Article
The Potential
of Generic Social Outcomes in Promoting the Positive Impact of the Public
Library: Evidence from the National Year of Reading in Yorkshire
Carolynn Rankin
Senior Lecturer
Faculty of Health and Social Sciences
Leeds Metropolitan University
Leeds, United Kingdom
Email: c.rankin@leedsmet.ac.uk
Received: 15 Sept. 11 Accepted:
20 Nov. 11
2012 Rankin. This is
an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons-Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike License
2.5 Canada (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ca/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial
purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the
same or similar license to this one.
Abstract
Objective – To present the development, planning and
implementation of a qualitative research project on the impact of National Year
of Reading in Yorkshire.
Methods – Generic
Social Outcomes (GSO) were used to develop a theoretical framework. Data were
gathered via in-depth interviews and focus groups with National Year of Reading
(NYR) steering group partners in Calderdale and North
Lincolnshire, selected as the two case study authorities. The use of MAXQDA
computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS) enabled data and
coding structures to be stored and facilitated comparison in this longitudinal
study.
Results –
The findings using the GSO framework show considerable evidence of NYR related
activities in supporting the three first-tier social outcomes: ‘Stronger and
Safer Communities’, ‘Health and Well-Being’ and ‘Strengthening Public Life.’
Conclusion
– The GSO
framework can be used by practitioners to help provide evidence for how public libraries contribute to diverse agendas and
demonstrate their value to the community. Public
library authorities can use this evidence for planning and for advocacy with a
range of audiences including local and central government.
Introduction
to the National Year of Reading Evaluation Project
The 2008 National Year of Reading
(NYR) campaign in the UK was about celebrating and encouraging reading in all
its forms. Its aim was to promote reading in the family and beyond, and to help
to build a nation of readers. The NYR campaign ran from January to December
with organizations and local authorities asked to pledge and plan their support
between January and March. The Department for Children Schools and Families
(DCSF) commissioned the National Literacy Trust (NLT), with lead partner The
Reading Agency, to run the NYR campaign. Delivery of the NYR was launched in
April 2008 to support ongoing work to achieve national literacy targets, engage
parents and families in reading with their children, and develop adult
literacy. The key values identified for the year-long social marketing campaign
were:
The
strategy was to create a network of partnerships to provide engagement with the
NYR campaign, particularly with education and libraries. The campaign intended
to stimulate community-based reading activities and to help publicize and
reinforce projects already underway. Public libraries were seen as central to
the NYR campaign and there was a 100% sign up from the 149 public library
authorities (Thomson, 2009). The campaign needed to focus on ways of attracting
people to start reading or develop their existing skills. A national headline
target driven media campaign promoted the year based on several key messages:
A partnership of Museums, Libraries
& Archives (MLA) Yorkshire, Renaissance Yorkshire, and Arts Council England
(Yorkshire region), jointly commissioned a longitudinal evaluation of the
social impact of the NYR in Yorkshire. Researchers at Leeds Metropolitan
University were appointed by MLA Yorkshire in August 2008 to undertake
evaluation research for the clients. This paper outlines the development,
planning and implementation of this qualitative research project, and discusses
the impact of NYR on the organizations that delivered the campaign and their
work with target groups.
Literature Review
This select review of the literature
will consider the role of the public library as a key partner in the NYR
campaign in 2008, and will discuss the importance of literacy in contemporary
society. The final section will consider the challenges of measuring the value
and impact of public library services and will focus on the MLA Generic Social
Outcomes (GSO) framework used in this evaluation project.
The Public Library and the Power of
Partnerships
There is growing interest in the
perceived social impact of the public library in contributing to the social
cohesion and development of the community served. It is suggested in the
literature that public libraries have the potential to act as generators of
social capital since they are open to all and provide community meeting spaces
and a safe place for people to meet (Johnson, 2010; Varheim,
2009; Bourke, 2005).
Communities give purpose to libraries
and good library services will put the community at the heart of developing and
delivering targeted services, engaging with people and responding to their
needs. In a guide to providing multicultural services the International
Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) notes that in
reflecting the needs of the population they serve, libraries impact greatly
upon people’s lives as learning centres, cultural centres and as information
centres (IFLA, 2009). This
has implications for the role of libraries in supporting family learning, and Pateman and Vincent (2010) provide a well-argued
justification for extending the social justice role of the public library and
the provision of needs-based services. Koontz and Gubbin (2010) note that the public library is the prime
community access point designed to respond to a multitude of ever-changing
information needs. The challenge for librarians is to implement policies in
libraries and work with partner organizations to achieve effective delivery of
services.
Public libraries in the UK have been
at the centre of their local communities since the 19th century,
providing services to reflect the diversity of the population they serve (Brophy, 2007; Goulding, 2006; McMenemy, 2008). The Public
Libraries and Museums Act 1964 came into force in April 1965 and since then
the provision of a public library service is a statutory duty for local
councils. In order to meet key legal requirements, a local library service must
serve both adults and children and provide value for money, working in
partnership with other authorities and agencies. The CILIP guidelines, What
Makes a Good Library Service?, say
that good library service should provide a positive experience for local
people, and that it will meet key policy objectives by providing a positive
future for children and young people; strong safe and sustainable communities;
equality, community cohesion and social justice; health improvements, and
well-being (CILIP, 2010).
Public
libraries were identified as essential partners in the NYR campaign strategy
and all 149 library authorities signed up for active involvement within a very
short period of notice. The inclusion of public libraries as key partners built
on three themes identified as priorities in the 1998 campaign a decade earlier:
changing attitudes to reading among different audiences, the role of libraries
in developing readers, and working in partnership (National Literacy Trust,
1999).
Dolan and Ayub
(2011) note the NYR campaign involved many partners and “it gave libraries a
bigger stage on which to perform” (p. 85). The inclusion of public libraries as
key partners acknowledged that public libraries make a measurable and
substantial contribution to local economies and help to bridge social divides.
They support well-being; encourage reading; spread knowledge; contribute to
learning and skills; and help to foster identity, community and a sense of
place for people of all ages, backgrounds and cultures (MLA, 2008). The public
library is also seen as a trusted community resource providing a universal
entitlement to the skills and joy of reading, essential information, learning
and knowledge at all stages of life and involvement in the social, learning and
creative life of the community (Dolan, 2007; MLA, 2008; MLA, 2010).
Why the NYR 2008 Campaign?
The overall
aim of the NYR campaign was to promote reading in the family and beyond, and to
help to build a nation of readers. This involved encouraging reading both for
pleasure and as a means of improving learning, achievement and individual
prospects. The campaign focused on ways of attracting people to start reading
or develop existing skills.
Competence
in literacy is essential for life in contemporary society. Moreover, it
dramatically contributes to people’s emotional wellbeing, mental health, and
economic success. The case for reading for pleasure has been set out in
research by bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD, 2002), which showed that reading for pleasure is more important
for children’s educational success than their family’s socio-economic status,
and that improvements in literacy, at any point in life, can have a profound
effect on an individual.
Literacy
Changes Lives
The
National Literacy Trust (NLT) has addressed the national literacy challenge as
a priority and was the lead organization for delivering the NYR in 2008. The
NYR campaign strategy was to create a network of partnerships that would
provide engagement and stimulate community-based reading activities. Low
literacy levels are a barrier to social justice, producing social, economic and
cultural exclusion that scars communities and undermines social cohesion. In
2007 a U.S. perspective on the wider benefits of literacy was reported in To
Read or Not to Read. The NLT compiled an equivalent document for
England and the Literacy Changes Lives report (Dugdale
and Clark, 2008) draws on a number of sources that have used longitudinal
studies that track subjects from birth. This research presents evidence that
literacy has a significant impact on person’s
happiness and success, and gives a clear indication of the dangers of
illiteracy as well as the benefits of improving literacy for the individual,
the community, the workforce and the nation (2008). Literacy Changes Lives
brings together evidence of the wider benefits of literacy by looking at five
key personal areas: economic well-being; aspirations; family life; health; and
civic and cultural engagement. In every one of these areas, those with poor
literacy had significantly worse outcomes. Literacy is not just about reading
ability but is a skill central to many facets of life.
A Unique Combination of Benefits –
Measuring the Value of the Public Library Service
Although there is much in the library
and information studies (LIS) literature about what the public library service
provides to the user community, it is more difficult to present this in terms
of perceived value. In the UK there is still a paucity of convincing published
evidence that is persuasive and likely to be used at a political level. A
commissioned report undertaken by Burns Owens Partnership (BOP) identifies
a lack of qualitative in-depth research that
analyses the specific nature of interactions that take place in libraries (DCMS/BOP Consulting, 2009).
A recent publication from The Paul
Hamlyn Foundation reports on what has been learned from the Reading and
Libraries Challenge Fund. In the introduction to this review of 60 grants made
over several years (an investment of £3.7 million), Helen Carpenter writes,
Public
libraries have tended to be slow to react to this changing environment. This
may be in part because their operating culture is not used to expressing their
role in terms of policy objectives emerging in other sectors, such as
children’s and youth services. It may also be that libraries have not
sufficiently entered the consciousness or collective imaginations of policy
makers in other domains, as a resource that can help them achieve their
objectives. (Carpenter, 2010, p. 3-4)
Using the Generic Social Outcomes
(GSO) framework, the National Year of Reading research project looked for
evidence of the public library offering in two contrasting public library
authorities. Powell (2006), in providing an overview of evaluation research,
says that it should enhance knowledge and decision making and lead to practical
applications. One way of exploring the challenging question of how libraries
contribute to the cohesion and development of their communities is to use the
concept of social capital. Measuring impact evaluation is more difficult than
collating statistics. Markless and Streatfield (2006) remind us of the problems of getting
sidetracked and looking at activities and processes when trying to evaluate
impact, rather than concentrating on what difference a public library offering
makes.
Marshall (2007), writing about the
future of value and impact studies, identifies two major strands of research on
the value of libraries. The first is composed of economic studies that focus on
return on investment, cost benefit analysis and other monetary measures. This
can demonstrate efficiency of libraries in comparison with other government or
industry sectors but the measures can appear to be distant from actual services
provided to users. She identifies a second strand that focuses on the use of
information by particular groups, e.g. library user studies. This is seen as
particularly relevant in the health environment where outcome measures for
particular populations and evidence based practice are gaining prominence, but
there are also messages for public library practitioners. Evidence based
practice is a concept that originated within healthcare but is migrating to
other fields. It involves applying the results from rigorous research studies
to professional practice in order to improve the quality of services to clients
(Booth and Brice, 2004)
Rooney-Browne (2011) undertook a
literature review of existing qualitative and quantitative evaluation
methodologies for demonstrating the value of public libraries in the UK. This
report, commissioned by the CILIP Library and Information Group, provides an
overview of current methods for measuring performance. Rooney-Browne found that
in the UK considerable emphasis is placed on the importance of measuring the
performance of public libraries using traditional statistical methods, with the
more complex direct and indirect benefits often being overlooked.
So
what is the value of the public library service and how might this be measured?
How can we “measure” that service in a way that is meaningful to stakeholders?
The particular challenge is that value is a psychological construct and there
are implications for the reflective practitioner in professional practice. The
next section will discuss the GSO framework developed as a tool to help
demonstrate how public libraries
contribute to diverse agendas and demonstrate their value to the community.
Public library authorities can use this evidence for planning and for advocacy
with a range of audiences including local and central government.
Generic Social Outcomes as an Evidence
Framework
Public libraries are recognised as
being good at
reaching
“hard-to-reach” groups and good at building partnerships based on reading and
family learning. However, there are critical challenges ahead in finding the
resources to continue delivering publicly funded library services in times of
economic strictures. Public libraries may be effective and reliable partners in
providing services that the public appreciate, but they are rarely recognized
as the lead agency and as such do not yet have the same political voice in
promoting their professional worth. This presents a particular dilemma, as
Rooney-Browne (2011) notes: “our ability to produce social value is considered
by some to be one of our greatest commodities” (p. 29).
MLA
funded research led to the development of Generic Social Outcomes (GSOs) – a
national framework developed and piloted by the Burns Owen Partnership (BOP) in
2005.
This
national GSO framework was developed as a combination of a bottom up process of
developing the framework with practitioners and a top down process of aligning
the sector's potential social contribution with key drivers of government
policy through consultation with external bodies. The result was the creation
of three GSOs: Stronger and Safer Communities, Strengthening Public Life, and
Health and Well-Being. Each of the Tier 1 GSOs is further subdivided into a set
of social outcome themes (Tier 2) as shown in Table 1.
Table 1
Tier 1 Social Outcomes Framework and
Tier 2 Social Outcomes Themes
Tier 1 |
1 Stronger & Safer Communities |
2 Strengthening Public Life |
3 Health & Well-Being |
Tier 2 |
1.1 Improving group and inter-group dialogue and
understanding |
2.1
Encouraging and supporting awareness and participation in local
decision-making and wider civic and political engagement |
3.1 Encouraging healthy lifestyles and
contributing to mental and physical well-being |
|
1.2 Supporting cultural diversity and identity |
2.2 Building the capacity of community and
voluntary groups |
3.2 Supporting care and recovery |
|
1.3 Encouraging familial ties and relationships |
2.3 Providing safe, inclusive and trusted public
spaces |
3.3 Supporting older people to live independent
lives |
|
1.4 Tackling the fear of crime and anti-social
behaviour |
2.4 Enabling community empowerment through the
awareness of rights, benefits and external services |
3.4 Helping children and young people to enjoy
life and make a positive contribution |
|
1.5 Contributing to crime prevention and
reduction |
2.5 Improving the responsiveness of services to
the needs of the local community, including other stakeholders |
|
(MLA North East)
The national GSO framework was
developed by the MLA to help museums, libraries and archives
show evidence of the benefit of their services, and is a way of aligning
the sector's potential social contribution with key government policy drivers.
The ability to demonstrate achievement of outcomes
alongside local priorities will give the sector strategic influence and help
advocate for resources (MLA, 2007). Linley and Herman (2008), in a report for
MLA Yorkshire, argue that the GSO framework is useful for advocacy with
potential partners and for funding applications.
The GSO framework can also be seen as
a tool enabling policy makers and practitioners to speak the same language.
Practitioners can then make the case for impact using terminology that is
meaningful to local and national government. The MLA suggests that the GSOs can
also support service improvement by helping practitioners to:
·
Plan projects, set objectives and
assess delivery against them
·
Develop best practice
·
Fit with the focus on shared outcomes
for local people measured by comprehensive area assessments
·
Develop reflective practitioners
·
Encourage partnership working through
shared priorities
Aim and Objectives of
the NYR Evaluation Project in Yorkshire
The aim of this longitudinal research
was to investigate the efficacy of the National Year of Reading campaign in
Yorkshire as it relates to the place shaping and social inclusion targets of the
NYR. The development of the Project Brief and specification for the consultancy
project was coordinated by MLA Yorkshire and required that qualitative research
should incorporate use of the MLA’s GSOs. The overall objectives were to
investigate the impact of the NYR in two contrasting local authorities in
relation to: 1) target beneficiaries, and; 2) partnership and cross departmental
working.
Methods
The NYR campaign was delivered in 15 local authorities in Yorkshire and the
Humber region. In consultation with the Leeds Metropolitan University research
team, the Yorkshire steering group decided to sample two contrasting authorities,
one predominantly rural, and the other urban; there was no intention to
undertake a comparison of the two case study authorities. Calderdale
Libraries and North Lincolnshire Libraries were invited to participate, along
with the departments and organizations involved in the NYR steering groups of
those two authorities.
Project
Planning and Timescale
The research was designed as a
longitudinal project in two phases. Contact with the key senior library
personnel in Calderdale and North Lincolnshire was
initiated by the Regional Participation and Inclusion Advisor for MLA
Yorkshire. For the researchers, this direct route to participants was of
particular advantage due to the short timescale for Phase One. A project
initiation meeting was held in September 2008 to communicate key messages about
the project objectives, agree on timescales, and facilitate a partnership
approach to undertaking a detailed and intensive analysis of NYR activities. In
Phase Two the researchers re-established contact with the respondents. A
variety of research methods were used to collect qualitative data from key
stakeholders in North Lincolnshire and Calderdale and
the project budget included funding for a research assistant to assist with the
transcription and analysis of the data sets.
Phase
One (October-November 2008)
Phase Two (May-June 2010)
The
Theoretical Framework for the NYR Evaluation Project in Yorkshire
Three levels of analysis were used to
evaluate the NYR impact issues in the two case study authorities. The MLA
Generic Social Outcome framework (GSOs) and the National Indicators (NI) from
The New Performance Framework for Local Authorities & Local Authority
Partnerships (Department for Communities & Local Government, 2007) were
specified in the project brief. A third level, issues raised by the respondents,
was added by the research team, as the “voice of the practitioner” was
considered an important aspect of this evaluation project. Issues raised by
respondents during interviews were coded to enable the capture of data about
individual concerns, interests, experiences and reflections. This paper will focus on the use of the GSO
framework.
The Generic Social Outcomes Framework
A requirement of the research brief
was to use the Generic Social Outcomes (GSOs). As discussed in the literature
review section the GSO framework has been developed by the MLA to help museums,
libraries and archives to deliver against key agendas and maximise their
contribution to communities. The framework is built around three key stands –
“Stronger and safer communities,” “Health and well-being,” and “Strengthening
public life” – providing a means by which museums, libraries and archives can
evidence their contribution to outcomes (Burns Owens Partnership, n.d.). The GSOs are seen as a key tool that practitioners
can use because of the increased emphasis on outcomes as well as outputs.
An
Overview of the Data Collection Strategies
The study was primarily qualitative,
involving the gathering, analysis, interpretation and presentation of narrative
information. An account of the project methodology has previously been
published by Rankin, Brock and Matthews (2009). A variety of research methods
were used to gather the data. In order to gain depth and rigour
of analysis, both the method and the process of analysis were triangulated. Bryman (2008) defines triangulation as the use of more than
one method or source of data in the study of social phenomena so that findings
may be crosschecked. This was undertaken through combinations and comparisons
of multiple data sources, data collection and analysis procedures. The
researchers gained different perspectives on outcomes by gathering the views of
staff, partners and users, as well as evidence from other sources using desk
research. Data was collected through focus group interviews with NYR steering
group partners, focus group written responses to key questions, and individual
interviews. A range of supporting material in printed, digital and visual
format was provided by the case study authorities (this material was readily
available and not created specifically for the purposes of the evaluation
research), and by using a variety of documentation and publicity materials from
each authority.
Interviewing
Interviews are a powerful data
collection technique because they use one-to-one interaction between
researchers and interviewees (Teddlie and Tashakkori, 2009).
It was decided that semi-structured interviews would be the most
appropriate method to gather data in support of the research questions (Denscombe, 2003; Pickard, 2007) and in-depth, face-to-face
semi-structured interviews were conducted with key senior library staff in the
two case study authorities. An interview schedule was devised covering key
questions about the target beneficiaries and partnership and cross-departmental
working (see Appendix 1 for the Phase One schedule). Each local authority
library setting was visited so that respondents were interviewed in their own
work environments. The interviews were digitally recorded with the permission
of the interviewees and this facilitated transcription of the data.
Focus Group Interviews with NYR
Steering Group Members
In Phase One, members of the NYR
Steering Groups in Calderdale and North Lincolnshire
were invited to take part in a group discussion. In social research, the focus
group methodology is used extensively; there is an emphasis in the questioning
on a particular fairly tightly defined topic, and on interaction within the
group and the joint construction of meaning. This is an effective and efficient
way of gaining qualitative data through engaging a small number of people in an
informal group discussion (Krueger and Casey, 2009; Bryman,
2008; Flick, 2009). The group discussions focussed on a number of key questions
designed to encourage discussion about partnership working and NYR legacy
issues and the representatives of the partner organizations were invited to
record their personal views, experiences and opinions on the NYR activities.
Data gathered during the group interview discussions were digitally recorded
for transcription, analysis and coding, as were written responses to key
questions generated during the session by group members working in pairs. As
noted by Bryman (2008) the group interaction was seen
as an important component of the discussion.
Analysing the Data – The Value of
Computer-Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software (CAQDAS)
Qualitative data from interview
transcripts can be difficult to manage and needs to be well organised and
structured to allow for coding and theory building. Analysing data involves
segmenting text and isolating items into categories to look for patterns. The
computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS) MAXQDA 2007 was
used to facilitate the organization of the data for coding, sorting and
retrieving as well as for theory building. The advantage of CAQDAS is that it
can be effective in handling large volumes of coded data, enabling the
researcher to track, retrieve, map, chart, and redefine it quickly and
accurately (Silverman, 2010). Appropriate coding of the qualitative data is an
important part of the interpretative process and MAXQDA 2007 enabled the
researchers to code and validate the data as required
by MLA (Yorkshire) clients by using the GSO framework and the PSA National
Outcome and Indicator Set. A third level
of coding was developed to identify issues raised by the interviewees. It is
the researcher who must determine the main areas for the analysis of the
research and interpret the data – not the software package. MAXQDA 2007 proved
to be a very effective tool that enabled the NYR data to be readily accessible
and continually re-interrogated.
These six
themes were still in evidence some eighteen months later in Phase Two but the
emphasis had rather shifted to:
·
The
differences in rural/urban experiences and the squeeze on resources
·
Initiating and
consolidating partnerships
·
The importance
of reading for social engagement
The findings using the GSO framework show considerable evidence of NYR
related activities in supporting the three first tier social outcomes of
“Stronger and Safer Communities,” “Health and Well-Being,” and “Strengthening
Public Life.” The next section provides an overview of the findings with
commentary on the related second tier themes. As it is interesting to hear the
practitioner voice, sample quotes from the both phases of the project are used
to help present the evidence. See Table
1 for the structure of the Tier 1 social outcomes framework and Tier 2 social
outcomes themes.
GSO
Stronger and Safer Communities
For
the project objectives “Target beneficiaries” and “Partnership and cross
departmental working” there is significant evidence for the Stronger and Safer
Communities second tier social outcome themes. There is very strong evidence
for “improving group and inter-group dialogue and understanding” that came from
all layers of analysis and from all participating groups. The coding and
analysis demonstrated that this was the strongest outcome overall from the NYR
activities. “Supporting cultural diversity and identity” was also identified as
being a strong theme throughout the data collection. A range of different
groups were identified as key target groups and there was varied cultural
diversity within the target groups in both case study authorities.
The
Manga event brought all sorts
of people in to the library who have never been before. I want to go one step further and consult
those people about using our service. (Phase
One)
One of our big successes is the manga.
We’d had one before we last saw you now we’ve had three – we get a group of
about 150 supposedly hard to reach people… some of those people come back, I
see some of the men twice a week sitting on our sofa reading manga and I know
they are from that event. (Phase Two)
“Encouraging
familial ties and relationships” was also strongly demonstrated as there was
interest in supporting family groups. Some projects focused on activities that
were aimed at hard to reach groups, some added value to regular users, while
others were new ideas inspired by the opportunities of the NYR partnerships.
We
are doing a lot of great stuff, including breakthrough initiatives for some
groups e.g. making materials for homeless people. We have never done that before. (Phase One)
We
are now thinking about legacy. We don’t
just want to run events and then stop it at the end of NYR. We are also thinking about community
engagement so I want to use some of the people we have made contact with to
improve our community engagement in future. (Phase One)
GSO
Strengthening Public Life
A
very strong second tier theme was improving services. This featured in both
phases of the project, and this is perhaps to be expected given the focus
public libraries have on designing services to meet the needs of their
communities.
We
have various targets and agendas that drive us.
The leading agenda is the Equalities Impact Assessment, which in library
terms means identifying new communities and providing a service for them. The NYR has pushed towards a service located
outside the library. Were it not for the
NYR we would have contented ourselves with providing stock within the library
and the outreach might not have happened.
The actuality is that the NYR gave us the steering group that provided
us with the contacts that we needed to do that. (Phase One)
From now people who want to rent
council houses will have to bid for them online … so we are doing open planned
sessions so people who don’t have computer skills or
access to the internet at home can come to the library… and we can show them
how to do it. (Phase Two)
There
was also evidence that partnership projects were being used to reach target
beneficiaries.
It
has been through the partnerships we have been working with – housing benefits,
sheltered housing, and the hospital library – we find it hard to reach those
target groups. Those kinds of people
don’t tend to come into libraries. We
need to make contact with the people who work with them on a regular basis. (Phase One)
Other
second tier themes that generated an evidence base were “Safe, inclusive and
trusted public spaces” and “Building the capacity of community and voluntary
groups.”
We
are taking out of this year a commitment to changing the pattern of city and
local libraries, where most things happen.
We will hopefully soon have two more places and hopefully we will have
more. In terms of redevelopment, a place
becomes a hub if it becomes a place where the community gets used to expecting
exciting and valuable reading events, workshops, festivals on a regular
basis. I hope that will emerge from the
NYR.
(Phase One)
There
is space in the library for events and activities. One of our milestones is to
make contact with community based organizations that will put on community
events in collaboration with us using the library space. (Phase Two)
GSO
Health and Well-Being
Within
the Health and Well-Being GSO the strongest second tier theme was “Helping
children and young people to enjoy life and make a positive contribution.” “Encouraging healthy life styles and
contributing to mental and physical well-being” also provided strong evidence.
The analysis of the findings show the contribution libraries can make to
healthy lifestyles and mental and physical welfare. A number of projects and
partnerships have lasted beyond the year of NYR; they have become embedded into
the organizational planning and are no longer dependent on individuals.
We
are reaching the homeless, new immigrants, people with mental health problems –
the potential is much more than we are doing.
I hope that we will maintain the commitment to be creative. (Phase One)
We
have staged a Third poetry competition aimed at adult learners across the
region. There were lots of entries.
People, who had never been in a library read out poems in front of a
whole audience.
(Phase One)
The other ongoing success is the
literary festival as that started win the NYR… and we run workshops for people
who want to improve their writing skills, these are hugely popular and
developed out of the NYR... And the whole reader profile – we have 40 readers
groups now. (Phase Two)
…the health theme might not be an
obvious theme for a library but there is an attempt to work with the local PCTs
… another initiative is called NHS Choices… if someone who comes in wants to
look up a health condition we actually log them on and show them how to use it. (Phase Two)
Discussion
The
NYR has certainly had an impact on the visibility of reading in communities and
the analysis of the evidence from the Yorkshire case study authorities gives an
indication of the enthusiasm and professionalism involved in delivering the
campaign. Public libraries played a key role in
delivering NYR campaign outcomes. Stronger and safer communities and the
improvement of group and inter-group dialogue and understanding proved to be
some of the most significant issues resulting from the NYR in Yorkshire
evaluation. The interviewees spoke about provisions that targeted adults, young
people and children; diverse ethnic communities; migrant workers; specific
workforce groups; hard to reach groups such as the homeless; and those with
mental health needs. The case study data showcases a wide range of activities
and events offered under the banner head of the NYR campaign.
The
voice of the practitioner was considered an important aspect of the qualitative
research in this evaluation project as issues raised by respondents during
interview were coded to enable the capture of data about individual concerns,
interests and experiences. Across all the data there were noteworthy issues
that are not addressed by the GSOs. For any evaluation of library services to
be effective it is important to elicit the voices of those engaged in the
management and delivery of the services and the development of new initiatives.
The voice of the practitioner needs to be heard and taken into account by those
who are involved in policy making. The interviewees felt strongly that
partnerships were a key aspect of the NYR activities. The steering groups in
both case study local authorities had worked successfully in different ways.
These were a very positive outcome in the two locations, driven by highly
motivated practitioners who were using the NYR as a focal point for drawing
together their work, showcasing new projects and partnerships and refreshing
ideas about existing provision.
But
what about the value of the evidence? In this project the GSOs provided a
framework that enabled the research team to map the evidence about the NYR
campaign to show how public libraries contribute to diverse agendas and
demonstrate their value to the community. This helps to reinforce the case for
an evidence base that is not just regarded as anecdotal. The university-based
research team used computer-assisted qualitative data analysis
software to store the narrative data and coding, but it is not
essential to use this complex software with the GSO framework. To help
encourage public library practitioners to use such tools, the MLA have provided
an online GSO Indicator Bank resource which includes templates for evidence
gathering and access to guidance and case studies.
In light of today’s economic climate there is a need
for public libraries to be more strategically aware and to be seen to take
credit in partnerships so that they are recognized for their impact. GSOs can
provide a framework for enabling public libraries to show social return on
investment and how they can contribute to diverse agendas and demonstrate their
value to the community. However, there are issues of translation and interpretation
that need to be addressed by practitioners in order to communicate effectively
with political stakeholders and in partnership with other organizations and
agencies to help achieve strategic objectives. There is a critical need for
practitioners to publish and disseminate information about the impact of
sustainable projects that benefit their communities (Rankin, 2010). Public
libraries can use GSO
evidence for advocacy with a range of audiences including local and central
government. Reflective practitioners must consider that setting outcomes should
be at the heart of service planning and improvement. Use of an evidence based
approach such as the GSO framework may contribute to decision making in
professional practice in these challenging times.
The NYR in 2008 provided an opportunity for public libraries to be
in the political limelight for a time as key partners in achieving success for
the government sponsored campaign. Durcan sees this
current time of imminent new austerity as “a good time to reinforce our
traditional role and to drive and exploit our potential as the free
street-corner, village, town and city-centre access points to positive
activity, recreation, skills support, information and knowledge” (Durcan, 2011, p. 328).
This paper discussed an
evaluation of the National Year of Reading in Yorkshire conducted by Leeds
Metropolitan University in response to a brief from Museums, Libraries and
Archives, Yorkshire. The National Year of Reading in
2008 provided an opportunity for public libraries to be in the political
limelight for a time, as key partners in achieving success for the government
sponsored campaign. Libraries need to become more strategically aware and
need to be seen to take the lead so that they are recognized for their impact
in delivering community based projects, particularly in light of today’s
economic climate. This research project has shown how
the Generic Social Outcomes framework can be used to help demonstrate how public libraries contribute to diverse agendas and
show their value to the community. The challenge is for librarians to drive
forward an agenda of demonstrating impact through value-added projects.
Acknowledgments
Thanks
are due to the funders MLA Yorkshire, Renaissance Yorkshire and Arts Council
England, Yorkshire; the senior staff at Calderdale
and North Lincolnshire Libraries who were interviewed, and members of the NYR
Steering Groups in those authorities for their participation in the focus group
discussions.
Wikireadia is a searchable and editable
encyclopaedia of good practice in reading, writing, listening and speaking. It
was originally created as part of the 2008 National Year of Reading and is now
managed by the National Literacy Trust. http://www.wikireadia.org.uk/index.php?title=2008_National_Year_of_Reading
References
Booth, A.
& Brice, A. (Eds.) (2004). Evidence-based
practice for information professionals: A handbook. London: Facet Publishing.
Bourke, C. (2005). Public libraries:
Building social capital through networking. Australasian
Public Libraries and Information Services (APLIS), 18(1), 71-75.
Brophy,
P. (2007). The library in the twenty-first century.
London: Facet Publishing.
Bryman,
A. (2008). Social
research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Burns Owens Partnership. (n.d.). MLA: Social outcomes
for museums, libraries and archives. Prototype social
outcomes framework. Retrieved
1 Feb. 2012 from
http://www.mla.gov.uk/policy/Communities/gso_overview
Carpenter, H.
(2010).
Leading questions: Learning from the
reading and libraries challenge fund. Retrieved
1 Feb. 2012 from http://issuu.com/paulhamlynfoundation/docs/phf-fund-report_leading-questions?viewMode=magazine&mode=embed
Chartered
Institute of Library and Information Professionals (2010). What
makes a good library service? Guidelines on public library
provision in England for portfolio holders in local councils. Retrieved 1 Feb 2012 from http://www.cilip.org.uk/get-involved/advocacy/public-libraries/Documents/What_makes_a_good_library_service_CILIP_guidelines
Denscombe,
M. (2003). The good research guide for small scale research projects.
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Department for
Communities and Local Government. (2007). The new performance framework for local
authorities and local authority partnerships: Single set of national
indicators. London: Dept. for Communities & Local Authorities.
Department for Culture, Media and
Sport/Burns Owens Partnership. (2009). Capturing the impact of libraries. Retrieved 1 Feb 2012 from
Dolan, J.
& Khan, A. (2011). The more they change, the more they
stay the same: Public libraries and social inclusion. In
D. Baker and W. Evans (Eds.), Libraries
in society: Role, responsibility and future in an age of change. (pp. 81-99) Oxford: Chandos.
Dugdale, G. &
Clark C. (2008). Literacy changes lives: An advocacy resource. London:
National Literacy Trust.
Durcan,
T. (2011). The future of and for library and
information services: A public library view. In
David Baker and Wendy Evans (Eds) Libraries in Society: Role, responsibility
and future in an age of change. (p. 327).
Oxford: Chandos.
Flick, U.
(2009).
An introduction to
qualitative research. London: Sage Publications.
Goulding, A. (2006). Public libraries in the 21st
century. Defining
services and debating the future. Ashgate,
Aldershot.
International
Federation of Library Associations (2009). Multicultural
communities: Guidelines for library services. Retrieved 2 Feb 2012 from http://www.ifla.org/files/library-services-to-multicultural-populations/publications/multicultural-communities-en.pdf
Johnson,
C. A. (2010). Do public libraries contribute to social capital?: A preliminary investigation into the relationship. Library and Information Science Research
32(2), 147-155.
Koontz, C. & Gubbin,
B. (Eds). (2010). IFLA public library service guidelines.
Berlin: IFLA Publications 147 Saur.
Krueger, RA
& Casey, M. A. (2009). Focus
groups: A practical guide for applied research. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage
Publications.
Linley, R.
& Herman, C. (2008). Yorkshire GSO pilot programme.
Retrieved 2 Feb 2012 From http://www.mla.gov.uk/about/region/Yorkshire/~/media/Files/pdf/2008/yorkshire_gso_pilot
Markless,
S. & Streatfield, D. (2006). Evaluating the impact of your
library. London: Facet Publishing.
Marshall,
J. G. (2007). Measuring the value
and impact of health library and information services: past reflections, future
possibilities. Health
Information and Libraries Journal 24(Suppl. 1), 4-17.
McMemeny, D
(2008). The public
library. London: Facet Publishing.
Museums
Libraries and Archives
(2007). Securing excellence; Delivering for
communities. Museum, libraries and archives and
the local government. Retrieved 2 Feb 2012 from http://www.mla.gov.uk/what/publications/2007
Museums
Libraries and Archives North East. (n.d.). Generic Social Outcomes indicator
bank for museums, libraries and archives. Retrieved 2
Feb 2012 from http://www.mla.gov.uk/what/programmes/renaissance/regions/north_east/info_for_sector/~/media/North_East/Files/2009/Generic%20Social%20Outcome%20Indicators%20Introduction
National Literacy Trust. (1999). Building a nation of readers: a review
of the National Year of Reading. Department for
Education and Employment and the National Literacy Trust.
Retrieved 2 Feb 2012 from
http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/resources/practical_resources_info/749_national_year_of_reading_1998_1999
Organisation
for Economic Cooperation and Development (2002). Reading
for change: Performance and engagement across countries. Results
from PISA 2000. New York:
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Pateman, J. & Vincent, J. (2010). Public libraries and social justice. Famham,
Surrey, England: Ashgate
Pickard, A. (2007). Research methods in information. London: Facet Publishing.
Powell, R. R. (2006). Evaluation
research: An overview. Library Trends
55(1), 102-120.
Rankin, C. (2010) Mind the gap. Library & Information Update. 9(11), 34.
Rankin, C. & Brock, A. (2009). Delivering the best start: A guide to early years libraries. London: Facet Publications.
Rankin, C., Brock, A., & Matthews, J.
(2009). Why can’t every year be a National Year of
Reading? An evaluation of the social impact of the National
Year of Reading in Yorkshire. Library and Information Research 33(104), 11-25.
Rooney-Browne,
C. (2011). Methods for demonstrating the value of
public libraries in the UK: A literature review. Library and Information Research 35(109), 3-39.
Silverman, D. (2010). Doing Qualitative Research.
London: Sage Publications.
Streatfield, D. R., Tibbitts, D., Swan, R., Jefferies, G., & Downing, R.
(1999). Rediscovering
reading: an evaluation of the role of public libraries in the National Year of
Reading.
Twickenham, England: Information Management Associates for the
Library and Information
Commission.
Teddlie, C. & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations
of mixed methods research : integrating quantitative
and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioural sciences. London:
Sage Publications.
Thomson, A. (2009.) Reading: the future. London: National
Literacy Trust.
Varheim,
A. (2009). Public libraries: places creating social capital? Library Hi Tech 27(3), 372-381.
Appendix
1
National
Year of Reading Evaluation Project
Phase
1 Interview Schedule for Library Staff in the Calderdale
and North Lincolnshire Case Study Authorities
Section
1: Target beneficiaries
Please can you
tell me about what are you doing to promote the NYR in [your authority] with
the target groups.
What
opportunities has the NYR offered for developing new projects and initiatives?
In what way
has the NYR changed the way you are supporting the target groups.
What
do you think are the likely legacy benefits for the NYR in your authority?
Section
2: Partnership and cross departmental working
How are
partnerships with other organisations being used to promote the NYR in [your
authority]?
What NYR
partnerships activities do you feel are working well in [your authority]?
What are the
challenges for your staff in working in NYR partnership activities?
How has the
NYR effected what you are doing in your everyday work?