I suspect they apply universally to research libraries. Mitchell readers also expressed concerns that reading room staff were not keeping up with new disciplinary approaches to scholarship and research. I'm fairly certain that if Ann Curthoys engaged most of our staff in a conversation about the genealogical approach to historical research she would be directed to the Lower Ground floor to the Newspaper and Microform reading room where most of our family history researchers may be found. We know who Foucault is, but we may not always be sufficiently aware of the implications of Foucauldian-thinking for our collections and services. The recent research at both the Mitchell Library and the National Library also reveals that readers are very concerned about improved communication between libraries and our clients.
Libraries spend a lot of effort endeavouring to communicate with users.
The National Library is littered with colourful pieces of corporate communication. We have a most comprehensive and I think very impressive web site. I suspect our location in the national capital creates added obstacles. Unless you are fortunate to be an ACT resident, I imagine research visits to the National Library are an increasingly infrequent luxury for many historians in locations more distant from Canberra. And the constraints on time which can be spent in libraries and the pressures on library staff which are all too obvious to readers inhibit the more extended conversations and interactions between librarians and readers which once occurred.