Karen M. Drabenstott
Associate Professor
School of Information
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1092 USA
Voice: (734) 763-3581
Fax: (734) 764-2475
karen.drabenstott@umich.edu
Thanks to Elisa Miller for hosting our discussion on "Technology and BI: Offering New Solutions or Creating Bigger Headaches?" We were rather disappointed that few CRISTAL-ED members offered comments and insight. We'd like to blame the uncharacteristic silence on the cold, wintry weather that the Midwest and Eastern United States is experiencing. Perhaps our friends in warmer climates will come to our aid in subsequent weeks while we are thawing out from a brutal two-week dumping of snow and cold air. Hats off to Elisa who did her best to keep the discussion going.
Let's return to a topic we visited briefly last summer entitled "Technology and BI: Offering New Solutions or Creating Bigger Headaches?" At the time, we were experiencing technical difficulties and were forced to reschedule this discussion for winter 1999. Please welcome back Robert Helfer as the guest editor for this topic. Robert's first library job was attaching barcode labels on books for the University of Chicago Library's then-brand-new automated circulation system in 1974. Since then, he has worked variously as a cataloger and as a programmer on two library automation projects. Since 1989 he has been developing an automated system for the Talking Book Program of the Texas State Library and Archives Commission. Robert Helfer holds an MA from the Graduate Library School at the University of Chicago and a Ph.D. from the Graduate School of Library and Information Science at the University of Texas at Austin.
Please join in the discussion!
Robert S. Helfer
Texas State Library and Archives Commission
Talking Book Program
1201 Brazos Street
Box 12927
Austin, Texas 78711-2927
Voice: (512) 463-5402
Fax: (512) 463-5436
robert@tsl.state.tx.us
Historically, library services have been accessible in a fixed location and have focused on print materials. Such accessibility has limits -- people who have physical disabilities or live in remote areas may not be able to go to the library, those who are blind or visually handicapped may not be able to use the materials the library holds. When we have recognized these limits, librarians have tended to provide specialized services: bookmobiles, outreach services, and books-by-mail programs distribute the library's location, and "talking books" and Braille libraries have been established for those who cannot read standard print.
But over the past decade computers and information networks have changed everything. We no longer need to go to a library to examine its catalog, or even to use its books. We can search the holdings of most of the world's great libraries without leaving our own homes, and in many cases the actual texts of books, journals, or archives are similarly available, or at least can be requested through interlibrary loan services. Blind and visually handicapped readers have access to an increasing number of "reading machines" that can convert printed text to spoken words and screen readers that will read aloud online books from the Internet or computer disks; books on tape, increasingly popular among the general population, can be purchased in any bookstore, borrowed from the public library, or rented from specialty stores.
What do such developments mean for the populations libraries have traditionally given specialized services, and for the librarians who have been providing such services?
These questions are not asked in a vacuum. Specialized services, such as that coordinated by the National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped in the United States, are expensive. In a time of continuing budget reductions we must consider whether these services provide for a real need or if they are merely redundant.
I have recently been interested in the loss of computer applications for those who are disabled, particularly those with vision difficulties. Just 10 years ago, the computer opened many new avenues for these people, offering them a potential for a career which they would not have otherwise have. Then came Windows, GUI, and all that jazz. This was developed solely for the sighted. It is visually based (Visual replaced all the standard programming languages), and offers little for improving accessibility. Now, nearly all library applications are GUI, some not offering any alternative.
I think because the money just was not there, developers of applications for those with visual problems have not been able to keep up the pace. I did recently hear of an application which translated images into sound (vOICe). I would like to see some sort of auditory ability to track the location of your mouse on the screen.
Microsoft has greatly reduced the capabilities for those with vision problems to fully integrate in the computer world. It would be nice to see Gates move to this after he has finished wiring the nation's libraries.
Robert S. Helfer
Texas State Library and Archives Commission
Talking Book Program
1201 Brazos Street
Box 12927
Austin, Texas 78711-2927
Voice: (512) 463-5402
Fax: (512) 463-5436
robert@tsl.state.tx.us
This discussion seems to be off to a very slow start. Perhaps it would be a good idea to look at one fairly specific aspect of the question of accessibility, starting with Karen Harker's comments about accessibility of computer applications to the visually handicapped. While the question that I originally raised pertains to library service, it is clear that in the current state of the world the computer has become essential for delivery of much library service -- from the online catalog to direct access to library materials through the world wide web we have become dependent upon computer applications to support many library services. The computer and WWW allow us to distribute a single library's services throughout the world. But such distribution comes with the requirement that our expected users be able to use computers effectively.
As Karen Harker notes, the early DOS PCs seemed to offer considerable freedom to visually handicapped people. Direct command-driven systems could easily accommodate screen readers, allowing the user to understand what was on the screen -- whether commands or retrieved text -- without actually seeing it. Gopher and other text-based systems of the early Internet and many early online library catalogs fit easily into these methods for dealing with computers. In contrast, graphic user interfaces are visual and often provide little or no access for those who do not see the screen. Little slogans spin on the screen, multiple windows open up, and the user has to know where on the screen the mouse arrow is located.
In my original message on this topic I asked, "Will improvements in technology automatically result in improved access to information for all?" Karen Harker's observations suggest that they may not, or at least that improved access may not be automatic. Does this necessarily have any impact on whether libraries should provide specialized services for those people who would not be able to use mainstream services?
Tisa Houck
Chattanooga State Technical Community College Library
4501 Amnicola Hwy
Chattanooga, TN 37406
houck@cstcc.cc.tn.us
Here in our community college library, we have purchased a very large monitor -- 25-inch, I believe -- for students with visual impairments. Attached to it is a reader that enlarges text. Those few students who need this large monitor appreciate Internet access that they can see and can more easily manipulate. We know who these students are when they come in and will require anyone who might be using that station to relinquish it to the disabled person. Of course, a sign is posted saying that it is designed for the visually impaired, but we let others use it when the demand is high.
What we need now is voice activated commands, Braille keyboards, speakers that read the text, and tapes that record the reading instead of printers that print the text -- or even printers that translate the text into Braille before printing. How far away is that, I wonder?
Then what about copy machines that are too tall for wheelchair bound persons to reach? We do whatever one-on-one assistance we need to for those whose handicaps prevent their using our materials as others do so easily. We don't wait for them to ask.
Samuel R M Souza
Sao Paulo, Brazil
sams@mandic.com.br
I do not know if it can be useful, but within the context of library users with disabilities, one can find an alternative in Phillips software for a Windows voice-activated system.
For details see http://www.freespeech98.com.
Thanks.
G. LeGrande Fletcher
Government Documents/Microforms Librarian
Brigham Young University
Howard W. Hunter Law Library
260C JRCB
Provo UT 84602-8000
Voice: (801) 378-9051
Fax: (801) 378-2188
LeGrande_Fletcher@byu.edu
D Heenan
CTO
PIX, LLC
DanH6000@aol.com
There are several products one can pick up at any computer supermarket that let one use voice commands to control Windows and translate dictation into popular word processors, such as Dragon System's Naturally Speaking, but these don't help the visually impaired. Its possible that the development of the data glove or data suit to include feedback will be of better use someday.
Caroline Blumenthal
libcab@panther.Gsu.EDU
LeGrande Fletcher wrote: "How do libraries assist those 'outside the norm'? Does all of society bear the cost or does the individual?"
Now this item is interesting and enlightening. Thank you.
I find the other "stuff" extreme and closed-minded. There are at least two sides or more to every issue. Exposing oneself to only one view is limiting, in my humble opinion.
Robert S. Helfer
Texas State Library and Archives Commission
Talking Book Program
1201 Brazos Street
Box 12927
Austin, Texas 78711-2927
Voice: (512) 463-5402
Fax: (512) 463-5436
robert@tsl.state.tx.us
I was hoping that LeGrand Fletcher's comments would lead to increased discussion, since they are so well-directed toward major issues in the provision of specialized services.
He comments that "'reasonable accommodation' does not always provide the level of service needed by library users with special needs." This comment suggests that the answer to my second question ("Will the services libraries provide for the mainstream now serve everyone?") is "No." Some library users need something beyond what we automatically provide for everyone.
Whose problem is this? What is the library's obligation to provide a service if it costs us something (staff time, special equipment, special materials, specialized training), thus reducing the library's ability to provide other services for the majority of the population who do not require such special services? For example, if a blind person cannot use the online catalog without a special screen reader, whose responsibility is it to provide the screen reader? If the blind person cannot read the printed text of a selected book, how can that person gain access to the book's contents, and who is responsible for providing the resources that permit that access? Unfortunately, the issue of allocation of scarce resources (money, yes, but not just money) has to be considered.
Susan K. Soy
Austin History Center
Voice: (512) 499-7388
ssoy@lexus.gslis.utexas.edu
At the risk of sounding like I'm on some sort of mission, I must state that librarians need to take the extra proactive steps toward making the intellectual content of collections accessible to those who can not use the traditional pathways for access.
Please consider some of the very simple ways that Web sites can be made more accessible by looking at one nonprofit organization's attempt to bring attention to this matter.
Look for and click on AIR-Austin. This event involved librarians at the local and state level in Web site building for nonprofit organizations and teamed librarians with the high-tech industry in Austin, Texas.
What are other librarians doing?
You may join the discussion and look over the list of past and future topics.
 |
|