Dual use libraries: guidelines for success.(factor contributing to the success of joint use libraries)

ABSTRACT

Combined school and public libraries have been studied extensively for more than thirty years. Common advantages and disadvantages, together with typical problems, have been identified. From the work of researchers in three countries, predictors of success can be articulated: the population served is less than 10,000; a formal planning process involving the stakeholders was undertaken; a written legal agreement for governance, administration, finances, and operations includes guidelines for evaluation and dissolution; a decision-making board or management committee develops policies and procedures and engages and evaluates the director; an integrated facility is conveniently and visibly located, accommodating a variety of groups and resources with a separate area for adults and designated parking; the library is connected with a larger network, regional system, or consortium; the principal has a strong desire for success and teachers support the concept; one highly motivated professional librarian is in charge; there is regular communication and planned cooperation between public library and school staffs; and there are no restrictions on access to resources or on the circulation of materials.

INTRODUCTION

Dual use libraries (note: dual not duel!) are not new. The language changes over time but the essential elements remain the same. Whether discussing dual use libraries, the school-housed public library, the joint-use, combined, or community library, or co-located libraries, the basic principle is consistent: a common physical facility from which library services are provided to two ostensibly different communities of users.

It is important to distinguish dual use libraries from other levels of cooperation. Generally, libraries and systems may cooperate at least informally in sharing resources, services, and expertise. These levels of cooperation may range from simple courtesy (class visits), to specific services for a related group (homework centers), to more formal cooperation (joint programs for promotion of reading); much less common is collaboration, in which two equal partners solve common community problems together (for example, an outcomes-based joint family literacy initiative).

Although terms are often used interchangeably, this article distinguishes between cooperation between two agencies and actual co-location of staff, collections, and services. There are many examples of successful cooperation (see, for example, Haycock, 1989, for a succinct summary of possibilities). There are fewer examples of successful co-location viewed through the lens of rigorous assessment.

The most common dual libraries are combined public (that is, secular, fully tax-supported) school (more commonly high school than elementary school) libraries and public libraries, usually in smaller communities. Less common are dual academic and public libraries; where these occur they are typically college and public libraries, less commonly large universities. The most recent notable exception is the San Jose State University Library and the San Jose Public Library in California. This has been variously described as a consummated courtship, a mutually beneficial relationship, a marriage of convenience, a planned or arranged marriage, and a shotgun marriage, no doubt depending on one's philosophical position and perspective rather than a particular set of key success factors.

Regrettably, the possibility of dual use libraries not only inflames passion but also seems to release all reason. One need only peruse the professional literature to realize that research is less commonly reported, where it even exists, than the experiences of both zealots and nonbelievers. Titles and subtitles include "A success story!" "Together at last," "The long over due partnership," "A call to action!" as well as "A case against combination," "Don't do it!" and "A blueprint for disaster." The many, many examples profiled are based on assumed or presumed successes and the experiences of unmitigated catastrophe. The focus of this article is specifically on school and public library combinations and the research that informs predictors of success.

Given certain conditions, mergers of school and public libraries may benefit both the community and the school. Where at least minimum separate service is not provided, combined facilities might be better, but they have not proven to be more economical when compared to an equivalent level of independent service; and they are usually initiated by school administrators and school boards due to their own lack of staff or funds. Indeed, one criterion for determining whether to proceed is whether the level of service will be at least equal to, or better than, two separate entities.

Articulation of general advantages and disadvantages, positive aspects and negative aspects, have developed from early reports of public librarians' unease with the "school-housed public library" (White, 1963). These have been extended by more recent examples reported in the literature.

ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES

To start with the upside, possible advantages or positive aspects of integrated services can include an improved collection, extended or better service, less duplication of effort and resources, more electronic and media services, and better use of funds. This can translate into professional staff where none existed previously, longer hours, and a broader range of information sources and literacy programs for the community. The bottom line is that there may be no viable alternative for a reasonable level of school or public library service in a small community. A joint library can become a community focal point.

Possible disadvantages or negative components include the possibility that fewer adults are willing to…