January 9

Journey to Discovery: Maintaining balance and then some

In the very first week or two of this course, we discussed and commented on the difference between collection management and collection development in the discussion forum. Full circle is now closing in. In the last weeks, I am throwing myself on it as you would a bucking bronco in an effort to, at least, retain my balance. I admit, I have struggled with the differences and my discussion forum response really reflects the confusion (Travassaros, 10/11/19).

‘Nutting it Out’

Logic would have it that development is a part of management. A teacher-librarian would go through the processes of evaluating the already acquired collection, establish the gaps and needs of the collection, collaborate with the principal, teaching colleagues, research most appropriate methods of selection and acquire the collection. All of this should be completed within the confines of the collection development policy, which would have been created earlier. Module 6 content reveals that this process  should be all about the what and why.  Therefore, defining what the context is and why have the purpose and goals of the library and (and make policies about that) and then manage the collection. My understanding is that the policy documents should be brief and broad and that there is a distinction between this document and the procedural document. When Module 6 content discusses the “how”, this would relate to the procedural information – how the policy is to be carried out or put in place. In contrast, it should be detailed and convey the method sequentially, exactly and logically. My question is: are the two – policy and procedures separate documents?

The collection development policy, according to the Australian Library and Information Association Schools and Victorian Catholic Teacher Librarians (ALIA Schools & VCTL), should contain the vision, values and principles of the school library. It should possess information about: the rationale, a policy statement, the audience, authorship, related documents, date of ratification and date for review (2007, p.8). Its “Collection Development” section consists of two sub-headings of “Collection Development Policy” and “Collection Development Procedures” – somewhat indicating that they could be separate.

However, on further research the IFLA clearly reveals that the procedures for developing and managing the collection should be either as an appendix or in a separate document to the collection management policy document (Oberg, & Schultz-Jones. (eds.), 2015, p. 34). The terms have now changed from collection development policy to collection management policy. Therefore, are the procedures part of the management process rather than the development process? Oberg and Schultz-Jones (2015) proceed to include procedures for selection and acquisition of the collection as part of this document.

After researching policy documentation, my findings are as follows:

  1. ALIA Schools & VCTL (2007, p.8-9) centers around vision, values and goals stood out. Their documentation is in context with the school environment in developing lifelong learners. Equitable access, scope of resources covered, central management, reference to national or international school library benchmarks, staff responsibilities and reference to related documents individualised this document. These organisations focus tailoring their policies around education – providing school library benchmarks,  giving students the best chances of obtaining the best education now and into the future by providing equitable access and crafting the collection goals, priorities and the scope of resources. To do this, the teacher librarian should evaluate the collection, have the ability to budget and apply needs to the goals such as collection gaps in the curriculum and student interest or fiction areas.
  2. The National Library of New Zealand (n.d.) emphasis includes management for donations or gifts, copyright and procedures for handling complaints; and
  3. IFLA’s Guidelines for a collection development policy using the conspectus model – publishes a very prescriptive model for a libraries in general. The headings include: introduction (including the mission statement, policy purpose, intended audience (also a brief comment about the community, description of programs served by the collection, size of the collection, budgetary overview, agreements made which affect policy or procedures); general statements (elements that determine the how the development evolves); narrative statements (policy statements unique to your library); subject profiles (collection strengths and weaknesses and reflection/revision of goals); collection evaluation methods; collection depth indicators (numerical assessment); language codes; policy implementation and revision timetables (Biblarz, Tarin, Vickery & Bakker, 2001 p. 2-6).

Coming full circle, the answers are not so simple. Context and individualisation of collection development policy is important. Collection development is part of collection management. Procedures can be part of the development or management process. Additionally, I am sure I will articulate my ideas further when actually completing the assessment.

References

Australian Library and Information Association School, & Victorian Catholic Teacher Librarians. (2007). A manual for developing policies and procedures in Australian school library resource centres. Retrieved from http://www.asla.org.au/policy/policy-development-manual.aspx

Biblarz, D., Tarin, M-J., Vickery, J.,  & Bakker, T. (2001). Guidelines for a collection development policy using the conspectus model. (p. 2-6). Retrieved from hhttps://www.ifla.org/files/assets/acquisition-collection-development/publications/gcdp-en.pdf

Lachmann-Anke, P. & M., (n.d.) Pixabay Images. Retrieved from https://pixabay.com/illustrations/males-3d-model-isolated-3d-model-2091714/. Image used in accordance with Pixabay licence.

National Library of New Zealand. (n.d.). Developing a collection management plan. National Library of New Zealand. Retrieved from https://natlib.govt.nz/schools/school-libraries/collections-and-resources/your-collection-management-plan/developing-a-collection-management-plan. Use of this document was used in accordance with Creative Commons attribution 3.0 New Zealand.

Oberg, D., & Schultz-Jones, B. (eds.). (2015). 4.3.1 Collection management policies and procedures. In IFLA School Library Guidelines, (2nd ed.), (pp. 33-34). Den Haag,
Netherlands: IFLA. Retrieved from https://www.ifla.org/files/assets/school-libraries-resource-centers/publications/ifla-school-library-guidelines.pdf

Travassaros, E,. (10/11/19). Module 1 Discussion Forum, Charles Sturt University. Retrieved from https://interact2.csu.edu.au/webapps/discussionboard/do/message?action=list_messages&course_id=_38050_1&nav=discussion_board_entry&conf_id=_74553_1&forum_id=_169572_1&message_id=_2573224_1.

 

January 9

Pre-meditated self-censorship

Self-censorship is refraining from doing or saying something that another person may find objectionable (“self-censorship”, 2020). This can be intentional or subconscious. Most teacher-librarians and librarians are brought into the occupation ready to follow their association or guiding body’s instructions regarding self-censorship. Some may not realise they are partaking in it. This blog entry focuses on those instances where it is recognised by the “guilty party”.

Geralt @ Pixabay

There are many organisations, some stricter and seemingly unforgiving than others with their guidelines. In an international school library context, the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) conveys that contained in the school library’s Collection Management Policy it should state that the school librarian has a responsibility to resist calls for censorship – no matter what the source is (Oberg, D. & Schultz-Jones, B., 2015, p. 34). The message here is blunt and seemingly inflexible. However, there are many situations where this may put the teacher librarian in a difficult situation whether it is due to the principal/executive input or a parent. Additionally, the material provided to students needs to be age-appropriate in schools, which the IFLA also recognises (Oberg, D. & Schulty-Jones B., 2015, p. 33) . Therefore, in a school, there is a type of censorship occurring.

Australian School Libraries Association in their ASLA School Policy Statement – School Bill of Rights, stops short of using the word “censorship” generally and states that the school library should provide materials “appropriate” to the user, as well as put “principle above prejudice and reason above prejudice”. It continues to reveal that the school library is concerned with the preservation of freedom which is achieved through the development of informed citizens [ASLA, 2011 (2018)]. Therefore, ASLA recognises that censorship does happen in a school library and it is appropriate in some circumstances.

However, the reality is more complicated than the ideal. Jacobsen, in her article Unnatural selection, reveals many reasons why censorship is on the rise. Reasons that include increasing controversial content, challenges for certain books to be excluded from the collection and age-appropriate concerns (Oct 2016, p. 20-24). Dawkins articulated that the ideal is not always the reality when it comes to self-censorship. Interestingly, she discusses the fear of challenge some teacher librarians may feel when selecting their collection – whether by principals and/or other teachers. Their choice may be in conflict with intellectual freedom and their own beliefs but they can feel pressured into self-censoring due to Noelle-Neumann’s Spiral of Silence theory (as cited in Dawkins, 2018, p. 8-9) – the fear of isolating oneself. I can imagine that support of the principal would very much affect a teacher librarian’s decision on how “free” choice would be perceived to be. Dawkins also mentions that it is important to communicate with the principal and ensure measures such as collaboratively constructed selection policy is in place as what is perceived is not always true (Dawkins, 2018, p. 8-12).

So, is self-censorship a dirty word? It can certainly put teacher-librarians in a difficult situation – having to decide or negotiate between what the ideal is and what the reality might be. Perhaps, it should be thought of as something to aspire to – an ideal that teacher-librarians should attempt to incorporate in their libraries. However, there are sometimes variables that are outside their control and other factors again will influence how the situation eventuates.

References:

ASLA, [2011 (2018)]. School Policy Statement: School Bill of Rights. Retrieved from https://asla.org.au/resources/Documents/Website%20Documents/Policies/Bill%20of%20Rights_2018.pdf

Dawkins, A.M. (2018). The decision by school librarians to self-censor: The impact of perceived
administrative discomfort. Teacher Librarian, 45(3),p. 8-12. Retrieved from http://libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/A_Dawkins_Decision_2018.pdf

Geralt @ Pixabay (n.d.). Pixabay. Retrieved from https://pixabay.com/photos/censorship-man-newspaper-read-news-4266441/. This image was used in accordance with Pixabay licence (Free for commercial use, no attribution required).

Jacobson, L. (2016). Unnatural Selection. (cover story). School Library Journal62(10), p.20–24. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lih&AN=118573940&site=ehost-live

“Self-censorship”. (2020). In Merriam-Webster, Incorporated. Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Retrieved from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/self-censorship

Oberg, D., & Schultz-Jones, B. (eds.). (2015). 4.3.1 Collection management policies and procedures. In IFLA School Library Guidelines, (2nd ed.), (pp. 33-34). Den Haag,
Netherlands: IFLA. Retrieved from https://www.ifla.org/files/assets/school-libraries-resource-centers/publications/ifla-school-library-guidelines.pdf