University of Denver

Library & Information Science

Course Syllabus

LIS 4060 Reference

3 Quarter Hours

Quarter:

Winter 2014; January 9 - March 6

Schedule:

Thursdays  7:00 - 9:20 PM

Place:

Ruffatto Hall Room 304

Instructor:

Christopher C. Brown, Penrose Library, Reference Technology Integration Librarian

Phone: (303) 871-3404 (work - voicemail); (303) 359-7460 (cell)

E-mail: cbrown@du.edu

Class Web Page:

http://www.du.edu/~cbrown/lis4060/

Course Description:

Information resources include a number of different kinds of reference materials in a wide variety of formats. These include guidebooks, encyclopedias and dictionaries, indexes and abstracts, handbooks, bibliographies, biographical finding tools and biographies, data sets and much more. Many of these resources are available on-line, as well as in print and other digital formats. This course will help students identify and evaluate the most likely resources for information queries in particular settings. It will also provide the opportunity to find answers to real research questions. The course will cover the primary resources for the broad disciplines of business, humanities, sciences, social sciences and government publications in print and electronic formats. Class exercises will reflect the multidisciplinary and multicultural interests and characteristics of library users. (Prerequisites: none; Recommended: LIS 4000, LIS 4011).

Course Objectives

The course objectives as stated are intended to serve as a framework for the course content. My responsibility is to provide the opportunities and guidance for achievement of these objectives. These opportunities will be found in class meetings and exercises, readings, assignments, and exams. Upon completion of this course, you should be able to:

1. Identify, evaluate, select, and use a variety of reference sources;
2. Discuss philosophy and trends of reference service in libraries;
3. Analyze issues related to reference sources and services in the print and electronic environment and in a variety of community settings; and,
4. Identify and discuss issues related to evaluation of reference resources and services.

Because LIS 4011 is a recommended and not required prerequisite, I will spend a relatively small amount of time on objective on search strategies. Objective 1 is a much deeper development of reference source knowledge than what you may have experienced in LIS 4011.

Textbooks (required)

The required texts for this course are:

Cassell, Kay Ann, and Uma Hiremath. 2011. Reference and Information Services in the 21st Century: An Introduction. 2nd rev. ed. New York: Neal-Schuman.

Keeran, Peggy, et al. 2007. Research within the Disciplines: Foundations for Reference and Library Instruction. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow. (This book is beting revised, so we will not use the old edition any longer).

Additional readings are listed in the schedule below. Permanent URLs are links to full-text articles available in databases via Penrose Library.

   

Assignments:

This class is intended to be thought-provoking and will allow you to interact with each other. It will also allow me to see if you are tracking with the topics.

Library Visits Report

You are to visit two libraries to observe reference models and interactions. The libraries may NOT be libraries where you currently work or volunteer. Ideally they should be of different types (academic, public, law, medical, special, etc.). You may chose to do unobtrusive observation of reference services, or you may chose to interview reference staff to inquire about the types of services they provide and their philosophy of reference. You may discuss reference collections, reference services, reference staffing, policies, or other ideas relevant to reference services. You will do two reports: a written report (covering two libraries) and a video report (covering the same two libraries). You may use your own video camera, or Flip cameras may be borrowed for a 24-hour period from the University Library circulation desk. There are a limited number of cameras available, so don't all wait until the last minute to borrow them.

You will then write up the results of your visits in a brief paper (3-5 pages).

Turn in the written report on Blackboard. Keep the video report on a flash memory stick or online in a non-public Web site for showing in class.

Reference Subject Guide You will prepare a reference subject guide on a specific subject area. This guide must include all formats that would be found in a reference collection (print, online databases, e-books, etc.). Grading will be based on selection of reference resources, arrangement of resources, and quality and originality of annotations. WARNING: This is not just a guide of nice Web pages on a topic. You are being graded on selection of reference resources.
To see examples of subject guides you can visit Springshare's Libguides Web site: http://www.springshare.com/libguides/reviews.html
Penrose Library's Libguides: http://libguides.du.edu/browse.php
Library School Libguides: http://libraryschool.campusguides.com/
Libguides Best Practices: http://bestof.libguides.com/bestpractices
Final Exam

Take home exam. The exam will be given out during class in week 9, and will be due at the beginning of class in week 10. The take home exam involves creating responses to email reference questions.

Remember, when answering email questions on homework, you must give many solutions to the problem. This about the many types of resources that you could recommend: books, encyclopedias, articles, statistical sources, primary sources, etc.

Example reference responses:
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10

Note:

This syllabus is subject to change based on the needs of the learning environment.

Disability Services If you have a disability protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and need to request accommodations, please make an appointment with the Disability Services Program (DSP); (303) 871-2455 / 2278 / 7432; located in The Center below the bookstore in Driscoll South.

Grading Criteria:

Library visits report and other homework assignments: 50%

Reference Subject Guide: 25%

Final Exam: 25%

Grading Scale:

A: 4.0 = 93-100
A-: 3.7 = 90-92
B+: 3.3 = 87-89
B: 3.0 = 83-86
B-: 2.7 = 80-82
C+: 2.3 = 77-79
C: 2.0 = 73-76
C-: 1.7 = 70-72
D+: 1.3 = 67-69
D: 1.0 = 63-66
D-: 0.7 = 60-62
F: 0.0 = 59 & below

Tentative Class Schedule -- Subject to Change

Date

Topic

Assignments

Week 1 Jan. 9

Reference Intro.

Notes

 

Week 2 Jan. 16

Reference Sources I

Tour of AAC Reference Area

Notes

Read Cassell and Hiremath ch.1-3

Assignment 1 Due

Week 3 Jan. 23

Reference Sources II

Notes

Read Cassell and Hiremath ch. 4-6

Read Griffey, Jason. "Chapter 2: The Rise of the Tablet." Library Technology Reports 48, no. 3 (2012): 7-13. Link.

Read Hanson, Cody W. "Chapter 1: Why Worry about Mobile?" Library Technology Reports 47, no. 2 (2011): 5-10. Link.

Assignment 2 Due

Week 4 Jan. 30

Reference Ethics

Reference Collection Development

Notes

Read Cassell and Hiremath ch. 7-11

Read Magi, Trina. "A Fresh Look at Privacy—Why Does It Matter, Who Cares, and What Should Librarians Do about It?." Indiana Libraries 32, no. 1 (2013). Link.

Read: Gibson, Craig, and Meris Mandernach. "Reference Service at an Inflection Point: Transformations in Academic Libraries." In Imagine, Innovate, Inspire: The Proceedings of the ACRL 2013 Conference in Indianapolis, Indiana, April 10-13, 2013. ACRL, 2013. Link.

Read Laura Saunders, and Mary Jordan. 2013. Significantly different?: Reference services competencies in public and academic libraries. Reference & User Services Quarterly 52 (3): 216.  Link.

Assignment 3 Due


Week 5 Feb. 6

Reference Interview

Notes


Read Cassell and Hiremath, ch. 13-16

Read  Shachaf, Pnina. "The paradox of expertise: is the Wikipedia Reference Desk as good as your library?" Journal of Documentation 65, no. 6 (2009): 977-996. Link.

Read Barratt, Caroline Cason, Phoebe Acheson, and Emily Luken. "Reference models in the electronic library: The Miller Learning Center at the University of Georgia." Reference Services Review 38, no. 1 (2010): 44-56. Link.

Read Arndt, Theresa S. "Reference service without the desk." Reference services review 38, no. 1 (2010): 71-80. Link.

Read Cogill, Allison A., Louise Feldman, and A. Robin Bowles. Virtual Reference Interviewing and Neutral Questioning. IN Technology in Libraries: Essays in Honor of Anne Grodzins Lipow. Edited and Published by Roy Tennant. Link.

Assignment 4 Due

Library Visits Report Due

 
Week 6 Feb. 13

Reference Models

Notes

Read Cassel and Hiremath, ch. 18-19

Arndt, Theresa T. S. "Reference Service without the Desk." Reference Services Review 38, no. 1 (2010): 71-80. Link.

Meyer, Erin Feb. 27E., Carrie Forbes, and Jenny Bowers. "The Research Center: Creating an Environment for Interactive Research Consultations." Reference Services Review 38, no. 1 (2010): 57-70. Link.

Holmes, Claire and Lisa Woznicki. "Librarians at Your Doorstep." College & Research Libraries News 71, no. 11 (2010): 582-585, http://crln.acrl.org/content/71/11/582.full.pdf+html.

Assignment 5 Due
Week 7 Feb. 20

Virtual Reference

Evaluating Reference Resources

Notes

Read Cassel and Hiremath, ch. 17

Read Ghasri, Atefeh Noorizadeh. "Chat reference: Training and competencies for librarians." (2009). Link.

Assignment 6 Due

Week 8 Feb. 27

Review

Notes

Reference Subject Guides Due

Final exam,take home handed out (respond to email questions)

Week 9 Mar. 6

Evaluation, Tie up loose ends
Notes

 Final exam due (hand in at beginning of class)

All older assignments due by 11:00 PM March 6 - NO EXCEPTIONS

Week 10 Mar. 13

NO CLASS

 

Grading Rubric for Assignments (note, this applies particularly  to reference research questions).

Criterion

Exemplary (4)

Good (3)

Acceptable (2)

Unacceptable (1)

Research

Provides at least three distinct search strategies for each question

Utilizes various library resources (print and online); demonstrates resourcefulness and knowledge of library and external resources

 

Provides three search strategies for each question

Utilizes various library resources (print and online); demonstrates knowledge of library and external resources

Provides search strategies for each question; some may be repetitive

Utilizes library resources, but dies not demonstrate resourcefulness in selection of library or external resources

Does not provide three search strategies for each question

Does not demonstrate knowledge of library and/or external resources

 

Comprehensibility

Addresses and answers each question; provides answers for possible interpretations of question

 

Provides detailed instructions for locating and using library resources

 

 

Logical, well organized, and uses appropriate screen-shots

Addresses and answers each question

 

 

 

 

Provides detailed instructions for locating and using library resources

 

 

Fairly logical and well organized; uses screen shots

Addresses each question; may not completely answer all questions thoroughly

 

 

Provides instructions for locating and using library resources that are somewhat vague

 

Somewhat organized and  logical answers; needs screen shots to demonstrate

Does not adequately address each question; answers are not complete or relevant

 

 

Instructions for locating library resources are confusing or incomplete

 

Unorganized and missing screen shots to demonstrate instructions

Mechanics

Correctly cites library resources

 

Links and instructions are correct and complete

 

 

Correctly cites library resources

 

Links and instructions are correct and mostly complete

 

Cites most library resources appropriately

 

Some links or instructions are correct and/or complete

Does not correctly cite library resources

 

Links and instructions are incomplete or incorrect

The University Honor Code

All members of the University community are entrusted with the responsibility of observing certain ethical goals and values as they relate to academic integrity. Essential to the fundamental purpose of the University is the commitment to the principles of truth and honesty. The Honor Code is designed so that responsibility for upholding these principles lies with the individual as well as the entire community.

The Honor Code fosters and advances an environment of ethical conduct in the academic community of the University, the foundation of which includes the pursuit of academic honesty and integrity. Through an atmosphere of mutual respect we enhance the value of our education and bring forth the highest standard of academic excellence. Members of the University community, including students, faculty, staff, administrators and trustees, must not commit any intentional misrepresentation or deception in academic or professional matters.
All members of the University community are entrusted with the responsibility of observing certain ethical goals and values as they relate to academic integrity. Essential to the fundamental purpose of the University is the commitment to the principles of truth and honesty. The Honor Code is designed so that responsibility for upholding these principles lies with the individual as well as the entire community.

The Honor Code fosters and advances an environment of ethical conduct in the academic community of the University, the foundation of which includes the pursuit of academic honesty and integrity. Through an atmosphere of mutual respect we enhance the value of our education and bring forth the highest standard of academic excellence. Members of the University community, including students, faculty, staff, administrators and trustees, must not commit any intentional misrepresentation or deception in academic or professional matters.

RATIONALE. The Code was developed following discussions among a broad range of constituencies within the University encompassing students, faculty, staff, administrators, and trustees. The Honor Code is a living document that will evolve with time. In order to better foster and advance an environment of ethical conduct in the academic community of the University both substantive requirements and enforcement procedures may be amended by the University to reflect experience gained from its implementation.
AUTHORITY. Any modification of the Honor Code, other than to the procedures governing its enforcement, must be approved by the Board of Trustees upon recommendation from the Provost. Modifications and variations in procedures governing enforcement of the Code, including the use of alternative procedures in specific context as mandated by federal or state law, are subject to the approval of the Provost. In addition, upon recommendation from a Dean or the Faculty Senate, the Provost, in his or her sole discretion, may permit individual units or divisions of the University to adopt and implement area-specific descriptions of conduct violative of the Honor Code, provided that such descriptions do not authorize or condone conduct prohibited by, or inconsistent with, the Code.
ENFORCEMENT. The University of Denver Honor Code Procedures Governing Students shall govern and be followed in the case of any student at the University who is accused of violating the Honor Code. The University’s Faculty Personnel Guidelines Relating to Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure shall govern and be followed in the case of any faculty member who is accused of violating the Honor Code. The University’s Employee Handbook of Personnel Guidelines & Procedures shall govern and be followed in the case of any non-faculty employee who is accused of violating the Honor Code. The By-Laws, or other Board policies, of Colorado Seminary or the University of Denver shall govern and be followed in the case of any trustee who is accused of violating the Honor Code. Any conflict or dispute concerning which procedure governs in the enforcement of this Honor Code shall be resolved by the Provost, or, in the case of the trustees, by the Board of Trustees.