Information Services Today

Chapter 11, “Information Intermediation and Reference Services,” addresses the changing roles of the reference librarian with the advent of the internet and “Reference 2.0” services. Johanna Tunon, an expert in digital instruction and design, identifies changing roles of reference services and information intermediation in the twenty-first century. After noting the role of reference services before the internet, she explores the impact of new technologies on reference services, the changing methods of information intermediation and instruction, and the strategies for addressing the decentralized and distributed roles of today’s reference librarians.

Tunon aptly traces the major shifts in reference content from the rise of internet archives and search engines like Google to the creation of digital content, noting that most information users no longer need bricks-and-mortar libraries as their gateway to access information. She identifies new types of more detailed reference questions and the tools that have been developed to respond to these questions. She further highlights new virtual reference tools that have been developed, which extend the reach of traditional reference services and provide a “high-tech and high-touch” approach by offering computer-mediated reference services via e-mail, chat/instant messaging, texting/short message service (SMS), voice chat and cloud-based videoconferencing, synchronous and asynchronous instruction, and more 24/7.

Throughout the chapter, Tunon addresses the competencies of reference librarians. Today’s professionals need to prepare for changing user behaviors, help engage patrons with new information tools and resources, and partner with other organizations to maximize both programming and services. Today’s reference librarians and information intermediators of all kinds need to be proactive and energetic, creative, innovative, open, and technologically advanced.

The advent of the internet and “Reference 2.0” services have changed the role of reference librarians in the last quarter century from passive purveyors of information to information intermediators and facilitators who help patrons access information in a myriad of new ways. This chapter examines the changing roles of reference services and information intermediation in the twenty-first century. After completing this chapter, the reader should have an understanding of:

• the strategies for addressing the decentralized and distributed roles of today’s reference librarians and other information intermediators.

Up until about one hundred fifty years ago, information professionals primarily focused on the acquisition and organization of library holdings. In his 1876 paper, “Personal Relations between Librarians and Readers,” Samuel Swett Green¹ introduced the concept of reference services as information intermediation through the process of helping users resolve a particular query, interest, task, or problem.

The pre-internet reference model provided librarian-centric reference services² at a reference desk staffed by professional librarians. Reference interviews were conducted to better understand the information needs of users. Reference questions ranged from ready reference questions for discrete facts, data, or information and verification of bibliographic information to directional, procedural, technical, subject, and specialized research questions. Reference librarians were typically supported by a physical reference collection of encyclopedias, dictionaries, atlases, thesauri, handbooks, directories, government documents, print indexes, and more that were housed nearby for ready access. Many of these roles remain essential for serving information users today, such as:

1. recommending, interpreting, and evaluating information resources to help users meet their information needs,

While these roles remain the cornerstone of reference service, as reference services adapt to new trends in how information users seek information, so too must the competencies and definitions of reference services be redefined, as is demonstrated in textbox 11.1.

The rise of the internet in the 1990s began disrupting reference services as access to information was no longer place bound.⁶ Subscriptions to reference resources (e.g., NewsBank⁷ and Web of Knowledge⁸) and free electronic reference collections (e.g., ERIC⁹ and PubMed¹⁰) became commonplace, while print reference tools, like Reader’s Guide to Periodical Literature and Books in Print,¹¹ became increasingly obsolete. Print reference resources housed in libraries, which took up massive amounts of shelving space, shifted to bundled digital collections like those offered by Credo Reference,¹² Gale Virtual Reference Library,¹³ and Oxford Reference.¹⁴ The digitization of millions of print books in massive digital collections, such as Google Books,¹⁵ Internet Archive,¹⁶ and the HathiTrust Digital Library,¹⁷ began to provide 24/7 direct access to scholarly resources that did not require information intermediation.¹⁸ Additionally, the creation of a staggering amount of new digital content over the last two decades has resulted in the rise of online repositories, such as the Digital Public Library of America.¹⁹

Consequently, most information users no longer need brick-and-mortar libraries as their gateway to access information, and they no longer need information professionals to help mediate their access to information. Search engines (e.g., Google,²⁰ Bing,²¹ Yahoo!,²² and DuckDuckGo²³) have provided users with easy access to everything from web-based images and books to maps, videos, and patents. As a result, information that people used to access in libraries, such as the value of a 2006 Camry in the Kelley Blue Book²⁴ or content for a fifth-grader’s class project on California missions, can now be easily accessed 24/7 online. The result is a self-service society where people routinely conduct their own unmediated online searches.

As access to information became easier through the advent of personal devices, cloud computing, and app technologies, people started asking information professionals new types of reference questions. This has led to the development of new reference tools that assist information professionals in providing value to users by finding answers to complex questions:

Algorithm-based search engines, such as Google and Bing, and computational knowledge engines, such as Wolfram Alpha, allow intelligent searching within documents.²⁵

Database search features from vendors such as ProQuest²⁶ enable searching anywhere in the document.

Discovery tools, from vendors such as EBSCO,²⁷ Primo from Ex Libris,²⁸ and WorldCat Discovery Services²⁹ from OCLC, permit global searching.

Citation index tools, such as Google Scholar’s Cited By tool,³⁰ provide a free and more comprehensive alternative to Web of Knowledge’s³¹ citation indexes for identifying the impact of articles in specific fields of knowledge and new trends.

Citation management tools such as EndNote³² and Zotero³³ make it easier to ethically cite information.

Cloud-based translation tools, such as Google Translate,³⁴ enable information professionals to communicate with patrons who speak different languages with increasing accuracy.

The advent of the internet also made seamless and multimodal virtual reference tools possible, providing users with multiple points of entry to hubs of information. Virtual reference services, sometimes called digital or mobile reference services, extend the reach of traditional reference services by offering users synchronous and asynchronous computer-mediated reference services via e-mail, chat/instant messaging, texting/short message service (SMS), voice chat and cloud-based videoconferencing, and more. Web-based applications on smartphones and other mobile devices provide users with additional mobility, and the global reach and “anytime, anywhere” point-of-need access of these new tools mean that reference services no longer need to be place bound.³⁵

Despite the use of technology in these interactions, virtual reference interviews are not that different from face-to-face transactions, because many of the same reference skills and techniques are used. Textbox 11.2 describes different virtual reference tools that reference librarians can use to support user needs.

Because many information institutions do not have the staff to offer extended hours of virtual reference services, online cooperative reference services that offer around-the-clock help have become another reference option. The Online Computer Library Center (OCLC)³⁶ offers QuestionPoint³⁷ as a 24/7 reference cooperative that includes chat, e-mail, and a reference knowledge base of libraries from around the world. Other information institutions participate in consortia arrangements, such as Florida’s statewide Ask a Librarian³⁸ consortium of public and academic libraries. Challenges arise, however, because staffing of the virtual reference desk is shared among the various participating libraries, which can result in information professionals being asked to answer questions about library systems with which they have no personal experience.

Technological advances have also impacted reader’s advisory services that information professionals offer in school and public libraries. Information professionals use reader’s advisory tools such as NoveList,³⁹ LibGuides,⁴⁰ and Pinterest;⁴¹ these are used to provide local recommendations on topics ranging from Christian fiction and graphic novels to popular crafts and local history. Users may also get reading recommendations from outside services, such as those that are offered by Amazon and GoodReads and social media applications including Facebook and Twitter.

Reference librarians today continue to play an educational role by helping users learn how to locate, navigate, and evaluate information (see also chapter 16: “Teaching Users: Information and Technology Instruction”). Library instruction offered to groups or individuals goes by many names, ranging from library instruction and bibliographic instruction to information literacy and, most recently, trans-literacy. Instruction can be conducted for groups and individuals in person or online. NetMeeting, first used to deliver library instruction synchronously in a 1997 experiment, provided instruction for distance students as an alternative to traditional face-to-face instruction.⁴² Since then, new tools include streaming media to deliver screencasts, webinars, and webcasts that can be embedded in courses at the point of need. Information professionals offer online synchronous group instruction, but they can also offer instruction for online and individual users regardless of their physical location using tools including Collaborate,⁴³ WebEx,⁴⁴ and GoToTraining.⁴⁵ Asynchronous videos and screencasts can be created using tools such as Screencast-O-Matic⁴⁶ and Jing,⁴⁷ or other online interactive tools like Guide on the Side⁴⁸ for point-of-need instruction.

Four different types of online question and answering (Q&A) services have emerged for helping people fulfill their information needs:⁴⁹

Community-based Q&A, such as Yahoo! Answers,⁵⁰ allows users to exchange information in a threaded discussion with an asker and one or more answers.⁵¹

Collaborative Q&A, such as WikiAnswers,⁵² uses a system of collaboratively edited questions and answers so that community peers can collaboratively refine the phrasing of questions and answers.

Social Q&A, such as Quora,⁵³ have e-commerce live chat applications used by members of a personal networking group to ask and answer questions by other members of the same social network.

Expert-based Q&A, such as LibAnswers,⁵⁴ offers a hybrid solution with the ability to provide questions and answers or a knowledge database of frequently asked questions as well as e-mail, a web form, and Twitter integration.

Web 2.0 social tools also encourage interaction and sharing through blogs, wikis, and group messaging. Social media tools, including Pinterest, Instagram, Snapchat, Facebook and Twitter, are frequently used for promoting library resources and services and for engaging with personal learning networks. These technological advancements in social tools have had a profound effect on library and information services, contributing to changes in the ways that reference services are delivered and to the development of a new service model called “Reference 2.0.”⁵⁵ Reference 2.0 uses collaborative social networking tools to provide digital reference services in the twenty-first century.

Reference 2.0 services have made it possible to move beyond the place-bound services offered at the reference desk to a two-way seamless interaction between information users and reference librarians who facilitate information intermediation services. For example, co-browsing of a user and librarian via chat reference expands the reach of reference services. Twitter makes it possible for reference librarians to amplify their social networks by tweeting when they may want expert help with specific questions.⁵⁶ Information professionals use other social media, such as blogs, Twitter, Instagram, and Pinterest, to promote reference services and enhance information intermediation.

Since users today have online access to decentralized, distributed, and often free sources for information intermediation services, reference services offered by libraries are competing with a variety of other information intermediation options in this age of Google. However, information professionals have unique expertise and skills that are otherwise not available to users via these other information intermediation options. Specifically, reference librarians provide value-added help to users with specialized research questions, can address patron-driven wants, and provide a “high-tech and high-touch” approach desired by many patrons. This expertise positions them to be knowledge professionals in the age of Google.⁶¹

The accelerating pace of technological change has increasingly diversified and decentralized the ways that information services are offered.⁶² One approach to providing information services in libraries uses a single integrated service point for circulation and reference services staffed primarily by well-trained paraprofessionals. Another approach uses tiered reference services, with paraprofessionals and student workers⁶³ who answer routine questions (e.g., about holdings, policies, directions to the bathroom) and professional librarians who are contacted for more difficult questions (see also chapter 15: “Accessing Information Anywhere and Anytime: Access Services”). As a result, reference librarians are increasingly reserved for consultations when users need help with more in-depth questions.⁶⁴ This gives these information professionals time to offer services such as My Librarian, which provides labor-intensive personalized help for individuals by addressing their information mediation needs.⁶⁵ The choice of multimodal approaches for delivering in-person and online reference services depends on the needs of the specific library.⁶⁶

The advent of virtual assistants, such as Apple’s SIRI, Amazon’s Alexa, Microsoft’s Cortana, and Facebook’s Jarvis and other chat bots that are providing unmediated answers to questions, exemplify other ways that information is being disseminated (see also chapter 25: “Managing Technology”). Given the growth of these artificial intelligence (AI) applications by Apple, Amazon, Google, and Microsoft and other technological advancements, as well as declines in the number of reference transactions in libraries over the last quarter century, information professionals have engaged in discussions about what the future of reference services will be. The declines in the reported numbers of reference transactions may be due in part because of the development of all of these new online resources and search tools.⁶⁷ The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) reported reference transactions decreasing by 69 percent between 1991 and 2012,⁶⁸ while the Pew Research Center’s Libraries 2016 report found that reference help in public libraries had decreased by 15 percent between 2012 and 2016.⁶⁹ Another reason for the decline in the number of reference transactions is because of the shift to the consultation role by librarians who answer the more in-depth and time-consuming questions such as those related to knowledge creation.⁷⁰ To help demonstrate their value, reference librarians have increased their efforts to quantify the relevancy of their information intermediation services and to document the return on investment of reference services being provided⁷¹ (see also chapter 28: “Advocacy”).

Changing user needs (see also chapter 4: “Diverse Information Needs”), increasing social media capabilities offered through Reference 2.0, and declining reference usage statistics have put pressure on libraries to reach out to users in new ways. As a result, libraries have focused more on providing outreach services.⁷² In fact, outreach—promoting the services and resources offered by information organizations to the broader community of users—has been identified by Tyckoson⁷³ as the fourth area of responsibility that continues to be handled by today’s reference librarians (see also chapter 27: “Communications, Marketing, and Outreach Strategies”).

Some new approaches to reference outreach have also been adopted. For example, roving reference, sometimes called roaming reference, uses a retail approach to outreach by providing reference services in high-traffic areas away from the reference desk.⁷⁴ This usually takes the form of helping patrons at points of need in the library rather than at a designated stationary location. A similar approach offered by outreach or community librarians serves a comparable role outside the library facility. These reference models have been fueled by the advent of tablets and cell phone technologies. Although these efforts have raised the visibility of information professionals, locating users who may want help can sometimes be challenging.

More targeted outreach efforts also provide visibility for information professionals so they can more easily engage with users. For example, some information professionals have used Pokémon Go⁷⁵ to reach out to new visitors in libraries, while others use library events including Harry Potter parties, International Game Day, and Comic-Con events.⁷⁶ Other libraries have focused on underserved populations, such as promoting library services to help immigrants, the homeless, seniors, and more.⁷⁷

Embedded librarianship offers yet another approach to outreach that uses librarians as information intermediaries as part of a team or community. For example, public librarians can be embedded in local government or community organizations. Academic librarians may have office hours in academic departments or can be embedded in online classes, participate on the curriculum planning committee at the departmental or university level, or be part of the instructional technology team who designs the academic courses⁷⁸ (see also chapter 7: “Learning and Research Institutions: Academic Librar ies”). Frequently, embedded librarians develop those collaborative relationships organically with faculty and students, patrons, city administrators, and even medical teams doing rounds in a hospital.⁷⁹ Whatever the role, embedded librarians help provide relevant information for their team or community.

Perhaps the most successful application of embedded librarianship is when information professionals are fully embedded in team-taught information literacy components of online courses and face-to-face classes.⁸⁰ Providing course-integrated instruction and research assistance for students ensures that an information professional is available at the point of need in the curriculum.⁸¹ Librarians who provide face-to-face instruction may also create instructional modules used in flipped classrooms where students can view instructional modules before class; providing instruction asynchronously before class frees students to focus on applying what they learned when they are in the classroom.⁸²

One major challenge with embedded librarianship is the issue of scalability to ensure that there are enough information professionals embedded in core classes. For example, embedded librarians may be inserted in as many as thirty or more classes per eight-week period. One solution that institutions like San José State University⁸³ have utilized is to provide asynchronous information literacy instructional modules that can be easily customizable and embedded into courses.⁸⁴ This provides a solution for information professionals to take an active role as information intermediators in online education courses so they can reach online students who might never set foot in a library.

As information-seeking behaviors become increasingly user driven, virtual, and self-directed, reference librarians have taken on new roles for mediating between users and their access to information. These new responsibilities are illustrated by the array of job titles, as listed in textbox 11.3.⁸⁵ These emerging roles frequently entail interdepartmental responsibilities that range from managing learning resource centers in schools and higher education to using learning management systems that provide access to digital resources and reference services.

Learning and knowledge are at the center of this shift away from information professionals simply helping users find information. Brian Kenney has argued that users in the communities being served are looking for ways to do things rather than simply to locate information.⁸⁷ R. David Lankes, on the other hand, has framed the issue in terms of a new mission for information professionals in that they are improving society by assisting in the creation of knowledge by users in library communities.⁸⁸ There are four critical but diverse areas where librarians function as information intermediators, as discussed below.⁸⁹

Information professionals are meeting the new types of diverse and global information needs of users by providing information literacy instruction. School librarians use the American Association of School Librarians’ (AASL) Standards for the 21st-Century Learner⁹⁰ to support traditional school students and homeschoolers in developing “information skills that will enable them to use technology as an important tool for learning now and in the future”⁹¹ (see also chapter 6: “Literacy and Media Centers: School Libraries”). Similarly, academic libraries address information literacy skills described in the Association of Colleges and Research Libraries’ (ACRL) Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education⁹² (see also chapter 7: “Learning and Research Institutions: Academic Libraries”). Meanwhile, public libraries are using a number of approaches to offer classes that address information and technology literacy skills as they teach users new technologies, offer programs on topics like estate planning, and help adults complete high school degrees via the Smart Horizons Career Online High School⁹³ in Florida (see also chapter 8: “Community Anchors for Lifelong Learning: Public Libraries”). These public libraries are also expanding access to higher education through resources such as the College Depot at the Phoenix Public Library.⁹⁴ Homework help and tutoring services are provided for school students and homeschoolers alike, and fun classes for preschool children are being offered on computer coding to support STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) initiatives.

Information professionals are serving many different constituent groups. In public libraries, information professionals are helping immigrants with reading literacy and providing classes in English as a second language. They are also providing story hours for children with autism and parenting techniques for addressing their children’s reading needs to their parents. Similarly, academic libraries ensure that online learning students receive equivalent levels of library instruction as on-campus students, providing instruction that is timely and ongoing and that helps students learn how to use and cite information ethically for their class assignments.⁹⁵ And, finally, school libraries offer homeless children a place to study after school while public libraries are finding ways to provide homeless adults everything from computer access to social services.

Information professionals are also helping local businesses and workers in the community. Information professionals offer classes in résumé writing, interview skills, computer skills, and job skills development.⁹⁶ Local business people can take classes on how to find grants for a nonprofit or how to navigate the world of business contracts or even can get one-on-one advice on issues ranging from procurement to licensing and local government policies.

Finally, information professionals are helping patrons learn how to use new technologies and develop new skills. Libraries are making more of an effort to help seniors learn various technologies like Kindles and iPads, while makerspaces and beta spaces allow users to foster experimentation and scholarship through the sharing of resources and knowledge by using new technologies and building prototypes⁹⁷ (see also chapter 17: “Hyperlinked Libraries” and chapter 18: “Creation Culture and Makerspaces”).

In the twenty-first century, information professionals need to prepare for changing user behaviors, help patrons with new information tools and resources, and partner with everyone—from people in universities and schools to local organizations and community groups. This means that reference librarians and information intermediators of all kinds need to be creative, innovative, and technologically skilled. Information intermediators need to keep up with new skill sets so they can offer the high-touch/high-tech reference services their users want. Whatever the model used or the type of information organization, it is important to integrate reference services with other parts of the organization to address the needs of users.¹⁰¹

In the twenty-first century, the definition of information intermediation focuses on cultivating information literacy, creating knowledge, and helping users learn how to do things. Reference librarians are key to achieving this goal and must be forward thinking in serving the needs of their communities. This entails the efforts of information professionals who are open and adept at identifying what is changing. As information professionals, reference librarians understand that they can no longer wait passively for patrons to come to use the library’s services. Instead, reference librarians are proactively and energetically promoting the library, as well as the value and significance of the library’s services and resources to the community.

At the core, reference services and information intermediators will continue to serve their communities by addressing the fundamental mission of helping users acquire knowledge and satisfy information needs through creativity, innovation, and outreach, while remaining technologically relevant in the twenty-first century.

NOTES

1. Samuel Swett Green, “Personal Relations between Librarians and Readers,” Library Journal 1, no. 1 (1876): 77–78.

2. David A Tyckoson, “What Is the Best Model of Reference Service?,” Library Trends 50, no. 2 (2001): 183. See also Dennis B. Miles, “Shall We Get Rid of the Reference Desk?,” Reference and User Services Quarterly 52, no. 4 (2013): 320.

3. Kay Ann Cassell and Uma Hiremath, eds., Reference and Information Services: An Introduction, third edition (Chicago: Neal-Schuman, 2014), 5–8.

4. American Library Association, “Guidelines for Behavioral Performance for Reference and Information Service Providers,” 2017, http://www.ala.org/rusa/resources/guidelines/guidelinesbehavioral.

5. Anne Houston, “What’s in a Name? Toward a New Definition of Reference,” Reference & User Services Quarterly 55, no. 3 (Spring 2016): 186–88, https://journals.ala.org/index.php/rusq/article/viewFile/5927/7512.

6. Jeanie M. Welch, “Who Says We’re Not Busy? Library Web Page Usage as a Measure of Public Service Activity,” Reference Services Review 33, no. 4 (2005): 371.

7. Newsbank, 2017, http://newsbank.com.

8. Web of Knowledge, 2017, http://www.webofknowledge.com.

9. ERIC, http://eric.ed.gov.

10. PubMed, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/.

11. Reader’s Guide is published by Wilson and there is a retrospective index for 1890 to 1982; “Books in Print,” 2017, http://www.booksinprint.com.

12. CREDO, 2017, http://www.credoreference.com.

13. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://www.cengage.com/search/showresults.do?N=197+4294904997.

14. Oxford Reference, 2017, http://www.oxfordreference.com.

15. Google Books, http://books.google.com.

16. Internet Archive, http://www.archive.org.

17. HathiTrust, http://www.hathitrust.org.

18. Andrew Weiss, “Examining Massive Digital Libraries (MDLs) and Their Impact on Reference Services,” Reference Librarian 57, no. 4 (2016): 291–92, doi:10.1080/02763877.2016.1145614.

19. DPLA, http://dp.la.

20. Google, http://www.google.com.

21. Bing, http://www.bing.com.

22. Yahoo, http://www.yahoo.com.

23. DuckDuckGo, http://duckduckgo.com.

24. Kelley Blue Book Online, http://kbb.com.

25. Stephen Abram, “Future World: Strategic Challenges for Reference in the Coming Decade,” in Reinventing Reference: How Libraries Deliver Value in the Age of Google, ed. Katie Elson Anderson and Vibiana Bowman Cvetkovic (Chicago: American Library Association, 2015), 133–45, PDF e-book.

26. ProQuest, http://www.proquest.com.

27. EBSCO, Host, http://www.ebscohost.com.

28. Ex Libris, “Primo,” http://www.exlibrisgroup.com/category/PrimoOverview.

29. OCLC, “WorldCat Discovery,” https://www.oclc.org/en/worldcat-discovery.html.

30. Google Scholar, http://scholar.google.com.

31. Web of Knowledge, http://webofknowledge.com.

32. EndNote, http://endnote.com.

33. Zotero, http://www.zotero.org.

34. Google Translate, http://translate.google.com.

35. John Paul Anbu and Sanjay Kataria, “Reference on the Go: A Model for Mobile Reference Services in Libraries,” Reference Librarian 57, no. 3 (2016): 236, doi:10.1080/02763877.2015.1132181.

36. Online Computer Library Center (OCLC), http://www.oclc.org.

37. QuestionPoint, http://www.questionpoint.org.

38. Ask a Librarian, http://askalibrarian.org.

39. NoveList, http://www.ebscohost.com/novelist.

40. LibGuides, http://www.springshare.com/libguides/.

41. Pinterest, http://www.pinterest.com/.

42. Paul Pival and Johanna Tunon, “NetMeeting: A New and Inexpensive Alternative for Delivering Library Instruction to Distance Students,” College and Research Library News 59, no. 10 (1998): para. 4.

43. Collaborate, http://www.collaborate.org.

44. WebEx, http://www.webex.com.

45. Go To Training, https://www.gotomeeting.com/training.

46. Screencast-O-Matic, http://screencast-o-matic.com.

47. Jing, https://www.techsmith.com/jing.html.

48. “About Guide on the Side,” Code.library, last modified 2017, http://code.library.arizona.edu/.

49. Thomas Pack, “Got Questions? Stack Exchange Has Answers,” Information Today 32 (2015, January– February): 31.

50. Yahoo! Answers, http://answers.yahoo.com.

51. Erik Choi and Chirag Shah, “User Motivations in Asking Questions in Online Q&A Services,” Journal of the Association for Information Services and Technology 67, no. 5 (2016): background para. 1, doi:10.1002/asi.23490.

52. WikiAnswers, http://www.wikianswers.com.

53. Quora, https://www.quora.com/.

54. LibAnswers, https://www.springshare.com/libanswers/.

55. Kay Ann Cassell and Uma Hiremath, “Chapter 21: Reference 2.0,” in Reference and Information Services: An Introduction, third edition (Chicago: American Library Association, 2014), 430. See also Marian S. Ramos and Christine M. Abrigo, “Reference 2.0 in Action: An Evaluation of the Digital Reference Services in Selected Philippine Academic Libraries,” Library Hi Tech News 29, no. 1 (2012): 8, doi:10.1108/07419051211223426.

56. Courtney L. Young, “Crowdsourcing the Virtual Reference Interview with Twitter,” Reference Librarian 55, no. 2 (2014): 173, doi:10.1080/02763877.2014.879030.

57. New York Public Library, 2017, NYPL Blogs, https://www.nypl.org/blog.

58. NYPL (Instagram account), https://www.instagram.com/nypl/.

59. New York Public Library, “What NYPL Is Reading Now,” https://www.pinterest.com/nypl/what-nypl-is-reading/.

60. New York Public Library, “Literary Greats,” https://www.pinterest.com/nypl/literary-greats/.

61. Kay Ann Cassell and Uma Hiremath, “Chapter 22: The Future of Information Service,” in Reference and Information Services: An Introduction, third edition (Chicago: American Library Association, 2014), 465.

62. Michelle Holschuh Simmons, “Finding Information: Information Mediation and Reference Services,” in Information Services Today, ed. Sandra Hirsh (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015), 130, PDF e-book.

63. Tyckoson, “What Is the Best Model of Reference Service?,” 194.

64. Amy Paterson, “After the Desk: Reference Service in a Changing Information Landscape” (paper presented at IFLA WLIC, Lyon, France, July 15, 2014), 3–4, http://library.ifla.org/944/1/101-paterson-en.pdf.

65. Meredith Farkas, “High Tech, High Touch: The Personal Touch in a Digital World,” American Libraries (September 29, 2014), https://americanlibrariesmagazine.org/2014/09/29/high-tech-high-touch. See also Cassell and Hiremath, eds., Reference and Information Services, 465.

66. Stephen P. Buss, “Do We Still Need Reference Services in the Age of Google and Wikipedia?” Reference Librarian 57, no. 4 (2016): 269–70, doi:10.1080/02763877.2015.1134377.

67. Rachel Applegate, “Whose Decline? Which Academic Libraries Are ‘Deserted’ in Terms of Reference Transactions?,” Reference & User Services Quarterly 48, no. 2 (2008): 177.

68. Association of Research Libraries, “Service Trends in ARL Libraries, 1991–2012,” last modified 2012, http://www.arl.org/storage/documents/service-trends.pdf.

69. John B. Horrigan, “Library Usage and Engagement,” Libraries 2016, Pew Research Center, September 9, 2016, para. 2, http://www.pewinternet.org/2016/09/09/library-usage-and-engagement/.

70. Cassell and Hiremath, eds., Reference and Information Services, 461.

71. Madelynn Dickerson, “Beta Spaces as a Model for Reconstructing Reference Services in Libraries,” In the Library with the Lead Pipe (2016): Beta Spaces, http://inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.org/2016/reference-as-beta-space.

72. Lisa A. Ellis, ed., Teaching Reference Today: New Directions, Novel Approaches (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2016), 41–44, PDF e-book.

73. Tyckoson, “What Is the Best Model of Reference Service?” 190.

74. Kealin M. McCabe and James R. W. MacDonald, “Roaming Reference: Reinvigorating Reference through Point of Need Service,” Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research 6, no. 2 (2011): 2.

75. Pokémon Go, http://www.pokemongo.com.

76. “Pokemon Hunt in the Library,” Karissa in the Library: Learning and Thinking about Libraries, in Libraries (blog), July 14, 2016, https://karissamlis.wordpress.com/2016/07/14/pokemon-scavenger-hunt-in-the-library; Chad Mairn, “Technologies to Watch: 2017 Edition,” Slideshare presentation, posted January 2017, http://www.slideshare.net/chadmairn.

77. Hafuboti, “Libraries Are for Everyone,” Hafuboti (blog), posted February 2017, https://hafuboti.com/2017/02/02/libraries-are-for-everyone/.

78. Alex Mudd, Terri Summey, and Matt Upson, “It Takes a Village to Design a Course: Embedding a Librarian in Course Design,” Journal of Library and Information Services in Distance Learning 9, nos. 1–2 (2015): 71–72.

79. Maryska Connelly-Brown, Kim Mears, and Melissa E. Johnson, “Reference for the Remote User through Embedded Librarianship,” Reference Librarian 57, no. 1 (2016): 166, doi:10.1080/02763877.2015.1131658.

80. Cassandra Kvenlid et al., “Embedded Librarianship: Questions and Answers from Librarians in the Trenches,” Library Hi Tech News 33, no. 2 (2016): 8, doi:10.1108/LHTN-11-20150878.

81. Brian T. Sullivan and Karen L. Porter, “From One-Shot Sessions to Embedded Librarians: Lessons Learned over Seven Years of Successful Faculty-Librarian Collaboration,” College and Research Library News 77, no. 1 (2016), http://crln.acrl.org/index.php/crlnews/article/view/9431/10650.

82. Christopher Michael Rosser, and Tamie Willis, “Flip Over Research Instruction: Delivery, Assessment, and Feedback Strategies for ‘Flipped’ Library,” Theological Librarianship 9, no. 1 (2016): 22, https://theolib.atla.com/theolib/article/view/413.

83. San José State University, http://www.sjsu.edu.

84. Christina Mune et al., “Developing Adaptable Online Information Literacy Modules for a Learning Management System,” Journal of Library and Information Services in Distance Learning 9, nos. 1–2 (2015): 101–2, doi:10.1080/1533290X.2014.946351.

85. Lisa Peet, “Five Brand-New Jobs for Today’s Librarians: Careers 2016,” Library Journal, March 9, 2016, http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2016/03/careers/five-brand-new-jobs-for-todays-librarians-careers-2016.

86. Ibid.

87. Brian Kenney, “Where Reference Fits in the Modern Library: Today’s Reference User Wants Help Doing Things Rather Than Finding Things,” Publishers Weekly, September 21, 2015, http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/libraries/article/68019-for-future-reference.html.

88. R. David Lankes, The Atlas of Librarianship (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2011), 13–14.

89. John B. Horrigan, “Libraries at the Crossroads,” Pew Research Center, September 15, 2015, http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/09/15/libraries-at-the-crossroads.

90. American Library Association, “Standards for the 21st-Century Learner,” http://www.ala.org/aasl/standards/learning.

91. American Association of School Librarians, Standards for the 21st-Century Learner. American Association of School Librarians (2007), http://www.ala.org/aasl/sites/ala.org.aasl/files/content/guidelinesandstandards/learningstandards/AASL_Learning_Standards_2007.pdf.

92. Association of Colleges and Research Libraries, Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education, January 16, 2016, http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/issues/infolit/Framework_ILHE.pdf.

93. Smart Horizons Online Highschool, http://smarthorizonsonline.org/.

94. Phoenix Public Library, “College Depot,” http://www.phoenixpubliclibrary.org/collegedepot.

95. “Standards of Distance Learning Library Services,” Association of Colleges and Libraries, last modified June 2016, http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/guidelinesdistancelearning. See also Yu-Hui Chen and Mary K. Van Ullen, “Helping International Students Succeed Academically through Research Process and Plagiarism Workshops,” College & Research Libraries 72, no. 3 (2011): 209; Daniel Doss et al., “Assessing Domestic vs. International Student Perceptions and Attitudes of Plagiarism,” Journal of International Students 6, no. 2 (2016): 542–44; Mary Knowlton and Shawn Bryant Collins, “Foreign-Educated Graduate Nursing Students and Plagiarism,” Journal of Nursing Education 56, no. 4 (2017): 211–14, doi:10.3928/01484834-20170323-04.

96. Phoenix Public Library, “PhoenixWorks: Job Help Resources,” last modified 2016, http://www.phoenixpubliclibrary.org/phoenixworks/job-help-resources.

97. Madelynn Dickerson, “Beta Spaces as a Model for Reconstructing Reference Services in Libraries,” In the Library with the Lead Pipe (2016), http://inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.org/2016/reference-as-beta-space.

98. “Computers in Libraries: Chad Mairn,” Info Today, 2011, http://www.infotoday.com/cil2011/speakers.asp?speaker=ChadMairn.

99. Innovation Lab on the Seminole Campus, “Pinellas Comic and Maker Con and a Maker Boot Camp,” https://sandbox.spcollege.edu/index.php/2016/08/pinellas-comic-and-maker-con-at-spc-seminole/.

100. Chad Mairn, “Technologies to Watch: 2017 Edition,” Slideshare presentation, modified January 2017, http://www.slideshare.net/chadmairn.

101. Paterson, “After the Desk.”

11 Information Intermediation and Reference Services

NOTES