Jacksonville Public Library
Jacksonville, Florida (Duval County) jpl.coj.net/lib/coll-dev-policy.html
Policy approved by the Board of Library Trustees-3/10/2011

Criterion 1-Introduction/Goals/Philosophy

The policy begins with a statement of purpose, which declares both what is contained in the policy, as well as to whom the policy is directed. The statement then briefly describes the library’s mission, followed by the actual mission statement: ‘To connect people with ideas that enlighten, encourage, inspire, enrich, and delight” (Jacksonville Public Library Collection Development Policy, 2011, para. 4).

While the Jacksonville Public Library (JPL) has provided both a mission statement and a statement of purpose, there is no mention of providing “materials representative of the points of view of the religious, cultural, ethnic, and social groupings within the community” (Bishop, 2013, p. 46). Having visited the city of Jacksonville, I know that it is, like most large U.S. communities, rich with diversity and populated with people from all walks of life. In order to address these differences, the JPL’s purpose statement should include an assertion affirming the library’s commitment to serving all members of the community.

The statement also neglects to reaffirm its pledge to ensuring patrons’ intellectual freedom. While the American Library Association’s (ALA) Workbook for Selection Policy Writing does not specifically touch on this, all of the other materials used in this evaluation do, including those issued by the ALA. In Libraries: An American Value, a component of the ALA’s intellectual freedom guidelines, four of the seven identified values are related to the protection of an individual’s intellectual freedom (ALA, 1998, para. 3). Kay Bishop, author of The Collection Program in Schools, suggests several relevant documents that may be consulted, among them statements from the ALA, the National Council of Teachers of English, and the American Film and Video Association (Bishop, 2013, p. 46).

To be fair, the policy does briefly mention intellectual freedom and First Amendment rights in its ‘Collection Development’ subsection, however, the importance of this issue warrants its inclusion in the library’s Purpose and Mission Statement. Simply attaching copies of the ALA’s Freedom to Read and Library Bill of Rights at the end of the policy does not adequately affirm the library’s stance-it should be communicated within the JPL’s purpose and/or mission statements.

Criterion 2-Responsibility for Selection

In the case of the JPL, the “responsibility of selection rests with the Library Director or designee, who operates within the framework of policies determined by the

Board of Library Trustees” (JPL, 2011, para. 5). There is no further delineation of selection duties, nor is there any statement that identifies those who participate in the selection process.

The ALA’s Workbook for Selection Policy Writing includes a sample statement of responsibility, and while it does not specifically identify those professionals responsible for selection (as it is a set of guidelines, not an actual policy), it does describe these parties as “appropriate professionally trained personnel…qualified by preparation to aid in wise selection” (ALA, 1998, Workbook for Selection Policy Writing, para. 13). In the JPL policy, those responsible are simply ‘designees’-this term is vague and may be easily misinterpreted.

Bishop maintains the policy should include “a statement that identifies who participates in the selection process” (Bishop, 2013, p. 47). While Bishop’s book is generally concerned with the school media center and its operations, this suggestion is universal to all libraries-school, public, academic, or otherwise.

Criterion 3-General and Specific Criteria

The policy is fairly successful in meeting the criteria suggested by both the ALA’s Workbook for Selection Policy Writing and by Kay Bishop in The Collection Program in Schools, although there were a few missing criteria of note. Since this policy is intended for a public library, and not a school library, there is no need to assess both the chosen material’s instructional design and arrangement/organization. These criteria are specific to the school media center’s operations, and therefore are not covered within the JPL policy.

Absent from the selection criteria is the “contribution the material makes to breadth of representative viewpoints on controversial issues” (ALA Workbook, 1998, para. 16). Treatment of controversial issues is listed as one of the general criteria to include in a collection policy, and it is not mentioned in the JPL policy.

Another important criteria omitted by the JPL is a “high degree of user appeal” (ALA Workbook, 1998, para. 16). The policy does list ‘popular demand’ in its criteria, but there is a difference between the two-‘popular demand’ generally applies to items previously released (except in the case of long-awaited releases by popular authors), while user appeal may apply to materials that are new to the collection and unfamiliar to patrons.

Criterion 4-Position on Intellectual Freedom

The body of the JPL policy says very little about intellectual freedom. This may be because the policy includes, as appendices, ALA positional statements that speak to intellectual freedom and confidentiality of patron records. Added to the end of the policy are the Library Bill of Rights, the Freedom to Read and Freedom to View statements in their entirety, as well as the Free Access to Libraries for Minors statement.

No mention is made regarding controversial materials, sensitive topics, or patron confidentiality. Again, these subjects are addressed in the addendum, so perhaps the author did not find it necessary to broach these issues within the policy itself.

Criterion 5-Special Areas

Surprisingly, no special area item policies exist within the document. The policy does not address gifts or sponsored materials, nor does it include information regarding late or lost materials. There is mention of how the library handles donations in the form of money or materials, but only to refer the reader to the library’s donation policy, available via hyperlink. Also missing is information regarding expensive or ephemeral materials.

What is included is information about special collections housed at the main branch of the library, including collections of Holocaust materials, the Ansbacher map collection, a Florida-centric collection, and a genealogy collection. The policy states that the existence and elimination of special collections are at the library’s discretion, and that the library will not house any collection that “cannot be maintained or secured within normal operations and procedures” (JPL, 2011, Para. 19). I had some difficulty determining what sort of collections these would be- perhaps an exhibit that is too large in scale or one that includes live plants or animals.

Criterion 6-Reconsideration of Materials

The policy is somewhat vague with regard to the reconsideration of materials. Patrons who wish to have materials reconsidered must complete and sign a fairly standard form provided by the library. Once the form is submitted, there is no specificity with regard to the reconsideration process, or the person(s) responsible for the review. The decision is then relayed in writing to the patron, who may appeal to the Director and the Board of Trustees, who will then ultimately decide on the fate of the material in question.

Both the ALA and the textbook extensively examine the reconsideration process, and what reevaluation information should be included in a library’s policy. They both recommend the policy list specific, step-by-step reconsideration procedures, leaving no room for patron interpretation. It is important that the process be as transparent to the patron as possible: Bishop even suggests that the policies and procedures for reconsideration should be available to the patrons upon request, and that a copy should remain at the circulation desk (Bishop, 2013, p. 50).

In the case of a school library, there is an added wrinkle, in that a decision may be overridden by the Superintendent of Schools, or ultimately by the Board of Education. Perhaps the policy in question might cover this area in greater detail if it were instead a school library policy.

Criterion 7-Selection Procedures

The ALA’s Workbook for Selection Policy Writing suggests that an effective selection policy outlines the entire selection process, from “initial screening to final selection” (ALA Workbook, 1998, para. 15). Also recommended is the inclusion of procedures for departmental coordination and staff recommendations, both of which do not appear in the policy. The JPL’s policy contains no information detailing the selection process, only a brief statement concerning selection.

Selection is a discerning and interpretive process, involving a general knowledge of the subject and its important literature, a familiarity with materials in the collection, awareness of the bibliographies of the subject, and recognition of the needs of the community (JPL, 2011, para. 15).

The document then goes on to list some of the tools the library consults for selection (publisher’s catalogs, professional journals, bibliographies, etc.), and a listing of the publications consulted for reviews, including Booklist, Library Journal, and Kirkus.

The policy contains a separate section devoted to the weeding process, covering the possible considerations with regard to the de-selection of items, and where those retired items ultimately end up.

Both areas (selection and weeding) of this policy are woefully inadequate. Both the ALA and Kay Bishop provide fairly detailed samples of appropriate procedural steps (which may vary according to organization). A successful policy details the selection process, no matter the library.

Criterion 8-Other

The JPL policy is, without the APA appendices, roughly 1,650 words long. One quarter of the policy (approximately 450 words) is dedicated to information about the city of Jacksonville, including population information, employment statistics, and recreational activities.

I maintain that this information is superfluous-this information is better suited for a chamber of commerce publication. Yes, the library does look to serve the needs of its community, but I found this unnecessary.

Criterion 9-Recommendations

There are many areas of this policy that I feel should be amended, and in most cases, this calls for additions to the policy. The following items should be added to the policy:

• A reaffirmation of the library’s commitment to all members of the community.
• The library’s stance on intellectual freedom (not simply a referral to the ALA’s statements).
• Specific identification of those responsible for selecting materials to be included in the collection.
• The library’s policies regarding controversial items, sensitive topics, and confidentiality of patron information.
• Special area items, including guidelines concerning late and lost materials, fee schedules, special requests, and expensive and ephemeral materials, among others.
• A step-by-step guide to how the library handles the reconsideration of materials.

Explicit details with regard to the library’s selection process.I found only one area of the policy that should be abbreviated: the Jacksonville city details. This abridgment is of lower priority than the suggested additions listed above, and should be addressed only after those have been amended.Instituting these changes may take some time. Before any policy revisions can be made, the policy’s creator must consult the proper professional(s) responsible for the specific area being addressed. This might take some time, as the author might experience a delay in response from one or more involved.

Once the author has received confirmation that the guidelines and procedures to be included in the policy are correct, (s)he must then draft a preliminary version of the new policy. Once written, the policy must then be approved by both the administration and the institution’s attorneys (if applicable).

Upon final approval, the new policies must be introduced to library staff. The Library Director should call a meeting, where each staff member receives a written copy of the revised policy. The director can then address each area of the policy, fielding any questions the staff may have. When the director is certain the members of the staff have been properly advised, the revised policy may be instated.

From beginning to end, this process could take anywhere from three to six months, depending on response time from other entities.

Ideally, a library’s collection policy should be reviewed on a regular basis, as policies and procedures may change in response to several possible factors, including new technologies, facility upgrades, and patron behavior.

 

References