An Exploratory Survey of Reference Source Instruction in LIS Courses

The responses called for a longer list of categories for challenges in teaching electronic sources than for print sources (see table 6). Many instructors identified more than one key challenge in teaching about electronic sources. These answers have been coded with all applicable categories.

Table 6. Challenges in Presenting Electronic Sources

Three main categories of challenges for electronic source instruction were:

• development of a deeper knowledge of electronic reference sources, identified by eight instructors (22 percent) (“Students tend to want to search as though using Web search tools such as Google. It can be a challenge to get them to embrace Dialog or other structured database resources.”);
• changes in the content and interfaces of the electronic sources (seven, 19 percent) (“… the vendors change the interfaces pretty frequently so it simply gets a little confusing, especially for the new students, remembering which sources work best for which type of search.”); and
• problems with accessibility due to cancellations and lack of availability of more expensive electronic sources (seven, 19 percent) (” … in my state there is such a huge discrepancy between the small rural libraries and the large public and college libraries in terms of what is available to use. Many small publics don’t have electronic resources at all. It’s an economic issue.”)

Additional challenges identified by more than one respondent were problems with technical support such as lab operations, proxy servers, and passwords (five respondents); selection of sources for inclusion in the course content (five); students’ uneven preparation for online searching (four); lack of time for in-class demonstrations (three); and lack of search-interface standardization (three). Three respondents stated that they do not face any major challenges because the representatives of online vendors are eager to help with in-class demonstrations. Finally, the issue of keeping the coverage of electronic sources interesting was mentioned by only two instructors.

Discussion

The study findings identify the instructional methods applied by LIS reference instructors in teaching about reference sources. In addition, the findings also point out the most effective and most challenging aspects of reference source instruction. In simplified terms, there are two general types of source instruction for both print and electronic reference sources:

1. Discussion about sources, led by the instructor or students reporting on their assignments. Frequently, discussion involves explanation of evaluative elements used for comparison of reference sources; and
2. Use of reference sources, primarily accomplished through students’ hands-on exercises. While exercises involving use of print sources happen primarily without instructor supervision and outside of class time, use of electronic sources is frequently demonstrated by the instructor during class time.

In general, students get little in-class experience in handling and using print sources. Instructors expect students to gain application skills outside of class, through exercises and assignments. Instructors also seem to believe that comparison of resources flows better in the context of practical experience in using the sources.This approach avoids the difficulty of in-class demonstrations involving print sources, such as moving books from the library to the classroom or creating representations of print sources in the form of slides, transparencies, or PDF documents.

Overall, the reference instructors in this study reported spending more time teaching about electronic sources than about print sources. They also devote more class time to demonstrating electronic sources than to print sources. One possible explanation for the instructional emphasis on electronic sources is the overall increase in importance of electronic formats in provision of reference services due to proliferation and accessibility. Furthermore, networked access to electronic reference sources eliminates the logistical difficulties for in-class demonstrations that are typically associated with bulky print formats. The portability and accessibility of electronic sources make it effortless to demonstrate their use in the classroom with just a computer, projector, and Internet connection. While instruction for print source utilization is deemed intuitive, and students are presumed to understand basic skills (for example, using page numbers, indexes, and tables of contents), electronic source instruction tends to be process-oriented and focused more on the search process. Instructors therefore make great use of modeling and demonstrating searches.

Many other instructional challenges reported by survey participants can be attributed to the changes in the format of LIS education from in-class, face-to-face instruction to various types of distance education and increased use of electronic reference sources. For example, in reference courses that are offered in a completely online format, students are widely distributed geographically and do not have access to the same collection of reference sources. Online teaching requires adjustments in instructional approaches that count on students’ hands-on exercises outside of class time as a prominent method of resource instruction. Furthermore, instructors teach courses that increasingly deal with nonprint materials but have not developed unique teaching approaches to present those electronic sources. They use many of the same or similar approaches for comparing electronic sources as they have traditionally used for comparing print sources. Some report they find these methods equally effective; however, others say they have not found an effective way to present electronic sources yet. Consistent with these results, this study identified many more challenges for the presentation of electronic sources than for the presentation of print sources.

Future research should address the impact of these other instructional challenges on the ability of LIS education to produce professionals with higher-level thinking skills. Action research in this area should engage students, practitioners, and instructors by allowing all parties to identify challenges, reflect on those challenges, and produce solutions for the problems of source instruction across a professional career. Qualitative research comparing the substance and process of reference source instruction, including rules of use and evaluation, form another potential avenue for understanding how instructors teach and new librarians learn to use reference sources. As LIS courses move from a face-to-face environment to a distance education environment, future researchers might conduct a deeper analysis of effective instructional techniques for various teaching modes. Finally, an additional promising approach to assessing reference source instruction is to place it within the context of the hierarchy of educational objectives (for example, Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives).²⁹ This study suggests that deeper understanding of reference sources is a desired objective of instructors; however, the methods they use for instruction may not be the most appropriate for creating that level of understanding. Interviewing instructors and looking at their instructional materials–syllabi, tests, and assignments–will provide richer information than can be obtained by a survey.

Conclusion

This study provided an insight into methods of reference source instruction heretofore lacking in LIS literature and identified a number of successful instructional approaches. These included students’ classroom presentations of sources, hands-on assignments, and fieldwork that allow students to work with sources. The study also identified challenges facing reference instructors in the era of distance education and the growth of electronic reference sources. Instructors want their students to develop a deeper knowledge of print and electronic sources, but face difficulties ensuring access to sources, working with technology, and changing interfaces. These challenges may be diminishing the potential quality of education for current students and future practitioners.

How is the field going to address instructors’ concerns with reference source education? One option may be a wait-and-see approach, by letting the natural processes of evolution in instructional practice follow their own course. This course of action would likely mean watching a decline in the quality and quantity of print source coverage in reference courses without intervening. The better option might be for reference instructors to initiate discussions about new strategies for reference source instruction in the context of the changing nature of LIS education. These discussions can help establish standards for the instruction of print and electronic sources, which may include a required list of print sources, skills for using electronic reference sources, or source evaluation criteria to be learned. Although RUSA’s reference competencies approach this state, they are more concerned with behavior and less with specific source knowledge or skills. Further, this standards approach, identified by Richardson Jr. as structuralist, has historically been difficult to maintain due to continual growth of the body of essential sources.³⁰ Nonetheless, a general consensus among reference instructors as to what print sources students must know would be a useful starting point for planning future reference curricula.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5