No abstract

Acceptable Use Policies (AUPs) are documents stating the limitations users must agree to when first accessing information and communications technologies (ICTs) in organisations, such as employers, educational institutions and public libraries. AUPs lay out the parameters of acceptable use expected of someone accessing the ICT services provided, and should state in clear and understandable terms what behaviours will attract sanctions, both legal and in terms of restricting future access. Utilising a range of standard readability tests used to measure how understandable documents are, the paper investigates how readable the AUPs presented to public library patrons in the UK are in practice. Of the 206 AUPs in use across the local government departments who manage public library services 200 were obtained and subjected to a range of readability testing procedures. Four readability tests were used for analysis: the Flesch Reading Ease, the Coleman-Liau Index, the Gunning Fog Index and the SMOG Grade. Results for all four readability tests administered on all AUPs raise significant questions. For the Flesch Reading Ease score only 5.5% of AUPs scored at the standard readability level or higher (60+), and 8% scored at a very high level of difficulty akin to a piece of scientific writing. Similarly, for SMOG, only 7.5% of the 200 AUPs scored at the recommended level of 10. Likewise, very few AUPs scored at levels recommended for a general audience with either the Gunning Fog Index (11.5%) or the Coleman-Liau Index (2%). With such variability in readability, the fitness for purpose of the average AUP as a contract patrons must agree to can be called into question. This paper presents the first ever analysis of the readability of library AUPs in the literature. Recommendations are made as to how public library services may improve this aspect of practice.

This paper reports the results of a survey undertaken in December 2021 and January 2022 related to public library staff in the United Kingdom and their experiences of COVID-19, exploring the lockdowns that were enabled, the subsequent re-openings, their mental health and their views for the future of the service post-COVID-19. Over 200 responses were received, and the findings indicate a range of views. The importance of the library as a community resource is evident in the comments from staff, and their observations of patrons on library re-openings. Findings also indicate concern for the future of the library service, and fear that new technologies like e-books may be seen as adequate replacements for the traditional library service. Findings also indicate staff face stress and mental health issues in terms of dealing with patrons while the virus remains highly prevalent.

This study reports on a series of focus groups of UK public library users to understand how the forced closure of UK libraries caused by the COVID pandemic and the increased use of replacement digital services affected their library use. We specifically focus on digital exclusion and whether this increased as the result of physical library services being inaccessible. We show that although digital exclusion did increase as the result of library closures, digital exclusion was not the best way to characterise our participants’ experiences and digital choices was a more suitable concept. We show how public library users adapted to library closures, how they coped with these closures, and how they intend to use library services in the future. Our participants reported different patterns of use of digital and physical library services, had different experiences of these two modes of library service, and described their value in different terms. We explore what they valued in physical and digital services and show how simple arguments that digital services can replace physical ones do not match the experiences or wishes of those who use these services.

No abstract