In all my years of doing and teaching research, and searching for answers, there are two alternative places I like to look when trying to find information I know little about.

The first place is The Reader’s Adviser published by R. R. Bowker in six volumes. Of course the old set I have is the 14^th edition, 1994, LCCN # 57-13277. I’ve been unable to find any online equivalent of this set on CD-ROM or digitized, although there appears to be a readers advisor online database available through ABC-CLIO, but seemingly only available to libraries. ALA does have a series called Reader’s Advisory which could be an updated replacement, but has limited subjects. And there is Robert Teeter’s web site having many resources listed as well.

Volume 6 of Reader’s Adviser, is an index of publishers, names, titles, and subjects. The other volumes cover large subjects such as Reference works and Literature, Science & Medical, Philosophy and Religion, Social Sciences, and World Literature. Each section of each volume has broken down bibliographies of the related topics and sub-topics with articles about each of those subject areas. These bibliographies give a person/librarian a good taxonomy of words to use in any online search, as well as additional information about who the experts are, and other possible resources for answers.

A second set of books I like to use, is the two volume set, The Great Ideas; a Syntopicon of the Great Books of the Western World.  This link is a description of the book and its contents at the Hathi-Trust. Many libraries may still have this in their collection. The volumes contain general articles of 102 topics with breakouts of all sub-headings of the topics one might want to know about, and an index of related articles in the 54+ volumes of the “Great Books.” It’s not unlike a clustering search engine in covering many sub-topics.

Now, having mentioned the clustering search engines, I’ve used Karnak, and Clusty–renamed Yippy; neither now exist. One reviewer says, using these is not a good way to locate closely related terms. I disagree. The one I’ve discovered and use now, is Carrot2. Carrot2 is a wonderful program which works well with MS Edge, Firefox, Opera, and other browsers. Doing a search of “search and research” Carrot2 came up with all sorts of research databases and search engine sites including directories of such. You can have the clusters in a list, a tree-map, or pie-chart. I like all three of the presentations.

Looking for answers sometimes brings us to look at many alternatives; generally, the do-it-yourself kind.

Often it is the alternative between easy (do what we can now,) or harder, do what will require more time or money. So this is about some of those alternatives taken.

When it comes to “what-cha-ma-call-it” questions, Thesauruses, Synonym, and Antonym dictionaries don’t always work, but some taxonomies may help. Finding one can be difficult, but this directory and databases of controlled vocabulary, could be useful. It includes the Taxonomy Warehouse which I’ve used on occasion; finding already built taxonomies for clients.

Some years ago when developing a database of candidates for a personnel service firm, I was wondering how best to put all the information about a person’s expertise into a formal database. I knew there were expensive programs out there for that, such as MS Access which we had, but we were in need of something to be done, often, very quickly. Since we already had all the letters and resumes from the candidates scanned in the computer as Word documents, we tried something different. We put all the letters and resumes into a single MS Word file, and were able to search the candidates for their expertise successfully using the “find” command.

Yes; later we took the information and placed it in an MS Access database, but in a burst of speed necessary, we were able to find and print a report of the candidates we needed for presentation to a client.

In another instance, taking notes and photographing them, then adding those photos to a note taking program like EverNote, allowed us to search those notes and bring up the items we needed.  From an article from MakeUseOf I saw a similar suggestion for indexing books not found on Google. One could enter subjects or notes based on chapters at the front or back of the book, and take photos of those notes; put them into EverNote or One Note and be able to search quickly in that same manner.

Working with a collection of rare race car books and photos, which contained information about motor serial numbers, chassis numbers, and other race result information, we needed to develop a new scheme instead of using the Dewey Decimal outline. This was important because the vintage cars being repaired and sold, often required original equipment; and restored cars brought $millions.

We did use the decimal system but gave each type of auto a place; 100s, 200s, 300s, 400s, etc. One of the sections of the scheme included all the manufacturer’s names, another all the pictorial books, thus getting everything together on the shelf similar to the Dewey System, but representing an arrangement of race cars, car manufacturers, and photos. The collection owner used this information for restorations of the cars he bought, and sold. In addition to giving the normal description of the book into our software, BookCat, we were able to add fields and ‘see’ and ‘see also’ notes for a taxonomy which allowed for searching all categories without worry of losing something in the translation of a term used by our foreign neighbors. This was a departure from the regular Dewey which didn’t give us enough depth for these specific fields. I haven’t heard, but we were hoping this collection and the catalog would someday end up at the America’s Auto Museum in Tacoma, WA, where there is a large program for restoring cars.

In one of my earlier pieces in Public Libraries Online, on finding answers, I wrote about the alternate use of cards in a drawer with our experts names on them and their particular expertise. It was somewhat like a card catalog except a topic subject was named, the expert, and a phone number…with the cards filed by topic. This was before PC databases, but could be used as a quick “write it down and enter it later scheme.”

I believe most librarians will find what works for their collections usage—not just doing the standard library descriptions and processes, but looking at how resources are being used and present a much greater access to what is needed and wanted by the public. One can do this often by asking questions of the patrons like, “What is the most important thing you need or need to know?” This often reveals a pattern through others as to what enhancements would be valuable.

Employed by a state prison as Director of Libraries, I realized we were receiving continued questions about businesses. Noticing what was being asked, I then realized we had a need for business planning books and resources. Receiving a grant, we set up a collection of business planning books, and developed a course on business planning for inmates; the course becoming a model for other prison libraries.

The post Finding Answers IV – This or That first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

Using a free one-month trial on Gimlet, we collected the dates, times, question types, people who asked the question, formats of the question, locations, the questions asked, and answers given. We recorded close to 800 questions – and probably missed a couple hundred more during our busy times and by simply forgetting to log the questions. The majority of our questions were asked by tweens and teens, with the remaining questions being asked by parents, children, adults and staff.

Thirty-nine percent of the questions asked were ready reference. “When is the fourth floor opening?,” “When does Mario Kart 9 come out?,” and “Where can I get online?,” are examples. Twenty-one percent of questions were directional, with “Where is the bathroom” being the most popular question. Fourteen percent of questions were technology-related. Twelve percent of the questions asked were reader’s advisory, and the remaining percentage made up circulation, pop-up programming, and research questions.

The locations where these questions took place are telling of our new reference model, which excludes the traditional reference desk. Over fifty percent of the questions asked were on the floor, twenty-six percent were asked while we were sitting on the couch, and only fourteen percent were asked at the computer stand. The remaining questions were asked in our arcade. This shows that we were having the majority of our reference transactions via staff on the floor approaching customers or through conversation and interaction.

Over the past few months we have increased the amount of pop-up programs at CPL. If lots of kids are here we then have a program for them, it’s that simple. This includes turning on a movie, pulling out robots, or playing with Legos. Lots of the regular program prep is done on the floor, so customers come up and ask us what we’re doing, giving us the opportunity to explain the program we are prepping and when that program will be. These interactions are the best kinds of promotions for our programming since customers can see what they are going to be doing, instead of reading a blurb in a calendar posting.

This assessment proved that pop-up programming is a great way to interact with customers and provided information on our busiest times, which will impact our future planned programs for 2016. As expected, our busiest times were from 2 p.m.-6 p.m., nearly twenty percent of our questions were asked at 5 p.m. and our busiest days are Monday, Wednesday and Saturday. This information is crucial when scheduling big events and programs.

This assessment proves that the information desk itself is not necessary to provide reference services to our youth customers; instead, being mobile and interacting with customers works best. But this will only work best if you are actively mobile. You need to be in the stacks, on the computers, in the arcade, doing pop-up programs and actually roving; otherwise it defeats the purpose. It will be interesting to see if a similar assessment is done on the first floor in the Adult Services area where there is a reference desk.

Resources:

Gimlet

The post A Roving Reference Assessment in Teen Services first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

What is becoming increasingly difficult within this plethora of information is finding answers. In 2005, Peter Morville wrote the delightfully entitled Ambient Findability. This should be a mandatory read for librarians. Morville takes us through a discussion of a number of evolutionary methods in the digitizing of data, information, images, and how this affects findability as well as how this journey is changing the way we work and live. The wonderfully informative Web Search Garage by Tara Calishan, who blogs under several titles including ResearchBuzz, tells us how to use the Google search engine to our best advantage. There are many books on searching, with discussions about semantics and federated searching, but I’ve noted some important earlier ones below.

The paradox is that the more things we digitize, even with more and more sophisticated methods of finding them through search and probability engines, the harder it becomes to find these items. Thus we create better software to help us with the finding of digital information. The ebook Desktop Searching Handbook (DSH) arrived in January of 2005 and is a thorough review of several “major” desktop search products.  It reviews Copernic, Google Desktop Search, Lookout for Outlook, MSN Desktop Search toolbar suite, Yahoo Desktop search, and offers a paragraph each on Enfish Find, X1, Blinkx, dtSearch desktop, Ask Jeeves Desktop, Wilbur, and Isys Desktop.  Oddly, they do not include HotBot Desktop toolbar. (HotBot. “Desktop” review of the Beta version, launched in 2004 hhttp://www.infotoday.com/newsbreaks/nb040322-1.shtml)  We had software called Kenjin by the company, Autonomy, which similarly searched both desk computer and Internet at the same time. Many of these are gone now, not always replaced with better products. The new Windows 10 now does something similar with its internal program Cortana.

Beyond ‘desktop searching’ we now have some 270 special search engines to help us around the various subjects and types of access. Along with these there are a number of reviews of the Top 10, Top 40, etc. https://blog.kissmetrics.com/alternative-search-engines/ .

With all the help we still have issues about whether the answers give us more questions. Around 2002, PEW Research told us if we used Broadband we’d get more work done. What they didn’t tell us was that the data on which they based the conclusion included listening to radio and watching movies or TV shows. I’m not sure all that was “work” unless one was a reviewer or critic of such things. Thus, defining the context is important as well. I ran into this recently. Someone is doing a survey for “digital humanities librarians.” Without context we don’t know precisely the definition of “digital humanities librarian,” e.g, the subject, Humanities librarians involved in digital projects, or  the activity, Librarians involved in humane/social project such as UNESCO and others.

The government sites tell us veterans will be given long-term health care, but nothing I found seems to tells me how to find out if I’m eligible. The Veterans Administration site also tells us of Medicare and Medicaid help, but doesn’t lead one to discover for oneself what VA eligibility is or how to apply. Other than a phone call, I’m sure it’s all there, but not here, the “Extended Care” page on the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs’ website, http://goo.gl/vZGJp9 . Almost every VA site provides information along with links to additional information, but not the answer to “am I eligible?” or “What are the exact eligibility criteria?”

At one point we had circular references in Statistical Abstracts, e.g., we were told information for one set of statistics came from the Record Industry Association of America (RIAA). When referring to RIAA inquiry of the statistics, they cited Statistical Abstracts as the source. Although dated, perhaps it’s time to get out the The Skeptical Business Searcher: The Information Advisor’s guide to Evaluating Web Data, Sites and Sources, by Robert Berkman: Information Today, Inc., 2005.

Because we librarians are used to looking things up, we forget that calling someone or finding an expert is also a process of accessing information quickly. When I worked at the Lincoln Center (NY) Research Library, we maintained a card file of subjects with names of people and phone numbers whom we could count on to help with answers. Find it Fast, an excellent book which came out many years ago, will be out in a sixth edition by the time readers see this article; Find It Fast: Extracting Expert Information from Social Networks, Big Data, Tweets, and More, Sixth edition by Robert Berkman.

Getting answers is the only reason we need to collect, process, and preserve the tons of digital and print resources being produced each day. Any suggestions or guides to finding answers should be the priority, not just providing information.

The post Finding Answers first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

What I’ve been pondering is the difference in reference interviews. Then it hit me like a ton of bricks: there are really two types of reference interviews, advising and coaching/counseling. The advising type of reference interview is when a patron comes to seek our advice and help in finding answers. Counseling interviews, on the other hand, are not where patrons come to seek answers from us, but come to get us to help them figure something out. In other words, advice is when we, librarians, tell patrons what we think; counsel is when librarians help patrons figure out what they are thinking.

While they may seem very similar, they are not, and if we use the wrong approach we can actually cause great harm (that statement may or may not be hyperbole). Let me illustrate with the same question. Let’s say both Patron A and Patron B come to your desk asking to help them find a book about becoming a veterinarian. Seems pretty straightforward doesn’t it? But through a solid reference interview you hear Patron A say, “Oh yes, I’ve always wanted to be a veterinarian, even when I was a little kid,” but Patron B has a different answer, “Well, I’m guess I don’t know what I want to do with my life, but I like dogs.”

Now, in both cases we can answer the question. We can give both patrons the same book. But does Patron B really leave with the answer they are looking for? No. Patron B is really looking for help on what the heck to do with their life. What Patron B really needs to hear is that it’s OK to not have it figured out. Maybe share a little of your story, or the story of someone you know. Then you can provide them with resources on taking the next steps. And if you have the resources or training, perhaps you can help them figure out what point on the compass they should pursue.

What is really important is to know the difference between the two types of questions. Sometimes patrons are just looking for an answer, but other times patrons are looking for much bigger answers. Many times patrons seek answers that don’t address the issue behind the question. And often times, patrons are looking for someone like us to validate their feelings, doubts, and fears.

May you remember that you can give great advice or great counsel, but know when to provide it. May you remember that we all don’t have this whole life thing figured out, so give your patrons great empathy, and may you remember that sometimes the answer the patron is really seeking is the ear of someone kind, much like YOU.

Photo Credit: Francesca Launaro (CC BY-SA 3.0)

The post Advice vs. Counsel first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

I can hear the patron now, even as I type this article. The deep breathing through the phone, the anticipation for the answer he needs now; as in five minutes ago, as in – why are you not responding yet?! And I feel the pull – the urge to use the old standby. To just Google it already! No need for those old school databases they taught you about in library school. The ones you swore you were going to use and master forever. The curmudgeonly caller has asked for a toll free number to an obscure company in North Carolina that manufactures carpet for RV trailers. I have already tried YP.com and struck out, knowing that getting to Reference USA will take several more clicks to be accessed through the library website. Yet, I held strong and eventually found the number through Reference USA instead of Google.

The addiction to Google is similar to what Kramer (on Seinfeld) had with his Kenny Roger’s chicken. He knows that neon sign blinking and buzzing keeps him up at night. Yet that chicken is too much for him and Newman to resist. All they have to do is walk right across the street and they will have almost instant satisfaction. Just like we know that Google is so quick and convenient, and right there at our fingertips.

Yet are they not storing our search data, and possibly selling it? They even assist the government by sometimes handing over user information. However, I quit Google for less philosophical reasons. I wanted – and needed – a New Year’s challenge. I certainly at times feel guilty for trying to hook the patrons on our electronic databases, when I know I am not using them enough myself. On January 1, 2014, I quit Google, and began a new love affair with my library’s databases.

To date I have found that my Google-less resolution has made me a better librarian by increasing my knowledge of our library’s databases. I have also been able to locate several new sources for information that are much more accurate. Along with that, I am now more invested in helping our patrons become familiar with the library website. Starting soon, I will be teaching library website training. My aim is to continue assisting patrons to be more self-sufficient while increasing traffic to our site. The databases I have found most useful so far are Reference USA, Gale Virtual Reference Library, NoveList Plus, and InfoTrac. It is still early in the year, but I am motivated to continue challenging myself as a public service librarian by strengthening old skills and learning new ones.

The post Stop Googling Around first appeared on Public Libraries Online.