As you can tell by my last post I have a lot on my mind. Last month was the pinnacle of my busy season at the library, with my usually workload and reference, combined with a lot of instruction. Now, let us just say that it wasn’t all bad. In the process of having to ignore a lot of feeds I subscribe to, I came to the conclusion that I have way too many subscriptions. It is nice to keep up with a variety of topics in the library, but let’s be honest, sometimes it can be an echo chamber. In conclusion, I eliminated about 60 feeds from my reader.
One blog that I quite enjoy is the Academic Librarian. One recent post, actually a reprint, is one I would like to discuss a bit. The article, “Reference is the Best Instruction” was originally written in 2001 and as Wayne says, he reprinted it as a way rethinking the issue. Let me just piggyback on that idea and use the article as a way of discussing some of my thoughts on reference and instruction in the academic world. To quickly sum up, the article makes a case that reference, or “just in time” can be more effective in instructing students in the ways of research than typical library instruction.
I will also say that this is not to refute any of Wayne’s ideas, but to add a few questions of my own and relate my experience to the article. His post just allows me to think about a few things.
As a librarian who works primarily with graduate students in education, I see an almost completely different type of student than the librarians who work with our undergraduate population. Undergraduates have first contact with the librarians in their First Year Seminar (FYSEM) or their English 1110 class, which are both required. These classes may not be the student’s major or hold any personal interest for the student. Generally, the enthusiasm from students tends to be a bit restrained…..to put it nicely. In most cases, it is not the only time an undergraduate will meet with a librarian, as they might see them in a more focused class, say a senior seminar. For graduates, I meet with them several times in a somewhat more relaxed setting. Yes, a lot of it includes an introduction to services, but it is also time for them to work while I walk around and answer individual questions. Just as a note, most of my instruction is around 2 hours. I do meet with a variety of the core classes in each area of grad ed: MAT, MAED, EdD, ESL, and Environmental Ed. I would imagine the instruction for these classes looks familiar for a lot of librarians, with an intro to services, a look at the catalog and maybe an article database as well. I then meet with them again when they are just about to start writing their capstone/thesis. Here they already have a basic foundation of our services and I can focus more on search strategies, more databases, and again more individual attention.
Ok, that was a rough description of what I do, but I wanted to just put that in there before I discuss some of the issues in the article. Wayne does describe how they coordinate instruction to coincide with an assignment/project. I don’t think there will be much disagreement on that as I, and most librarians try and follow that practice. I am lucky enough to work with a department where most, if not all of the faculty, have similar ideas. The immediacy does help a lot of students to focus. Not all of them mind you, but a good portion of them. Wayne describes how a lot of students even after having an instruction will still show up at the reference desk “clueless”. I, myself will have a lot of students from my instruction show up needing more assistance. Personally, that’s one of the best things we pound into our student’s heads…”Come to the Reference Desk”. I start and end every instruction with this mantra. I think recognizing that every student learns in different ways is important as well. On my assessments, I ask about the pace of the instruction. It is inevitable that the majority will say “just right”, with a few saying “too fast” and a few saying “too slow”. Wayne’s article sees that as a “bad trade off” as we are seemingly creating a need for reference services, but I would disagree. Especially with graduate students, they are not coming there in the nick of time, but weeks/months in advance of when a project might be due. Also, I think he is a bit too general on that. It sounds like the majority of students from the classes are showing up at the reference desk. With me, it’s probably less than 3%. NOW, with undergraduates, I will concede that there are quite a few more students, who show up towards the end of the semester looking for “assistance”. I put assistance in quotes as sometimes they really you to do the work for them. J. Now, unfortunately, we do not ask what year they are, but I can tell you a good portion of these types of reference questions come from students in survey classes. Again, I think issues of motivation need to be explored more here.
Now, I do believe that the reference desk can be a great place for teaching moments, and I would also say that “By appointment” with a subject librarian could be even better. I do this as well for my students. However, I think the big part of what we do is redundancy. There is not one catch all for everything we show, and both instruction and reference play a part.
What else do we need to be doing or trying? Personally, I would probably want better integration into specific classes. Not just a one 45-60 minute session or even a 2 hour session. These sessions try to do too much with too little time. I think a reason why we might be seeing more students from our classes, is that they do not absorb everything from our instruction. And why should they? What we teach them requires reflection, and practice. The same thing happens at the Reference Desk. Yes, it is individualized to their specific research needs, but how much better will their research skills be after they leave? If their motivation is “point of need”, once that is fulfilled, do they care or absorb what we have taught them?
