Effective Library Signage. SPEC KIT 208.

Fuente: ERIC Institute of Education Sciences
Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ragsdale, Kate, Comp., Kenney, Don, Comp.
Format: Recurso educativo Open Access
Language:en
Published: 1995
Subjects:
Online Access:
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1867181304354701312
author Ragsdale, Kate, Comp.
Kenney, Don, Comp.
author_facet Ragsdale, Kate, Comp.
Kenney, Don, Comp.
Ragsdale, Kate, Comp.
Kenney, Don, Comp.
collection Education Resources Information Center
contents Effective Library Signage. SPEC KIT 208. Ragsdale, Kate, Comp. Kenney, Don, Comp. Academic Libraries Higher Education Library Statistics Library Surveys Research Libraries Signs Visual Aids To gather information on effective library signage, the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) distributed a survey to its 119 member libraries in fall 1994. Eighty libraries completed the survey. Responses overwhelmingly show the tremendous variety in the way libraries manage signs. Sixty percent of responding libraries report that their institutions do not have a signs system, manual, or written guidelines and policy. Of the 32 institutions that do have a systematic approach to signs, 22 have an on-campus office that produces signs, and 4 institutions require that permanent signs for all campus buildings be produced centrally. Only 12 libraries have signs manual; 17 have written guidelines and policies; and several of the 18 without existing guidelines are in the process of developing guidelines or manuals. Only 23 libraries have systematically evaluated the signs in their buildings. Upper and lower case letters are combined for signs in nearly two-thirds of the responding libraries; seven libraries use all upper case; two use all lower case. Thirty-seven different color combinations for letters and background were offered as visible and legible for signs. A white background with black letters is considered the most effective in libraries. Respondents identified 23 color combinations as difficult to read. Libraries tend to use a combination of sign construction sources, both in-house and outside the library. For libraries that construct signs in-house, over 90% report that signs are computer-generated. The staff at most libraries walk through the building to decide where signs are needed; many libraries incorporate user input as well. One-half of the responding libraries report that vandalism of signs is only a minor problem; only nine report that it is a major problem. Although 37 libraries report that their signs do not yet conform to Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements, a significant number of libraries are incorporating raised lettering and Grade II Braille for the newer signs. Examples of institutional guidelines, manuals, guidelines and instructions, and specifications are provided. A 19-item annotated bibliography is included. (MAS)
format Recurso educativo Open Access
id eric_ED385288
institution ERIC Institute of Education Sciences
language en
publishDate 1995
record_format eric
spellingShingle Effective Library Signage. SPEC KIT 208.
Ragsdale, Kate, Comp.
Kenney, Don, Comp.
Academic Libraries
Higher Education
Library Statistics
Library Surveys
Research Libraries
Signs
Visual Aids
Effective Library Signage. SPEC KIT 208. Ragsdale, Kate, Comp. Kenney, Don, Comp. Academic Libraries Higher Education Library Statistics Library Surveys Research Libraries Signs Visual Aids To gather information on effective library signage, the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) distributed a survey to its 119 member libraries in fall 1994. Eighty libraries completed the survey. Responses overwhelmingly show the tremendous variety in the way libraries manage signs. Sixty percent of responding libraries report that their institutions do not have a signs system, manual, or written guidelines and policy. Of the 32 institutions that do have a systematic approach to signs, 22 have an on-campus office that produces signs, and 4 institutions require that permanent signs for all campus buildings be produced centrally. Only 12 libraries have signs manual; 17 have written guidelines and policies; and several of the 18 without existing guidelines are in the process of developing guidelines or manuals. Only 23 libraries have systematically evaluated the signs in their buildings. Upper and lower case letters are combined for signs in nearly two-thirds of the responding libraries; seven libraries use all upper case; two use all lower case. Thirty-seven different color combinations for letters and background were offered as visible and legible for signs. A white background with black letters is considered the most effective in libraries. Respondents identified 23 color combinations as difficult to read. Libraries tend to use a combination of sign construction sources, both in-house and outside the library. For libraries that construct signs in-house, over 90% report that signs are computer-generated. The staff at most libraries walk through the building to decide where signs are needed; many libraries incorporate user input as well. One-half of the responding libraries report that vandalism of signs is only a minor problem; only nine report that it is a major problem. Although 37 libraries report that their signs do not yet conform to Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements, a significant number of libraries are incorporating raised lettering and Grade II Braille for the newer signs. Examples of institutional guidelines, manuals, guidelines and instructions, and specifications are provided. A 19-item annotated bibliography is included. (MAS)
title Effective Library Signage. SPEC KIT 208.
topic Academic Libraries
Higher Education
Library Statistics
Library Surveys
Research Libraries
Signs
Visual Aids
url https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED385288