Importance

Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is interpreted to grant individuals the right to access information, including information in archives—and, therefore, in finding aids. While finding aids were not originally intended to function as the first points of contact between archival users and materials, today, they often do just that. This reality creates challenges for many users because finding aids are not currently created in wholly accessible manners, which impedes users' information access rights. To access a finding aid, a user must be able to find it (discoverable). Once they have found it, they must also be able to use it (usable) and read it (readable) to take full advantage of the information available.

Definitions

Discoverable: Finding aids should be easy to locate on an archive’s website. The path to them should be clearly marked, and they should not be hidden many pages away from the homepage [1].

Usable: Web-based finding aids should use Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) to ensure that all users can navigate them [2]. Using WCAG allows: screen readers to navigate the page, copy/paste logic to remain intact, keyboard navigation to function—and more! 

Readable: 54% of people in the U.S. read at or below a sixth-grade level [3]. Finding aids should be written in language that is simple, clear, and easily understood. It may be tempting to use generative AIs for this purpose, but, right now, they are not up to the task [4]. 

Findings

I analyzed three finding aids using the discoverable, usable, and readable metrics. They were for: The Library of Congress's Robert S. Gottlieb recordings of North Indian tabla, 1956-1972 collection; the University of Maryland's Society for Ethnomusicology records; and Syracuse University's Belfer Cylinders Collection. 

Discoverable

To examine discoverability, I assessed the logic and length of the paths from an archive/library’s homepage to the finding aid itself. The lower the numbers in the table below, the more easily discoverable the finding aid is.

Usable

To examine usability, I analyzed the implementation of WCAG guidelines on each page. To do so, I used WebAIM's Web Accessibility Evaluation Tool (WAVE). WAVE checks webpages against Section 508 and WCAG 2.2 guidelines. In the table below, total errors are the number of errors WAVE returned overall on each webpage. Critical errors are the number of features that would make the page incompatible with a screen reader. Major alerts are the number of errors that make functionality challenging but not impossible.

Readable

To examine readability, I ran the text from each finding aid’s Scope and Content note through a Flesch-Kincaid reading level checker. The table below shows my findings, and the image below that demonstrates the potential differences in text.