2011
DOI: 10.21083/partnership.v5i2.1183
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Transaction Analysis of Interactions at the Reference Desk of a Small Academic Library

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Most of the inquiries in both Stevens' ( 2013) and Empey's (2010) studies were concluded quickly. Empey (2010) found a slight decrease in the number of inquiries lasting longer than 6 min from data collected in 2006 and 2007, compared to data from 2009 and concludes that the level of instruction being provided had decreased. In Stevens' (2013, p. 204) study, only 3% of the questions "required 10 or more minutes to answer."…”
Section: The Reference Interviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Most of the inquiries in both Stevens' ( 2013) and Empey's (2010) studies were concluded quickly. Empey (2010) found a slight decrease in the number of inquiries lasting longer than 6 min from data collected in 2006 and 2007, compared to data from 2009 and concludes that the level of instruction being provided had decreased. In Stevens' (2013, p. 204) study, only 3% of the questions "required 10 or more minutes to answer."…”
Section: The Reference Interviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly, the omission of closing phrases was related to dissatisfaction (Saunders and Ung, 2017). Empey (2010), who analyzed reference interactions at a small academic library, suggests that the time spent on inquiries indicates either the level of instructions or the complexity of the questions. Most of the inquiries in both Stevens' ( 2013) and Empey's (2010) studies were concluded quickly.…”
Section: The Reference Interviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A hallmark of neoliberalism in library service structures is the commodification of patrons and their data (Mathios,125 2019). Even though varied metrics such as in-house materials usage statistics (Rose-Wise & Irwin, 2016), circulation statistics (Rose-Wiles et al, 2020), and reference transaction statistics (Beirne & Aldridge, 2012;Dubnjakovic, 2012;Empey, 2010;LeMire et al, 2016;Ryan, 2008) continue to be used to gauge the value of libraries, these methods are ill-suited to establish with confidence authentic correlations between student success and the utilization of library resources and services. Thorpe et al (2016) write that "changes in student use of the library, both physically and virtually, mean that gate counts, room use counts, in-house print collection tick marks, and attendance for library instruction sessions are insufficient measures for showing student engagement with the library" (p. 373).…”
Section: Establishing Protocols For the Collection And Management Of Datamentioning
confidence: 99%