Association of College and Research Libraries 11th National Conference

Citation

Ruttenberg, J. and Moffett Padley, P. (2003), "Association of College and Research Libraries 11th National Conference", Library Hi Tech News, Vol. 20 No. 6. https://doi.org/10.1108/lhtn.2003.23920fac.003

Association of College and Research Libraries 11th National Conference

Judy Ruttenberg and Pamela Moffett Padley

The Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) held its 11th National Conference titled "Learning to make a difference" in Charlotte, North Carolina on April 10-13, 2003. The conference had almost 200 conference programs. The following are a few of the highlights from this well-attended, information packed conference.

ACRL Conference Program ReportJudy Ruttenberg

Library subject guides

In a contributed paper session, "Bringing the library to students: linking customized library resources through a course-management system", Loanne Snavely and Helen Smith from Penn State University presented a collaborative project between the Penn State University Libraries and several campus Information Technology units.

By working with IT specialists, librarians at Penn State are making customized subject guides to library resources available directly through the campus's chosen platform for course management, called ANGEL, on a course by course basis. The Penn State Libraries serve 83,000 students, more than half of who have been enrolled in at least one class that uses the ANGEL course management software. Librarians at PSU were critical of both the dearth of (often free) information resources provided in the standard ANGEL course template, as well as the quality of commercial databases with which the CMS software company contracted. That concern, coupled with a general reference and instructional mission to "bring the library to the students," fueled the ANGEL subject guide project.

The project goals were highly user-centered. The primary goal was to make high-quality library resources available to specific courses directly on course Web pages. This was accomplished by creating easy to use templates – requiring no HTML knowledge on the part of the librarians – which provided a standard look and feel for the subject guides across different courses. The project also included other conveniences for students, faculty and librarians alike – such as a provision to automate the creation of dynamic links to the courses' reserve reading through the libraries' OPAC. Finally, they were looking for a "one-click" environment that worked with a single authentication process for the variety of resources offered.

The PowerPoint slides for this innovative program can be found on the PSU Libraries' Web site at: www.personal.psu.edu/faculty/h/f/hfs1/acrl/ACRLpresentation_files/v3_document.htm/

Digital video

In the same contributed paper session, Susan Lessick and Heather Tunender from the University of California Irvine gave a presentation entitled "Digital video: the next step in reference and education."

Put in the context of UC Irvine's long-standing interest in electronic reference on one hand, and its previous exploration of desktop videoconferencing for reference in the mid-1990s on the other, the presentation outlined UCI's latest research and development project in this area: digital video. A Digital Video Research and Planning Team at the UCI Libraries was charged to "examine the feasibility and desirability of using digital video technology to enhance library services and work, examine key issues, and test, pilot, evaluate and make recommendations for (its) use in reference, user education, and meeting teleconferencing."

By addressing some of the limitations of "chat" reference, Lessick explained, digital video with full audio seems to the next logical step for electronic reference services. Combined with the power of collaborative reference software (UC Irvine uses 24/7 Reference Software), digital video will potentially enhance the reference experience with "visual and auditory clues" and at the same time "may reduce pressure [for librarians] to give rapid answers."

The team at UC Irvine plans to pilot the digital video service at the libraries' Science and Medical branches, explore different staffing models and implement a patron satisfaction survey for reference participants.

The PowerPoint slides for this presentation can be found on the UC Irvine Libraries' Web page at: http://projects.lib.uci.edu/digvid/acrl.pdf. The full paper, published in the conference proceedings, is available at: http://projects.lib.uci.edu/digvid/acrlpaper.pdf

Another ACRL conference program reportPamela Padley

In a panel session, "Making the online library environment accessible to all: strategies for change" Suzanne Byerley, Librarian/Assistant Professor, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, Bryna Coonin, Librarian/Assistant Professor, East Carolina University, Judith Dixon, Consumer Relations Officer, The Library of Congress and Axel Schmetzke, Librarian/Associate Professor, University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, all experts on library-related accessibility issues, discussed challenges, best practices, current technologies, the latest research and strategies for moving forward into the twenty-first century with a fully inclusive virtual information infrastructure.

Axel Schmetzke introduced the panel and highlighted numerous disabilities which libraries must consider, including print disabilities, blindness or vision impairment, color blindness, learning disabilities, mobility problems, and deafness or severe hearing impairment. The great challenge to librarians is to provide "access to all" in an increasingly complex electronic environment. For persons with disabilities, digitization offers unprecedented opportunities. Electronic access includes not just Web pages but also online catalogs, full-text databases, electronic reference works, e-books, e-journals, and e-reserves, to touch on a few.

Judith Dixon offered a demonstration of one of the two major screen readers available in the USA, Window-Eyes. The other is JAWS. She advised that libraries should find out what their constituents prefer in order to determine which will be the best to employ. Screen readers are constantly multi-tasking – always monitoring information going to the screen as well as input from the keyboard. Because they are resource-intensive Dixon advises to put adapting technologies on different computers rather than designating one workstation to provide all assistive programs.

Web page design can hinder or enhance the effectiveness of screen readers. Print size is irrelevant to a screen reader, for example, and screen readers completely ignore scrolling banners. Simple steps can greatly assist users of screen readers, such as ensuring that all Web pages have a single-pixel graphic allowing the user to "skip to main content" by skipping all other navigation links. The CNN Web site, for example, includes the option to turn off images in Browse and skip directly to the main content. Other users are not confused as they do not know the option exists.

In response to an audience question, Dixon advised that sighted librarians need not learn to use screen readers themselves. It is better during selection and testing to have a blind person use the software with a sighted person. The blind user can evaluate the software's usefulness and the sighted person can interpret text or graphics on the screen which the user might not know are there.

Dixon concluded by mentioning free and fee-based software, such as the free "Bobby" and fee-based Watchfire product, which will test for compliance with changes to Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. 794d) concerning Web accessibility. In total, 16 requirements speak to Web design, and software checkers aid in compliance.

Suzanne Byerley explored vendors' commitment to accessibility. Section 508, as amended by Congress in 1998 and effective June, 2001, now requires that vendors must provide accessible products if they want to sell to the Federal government. She sent a questionnaire to 14 vendors, asking if and to what degree they have implemented the 508 standards. Just 11 responded. Issues covered included methods of delivery and highlighted problems with PDF format which is totally inaccessible unless OCR software processes the scanned image first. TAG image format, or "tif", was discussed as an alternative to PDF, but some vendors indicated that they would wait until the problem is solved and will offer PDF in the meantime.

In an attempt to learn the extent to which sales representatives could talk about accessibility issues in general, Byerley and colleagues visited ten booths at a recent ALA conference – only two reps were conversant on the subject. Only one vendor, EBSCO, reported that its reps receive formal training. Most reps receive little or no training, or only the project managers received training. Project Muse indicated that it plans to hire an accessibility librarian. Regarding compliance testing, eight of the respondents did test using a variety of software, including JAWS, Web Eyes, IBM Home Page Reader, A-Prompt, and/or Bobby. Some vendors conducted usability testing with people with disabilities. OCLC, or example, responded that it solicits feedback from a blind support specialist who uses JAWS and from an accessibility team member with low vision. Eight respondents report that they have implemented 508 standards. Elsevier noted that it does not follow 508 requirements as there is no equivalent in The Netherlands. Byerley urged librarians to ask vendors to post their Section 508 compliance policy on their Web sites.

Bryna Coonin then offered an update on e-journal accessibility with regards to scientific research, noting that only a tiny proportion of advanced degrees are awarded to persons with disabilities. She discussed search interfaces, output formats, and the levels or severity of errors or noncompliance issues. Regarding output formats, HTML works best. Problems include difficulties with scientific and mathematical notation and with reading graphs, charts, maps, diagrams, and tactile graphics. Coonin concluded by asking what our role is as partners in the research process. Librarians should query vendors and their sales representatives, encourage publicly-stated policies, and encourage accessibility wording in licensing agreements.

Schmetzke brought the session to conclusion by highlighting the need for institutional online accessibility policies, awareness training, collaboration with IT and Disability Services on campus, vendor education, and the exercising of buying power. He also stated that anyone hired as a Web designer should be familiar with accessibility issues in general, including 508 and W3C. He charged everyone to check access at their home institutions, check library policies, and, if needed, to initiate a review. Finally, he made reference to AXSLIB-L, an electronic list dedicated to library accessibility issues (subscribe at: Listserv@maelston.stjohns.edu).

The archives of this and past ACRL National Conferences, with electronic versions of invited and contributed papers and information on the next biennial ACRL National Conference can be found at: www.ala.org/Content/NavigationMenu/ACRL/Events_and_Conferences/ACRL_National_Conferences.htm

Judy Ruttenberg(jruttenb@uci.edu) is a Research Librarian for African American Studies & Criminology, Law and Society at the University of California, Irvine Libraries, Irvine, California, USA andPamela Moffett Padley(padley@umbc.edu) is a Catalog Librarian at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, Baltimore, MD.