Tim Spalding wrote:
> That said, I think it would be worth it if NGC4Lib discussed the
> O'Reilly post showing declines in reference questios, and other
> metrics among ACRL members. I'm surprised it didn't go off like an
> atom bomb. Indeed, there's been fairly little discussion on library
> blogs too.
>
I think the reason it didn't go off like a bomb is because we've been
aware of this for some time. Especially those actually working the
reference desk over the past 10 years have noticed this, it's been hard
to miss.
People have also noticed a change in the NATURE of the reference
questions we do get---we get harder ones! Or maybe we get the same
amount of harder ones, we just don't get as many easier ones anymore.
Now, the reason it hasn't gone off like a bomb is because it was not
news. That doesn't give us as a profession an excuse for not talking
about what it means for us though, and then taking action to move
towards our future roles. We all know (or at least believe; myself
included) that this does NOT mean libraries or librarians are becoming
less valuable. It doesn't even mean that the role of a reference
librarian is becoming less valuable---if the role of a reference
librarian is research aid. It DOES mean that the role of a reference
librarian is changing, and we need to be pro-active in meeting that
change, and we're not neccesarily being pro-active enough.
But to be sure, change is hard, in any industry. It is uncomfortable
for everyone to be told that the job you have gotten really good at over
possibly decades will now change completely.
Jonathan
--
Jonathan Rochkind
Digital Services Software Engineer
The Sheridan Libraries
Johns Hopkins University
410.516.8886
rochkind (at) jhu.edu
Received on Fri Aug 03 2007 - 08:39:15 EDT