How Equitable Is Your Library Policy?

by Kim Sigle and Maura Madigan, October 2022

The school library should be a safe, welcoming place where students can explore new interests, challenge themselves, and build a love of reading by checking out resources from diverse collections. In "Economic Barriers to Information Access: An Interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights" the ALA supports the idea that "all resources…should be readily and equitably accessible to all library users.…[School libraries] should consider eliminating barriers that limit access to library resources and other services" (2019). How do school librarians apply the concept of equitable access within their own libraries? To answer this question, we surveyed 426 school librarians about their circulation policies and practices. The results show that policies regarding when, how many, and which types of books may be checked out vary drastically from school to school.

Inquiring Minds Wanted to Know

The survey started as a passion project. We began talking about checkout policies while attending the AASL conference in Salt Lake City in 2021. Like the ALA Bill of Rights, our school board has a policy stating that library resources in our district are open to all students. No student, even one with overdue or lost book fines, should be blocked from checking out books. Despite the written policy and professional development around the topic, we both knew of librarians whose practices didn't align with the policy. We wanted to understand why. Were there barriers to following the district guidelines? Was it happening in other school districts as well?

We created an anonymous Google Form survey hoping to answer our questions. In December 2021 we posted a link to it in the AASL and VAASL listservs and a handful of social media platforms (Twitter, Facebook, Instagram). We stated that we were working on a personal research project. Respondents had the option to provide their contact information for follow-up questions.

The survey began with a mix of 16 multiple choice and short-response questions. More specific questions followed, depending on the age of the students served. The majority of respondents (53%) were suburban public school librarians, followed by rural public (18%), urban public (15%), and private (12%), from across the United States and eight other countries.>

Information from the multiple-choice questions was compiled, sorted, and analyzed in a spreadsheet. As we read through responses to our open-ended questions, we looked for trends. If we needed clarification and the respondent had provided contact details, we followed up with additional questions. For example, we were curious about librarians who placed a particular limit on the number of books a student could check out. We wanted to know if this was the total number a student was allowed to have checked out, meaning they must return books before checking out new ones.

In the sections that follow, we present selected results of our study and delve into how they align with best practices and professional guidelines on equity.

Checkout Restrictions

The term "equity" is frequently used in education. All students deserve equitable access to high-quality schools, teachers, resources, and learning experiences. Librarians might conduct equity audits to ensure their collections check all the boxes, but is having a well-curated, diverse collection enough? Is equity considered in terms of circulation policies? Do librarians restrict the number of books a student may check out? What if that student has overdue books? Can a kindergartener check out a Harry Potter book?

Some respondents prevent students from checking out books considered too difficult. They might limit young readers to easy nonfiction and picture book sections. We believe that this penalizes students who are reading above their grade level or whose family members plan to read the books with them. If we truly want students to become independent, to read more, and to love books, we need to let them choose from any section of the library.

Although the majority of respondents do seem to encourage student choice, a surprising 72% limit the number of books students may check out. Some librarians link this number to a student's grade level. Primary grade students experience the greatest restrictions, often allowed only one or two books at a time. So, if a second grader with a two-book limit forgets to return one, they can only choose one new book. We ask: wouldn't it be more equitable to allow each student to decide how many books they need each week, rather than assigning a cap based on grade level? Some weeks a student might need three books and the next only one. Before winter break, or when working on a project, they might need ten books.

Forty-eight percent of respondents block students from checking out entirely if they have any overdue books. Our opinion on this policy is that for students without books at home or access to the public library, the school library is their sole source of reading material. Restricting access may have a profound, negative impact on these students.

Equity and Socioeconomic Issues

For years, librarians have been encouraged to eliminate overdue book fines, and many school librarians have adopted this equitable practice. According to our survey, 94% of respondents don't charge fines for overdue books. However, 89% indicate that they do charge for lost or damaged books. We wondered: What happens to students who cannot pay for lost and damaged books? Or students who are too embarrassed to admit they can't pay? Do you prevent them from checking out books? What about families who struggle and pay, but then refuse to let their children check out books in the future in case they lose them?

In the book Game Changer!: Book Access for All Kids, Donalyn Miller shares the story of a former sixth grade student who hadn't checked out a library book in three years because he was unable to pay for a lost book (2018, p.12). Not only did this restrict book access, we guess that it must have been embarrassing to be publicly reminded of this each week for years.

Returning books on time is often beyond a student's control. Some students split their weeks between households, live with extended families, or experience homelessness and move frequently. These are often the students who need book access from the school library the most. Overdue and lost books don't always signal a lack of responsibility. Instead, they could indicate the lack of a stable home life. All students have the right to free and open access to books. Blocking book checkout without considering the circumstances is not equitable. It also undermines the library's image as a warm, welcoming place.

The Social Media Effect

How often do we reflect upon our policies and practices to see if they're still equitable? Are we just perpetuating policies that were already in place, or do we re-evaluate these each year to ensure they're current and meeting the needs of our students and staff? Can changes be made to provide all students more equitable access?

Librarians who want validation, fresh ideas, or help making decisions may turn to social media for immediate feedback from a large group of peers. Comments are usually positive and affirming, but not always. School librarians have been calling out colleagues when their library practices and policies seem outdated or negatively impact students. These criticisms may be hard to hear, but they're important. If we don't hold each other accountable, who will?

In her Knowledge Quest blog post "Putting Your Graphic Novels on Vacation Is Censorship," Ashley Hawkins discusses the practice of removing whole series from circulation when shelves are messy or students fixate on popular books. She points out that such "book vacations," which often focus on graphic novels, penalize students who favor visual formats. Hawkins makes a strong but accurate assessment by stating, "You cannot wear a t-shirt that says 'I Read Banned Books' one day, then hide an entire format the next" (2022). We consider Hawkins's post to be bold and brave. It takes courage to call out injustice, but it also takes courage to listen. Criticism, even when it's accurate and constructive, can make anyone feel defensive. It's important to push beyond that initial gut reaction and to really consider the points being made.

It can be tough to ask ourselves questions about what is truly happening in our libraries, especially when we suspect the answers might reflect badly upon us. If we never question and change our practices, however, it's difficult to improve. To champion equity and combat censorship, we need to start with ourselves. Our hope is that a library policy survey conducted five years from now would show that more librarians are embracing equitable policies and prioritizing access to books.

Works Cited

"Economic Barriers to Information Access: An Interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights," American Library Association (January 28, 2019). http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpretations/economicbarriers.

Hawkins, Ashley. "Putting Your Graphic Novels on Vacation Is Censorship." Knowledge Quest blog. March 4, 2022. https://knowledgequest.aasl.org/putting-your-graphic-novels-on-vacation-is-censorship.

Miller, Donalyn, and Colby Sharp. Game Changer! Book Access for All Kids. Scholastic, 2018.