. That perfect answer to a question?5. Something else, not quantitative?
How do the librarian and the student work together to answer research questions in virtual reference environments?
Critical Discourse Analysis
An analysis of the way language confers power on some members of society and controls other members.
James Paul Gee: Critical Discourse Analysis
Two discourses: our native discourse and our acquired discourses
Transcript #3-1
The librarian has an agenda. She tells the student what search terms and what databases to use. She also finds articles for the student.
Transcript 3-2
After the librarian finds the answer, a relevant article, she relinquishes power to the student.
Transcript 4-2
Two Discourse Models:
The discourse model of the linguist – How do you say it?
The discourse model of the librarian – What do sources say that we say?
Conclusion:
Students and librarians aligning their discourse models to create a new dynamic Virtual Reference Discourse Model
BibliographyDesai, C.M. & Graves, S.J. (2006).
Instruction via instant messaging reference: What's happening? The Electronic Library, 24(2), 174-189.
Doherty, J. J. & Ketchner, K. (2005). Empowering the intentional learner: A critical theory for information literacy instruction. Library Philosophy and Practice, 8(1), n.p.
Ellis, L. A. (2004). Approaches to teaching through digital reference. Reference Services Review, 32(2), 103-119.
Bibliography (cont.)
Gee, J.P. (2005). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis (2nd.). New York: Routledge.
Gee, J.P. (2008). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideologies in discourses (3rd.). New York: Routledge.
Lee, I. J. (2004). Do virtual reference librarians dream of digital reference questions?: A qualitative and quantitative analysis of email and chat reference. Australian Academic and Research Libraries, 35(2), 95-110.
Bibliography (continued)Ward, D. (2003). Measuring the
completeness of reference transactions in online chats. Reference and User Services Quarterly, 44(1), 46-52.
Westbrook, L. Virtual reference training: The second generation. College & Research Libraries, 67(3), 249-59.
Woodward, B.S. (2005). One-on-one instruction: from the reference desk to online chat. . Reference and User Services Quarterly, 44(3), 203-209.