First Monday
Toward Context-Centered Methods for Evaluating Public Library Networked Community Information Initiatives by Joan C. Durrance and Karen E. Pettigrew

The Internet provides new ways for citizens to access information about the community, which has often been difficult to obtain in the past. To gain a better understanding of how public libraries and their partner organizations are poised to provide such community information (CI) in the next decade we have conducted a major study of the provision of CI and its use. Funded by the Institute of Museum and Library Services ( IMLS) "Help-Seeking in an Electronic World: The Impact of Electronic Access to Community Information on Citizens' Information Behavior and Public Libraries" ( www.si.umich.edu/helpseek) is a multi-stage research project consisting of a two-stage national survey of the provision of CI in the digital age and case studies of public library community networking partnerships, which were designed to provide in-depth knowledge of community networking approaches. We identified a wide range of impacts of digital CI services and systems on citizens, organizations, and communities. The examples we discuss are indicative of the ways that CI librarians and those who are building community networks contribute to the social fabric of their communities. In this article we present 1) an introduction to public library involvement in CI provision; 2) examples of digital best practices and community networking activities; 3) a discussion of benefits of networked CI and community networks from the perspective of users; and, 4) implications for evaluation since current tools cannot determine the impact of digital CI initiatives.

Contents

Introduction
National Study of Networked Community Information
Determining the Benefits of Access to Networked Community Information
Digital CI Best Practice Examples
Benefits of Networked Community Information
Best Practice Public Library Community Networking Initiatives
Benefits of Community Networks
Implications for Evaluation

 

++++++++++

Introduction

Numerous studies show that all citizens - despite their occupation, education, financial status, or social ties - encounter situations where they experience great difficulties in recognizing, expressing and meeting their needs for information (Bishop et al., 1999, Chatman, 1996, 1999; Chen & Hernon, 1982; Dervin et al., 1976; Durrance, 1984; Harris & Dewdney, 1994; King Research, 1979; Childers, 1975, Pettigrew, 1999, 2000; Warner et al., 1973). Physical and geographic barriers also may prohibit citizens from successfully obtaining information. As a result, many citizens cannot obtain important information, access needed services, or participate as full-fledged members in their community's daily life. To respond to these needs, public libraries have facilitated citizen access to CI since the early 1970s by providing information and referral (I&R) services, and through organizing and supporting community-wide information initiatives with local service providers (Baker & Ruey, 1988; Childers, 1984). In addition to providing individuals with information about local services that can assist them with problems of daily living, community information services connect people and groups, and facilitate civic life.

 

++++++++++

National Study of Networked Community Information

The Internet along with high-speed personal computers, modems, and graphical interfaces provide new ways for public libraries and other like-minded organizations such as community networks to facilitate citizens' information needs. To gain a better understanding of how public libraries are poised to provide CI in the next decade we were awarded funds from the Institute of Museum and Library Services ( IMLS) to conduct a major study of the provision of CI and its use. "Help-Seeking in an Electronic World: The Impact of Electronic Access to Community Information on Citizens' Information Behavior and Public Libraries," is a multi-stage research project, consisting of a two-stage national survey to gain a breadth of knowledge of the provision of CI in the digital age, examination of best practice through library Web presence, and case studies of community networks in three communities designed to provide us with rich in-depth knowledge about the approaches librarians use to create and nurture best practice community networks (Durrance & Pettigrew, 2000; Pettigrew & Durrance, 2000).

 

++++++++++

Determining the Benefits of Access to Networked Community Information

Throughout this article we discuss benefits from the perspective of users of CI information and the systems through which they found it. We framed our study from the perspective of the user in order to obtain instances of how CI helps from a variety of context-centered perspectives. Examples are drawn both from the national survey of CI librarians, examination of public library Web sites, and from surveys and interviews of citizens, representatives of local organizations, and public library staff in selected communities in the course of our public library-community network system case studies.

In the case study communities we sought to determine the impacts of digital community information on citizens, organizations and groups (including service providers who participate in community networks), as well as its impact in the community. Both the user survey and follow-up interviews were based on Dervin's sense-making theory (c.f., Dervin, 1992; Savolainen, 1993), a set of user-centered assumptions and methods for studying the uses individuals make of information systems. This theory asserts that people encounter gaps in their knowledge that they can only bridge by making new sense of their situations. Thus they use varied strategies to seek and construct information from different resources or ideas as they cope with different barriers. Sense-making facilitates the study of different aspects of information behavior. Our research included two aspects: (1) users' assessments of the helpfulness of digital CI, and (2) users' and service providers' constructions or images of these systems. An examination of helpfulness yields an array of responses that identify benefits.

Data collection methods at each site included (a) an online survey and follow-up telephone interviews with adult community network users who access "tagged" CI Web pages, along with (b) in-depth interviews, field observation and focus groups with public library-community network staff, local human service providers, and members of non-profit organizations. The survey was posted (during different time periods) on the main CI page of each network. The steps we took to address methodological considerations when conducting online surveys (see Witte et al., (2000) and Zhang (2000)) are discussed in Pettigrew & Durrance (2000).

The multiple approaches we used to collect data result in an analysis of many of the ways that CI librarians and those who are building community networks contribute to the social fabric of their communities. In the remainder of this article we discuss examples of digital best practices that represent some CI activities currently undertaken in public libraries; benefits of networked CI identified by librarians but seen from the perspective of the community; examples of best practice public library community networking activities and their benefits both from the perspective of those who contribute to them and those who use these CNs. We close with a discussion of implications for evaluation for these services whose benefits are not fully realized by librarians and decision-makers.

 

++++++++++

Digital CI Best Practice Service Examples

Through our IMLS sponsored research we found numerous examples across the U.S. of innovative services that empower citizens and facilitate the flow of information within communities ( http://www.si.umich.edu/libhelp/best.htm).

For instance:

Our project Web site, www.si.umich.edu/helpseek, includes many examples, arranged by category, of best practices employed by community information librarians. These include examples of digitization projects that increase access to previously unavailable CI of historic value, outstanding CI database efforts, exemplary community information services, etc.

 

++++++++++

Benefits of Networked Community Information

Although we found that librarians believe that their current evaluation tools are grossly inadequate to evaluate the public's use of CI; many, when asked, were able to identify ways that the citizens in their community used CI. Fifty-four percent said that they remembered a time recently when they had learned how someone or some group had made use of community information. We received scores of examples from librarians responding to our survey. This kind of data, however, is haphazardly collected if at all.

The benefits discussed in this section are filtered through librarians. They came as a result of informal feedback from users of CI. Many resulted both from use of information in the library's CI database and from personal assistance provided by a librarian. To indicate the cumulative impact of anecdotal data, we grouped responses into several representative categories of impact. These include personal assistance or empowerment, value resulting from connecting people with other people and groups, neighborhood improvement, and community building. In the interest of space, the examples below are not categorized. A number of examples can be found on the final report of "Help-Seeking in An Electronic World" on the project Web site.

Examples of CI Benefits Identified by Librarians

 

++++++++++

Best Practice Public Library Community Networking Activities

For more than a decade a group of best practice libraries have played pivotal roles in community network (CN) development. CNs provide citizens with equitable access to the Internet for obtaining CI and communicating with others (Cisler, 1996; Durrance, 1993, 1994; Durrance & Schneider 1996). CNs provide citizens with one-stop shopping using community-oriented discussions, question-and-answer forums, access to governmental, social services, and local information, e-mail, and Internet access (Schuler, 1994; 1996). While individuals may interact with other users by posting queries, monitoring discussions, etc., CI is often a central community network feature that appears in many forms: information and referral (I&R) agencies and libraries, for example, may mount their databases on the Internet, while individual service providers may post information about their programs and services.

Thus, the architecture of the Internet makes networked CI possible by linking information files created not only by single organizations such as libraries, but by agencies, organizations, and individuals throughout the community (and, of course, the world). This is a major departure from traditional I&R services where librarians and other CI agency staff work with files about the community that are created and manipulated using an internal system. For individuals, the availability of networked CI over the Internet means they can access it at anytime and from any place, including the home, office, and public library. The success of these community networks, however, in facilitating citizens' access to needed services hinges both on the participation of service providers and its use and support by the intended audience, i.e., the public.

The roles played by libraries and librarians in community networking vary considerably (Durrance & Schneider, 1996; Durrance & Pettigrew, 2000; Pettigrew & Durrance, 2000). CN initiatives reflect the leadership taken by these public libraries in increasing access to the community's information about itself. These projects virtually depict the community with information by and about local non-profits and other organizations, health and social services agencies, libraries, museums and educational institutions, some businesses and employers, and local and state governments. By bringing information created by a number of organizations including, but not limited to, the library together in one place the CN provides one-stop shopping for community information. Some CNs help the community keep track of its events by creating, hosting, or linking to a community calendar. Some libraries invest in information infrastructure for the good of the community - a server, software, tech support, etc. - for the CN. In come communities the library serves as a physical presence for this virtual entity. Some library staff train community leaders and citizens in technology use. As a result, as we see below, CNs can function as catalysts for educational, social, and economic growth in their community.

 

++++++++++

Benefits of Community Networks

The CNs in our case study examples, the Three Rivers Free-Net in Pittsburgh, PA; NorthStarNet in the Chicago area; and CascadeLink in Portland, OR serve as powerful examples of what can happen when a community pools its resources to better inform the public. The site visits to the three communities provided us with rich data obtained from interviews, focus groups, and examination of resource materials. Our respondents represented social services agencies, non-profit organizations, local government units, the librarians who created, developed and nurtured these community networks as well the administrators of their library systems. Finally, we surveyed and interviewed users of CNs who were engaged in seeking information from the CN. We found that those involved with their local community network were able to identify in their own words a range of benefits that accrue to themselves and to the community. (Pettigrew & Durrance, 2000).

The case study CNs profiled in our IMLS study share some elements or approaches; see http://www.si.umich.edu/libhelp/casestudies.htm

Each CN reflects the mission of its parent organization, and, just as importantly, the knowledge, skills, and values of librarians. The leadership in these best practice community networks are able to assess situations and local conditions. In addition, each CN model seeks to solve a local access problem or to improve existing access. The actual CN model developed will result from a variety of community and library circumstances and consist of a range of content development and service considerations. Leaders of these three CNs recognize the need to provide training and technical assistance to community organizations and non-profit groups - how they do it varies. They are likely to convene or otherwise bring community organizations together (through Web technology, listservs, etc). They find different ways to show community groups the value of developing relevant content and linking to related organizations. CN leaders foster communication among community organizations. They know that communication leads to the creation of new partnerships among community groups. The CN is a mechanism for modeling activities that result in increased collaboration, volunteerism, training, and other benefits to the community.

In this research we identified a number of ways that these CNs provide value for service providers, their clientele, and the community. The use of qualitative approaches yielded rich and convincing examples of how a CN can help a community through the information it brings together and the community building activities that occur along the way. Our data showed several distinct categories of benefits. We found that a CN can:

In this article, we can provide only a few examples from each broad category. The project Web site provides much more detail from our study; see http://www.si.umich.edu/libhelp/benefits.htm

A CN Can Help Overcome Barriers

We saw that community networks are able to overcome barriers that citizens had identified - including geographical and digital divide barriers and the reluctance to ask for sensitive information. CNs in our study harnessed the power of the Internet to bring together previously unconnected individuals and groups by diminishing the barriers of physical distance. We illustrate this in the profiles of the three community networks ( http://www.si.umich.edu/libhelp/casestudies.htm).

The following are just two examples of how CNs help bring down barriers:

A CN Can Increase Organizational Effectiveness and Responsiveness

Staff at we interviewed at different non-profit organizations articulated how the CN increased their effectiveness by saving them time and money and by increasing their knowledge, skill and organizational visibility not only in the community but beyond its borders. For example:

As a result of their increased effectiveness, these service providers found that they had been able to build capacity by becoming more responsive to their constituents and to the community. For example, a city official reports that he has taken an active role in his community network because he feels information technology can make government more responsive to its citizens, especially due to the interactive nature of the Web. He further asserted that citizens have a right to feel angry with government if doesn't make government information available online.

A CN Can Increase the Ability to Access Relevant Information

Community networks increase the ability to access relevant information thus empowering community organizations to provide their clientele with well-organized, trusted information sources brought together in the CN. People reported an increased ability to access relevant community information. Our interviews with users of CNs repeatedly revealed the appreciation that people felt being able to get information that they had previously viewed as hard-to-get. They told us that through the CN they felt that they were able to access a 'higher quality' of information - more current, more comprehensive, better organized, and information linked to other relevant sources and sites. Users also found that the information brought together on the CN was easier to use. That saved them time, money, and energy, reducing their "transaction costs" and increasing the convenience of getting information. Finally, CN users felt that they had an increased ability to identify trusted information.

A CN Can Mobilize Community Organizations as Information Providers

Very importantly, community networks help non-profits and government agencies become information providers. The community networks we studied actively work with organizations in their communities to help them become information providers. As IPs, these non-profits and government agencies are learning to recognize their responsibility to provide content regarding their services and programs via their library-sponsored electronic community networks. The non-profit organizations we interviewed have come to recognize the tremendous potential of information sharing and collaboration through their community network. In the process, groups become more likely to link to and from related information, understand the value of information currency for their own information and that of others, and come to value librarians' knowledge, skills, and ability increase access to CI.

A CN Can Contribute to Community Building

The benefits of community networks summarized above have a cumulative effect. A viable community network results in a critical mass of organizations that understand its functions and contribute to its success. When these conditions occur the community network can make strong contributions to community building by bringing organizations together, strengthening organizational partnerships, often resulting in increased training opportunities, organizational telecommunication capabilities and other benefits. A CN can foster civic engagement through volunteerism and other means, and it can create among the citizens a sense of community. Below are examples of these community building contributing factors.

 

++++++++++

Implications for Evaluation

Despite their use of information technology to provide community services and inroads aimed at closing the digital gap, public librarians are unable to show the impact of these efforts. We found that the vast majority (nearly 75%) believe that current tools are not able to show how effective their efforts in this area are. So far little work has been done on this front. Our work (Durrance & Pettigrew, 2000; Pettigrew & Durrance, 2000) and Ann Bishop's (Bishop et al., 1999, Bishop et al., 2000; Bishop, 1998; Mehra, Bishop & Bazzell, 2000) present a framework for beginning to look at impact issues and tools.

A number of factors - an increased realization that tools are inadequate, pressure on governmental agencies for more accountability, growth in scholarship that focuses on impact, the availability of funding for such ventures, and the willingness of agencies and groups, including libraries, to experiment with new evaluation approaches - have converged to facilitate the development of such tools.

The challenge is to develop tools that will, on the one hand, effectively tell the story of the differences that library community information services make and, on the other, will be used. Without appropriate tools for evaluating their initiatives in digital community services and community building, libraries may not be able to justify the receipt of public support and will experience difficulty in adapting their services to meet the growing needs of the public for information in new formats.

The tools librarians need can be built on the work we have done in this IMLS sponsored study; they should identify indicators of impact that reflect the social context in which individuals access and use digital community services. These new tools should be context-based, easily implemented, capture richness and show patterns that reflect how digital community services affect people's lives. They should help librarians determine how digital community services help and show them how community organizations, citizens and communities benefit from public library digital community services, and how these services build community.

Our new study, "How Libraries and Librarians Help: Context-Centered Methods for Evaluating Public Library Efforts at Bridging the Digital Divide and Building Community" ( http://www.si.umich.edu/libhelp/)seeks to develop such tools. In that study we aim to: assess librarians' evaluation needs, tool requirements and current practices; identify candidate indicators of impact from the context of the benefit to the individual, non-profit organization, and/or the larger community. We will develop tools for librarians that will yield clear indicators and field test their usability. Using Web technology we will make our findings and the tools easily accessible to public librarians and decision-makers. Finally, to assure that such new and unfamiliar tools are accepted by opinion leaders, gate-keepers, and librarians, we will collaborate with organizations whose constituencies will benefit and we will develop and conduct evaluation training workshops. End of article

 

About the Authors

Joan C. Durrance is Professor at the University of Michigan School of Information (SI) where she teaches, conducts research, and contributes to the literature of information needs and use in community settings, evaluation of information services, and the professional practice of librarians. She is co-principal investigator on "How Libraries and Librarians Help" ( http://www.si.umich.edu/libhelp/) with her colleague Karen Pettigrew. This major project, funded by a National Leadership Grant from the Institute of Museum and Library Services, will provide librarians with tools for measuring the outcomes of public library community information services. It builds on their previous IMLS grant - "Help-Seeking in an Electronic World" which examined how libraries provide digital community information and how people benefit from it. For information see http://www.si.umich.edu/helpseek/ Prof. Durrance has been active in the American Library Association and the Public Library Association, particularly on committees that focus on research and evaluation and on the provision of community information. She is one of the founders of the Association for Community Networking. She has served the Association for Library and Information Science Education (ALISE) as President and as chair of various units.
E-mail: durrance@umich.edu

Karen E. Pettigrew is an Assistant Professor at The Information School, University of Washington. Her main research and teaching area is information behavior or how people need, seek, give and use information in different contexts. In past work she examined the flow of community information among community health nurses and the elderly at health clinics. She began working with Dr, Durrance as a postdoctoral research fellow funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. In addition to her IMLS studies with Dr. Durrance, Dr. Pettigrew is studying the flow of health information among residents and service provides in Central Washington. Her work, which primarily draws upon qualitative approaches, explores social and affective aspects of information exchange. She is active in several associations such the International Network for Social Network Analysis, and conference series, including "Information Seeking in Context."
E-mail: kpettigr@u.washington.edu

 

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of our Research Assistants throughout the life of the "Help-Seeking in an Electronic World"project, Karen Scheuerer and Michael Jourdan; see http://www.si.umich.edu/helpseek/About/staff.html

 

References

Sharon L. Baker and Ellen D. Ruey, 1988. "Information and referral services - attitudes and barriers: A survey of North Carolina public libraries," Reference Quarterly, volume 28, number 3, pp. 243-252.

Ann P. Bishop, Nancy A. Van House, and B. Buttenfield (editors), in press. Digital library use: Social practice in design and evaluation. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Ann P. Bishop, Bharat Mehra, Imani Bazzell, and Cynthia Smith, 2000. "Socially Grounded User Studies in Digital Library Development," First Monday, volume 5, number 6 (June), at http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue5_6/bishop/

Ann P. Bishop, Tonyia J. Tidline, Susan Shoemaker, and Pamela Salela, 1999. "Public libraries and networked information services in low-income communities," Library and Information Science Research, volume 21, pp. 361-390.

Elfreda A. Chatman, 1999. "A Theory of life in the round," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, volume 50, pp. 207-217.

Elfreda A. Chatman, 1996. "The Impoverished life-world of outsiders," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, volume 47, pp. 193-206.

Ching-Chih Chen and Peter Hernon, 1982. Information seeking: Assessing and anticipating user needs. New York: Neal-Schuman.

Clifton Chow, Jan Ellis, June Mark, and Bart Wise, 1998. "Impact of CTCNet Affiliates: Findings from a National Survey of Users of Community Technology Centers," Newton, Mass.: CTCNet, at http://www.ctcnet.org/impact98.htm

Thomas Childers, 1984. Information and referral: Public libraries. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.

Thomas Childers, 1975. The Information-poor in America. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press.

Steve Cisler, 1996. "Weatherproofing a great, good place," American Libraries, volume 27, number 9, pp. 42-46.

Steve Cisler, 1994. "Community networks: Past and present thoughts," In: Steve Cisler (editor). [Proceedings of the First] Ties that Bind: Building Community Networks. Cupertino, Calif.: Apple Library, pp 29-37.

Brenda Dervin, 1992. "From the mind's eye of the user: The Sense-making qualitative-quantitative methodology," In: Jack D. Glazier and Ronald R. Powell (editors). Qualitative research in information management. Englewood, Colo.: Libraries Unlimited, pp. 61-84.

Brenda Dervin, D. Zweizig, M. Banister, M. Gabriel, E. P. Hall, and C. Kwan, 1976. The Development of strategies for dealing with the information needs of urban residents: Phase I: The citizen study. Final report of Project L0035J to the U.S. Office of Education. Seattle, Wash.: University of Washington, School of Communications, ERIC: ED 125 640.

Joan C. Durrance and Karen E. Pettigrew, 2000. "Community Information: The Technological Touch, " Library Journal, volume 125, number 2, pp. 44-46.

Joan C. Durrance, 1994. Meeting community needs through job and career centers. New York: Neal-Schuman.

Joan C. Durrance, Kathleen M. Savage, Mary Jo Ryan, and Stephen M. Mallinger, 1993. Serving job seekers and career changers: A Planning manual for public libraries. Chicago, Ill.: American Library Association.

Joan C. Durrance, 1984. "Community information services - An innovation at the beginning of its second decade," Advances in Librarianship, volume 13, pp. 99-128.

Roma M. Harris, Roma M. and Patricia Dewdney, 1994. Barriers to information: How formal help systems fail battered women. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.

Institute for Museum and Library Services, 2000. Perspectives on Outcome Based Evaluation for Libraries and Museums. Washington, D.C.: IMLS.

King Research, Inc., 1979. Information needs of Californians: commissioned by California State Library: for the California Governor'sConference on Libraries and Information Services. Rockville, Md.: King Research.

Bharat Mehra, Ann P. Bishop, and Imani Bazzell, 2000. "The Role of Use Scenarios in Developing a Community Health Information System," Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science, volume 26, number 4, at http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/May-00/mehra__et_al.html

Karen E. Pettigrew, 2000. "Lay information provision in community settings: How community health nurses disseminate human services information to the elderly," Library Quarterly, volume 70, number 1, pp. 47-85.

Karen E. Pettigrew, 1999. "Waiting for chiropody: Contextual results from an ethnographic study of the information behavior among attendees at community clinics," Information Processing & Management, volume 35, number 6, pp. 801-17.

Karen E. Pettigrew and Joan C. Durrance, 2000. "Community Building Using the 'Net: Perceptions of Internet Users, Information Providers and Organizers," Conference Proceedings from Internet Research 1.0: The State of the Interdiscipline, First Annual Conference of the Association of Internet Researchers (AIOR), 14-17 September 2000, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas.

Reijo Savolainen, 1993. "The Sense-making theory: Reviewing the interests of a user-centered approach to information seeking and use," Information Processing & Management, volume 29, pp. 13-28.

Douglas Schuler, 1994. "Community networks: Building a new participatory medium," Communications of the ACM, volume 37, pp. 39-51.

Douglas Schuler, 1996. New community networks: Wired for change. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.

Edward S. Warner, Ann D. Murray, and Vernon E. Palmour, 1973. Information needs of urban residents: Final report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Bureau of Libraries and Learning Resources.

J.C. Witte, L.M. Amoroso, and H. Pen, 2000. "Research methodology - Method and representation in Internet-based survey tools - Mobility, community, and cultural identity in Survey 2000," Social Science Computer Review, volume 18, number 2, pp. 179-195.

Y. Zhang, 2000. "Using the Internet for survey research: A case study," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, volume 51, number 1, pp. 57-68.

Editorial history

Paper received 5 March 2001; accepted 16 March 2001.

Contents Index

Copyright ©2001, First Monday

Toward Context-Centered Methods for Evaluating Public Library Networked Community Information Initiatives by Joan C. Durrance and Karen E. Pettigrew
First Monday, volume 6, number 4 (April 2001),
URL: http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue6_4/durrance/index.html