A convergence of forces, including budget cuts and reduced staffing, automation, and patrons “browsing” online when the library is actually closed, means that readers’ advisory can’t always be a face to face conversation. Some libraries are using forms to create “personal shopper” style recommendations for readers. Others are blogging or posting reviews in local media and on their websites, casting a wide net with recommendations.
My public library tested NoveList Select for our catalog and I found that it worked pretty well. It connects Ebscohost’s NoveList tool, which recommends books when you input a title, author, or series, to the library’s catalog so that when a patron searches for a book, other recommended titles from your collection appear at the bottom of the page. NoveList says “The recommendations are created by professional librarians who understand readers’ advisory.” So it’s automated from the patron’s point of view, but a human being decides what to suggest.
Chelmsford Public Library in Massachusetts is in the middle of a very cool project linking their children’s staff’s readers’ advisory to their catalog and even to their physical collection with QR codes. You should read Brian Herzog’s post at Swiss Army Librarian for the technical details. But the executive summary is that their read-alike lists, which are something most libraries create for their patrons, are integrated into the library’s website and catalog, and the staff are linking them all to QR codes. They’re printing stickers and putting them in the books themselves so when a reader gets to the end of a book, they can immediately find recommendations for their next read.
Do you know of another example of best-of-both-worlds readers’ advisory that combines human brainpower (rather than computer algorithms) to make reading recommendations but harnesses technology to get these suggestions into readers’ hands? Comment below and share your thoughts.