Course:LIBR559A/Power, R., & LeBeau, C. (2009)

Citation: Power, R., & LeBeau, C. (2009). How well do academic library web sites address the needs of database users with visual disabilities? The Reference Librarian, 50(1), 55-72. doi:10.1080/02763870802546399

Objectives: The objectives of this website and database evaluation study were: (1) to examine how well academic library websites guide visually impaired people in the use of databases, and (2) to look at how well libraries generally serve visually impaired users through their websites.

Sample: Thirty-three academic library websites was used. The Education Trust databank was used to select 23 schools (public and private schools ranging from undergraduate through research institutions). Ten schools were selected from a 1998 article in New Mobility magazine featuring ‘disability friendly’ schools. Eight database vendors and information providers (CSA, EBSCO, JSTOR, OCLC FirstSearch, Ovid, Proquest, Thomson Gale, and Wilson) were examined for Section 508 compliance.

Methodology: Academic library websites were examined to see how many offered access to text-only versions of databases and emphasized this access to visually impaired users. The database access page and the disability services page were examined to ascertain this information. Limited usability testing of databases (EBSCO, Wilson, OCLC, FirstSearch, and Ovid) using two screen reading programs: JAWS 7.0 and WindowsEyes 5.5. Library disability service pages were also examined by using an author-created five-category rating scale (ranging from ‘good disability services page’ to ‘no disability services page evident’) that considered the content of the Web page and access to informational pages.

Main Results: “Only 5 out of 33 libraries made any mention [of database accessibility] and the information provided was typically inadequate” (p. 59). In terms of the vendors, only 3 of 8 vendors offered text-only database interfaces. For the library disability service pages, seventeen were rated as good pages that were easy to find and provided important basic information. “Sixteen were rated as mediocre or poor, meaning the pages were hard to find or provided minimal or no information. Of these sixteen, nine libraries appeared to have no disability services page at all” (p. 60). Of the ten institutions named by New Mobility magazine “as good institutions for people with disabilities” to attend, this study rated nine of them as ‘good’ and one as ‘mediocre’ (p. 60).

Discussion/Conclusion: The elements of a good model for a library webpage included useful and comprehensive content and a simple webpage design. Furthermore, the five essential basic components of a disability services page are: contacts, services, building access, assistive technology, and database accessibility.

The following difficulties were identified as problems for screen reader users that were trying to access databases: difficulties with search box identification and navigation; reading and navigation of drop-down menus and check boxes; images with poor ALT text; and unclear link terminology.

Pitfalls, Blind Spots, and Weaknesses of This Article: There is a lack of comprehensiveness of the testing of the usability testing of the databases in this study. A comprehensive study that “evaluates databases on ease of use and identifies barriers to use specific to each database would be invaluable in helping librarians assist their users and perhaps database vendors to make further changes” (p. 68).

A limitation of this study was only a limited usability assessment was conducted with JAWS 7.0 and WindowsEyes 5.5. A more comprehensive usability assessment is required that not only uses automated accessibility tools but to incorporate user-based usability testing as well. Another limitation of this study is that: it only focused solely on the accessibility of some of the major databases available. It did not look at catalogs, online journal locators, or federated search engines, all products that libraries and their patrons rely heavily on and spend large amounts of money on. At least one major catalog vendor and a few federated search engines are not Section 508 compliant. It would be interesting to know how well these products perform with screen readers, what steps vendors have taken towards accessibility, and what they are planning for the future (p. 68).

Theoretical Framework: The author implies the use of the Social Construction of Technology (SCOT) by grounding the discussion of accessibility in legal requirements. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 was discussed.

Potential Contribution to The Scholarship of Social Studies of Library and Information and to The Practice of Librarianship:

There are four implications of this study for reference and public services librarians’ knowledge to help everyone access databases: vendor feedback, screen reader software, reference services, and the clarity, communication and familiarization of a library’s website.

This study highlights the importance of web accessibility for people with disabilities so they have the same access to information and support just like any other person. Accessibility will open doors and opportunities for people with disabilities in the different domains of life including the social studies of Library and Information and the practice of Librarianship whether as students, researchers or patrons.

Page Author: Karan Bola