That phrase gets mentioned a lot in the literature. But no one ever seems to stop and define what they think it means nor why is it such an important descriptor of library collections. More often than not it seems to mean the balancing of fiction VS non fiction or; print/physical VS digital/networked resources. It is both of these and more.
Reading for enjoyment has been an important focus for me in my current school library (Wilson, 2021, May 8 and; Wilson, 2020, November 21). While it is important to my students who have few or no books in their home I have started teaching inquiry learning using the Information Search Process every week. Students have started to question why – why are we doing this in the library? I had focused so much on reading for pleasure and reading print that they didn’t know the library had other resources and another purpose. There is the real balance needed – the balancing of purpose.
I am slowly coming to understand that the school library collection should not be viewed simply as accessing resources to read. It’s accessing the resources needed to support the kind of learning required for the 21st century. Every school library organisation operates on a similar principle but I had forgotten until Newsum (2016, p99) quoted the American Association of School Librarians, that the goal of the TL and therefore the school library collection is:
“promoting activities and technology tools that engage students, encourage the development of lifelong learning, and the endorsement of the various literacy skills inherent in a participatory culture (AASL, 2009).”
So collection development is not about meeting curriculum needs – at least not traditional curriculum needs, not books and reading materials. It’s about ensuring students and teachers have the resources, the equipment and the skills to access the content. The Australian curriculum’s General Capabilities highlight these needs. Balance, therefore, is not as important a measure as purpose. And you cannot future proof your collection without future proofing the role or mission of your school library – everything else hangs on that (Braxton, 2018).
I have previously acknowledged this by stating that the most important measure of a resource is its “usefulness” (Wilson, 2021, March 12 and; Wilson, 2021, April 23). But, at the time I was thinking about the collection as a series of resources to be read. Exactly what Larson (2012) warned against but even he was thinking of content and not the resources and skills needed to access the content.
And NO ONE else at school gets it (Wilson, 2021, April 23). So the collection development policy (CDP) becomes a strategic document because it is your teaching tool for teachers, otherwise known as advocacy. I thought it was just to help justify spending so you would keep getting money but it’s far more complex (Wilson, 2021, March 12 and; Wilson, 2021, April 23). An ongoing issue for me is that TLs are continually being asked to lead but the school does not recognise us as leaders (Wilson, 2021, April 23). So the CDP becomes a leadership tool. We create it in collaboration with the school leaders, listening to their expertise while also sharing ours – teaching the teachers what is needed to make sure our teaching and learning and the resources required to go with it follow the well known evaluation tool that TLs are supposed to teach students, the CRAP rule – make sure resources are current, reliable, have authority and achieve their purpose (Oddone, 2018). Even though I complain that I have been given no time to do this, I also plan ways around it, like creating instructional videos that teachers can watch in their own time (Wilson 2021, February 28 and; Wilson, 2021, March 20).
A big change in my understanding of school library collections is that the definition of resources is NOT restricted to reading material. It must also include the hardware and software required to read and to create (Schultz-Jones & Oberg, 2015). This causes equity issues for me in my current school which I complain about (Wilson, 2021, March 12 and Wilson, 2021, March 19). However, contributors to the IFLA Trend Report Update of 2018 are urging TLs to solve these problems in new and creative ways, often collaborating with the community that they are serving (Moody, 2018 and; Baig, 2018).
It should also be acknowledged that a valuable resource is time. I chose to delete that part of the St Bede’s CDP – where the librarian talked about teaching students how to search the internet. But time is a resource – it should be included in the CDP or at least acknowledged. Newsum believed that a CDP should include the promotion and teaching of digital resources (2016). Scholars and practitioners are also suggesting that students should be actively involved in the processes of the CDP; evaluating, weeding and selecting. However, if you want your students to help evaluate the collection, first you have to teach them how (Wilson, 2021, May 8). This also requires the resource of time. Previously I reported being ill-equipped to deal with the rejection of a budget request for an online encyclopedia subscription for the reason that students must learn to “Google” (Wilson, 2021, May 14). Now it seems that scholars agree with my boss. The TL should teach students how to curate their own websites for research (Oddone, 2018). So now I have my response ready:
That’s fine. Here are the tools I will need to achieve this: laptops, internet access and; time. Time to collaborate with classroom teachers and time to teach the skills needed to curate and share. I also need time to evaluate my own deficiencies in these skills, research what tools are available and learn how to use them myself.
And these principles belong in a collection development policy to make it balanced, purposeful and future proofed.
References
Baig, R. (2018). Libraries and community networks: A collection of win-win opportunities. p6. IFLA Trend Report 2018 Update. https://trends.ifla.org/files/trends/assets/documents/ifla_trend_report_2018.pdf
Braxton, B. (2018). Sample collection policy. https://500hats.edublogs.org/policies/sample-collection-policy/#deselection
Larson, J. (2012). CREWing children’s materials. In CREW: A weeding manual for modern libraries, (pp. 33-36). Austin, TX: Texas State Library and Archives Commission
Moody, G. (2018). Libraries are under attack: Here’s how they can fight back. p9-11. IFLA Trend Report 2018 Update. https://trends.ifla.org/files/trends/assets/documents/ifla_trend_report_2018.pdf
Newsum, J.M. (2016). School collection development and resource management in digitally rich environments: An initial literature review. School Libraries Worldwide, 22(1), 97-109. Doi.10.14265.22.1.008
Oddone, K., (2018).Supercharge students’ digital literacy skills with content curation. SCIS Connections, 105.https://www.scisdata.com/connections/issue-105/supercharge-students-digital-literacy-skills-with-content-curation/
Schultz-Jones, B. & Oberg, D., (eds.). (2015). 4.3.1 Collection management policies and procedures. In IFLA School Library Guidelines, (2nd ed.), (pp.33-34). Den Haag, Netherlands, IFLA
Be First to Comment