I used qualitative research methods to enhance the role of accessibility in librarians' evaluations of electronic resources.
Project Overview
Problem
Client
Duration
Role
Collaborators
Output
Improve the role of accessibility in librarians' evaluations of electronic resources
U of Michigan Library
January 2019 - April 2019
Researcher, Designer
Accessibility Specialist,
Electronic Resources Officer
Interview observations and recommendations
Evaluation toolkit designs and workflows
Conference paper and article draft
Project Phase | Lesson Learned
Planning Phase
Selector librarians identify, evaluate, and procure print and electronic resources for their universities' libraries. Stakeholders wanted to improve the role of accessibility in librarians' evaluations of electronic resources.
No course on accessibility was taught during the final year of my program. In response, I sought an internship with the
U of Michigan Library to pursue this project.
After several meetings with my key stakeholders -- the library's
Accessibility Specialist and Electronic Resources Officer -- I needed a way to make the project plan tangible for both my stakeholders and me. I created a project timeline for the semester that included research, discovery, design, and reporting stages.
I received feedback during the interviews in the Discovery Phase requiring me to revise the timeline now that I had a better understanding of librarians' workflows.
Lesson Learned
Project plans are necessary for framing the work to be done, but they must adapt as new information is uncovered.
Discovery Phase
In addition to my own review of relevant research and examples,
I spoke with selector librarians to understand their process for evaluating electronic resources.
-
7 interviews
-
45 minutes / interview
I synthesized the interview notes using the affinity wall technique and presented my observations and recommendations to key stakeholders as well as other groups within, and external to, the
U of Michigan.
While accessibility didn't have defined role in the evaluation process, librarians did evaluate against use cases from their interactions with patrons. These use cases were transferable across products and quickly came to be seen as a valuable part of their current workflows that could be leveraged in the new designs.
Key stakeholders provided feedback and decided to pursue two recommendations:
-
Formalize accessibility-related standard operating procedures
-
Develop evaluation toolkits based on patron use cases
Lesson Learned
Understanding users' current workflows takes time, but enhancing key elements has the best chance for adoption.
Ideation Phase
After presenting my findings to the selector librarians I interviewed earlier, I used a co-design activity to involve them in the next project phase: toolkit ideation. Using a modified affinity wall, I asked the group to brainstorm about use cases and other examples they use in their evaluation processes.
UX projects belong to multiple disciplines and communities. My work is improved by being in conversation with people in other fields doing similar work. To that end, I presented my project and findings-to-date at the Wayne State University 16th Conference on Citizenship. The 2019 conference theme was citizenship and technology.
By the project's end, it was clear that more systemic changes needed to be explored in the e-resource evaluation process before toolkits could be developed and implemented. I submitted a report to stakeholders that detailed my work and provided recommendations about developing buy-in from end users and things to consider moving forward such as being clear about who's responsible for accessibility and triaging technical documents across diverse teams.
Gallery
