Mary Kickham-Samy Reference Renaissance Conference Denver, CO August 4, 2008. Balance of Power and Negotiation of Meaning in Virtual Reference Learning Environments. Community of Inquiry Model: by Garrison, Anderson,& Archer. Literature Review.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Reference Renaissance Conference
August 4, 2008
Balance of Power and Negotiation of Meaning in Virtual Reference Learning Environments
VR Librarian hesitating to instruct (Lee, 2004)
Students willing to be instructed (Desai and Graves, 2006)
92% - receptive
8% - “unreachable”
the activities and behaviors of the student and the librarian in the negotiation of questions and answers in a virtual reference session.
Is there parity of participation on the part of the librarian and the student?
Does the number of questions asked during a session by the librarian, the student, or both parties combined affect the length of the transaction?
Does the intensity of the student- librarian engagement predict the librarian’s assessment of the quality of the session?
Analyses of descriptive statistics
Scatter plots, and
Tests for correlations and predictions.
How do the librarian and the student work together to answer research questions in virtual reference environments?
An analysis of the way language confers power on some members of society and controls other members.
Student: Thank you
Shared Discourse Model, Shared Vocabulary:
The librarian has an agenda. She tells the student what search terms and what databases to use. She also finds articles for the student.
After the librarian finds the answer, a relevant article, she relinquishes power to the student.
A student asks which term is more correct?
Two Discourse Models:
Students and librarians aligning their discourse models to create a new dynamic Virtual Reference Discourse Model
Desai, C.M. & Graves, S.J. (2006). Instruction via instant messaging reference: What's happening? The Electronic Library, 24(2), 174-189.
Doherty, J. J. & Ketchner, K. (2005). Empowering the intentional learner: A critical theory for information literacy instruction. Library Philosophy and Practice, 8(1), n.p.
Ellis, L. A. (2004). Approaches to teaching through digital reference. Reference Services Review, 32(2), 103-119.
Gee, J.P. (2005). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis (2nd.). New York: Routledge.
Gee, J.P. (2008). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideologies in discourses (3rd.). New York: Routledge.
Lee, I. J. (2004). Do virtual reference librarians dream of digital reference questions?: A qualitative and quantitative analysis of email and chat reference. Australian Academic and Research Libraries, 35(2), 95-110.
Ward, D. (2003). Measuring the completeness of reference transactions in online chats. Reference and User Services Quarterly, 44(1), 46-52.
Westbrook, L. Virtual reference training: The second generation. College & Research Libraries, 67(3), 249-59.
Woodward, B.S. (2005). One-on-one instruction: from the reference desk to online chat. . Reference and User Services Quarterly, 44(3), 203-209.