Rebecca K. Miller

RIS Summer Workshops 2011

May 25, 2011

SAY WHAT? AN ANALYSIS

DISCUSSION OF VIRTUAL REFERENCE AT THE UNIVERSITY

LIBRARIES

WHY VR?

A VR training session for operators

An evaluation of VR at VT

A critical review of VR at VT

A comprehensive, statistically valid analysis of VR at VT

THIS IS NOT…

A contemplative discussion about virtual reference at Virginia Tech, driven by a few statistics and some literature

A brainstorming session about the issues that impact us and how we can improve VR (and other) service

A time of reflection about where we’ve been Admission: I don’t really know, despite some digging!

A time of creative consideration about where we’re going

THIS IS…

Overwhelming amount With the phrase “virtual reference,” Summon returns around 500 journal

articles published between January 2008 and May 2011. Library Lit & Info (Wilson) returns 255 articles.

Ranges from the practical to the philosophical: Pervasiveness of VR Usage (low?) User expectations related to speed/readily available materials Marketing Users and usage statistics User perception User satisfaction Question depth Specific tools (Meebo, Second Life, etc.) Service enhancements Reference interview issues/customer service Instruction opportunity/informing instruction Core competencies for operators

RECENT LITERATURE

Take a few minutes and consider:

Which of these issues impact us here, at Virginia Tech?

What other issues not listed here may impact us?

What do you want to know about virtual reference at Virginia Tech?

http://tinyurl.com/communityascontext

REFLECTION: COMMUNITY AS CONTEXT

“So the fi rst step toward improving VR is for l ibrarians to stop acting like computers.” (Zino, 2009)

“You’d think I’d get used to the rush one feels at this point in the transaction…the challenge to get it right quickly.” (Harmeyer, 2008)

“Taking into account the diff erences between an in-person transaction and one done over e-mail, chat, or texting, the big thing missing from those in the latter category is the ability to visually demonstrate during the teaching moments of the transaction.” (Steiner, 2010)

“The extent to which [reference services] adapts to Google, WorldCat, Facebook, and other social networking tools, the iPhone and derivatives of handheld devices will ultimately determine future patterns of service and open up the possibilities.” (Bodner, 2009)

THOUGHT PROVOKING QUOTES FROM

RECENT LITERATURE

In October 2004, Luke Vilelle, Dave Beagle, and Buddy Litchfield analyzed VT’s virtual reference service:

1 question per 105 university affi liates 1.33 questions per hour 48% of questions asked by undergrads 30% asked by grads 12% asked by faculty/staff 10% asked by non-affi liates Live Ref = 13.87% of total reference questions

WHERE WE’VE BEEN:2004 STATISTICS

A review of October 2010 statistics (of taken chats) shows: Total: 349 chats started; 86 email tickets received = 435,

total, received 1 question per 87 affi liates

(6,866 faculty + 31,006 students): 37,872 total affi liates 0.98 questions per hour (out of 441.5 library open hours)

Out of the 343 chat transcripts available: 42% of questions asked by undergrads 36% asked by grads 14% asked by faculty/staff 5% asked by non-affi liates 3% asked by alumnus/na

VR = 16.75% of total reference questions (total of 1734 + 435)

WHERE WE ARE?2010 STATISTICS

October 2004 October 2010

1 question/105 affiliates 1 question/87 affiliates

1.33 questions/hour .98 questions/hour*

48% asked by undergrads 42% asked by undergrads

30% asked by grads 36% asked by grads

12% asked by faculty/staff 14% asked by faculty/staff

10% asked by non-affiliates 5% asked by non-affiliates (+3% asked by alumnus/na)

13.87% of total reference 16.75% of total reference (at desks)

2004/2011 COMPARISON CHART

*per total open hours of Newman Library, October 2011 Using figure of 435 total questions (email and chat)

OCTOBER 2011: GROUPED BY SKILLS

Compare with in-person (desk) reference*:BHSS: 701 questions Sci/Tech: 754 questionsTorg/Tower: 270 questions

*Statistics courtesy of Heather

Sticking with October 2010—a few averages:

Response Operator: 40 seconds Visitor: 33 seconds

Response length Operator lines: 10.65 Operator words: 114.9 Visitor lines: 8.58 Visitor words: 87.84

OTHER INTERESTING DETAILS

Since March 16, 2011, we’ve received 37 texts: March 2011: 11 text messages April 2011: 22 text messages May (1-22) 2011: 4 text messages

LivePerson doesn’t capture ID statistics

Message content: Directional, general, quick answer: 28 Subject-specific, in-depth answer: 5 User rang in, then didn’t respond: 4

REF-TEXTING (REXTING?)

Enhancement through technology Videos & images (Screenr, Jing, tutorials on library site) Web annotation (AwesomeHighlighter, SharedCopy) Demo of Screenr and SharedCopy

Personal awareness Log into LivePerson and review your transcripts Review word counts, response times, and other elements

Mining the data…

CONCEPTS FROM THE LITERATURE

Take a few minutes and consider:

What sort of information can VR transactions tell us about library users?

What sort of information can VR transactions tell us about library services?

What else can VR transcripts tell us about our work and planning for the future?

http://tinyurl.com/futureresearch

REFLECTION:FUTURE RESEARCH

Bodner, S. (2009). Virtual reference refl ections. Journal of Library Administration, 49 (7), 675-685. doi:10.1080/01930820903260432

DeMars, J . M., & Breitbach, W. (2009). Enhancing virtual reference: Techniques and technologies to engage users and enrich interaction.   Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 14 (3-4), 82-91. doi:10.1080/10875300903256571

Harmeyer, D. (2008). Virtual reference: Less is more.The Reference Librarian, 48(1), 113-116. doi:10.1300/J120v48n99_11

Olszewski , L. , & Rumbaugh, P. (2010). An international comparison of virtual reference services.  Reference & User Services Quarterly, 49 (4), 360-368.

Steiner, H. M. (2010). Livening virtual reference with screencasting and screen sharing.  Library Hi Tech News,27 (4/5), 9-11. doi:10.1108/07419051011083172

Sul l ivan, D. (2008). Is the virtual reference interview dead?   Incite, 29(12), 13-14.

Walton-Sonda, D. (2009). Virtual reference service: From competencies to assessment.  Austral ian Academic & Research Libraries, 40 (1), 67-68.

Zino, E. (2009). Let's fi x virtual reference.  Library Journal ,  134 (2), 94-94

FURTHER READING:A (VERY) SMALL SAMPLE