首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology >Shared Values, New Vision: Collaboration and Communities of Practice in Virtual Reference and SQA
【24h】

Shared Values, New Vision: Collaboration and Communities of Practice in Virtual Reference and SQA

机译:共同的价值观,新视野:虚拟参考和SQA中的协作和实践社区

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

This investigation of new approaches to improving collaboration, user/librarian experiences, and sustainability for virtual reference services (VRS) reports findings from a grant project titled "Cyber Synergy: Seeking Sustainability between Virtual Reference and Social Q&A Sites" (Radford, Connaway, & Shah, 2011-2014). Indepth telephone interviews with 50 VRS librarians included questions on collaboration, referral practices, and attitudes toward Social Question and Answer (SQA) services using the Critical Incident Technique (Flanagan, 1954). The Community of Practice (CoP) (Wenger, 1998; Davies, 2005) framework was found to be a useful conceptualization for understanding VRS professionals' approaches to their work. Findings indicate that participants usually refer questions from outside of their area of expertise to other librarians, but occasionally refer them to nonlibrarian experts. These referrals are made possible because participants believe that other VRS librarians are qualified and willing collaborators. Barriers to collaboration include not knowing appropriate librarians/experts for referral, inability to verify credentials, and perceived unwillingness to collaborate. Facilitators to collaboration include knowledge of appropriate collaborators who are qualified and willingness to refer. Answers from SQA services were perceived as less objective and authoritative, but participants were open to collaborating with nonlibrarian experts with confirmation of professional expertise or extensive knowledge.
机译:这项旨在改善虚拟参考服务(VRS)协作,用户/图书馆员体验和可持续性的新方法的调查报告了一项名为“网络协同:寻求虚拟参考与社会问答站点之间的可持续性”(Radford,Connaway和沙阿(2011-2014)。对50名VRS图书馆员的深入电话采访包括有关协作,转诊实践以及使用关键事件技术对社会问答(SQA)服务的态度的问题(Flanagan,1954年)。实践社区(CoP)(Wenger,1998; Davies,2005)框架被认为是理解VRS专业人士工作方式的有用概念。调查结果表明,参与者通常会将其专业领域之外的问题转介给其他图书馆员,但偶尔会将其转介给非图书馆员。之所以可以进行这些转介,是因为参与者相信其他VRS图书馆员是合格且愿意的合作者。合作的障碍包括不认识合适的图书馆员/专家进行推荐,无法验证证书以及不愿意合作。协作的促进者包括适当的协作者的知识,这些协作者是合格的并且愿意推荐。 SQA服务的回答被认为不太客观和权威,但是参与者可以与非图书馆专家进行合作,并确认其专业知识或丰富的知识。

著录项

  • 来源
  • 作者单位

    School of Communication and Information, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ 08901;

    OCLC Research, Dublin, OH 43017;

    School of Communication and Information, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ 08901;

    School of Communication and Information, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ 08901;

    School of Communication and Information, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ 08901;

    Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL 61820;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号