Public library ratings

There are several national systems for rating the quality of public libraries

United States

The basic public library statistics (not rankings) are published by the National Center for Educational Statistics; the most recent version was published in in July 2006, using data from fiscal year 2005. [Library Statistics program site Index [http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/libraries/site_index.asp] ] As of October 1, 2007, the Institute of Museums and Library Services assumed responsibility for the publication of public library statistics. [ [http://harvester.census.gov/imls/pubs/pls/index.asp IMLS Library Statistics - Public Library Publications ] ]

A commercial product,"Hennen’s American Public Library Ratings Information" [http://haplr-index.com (HAPLR)] , is prepared by Thomas J Hennen Jr [http://www.haplr-index.com/ResumeLong.htm] ., Director of Waukesha County Federated Library System in Wisconsin. It is published annually in the November edition of American Libraries, and rates over 9,000 public libraries in the United States.based on this data. [Library Statistics Program [http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/libraries/FSCS.asp] .] Libraries are rated on 15 input and output measures with comparisons in broad population categories.

Controversy

The HAPLR ratings have drawn significant criticism and praise from members of the library community.

In Library Journal, Oregon State Librarian Jim Scheppke notes that the statistics that HAPLR relies on are misleading because they rely too much on output measures, such as circulation, funding, etc. and not on input measures, such as open hours and patron satisfaction. He adds "To give HAPLR some credit, collectively, the libraries in the top half of the list are definitely better than the libraries in the bottom half, but when it gets down to individual cases, which is what HAPLR claims to be able to do, it doesn't work." [ Scheppke, Jim. (1999-11-15) “The Trouble with Hennen”, "Library Journal" 124 (19): p. 36, ISSN 03630277 ]

However, John Berry III, in a Library Journal editorial said "Unfortunately, when you or your library receives any kind of honor, it stimulates the flow of competitive hormones in your professional colleagues. This jealousy rears its ugly head in many ways. We've suffered endless tutorials on the defects in Hennen's rankings. So what? They work!" [ [http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA158847.html?q=hennen+1999 April 15, 1999] Library Journal] A 2006 Library School Student Writing Award article questions HAPLR’s weighting of factors, and its failure to account for local factors (such as a library’s mission) in measuring a library’s success, the index’s failure to measure computer and Internet usage, and its lack of focus of on newer methods of evaluation, such as customer satisfaction or return on investment. [Nelson, Elizabeth. (Winter 2007) “Library Statistics and the HAPLR Index” by Elizabeth Nelson "Library Administration & Management" 21 (1) : p. 9, ISSN 08884463 ]

Keith Curry Lance and Marti Cox, both of the "Library Research Service", take issue with HAPLR’s reasoning backwards from statistics to conclusion, point out the redundancy of HAPLR’s statistical categories, and question its arbitrary system of weighting criteria. [ Lance, Keith Curry and Marti A. Cox. (June/July 2000), “Lies, Damn Lies, and Indexes”, "American Libraries" 31 (6): p. 82, ISSN 00029769 ]

Hennen responded to Lance and Cox in the same issue of American Libraries,saying their "thesis seems to be that the job of comparing libraries cannot be done, so I am at fault for having tried. Somehow, unique among American public or private institutions, libraries are just too varied and too local to be compared. Yet despite these assertions, the authors urge individuals to use the NCES Public Library Peer Comparison tool (nces.ed.gov/surveys/libraries/publicpeer/) to do this impossible task." [American Libraries; Jun/Jul2000, Vol. 31 Issue 6, p87, 1p]

Australia and New Zealand

There is some interest in developing an index in Australia and New Zealand [ Alan Bundy in "APLIS, the Australasian Public Library and Information Science" [http://conferences.alia.org.au/alia2000/proceedings/alan.bundy.html] ]

Great Britain

Great Britain adopted national standards, and in 2000 the Audit Commission began publishing both a summary annual reports of library conditions and individualized ratings of libraries. Audit Commission personnel base the reports on statistical data, long-range plans, local government commitment to the library, and a site visit. The Audit Commission is an independent body. Every library is assigned a score. [ [http://www.bestvalueinspections.gov.uk/ Audit Commission - homepage ] ]

Germany

Bertelsmann Publishing partners with the German library association to produce BIX, a library index quite similar to HAPLR. The main difference between BIX and HAPLR, is that BIX was designed to provide comparisons of one library to another in a given year as well as over time. HAPLR compares all libraries to one another only during a given year. [ [http://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/documents/Projekt_Info_Englisch_010112.pdf English version] ]

References

External links

* [http://www.bix-bibliotheksindex.de/index.php?id=115 Information on the BIX index]