Module 5 – Collection mapping in school library

Collection mapping is one of the important collection evaluation strategies in a school library setting. It is a valuable process that involves assessing, organising, and optimising the library’s collections to better meet the needs of students, teachers, and the wider community.

To approach collection mapping in a school library, firstly, it is important to understand the curriculum and educational goals and identify key subject areas and topics that align with the curriculum. Collaboratively working with classroom teachers or having discussions with subject experts in the school will provide first-hand information about their specific needs and the resources required for their lessons.  Secondly, conduct a thorough inventory of the existing collection to have quality information for evaluation. As mentioned by Johnson (2018), evaluation and assessment can inform librarians in their future decision-making. Based on the results of the evaluation, identify gaps in coverage or redundant materials and determine if there are areas where the collection can be expanded to better support the curriculum. TLs also need to ensure that the collection represents diverse perspectives and cultures in the school community. The collection should cater to the varied interests, needs, and backgrounds of the students.  Thirdly, create a collection development plan that outlines goals, criteria, and strategies for ongoing evaluation and effectively allocate a budget for the identified needs. Finally, TLs need to regularly update and evaluate the collection, seeking feedback from teachers, students, and other stakeholders for future acquisitions.

Collection mapping needs to be approached systematically and collaboratively to ensure the school library’s resources align effectively with educational goals and provide a valuable teaching and learning environment for students in the school.

 

Johnson, P. (2018). Fundamentals of collection development and management. American Library Association.

 

 

Module 4 – Regulating online content in schools

This reflective journal is based on the ALIA online content regulation in the context of students’ learning in school.

It has been a common operation for schools to apply internet filters to restrict students’ access to certain websites or specific content on a website, such as a video on YouTube. I think we need to approach this discussion from two perspectives. Firstly, by using school internet filters, it can improve students’ safety and prevent them from accessing inappropriate content, thereby simplifying school network management responsibilities. Additionally, web filters potentially could offer some advantages, such as improving students’ concentration and creating a smoother learning environment for better well-being development. Moreover, web filters in schools could significantly reduce teachers’ pressure when conducting any online research or activities. From this perspective, filters are a necessity for every school. They could be considered by schools as safeguards for students.

However, from the other end, I will argue that internet filtering will limit our freedom to access information and ideas. As mentioned by the Australian Library and Information Association, ‘Access to electronic information resources should not be restricted except as required by law’ (2002). What we need to do is assist students with the necessary skills, such as digital literacy, to teach them what to choose, how to choose, and why to choose.  Batch (2014) also pointed out that the implications of internet filtering create both an educational and a social issue, as educators cannot teach students to navigate ethical choices online.  We should promote and facilitate responsible access to quality digital information for young people at school, so they are equipped with the skills and knowledge to use the internet and electronic information efficiently and effectively in the future.

 

Australian Library and Information Association. (2002). ALIA on online content regulation. https://www.alia.org.au/Web/Research-and-Publications/Guidelines/ALIA-on-online-content-regulation.aspx

Batch, K. R. (2014). Fencing out knowledge: Impacts of the Children’s Internet Protection Act 10 years later. Office for Information Technology Policy, American Library Association.

Module 4 – Do we face the same challenges?

This reflection is based on the article ‘Selection & Censorship: It’s simple arithmetic’ by Dave Jenkinson.

The library serves as a lifeline for all of us. We rely on books not only to enhance our reading but also to learn about the world. However, many times, concerns over race, sexual orientation, gender, etc., lead to the banning of certain books. This not only harms our education but also infringes upon our freedom of thought. The library plays a crucial role in youth literacy. Without access to a robust and complete set of library resources and the guidance of professional skilled librarians, learning to read becomes a challenging task.

While I am currently not a school librarian, I believe that we face similar censorship challenges in Australia as in Canada. Censorship should aim to protect our students and assist in selecting the most appropriate reading and learning resources to support individual needs. However, as mentioned in the article, one of the significant challenging form of censorship is invisible self-censorship (Jenkinson, 2002). This can be based on personal beliefs, biases, or challenges from parents and the community. Moreover, a significant portion of the challenges comes from our fellow teachers (Jenkinson, 2002).

Self-censoring is ethically indefensible; therefore, school librarians need to take measures to become strong advocates. Librarians have an obligation to read what students read. This prepares them to respond to questions about the book collections from fellow teachers, parents, or other community members. There are other ways to prepare for challenges and potentially eliminate self-censorship. Dawkins (2018) emphasizes the importance and need for a collection development policy. However, a policy alone is not enough. Hoffman & Wood (2007) agree that a strong relationship and understanding of roles throughout the entire school will help reduce difficulties in dealing with these issues.

 

Dawkins, A.M. (2018). The decision by school librarians to self-censor: The impact of perceived administrative discomfort. Teacher Librarian, 45(3),8-12

Hoffman, F. W., & Wood, R. J. (2007).Intellectual freedom. In Library collection development policies : school libraries and learning resource centers, (pp. 63-80). Lanham, Maryland : Scarecrow Press. (e-reserve)

Jenkinson, D. (2002). Selection and censorship: It’s simple arithmeticSchool libraries in Canada, 2(4), 22.