AcadEmi

I found the process of creating a website to be far more appealing than I had anticipated. Despite the brief moments of aggravation, the general procedure was almost soothing, and each new skill represented a triumph. In my enthusiasm, I planned a site that was perhaps more complicated than necessary, with the result that I did a lot of copying & pasting & revising tables and ended up with a less pleasingly streamlined final creation than I’d envisioned. This is something I will keep in mind in the future, but achieving a less than perfect product dimmed my sense of accomplishment only very mildly.

Along the way, I experienced the usual frustrations. Sadly, in two instances these frustrations arose from my inexplicable inability to keep Powerpoint & PDF straight. Tabling was perhaps the biggest challenge; although I managed to create a table for my home page that is reasonably close to what I had planned, I never managed to achieve an attractive layout on some of my other pages. Despite these minor setbacks – which wasted a little time and made me feel like an idiot but were otherwise harmless – the process went relatively smoothly.

I realized, moreover, how many small decisions go into creating even a very simple website. Choosing brief titles for my pictures was rather a challenge: should I indicate the title of the work of art, or should I give information about the link embedded in the image? In the end, I decided to describe the work rather than the link, trusting that the navigation would be reasonably self-evident. The one exception on my home page is my image for “Music,” which I left labeled as such because there was no particular significance to the album cover I chose other than appearance.

One of the highlights came when I finally lined up the complicated table on my home page correctly – a minor achievement that nonetheless proved highly satisfactory. But my most exciting moment came late last night. I was tinkering with the layout of one of my pages when it occurred to me to attach an audio file. The accomplishment of this was heartwarming enough, but it got even better when I succeeded in opening the file in a new window so that it didn’t bring my entire presentation to a screeching halt. It really is the little things in life…

Reference librarians wishing to update their services face a number of questions. Should they employ chat or instant messenger for their virtual reference service? Can they provide virtual reference around the clock, or will a few hours a week have to suffice? Is it better to join a consortium or remain independent? Will they have to hire extra staff, or might they attempt to juggle the virtual reference desk and the physical one? Naturally, these questions will be approached differently by every library.

And naturally the subject has been well-researched: these are reference librarians, after all. It’s easy to find a variety of case studies, reports, and articles online about the various services and software packages available. Usage statistics are somewhat less readily available. A few surveys have been conducted; the Global Census of Digital Reference, perhaps the most thorough, has led some early proponents of virtual reference to question its efficacy. Steve Coffman and Linda Arret, for instance, argued in an oft-cited two-part article that the high operational costs of chat services outweigh the benefits, given the low usage levels most libraries have reported. They acknowledge, however, that some programs have been quite successful, and that the key factor seems to be promotion.

The drawbacks of chat notwithstanding, even Coffman and Arret offered tentative praise for reference conducted via Instant Messenger. In fact, there are a variety of reasons to prefer IM to Chat, not least of which is cost: IM is free, easy to use, and available to anyone with internet access. Adopting this technology involves very little risk for libraries, even if most patrons eschewed virtual reference entirely. Moreover, IM comes with an automatic promotional feature: a student who adds his library’s user name to his list of buddies will be reminded of the service any time it’s available. There will be no need for him to consciously decide to log-in to his library’s home page in search of the virtual reference function. The library must still succeed in spreading the word initially, but will face less of an uphill battle.

Virtual options may not have redefined reference as dramatically as was once predicted, but IM offers too many advantages to ignore. Students who have grown up with computers have been encouraged to be self-sufficient; they are not always comfortable asking for help, and may consider approaching a reference librarian only as a last resort. They are remarkably skilled at finding information electronically, on the other hand. The key is perhaps to make virtual reference a vital component of independent research quests. Sure, some patrons will find Instant Messenger too distracting, or will simply prefer face-to-face interaction (remember how much everyone used to complain about talking to answering machines?). But the bottom line is that librarians have a free, easy way to extend reference services into more patrons’ comfort zones. Why wouldn’t they take advantage?

I haven’t visited Macalester College’s library website since I graduated six years ago, so I thought it might be interesting to reevaluate the site through my experience as a student of library science. During my years at Macalester, I devoted many hours to wading confusedly through electronic journal lists. In retrospect, I recognize that my difficulties had less to do with an inherently confusing approach to journal lists than with my own unpolished research skills. It is interesting, however, to note some developments that might have enriched the experience for me.

The site is clear and easily navigable, if not especially eye-catching. A navigation bar at the top offers links to basic library information, the library’s blog, LESTER (for accessing materials from off-campus), and MOODLE (for online course information). The left side of the page includes the subtopics Resources and Collections, Research Guides and Help, and About the Library and Services. The right side represents the most prominent change since my last visit: a library blog.

As I checked out various aspects of the website, it became clear that the fundamental research options have not changed dramatically since 2001. The library’s catalog is available through CLICnet, a resource sharing consortium of eight private colleges and universities in Minnesota. Students can request interlibrary loan materials through ILLiad, and can also browse the collections of the University of Minnesota, local public libraries, and the Library of Congress from the DeWitt Wallace website. I also found descriptions of the archival and special book collections, the latter of which focuses on 20th century American authors, and Midwestern authors like Cather, Hemingway, and Sinclair Lewis in particular. Unfortunately, no links or scanned passages are available.

There are a number of new features, even in familiar programs like CLICnet: many of the participating libraries now offer live reference chats, or at least online reference appointments. One new program, RefWorks, allows students to import references from online databases to create personal citation lists. Lists can then be automatically formatted into research papers.

The library, in conjunction with the archival & media services departments, has also undertaken an oral history interview project. This project began in January of 2007, and so far there are only three interviews, all by professors. These interviews, which apparently constitute the website’s only audio resources, are available through one of the most intriguing recent additions to the library’s online offerings: the Digital Commons. The Commons are devoted to organizing and sharing creative and scholarly works produced at Macalester. While most of DeWitt Wallace’s resources are accessible only to current students and faculty, the Digital Commons allows anyone to download essays and articles. It currently focuses on student publications, but will be expanding over the next year. Had it been around when I was in school, I might have submitted my honors project to it, thus rendering said project slightly less pointless. I found more information about Digital Commons in a discussion on MIT’s website, in which the debate raged between those who view information as a public good and those who consider it a commodity.

It is difficult to evaluate LESTER: I was able to sign in as an alum, but found only links that require an active student password. The Information Fluency Project is an endeavor that seems to have not yet lived up to its potential. It emphasizes the need for students to recognize the legal and ethical implications of information, and is certainly topical for students of library science. But while its goals are admirable, I found little to suggest that practical results had followed the implementation of a task force and statement of purpose.

Overall, the website is an admirable platform for students to access scholarly resources. It seems to be geared towards students who already possess good research skills and an appreciation for the library; it offers few bells and whistles to draw in reluctant undergrads. On the other hand, it is well-designed, logical, and uses technology to provide students with an enhanced learning environment.