IM reference impressive; librarians should suggest critical evaluation of info
By risablumlein - Posted on April 2nd, 2008
Tagged: Exercise
• virtual reference
Both librarians that responded to my question were helpful and quick to reply. Interestingly, both librarians ended up referring me to the same site. Since the librarian I spoke with via Meebo admitted to using Google, I googled “murder rate California 2005” myself and found what I expected—the resource that both librarians offered me was the very first link provided on the very first Google page. I hardly hold it against either librarian, as I admit to using Google for all my quick searching needs. Not to mention that the site seems reputable enough since it’s from the California Law Enforcement Agency (or so it seems). I wonder, though, if it wouldn’t be helpful in this situation to mention to virtual reference customers that the information provided is just a snapshot, and should be evaluated with other resources as well. Not all people using IM reference (actually, not even close to all people) will be librarians or librarians-in-training, and many may not be critical of information resources or google searches.
As an overall service, I was quite impressed. Both interactions took less than 10 minutes, and both librarians were friendly and casual. My chat transcripts are included below:
Meebo Reference Chat
[16:52] meeboguest154724: Hello there. I was wondering if you could help me find the # of murders in california in 2005?
[16:52] Sulreference: Hi, let me see what I can find
[16:53] meeboguest154724: Thanks.
[16:56] Sulreference: OK, I found a table in statistical abstracts of the united states: it says a number that is too low; let me check something else
[16:56] meeboguest154724: Okay, thanks.
[16:57] meeboguest154724: By the way, how do you know it is too low?
[16:57] Sulreference: It's a figure by 100K population: the figure is 7
[16:58] meeboguest154724: I see.
[17:00] Sulreference: You will laugh; I used Google and found this site with lots of data http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/cacrime.htm it says 2503 if I am reading it correctly
[17:01] meeboguest154724: Yeah, that's what it looks like to me too. That page is a good resource.
[17:01] meeboguest154724: Thanks!
[17:02] Sulreference: Great; glad I could help you.
[17:02] meeboguest154724: Have a good weekend.
[17:02] Sulreference: You too; it's quittin time here.
AskNow Reference Chat
|
Hello, Sandia (iluvbeats@yahoo.com)
|
|
Chat Transcript: How many people were murdered in California in 2005?
|
|
MLV_ADMIN: Librarian 'MLV_ADMIN' has joined the session.
|
|
MLV_ADMIN: Hi Sandia--let me see what I can find.
|
|
Sandia: Hello. Is someone there?
|
|
Sandia: Oh hello there. Thanks!
|
|
MLV_ADMIN: Hi I'm looking for your question...
|
|
Sandia: Can I click on links in the right window, or will that end my session?
|
|
MLV_ADMIN: No, it won't end.
|
|
Sandia: I'm looking on the TOC for organized crime but don't see homocide ...
|
|
MLV_ADMIN: Go ahead and click.
|
|
Sandia: Oh this one is cool ... looks like 2,503 ... thanks!
|
|
MLV_ADMIN: Yes, that's a good one.
|
|
MLV_ADMIN: Will this help you?
|
|
Sandia: Do you know how to get a copy of our chat so I can save the links?
|
|
MLV_ADMIN: You should be able to keep our chat.
|
|
MLV_ADMIN: Just go to "murders california 2005' and click on that.
|
|
Newest Message
Sandia: Okay, thanks a lot! |
risablumlein's blog
• Login to post comments
