Equity and Excellence in the Public Library: Why Ignorance Is Not Our Heritage

Citation

McNicol, S. (2009), "Equity and Excellence in the Public Library: Why Ignorance Is Not Our Heritage", New Library World, Vol. 110 No. 1/2, pp. 99-100. https://doi.org/10.1108/03074800910928649

In the preface to his latest book, Equity and Excellence in the Public Library, Bob Usherwood admits that the text is “rather more polemic than I had planned”. I, for one, am delighted that he decided to take a more forthright approach. His sense of frustration about the wasted opportunities, as well as his obvious belief in the importance of excellent library services set this work apart from the vast majority of library studies texts.

At the heart of the book is the question of whether public libraries should provide “the best”. At first glance, this appears to be a fatuous question, but, as the author points out, whereas in fields such as health and education professionals argue that everyone should have access to the best services, many in public libraries reject this concept, regarding it as elitist to identify and provide access to “the best”.

The book is based on the findings on an electronic questionnaire sent to all English public library authorities and to a group of postgraduate students at Sheffield University. The questionnaire and a summary of the results are provided as appendix, but the main text also draws on research undertaken by staff and students at Sheffield, plus a review of literature from within, and beyond, the library world.

The first chapter places the central thesis in the context of recent political and developments in the UK, in particular, attitudes towards education and culture. This is followed by a comparison of developments in other parts of the world, especially Scandinavia and the United States. The remainder of the book discusses a series of important issues in turn.

Central to the question of excellence in libraries is the value versus demand debate, i.e. should libraries focus on satisfying users' demands or on providing access to and promoting more challenging and high quality resources? From the survey responses, it appears that the majority of public library services are more concerned with the former. But, as Usherwood points out, as well as limiting the material which is available to users, this leads to the degrading of the role of the professional librarian. It is interesting that just 14.3 per cent of respondents to the survey felt that professional librarians should be mainly responsible for stock selection.

Another issue is the extent to which libraries should adopt commercial practices. The survey responses suggested that many in the sector see this trend as inevitable. However, the author makes a convincing argument for an alternative to market‐driven library services to provide not just a high quality service, but also an equitable one.

The role of libraries as educational institutions is another key theme of the book, from traditional links between the library and “self‐improvement” and more recent initiatives, such as reader development activities. As the title of one of the chapters says, “information is not enough”; libraries also need to be concerned with the advance of knowledge and wisdom.

These are just a few examples of the issues raised in this book. It is impossible in the space of a review to deal with all of the many debates it touches on. So I would urge anyone with an interest in the future of public library services in the UK to read Equity and Excellence. Most readers are sure to find themselves, as I did, concurring with the author on some points, but contesting other issues. The importance of this book is that it opens the debate and will challenge your thinking about the current and future direction of public libraries.