Charting Future Directions for Reference Service

Abstract

At the University of Kansas Libraries, daily reference interactions have been collected since 2007 via the open source software known as LibStats at the two largest campus libraries: Anschutz and Watson Libraries. Together, these libraries contain the central collections in the sciences, humanities, and social sciences. For the CULS conference, we propose to present information about the reference questions posed by users at these libraries, more specifically about the disciplines from which these questions emanate.

Our proposal is based on a study done for the 2011 ACRL conference held in Philadelphia this past April. In that work, we presented information about the patterns, modes and disciplinary areas of patron interaction at these two reference desks. Reference questions were coded using a taxonomy based on subject headings used to organize databases into broad categories, in addition to corresponding to professional schools within the University.

Using our earlier study as a point of departure, we will present additional information of a more detailed nature about questions asked in the areas of humanities, social sciences, and sciences. Based on our research, we will discuss how this information reveals trends in queries posed by users at our reference desks. We will also consider broader implications to assist the Libraries in addressing increasing complex questions regarding how faculty and staff time should best be relegated within reference services.

In addition, our aim is to reflect on our reference-related work within the context of other assessment activities currently underway at the University of Kansas. This past summer, for example, the Libraries hosted two consultants charged with examining the position of the Libraries within the wider University context. Further, the University has engaged with an outside agency to conduct a broad-ranging self-study with the goal of improving efficiencies and effectiveness of certain administrative functions, including the University Libraries. These reviews raise questions regarding levels of staffing, the nature of our work, and may determine how we approach our profession in the future at the University of Kansas.