Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Let's Chat: The Art of Delivering Information Literacy Instruction in a Virtual Reference Setting - Tummon & Hervieux

139 views

Published on

Presented at LILAC 2018

Published in: Education
  • My special guest's 3-Step "No Product Funnel" can be duplicated to start earning a significant income online.  http://ishbv.com/j1r2c/pdf
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Tired of being scammed? Take advantage of a program that, actually makes you money! ■■■ http://scamcb.com/ezpayjobs/pdf
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

Let's Chat: The Art of Delivering Information Literacy Instruction in a Virtual Reference Setting - Tummon & Hervieux

  1. 1. Let’s Chat! The Art of Delivering Information Literacy Instruction in a Virtual Reference Setting Nikki Tummon & Sandy Hervieux, McGill University Library LILAC Conference, April 6th, 2018
  2. 2. INTRODUCTIONS Nikki Tummon ⊡ Liaison Librarian for Anthropology, Sociology, and Social Work ⊡ nikki.tummon@mcgill.ca Sandy Hervieux ⊡ Liaison Librarian for Political Science, Religious Studies and Philosophy ⊡ sandy.hervieux@mcgill.ca
  3. 3. AGENDA ⊡ Context □ McGill University □ Previous virtual reference studies at McGill ⊡ Justification for Study ⊡ Literature Overview ⊡ Methodology ⊡ Findings ⊡ Practical Applications ⊡ Future Direction of Research ⊡ Feedback
  4. 4. CONTEXT McGill University and Previous Virtual Reference Studies 1
  5. 5. MCGILL UNIVERSITY ⊡ Located in Montreal, Canada ⊡ 40 000 students ⊡ 25 % international students ⊡ 23 % graduate students ⊡ Medicine and Law faculties ⊡ 8 library branches ⊡ Humanities and Social Sciences Library is the biggest branch ⊡ 65 librarians ⊡ 4,414,654 books ⊡ 1288 databases
  6. 6. MCGILL UNIVERSITY’S VIRTUAL REFERENCE SERVICE ⊡ Open to McGill students, faculty, staff, alumni, and holders of McGill Library Borrowing Cards as well as members of the public ⊡ QuestionPoint platform (OCLC) ⊡ Chat, email, and text questions ⊡ Started in 2006 ⊡ Monday to Friday from 10h to 17h (winter); 11h - 16h (summer) ⊡ Staffed by Librarians and MLIS students
  7. 7. PREVIOUS VIRTUAL REFERENCE STUDIES AT MCGILL ⊡ Kochkina, S. & Mawhinney, T. (2018) Is the medium the message?: Examining transactions conducted via text in comparison with traditional virtual reference methods. [Paper being presented at the Distance Library Services Conference, San Antonio, TX, Apr 11-13, 2018.] ⊡ Côté, M., Kochkina, S., & Mawhinney, T. (2016). Do you want to chat? Reevaluating organization of virtual reference service at an academic library. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 56(1), 36- 46.
  8. 8. OUR STUDY Justification ⊡ Perceived increase of complexity of questions ⊡ Mandate to incorporate more information literacy instruction into virtual reference Method ⊡ Evaluate instances of information literacy instruction and the types of instructional methods used Purpose ⊡ Align our practice with the ACRL Frame “Research as Inquiry” ⊡ Formalize best practices or library standards for virtual reference instruction ⊡ Develop training for librarians and student reference assistants on delivering information literacy instruction during a chat (and in-person) reference interaction ⊡ Offer the best virtual reference service possible
  9. 9. LITERATURE REVIEW Reference, Instruction, and Chat 2
  10. 10. LITERATURE REVIEW You can’t find an article about instruction and virtual reference without a reference to J.K. Elmborg’s 2002 article* In a nutshell: The goal of reference is to teach students to be self- sufficient researchers *Elmborg, J. K. (2002). Teaching at the desk: Toward a reference pedagogy. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 2(3), 455-464.
  11. 11. LITERATURE REVIEW ⊡ Matteson, Salamon, & Brewster (2011) conducted a systematic review of research on all aspects of live chat service. ⊡ The literature on offering library instruction through a chat service asked several questions (p. 181): □ Is instruction provided through chat? □ What techniques are used to provide instruction? □ Do users want instruction? □ Do users ask for instruction? □ Do users believe they can learn through chat?
  12. 12. LITERATURE REVIEW Gronemeyer & Deitering (2009) surveyed academic librarians on their attitudes about providing instruction in a virtual reference setting. ⊡ 294 complete responses, most from academic libraries. ⊡ Librarians place value on virtual instruction but consider the technology and time pressure as barriers to delivering good service. ⊡ Some comments indicate that librarians want more practice and training aimed at teaching and learning in the virtual reference transaction.
  13. 13. LITERATURE REVIEW Since 2011: Jacoby, Ward, Avery, & Marcyk (2015) ⊡ Gain insight from students and instructors about the value of chat, asking, what do users value during a chat interaction and are these things the same as all the standards, best practices, and expert studies say? Maloney & Kemp (2015) ⊡ Asks questions about the complexity of reference questions, which service points receive more complex reference questions, and whether a proactive chat system would increase frequency and complexity of questions.
  14. 14. LITERATURE REVIEW Dempsey (2016) ⊡ Uses conversational analysis theory to analyze opening exchanges in virtual reference and how these influence the length and nature of the chat as well as the potential teacher-student dynamic. Dempsey (2017) ⊡ Documents how librarians link to research guides in live chat interactions at two universities, comparing the use of research guides with more general reference strategies.
  15. 15. METHODOLOGY Coding and Sampling 3
  16. 16. METHODOLOGY ⊡ Qualitative analysis ⊡ Time-frame: September to December 2017 ⊡ Sampling □ Coded the transcript for the 2nd full week of each month ⊡ Coding based on study by Desai & Graves (2008) and adapted to emerging themes ⊡ Inter-coder reliability □ 10 random transcripts from each month were coded by both librarians □ Flagged problematic transcripts were coded by both librarians
  17. 17. “Information literacy is the set of integrated abilities encompassing the reflective discovery of information, the understanding of how information is produced and valued, and the use of information in creating new knowledge and participating ethically in communities of learning. (Association of College and Research Libraries, 2015)
  18. 18. CODING: INSTANCES OF INSTRUCTION I1 User asked for instruction and it was given by the staff member. I2 User asked for instruction but the staff member did not provide it. I3 User did not ask for instruction but it was given by the staff member. I4 User did not ask for instruction and it was not given by the staff member. Instruction would have been possible given the question. I5 The question did not make information literacy instruction possible. Examples: policy, access, circulation, ILL questions or technological issues. Adapted from Desai & Graves (2008) I6 User asked for instruction and was directed to a subject specialist.
  19. 19. CODING: TYPES OF INSTRUCTION T1: Modeling Librarian gives the required information by outlining the steps to find it but does not check if the patron is following along or replicating their actions. T2: Resource Suggestion & Explanation Suggesting a resource and explaining how it can be used. Ex: research guide use, catalogue link and searching. T3: Terms Suggestion Librarian suggests keywords, subject headings, Boolean operators or limits to help the patron create a search strategy. T4: Leading Librarian outlines the steps and leads the user to finding the information needed. The librarian checks if the patron is following along. T5: Lessons Librarian provides instruction on library specific terminology or research concepts. Ex: peer-review process, open access. Adapted from Desai & Graves (2008)
  20. 20. FINDINGS Instances and Types of Instruction 4
  21. 21. CHAT TRANSACTIONS Total Number of Chat Transactions Number of Chat Transactions Sampled September 540 88 October 475 62 November 450 64 December 265 62 Total 1730 276
  22. 22. SEPTEMBER 2017
  23. 23. SEPTEMBER 2017
  24. 24. OCTOBER 2017
  25. 25. OCTOBER 2017
  26. 26. NOVEMBER 2017
  27. 27. NOVEMBER 2017
  28. 28. DECEMBER 2017
  29. 29. DECEMBER 2017
  30. 30. 52 % Of questions were I5 Modeling and Resource Sharing Were the most common types of instruction used 22.9% Of interactions led to instruction
  31. 31. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTION Where Do We Go from Here? 5
  32. 32. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
  33. 33. FUTURE DIRECTION OF RESEARCH Report initial findings at LILAC 2018 and at our home institution Exploratory study (Fall 2017) Refine research question and design, launch study (Summer 2018)
  34. 34. QUESTIONS? FEEDBACK?
  35. 35. Thank you! Nikki Tummon nikki.tummon@mcgill.ca Sandy Hervieux sandy.hervieux@mcgill.ca
  36. 36. BIBLIOGRAPHY Association of College and Research Libraries. (2015, February 9). Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education [Text]. Retrieved January 8, 2018, from http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework Côté, M., Kochkina, S., & Mawhinney, T. (2016). Do You Want to Chat? Reevaluating Organization of Virtual Reference Service at an Academic Library. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 56(1), 36–46. https://doi.org/10.5860/rusq.56n1.36 Dempsey, P. R. (2016). “Are You a Computer?” Opening Exchanges in Virtual Reference Shape the Potential for Teaching | Dempsey | College & Research Libraries. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.77.4.455 Dempsey, P. R. (2017). Resource Delivery and Teaching in Live Chat Reference: Comparing Two Libraries. College and Research Libraries, 78(7), 898. Desai, C. M., & Graves, S. J. (2008). Cyberspace or Face-to-Face: The Teachable Moment and Changing Reference Mediums. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 47(3), 242–255. Elmborg, J. K. (2002). Teaching at the Desk: Toward a Reference Pedagogy. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 2(3), 455–464. https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2002.0050
  37. 37. BIBLIOGRAPHY Gronemyer, K., & Deitering, A.-M. (2009). “I don’t think it’s harder, just that it’s different”: Librarians’ attitudes about instruction in the virtual reference environment. Reference Services Review, 37(4), 421–434. https://doi.org/10.1108/00907320911007029 Jacoby, J., Ward, D., Avery, S., & Marcyk, E. (2016). The Value of Chat Reference Services: A Pilot Study. Portal : Libraries and the Academy; Baltimore, 16(1), 109–129. Kochkina, S., & Mawhinney, T. (2018). Is the medium the message?: Examining transactions conducted via text in comparison with traditional virtual reference methods. Presented at the Distance Library Services Conference, San Antonio, TX. Maloney, K., & Kemp, J. H. (n.d.). Changes in Reference Question Complexity Following the Implementation of a Proactive Chat System: Implications for Practice | Maloney | College & Research Libraries. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.76.7.959 Matteson, M. L., Salamon, J., & Brewster, L. (2011). A Systematic Review of Research on Live Chat Service. Reference & User Services Quarterly; Chicago, 51(2), 172–190. Oakleaf, M., & VanScoy, A. (2010). Instructional Strategies for Digital Reference: Methods to Facilitate Student Learning. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 49(4), 380–390.

×