Recently Asked Questions (RAQs)

We got a question from a school library...

I was wondering about student privacy when substitutes are in the library. When I started here, subs were able to use the circulation desk to check out material. However, since September we have had one substitute who is also a parent looking up their children’s accounts. We also had another issue with a different substitute looking up material to see what students were checking out. When I found this out it made me uncomfortable and I am no longer allowing subs to circulate materials. I have had some pushback from subs about the sudden limitations. I was thinking that the information would be along the same lines as an adult volunteer. However, I did not know if subs had more privileges to access student accounts because they are district employees. I would like something in writing to reference if admin ever asks.

Faculty and students sometimes advise each other to upload articles downloaded from library-licensed databases into AI tools for summarization, or for study purposes, such as generating study questions and dialogs about the materials. These are not public domain articles that happened to be indexed in a library database.

Many of our faculty have access to ChatGPT EDU, which creates a "walled garden" around the files, preventing them from being used for AI training and treating them as institutional data. However, our students do not yet have access to the EDU account. In addition, many students and faculty are experimenting widely with other free AI tools on the Internet and are most likely uploading all types of files. I realize we cannot stop all of this, but if we have a statement to let library patrons know the proper uses, we are hopefully at least covering our obligations here.

Could you suggest a reasonable policy statement that libraries could publicize to their patrons regarding this issue to help ensure that patrons respect author and publisher rights and that libraries will not end up in legal trouble down the road?

Under what circumstances could faculty face personal liability if they wrongly accuse a student of breaching academic integrity through AI use? Would liability primarily arise under defamation, negligence, or contract/tort law (e.g., duty of care to students)? Would the institution’s liability insurance typically cover individual faculty in these cases?

I’m part of a professional library association that is a 501(c)(3), like the American Library Association, Association for College and Research Libraries, and the Society for American Archivists. Occasionally, the group issues statements in solidarity with various groups, for instance, in protest of police violence against Black people and against Anti-Asian violence. Most recently, the organization identified the hostility of the current political climate against diversity, inclusion, equity, and accessibility (values the organization holds as part of its mission) as a national threat. Are there legal or ethical boundaries for issuing such statements that we should be aware of? Would a statement by the president of the organization, not necessarily reflecting the views of the board/organization, for example, be safer for the organization and/or the president? If we speak out in favor of one group, do we have to do so for every group? There have been no statements in solidarity with women or the gender-queer community, for example, in spite of the violence and bias such individuals face.

Recently, a page at the library made some comments that were less than flattering about how the local town was handling a new subdivision. The town supervisor came to me (we are an association library and not part of the town government) and asked if our personnel handbook had any language about social media use. He shared that the town personnel handbook had a clause about not disparaging the town when you are an employee. Our handbook does not have specific language on this matter, instead stating that “Appropriate use of the Internet, email and social media is expected.” (There are more clauses about how and when to use the libraries social media, but this seems to be the only line about personal social media)

He and I discussed the matter further and he made a suggestion that the library should look in to whether or not a non-disparagement clause should be part of our social media policy. I got the impression he further thinks that should apply to our major funders (mostly, the town).

How, if at all, should libraries handle personal social media use by employees, especially in regards to usage that might disparage the library or the town that funds us?