It was like it was yesterday....

While I was researching topics for the Reference Services in Public Libraries discussion group, I came upon an article that discussed relevancy, sharing resources across library networks, centralized v. decentralized reference, increased use of para-professionals in reference, and maintaining a better catalog.

It's a very timely piece written by Geraldine B. King, entitled: Current Trends in Reference Service in Public Libraries. The most interesting thing is that it was written in 1983. (Library Trends, v31 n3 p447-56 Win 1983)

What does this say about our profession? It's been 26 years since this article was published and yet these issues are the thorn in our side.
We still haven't quite hit the mark with a catalog that is intuitive and not bogged down by search terms that even leave me scratching my head. Example: If one wants to learn how to speak Spanish, Greek, French or some other foreign language, one would use the search terms: " spanish language self instruction " and substitute the other language instead of spanish to find those materials.

It troubles me to say this but it's not our websites that we need to fix, it's our catalogs. However, does it really matter anymore? How can we earn back the public's trust in us to find information easily, place items on reserve, etc.? Are we too far gone and everyone's going to Google and Wikipedia?

Not to turn on a dime from my previous paragraph, I still think we need to fix our websites. Our databases are buried. These are things that could be immensely useful for our patrons. We spend thousands of dollars on these resources. We should make information easier to find!

I don't mean to be Little Ms. Negativity here. I want our users to have a welcoming experience. I want our users to be able to find the things they want and come back again for more. Our users need this. We, as a profession, need to do this.

Even though my library revamped parts of the Cleveland Heights-University Heights Public Library website last year, I want to change more. I'm going to invite members of the community to discuss their thoughts on our website, especially our Do Research page. (I wasn't keen on linking to it because I find it so ghastly but if others can provide insights/criticisms, I'm open.) I'd still prefer a better working catalog first.

These statements are not new. While we step into virtual realms and enter social networking environments, are we neglecting some of our most basic needs that are the platforms of our institution? I don't hold the catalog sacred. Yet, we need to seek out better catalog interface systems. We can't just make them for librarians anymore.