Reference Desk O Reference Desk

Today's library link of the day is another article about whether or not we want to keep the reference desk. Do these articles make anyone else crazy? Yes, reference is changing. Yes, students are tech savvy and like to communicate primarily through txt messaging and MySpace or Facebook. Yes, "where's the bathroom" and the art of unjamming staplers and printers is not why I went to library school. But there's something to be said for being out there.

I want to see how the patrons are using our space and our resources. I want to be there for when they get stuck. I want to see the questions people ask about my disciplines and collections. Being out there is how I learn what to teach and buy for the collection.

I'm happy to answer questions through IM--I love Meebo and tell everyone they should use it. I think del.icio.us is great for storing collection-relevant links. (I have a fantasy of making a huge LII style repository that would replace all our broken home-grown link storage tools, but that's another topic.) I'm happy to txt. I love MySpace. I think email and chat reference are easier than in-person reference because I can send users the links and they're right there. I've done mobile reference with a laptop and no print collection--no sweat. But for all of those situations, the users have to know where I am.

The library building is symbolic. Most students prefer the online resources, and if they get stuck and can figure out who to ask for help and how to get ahold of them without getting up, they will. But sometimes they just don't know who to ask. And that's when they come to the reference desk. Take it away, they won't ask at all.

I say this coming from the social sciences and humanities. It seems different in the physical sciences, mostly, I think, because there are fewer tools to choose from (Do I feel like PubMed or SciSearch today?) and folks are usually looking for more factual information or just a quick collection of recent articles. In the social sciences, the facts tend to be obscure, often buried in government publications or appended to articles; in the humanities, the concepts are nebulous and often indexed badly. There usually are no perfect keywords (because if there were, they're be no point in doing the research) and the research usually requires as many articles as are relevant, so the results require some sifting through, and alternative searches are required to pick up any strays. The patrons have to do it themselves, because only they know what is really right for them, but they often like having us around for further consults as they get stuck or switch databases. Take away the reference desk, you lose that--in a scheduled consult, it's my full attention and then your time's up.

Yes, reference has evolved and will keep evolving. But don't tell me my time (usually 4-8 hours a week) is wasted doing the same things I do at my desk (email, catching up on blogs and current literature, personal research, answering email reference questions, etc.) out where people can easily find me.