JeCity Unive

352 The Jou

Alternative Strategies for PromotingInformation Literacy

by Jeanne Galvin

Available online 19 July 2005

This article considers strategies for promotinginformation literacy other than classroom

instruction. Library services, such as thecreation of pathfinders, excellent reference

practices, and provision of user-friendly Webpages, are considered in terms of how they

might be useful in supporting an informationliteracy initiative.

anne Galvin, Kingsborough Community College,rsity of New York, Brooklyn, NY 11235-2398, USA

bjgalvin@kingsborough.eduN.

rnal of Academic Librarianship, Volume 31, Number 4, pages 352–35

When we discuss the importance of informationliteracy and the ways of promoting these veryimportant skills, classes are the first vehicle that

comes to mind. Discussion focuses on appropriate teachingstrategies and the debate over whether such instruction shouldbe integrated into course content or taught as a separate course.While course-related instruction is far more popular and theEarlham model1 has been accepted by many as the standard,Edward Owusu-Ansah2 makes a very compelling argument fora separate course which would eventually become part of thegeneral education requirements.

What librarians sometimes overlook is that informationliteracy, unlike bibliographic instruction, embraces skills andconcepts which are learned over time, both in and outside thelibrary.3 Kuhlthau4 describes the information search process asconsisting of different stages and discusses the importance ofuncertainty in the process.5 These stages and the steps fromuncertainty cannot take place in the common one-hour, one-shot bibliographic instruction session.

Even when classroom instruction takes place, reinforcementand more active learning experiences are needed. Librariansneed to strive for the ideal in the future, but live and work inthe present, with its limitations. Therefore, librarians cannotafford to overlook out-of-class opportunities to promote andsupport information literacy.

Any librarian who works at a reference desk experiencesthe frustration of meeting students who have been givenclass assignments for which they lack the informationliteracy skills. Faculty also note the failure of students touse appropriate scholarly materials in their research assign-ments.6 While we wish that teaching faculty would considerincluding library instruction in their courses, the reality isthat some faculty members have a variety of excuses for notscheduling library instruction for their classes. In somecases, they refuse to acknowledge that their students lackinformation literacy skills. Others, as Hardesty notes,7 saythat they are unable to spare a class session for libraryinstruction.

We do not want to see our students turning to ‘‘google.com’’as their only research tool. Several alternative tools forpromoting information literacy are available. We wish toconsider the opportunities offered by library pathfinders,individual instruction at the reference desk, instruction in thevirtual reference environment, and library Web pages.

7

LIBRARY GUIDES AND PATHFINDERS

Library guides and assignment-specific pathfinders function asa tool for students who need guidance in using the library tocomplete assignments. The use of pathfinders and the benefitsof point-of-use instruction are documented in library literaturedating back to the 1970s8 when they were used in ProjectINTREX at Massachusetts Institute of Technology.9

Students benefit from course or assignment-specific path-finders in that they are provided with a model for properresearch techniques. The advantage of guides and pathfindersover one-shot library instruction is illustrated in the account ofthe support given to students at the University of Waikato whowere working on required history papers on New Zealandhistory. The librarians had tried classes and exercises to assessstudent competencies but found that the Green Guide andvarious other library guides were much more effective inpromoting students’ search for and use of library materials.10

Another study of information-seeking behavior among studentsat Manchester Metropolitan University11 reveals that studentswho, for a variety of reasons, did not seek assistance from thelibrarian would use a library guide for assistance in use oflibrary resources.

User guides or pathfinders allow the student to learn to usedifferent resources (reference books, the library catalog, data-bases, and periodicals) at their own pace. They provide some ofthe features of the information retrieval system sought byKuhlthau12 when she asks, ‘‘Can systems be designed that donot close the person down too quickly—that are sufficientlyopen to accommodate exploring and formulating?’’ Studentswho are using a pathfinder have a variety of resources set outfor them and they can work through the various stages of theinformation-seeking process at their own pace.

The importance of making pathfinders or subject guidesrelevant to specific courses or assignments cannot be over-looked. As Shirley Wilbert13 reported in 1981, AddisonWesley’s attempt to distribute pathfinders commercially failedbecause the generic pathfinders did not match individuallibrary collections. More recently, Reeb and Gibbons14 citestudies where Web-based general subject guides were ignoredbecause they did not address the user’s specific informationneeds.

Although making pathfinders available on the Web hasobvious advantages in that distribution and updating are easier,one study by Magi15 at the University of Vermont revealed thatstudents in a business course found online guides somewhatconfusing, but they expressed great satisfaction with using aprint pathfinder. Dahl,16 in her study of pathfinders atCanadian universities, also found that creators of electronicpathfinders were more likely than creators of print pathfindersto overlook the generally accepted recommendations forcreating useful pathfinders. Pathfinders need to be readable,address a specific need, and be accessible (i.e., not hidden on alibrary’s Web site).

Both print and electronic guides and pathfinders extend thelibrary’s educational role when they are placed in a context andgiven an appropriate label so that students see them as tools forspecific needs. The importance of proper labeling and specificissues having to do with Web-based pathfinders are discussedby Carla Dunsmore.17

Pathfinders which only list resources without providingexplanations of the type of information offered in different

sources do not teach students to evaluate information. AsKuhlthau18 points out, ‘‘They have not formed newconstructs during the search process and have not soughtmeaning from the information encountered as the searchprogressed. The dpile of sourcesT does not necessarily leadto understanding and learning.’’ A well-constructed path-finder includes some information about the type of source(e.g., reference book, government documents, periodicaldatabase) that is recommended and why it would behelpful.

Collaboration from faculty in providing assignments to thelibrarians on a timely basis is, of course, a prerequisite to thecreation of useful pathfinders. At Kingsborough CommunityCollege19 in Brooklyn, New York faculty members who haveused this service are very likely to request it again for differentcourses and assignments. Economics and English professorsindicate that students who had an assignment-specific path-finder were much more likely to use scholarly resources. Thelibrary has an ongoing effort to make the availability of thisservice better known to all faculty.

Different types of user guides are offered by some libraries,such as the University of Rhode Island library (http://www.uri.edu/library/instruction_services/infolitplan.html).These guides range from general guides that outlinelocations and services of the library and provide generalinformation on using the catalog and finding periodicalarticles. Guides for individual databases are provided.Subject-specific guides delineate specific resources, both printand online, for particular subject areas. Finally, specificassignment guides are available if they are requested by theinstructor. Guides include the advice that users can seek furtherassistance at the reference desk and assignment guides eveninclude the name of the subject specialist librarian who can becontacted.

It is the hope of libraries offering guides and pathfinders thatthe practice in using appropriate materials for one course willbe a model and that the students will try to use the same searchskills for other assignments.

REFERENCE INTERVIEWS AND INSTRUCTION AT

THE REFERENCE DESK

Increasing concern among librarians about the tendency ofstudents to go to a search engine rather than to the referencedesk to meet information needs is certainly justified.20 Many,but not all, libraries report a decline in reference deskstatistics.21

While librarians are not to blame for the students’ failure torecognize their own lack of information skills, some measurescan be taken to improve the reference desk as a place forlearning. These remedies include attention to the referenceencounter, roving reference and consciousness of the hiddendifficulties in searching for information online.

‘‘Increasing concern among librarians about thetendency of students to go to a search engine

rather than to the reference desk to meetinformation needs is certainly justified.’’

July 2005 353

As early as 1980 the American Library Association22 statedthat instruction should be one of the primary goals of servicein all libraries. Most librarians agree that students are morelikely to use information skills when they learn these skills atthe point of need. Reference librarians report that whenpatrons are aware of the wealth of resources provided bydatabases and other Internet sources, the reference desk can bebusier than ever.23 Librarians do spend more time teachingthose patrons who do come to the reference desk to useelectronic resources.

Although Mabry24 cautions about giving only as muchinformation as the user can handle and about being wary of the‘‘glaze over,’’ librarians do need to see the reference encounteras a possible teaching moment. Small lessons in informationliteracy can be incorporated in nearly every referenceencounter. In an academic library, imparting skills for lifelonglearning is part of the librarian’s responsibility.

Fritch and Mandernack25 point out that reference encounterssometimes turn into mini-instruction sessions. During thereference encounter the librarian may have the opportunity toteach the student some general search skills. Students need tolearn to examine the scope of the source, to frame a search, toemploy Boolean operators, to use hypertext links, and toevaluate the information found.

Radford26 cautions about nonverbal behavior of librarians atthe reference desk (such as long phone conversations,discussions among librarians at the desk, librarians who arevery involved in their own projects). Such behavior has adefinite impact on the student’s decision to approach thereference desk. Reference librarians need to be perceived asavailable and willing to assist students. This perception ofavailability is even more important when the student has thealternative of walking over to the computer and typing‘‘google.’’ It is important to remember that no matter howmany times the reference librarian has heard the samequestions, the moment in time when the question is asked bya particular user is unique27 and the librarian should notexpress annoyance at being asked the same question for thetenth time.

Roving reference is another strategy suggested in libraryliterature (Fritch and Mandernack,28 Huwe,29 Courtois andLiriano,30 and Kramer31). Students may be reluctant to give upa seat at a library workstation to go over to the reference deskand ask for help, but a roving librarian would resolve thatproblem. Roving provides valuable point-of-need instruction.Huwe even recommends roving in the stacks and study areaswith wireless technology.

Librarians sometimes fail to recognize certain difficultiesinherent in searching for information online. Referencelibrarians sometimes overlook the fact that students do notdistinguish between search engine results and scholarly,authoritative databases. For the student, the operation is thesame—type some words into a search box and hope to getgood results. Fritch and Mandernack remind us that ‘‘manyof our users consider themselves experts at searchingbecause they are slightly familiar with Web search engines(where almost all searches return many hits).’’32 Beckernotes that the failure of Internet users to evaluate Websources is considered as a result of students’ lack ofunderstanding of the organization of the Internet and oftheir failure to distinguish between using a search engine anda database.33

354 The Journal of Academic Librarianship

Librarians need also to be concerned about their failure totreat free online sources as serious reference tools. When areference librarian suggests to a student that he might go on theInternet to find an answer to his question, he is treating theInternet as something to be used independently. Librarians tendto treat the Internet as ‘‘the store next door’’ and not as part ofthe actual reference transaction.34

‘‘Librarians need also to be concerned abouttheir failure to treat free online sources as

serious reference tools.’’

A particularly effective way of leading students to use thecatalog and databases is mentioned by Devine and Egger-Siderin their article on the Invisible Web.35 They remind studentswho intend to go to Google for their information that about 80percent of the information available online will be missed byGoogle and other search engines. Having piqued the students’interest, they can then begin to teach how to use libraryresources and how to evaluate information.

It is the librarian’s responsibility to be attentive to thereference encounter and the opportunities for teaching pre-sented in it, to guide the student to appropriate and valid onlineresources, and to teach the student to evaluate informationfound online.

VIRTUAL REFERENCE

As early as 1943,36 telephone reference was recognized as ameans of giving service to patrons who, for various reasons,did not come to the library. Service to remote users has nowexpanded to include a virtual reference desk which mayencompass e-mail reference, chat reference, and collaborative24/7 reference. Although the literature still has a heavy focuson the technical and staffing issues involved in virtual referenceand on questions regarding the viability of extending servicehours via consortial arrangements, librarians are beginning topay attention to the possibilities for promoting informationliteracy in the virtual reference environment.

Just as librarians in a face-to-face encounter with a patronoften want to teach the user to find and evaluate information,librarians at a virtual reference desk are interested in teachingtheir patrons to become information literate. The onlineenvironment presents new challenges and some institutionshave taken interesting steps.

The earliest work in virtual reference focused on readyreference (such as the Kansas State Virtual Reference Project37)or provision of resources and referral (such as the Reference andReferral center at the University of South Florida, described bySmith, Race, and Ault38). In these situations the emphasis wason providing a group of resources that would be available to alldistance learners enrolled in public institutions and makingremote access available to all. Although awareness of suchservices has grown slowly, students are beginning to recognizethat they can access help with assignments from librarians whoare familiar with the resources that they have available.

A case of more substantial librarian involvement withdistance learners is described by Wheeler and Fournier.39 Inthe Master of Continuing Education program at the Universityof Calgary, distance learners are involved in a library sub-

conference where they have the opportunity to receiveassistance and instruction regarding research issues. Thelibrarian is a pro-active participant in these e-mail discussions.

Live chat reference would seem to be the preferred methodof virtual reference. Although studies of library chat logsindicate that it takes time for such a service to become wellknown, it is frequently reported that chat reference doesprovide good opportunities for promoting information literacy.

Although it is seriously tempting to limit online reference toanswering the question, Patricia E. Johnson40 reports that ananalysis of chat reference sessions at the University of NewBrunswick revealed that instruction was involved in about sixtypercent of all virtual encounters.

Some interesting findings about chat reference at BaruchCollege are reported by Stephen Francoeur and Lisa A. Ellis.41

The technical capabilities of a chat reference system make itpossible to push screens back and forth and guide the userthrough a search. They note a phenomenal growth in thenumber of chat reference systems and an increasing use of chatreference, even from on campus at Baruch. A similarexperience that users of virtual reference may be on campuswas noted at Bowling Green State University.42 It is suggestedthat the convenience and anonymity of asking for referencehelp online appeals to many users, including those who are oncampus and could visit the reference desk in person.

‘‘Librarians who teach via virtual reference needto be well prepared with ‘‘handouts’’ and

tutorials that can be sent to the user.’’

Instruction via chat reference is a prime example of‘‘learning at the point of need’’ and librarians have foundusers very open to learning in the chat reference situation.Ellis43 cautions that promoting information literacy in theonline environment requires that the librarians be attuned to theimportance of teaching at the reference desk rather than simplygiving patrons the answers. Librarians who teach via virtualreference need to be well prepared with ‘‘handouts’’ andtutorials that can be sent to the user. At Baruch, a topicdevelopment exercise is used frequently in virtual reference,just as it would be employed at the reference desk. An analysisof chat reference sessions at Baruch44 revealed that mostinformation literacy competencies were taught in the sessions.

LIBRARY WEB SITES

The library’s Web site should be an introduction to the library’sservices and resources. If the academic library has as one of itsgoals the promotion of information literacy the library Web siteshould provide a way for students to experience appropriateinformation-seeking behavior. Librarians need to acknowledgethat information skills are frequently learned and practiced atthe point of need and that point may not take place in thelibrary.

Library literature includes mixed reports regarding studentuse of library Web sites. The OCLC White Paper on theInformation Habits of College Students45 reports that studentsstate that remote access to full text is either unavailable or toodifficult to use. Young and Von Seggern46 mention that studentsneed help in formulating search strategies, both in general and

for specific databases. Guides to using the site and to what canbe found on the site would be helpful. A usability studyconducted at the University of Illinois at Chicago47 revealedthat students were confused by library terminology. Thisconfusion prevented them from effectively using the menuson the college library Web site. Instead they chose to use thesearch engine on the Web site or sought human intervention.

Stephanie Willen Brown48 emphasizes the need to test andedit library Web sites in order to eliminate library jargon anduse terminology that will be understood by students. In a studyat Western Michigan University, the Web site was found not tobe helpful to students who were asked to find periodicalarticles. Cockrell and Jayne49 explain how steps were taken toeliminate jargon and improve the Web site’s usability.

On the other hand, several studies by Lubans50 report thatwhen students are aware of library Web sites, they do find themuseful as guides to appropriate sources for research. Thestudents surveyed liked subject access and help in navigatingtheir way to full text.

A study by Virginia Massey-Burzio51 at Johns HopkinsUniversity led her to conclude that libraries should concentratetheir efforts on making themselves more user-friendly, partic-ularly by the improvement of their Web sites. The point-of-usehelp that can be provided by a well-constructed Web site isfound to be preferable to classes which seem to focus onmaking the students expert searchers.

Students and librarians can be frustrated by the results foundby using a search engine. As Waldhart52 points out, ‘‘theseInternet search systems have not yet demonstrated that they canprovide the kinds of selective, specialized access to highquality Internet resources in a way that institutions of highereducation both need and value.’’ A search engine frequentlyyields too many results and students may have difficulty indetermining which results are of appropriate quality for collegelevel research. These problems can be remedied in some casesby offering a portal on the library’s Web page. Waldhart53

suggests that ‘‘developing local strategies for identifyingInternet information resources of special value to the academiccommunity and using various methods to provide their clientswith efficient and effective access to those selected resources’’is one of the ways that libraries have endeavored to assistpatrons in effective use of the Internet.

‘‘A well-constructed and carefully maintainedportal would be a good vehicle for breakingdown the border between the free Internet

resources favored by students and authoritative,scholarly databases not available via Google.’’

Several Internet directories, such as Academic Info, InternetPublic Library, and Infomine, provide some direction toacademically suitable Web sites. However, Michael Adams54

recommends that academic librarians create and maintain theirown portals, using criteria having to do with scholarship,appropriate language, design, and timeliness. A well-con-structed and carefully maintained portal would be a goodvehicle for breaking down the border between the free Internetresources favored by students and authoritative, scholarlydatabases not available via Google.

July 2005 355

CONCLUSION

Information literacy skills can be learned in a variety of ways.As Thomsen55 comments ‘‘there is no one solution to theproblem of how to help students improve their research skills,library skills, or information literacy skills. . .academic librar-ians may need to use a combination of approaches and, aboveall, be persistent in their efforts to aid students’ informationliteracy.’’

Classroom instruction, whether as a part of a course or asa stand-alone course, is valuable. The classroom situationforces the student to focus on the research process. However,the reality is that classroom instruction may not be possibleor may not be sufficient. Library classes are frequentlyallotted so little time that the librarian is unable to facilitatethe active learning that will lead to retention and incorpo-ration of skills into the students’ ways of learning. Path-finders and individual instruction at the reference desk(whether it is a physical reference desk or a virtual one)focus on teaching the student to deal with a specificinformation need. The student is given a model of the kindof information-seeking behavior that we want him to develop.Well-constructed and maintained library Web sites and portalsenable students to navigate the Internet in an intelligent way.In some situations, these alternative strategies work betterthan formal instruction.

A study by E. Stewart Saunders56 reveals that classroominstruction actually increases the volume of questions at thereference desk. Once students become more sophisticatedinformation seekers and users, they are more likely to try toimprove their knowledge and use of resources.

‘‘Educating users to make full, judicious, and informed useof information is a fundamental responsibility shared by alllibrarians.’’57 Whether this responsibility is met by classroomsessions, pathfinders, individual instruction at the referencedesk, or library Web sites the goal remains the same. Librariansare responsible for creating habits which will support lifelonglearning among our users.

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1. James R. Kennedy, ‘‘Integrated Library Instruction,’’ in UserInstruction in Academic Libraries, edited by Larry Hardesty,(Metuchen, N.J: Scarecrow, 1986), pp. 231–242.

2. Edward K. Owusu-Ansah, ‘‘Information Literacy and HigherEducation: Placing the Academic Library in the Center of aComprehensive Solution,’’ Journal of Academic Librarianship 30(January 2004): 3–16 (In Ebsco Academic Search Premier. Cited15 July 2004. Available from Kingsborough Community College).

3. Hannelore Rader & William Coons, ‘‘Information Literacy: OneResponse to the New Decade,’’ in The Evolving EducationalMission of the Library, edited by Betsy Baker & Mary EllenLitzinger (Chicago: Bibliographic Instruction Section, Associationof College & Research Libraries, 1992), p. 113.

4. Carol Collier Kuhlthau, ‘‘Accommodating the User’s InformationSearch Process: Challenges for Information Retrieval SystemDesigners,’’ Bulletin of the American Society for InformationScience 25 (February/March 1999) (In Free E-Journals. Cited 8August 2004).

5. Kuhlthau, Seeking Meaning: A Process Approach to Library andInformation Services. 2nd ed., (Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited,2004).

6. Philip M. Davis, ‘‘The Effect of the Web on UndergraduateCitation Behavior: A 2000 Update,’’ College & Research Libraries63 (2002): 53–60.

356 The Journal of Academic Librarianship

7. Larry Hardesty, ‘‘Faculty Culture and Bibliographic Instruction:An Exploratory Analysis,’’ Library Trends 44 (Fall 1995):339–367.

8. J.J. Gardner, ‘‘Point of Use Library Instruction,’’ Drexel LibraryQuarterly 8 (July 1972): 281–285.

9. Project INTREX was a research project on computer-basedinformation retrieval and transfer. Part of the project, the ModelLibrary Program, is described by Katherine G. Cipolla in ‘‘M.I.T.’sPoint-of-Use Concept: A Five Year Update.’’ Journal of AcademicLibrarianship 5 (January 1980): 326–329.

10. Jeanine Graham and Kathryn Parsons, ‘‘Enhancing InformationLiteracy: A Practical Exemplar,’’ Academic Exchange Quarterly 7(Fall 2003). http://rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/mo2458may.htm(accessed July 24, 2004).

11. Jackie Murtagh and Caroline Williams, ‘‘dTell me what you want,what you really, really want!T Developing Students’ InformationSkills at Manchester Metropolitan University (MMU) Libraryby Asking the Right Questions and Giving the Right Answers,’’New Review of Academic Librarianship 9 (December 2003):106.

12. Kuhlthau, Seeking Meaning.13. Shirley Wilbert, ‘‘Library Pathfinders Come Alive. In dThe Visible

CollegeT, edited by Sinikka Koskiala.’’ Journal of Education forLibrarianship 21 (4): 345–349.

14. Brenda Reeb and Susan Gibbons, ‘‘Students, Libraries andSubject Guides: Improving a Poor Rate of Return,’’ portal:Libraries and the Academy 4 (January 2004): 123–130 (InProject Muse. Cited 3 August 2004. Available from Kings-borough Community College).

15. Trina J. Magi, ‘‘What’s Best for Students? Comparing theEffectiveness of a Traditional Print Pathfinder and a Web-BasedResearch Tool.’’ Portal 3 (October 2003): 671–686.

16. Constance Dahl, ‘‘Electronic Pathfinders in Academic Libraries:An Analysis of Their Content and Form [At Nine CanadianUniversities],’’ College & Research Libraries 62 (May 2001):227–237.

17. Carla Dunsmore, ‘‘A Qualitative Study of Web-Mounted Path-finders Created by Academic Business Libraries,’’ Libri 52(September 2002): 137–156.

18. Kuhlthau, Seeking Meaning, p. 117.19. The author is Chief of Reference and Bibliographic Instruction at

Kingsborough Community College. She has established ongoingrelationships with members of the Economics and English facultywho routinely request pathfinders to support their assignments.

20. Steve Jones, et al., ‘‘The Internet goes to college: How studentsare living in the future with today’s technology,’’ in Pew Internetand American Life Project (updated 15 September 2002; cited 3August 2004), http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_College_

Report.pdf.21. Association of Research Libraries, ‘‘ARL Statistics Interactive

Edition,’’ (updated 21 April 2004; cited 3 August 2004), http://fisher.lib.virginia.edu/arl/index.html.

22. American Library Association, ‘‘Policy Statement: Instruction inthe Use of Libraries, Council Document #45,’’ (Chicago: ALA,1980).

23. Carol Tenopir, ‘‘Reference Use Statistics,’’ Library Journal 123(May 10, 1998): 32.

24. Celia Hales Mabry, ‘‘The Reference Interview as Partnership: AnExamination of Librarian, Library User, and Social Interaction,’’Reference Librarian 83/84 (2003): 54.

25. J.W. Fritch and S.B. Mandernack, ‘‘The Emerging ReferenceParadigm: A Vision of Reference Services in a ComplexInformation Environment,’’ Library Trends 50 (Fall 2001): 295(In Ebsco Academic Search Premier. Cited 2 August 2004.Available from Kingsborough Community College).

26. Marie L. Radford, ‘‘Approach or Avoidance? The Role ofNonverbal Communication in the Academic Library User’sDecision to Initiate a Reference Encounter,’’ Library Trends

46 (Spring 1998) (In Ebsco Academic Search Premier. Cited 2August 2004. Available from Kingsborough CommunityCollege).

27. Mabry, p. 41.28. Fritch and Mandernack, p. 302.29. Terence K. Huwe, ‘‘Casting a Wider Net with Roving Reference,’’

Computers in Libraries 23 (March 2003): 34–37.30. Martin Courtois and Maira Liriano, ‘‘Tips for Roving Reference,’’

College and Research Libraries News 61 (April 2000): 289–292.31. E.H. Kramer, ‘‘Why Roving Reference: A Case Study in a Small

Academic Library,’’ Reference Services Review 24 (3) (1996):67–80.

32. Fritch and Mandernack, p. 295.33. Nancy A. Becker, ‘‘Google in Perspective: Understanding and

Enhancing Student Search Skills,’’ The New Review of AcademicLibrarianship 9 (December 2003): 84–99.

34. Catherine Sheldrick Ross and Kirsti Nilsen, ‘‘Has the InternetChanged Anything in Reference?’’ Reference and User ServicesQuarterly 40 (Winter 2000): 147–155.

35. Jane Devine and Francine Egger-Sider, ‘‘Beyond Google: TheInvisible Web in the Academic Library,’’ Journal of AcademicLibrarianship 30 (July 2004): 265–269 (In Ebsco AcademicSearch Premier. Cited 12 November 2004. Available from Kings-borough Community College).

36. Florence M. Gifford, ‘‘Telephone Reference Service,’’ WilsonLibrary Bulletin 17 (1943): 630.

37. Marcia Stockham, Elizabeth Tuttle and Eric Hansen,‘‘KANAnswer: A Collaborative Statewide Virtual ReferencePilot Project,’’ The Reference Librarian 79/80 (2002/2003):257–266.

38. Rhoda M. Smith, Stephanie F. Race and Meredith Ault, ‘‘VirtualDesk, Real Reference,’’ Journal of Library Administration 32(January 2001): 371–382.

39. Justine Wheeler and Leslie Fournier, ‘‘Working in the Asynchro-nous Environment: Two Case Studies,’’ Journal of LibraryAdministration 32 (January 2001): 425–438.

40. Patricia E. Johnson, ‘‘Digital Reference as an Instructional Tool,’’Searcher 11 (March 2003): 31–33 (In Ebsco Academic SearchPremier. Cited 19 November 2004. Available from KingsboroughCommunity College).

41. S. Francoeur & L.A. Ellis, ‘‘Information competency standards inchat reference,’’ (3rd Annual Virtual Reference Desk Conference,Electronic Proceedings: Setting Standards and Making It Real,2001), http://www.vrd.org/conferences/VRD2001/proceedings/francoeur.shtml (Accessed November 19, 2004).

42. Kelly M. Broughton, ‘‘Usage and User Analysis of a Real-TimeDigital Reference Service,’’ The Reference Librarian 79/80 (2002/2003): 183–200.

43. Lisa A. Ellis, ‘‘Approaches to teaching through digital reference,’’Reference Services Review 32 (Summer 2004): 103–119.

44. S. Francoeur, ‘‘An analytical survey of chat reference services,’’Reference Services Review 29 (Fall 2001): 189–203.

45. OCLC Online Computer Library Center, OCLC White Paperon the Information Habits of College Students: HowAcademic Librarians Can Influence Students’ Web-Based Infor-mation Choices, (updated June 2002; cited 15 July 2004).Available from http://www5.oclc.org/downloads/community/informationhabits.pdf.

46. Nancy J. Young and Marilyn Von Seggern, ‘‘General InformationSeeking in Changing Times: A Focus Group Study,’’ Referenceand User Services Quarterly 41 (Winter 2001): 166.

47. Susan Augustine and Courtney Greene, ‘‘Discovering HowStudents Search a Library Web Site: A Usability Case Study,’’College and Research Libraries 63 (July 2002): 354–365.

48. Stephen Willen Brown, ‘‘Test, Edit, Repeat: Steps to Improve YourWeb Site,’’ Computers in Libraries 22 (November/December2002) (In Ebsco Academic Search Premier. Cited 6 July 2004.Available from Kingsborough Community College).

49. Barbara J. Cockrell and Ellaine Anderson Jayne, ‘‘How Do I Findan Article? Insights from a Web Usability Study,’’ Journal ofAcademic Librarianship 28 (May 2002): 122–133.

50. John Lubans, ‘‘I Can’t Find You Anywhere But Gone: AvoidingMarginalization,’’ Library Administration & Management 14(Spring 2000): 67–69.

51. Virginia Massey-Burzio, ‘‘From the Other Side of the ReferenceDesk: A Focus Group Study,’’ Journal of Academic Librarianship24 (May 1998) (In Ebsco Academic Search Premier. Cited 23August 2004. Available from Kingsborough Community College).

52. Thomas J. Waldhart, Joseph B. Miller and Lois Mai Chan,‘‘Provision of Local Assisted Access to Selected InternetInformation Resources by Arl Academic Libraries,’’ Journal ofAcademic Librarianship 26 (March 1, 2000) (In Ebsco AcademicSearch Premier. Cited 24 August 2004. Available from Kings-borough Community College).

53. Ibid.54. Michael Adams, ‘‘Meeting Reference Responsibilities through

Library Websites,’’ Reference Librarian Number 74 (2001):91–101.

55. Christen Thompson, ‘‘Information Illiterate or Lazy: How CollegeStudents Use the Web for Research,’’ portal: Libraries and theAcademy 3 (April 2003): 266 (In Project Muse. Cited 30 July2004. Available from Kingsborough Community College).

56. E. Stewart Saunder, ‘‘The Effect of Bibliographic Instruction onthe Demand for Reference Services,’’ portal: Libraries and theAcademy 3 (January 2003): 35–39 (In Project Muse. Cited 15 July2004. Available from Kingsborough Community College).

57. L.A. Wilson, ‘‘Instruction as a Reference Service,’’ in Referenceand Information Services: An Introduction, edited by Richard E.Bopp, Linda C. Smith (Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited,1991), p. 145.

July 2005 357