Technological Advances in Reference: A Paradigm Shift?

Citation

Hodgson, J. (2002), "Technological Advances in Reference: A Paradigm Shift?", Library Review, Vol. 51 No. 8, pp. 430-431. https://doi.org/10.1108/lr.2002.51.8.430.8

Although the title of this edition of Library Trends asks whether technological advances have brought about a paradigm shift in reference practice, the question running through the volume might more bluntly be phrased as: “is the traditional reference library on its way out?” This collection of eight essays by US academics and library professionals examines how, and the extent to which, technological advances have changed basic reference practice. The message emerging is that the answer to the first question is equivocal: though reference librarians may have new tools and new responsibilities in the digital era, this has not altered the basic principles of the profession. As far as the second question is concerned, it will, perhaps, be of some comfort to many to learn that the contributors to this volume, at least, think that the traditional reference service does have a future.

The eight essays cover a range of topics, dealing with issues including the values underlying reference work; models of reference service delivery; analysis of user needs; information science education; and strategies for the assessment of electronic reference. Nevertheless, underlying the collection is the premise that although the social context of reference work has changed dramatically over the past 20 years, the library user and his needs remain at the heart of the information profession.

In the first essay, Michael Gorman argues that technology can enhance but never supplant what he calls human‐to‐human reference service. He contends that if the reference library is to flourish in this time of change, professionals must affirm the core values of the profession and maintain the vital human‐to‐human component which he identifies as typifying the reference service. This view is echoed in the essay by David Tyckoson, who says that since the information that was once only available to the reference librarian, is now available to all, reference professionals must re‐examine the foundation of their service and identify its core values. The library, he argues, must develop a symbiotic relationship with the community if it is to survive.

Jo Bell Whitlatch’s essay follows on from this by offering an analysis of methods of evaluating electronic reference services. Shifting patterns of user demands, she maintains, provide libraries with opportunities to use different strategies to connect library materials with users. For Yvonne Chandler and Bill Katz, such opportunities must, out of necessity, be taken. Katz argues that reference librarians must take the lead in this new era of access to information. He says that it is necessary to fit new technologies into traditional reference service goals, which means a new approach to methods of service. Chandler points out that the rise of the Internet led sceptics to foresee the end of a need for libraries. She argues that what has in fact happened is that library users now have higher expectations of libraries and library professionals; which requires that information professionals must develop new skills; more technical knowledge and a better understanding of user‐information‐seeking.

In what is perhaps the most thought provoking essay of the collection, Juris Dilevko argues that a rush to embrace new technology, in the form of a call‐centre model for dealing with reference queries, runs the risk of deprofessionalising the librarian. He warns that this model will lead to the librarian being reduced to a mere information retriever not cognisant with the information being dispensed. Like Katz and Chandler, Dilevko contends that as technological skills are widespread, librarians should carve out a unique knowledge‐niche that differentiates them from library users. People, even those conversant with the Web, he reasons, turn to a library when they are at a loss and are in need of assistance. The key to the preservation of the reference library, he says, may lie in librarians forging a reputation as a profession whose members are a repository of accumulated knowledge. The old fashioned at heart will be pleased to know that Dilevko sees this being achieved through extensive reading.

The collection ends with a piece by John Fritch and Scott Mandernack which stresses that librarians are key agents in the advancement of society and culture and as such must recognise the value of community and social context in providing services that meet user needs.

Overall, the message is that the reference library as we know it does have a future, and in the words of Fritch and Mandernack, “keeping focused on a vision of reference service that embodies the mission of librarianship – of providing high quality service on behalf of the public good – will minimize the turmoil that the evolving information environment seemingly forces upon us”.