Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Still “Destined To Be Under-Read”? Access to Books for Visually Impaired Students in UK Higher Education

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Publishing Research Quarterly Aims and scope

Abstract

A questionnaire was circulated to librarians and learning support staff in all 109 UK universities asking how they were dealing with material only available in print, accessing electronic copies of books for print-disabled students and whether they felt a change in the law was required to make publishers take greater responsibility for accessibility issues. At the same time publishers’ policies were retrieved and an interview was conducted with a senior manager at JISC TechDis, the disabilities section of the Joint Information Systems Committee. Findings: While some publishers are going to considerable lengths to be helpful, others are not, and many learning support staff are struggling, either through lack of time or finance or both, to deliver the level of service they aspire to provide. An overwhelming majority of respondents to the questionnaire believe on grounds of cost and morals that there should be a change in the law, either by way of amendment to existing legislation or through the creation of a separate Act.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Article in CILIP Library + Information Gazette [see Ref 1].

  2. Figures supplied by Cambridge University Press on 10/02/2009.

  3. Figures supplied by Oxford University Press on 08/01/2009.

  4. Interview with Mark Majurey of Taylor & Francis, 27/11/2008.

  5. Interview with Alistair Mcnaught of TechDis, 16/10/2008.

  6. Correspondence with Maggie Sarjantson, 08/05/2009.

  7. “the publisher’s view”. Presentation given by Clare Hodder of Palgrave to CLAUD Conference 2008. Supplied via email by Jane Woodward of Sheffield university 01/05/2009.

  8. The National Instructional Materials Accessibility Standard.<nimas.cast.org/> [Accessed 17 May 2009].

  9. 2008 report of the National Students’ Forum, see bibliography.

  10. Correspondence with Georgina Bentliff of the Copyright Licensing Agency on 09/06/2009.

References

  1. Joint NC. UK copyright law: A curse not a blessing? CILIP Library + Information Gazette (2007). 24/08/2007 to 06/09/2007.

  2. Copyright (Visually Impaired Persons) Act 2002. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2002/ukpga_20020033_en_1. Accessed 10 June 2009.

  3. Special Educational and Additional Needs Act 2001. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/acts2001/en/ukpgaen_20010010_en_1. Accessed 10 June 2009.

  4. Individual with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 2006. http://www.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/idea2004.html. Accessed 10 June 2009.

  5. See the TechDis website. http://www.techdis.ac.uk. Accessed 17 May 2009.

  6. Publisher lookup service. http://www.publisherlookup.org.uk/. Accessed 10 June 2009.

  7. Publishers Association guidelines on accessibility. http://www.publisherlookup.org.uk/. Accessed 10 June 2009.

  8. Accessibility policy of Sage. http://www.uk.sagepub.com/repository/binaries/VIP_policy.doc. Accessed 17 May 2009.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to all those who responded to the questionnaire which forms the basis of this article. Three people deserve particular mention: Caroline Moughton of Oxford Brookes University raised awareness of the questionnaire amongst potential respondents, Paresh Ravel of St. Andrews University sent a message concerning the questionnaire to all disability departments in the country, and Liz White of Nottingham Trent University co-ordinated a detailed response from three departments and typed in the data twice when her first attempt at completing the questionnaire failed due to technical difficulties.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guy Whitehouse.

Appendix

Appendix

A list of universities who responded to the questionnaire is given below. They are listed by mission group and then in alphabetical order, not in respondent order.

From the 1994 group: Durham, East Anglia, Loughborough, Queen mary, Reading, St. Andrews, Sussex, York.

From the Russell Group: Birmingham, Bristol, Cambridge, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Imperial College London, King’s College London, Leeds, Manchester, Newcastle, Nottingham, Oxford, Queen’s University Belfast, Sheffield, Warwick.

From the University Alliance: Aberystwyth, Bradford, De Montfort, Glamorgan, Gloucestershire, Kent, Manchester Metropolitan, Nottingham Trent, Oxford Brookes, Portsmouth, Sheffield Halham, University of the West of England.

Information on membership of the various mission groups was taken on 10/06/2009 from http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/UKHESector/FAQs/Pages/About-HE-Sector-and-Universities.aspx.

The other universities who responded are, again in alphabetical, not respondent order: Aston, Birmingham City University, Bolton, Brighton, Brunel, Chester, Edgehill, Hull, Leeds Metropolitan, Napier, Northampton, Roehampton, Robert Gordon University of Aberdeen, Sunderland, Strathclyde, Swansea, University of East London, University of Westminster, Worcester.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Whitehouse, G., Dearnley, J. & Murray, I. Still “Destined To Be Under-Read”? Access to Books for Visually Impaired Students in UK Higher Education. Pub Res Q 25, 170–180 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-009-9124-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-009-9124-0

Keywords

Navigation