If It’s Not on the Library Website, Does It Really Exist?
Reflecting on Secondary Research into Personal Librarian Programs in Medical Libraries
Submitted by: Natasha Williams
In 2022, I published my first research article in JMLA on the existence of personal librarian programs in academic health sciences and medical libraries [1], a study I undertook as a fellow in MLA’s Research Training Institute’s inaugural cohort. Data for the study was gathered via a survey sent out to 2,882 potential participants. Ultimately, 12 libraries with such a program were identified from 38 completed responses, their services and other how-to details documented so that readers could take this information into account if they wanted to start one at their institution. While a good first attempt to explore this topic, the study itself had two key limitations: 1) low-response rates for the survey, and 2) ineffective recruitment of volunteers to complete optional follow-up interviews to complement the survey responses. Thus, a follow-up study came to mind where perhaps more information could be gleaned by my simply visiting the websites of academic health sciences libraries identified via AAHSL participation instead, cutting out the two-headed middleman of lost recruitment emails and survey fatigue. In this study, a personal librarian program would count as being “offered” if a webpage specific to a personal librarian program existed on the library website or if references to a personal librarian service are mentioned anywhere on the library website. Once again, services performed by personal librarians would be documented when available. With any luck, a primary contact for each program would also be identified and contacted to respond to a questionnaire regarding their program’s implementation.
Round two revealed information that I was not expecting. While it did manage to identify two additional personal librarian programs that were not previously captured during the initial study, it also managed to highlight something that the study methods had not taken into account. Even among the libraries originally identified in the original study, only three made mention of their personal librarian program as a service somewhere on their library website. Did this mean that there were more programs out there, but the study methods were ineffective for revealing them, or was it really the case that there are a limited number of programs in place? I couldn’t help but find the results to be unsatisfyingly inconclusive.
Website crawling did seem like a foolproof plan, though in hindsight, what is a library website anyway and who is it truly for? The users? The library team? Library website discourse has been in existence for years, raising questions that acknowledge how difficult it is to build a library website that meets all user needs while simultaneously trying to conform to wider institutional standards [2] and compete against Google-style search behaviors [3]. It is not an easy task to decide what receives prime real estate and what can be communicated in other ways. But if a service doesn’t make the cut on the website, is its importance diminished in some way?
Personal librarian programs are perhaps only as useful as they are utilized, which we can probably agree is true for many other library services or programs. That said, I’ve found myself reflecting on some possible reasons for their conspicuous absence from these websites.
From my prior research and echoed in the literature [4, 5], across the board, one of the key service categories provided by personal librarian programs is assistance with research. From helping with literature searches to making journal recommendations as students pursue getting published, services performed by most personal librarians are in close proximity to what could be considered research services. That being the case, perhaps it makes more sense to broadly advertise the availability of research services and everything that could fall under that umbrella on the library website due to its applicability to a wide range of library patrons instead of duplicating this information on a separate page dedicated to a program designed just for students.
Further, considering the program itself, is a personal librarian program truly a standalone service, or simply an internal mechanism for delivering other services? The designation might ultimately depend on the function and individual goals of each personal librarian program and thus help determine whether to specifically create website space for it. At our library – which does make a point of making our program visible on the library website – it’s a little of both. From a connection and relationship-building standpoint, the program was put into place to enable our students to experience more longitudinal interactions with our library, the “service” being direct access to one librarian with whom a student can continue to work and build continuity throughout their medical school journey. At the same time, though, the program has managed to become an effective vehicle for providing services and delivering instruction that in different circumstances might have otherwise fallen under the purview of one specific librarian. Services such as reviewing personal statements for residency applications or participating in curricular activities that relate to the use of evidence-based medicine resources for patient care come to mind as services that could still be provided outside of the structure of a personal librarian program.
It may also simply be that our websites more often now prioritize access to information and resources over services. A library could not be faulted for giving ample website space to features and resources that they know their patrons interact with most frequently. Links to frequently used databases and access to powerful OneSearch-style search boxes may experience levels of high use such that the library website functions as more of a gateway connecting patrons to the unique resources only a library can provide, such that services outside of larger service umbrellas like research can be communicated in other ways (via newsletters, emails, or even embedded within a learning management system for instance).
Post-reflection, I find myself much less disappointed in the outcome of what was meant to be my second foray as a librarian-researcher into an individual research project. While the project’s methods didn’t entirely yield their intended results, as with all “failures” there was still quite a bit to be learned from the experience, and arguably what I did learn helped me to think about personal librarian programs and their purpose in a more thoughtful way. That said, it’s probably “back to the drawing board” if I hope to discover more about these programs in academic health sciences libraries.
References
- Williams NA. Personal librarian programs in medical and academic health sciences libraries: A preliminary study. J Med Libr Assoc. 2022;110(1):87-96. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2022.1290.
- Jones SL, Leonard K. Library homepage design at smaller bachelor of arts institutions. Journal of Web Librarianship. 2011;5(1):24-45. doi: 10.1080/19322909.2011.546216.
- Swanson TA, Green J. Why we are not google: Lessons from a library web site usability study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2011;37(3):222-229. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2011.02.014.
- Moats J. Development and implementation of the personal librarian concept. In: Moniz R, Moats J, editors. The personal librarian : Enhancing the student experience. Chicago, IL: American Library Association; 2014. p. 18-29.
- Eshleman J. Information literacy and the personal librarian. In: Moniz R, Moats J, editors. The personal librarian: Enhancing the student experience. Chicago, IL: American Library Association; 2014. p. 30-44.