My knowledge about school library collections has taken on new dimensions as a result of the learning I have done. While at the beginning of the course I had a somewhat accurate view of what a school library collection is comprised of, the term collection development policy was completely new to me. It is interesting that I have not ever heard of this document in 20 years of teaching when best practice suggests taking a collaborative approach to creating and reviewing a collection development policy (ALA, 2014, para 3; Combes, FitzGerald & Croft, 2018). While a collection development policy has not yet been created in my current school, when this process begins I hope to promote the collaborative model suggested in Doll & Barron (2002, p. 4). Including representative members of the community in the process of creating a collection development policy would have three benefits:

1. Promote a sense of ownership in the policy (Combes et al., 2018),
2. Create a higher profile for the school library, and
3. Justify funding for building the collection envisioned by the policy.

 

My development in understanding the priorities of developing a learner-centered collection can be seen in comparing my first attempt at selection criteria with the selection criteria I adapted for Assessment 1. At first I chose quality and authoritative as my top two selection criteria (Robertson-Jones, 2018, 5 December). After reading Hughes-Hassell & Mancall I came to see the importance of learner-centered selection criteria (2005, p. 89). As a result I changed my top considerations to match the Hughes-Hassell & Mancall priorities:

Addresses the information needs of the learning community, and

Matches learner characteristics (2005, p.89)

I also found the word scope from the Kolbe Catholic College Collection Development Policy (Wesselly, 2010) very useful when I was selecting resources. I added the International Baccalaureate [IB] phrase international-mindedness as a descriptor under scope to emphasize the importance of seeking more diverse resources that will better suit my international students (International Baccalaureate Organization [IBO], 2017). Considering international mindedness helped me to be more aware of how country-centric some resources are and motivated me to search for more diverse options (Robertson-Jones, 2018, Dec 21).

 

Understanding copyright is another area of new learning. Previously I was unaware that there could be restrictions for how things online can be used for educational purposes (Robertson-Jones, 2019, 6 January). As a result, I did not address copyright issues in my annotated bibliography because I assumed there were no restrictions on the educational websites I chose. Some close looking at conditions of use for the resources I chose from assessment 1 helped me to see the significance and convenience of Creative Commons [CC] licensing. Before learning about CC licensing I thought of copyright as a way to protect work; now I can see how choosing and applying the correct CC license can be a positive step towards sharing your work (Coates, 2013). This inspired me to look into the right license for my reflective blog. After choosing a more restrictive license, I read about the purpose behind the International 4.0 License which I then applied to my blog (Creative Commons, n.d.). Understanding and honoring copyright is an area I still have many questions about (Robertson-Jones, 2019, 12 January). However, my initial learning about the importance of copyright compels me to keep investigating.

 

Probably the biggest mindshift for me was in understanding the topic of censorship. Flipping the discussion of censorship to only selecting the best materials for the learning community initially appealed to me (Asheim, 1953, p.63). However, after further reading and consideration I saw that in this context the term “selection” is just a more palatable way to package censorship. Understanding the many forms of covert censorship and self-censorship helped me to see censorship as a much more widespread and insidious practice than I was previously aware (Robertson-Jones, 2018, 26 December). I agree with Jenkinson that it should be a priority for a school to have a preemptive discussion about censorship to help everyone understand the dimensions of the term and the process for challenges (2002, p.22-23). This gives one more reason for the need for a collaboratively-created collection development policy: to uphold the values of intellectual freedom and protect against self-censorship. As the American Library Association [ALA] states,

 

Members of the school community involved in the collection development process employ educational criteria to select resources unfettered by their personal, political, social, or religious views. (ALA, 2014, para. 5)

 

I plan to continue learning about the responsibilities I hope to one day have as a teacher librarian in protecting intellectual freedom.

References

 

American Library Association [ALA]. (2014). Access to resources and services in the school library.

Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpretations/accessresources

 

Asheim, L. (1953). Not censorship but selection. Wilson Library Bulletin, (28), 63-67. Retrieved from

http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/censorshipfirstamendmentissues/notcensorship

 

Coates, J. (2013). Creative Commons in the the classroom. [slideshare]. Retrieved from

http://www.slideshare.net/Jessicacoates/creative-commons-in-the-classroom-2013

 

Combes, B., FitzGerald, L., & Croft, T. (2018). Policy and procedures: Contents. In Collection development

policy [ETL503 Modules: Topic 6]. Retrieved from Charles Sturt University website: https://interact2.csu.edu.au/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_32995_1&content_id=_2550582_1

 

Creative Commons (n.d.). Understanding free cultural works. Retrieved from Creative Commons website:

https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/public-domain/freeworks/

 

Doll, C.A. & Barron, P.P. (2002). Managing and analyzing your collection: A practical guide for

small libraries and school media centers. Chicago and London: American Library Association.

 

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

Retrieved from http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/7277053/selection-censorship-simple-arithmetic

 

Hughes-Hassell, S. & Mancall, J. (2005). Collection management for youth: Responding to the

needs of learners. Chicago: ALA Editions.

 

International Baccalaureate Organization. (2017). Programmes. Retrieved from

http://www.ibo.org/en/programmes/

 

Robertson-Jones, M. (2018). ETL503 assessment 1: Annotated bibliography [Graduate Degree Assessment

Paper].

 

Robertson-Jones, M. (2019, January 12). Creative commons: Attributing images. In Forum 4.2: Creative

commons licensed resources [Online discussion comment]. Retrieved from Charles Sturt University website: https://interact2.csu.edu.au/webapps/discussionboard/do/forum?action=list_threads&course_id=_32995_1&nav=discussion_board_entry&conf_id=_59376_1&forum_id=_143737_1

 

Wessely, T. (2010). Collection development policy. Kolbe Catholic College: Learning Resource

Centre.