Assignment+6

Final Reflection   **LIBE 463** **Assignment 6 – Final Reflection**

“School libraries are access points for rich and diverse resources available in various media formats, on the Internet, and through e-mail. School libraries are gateways to global information sources, acting as portals through which students and teachers find diverse ideas and perspectives from around the world” (CASL, 2006, p.7).

This will be the quote hanging in my soon to be library office! I want the library to become that “gateway” to information for every single person in the school community.

When I began this journey called LIBE 463, it was done with trepidation and very little confidence. There seemed to be an overwhelming amount of information and practices that I needed to conquer, with little background knowledge and few “tools.” However, as time went by, I began to build upon and collect the tools necessary to create a library that hopefully will be that “gateway” to the information world.

Theme 1 had us studying our __School Community__. At the beginning of this project I had the misconception that I had a good understanding of the literacy needs of the school. As a classroom teacher I knew that helping children become lifelong readers was one of the most important goals of the literacy program. However, getting students to that stage was the challenging part. Joseph Sanacore (2006) in his article //teacher-librarians,// //teachers, and children as cobuilders of school library collections// states “an important part of becoming an effective reader is to be able to select reading material with relative ease and facility. Regrettably, what children prefer to read is often not available in schools” (p. 24). All too often in my own classroom I filled it with resources that I thought would be “best” for my students, not necessarily resources that reflected both their interests and resources that covered the curriculum.

By completing a community analysis it allowed me to focus on what the needs of the school community were, not what I thought was applicable. This analysis had me focusing on the different ethnic groups, stability of the students, as well as the impact of finances. It made me cognizant of the fact that all these factors influence the choices and types of resources needed to fulfill the goal of having students become lifelong learners. “Information gathered in a community analysis and through needs assessments should be major influences for collection development and the school media center program” (Bishop, 2007, p. 24). It soon became apparent that without conducting a community analysis, it would be wasting not only the school finances, but wasting the minds of students.

The second theme covered in this course was __Evaluating your Collection__. The Surrey School District has a very clear outline of the selection and evaluating objectives for their school libraries. The policy states, “the Teacher-Librarian evaluates the existing collection and determines what materials are needed to enhance and expand the collection” (Surrey School District Teacher-Librarian Handbook, 2007, p. 8). This includes materials that enrich curriculum, stimulate growth in factual knowledge, enable and promote informed judgments, and contribute to heritage (TL Handbook, p.8). After reading the collection development section of the handbook, it was clear that evaluating was a large portion of the process. A process that needs to be done in order to not only enhance and expand a collection, but a process that creates a library that supports all types of learners and learning styles.

Supporting students in their learning process by incorporating resources that meet the different learning needs should be the focus of every collection. Bishop (2007) states, “the evaluation of any library collection, including a school library collection, should be based upon how well the collection serves the needs of the users” (p. 141). Agee (2005) also states that “because collection evaluations help librarians better realize what materials are in their collections, and how well they are meeting their collection development goals, collection evaluation is seen as one important measure of collection development” (p. 92). After completing my own collection evaluation by using catalogues, bibliographies, physical examinations, circulation studies, and surveys, it enabled me to get a clearer picture of the resources in my area of study that was either lacking or needed refreshing.

Looking back, I realize how naive I was about the evaluation process. I simply thought it was a matter of asking a few questions, and searching the government learning outcomes. Although asking questions and searching the Prescribed Learning Outcomes was a large part of the evaluation process, it soon became apparent that this was only one piece of the whole “picture” of  evaluating a library collection. By combining the quantitative and qualitative data allowed me to get a well rounded “view” of the Grade 3 science collection, and provided me with the information for the next step, the process of selection.

As a new teacher-librarian, collection evaluation will **need** to become part of my “repertoire.” Although it may feel tedious and time consuming, it is a very important component for a well-rounded and effective library. Completing and recording the information would not only be valuable for a general overview of the collection, but imperative to outline future goal areas and further funding for the library.

Theme three was the dreaded __Weeding the Collection__! This by far was the most difficult and soul “searching” of all the areas of this course. As stated in my reflection in assignment four, looking through the lens of a classroom teacher there simply was no justification for “throwing” books away. After reading the articles and having my “aha” moment, I realized that weeding is not a “hazard” of being a teacher-librarian, but a critical and yes, “life- saving” element of every library. Allen (2010) reported that “collections that are not weeded often contain unacceptable stereotypes and misinformation, not the reliable, accurate, unbiased, up-to-date materials your patrons need” (Weed’Em and Reap, p. 32). We need to keep the best interests of the school community in mind at all times, and by removing “outdated and unused materials” (Bishop, 121) this can be accomplished.

After the completion of the assignment I no longer viewed weeding as an evil or dark part of being a teacher-librarian. It is the exact opposite! Johnson (2003) writes in his article that “small, but high quality collections are infinitely better” (para. 7). Without weeding, the library can become dangerous if filled with outdated, misleading, or inaccurate information. “Systematic weeding is not an irresponsible disposal of school property; rather, it is a necessary service that enhances the credibility and usability of the school library” (SD 36 Teacher-Librarian Handbook, 2007, p. 12).

To create a library collection that is highly effective and filled with quality resources, I developed a plan or method that I would like to adopt when I am given the opportunity to work in a school library. I would limit my weeding to only one section at a time due to time constraints, and to not become overwhelmed. I would begin by physically checking the resources using the MUSTIE criteria from the Surrey School District (SD 36 Teacher-Librarian Handbook, 2007, p. 12). When time allowed, I would then check the circulation of that section. If there were a resource in question, I would pull it aside and peruse more closely at the earliest convenience to make the decision of discarding or keeping. The final goal of the weeding project would be to have a quality library that enhances and encourages student literacy.

__Issues in Collection Management__ was the fourth theme that addressed the areas of policies, policy making, intellectual freedom and censorship. After responding to the group discussion online, I began to inquire about the legal situation of the “banned” books in Surrey. A few of my colleagues reported that they knew some of the people that were at the school at the time, and stated that it had turned into a very ugly situation. It divided the staff and parent population, which in turn affected the student population. Between reading all the information and listening to your podcast, finding and ear marking the policies and procedures in this area of collection management was of high priority.

I began searching for policies and statements that could be used in the case of a challenged resource. The “IFLA (International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions) (1999) therefore calls upon libraries and library staff to adhere to the principles of intellectual freedom, uninhibited access to information and freedom of expression and to recognize the privacy of library user” (para. 5).

As intellectual freedom was a major concern in Surrey, I wanted to make sure that I was able to find the district’s policy and get a better understanding. Adams (2008) states that by having a policy it not only outlines the criteria of the selection, but also “provides guidance on the selection of potentially controversial resources” (p. 28). To ensure that I am prepared for a situation like this, I searched the SD 36 Teacher-Librarian Handbook. It states, “the School Library Program is committed to the defense and promotion of intellectual freedom. Teacher-Librarians are committed to the conviction of education, not censorship, is the key to helping students to be successful in critically and thoughtfully acquiring, analyzing, and synthesizing information” (p. 3). The handbook also gives a detailed outline of the procedures to follow to deal with challenged materials, as well as a challenge form that needs to be filled out and then sent to the appropriate authorities.

The job of the teacher-librarian is to ensure that students receive the best possible resources to help them become critical thinkers. Part of collection management is to make sure this happens, even if there may be some areas of contention. I am feeling a little more confident after studying the SD 36 Teacher-Librarian handbook. Applying the policy and information of collection management and researching the challenging of resources, I feel that I am better prepared. Referring to the procedure policies of the district as the “backbone” for my selection decisions, I can later amend and revise different areas to suit the school community.

Theme five dealt with __Acquiring Resources for Your School Library__. Selecting materials for a school library encompasses many aspects. I soon realized that books were not just chosen because the TL “thought” they might be applicable or interesting to the school community. “Responsible collection development requires that broad considerations govern the evaluation and choice of a single item” (Bishop, p. 59).

The most difficult aspect was narrowing down the resources and deciding which materials were the most suitable in both “worthiness” and “timeliness.” Once I began digging it soon became apparent that this part of a TL’s job could become overwhelming. There was a plethora of incredible resources, that with unlimited funding you could create the most fantastic library. However, with the realities of budget cuts, I realized that I needed to stick to a “plan”. As a reference guide I referred back to Bishop’s 10 ways to evaluate a resource. They included: “authority, appropriateness of content to users, scope, authenticity, treatment, arrangement and organization, instructional design, special features, materials available on the subject, and value to the collection” (p. 59).

Armed with all this information I began compiling the list of resources. After my four-hour stay at Kidsbooks, I realized that although the list of resources was extensive, not all were necessarily ones that fell into Bishop’s evaluative criteria or ones that were “highly” recommended by the book reviews. Sieruta (2003) stated that “one part of me wants to protest, ‘Too many cooks…’ but another part recognizes that the more input a review receives, the more balanced the outcome will be” (p. 636). The focus of the nonfiction resource selection was based on Danielle Ford’s //More than the// //Facts: Reviewing Science Books//. Ford (2002) reports that a good science book is one that is accurate, is error-free in text and illustration, contributes to the community and practices of science, and poses open- ended questions. Relying on the expertise and reviews of professionals had me focusing on the best resources. Using Bishop’s criteria, the reviews, and my years of teaching in the classroom, I was able to clearly justify the resource choices.

My vision and goal is one that features the library to become the hub of the school. I want the staff, students, and parents to view the library as the “gateway” to the world. Building upon my new found knowledge, incorporating all that I have learned this semester, I know that it is the first step in creating a library that will be that “portal” to ideas and perspectives.

“Perhaps no place in any community is so totally democratic as the town library. The only entrance requirement is interest.” - Lady Bird Johnson

[]

References:

Adams, H. R. (2008). The materials selection policy: Defense against censorship. //School Library Media Activities Monthly// XX1V(7), p, 28.

Agee, J. (2005). //Collection evaluation: a foundation for collection// //development.// Volume 24 (3), 92-95. Retrieved from [|www.emeraldinsight.com/0160-4953.htm]

Allen, J. (2010). Weed’em and Reap: The art of weeding to avoid criticism. //Library Media Connection// 28(6), 32-33. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.

Bishop, K. (2007). //The Collection Programs In Schools.// Concepts, Practices, And Information Sources (4th ed.). Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited

Canadian Association For School Libraries. (2003). //Achieving Information// //Literacy.// Standards for School Library Programs in Canada. Ontario: Canadian Association For School Libraries

Ford, D. (2002). More than the Facts: Reviewing Science Books. //Horn Book// //Magazine,// 78(3), 265-271. Retrieved from Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts with Full Text database.

IFLA Statement on Libraries and Intellectual Freedom. (1999, March 25). Retrieved from []

Johhson, D. (2003). Weed! Writing, Speaking and Consulting on School Technology and Library. //Library Media Connection,// Sept/Oct. Retrieved from []

Sanacore, J. (2006). Teacher-librarians, teachers, and children as cobuilders of school library collections. //Teacher Librarian//, 33.5, 24-29. Retrieved from []

School District No. 36 (Surrey). (2007). //Teacher-Librarian Handbook.// Retrieved from []

Sieruta, P. (2003). Reviewing by Number. //Horn Book Maazine//, 79(5), 635- 643. Retrieved from Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts with Full Text database.