Search results

This paper aims to contribute to an understanding of current accessibility efforts and practice in librarianship by providing a broad overview of the information about services, resources and facilities on academic library accessibility pages. By compiling and analyzing data from 85 libraries, this study seeks to facilitate comparisons between current and past accessibility practice and to provide perspective on how libraries communicate to users about accessibility efforts across libraries.

The authors conducted a content analysis of 85 library accessibility pages from a sample population of 98 institutions, consisting of all members institutions of four US academic library consortia. Pages were coded for content elements regarding services, facilities, collections, staffing, assistive technologies and general information. Webpage features, architecture and accessibility/functionality were also assessed.

Libraries have broadened and strengthened efforts to publicize/provide services and resources to functionally diverse users. Pages most commonly prioritize information about assistive technologies, services and facilities. Pages varied greatly in size, complexity and detail, but public institutions' pages were more prevalent and informative than their private counterparts. Libraries can work to foreground accessibility pages and increase transparency and evidence of currency to improve communication to their users.

This study provides a large-scale content analysis of library accessibility webpages. It allows for comparison of the features and information most commonly featured on these important online points of service.

Leadership development programs have become widespread in higher education; over 1500 different programs had been registered with the International Leadership Association as of 2012 (Owen, 2012). Given the prevalence of these programs and the substantial institutional investments they require, examination of their purported impacts is a valid area of investigation. Using the used Multi-Institute Study of Leadership, the current study explored the impact of experiential development programming on two of the instrument’s key outcome variables, resilience and self-efficacy. Results found a significant positive relationship between leadership development programs and self-efficacy, but not for resilience. Additional analyses found that other experiential activities (e.g., on-campus jobs, study abroad, etc.) had essentially the same (significant) impact on self-efficacy as did intentionally leadership development ones. Interpretations and implications are discussed.