Nowicki, S. (2003). Student vs. search engine: undergraduates
rank results for relevance. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 3
(1), 503-515.Riley, C. (2004). Electronic content: is it accessible
to clients with differabilities? Serials Librarian, 46 (3/4),
233-40.Stewart, R., Narendra, V. and Schmetzke, A. (2005).
Accessibility and usability of online library databases. Library Hi
Tech, 23 (2), 265-286.Valentine, B. (2001). The legitimate effort
in research papers: student commitment versus faculty expectations.
The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 27 (2), 107-115.Vassiliadis,
K. and Stimatz, L.R. (2002). The instruction librarians role in
creating a usable web site. Reference Services Review, 30 (4),
338-42.Weiler, A. (2005). Information-seeking behaviour in
generation y students: motivation, critical thinking and learning
theory. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 31 (1), 46-53.Whitney,
G. (2006). Enabling people with sensory impairments to participate
effectively in research. Universal Access in the Information
Society, 5, 287-291.Zoellner, K., Samson, S., & Hines, S.
(2008). Continuing assessment of library instruction to
undergraduates: A general education course survey. Colleges &
Research Libraries, 69, 370-383.
**This is an outline of a research study we conducted on the
accessibility and usability of online library databases by auditory
readers**According to Statistics Canadas 2006 Participation and
Activity Limitations SurveyLegal obligation to identify, remove and
prevent barriers for a person with a disability in Ont. *Customer
Service: covers the delivery of services to Ontarians with a
disability ; currently the only standard in effect (as of Jan.
1/2010) --includes training of staff in customer service; requires
organizations with 20+ employees to create document re: such
policies, practices and procedures*proposal for other 4 areas
currently being developed
**In 2006, 5.4% of Canadians with a seeing limitation between
15-64 yrs were enrolled in school, college or university courses.
Almost half of those (47.9) were between 15-24 yrs (capturing
majority of higher education students)13.9% of those with a
learning limitation attended school, college or university; 75% of
them between 15-24 yrs old
Kelly and I have worked with students with disabilities in our
respective positions (hers on a daily basis)**In general, students
want to access information remotely (outside library); libraries
increasing rely on use of online resources (electronic journals,
ebooks, online databases); need for information to be accessible to
all users*Various studies have investigated the accessibility of
online databases for users with disabilities and most have
concluded they are inaccessible and their navigation designs are
not user-friendly.Stewart (2005): evaluated 37 database interfaces
with adaptive software and checked for compliance with web content
accessibility guidelines; one research limitation listed was Future
research could benefit from closer attention to the degree of
difficulty involved in performing search tasks and to the
accessibility of document content. 6 sighted students were trained
to evaluate the interfaces (not actual users of the adaptive
software)Byerly and Chambers (2002): examined the use of 2
databases (OCLC First search and Expanded Academic) by blind
students using screen readers; also used web content accessibility
guidelines as measurement of accessibility
2007 study by Byerley, Chambers and Thohira examined the
accessibility of online databases from database vendors'
perspectives. Nearly all of the companies who participated in the
survey consider their products to be mostly accessible to users of
assistive technologies and Findings were that vendors were
committed to improving product accessibility in the future, but few
companies promoted accessibility in their marketing efforts. Most
companies test their products for accessibility, but few conduct
usability tests with actual persons with disabilities. This 2007
study from the vendors perspective sparked the interest of the
research study that we conducted.*Other studies have examined the
research skills of university students.The findings indicate that
students have poor research skills and significantly limited
knowledge of the basic elements of research and database searching,
but none have looked at the specific issues of students who use
screen readers Screen readers: Software for the visually impaired
or users with a learning disability that reads the contents of a
computer screen, converting the text to speech. Screen readers are
designed for specific operating systems and generally work with
most applications This study goes further than these studies by
examining the experiences of students who use screen readers to
search online library databases and explore their research
skills
*The study seeks to answer the question: are they finding what
they need?*Our study traces the research process of students with a
print disability who are native users of screen readers to access
information in online library databases*The study aims to answer
several questions:Are students who use screen readers missing
enhanced features in databases?Can students navigate these
electronic resources independently and use the features fully to
conduct research?What kinds of barriers, if any, are encountered
during the research process?Which specific steps or tasks during
the research process, if any, are users having difficulties?
*Kelly and I collaborated on this research; applied and won a
small SSHRC grant (Social Sciences and Humanities Research
Council)
- 5 York and 5 Ryerson students who used screen readers (e.g.
JAWS, Zoomtext, Kurzweil 3000) were recruited; had to have used the
screen reader for at least 1 yr Demographics survey was completed
before study (covering student status, rating of research skills,
type of disability, knowledge of accessibility features
etc.)*Screen capture software used to record the steps of
participants throughout the research process
Participants were asked to complete a series of tasks in 3
different databases.The tasks were:*Thomson-Gale/ Gale Cengage
Learning database*CBCA Complete: a proquest database*Sociological
abstracts via Scholarsportal (Ontario Council of University
Libraries)CSA database (a brand of Proquest with different
interface)*After searching each database students completed a
survey (in Word) on their search experiences (e.g. have they ever
searched this database before, did they think they completed the
task, rating the search experience, ability to retrieve articles,
to read articles, navigating etc.). The same survey was completed
after searching all 3 databases.
A Final survey was completed after all 3 databases were searched
about their overall search experience and comments.Research study
started in November (Ryerson) and ended in March (York due to
strike).The studies we looked at indicated that students with out
disabilities are having difficulties using on-line databases. If
the study had more resources and time we would have looked at a
control group of students with out disabilities to compare our
results to. *Once testing was done we compiled the results of the
two institutions.
The results were codified to protect the privacy of the
students.
* Majority of the students (60%) had a vision related disability
(either low vision or vision loss), 30% had a learning
disability.10% or one student had multiple disabilities which can
be a combination of learning, visual and mobility
The average years of experience using reading software was
6.5And it was evenly split with 3 using JAWS, 3 using Zoomtext, 3
on Kurzweil.One student used a zoom in function built into
Microsoft operating system.
*Our students rated their computer and searching skills as
intermediate.70% said they regularly used library databases to find
sources for their assignments and60% had asked a librarian for
helpSO over all the majority had used the library and its
services.
The students spent an average of 4 hours searching for articles
for one paper/assignment, but 30% of our students spent over 8
hours searching for articles for one paper.
Use of databases was evenly split, 50% had used Sociological
Abstracts, 30% had used ASAP Expanded Academic and 40% had used
CBCA. *We asked our students to enter search for Women with
Disabilities in Canada. After each database we asked them to rate
their ability to enter search terms and we also recorded their
search strategy. Students rated entering search terms in all 3
databases was somewhat easy. Our video evidence shows something
different. VIDEO on CBCA JAWS user puts in Women : disabilities,
perceptions of
Video evidence showed that students only used correct boolean
search strategy 44%.
VIDEO Soc Abs, Zoomtext user, visually impaired. Goes across so
will get 10000s of results. Boolean trouble occurred most in CBCA
Complete and students used it correctly in Expanded Academic
After students were done we asked them in a exit interview if
they were aware of search limiters such as full text, date, peer
reviewed, author, title etc. Over all 87% were aware of all the
limiters listed. However, limiters were only used 40% of the time
in the actual searches.
Here we concentrate specifically on peer reviewed bc it is an
important tool at the University level. 90% were aware that they
could limit by peer reviewed but it was only used 13% of the time
in the searches.
*On average students spent 12 minutes searching. We asked them
to estimate how long they spent searching and it was very
comparable to our video evidence. Students spent longer on
sociological abstracts. * Completing the Task did they find two
readable articles? For each database we asked the students if they
felt they had completed all the steps and found two readable
articles, 70% felt they had. More students felt they had succeeded
at Expanded Academic and most felt they failed at sociological
abstracts.
The video evidence is quite interesting, it shows that 75% were
successful at locating the summary page of two articles, but the
success rate of then finding the full text that is readable by
screen readers falls to 50%
Of the articles located only 41% were on Women with Disabilities
in Canada. Many where book reviews, not on the topic at all or
conference proceedings.
*In finding two readable articles Sociological Abstracts did the
worst but had the highest rate of appropriate articles. This is
because the content of this product tends to be more scholarly.
CBCA had the most readable articles but scored the lowest on
appropriateness. Again this is also due to the content of the
product which has more newspaper and magazines. It should also be
noted that our students only used the peer reviewed limiter 13% of
the time.*Over all students felt that completing the steps was
challenging. They rated all three databases middle to low in terms
of finding, retrieving and reading while using a screen reader. Its
interesting to point out that the students felt all 3 did a poor
job in provided readable full text articles. *When asked in the
demographic survey, 80% said they were unaware of any accessible
features on databases. Students rated the accessibility of the
databases from challenging to somewhat poor. I want to show you a
video of an unreadable article so you can better understand this
barrier
VIDEO on CBCA of a JAWS user who found a article, but the PDF
could not be read by her screen reader. The PDF was just a picture
and had not been formatted.
VIDEO CBCA student who uses zoomtext visual impairment, she cant
find the SFX and gives up.*We believe that these results have
implications for our students, the database vendors and academic
libraries*Students with sensory and learning disabilities are
information users, but their disability means they can miss
information or interpret it differently. In most cases they miss
information because of environmental barriers like the design of
databases. *Students with print and learning disabilities receive
accommodations from their University to help level the playing
filed, through technology like screen readers, and special exam and
assignment accommodations, student achieve the same success through
hard work and study as their non-disabled peers. These comments
show how students with print/learning disabilities are frustrated
with the library experience. The last comment should make us ask
our selves if we are creating a level playing field for them in the
library. Is the barriers they encounter in our databases preventing
them from becoming information literate students? *I think that
this quote from Byerley et al sums up this implication very well,
and really launched us on our own research..it may be technically
possible for people who use screen readers to perform a given task,
but it does not mean they can execute the task gracefully (Byerley,
Chambers, Thohira, 2007). *Video evidence and student comment
indicated that one of the bigger issues with database design was
the amount of links on result pages. Although these are there to
enrich the visual leaner, they do not work well with screen
readers. Screen readers will end up reading every single link on
the page, more then often out of order. It makes the search process
longer and confusing for students with print/learning
disabilities.
VIDEO for Sociological Abstracts shows how a JAWS user has come
up with trick to navigate all the links on the page. She uses a
special function within JAWS to pull up a list of links just for
the article she likes. You can see it is out of order and some of
the links do not make sense. She however, knows to look for the GET
IT button to retrieve the full text. Not all visually impaired
students who uses JAWS would be aware of this function or to look
for the words associated with their institutions SFX link.Students
with learning disabilities can also be disadvantaged by too many
links on a page. The amount of information can over whelm them or
create visual distraction. *Students could not find the full text
link whether they were the databases link or SFX. As you say in the
video on accessibility, students screen readers could not locate or
read out the Link to the Full text. Placement and naming of SFX is
within the librarys power to change. Sometimes SFX logos are just
pictures and screen readers like JAWS will not recognize them
unless they are labelled. Labelling was also a problem as students
did not understand what FIND IT or GET IT meant. Here is some video
evidence.
*Byerely et al of the five who use testers they only use people
who are visually impaired. *Vendors are responding to accessibility
legislation and the community pressure.
Ebsco and Proquest offer an accessible search page. In fact the
link to the accessible search page was available to our students
while they were searching CBCA but none of them were aware of it or
knew how to locate it. This is a clear marketing issue. They are
not using accessibility as a selling point.
In researching for this project we looked into the efforts of
the 3 databases. CSA Illumina does not have a text-only version yet
but since it has been bought by Proquest, it might be soon brought
up to Proquest standard. GALE is planning to clear up its links
clutter and it recognizes the problem of too many links with screen
readers. BUT not looking at a text-only version for the near
future. Possibly in the long term. Beside the accessible full text
search option, Proquest provides its accessibility policy and
updates on its website. ****What is the implication for the
library? Clearly this study shows there are gaps in the information
skills sets of students with print/learning disabilities. To reduce
the gaps the library can provide instruction and teaching
strategies tailored to the unique research habits of auditor
learners who use screen readers.
*The question we asked ourselves is whether the barriers in
database design can affect a students information literacy skills.
Our study would point to yes, the first step in info literacy the
ability to critically locate appropriate articles is being
compromised. They can not become searchers on their own without
much difficulty. Their self efficacy is challenged.
Majority of studies indicate the benefits of basic library
instruction for undergraduate students.Our results show our
students need more instruction, even though 70% said they had asked
for help from a librarian and 80% had received library instruction
in one of their classes. they clearly had difficulty executing
Boolean searches (46% success), using limiters 36% and choosing
appropriate articles (41%).
We know these students have unique needs and need unique
strategies to get around design barriers. We can offer strategies
to help them master the research process.
Clutter and Label links is also within the librarys
responsibilities especially around SFX. Libraries should consider
testing their own gateways and labelling practices.
*As buyers of databases we can rewrite our buying policies to
include questions around accessibility this will indicate to the
vendor that we take accessibility serious. Under the new AODA act
in Ontario this could very well become part of our policies.
Universal Instructional Design best website is Guelphconsidering
the potential needs of all learners when designing and delivering
instruction. eliminating unnecessary barriers to teaching
4 design principles1. the design of learning (courses,
activities, assignments, assessment)2. the planning of delivery
strategies3. the design of materials or tools (manuals, CDs,
learning objects, handouts), and 4. the design of environments
(websites, classrooms, learning spaces)
*In conclusion, we started this research to figure out if
University level students with disabilities who use screen readers
are having difficulties using screen readers. The studies we
consulted pointed towards yes but had not used students with visual
and print disabilities. We decided to observe our students using
their screen readers and our databases. Our video results showed us
that the other studies were correct, our students experienced
accessibility barriers that prevented them from accessing articles.
But the study has left us asking ourselves if we as librarians can
do more for students with print disabilities. While the databases
vendors play an important role in making their databases more
accessible, there can never be 100% success without the involvement
of the academic librarian. We are the instructors, the marketers
and the champions of accessibility. We play must play a pivotal
role in fostering an environment where students with print
disabilities can become critical thinkers in their own right.
*****
![DBease: Making Databases Userfriendly and Easily Accessiblejnwang/papers/cidr2011-dbease.pdf · search in relational databases [12, 11, 10, 18]. However they cannot support search](https://img.dokumen.tips/doc/110x75/600e0d010028e13df218a143/dbease-making-databases-userfriendly-and-easily-accessible-jnwangpaperscidr2011-.jpg)
![DBease: Making Databases Userfriendly and Easily Accessibledbgroup.cs.tsinghua.edu.cn/ligl/papers/cidr2011-dbease.pdfsearch in relational databases [12, 11, 10, 18]. However they cannot](https://img.dokumen.tips/doc/110x75/600e0d000028e13df218a13e/dbease-making-databases-userfriendly-and-easily-search-in-relational-databases.jpg)
