READ-ing Our Way to Success: Using the READ Scale to Successfully Train Reference Student Assistants in the Referral Model

Vassady, Lisa; Archer, Alyssa; Ackermann, Eric G.

doi:10.1080/01930826.2015.1076309

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The traditional READ Scale’s summit often features extensive literature searches with advanced sources, rather than introducing a student to database searching or taming an over-formatted Word document (Bowron and Weber, 2017). Those using the READ Scale often have trouble distinguishing between its intermediate levels (Bowron and Weber, 2017) or deciding whether questions are difficult enough for a librarian (Vassady et al , 2015). Particular tasks receive arbitrary values.…”

Section: Setting and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Particular tasks receive arbitrary values. Vassady et al ’s (2015) library rated hanging indents in Word easy but considered Excel charts difficult. Worse yet, by giving low rankings to routine reference queries, these tasks become something a student can do, which in turn justifies removing librarians from day-to-day reference (Paulus, 2014; Mannion, 2019; Vassady et al , 2015; Bowron and Weber, 2017).…”

Section: Setting and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A close look: roving reference in a community college library information commons

Kramer¹

2020

RSR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to answer the questions: What challenges do students face in an information commons and how does roving reference help?. Design/methodology/approach The author recounts her work roving in her community college information commons and supplements this with an analysis of 1,500 records from her detailed reference log that compares roving reference results with conventional references and with reference questions as a whole. Findings Her autoethnography and data reveal that roving substantially increases the number of reference encounters. In addition, her data sheds light on students’ struggles with common, productivity software, academic packages and malfunctioning hardware. More importantly, these findings show that roving reference data identify problems that librarians, as stakeholders, can solve. Research limitations/implications Roving reference in a community college information commons brings students in one library into sharper focus. Roving reference increases the number of reference encounters and the reach of reference service. It also exposes a use-based digital divide that calls for collaboration in the long run and increased point-of-need service immediately. Practical implications Even data that points to digital divides, hardware issues or other shortcomings and offers empirical evidence of problems for which library staff, unlike student workers, can find long-term solutions. This study shows that it is possible to gather rich and extensive data with minimal personnel and off-the-shelf software. Social implications A college degree is vital to social mobility and easing inequality. Fluency with academic technology and information is necessary for completing college. Roving reference means more opportunities to teach information and computer fluency at point of need and more opportunities for librarian stakeholders to find and remove obstacles to student learning. Originality/value This is one of the few, recent studies, autoethnographic or otherwise, on roving reference in a community college library’s information commons.

show abstract

Section: Setting and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Setting and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A close look: roving reference in a community college library information commons

Kramer¹

2020

RSR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With small groups of students, Manley and Holley (2014) found that demonstration videos and voice over PowerPoints worked well when combined with shadowing full-time staff. Vassady, Archer, and Ackermann (2015) trained students to work at the reference desk by requiring them to read a student manual, to attend group training sessions (featuring games and question and answer sessions), and to participate in monthly meetings. Additionally, Vassady, Archer, and Ackermann (2015) had the flexibility to give student workers in the department annual performance reviews.…”

Section: Downloaded By [Fordham University] At 13:13 03 January 2018mentioning

confidence: 99%

Training Student Workers for Cross-Departmental Success in an Academic Library: A New Model

Becker-Redd

Lee

Skelton

2018

Journal of Library Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many academic libraries rely on a student workforce for everyday operations, interacting with patrons, and assistance with larger projects. Training these students for such multifaceted and customer-service-focused positions can be a challenge. This article traces an overhaul of training procedures made during the transition to a centralized, services desk workflow. All aspects of training a large student workforce, from planning and presentation to assessment, are outlined. Interactive group sessions and peer-to-peer reinforcement of procedures have proven to be most effective in training student workers for varied roles in an academic library.

show abstract

“…Dinkins and Ryan (2010) documented the first year of their library’s shift to a tiered model, detailing both how paraprofessionals and students were trained to refer questions and the amount, type and appropriateness of the referrals they made during the transitionary stage. Finally, Vassady et al (2015) combined some of these concepts in their analysis of a training program for the READ scale to facilitate a tiered service referral model. They noted some challenges in developing a common understanding of both how to rate a question and when a referral threshold has been reached when working with student assistants as front-line staff.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A rubric and methodology for benchmarking referral goals

Ward¹,

Jacoby

2018

RSR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This paper aims to identify more advanced criteria for identifying referral opportunities and improve understanding of when to refer through developing and defining distinct question categories and related criteria. Design/methodology/approach Chat transcripts were analyzed and coded using a rubric developed on the basis of published research and original criteria developed for the study. Coding focused on whether a referral was made, if an opportunity was missed (termed “referral gap”), and what factors influenced its presence or absence. Findings Quantitative and qualitative factors that influence when referrals are successfully made were identified. Questions higher on the reference effort assessment data scale and those relating to subject-based research tended to have a higher referral gap, while the presence of instruction in evaluating resources had a positive impact on referrals being made. Recognizing patron-based factors such as knowledge of library policies also impacted the presence of referrals. Research limitations/implications Limitations include the data, which were taken from a single institution and primarily reflect questions occurring in academic libraries. Practical implications Suggestions are provided for training and reference management approaches to improve the presence, substance and quality of referrals. Originality/value The study introduces a new measure for evaluating referrals, termed the “referral gap.” The methodology also expands on traditional data points used to measure when referrals should occur, which typically focus on patron and staff affiliations.

show abstract

READ-ing Our Way to Success: Using the READ Scale to Successfully Train Reference Student Assistants in the Referral Model

Cited by 10 publications

References 8 publications

A close look: roving reference in a community college library information commons

A close look: roving reference in a community college library information commons

Training Student Workers for Cross-Departmental Success in an Academic Library: A New Model

A rubric and methodology for benchmarking referral goals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About