'To be understood as to understand': a readability analysis of public library acceptable use policies

Elaine Robinson, David McMenemy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Acceptable Use Policies (AUPs) are documents stating the limitations users must agree to when first accessing information and communications technologies (ICTs) in organisations, such as employers, educational institutions and public libraries. AUPs lay out the parameters of acceptable use expected of someone accessing the ICT services provided, and should state in clear and understandable terms what behaviours will attract sanctions, both legal and in terms of restricting future access. Utilising a range of standard readability tests used to measure how understandable documents are, the paper investigates how readable the AUPs presented to public library patrons in the UK are in practice. Of the 206 AUPs in use across the local government departments who manage public library services 200 were obtained and subjected to a range of readability testing procedures. Four readability tests were used for analysis: the Flesch Reading Ease, the Coleman-Liau Index, the Gunning Fog Index and the SMOG Grade. Results for all four readability tests administered on all AUPs raise significant questions. For the Flesch Reading Ease score only 5.5% of AUPs scored at the standard readability level or higher (60+), and 8% scored at a very high level of difficulty akin to a piece of scientific writing. Similarly, for SMOG, only 7.5% of the 200 AUPs scored at the recommended level of 10. Likewise, very few AUPs scored at levels recommended for a general audience with either the Gunning Fog Index (11.5%) or the Coleman-Liau Index (2%). With such variability in readability, the fitness for purpose of the average AUP as a contract patrons must agree to can be called into question. This paper presents the first ever analysis of the readability of library AUPs in the literature. Recommendations are made as to how public library services may improve this aspect of practice.

LanguageEnglish
Number of pages21
JournalJournal of Librarianship and Information Science
Early online date28 Aug 2019
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 28 Aug 2019

Fingerprint

communication technology
information technology
testing procedure
educational institution
fitness
sanction
employer
literature

Keywords

  • acceptable use policies
  • readability analysis
  • ICT

Cite this

@article{d3612432effa436da3bcc1a2f4f0570e,
title = "'To be understood as to understand': a readability analysis of public library acceptable use policies",
abstract = "Acceptable Use Policies (AUPs) are documents stating the limitations users must agree to when first accessing information and communications technologies (ICTs) in organisations, such as employers, educational institutions and public libraries. AUPs lay out the parameters of acceptable use expected of someone accessing the ICT services provided, and should state in clear and understandable terms what behaviours will attract sanctions, both legal and in terms of restricting future access. Utilising a range of standard readability tests used to measure how understandable documents are, the paper investigates how readable the AUPs presented to public library patrons in the UK are in practice. Of the 206 AUPs in use across the local government departments who manage public library services 200 were obtained and subjected to a range of readability testing procedures. Four readability tests were used for analysis: the Flesch Reading Ease, the Coleman-Liau Index, the Gunning Fog Index and the SMOG Grade. Results for all four readability tests administered on all AUPs raise significant questions. For the Flesch Reading Ease score only 5.5{\%} of AUPs scored at the standard readability level or higher (60+), and 8{\%} scored at a very high level of difficulty akin to a piece of scientific writing. Similarly, for SMOG, only 7.5{\%} of the 200 AUPs scored at the recommended level of 10. Likewise, very few AUPs scored at levels recommended for a general audience with either the Gunning Fog Index (11.5{\%}) or the Coleman-Liau Index (2{\%}). With such variability in readability, the fitness for purpose of the average AUP as a contract patrons must agree to can be called into question. This paper presents the first ever analysis of the readability of library AUPs in the literature. Recommendations are made as to how public library services may improve this aspect of practice.",
keywords = "acceptable use policies, readability analysis, ICT",
author = "Elaine Robinson and David McMenemy",
year = "2019",
month = "8",
day = "28",
doi = "10.1177/0961000619871598",
language = "English",
journal = "Journal of Librarianship and Information Science",
issn = "0961-0006",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - 'To be understood as to understand'

T2 - Journal of Librarianship and Information Science

AU - Robinson, Elaine

AU - McMenemy, David

PY - 2019/8/28

Y1 - 2019/8/28

N2 - Acceptable Use Policies (AUPs) are documents stating the limitations users must agree to when first accessing information and communications technologies (ICTs) in organisations, such as employers, educational institutions and public libraries. AUPs lay out the parameters of acceptable use expected of someone accessing the ICT services provided, and should state in clear and understandable terms what behaviours will attract sanctions, both legal and in terms of restricting future access. Utilising a range of standard readability tests used to measure how understandable documents are, the paper investigates how readable the AUPs presented to public library patrons in the UK are in practice. Of the 206 AUPs in use across the local government departments who manage public library services 200 were obtained and subjected to a range of readability testing procedures. Four readability tests were used for analysis: the Flesch Reading Ease, the Coleman-Liau Index, the Gunning Fog Index and the SMOG Grade. Results for all four readability tests administered on all AUPs raise significant questions. For the Flesch Reading Ease score only 5.5% of AUPs scored at the standard readability level or higher (60+), and 8% scored at a very high level of difficulty akin to a piece of scientific writing. Similarly, for SMOG, only 7.5% of the 200 AUPs scored at the recommended level of 10. Likewise, very few AUPs scored at levels recommended for a general audience with either the Gunning Fog Index (11.5%) or the Coleman-Liau Index (2%). With such variability in readability, the fitness for purpose of the average AUP as a contract patrons must agree to can be called into question. This paper presents the first ever analysis of the readability of library AUPs in the literature. Recommendations are made as to how public library services may improve this aspect of practice.

AB - Acceptable Use Policies (AUPs) are documents stating the limitations users must agree to when first accessing information and communications technologies (ICTs) in organisations, such as employers, educational institutions and public libraries. AUPs lay out the parameters of acceptable use expected of someone accessing the ICT services provided, and should state in clear and understandable terms what behaviours will attract sanctions, both legal and in terms of restricting future access. Utilising a range of standard readability tests used to measure how understandable documents are, the paper investigates how readable the AUPs presented to public library patrons in the UK are in practice. Of the 206 AUPs in use across the local government departments who manage public library services 200 were obtained and subjected to a range of readability testing procedures. Four readability tests were used for analysis: the Flesch Reading Ease, the Coleman-Liau Index, the Gunning Fog Index and the SMOG Grade. Results for all four readability tests administered on all AUPs raise significant questions. For the Flesch Reading Ease score only 5.5% of AUPs scored at the standard readability level or higher (60+), and 8% scored at a very high level of difficulty akin to a piece of scientific writing. Similarly, for SMOG, only 7.5% of the 200 AUPs scored at the recommended level of 10. Likewise, very few AUPs scored at levels recommended for a general audience with either the Gunning Fog Index (11.5%) or the Coleman-Liau Index (2%). With such variability in readability, the fitness for purpose of the average AUP as a contract patrons must agree to can be called into question. This paper presents the first ever analysis of the readability of library AUPs in the literature. Recommendations are made as to how public library services may improve this aspect of practice.

KW - acceptable use policies

KW - readability analysis

KW - ICT

UR - https://journals.sagepub.com/home/lis

U2 - 10.1177/0961000619871598

DO - 10.1177/0961000619871598

M3 - Article

JO - Journal of Librarianship and Information Science

JF - Journal of Librarianship and Information Science

SN - 0961-0006

ER -