Course:LIBR559A/Epp, M.A. (2006)

Citation

Epp, M. A. (2006). Closing the 95 percent gap: Library resource sharing for people with print disabilities. Library Trends, 54(3), 411-429.

Annotation

Summmary

In this article, the author conducts an analysis of access to information for people with print disabilities. He focuses on the situation in Canada, USA and UK, which does not cover all countries but is a goods scope allowing for a comprehensive and accurate overview. The article is a call for collaboration between public and private organizations to form partnerships and optimize sharing for access to alternative format materials that better meets the needs of people with print disabilities. He begins by stating that “experts estimate only 5 percent of the world’s publishing output is made accessible in alternate formats for people who cannot use print”. Then he describes the current services and information systems available, points out barriers to access, highlights examples of progressive steps taken, and provides recommendations on how to improve the situation. He provides illustrations of exemplary organizations who formed partnerships to extend their resources and accessibility. In Canada, he mentions the Canadian Association of Educational Resource Centers (CAER), a consortium of 11 centers for alternate format materials including public, private and academic libraries across Canada. He lauds it for using a collaborative and collective approach to achieve its goal of serving students with print disabilities in postsecondary institutions. In the USA, he mentions partnerships between libraries and commercial providers of audio books. The Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) delivers popular audiobooks from commercial publishers to many libraries, large and small, through its NetLibrary service. Overall, the article calls for libraries and other information providers to follow these organizations and form collaborative partnerships to improve access.

Critique

This article is excellent for educating librarians about services, systems and issues related to alternative formats. It ends with a list of recommendations for librarians, producers/publishers, educators, politicians and advocates. This last section is useful for informing future steps in the design of information systems. However, the article is 10 years old so many of the problems may have been resolved by now.

Although he mentions universal design as his guiding principle, he does not use this lens thoroughly throughout his analysis. Much of what he talks about targets the needs of one group, people with visual disabilities, above the needs of others, those with auditory, cognitive and physical disabilities. Although he shortly mentions learning and physical disabilities, he does not explain much about resources and solutions for them. Finally he does not provide a critical perspective on this shortcoming. Author:Idil T