Search results

This paper aims to analyze the effectiveness of the subject librarian literacy training and put forward suggestions for the improvement of the subject librarian literacy training based on the satisfaction degree survey for the CALIS III Subject Librarian Literacy Training.

On the basis of the satisfaction degree survey for the CALIS III Subject Librarian Literacy Training, this paper elaborates on the design of the survey, analyzes effectiveness of the training according to the survey results, and further advances suggestions for the enhancement of the subject librarian literacy training.

As an essential part of the library user service, subject services are highly demanding of subject librarians' literacy and capabilities. The subject librarians should thus own great abilities to be qualified for the innovative subject service work. Although the CALIS III Librarian Literacy Training and Qualification Certification Program, a vital executive program, has made great achievements, the training still needs to be further improved concerning the schedules, teaching atmosphere, training forms, training content, etc., to enhance the subject librarians' ability, raise the service standards and promote the fast and sound development of librarianship in China.

This paper offers detailed information on how to design a satisfaction degree survey for the subject librarian literacy training, analyzes the effectiveness of the librarian literacy training, and finally makes suggestions for the enhancement of the subject librarian literacy training.

The librarian's basic duty has always been to acquire, to organize and to exploit a collection of books and other sources of information. Concerning his ability to perform the first two tasks there has never been much doubt, but about the third responsibility he has either kept very quiet or done little—or both!—if we are to judge by the dictionary definitions attached to our profession. Emphasis on exploitation arrived with the twentieth century when closed access was swept away in the public library. It was not long before the merits of subject specialization became apparent to those who administered the public library, and subject departments were born in the days following the First World War. It took another World War before similar ideas had impact on the academic library world—witness the developments at University College, London, at the end of the 1940s, described by Scott—and only in the past twenty years have the results become apparent. And yet this is a strange situation, because the librarian of an academic library has traditionally been a subject specialist himself. As far back as the Renaissance, universities had learned librarians who were scholars in law, or literature or theology. This tradition has been carried on until the present century. Libraries in German universities in particular appear to have seen the need for the continuance of the scholar‐librarian, with their scheme of ‘Referenten’. In Britain, university libraries have remained faithful to the idea of the scholar‐librarian but it has not resulted in much ‘exploitation’ of the stock until recent years, with the emergence of the ‘subject specialist librarian’.

The development of educational programmes for special librarians has been very gradual in America. As recently as 1937 the Training and Recruiting Committee of the Special Libraries Association reported that there was only one library school giving a separate course for special librarians. The inclusion of one or two lectures or units in general courses, visits, field work, or some special adjustment for individual students in thirteen other schools represented all the special library training available at that time. A similar survey made by the Training Committee in 1945 indicates that somewhat less than half of the thirty‐six accredited library schools now have some kind of special library programme and most of the schools have at least one or two lectures, usually given by special librarians, as well as several visits to special libraries in order to acquaint their students with the opportunities in this field and the qualifications desirable.

This article aims to explore the attitudes of academic reference librarians toward generalist and subject specialist reference service, and to present an examination of the ways that these librarians obtain training to handle a range of research queries that fall outside their areas of expertise.

A literature search was conducted to explore the current best practices for ongoing professional training. A follow up survey was conducted among reference librarians to gain insights into their attitudes toward generalist and subject specialist reference activities, and their participation in, and attitudes toward, related professional education and training.

The results suggest that the reference librarians who responded have a high comfort level for answering queries in a range of subject areas, and that while some librarians may defer to a readily available subject expert this is not a reflection of their confidence in their own ability to have assisted the patron.

Based on the insights garnered from this survey, the authors did an additional review of the literature and incorporated the additional research for their conclusions and recommendations as to how reference librarians, regardless of whether they regard themselves as generalists or specialists, can best expand their knowledge of reference sources in additional fields and answer queries outside their areas of expertise.

Other libraries and reference librarians can use the results of the paper to develop their own training/professional development programs and activities.

Traces the poor agricultural production situation in Nigeria which gave rise to food insecurity, forcing the Government to take various measures to contain the resultant food scarcity. One of these measures was the establishment of Universities of Agriculture (Uni‐Agrics) with the specific mission to transform agriculture through training, research and extension in order to boost food production. After giving a brief history of the education and training of librarians in Nigeria, the author submits that such training is not suitable for prospective subject agricultural librarians. This situation has resulted in the acute dearth of such librarians, giving rise to an unhealthy state of affairs, whereby nonspecialized librarians are currently employed. A blueprint for the education and training of subject agricultural librarians is therefore given.

Whether a reference librarian needs a good subject background to provide a quality service, or can rely upon generic professional skills, is an old debate. However it is sharpened once again by the emerging changes in reference services in the digital environment, in particular sophisticated end‐user access to information resources. Already in recent years subject expertise, which is not the same as subject knowledge, has been somewhat overshadowed in the recruitment and training of librarians by requirements for advanced technological and other, for example training, skills. However amongst the wide range of skills and knowledge required by current practice in reference, and especially for the future roles envisaged for librarians, are an understanding of specific client needs and information sources, which constitute the traditional strengths of subject specialists.

The purpose of this study is to learn what factors liaison librarians in academic research libraries consider in determining whether to refer chat reference patrons to subject specialists.

Subject specialists were asked what policies guided their decisions to refer to a specialist and then assessed unreferred chat session transcripts both within and outside their specializations to determine need for a referral.

Few respondents were guided by formal policies. Contrary to an initial hypothesis, subject area was not a key factor in referring chat. A broader set of criteria included reference interviewing, provision of relevant resources and information literacy instruction. Respondents valued both the depth that subject specialists can provide to reference interactions and the ability of a skilled generalist to support information literacy.

Findings are most applicable to large, public doctoral universities with liaison librarian programs. Assignment of respondents to subject specialist categories was complicated by their broad range of background and expertise.

The study contributes new understanding of referrals to subject specialists who have potential to guide development of formal referral policies in academic library virtual reference services.

The study is the first empirical examination of chat reference referral decisions.

From 2007 to 2009, Kansas State University Libraries (K-State Libraries) committed to strategically assess and redevelop their organizational structure. The Libraries’ Strategic Plan and position redistributions commenced in 2007 and 2009 respectively, with adjustments in 2010 to accommodate the university’s K-State 2025 Strategic Plan. Together, these changed the roles of former subject librarians, dividing and transferring responsibilities for outreach, reference, instruction, and collection development. Among the more significant changes was the creation of departments devoted to patron groups, rather than specific academic disciplines. Illustrating how the reorganization changed the roles of traditional library services, this chapter outlines the responsibilities of three librarian positions: Undergraduate and Community Services, Faculty and Graduate Services, and Content (collection) Development. The librarians are also founding members of the K-State Libraries Arts Matrix, an ad hoc team operating within the new organization to enhance communication and expand subject expertise in the visual and performing arts. These transitions presented both opportunities for engagement and specialization, as well as challenges to communication and subject identity. These issues are addressed, including solutions offered by the matrix model. Although this study is limited by the neoteric existence of this model, and lack of precedents for comparison, K-State Libraries’ example may offer a viable model for institutions adapting to fiscal realities. Additionally, matrices may supplement the traditional subject librarian model for those seeking to enhance engagement and collaboration. This chapter offers further insight into a strategic planning process, as well as a transparent, inclusive strategy for librarians adjusting to organizational change.

The purpose of this paper is to report on a research project aimed at gaining an understanding of subject librarians' perceptions and promotion of institutional repositories as an information resource for their clients.

The researchers used the five attributes of innovations and the change agent concept, both drawn from Rogers' diffusion of innovations theory, as the basis of semi‐structured interviews with nine librarians, spread equally across the humanities, social sciences, and sciences at three universities.

The researchers found that subject librarians have varying levels of knowledge about institutional repositories as an information resource and hold both positive and negative perceptions. The librarians perceived institutional repositories to be still underdeveloped, with greatest value for humanities clients and least value for science clients, offering little value to undergraduates, but a good resource for accessing theses.

Due to their current perceptions of the value of institutional repositories, subject librarians are not yet promoting them as an information resource. If institutional repositories are to be successful, library managers must not only ensure that content is being input into the repositories, but also that they are being promoted to library clients as valuable information resources, so that the content is being accessed and used.

While there has been much research in recent years about institutional repositories, the focus has been predominantly on issues related to motivating individuals to input content into them. This research shows that institutional repositories are not yet being perceived or promoted as a valuable information resource by academic subject librarians, who view them as having varying value to their clients.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the extent to which patrons use chat widgets for individual consultations with subject librarians.

Subject librarians with an embedded chat widget on their research guides were contacted and asked to fill out an 11‐question survey on the use of the widgets by students or faculty for consultation purposes.

Overall, patrons used chat widgets infrequently to consult with their subject librarians. Only 28 per cent of librarians reported weekly or daily consultations through the widget. However, certain factors increased the use of this communication tool. These included advertising the service and longer connection times to the chat widget. Consultations were also more frequent according to librarian age group and subject responsibility.

Statistical analyses were precluded due to insufficient number of responses when tabulating cross‐comparisons between survey questions. Only trends, rather than clear conclusions, could be established.

To date, there have not been any studies describing the use of instant messaging or chat widgets by individual librarians, despite the fact that many subject librarians have inserted chat widgets on their subject guides to provide individualized assistance to patrons who seek subject‐specific consultations.