In the “Conducting a Reference
Interview” book (page 1-2), it states that in any type of interview, the
interviewer and the interviewee need to have a common purpose for the interview
to go well. At the same time, they will also have opposed purposes. The book
gives an example of a student asking for a classic to read. The librarian
suggests to him “War and Peace.” The librarian want to educate the student. But
this defeats the student’s intention. He doesn’t have the time to read Tolstoy’s
work and then write a book report on it. This is a no-no in library science.
The whole point of a reference interview is to find out exactly what the patron
wants, not suggest to them other things, or suggest to them things that
sidetrack them from what they really need to know. I always do what I can to
get patrons what they want. I don’t really go further beyond that, unless I
show them how to do things, if there are more than one ways of doing something.
Sometimes the person doesn’t even want to know that and is trying to walk away
from me. I have one coworker who will sit with someone for an hour, giving them
all sorts of information. She is a fountain of information and a lot of what
she talks about is interesting, but some of it is actually sidetracking from
what someone wants. Sometimes I go and eavesdrop and observe the transaction to
make sure that the patron doesn’t want to get away; sometimes they do,
sometimes they don’t.
The book also talks about the 6
common causes of communication accidents. Number 1 is not acknowledging the
user. It states that the librarian must “establish immediate eye contact with
users by acknowledging their presence thorough eye contact and other immediacy
behaviors” (page 15). The academic librarian I interviewed for my customer
service observation did not do that. She glanced at me and then said “Hi” as
she turned back to her computer screen. I thought that that was kind of rude. The
book states that “looking down at work on the desk rather than up to catch the
user’s eye says, in effect, that the librarian is too busy to be approached”
(page 50). That is EXACTLY how I felt when I walked up to her. Of course, it
didn’t help that the desk was so high that I could rest my arms on it while
standing. It created a physical barrier between us, which further impeded the
reference interview transactions; another thing the book talks about, in
regards to physical layouts.
As part of the requirement for our
blog this time around, we had to go borrow the book from course reserve at the
library. To do this, you walk up to the desk, tell them you need a book on
course reserve, tell them the class number (SI 647) and then tell them which
title you need. They then find the information you supplied them and find out
the location of the book so they can retrieve it for you so that you can check
the book out. Well, I’ve done this 3 times so far this semester. And twice, it
was kind of a disaster (in my opinion). Normally, a student comes up and says
they need a course reserve, or that you (the desk) have a book their professor
gave them. You then ask them for the course number. And then when you get it,
you ask which title they need if there is more than one book on reserve for
that class. Pretty simple. Except it’s not. It’s not simple all the time because
the students don’t always know what they need (like in reference interviews). Twice
when I asked for SI 647, they told me they couldn’t find it; there were no
books on course reserve for that class. I told them both times that there is
because I looked it up in Mirlyn myself. I told the one girl to look up the
instructor. The other girl asked me for the name of the course. The name of the
course is the last thing I ever ask someone for. I always ask for course
number, instructor, book title, author, then as a last resort the name of the class.
I have found that patrons never know the name of the class. They tell me they
know it but when I can’t find any info, I ask for their syllabus (half the time
they don’t have it, if they know what it is) and discover that the name of the
course is not what they thought it was. Sometimes they only know the name of
the book or author and nothing else about the class. So as I know I know what I’m
talking about, I have assumed that the students at the desk are new and don’t
know what they are doing because they can’t find the course (it could be that
they are not in course reserves in Mirlyn). I definitely now think they don’t
know what they are doing because they have lost the textbook. I was the last
person to check the book out. I turned it in at 2:43pm on Monday the 26th.
So who knows what they did with it.
The "War and Peace" recommendation example gets at a really compelling conflict at the heart of librarianship (and specifically reader's advisory). You suggest that the role of the librarian is to "find out exactly what the patron wants," and I agree that a nuanced understanding of the patron's wants and needs is critical. That said, I think that some of the great value of libraries derives from the opportunities they afford folks to encounter unexpected and world-broadening ideas, texts and information. Of course, this train of thought can be dangerous because it can quickly become patronizing and patriarchal (think Greene's "best books"). Still, I think some of the best hoped-for outcomes of libraries depend on the user's willingness to encounter something other than exactly what they expected and the librarian's willingness to introduce unexpected information or recommendations.
ReplyDeleteWow I forgot all about the course reserves drama! Good times!
ReplyDeleteThe desk height issue you brought up is interesting and I wish we discussed the spatial relations of the reference desk a bit more in this class. Being unable to physically relate to the librarian because of that issue means that successful reference interactions are unlikely to take place, which also means that information questions are left unanswered.
When I was behind the desk at the Carleton library last year, my desk was lower than the student workers at the circulation and reserves desks. This often resulted in students coming up to me with their needs and not the students next to me whose entire jobs are resolving the issues of patrons. It's fascinating what a little change in height can do to change reference interactions dramatically! It's as if the sense of comfort a patron feels is more important than their immediate reference need in that brief moment before they approach the desk.