Reference's Longstanding Relationship to Collections

Murray, D. C. (2016, Fall). A thirty-year reflection on the value of reference. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 56(1), 2–5. https://doi.org.libaccess.sjlibrary.org/10.5860/rusq.56n1.2

Article reviewed by Lindsey Memory

I'm taking INFO 210 (Reference in the 21st Century) this semester in addition to this class, and I've been struck by the way that reference service intersects with collection development. In fact, the first two weeks of that class were simply about "collection development," albeit the focus was on developing a reference collection specifically. Later, we learned how we can use reference data (obtained through surveys, reports, or information-seeking behavior studies) to inform wider collection development decisions.*

In his reflection on the history and trajectory of reference work, Murray (2016) responds to an ARL report that posited that reference services are librarian-centered rather than patron-centered. He points out how often reference services have changed based on patron needs. He then discusses how reference services are changing yet again.

Most interestingly (for OUR class's purposes), he discusses new roles for reference librarians that include "supporting interdisciplinary research, implementing 'expertise databases' to enhance collaboration, assisting in the management of the data lifecycle, [and] identifying repositories of available research data" (p. 4). Direct reference consultations are not being replaced, but rather added upon, by these new roles.

Photo by Martin Adams on Unsplash

In my academic library, I know that these roles are on the forefront of the administration's minds. Interdisciplinary research, by definition, requires a collection that sufficiently informs students and faculty on the landscapes of multiple disciplines quickly and comprehensively. This enables them to engage with several disciplines at a time, often including disciplines in which they have very little methodological or theoretical experience.

Our university librarian is very interested-- and has authored several articles-- about academic libraries' capacity to contribute to the other three goals through the concept of open access publishing. If you aren't familiar with this growing movement, it is a push by researchers, university faculty, university IT professionals, and academic libraries to establish open access repositories for research (both article research as well as data sets) in order to counter the spiralling costs of journal subscriptions. Over the last few decades, subscription costs have ballooned to the point that many libraries have had to cut all but their most essential subscriptions, which have in turn driven the price of those subscriptions higher. There are many researchers who do not want their work hidden behind expensive paywalls, but rather out where their research can be used, verified, and cited. University faculty in particular have sought open access publication possibilities, and academic libraries have supplied the much-needed frameworks, expertise, and often the hosting of open access databases and/or repositories. There is a lot left to be determined about how to manage these new digital collections: are they part of a library's digital collection? Are they part of an institutional repository? Being open access, are there any types of access restrictions the library can or should put on them? How do we market our open access repositories? A good grounding in collection development principles will no doubt help contribute to reference librarians' exploration of these new roles.





* It must be pointed out that, even though understanding what resources are actually being used is important to collection development, there will always be a tension, or a challenge, for librarians to find a middle ground between buying what people want and maintaining the library's status as a receptacle of ALL types of knowledge... even unpopular or unused types.

Reference is dead, long live reference

Pierucci, Jessica

Terrell, H. B. (2015). Reference is dead, long live reference: Electronic collections in the digital age. Information Technology and Libraries 34(4), 55-62. doi:10.6017/ital.v34i4.9098

Summary

The role of print reference in the library is becoming increasingly unclear as electronic information becomes more and more ubiquitous. The author explains that only about 10% of print reference collections are now used. Some librarians have expressed concern about the print reference collection diminishing in size and use, citing concerns of browsability of print, potential reliability issues for electronic sources, and access for those without library cards who therefore cannot use library internet. The author dismisses these concerns, explaining how ready reference is now best handled using mainly electronic resources in the current information environment and many electronic sources used in the library have no more issues with reliability than print sources. In addition, the author thinks the concern about patrons without internet access is better and more cost effectively addressed in ways other than keeping a mostly unused print reference collection for this group of patrons. For example, San Francisco Public Library has the Welcome Card allowing those who don’t qualify for a library card (often due to lack of an address or proper identification) to use computers and check out one book at a time, giving the user limited library privileges. The author cites this as a much better solution to the concern of those without ability to get library card being able to only use print than keeping unused reference material around.

Evaluation

The article’s title is a bit deceiving. The author doesn’t think reference itself it dead. Instead the author thinks the reference print collection is dead and needs to be dramatically weeded in favor of more highly used electronic reference resources. I’m happy that’s the case as I think reference is still important to help patrons develop valuable search skills and find what they want in the library’s collection. This just happens increasingly online.

I agree with the author’s assessment of the print reference collection as in the library where I work I’ve seen how rarely the librarians turn to print to answer reference questions. They generally favor library databases and other electronic resources. They show patrons how to search these resources to find the information they want to answer their inquiry. I was happy to see a passionate argument for weeding a rarely used part of the library’s collection. In a time of ever-shrinking budgets it’s great to find the places where the library can cut acquisitions and weed out unused material to put funds toward well-used parts of the collection.