A Survey of Library Services to Schools and Children in the UK 2002‐2003

Citation

Anne Clyde, L. (2005), "A Survey of Library Services to Schools and Children in the UK 2002‐2003", Library Management, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 162-163. https://doi.org/10.1108/01435120510580942

The Library and Information Statistics Unit (LISU) at Loughborough University in the United Kingdom has been conducting questionnaire surveys of library services to schools and children since 1989‐1990; this 2002‐2003 volume reports on the 14th survey. From 1989 to 1991 the surveys covered England and Wales; in 1991‐1992 the research was extended to include Scotland and Northern Ireland. In terms of “library services to children”, the reports deal with public library services to children, but not school libraries that serve children and young people. In terms of “library services to schools”, the reports deal with the central schools library services provided for schools by local education authorities and others. The report under review covers the period from 1 April 2002 to 31 March 2003.

The data collected on both types of services include staffing data (staff numbers and qualifications, among other things), and expenditure per capita. For schools library services, statistics are provided for expenditure per pupil and expenditure per capita, percentage of Local Education Authority pupils served by the schools library services, book stock levels per child, replenishment rates, expenditure on different types of school library materials, percentage of resource stock on loan to schools, and loans per capita. For public library services to children, statistics provided include materials available to children, requests processed (and any charges for those requests), overdues, non‐book provision, activities such as class visits or holiday events, library promotion activities aimed at young people, provision of materials to meet special needs (such as large‐print books or easy readers), and provision of materials in minority languages.

One of the strengths of this long‐term LISU work is that data have been collected over a period of 15 years in the United Kingdom, using similar data collection instruments throughout the period. This should facilitate the analysis of performance indicators over time for both types of services. However, as the authors themselves indicate, the surveys do have some limitations, although these do not necessarily negate the value of the reports for some purposes. The reorganisations of local government authorities in various parts of the United Kingdom through the years have meant that it is not necessarily easy to compare the results of the surveys over time, though information is provided to help those who wish to do so. In addition, response rates for the questionnaires have varied through the years, with the response rates for 2002‐2003 (at 81 per cent for public library authorities and 88 per cent for schools library services) being higher than for the previous year. However, the non‐responding authorities/services have not been the same through the years, so that there are gaps in the data for many authorities/services. Nevertheless, few countries have such significant collections of data related to these particular types of services over time.

The authors' summary of trends from 1997‐1998 to 2002‐2003 (a five‐year period), extrapolated from several data sets, indicates that the picture across the United Kingdom is a mixed one, with declines in some regions over the five years, but with gains in others, and with spending per capita varying from year to year and by geographic location. For example, in relation to schools library services, “expenditure per pupil has fallen in real terms in the English counties each year for the last five years. In London and the metropolitan districts, figures have been fairly stable, while in the unitary authorities there have been some fluctuations”; further, “in Wales, spending has picked up slightly after a substantial fall in 1998‐1999. In Scotland there has been an increase this year after three successive drops. Spending remains high in Northern Ireland partly due to the different basis of operation of services under the Education and Library Boards” (p. 6). In part the effect of any fluctuations in spending will depend on the level of collections and services already in existence; the effects of short‐term cuts will be felt most strongly in areas where the resource base is poor in comparison with other places. Nevertheless, it is clear that teachers and students in different parts of the United Kingdom will receive different levels and types of resource support from schools library services, and the children in different parts of the United Kingdom from the public library authorities. The equity and human rights implications are obvious.

One of the stated aims of LISU is “to increase the understanding and use of statistics by LIS managers”. How might library managers and others use the statistics that are published in this volume? The performance of a single authority might be tracked over time to understand both positive and negative trends. A schools library service or public library authority might benchmark itself against authorities of a similar size or against the authorities whose performance has been best over time. Library associations and school library associations (as well as other organisations concerned with education, literacy and reading) might use the statistics as a basis for an advocacy campaign aimed at ensuring better and more equitable access to resources for children throughout the United Kingdom, while associations and organisations in other countries might learn much from the detailed evidence presented here. The provision of the data collection instruments as Appendices (pp. 260‐268) will assist people in other countries who might be considering such a data collection exercise.