Jenny Bossaller & Denice Adkins University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA Reference Librarians and LIS Students: Contrasting Views of Reference Source Training and Experience Abstract: An examination of students’ and practitioners’ attitudes towards, and uses of, various reference sources. Students found print sources to be educational, but use of print is waning. Many practitioners said learning specific sources was best done on the job, and felt new hires were better prepared to use online sources. 1. Introduction Our conception of the use of physical space in libraries, and especially the reference area, has undergone a fundamental change in recent years. Where books previously made a large footprint in the reference section, many libraries have shifted to “people space”--creating areas for group work, computers, or common space for study and socializing (Wolfe, Naylor and Druecke, 2010). Some libraries have almost completely shifted to an online format for their reference sources, using a combination of subscription databases and free Internet sources. Reference models have made use of the shift to online access, as well--online reference (such as chat) has become increasingly common, placing more importance still on online sources (Tyckoson, 2011). However, this research found that reference work is often still done in a traditional manner, with print sources and live people. Because of the changing reference environment, there have been several recent studies that have discussed the issue of education for future reference librarians--what should we be teaching our students in the classroom in order to help them get jobs, and make contributions to the field? Adkins and Erdelez (2006) surveyed reference instructors to determine how they divide their instruction between print and online reference sources. O’Connor (2011) examined syllabi of reference classes in order to determine whether changes in practice are reflected in LIS education. This research began as a pedagogical problem--how to teach, or whether to teach, print resources in this new reference landscape, using a new pedagogical model (from in-person to largely online). We quickly realized, though, that the underlying issue goes beyond which sources to teach, to what was most important for students to learn in class and what they needed to know on the job. This study, therefore, was conducted in order to gain the viewpoints of multiple groups of stakeholders whose views had not been recorded. Reviewing the literature, we found no studies that systematically examine practitioners’ opinions about student preparation, nor any studies regarding students’ impressions of course requirements. (We did, of course, find anecdotal accounts on the inappropriateness of LIS education and its lack of connection to the profession, notably in blogs). Most analysis of the reference curriculum has been done by LIS educators. If educators want to meaningfully examine their course requirements, it