Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [Northeastern University]On: 10 November 2014, At: 14:54Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
The Reference LibrarianPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wref20
Reference Librarians as Teachers:Ellen Broidy aa Coordinator of Library Education Services, General Library,University of California , Irvine, CA, 92713Published online: 17 Mar 2009.
To cite this article: Ellen Broidy (1986) Reference Librarians as Teachers:, The ReferenceLibrarian, 5:14, 159-171, DOI: 10.1300/J120v05n14_15
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J120v05n14_15
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information(the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor& Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warrantieswhatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions andviews of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. Theaccuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independentlyverified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liablefor any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly inconnection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Reference Librarians as Teachers: Ego, Ideal and Reality
in a Reference Department Ellen Broidy
The question of burnout has become an extremely popular subject amongst academic reference librarians.' More often than not, we engage in heated debate about the causes of burnout, actively seek- ing out villians upon whom to lay the blame for our distress. Much less frequently heard are ideas about how to stem the negative tide once it has begun, or creative solutions designed to prevent the ap- pearance of the burnout monster in our midst. The litany of reasons offered for this apparently highly prevalent malady often includes, overtly or covertly, the stresses and strains that accompany active bibliographic instruction programs. Somehow the effort to expand traditional definitions of reference service and to enrich and enhance professional opportunities for individual librarians (not to mention Improving thequality of life for our students) by integrating library instruction activities into a general reference program is having the opposite effect. Let me suggest that the problems we are facingwith respect to burnout may have little to do with what we are trying to accomplish when we encourage the development and growth of in- struction programs. The difficulties we encounter may well lie in how we are going about it.
Poor allocation of personnel resources poses as serious a problem as inadequate resources. Whiie I hesitate to recommend that li- braries, or more specifically reference services, make do, there comes a point where our energies must be directed towards dealing with present realities. In terms of the impact of library instruction on traditional library and reference services, that moment is clearly upon us. The perceived adverse effects of new or different or ex- panded service must be analyzed from the perspective of carefully
The author is Coordinator of Library Education Services, General Library. University of California at Irvine. CA 92713.
O 1986 by The Hawonh Press, Inc. All rights reserved. 159 Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
thea
ster
n U
nive
rsity
] at
14:
54 1
0 N
ovem
ber
2014
160 PERSONNEL ISSUES IN REFERENCE SERVICES
considered allocation of available personnel resources. The per- sonnel issues that most often affect the delivery of quality library in- struction services fall into four main areas:
I . administration of the library instruction program; 2. recruitment, interviewing, and hiring of instruction librarians
(or, librarians with an instruction component to their jobs); 3. training and evaluation of instruction librarians; 4. decisions about which librarians should teach.
All of these areas are sensitive because they call into question insti- tutional and programmatic priorities as well as individual profes- sional self-image and academic judgement. The point of this dis- cussion is to describe situations rather than prescribe solutions. Although each library is unique, each situation different, both the questions and the potential solutions are common enough to permit a degree of generalization.
ADMZNZSTRA TZON OF INSTRUCTION PROGRAMS
Administration of an instruction program is important not only for the quality and survival of the program, but also because various administrative configurations bring particular personnel issues to the fore. There are several different possible models for program administration, ranging from the creation of a separate and indepen- dent library instruction department to incorporation of the instruc- tional activities as one functional area in a department, most often but not exclusively the reference department. Rather than join the ongoing debate on how to manage bibliographic instruction most effectively (a debate now celebrating more than a decade of non- resolution) let me simply sketch out some alternative models of pro- gram administration, highlighting the personnel issues (or conse- quences) inherent in each.
The Committee Approach
When libraries first become actively involved in the effort to pro- vide bibliographic instruction to students (and faculty and staff), the program, in this nascent phase, is often coordinated by a library or bibliographic instruction committee. The committee may draw its
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
thea
ster
n U
nive
rsity
] at
14:
54 1
0 N
ovem
ber
2014
Ellen Broidy 1 61
membership from throughout the library, attracting both individuals committed to library instruction and those who feel they need a place to become involved-in any activity. Coordination through the committee structure should mean that the actual responsibility for provision of BI is shared amongst various librarians representing most, if not all, departments in the library. In some instances, the committee structure works admirably; the workload is truly shared, and technical services librarians with teaching ability and the desire to engage in this aspect of public service join their colleagues in pro- viding instruction to the campus community. On the negative side, the committee approach may prevent the development of a true pro- gram, as the direction and philosophy must change with each shift in membership. Administration by committee is less successful as the program grows, communication may be difficult and coordination impossible.
The major reason for the lack' of success with this administrative model emerges as a personnel issue. Although on paper all inter- ested librarians share equally in the joys (and pitfalls) of library instruction, the reality is that public service librarians have the ma- jority of opportunities for contact with faculty as well as the neces- sary familiarity with users' research difficulties. In addition, there is the problem of technical services department heads questioning the involvement of their staff in labor-intensive activities unrelated to traditional functional areas. The burden begins to fall more and more onto reference librarians who find that they are sharing "authority" for the program's direction, but shouldering the work alone.
The committee structure, designed initially to help get a fledgling program off the ground while fostering greater library-wide cooper- ation for the new effort, often has the reverse effect. Librarians may become less inclined to involve themselves in a new or different ac- tivity, particularly if department heads and administrators view these activities as ones which create conflicting demands on per- sonnel.
Reference Department Responsibility
The assignment of responsibility to a particular department, usually reference, often evolves as the second stage in the adminis- trative development of library instruction programs. Many refer- ence departments, upon receiving the call for instruction or initi:
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
thea
ster
n U
nive
rsity
] at
14:
54 1
0 N
ovem
ber
2014
162 PERSONNEL ISSUES IN REFERENCE SERVICES
ating it, create a functional area within the department and appoint one individual as coordinator.
This particular administrative model may have a profound impact on the library instruction program, the reference department and personnel throughout the library. Once instruction is situated in a particular department, the message sent to (or received by) the rest of the library is that bibliographic instruction is now territorial, the private preserve of one group of librarians. This, in and of itself, is not altogether negative. The nature of reference work, the daily contact with both users and sources, creates a "natural" base from which to build and refine instructional skills. But, ability at the desk does not always translate into ability in a classroom setting, and con- versely, lack of public service experience does not automatically spell failure as a teacher.*
The incorporation of instruction into the functional duties of a reference department, while adding a dimension or at least an ex- pectation to the librarians in that department, may rob others of the opportunity to teach. Department heads as well as upper level ad- ministrators may now point to reference, and its sole responsibility for intruction, whenever a librarian from another area expresses an interest in the activity. Instruction runs the risk of becoming an issue of territoriality, enforced more from outside the reference depart- ment than from within.
At this point instruction as a contributing factor in reference librarian burnout becomes apparent. As instruction programs grow, reference librarians, feeling overburdened and alone, may begin to perceive themselves as victims of their own successes. In recent years, with the advent of online catalogs and other changes in the technological face of the library, the growing need to respond to in- creasingly diverse student populations, and the necessity of expand- ing the definition of library instruction to include in-service training programs for library staff, it's no wonder reference department centered instruction programs are feeling the pinch-and succumb- ing to the burnout monster.
Independent Coordination
The third stage in my evolutionary theory of administrative mod- els often comes about because the pressures on a particular depart- ment become too great, threatening the viability and vitality of the instruction program, not to mention the well-being of the reference
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
thea
ster
n U
nive
rsity
] at
14:
54 1
0 N
ovem
ber
2014
Ellen Broidy 163
librarians. As demands on an instruction program grow, the pro- gram may be in danger of having its philosophy, or goals, or rnis- sion determined externally. It may be difficult for a reference de- partment, juggling a myriad of conflicting demands, to successfully manage or control an instruction program that incorporates not only traditional BI (tours, in-class lectures, etc.) but now must also re- spond to requests for in-service training for library staff, instruction in the use of online catalogs from campus administrators, and the successful integration of library instruction into dozens of required undergraduate courses. At this point, a library administration may wish to make an important, if delicate, personnel decision and re- move coordination of library instruction from the reference depart- ment. Stage three sees the development of an independent office of library instruction.
This type of internal restructuring results immediately in a de- emphasis on reference as the sole providers of library instruction and possibly some relaxation of the strain reference librarians feel. In that respect this model is quite positive. On the other hand, co- ordination of a program from a separate office, physically as well as structurally, may create some unique personnel issues all its own. If the coordinator has programmatic responsibility but no direct super- visory function, what role, if any, may this .individual play in evaluating the teaching performance and effectiveness of librarians? Responsibility without authority frequently proves to be a cause of dissatisfaction amongst middle managers. Coordinators who are not formally in management, yet are directly responsible for the quality of a library program, are apt to experience elevated levels of frus- tration as they strive to improve programs without having all the necessary resources and authority.
Evaluation, both of the program and its participants, is a key in- gredient in the success of bibliographic instruction. The situation wherein a supervisor or department head "invites" evaluative com- mentary from a program coordinator is counterproductive to the in- struction service. While a separate office probably performs the ad- ministrative activities (scheduling, communication, coordination) more successfully than either of the other two models, the personnel issues raised are less easily addressed.
Each of the three administrative models presented above creates unique personnel situations, many of them well beyond the scope of this article. Each of these three options, and there are others, does serve to underscore the need for each library to look critically at its
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
thea
ster
n U
nive
rsity
] at
14:
54 1
0 N
ovem
ber
2014
164 PERSONNEL ISSUES IN REFERENCE SERVICES
own instruction program; determine the direction the program is taking, and who is taking it there. Weak or unsuccessful programs may result from lack of leadership. Leadership, as shown above, need not come from a single individual or even a single department, but the absence of a strong advocate (a committee chair, department head, program coordinator) for the librarians performing the in- struction tasks contributes to the reference librarians' sense of iso- lation and feelings of burnout.
RECRUITING, INTERVIE WING, HIRING
Once, or when, or if, the question of program administration is resolved, the next personnel issue that must be addressed is recruit- ing, interviewing, and hiring of instruction librarians (or, librarians with an instruction component to their positions). The variety of types of instruction situations in academic libraries range from a position in a reference department in which librarians are expected to lead tours or provide orientation sessions to fully developed, administratively separate departments which recruit librarians spe- cifically to teach. Rather than engage in a lengthy analysis of differ- ent librarian positions, let me instead discuss some possible methods which may be employed during recruitment and interview of candi- dates to assist in bringing the most qualified individual(s) to any in- structional setting.)
Position announcements should emphasize the instruction com- ponent. The candidate must not read it as though it were put there as a trendy afterthought, or, even worse, feel that it may be ignored completely. Position announcements in professional journals are de- signed to transmit a great deal of information in a very little space. More care should be taken to spelling out the library's expectations. If instruction is an integral part of the job, it should be stated as such, with requirements fully outlined. For those institutions that can afford it, a separate position announcement detailing the instruc- tion program should be prepared and forwarded to all serious appli- cants. Because of the wide variety of possible instruction programs and activities, the single statement "participation in bibliographic instruction" is insufficient. Applicants need information about the nature, scope, philosophy, and even the administration of the in- struction program. While much of this may seem obvious, regret- tably our personnel offices are still deluged with applications from
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
thea
ster
n U
nive
rsity
] at
14:
54 1
0 N
ovem
ber
2014
Ellen Broidy 165
individuals who are clearly unqualified'for the position at hand and who have misread, or selectively read, the announcement.
The decision about who to invite for an interview is a major hur- dle in the hiring process. A combination of factors including re- sume, cover letter, statement of qualifications (an oft neglected, very useful document), written and phone references, and the inevi- table invisible networks combine to help us determine who to inter- view. Each component of this composite portrait of a potential em- ployee must be scrutinized carefully. The library should be clear from the outset about its expectations, in terms of the job itself, the range of responsibilities and the level of appointment. With respikt to the burnout factor, we need to take more care when we decide that a position with multiple, often conflicting responsibilities and pressures, is an entry level job. This is particularly true when deal- ing with library instruction which carries with it the added strain of teaching. Too often who we hire is determined by the level at which we can afford to hire rather than who will do the best job and suffer the least strain while doing it.
Applications from experienced librarians should look signifi- cantly different from those of entry level recent graduates. As we examine an applicant pool for an instruction job we must be willing to be analytical, critical, and read between the lines. Since few library schools offer courses specifically designed to teach librarians how to teach, transcripts prove less useful in determining skill or ex- pertise (or experience) in this area. In the case of the recent grad- uate, the resume, statement of qualifications, and cover letter deserve careful attention. How much emphasis is the candidate put- ting on the instruction component? Did the candidate hold a teaching assistantship, either in library school or in another graduate pro- gram? Is there any evidence of membership in or attendance at orga- nizations or programs focusing on bibliographic instruction? Just as those reading the various documents in support of a particular can- didate must be diligent, the candidate must take care to highlight those points in her or his application.
Applications from more experienced librarians require another type-of creative appraisal. Not only should the search committee ex- amine the documents submitted, but someone needs to take the time to learn about the instruction program at the applicant's current library. Instruction programs vary widely, not only in the subjective areas of quality, but also in scope and quantity. No single phil- osophy unites us in assessing elements that make for a quality in-
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
thea
ster
n U
nive
rsity
] at
14:
54 1
0 N
ovem
ber
2014
PERSONNEL ISSUES IN REFERENCE SERVICES
struction program. Different institutions employ various methods, some of which are mutually exclusive. We owe it to our program to be as knowledgeable as possible about our candidates and their in- stitutional experiences.
The Interview
Once the decision about who to interview has been made, the next step is to determine how to interview. This is somewhat more com- plicated if the open position is only partially instruction; here the issue becomes how best to integrate the instruction component into a crowded interview day, without losing sight of its importance. Since interviewing for a combined referencelinstruction librarian position is a fairly typical situation, there are three general formats that a search committee or interview team might consider when inter- viewing a candidate for this particular split (or combined) assign- ment:
1. incorporate questions about library instruction into the general question and answer format;
2. ask the candidate to prepare a brief presentation on a particular reference source-frequently referred to as "teaching a tool;"
3. have the candidate outline a full instruction session in response to a scenario presented to the candidate in advance.
Option three, the scenario, though requiring the most effort on all parts, probably reveals the most and thus is the most productive. The candidate is sent an instruction situation or scenario, usually in the same mailing in which she or he receives the schedule for the in- terview day. The scenario should illustrate, as closely as possible, a situation the candidate might actually encounter in your institution. This has the advantage of providing the candidate with some infor- mation about your library while ensuring that the search committee may knowledgeably judge what it is hearing. Keep the scenario short, simple and relevant to the position in question. In other words, construct the scenario to the specifications of the job and the institution.
The scenario allows the candidate an opportunity to creatively ex- plore issues in bibliographic instruction while at the same time pro- vides enough structure so that the interviewers (or audience) may judge the candidate's ability to organize and present information.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
thea
ster
n U
nive
rsity
] at
14:
54 1
0 N
ovem
ber
2014
Ellen Broidy 167
An interview is one part of a complex and competitive personnel process. The candidate of the moment is aware that her or his per- formance is either being compared to yesterday's or filed away for future comparison. We continually search for objective standards against which to measure each candidate, yet far too often fall back on reliance upon the element of surprise, how well the individual performs under fire (or, to put it more politely, how well they "think on their feet"), answering a barrage of interview questions. But this provides only part of the picture and frequently the candi- date and the committee become locked in battle over control of the interview. The scenario allows a modicum of breathing space for both parties. The candidate takes the lead, having the benefit of ad- vanced preparation and creative control over the presentation, while the committee can devote a full 10-15 minutes to just intently listen- ing.
The one caveat I might offer with respect to using a scenario in an interview situation is that the candidate must be told clearly and in advance that the scenario is not a fully developed bibliographic in- struction presentation. It is an outline of a presentation, designed to highlight how one might approach a subject, a class, a specific in- struction situation. The search committee must make its expecta- tions crystal clear and not hesitate to call time if it appears that the candidate has exceeded the space allotted for the presentation.
EVALUATION AND TRAINING
Recruitment and hiring of new librarians is but the beginning in the personnel process. Once the newly hiredlibrarian is in place, the real personnel issues begin to surface. New librarians, whether fresh out of library school or seasoned professionals new to the library, need and deserve careful orientation and training. In order for an instruction program to succeed it must be just that, a pro- gram, not merely a disjointed collection of activities, without phi- losophy or focus, that fall loosely under the rubic "bibliographic in- struction." To ensure a quality program a great deal of attention must be paid to evaluation and training of all program participants, particularly new staff, and to the development of goals and objec- tives for the program.
The traininghetraining and evaluation components of library in- struction programs are, as in all things related to professional ac-
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
thea
ster
n U
nive
rsity
] at
14:
54 1
0 N
ovem
ber
2014
168 PERSONNEL ISSUES IN REFERENCE SERVICES
tivities, sensitive issues. Many librarians involved in bibliographic instruction are "self-taught." By that I mean that they acquired their classroom skills through actually teaching, generally unsuper- vised. It becomes the responsibility of the reference department head (in cooperation with the instruction coordinator) to convince individual librarians of the necessity and advisability of improving and refining their classroom skills. Therein lies a multitude of potential personnel problems.
Reference departments frequently offer an interesting mix of in- dividual styles and abilities, not to mention length of time in the pro- fession or at the particular library. Many reference librarians pre- date the introduction of bibliographic instruction in their libraries. The mix of talent and interest, youth and experience, fiery en- thusiasm and burnout, combined with the demands of an additional functional area, instruction, may wreak havoc in the library. When we add the possibility of evaluating classroom performance to that potent brew, real problems may arise.
The fact is that library instruction programs and instruction librarians need constant evaluation. Our students change, our col- lections expand (or occasionally contract), and technology is chang- ing the face of the library. Evaluation of an instruction program ex- tends far beyond needs assessment; it entails evaluation of individual librarians involved in the program, and that often requires each librarian-instructor to agree to participate in the effort to maintain or improve the quality of the service. Unfortunately there are no easy answers or pat solutions to the question of how to evaluate teaching. Teaching is a uniquely personal undertaking with few clearly de- lineated rights or wrongs. In our attempts to evaluate classroom per- formance we frequently confuse style with substance, thus reducing the whole enterprise to a subjective assessment. But we do our- selves, our colleagues, and our programs a greater disservice if we shy away from grappling with the thorny issue of evaluation. If the review of reference librarians actively involved in instruction ig- nores that aspect and concentrates solely on performance at the ref- erence desk, how does the librarian-instructor know when she or he needs guidance, deserves special praise, or might well be directed to another type of activity.
One possible solution to the problem of improving librarians' teaching skills may be found in the development of a clear set of goals and objectives for the instruction service and their connection to a comprehensive training program for all instruction librarians4
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
thea
ster
n U
nive
rsity
] at
14:
54 1
0 N
ovem
ber
2014
Ellen Broidy 169
In-service training, while hardly a guarantee of quality or even stan- dardization, provides individual librarians with the tools to improve or enhance their teaching ability. The more familiar we are with concepts and sources, the easier it becomes to share that information with others. In-service training affords the opportunity to both learn and teach, particularly if the role of instructor is shared among all reference librarians.
A comprehensive in-service training program can accomplish three major goals. The first and most obvious is that librarians are in- troduced to, or reacquainted with, new, unusual or difficult sources, strategies, or conceptual approaches to bibliographic instruction. Secondly, individual teaching styles are shared, and we learn both by doing and by watching others. The third goal or benefit is some- what less obvious, yet potentially the most important of all. The sharing, of skills and expertise with colleagues, or the collective worlung out of the most effective method for presenting material, may break down isolation and help to foster a sense of shared com- mitment to the educational mission of the library. It is during these sessions that the group might also address the issue of burnout and together come to some resolution of the problem, often by simply redistributing (or more equitably sharing) the instruction workload.
SHOULD ALL REFERENCE LIBRARIANS TEACH?
On a less collegial and optimistic note, I turn now to the single most pressing personnel issue in any instruction program: who should be teaching. All other issues pale when compared with the problem of determining how the library presents itself to the rest of the campus in that most revealing arena, the classroom. The prob- lem must be addressed on several levels because what is "good" for the individual librarian may be detrimental to the instruction pro- gram (or to the library). On the other hand, our resources are often stretched to the limit and if we are to continue to provide biblio- graphic instruction, we may not have the luxury of encouraging some librarians to teach while actively attempting to divert others to less public-performance oriented activities.
The question of "to teach or not to teach" is a particularly com- plex one for academic reference librarians. Many of us have faculty status in our institutions; this may create an external pressure that we "behave" as much like teaching faculty as possible. For others,
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
thea
ster
n U
nive
rsity
] at
14:
54 1
0 N
ovem
ber
2014
170 PERSONNEL ISSUES IN REFERENCE SERVICES
the perception that the librarian functions we perform are somehow less valid than those undertaken by other academics, puts us in a defensive posture vis ii vis our colleagues on the faculty. The only response seems to be that we, too, teach.
In terms of the reference department, librarians are frequently responsible for bibliographic instruction because they are responsi- ble for a certain portion of the reference collection or conduct liaison activities with specific academic departments. Occasionally instruction responsibilities fall to an individual librarian because she or he has a degree in the subject.
None of these seem particularly compelling reasons for all librarians to teach. In fact, given the far reaching negative impact that a poor performance may have on the library, just the opposite is true. Librarians with a commitment to quality teaching should represent the library in the classroom, others should not. But, how do you judge, where do you draw the line, how do you maintain quality in the face of escalating demands? The answer may lie in analyzing the causes of reference librarian burnout.
At the beginning of this paper I stated that poor allocation of per- sonnel resources was as serious an issue as inadequate resources. The question of the responsibility for provision of quality library in- struction is clearly a question of allocation of resources. Reference departments and library administrations need to set goals for in- struction programs, keeping in mind the four areas touched upon in this paper: administration of the program, hiring of new personnel, training and evaluation of instruction librarians, and most impor- tantly, the question of who should teach. Some reference librarians are uncomfortable with the expectation that they teach. Perhaps we are being too facile when we lump every personnel problem under the rubric "burnout." These individuals may have all the energy necessary to do most reference jobs, but neither the interest nor the skills to teach.
Bibliographic instruction per se is not a villain in the saga of burn- out in our reference departments. But the tendency is to focus on it rather than taking the difficult steps of investigating what might truly be going awry. A careful analysis of what is actually happen- ing in a reference department, determining strengths and weak- nesses, both of programs and personnel, might help clarify the direction for the department and its myriad services. If, after this analysis, bibliographic instruction still appears to be causing more than its share of departmental woes, it may be time to reallocate per-
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
thea
ster
n U
nive
rsity
] at
14:
54 1
0 N
ovem
ber
2014
Ellen Broidy 171
sonnel resources or alter the administrative structure of the program. The personnel issues brought to the fore by an active in- struction program are sensitive, but not insurmountable. Careful assessment and the willingness to act to insure a quality instruction program may reveal creative solutions to stem the tide emergent burnout.
REFERENCES
1. William Miller. ':What's wrong with reference: coping with succcss and failure at the reference desk," American Libraries, 1.53 (May 1984): 303-322.
2. Fromm, Roger W., "Tuesday morning live-personality and bibliographic instruc- tion." Direcrions for the decade: library insrruclion in rhe 198O3s, ed. by Carolyn Kirken- dall, Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Conference on Library Orientation for Academic Libraries, Library Orientation Series no. 12. Ann Arbor: Pieran Press. 1981, p. 31.
3. Anne K. Beaubien, Sharon A. Hogan and Mary W. George. Learning the library: concepts and methods for effective bibliographic instrcrion. New York: Bowker, 1982, see particularly chapter I I . Administrative climate. This book fast became a standard in library instruction. Chapter 2, "Setting objectives" is also highly recommended.
4. Beverly Renford and Linnea Hendrickson. Bibliographic Inslmcrion: a handbook, New York: Neal-Schuman, 1980, pp. 10-13.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
thea
ster
n U
nive
rsity
] at
14:
54 1
0 N
ovem
ber
2014
