Some colleges and universities in Illinois have worked with anthropologists to study library use. This study is one of several that come on the heels of the University of Rochester study. Their results are that both librarians and faculty expect college students to be more thoughtful, skilled, dedicated researchers than they are.
Their results match my experience, so I'm surprised at their surprise. Someone who is 20 years old today does not have much of a memory of a time Before Google (B.G.). The whole frame of mind about how search is supposed to work completely different from what an "old fogy" like me expects. I've tried to explain how sparse the information in the library's catalog is compared to what Google pulls off a Web site and why it requires a different mindset. I think it just gave them the impression that the library catalog and paper books are a lot of bother.
The one statement that troubles me is, "Librarians tend to overestimate the research skills of some of their students, which can result in interactions that leave students feeling intimidated and alienated, say the ERIAL researchers." Comments on my teaching evaluations sometimes say that the information I present is too basic, but at the information desk, I see students struggle with things that I think should be easy. I'm still trying to find the sweet spot: not too easy and not too difficult.
Monday, August 22, 2011
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
I'm Celebrating a Subtle Change in the Catalog
A few weeks ago, Morris Library reintroduced "Location Codes" to the online catalog. I'm celebrating because the new limits let me narrow my search results down to just things that are available in the Morris Library building. When I help someone at 9 PM who has a paper due at 8 AM the next day, the limit will be much better than the tricks I had been using.
I won't break out the champagne until the books in McLafferty are back in the Morris Library building, but this change is good enough to merit some chocolate.
 | |||
| The location limit (marked in maroon) appears in the right-hand section of the results page in I-Share. |
Sunday, August 14, 2011
How to Find Morris Library's Web Site
The most popular way for people to access Morris Library's Web site is by going directly to http://lib.siu.edu, but about 12-15% of the library's site visits came from the link on the siuc.edu home page for the university. It rivaled Google's 11-17% as the second most popular way to get to the site.
The library does not have a link on the university's home page right now. It's hard to find the library on second level pages such as "Academics," so the most efficient way currently to get to the library from the university's home page is to type library in the search box on the upper right hand corner, being careful to remove "SEARCH..." from the box.
If you are in the 12-15%, I hope this helps.
The library does not have a link on the university's home page right now. It's hard to find the library on second level pages such as "Academics," so the most efficient way currently to get to the library from the university's home page is to type library in the search box on the upper right hand corner, being careful to remove "SEARCH..." from the box.
If you are in the 12-15%, I hope this helps.
Thursday, August 11, 2011
Special Librarianship Research: We're Number 32!
The July / August issue of Information Outlook has a list of U.S. universities ranked by number of articles published in 2000 - 2010 for subject specialist librarians. To create the list, Amy Hardin and Tony Stankus counted the number of substantial articles librarians had published in fourteen journals. The fourteen journals were in special librarianship areas such as medicine, law and music.
I already knew that SIUC would be on the list. SIUC comes in at number thirty-two with twenty articles. A lot of the credit for this rank goes to the librarians at the law school for publishing in law journals. There's also plenty of credit to go around at Morris Library. Mary Taylor was a coauthor of four articles in medical librarianship journals. Cassie Wagner, Beth Cox, Andrea Imre and I were authors or coauthors of two articles each in special librarianship journals. Jonathan Nabe, Melissa Hubbard, and Ann Myers also have written articles in these journals.
I already knew that SIUC would be on the list. SIUC comes in at number thirty-two with twenty articles. A lot of the credit for this rank goes to the librarians at the law school for publishing in law journals. There's also plenty of credit to go around at Morris Library. Mary Taylor was a coauthor of four articles in medical librarianship journals. Cassie Wagner, Beth Cox, Andrea Imre and I were authors or coauthors of two articles each in special librarianship journals. Jonathan Nabe, Melissa Hubbard, and Ann Myers also have written articles in these journals.
Thursday, August 4, 2011
Are you a Physicist who Compulsively Checks for Reviewer Comments? There's an App for that!
The American Institute of Physics (AIP) just announced iPeerReview. It’s an app to make it easier for authors and reviewers to access AIP's manuscript submission system from an Apple mobile device.
My first thought, probably because I'm curmudgeonly, was that a mobile device is not the right tool for the careful thought that peer review should receive. On second thought, it could be useful at times. When a reviewer gets the notice that a deadline for returning a review is fast approaching, s/he can act on it immediately. An author who is eagerly awaiting the reviewer comments can find out whether the news is good or bad as soon as s/he gets the message that the comments are in. As someone who submitted an article at the beginning of summer and who is hoping to get the comments before school starts, I know that urge.
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
PDA found in the Cornerstone
No, the library isn’t giving away Blackberries to readers of its Cornerstone newsletter. No, the latest Cornerstone doesn't have a picture of a couple getting intimate in the stacks. This PDA is Patron Driven Acquisition. Dean Carlson’s column describes two kinds of “patron-initiated on-demand acquisitions” that the library has for books.
PDA is different from a “suggest a purchase” form because there’s less librarian involvement in the purchase decision. At the outset, a librarian decides on parameters such as the price range and the types of books to include for PDA. After that, library users pick the books. When someone requests a book on interlibrary loan or when an electronic book crosses some threshold on how much it is used, the purchase happens.
The idea didn’t make it into the Chronicle of Higher Education until late last year because it’s becoming popular lately. Even at Morris Library, the idea has been around for a few years. By definition, books selected this way are going to be used by someone at least once. Moreover, within certain limits, being used in the past is one of the better predictors of whether a library book will be used in the future.
Most libraries that I’ve heard about, including Morris, are only setting aside a fraction of their book budget for PDA. Even though programs have been popular, librarians are hesitant to jump in with both feet. One concern is whether this approach produces coherent collections that will be valuable over the long term. Another concern is that PDA mainly is sold for electronic books.
PDA for electronic books brings in all of the problems that electronic books currently have. Basic functions of print books are missing from many electronic library books. Being able to skim and browse without DRM blocking you, being able to print or copy a few pages for personal use, or being able to send a book on interlibrary loan are often (usually?) missing from electronic library books. At one of the sessions of the SLA conference, a speaker described licensing for e-books as “a jungle.”
If you want to know more about how “patron-initiated on-demand acquisitions” has worked at Morris Library, Andrea Imre and Jonathan Nabe have posted some conference presentations about it.
PDA is different from a “suggest a purchase” form because there’s less librarian involvement in the purchase decision. At the outset, a librarian decides on parameters such as the price range and the types of books to include for PDA. After that, library users pick the books. When someone requests a book on interlibrary loan or when an electronic book crosses some threshold on how much it is used, the purchase happens.
The idea didn’t make it into the Chronicle of Higher Education until late last year because it’s becoming popular lately. Even at Morris Library, the idea has been around for a few years. By definition, books selected this way are going to be used by someone at least once. Moreover, within certain limits, being used in the past is one of the better predictors of whether a library book will be used in the future.
Most libraries that I’ve heard about, including Morris, are only setting aside a fraction of their book budget for PDA. Even though programs have been popular, librarians are hesitant to jump in with both feet. One concern is whether this approach produces coherent collections that will be valuable over the long term. Another concern is that PDA mainly is sold for electronic books.
PDA for electronic books brings in all of the problems that electronic books currently have. Basic functions of print books are missing from many electronic library books. Being able to skim and browse without DRM blocking you, being able to print or copy a few pages for personal use, or being able to send a book on interlibrary loan are often (usually?) missing from electronic library books. At one of the sessions of the SLA conference, a speaker described licensing for e-books as “a jungle.”
If you want to know more about how “patron-initiated on-demand acquisitions” has worked at Morris Library, Andrea Imre and Jonathan Nabe have posted some conference presentations about it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)