MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1480904228

Reference Librarians and Keeping Up-to-Date: A Question of Priorities

2004· article· en· W1480904228 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ethel Auster, Donna C. Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueReference & User Services Quarterly · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)Order (exchange)Public relationsMeaning (existential)Service (business)Professional developmentSociologyKnowledge managementPolitical scienceComputer scienceBusinessPsychologyPedagogyMarketingEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The practice of reference work has been changing rapidly due to new information resources, emerging services, alternative ways of organizing work, and increased expectations of users. We review the literature in order to identify the competencies for reference work that have been pinpointed as necessary for today's work environment, and we present results of a study in which we explored the extent to which professional development of reference librarians was occurring in large public libraries in Ontario. We examine those competencies reference librarians were choosing to acquire through formal and informal professional development activities, and we explore barriers that might be preventing reference librarians from participating in these activities. Our discussion focuses on the meaning of the results for the professional development of librarians in the twenty-first century. ********** Reference librarians have been facing a decade of rapid change in the workplace: new information resources, emerging services, alternative ways of organizing work, and increased expectations of users. All these point to an urgent need to keep up-to-date the knowledge and skills for public service and reference work. In this article, we review the literature in order to identify the competencies for reference work that have been pin-pointed as necessary for today's work environment. We present results of a study in which we explored the extent to which professional development of reference librarians was occurring in large public libraries in Ontario. We examine those competencies reference librarians are choosing to acquire through formal and informal professional development activities, and we explore barriers that might be preventing reference librarians from participating in these activities. Our discussion focuses on the meaning of the results for the professional development of librarians in the twenty-first century. Technological change, in the form of the development of the Internet and electronic resources, is changing the practice of reference work. The development of electronic resources has changed the volume, nature, and quality of the information sources available. Where reference librarians once relied solely on print resources, they can now answer the majority of questions accurately using only Web-based sources. (1) However, there is evidence that traditional print resources still form the main source of answers to reference questions in public libraries. (2) Thus, there are concerns about the ability of the reference librarians to use Internet sources to answer reference questions. Change is also occurring due to management practices. Organizational restructuring, increased use of paraprofessionals on the reference desk, and growth in part-time employment have resulted in changing roles for librarians. The knowledge and skills that librarians have acquired through formal education and on-the-job experience may no longer be relevant for jobs that have been redesigned. The graying of the profession is also leading to concerns about whether librarians are keeping their knowledge and skills up-to-date. Librarians nearing retirement may be reluctant to invest time and money in professional development they will hardly use, and libraries may be reluctant to invest in training librarians who will soon retire. There is no overall picture of the amount of training and development undertaken by libraries and librarians. Studies of training in libraries have been descriptive for the most part. In one study, the average length of time that staff spent in training on new information technologies was only one or two days in total and the main method used to train library staff was informal coaching by co-workers. (3) Libraries are adopting a competency approach to manage their human resources. Competencies are the knowledge, skills, and personal traits that enable the professional librarian to function effectively in the tasks considered essential in the profession. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.060
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.123
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.233
Threshold uncertainty score0.463

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0600.123
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0190.040
Scholarly communication0.0280.052
Open science0.0060.013
Research integrity0.0150.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReference & User Services QuarterlySame topicLibrary Science and Information LiteracyFrench-language works237,207