Readers Advisory Servies: How to Help Users Find A "Good Book"

Beginning this chapter, I honestly thought I could sort of blow it off. I've always believed that the best way to recommend a literary work to someone else is to have the most extensive personal knowledge of the literature your library offers as humanly possible. It was one of the driving reasons behind me deciding on a BA in English. It's one of the reasons I believe in doing as much diverse reading now as I did while I was in school. I really like to feel like I can fairly recommend something to someone if I have immediate knowledge of that work or, at least, the author. I realized as soon as I got into this chapter that simply having knowledge of the author means I place a lot of assumptions on that author's body of work which aren't necessarily true. For example, they could genre hop without my knowledge. Unsure of what I mean? Take Susanne Finnamore for example. She's written two books about marriage and pregnancy and recently published a book on divorce. One important tidbit I could've easily missed: this last book is autobiographical and thus non-fiction, unlike her previous works.

Chelton also gives a rundown of how a library can be more effective suggesting (not recommending) selections for patrons. I tried to grade the library I work at in my mind while reading through some key paragraphs on display, circulation, and high traffic areas, to name a few. One area that stood out to me where I was surprised we did well: the end of stacks areas. We've utilized that space to the fullest. Instead of placing "Read" posters at the end of each stack, we have placed computers and displays. I often see these computers being used and think this is a great location for them because when patrons are searching for a book they know will be in the stacks, they tend to head there first before looking up exactly what number it may be.

One area of improvement we could stand to work on that Chelton mentions: We have no description as to what kind of materials are shelved between say, 0.01-100. Those would absolutely help with patrons searches and save librarian time. It would also be browser friendly, allowing patrons to find things they may enjoy without specifically seeking them out through a computer system or librarian. I often find the items I enjoy the most are the ones I "stumble" upon. If that process were made easier, it could happen more often. This could increase circulation numbers in the long run.

A picture of our teen lab, where computers are placed at the ends of rows to conserve and maximize space.