Article Review 2

Samantha Finefield

October 3, 2011

Article Review 2

Koontz, C., Jue, D., & Lance, K. C. (2005). Neighborhood-based in-library use performance measures for public libraries: A nationwide study of majority-minority and majority white/low income markets using personal digital data collectors. Library and Information Science Research, 27(1), 28-50.

Introduction:

The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the need for proper data collection methods in libraries in regards to non-book usage, i.e. internet usage, and also to demonstrate the need for “neighborhood-level” library data. Previous studies have shown that when library populations diversify, circulation tends to shrink. This does not, however, mean that libraries are any less busy. It simply means that minority groups and low-income whites tend to use other aspects of the library that are not being statistically monitored. Because of this, circulation can appear low leading to cuts in funding and often merging or closing of libraries in urban and socioeconomically diverse areas. This relates very closely to my topic because it is demonstrative of the inequities in library funding in high minority and/or low income areas. The researchers also employed survey techniques that I also plan to propose in my formal research proposal.

Problem Statement:

The researchers in this study wanted to answer three main questions:

1.)  What library-usage differences are present between library markets in majority White/low income markets and majority-minority markets?

2.)  What library performance measures could be created to discover and measure these uses?

3.)  Could a standardized data collection system be developed for all different public library systems.

Literature Review:

This study did not publish a formal literature review, however, many sources were cited within the article itself. A large portion of the cited literature deals with how to best accommodate diverse library populations and analyzing library services in urban environments.  Another portion of the referenced sources dealt with different library markets and how to forecast use in the different markets present. Finally, the researchers spent some time researching how distance from a library can affect how much usage and what type of usage is present. Many of these sources would also be helpful for my own research and I plan on utilizing them.

Method:

The researchers have self-proclaimed their research design to be “multifaceted”. For their population, they had to find public libraries that had a patron base of majority-minority or majority White/low income. To do this they initially used census data to identify the communities they should be researching in. By using this data and geographic information system (GIS) data, they were able to identify 3536 public library outlets that met their requirements. This is equivalent to about 20% of the United States’ library outlets.  They then chose a sample out of the 3536 libraries to equally represent the Northeast, South, Midwest, and Western regions of the United States. This narrowed the sample to 495 outlets.

After the sample was chosen, a survey was created that would ask questions in regards to data collection practices that were already in place for the library outlets in the population. In many cases, libraries did not answer or denied participation. This narrowed the population down to 177 libraries. Over the two year period, another large portion of the libraries in the study for various reasons decided not to or were unable to participate, so the sample was narrowed down to 92 libraries who participated from beginning to end of the study.

It is important to note that in analysis this project was not designed to answer why the data collected in regards to library usage might vary, but simply to prove that it does vary. The researchers chose to analyze their data in statistical chart form for different racial groups. They offered percentages on how different racial groups use their libraries so that one reading this study might be able to see all of the data side by side. This further demonstrates the need for neighborhood-level data so that not all libraries are judged by the simple manner of circulation percentages.

Caveats:

Because of the time at which this data was collected, the processes were understandable and admittedly by the researchers complex and complicated-which can often lead to error. Another major caveat is that when the population was narrowed down by region study then lost a large portion of participants, and it is unlikely that after losing such a large group that the distribution of participating libraries would still be even across the four geographic regions listed.

Appendix

Dr. Kumasi:

I made that chart as you suggested and have attached it here.

Research Question	Data Collection Technique	Data Analysis Technique
How do socioeconomic status and demographics play a role in library closures?	Unstructured interviews; Review of documents	Thematic analysis
How does the socioeconomic and demographic status of a library effect its circulation and funding?	Survey; Review of documents	Thematic analysis; descriptive statistics
How is the homeless population served by the public library?	Survey; unstructured interviews	Thematic analysis
Why are disadvantaged groups less likely to use public libraries and what variables affect this?	Review of documents; unstructured interviews; survey	Thematic Analysis

The first and fourth questions are the ones that I feel are the strongest but please feel free to disagree with me.