Blog Post 8A:
In our previous class session, we focused on a mix of frantic Gchat virtual reference interviewing, looking at transcripts of successful and not-so-successful exchanges, and presenting our libguides. A few moments and themes that jumped out at me:
- There's not always an easy consensus when Monday morning quarterbacking (ha this is my favorite sports metaphor..) virtual reference conversations. The class as a whole paid attention to pivotal moments in the not-so-successful virtual reference transcript and tried to identify critical shifts that happened -- and while we could intuit shifts in engagement or how an overly-professional attitude or overly-specific recommendation at one point may have lead to the souring of an interaction, it's hard to know for sure. The biggest takeaway from that exercise, for me, was that that rapport we build with patrons is a unique, specific, and complex relationship, and like any relationship it needs to be tended to appropriately and treated with an attitude of unconditional goodwill (to borrow Alyssa's framework of always approaching the interaction assuming the best).
- Our class seems to have really adopted a relationship and person-focused approach to reference, which is really nice to see. It was also helpful to hear from folks who work in virtual reference and hear about their experiences with training, supervisors, etc. -- as well as those strange experiences like prank/bizarre reference questions! But as somebody who likes to think about things theoretically, it's really really helpful to have a constant sense of how a certain approach plays out in practice, and how the ambiguities inherent in reference conversations play out when you are forced to make a decision to how to respond in the moment. It seems like a lot of pressure in some ways, and clearly many folks have found ways to be graceful in those situations and interact in a way true to their values, which I definitely appreciate.
- I enjoyed seeing all of the libguides, and kind of wish we had some time to actually explore the pages digitally ourselves. One thing that I noticed was that we didn't really discuss the accessibility and usability of our resources. I would have liked to have discussed how we expected our resources to be used in actual libraries, and also how the design of our sites (such as the contrast between text and background colors, the use of alt-text and standardized headings/formatting) affects how somebody with low vision or somebody using a screenreader would experience the resource. I hadn't really thought about the role of intermediaries in libguides, but after seeing a wide variety of hyper-useful resources (the citizenship resources stick out to me) I thought more about how a libguide could be targeted to a librarian who would facilitate learning and exploring these resources, perhaps in an open computer lab or out on the floor with patrons. I'm actually unsure, would this use fall outside of the realm of libguides and into something else, like a guided librarian tutorial? Regardless there was a lot of potential for learning and guiding patrons through a variety of resources, and it was neat to see all of the ways that manifested across projects.
I agree that the diversity of topics and design in the libguide projects was great to see! Your comment about if things "fall outside of the realm of libguides" got me thinking about how I define or conceptualize it. Lib guides in an academic library setting - i.e. university or school library - definitely hew closely to lib guide model most of us would think of - focused on a specific research topic or course topic. But, in public libraries it seems that the use if much more broad and akin to a "resource guide" - I think the Citizenship Guide project should this concept in action. That would definitely be a resource for a broad public, non-academic audience. So, in that sense I think resources and "guides" created by librarians are a pretty flexible creative realm to explore.
ReplyDeleteLove the emphasis on building rapport with our patrons. I imagine it is much harder to do that in the virtual and often anonymous parts of reference work. I remember one our reading suggesting mirroring the type of language and formality used by patrons, but I'm sure it isn't nearly as easy as it sounds (and actually I'm not positive that it sounds easy!). Hopefully this is one task that becomes easier and more familiar with time.
ReplyDeleteI too, would have liked more time to go over the libguides. I think they are a hidden jewel - at least for me -as I often don't come across them until it's too late! I did notice that the librarians/creators of the various libguides all had different layouts and spacial arrangements. From looking at them, I don't think usability or accessibility was an area that some of the creators remembered to account for in their creation of the guides. Some guides were text heavy, with lots of links, which I don't think would be conducive for everyone's viewing pleasure. Thanks for bringing up this point.
ReplyDelete