Monthly Archives: January 2020

ETL503 Assessment 2 Part B – Reflection

Posted on by
Reply

One of the exciting yet challenging features of the school library is change. The speed of change. The pervasiveness of change. The digital revolution (O’Connell, Bales and Mitchell (2015) that has swept the world has transformed the information landscape and the people who inhabit it. Bringing new formats, digital content, changing publishing models, shrinking print collections, increasing digital collections. But it is still all for the same purpose. The school library still exists to help students find, create and explore ideas (Lamb 2015), to assist students to learn to navigate the information landscape confidently, critically and efficiently. Central to that purpose is the development of a comprehensive, balanced and accessible collection. And central to that is the collection development policy.

 

We all share the ultimate destination: we want students to be life-long learners. Capable, confident, efficient, ethical and flexible thinkers. While the end destination is the same for all schools, the scenery, route and landmarks are all different. Our approach to collection development and management must be reflective of the community in which we work and the goals and aspirations of that community. It is the responsibility of the teacher librarian to ensure that the library’s policies and procedures support and implement the mission of the school (ALIA and ASLA 2005).

 

The elements of a collection development policy allow teacher librarians to assess the state of the collection presently, posit the ideal state of the collection and formulate a plan to move towards that goal. I discussed collection evaluation strategies in my blog post, Collection Evaluation. One of the challenges faced by teacher librarians is developing a strong collection that supports the needs, wants, expectations and interests of the school community now and is also flexible enough to be useful as technology and pedagogy continue to develop. Loh and Sun (2019) argue that it is the preferences and interests of the readers themselves that determine whether print or digital resources are more effective. Print is heavy, not updated and takes up valuable shelf real estate, yet students prefer it in some circumstances (Copyright Agency, 2017; Johnston& Salaz, 2019). But what about picture books? Richter and Courage (2017) found that younger readers were more engaged in e-books than in print. It is therefore important for the school library to offer a variety of formats and delivery methods so that readers of all persuasions might access information in their preferred format. This should be reflected in the goals and selection criteria of the collection development policy.

 

Along with a diversity of formats, the collection development policy should reflect the desire to create a collection that represents a diversity of viewpoints (Disher, 2014). All students have the right to see themselves reflected in the characters, stories and problems they read about (Braxton, 2018). Recognising themselves in characters that face hardship and overcome challenges encourages them to do the same when they are experiencing difficulty. Seeing the world through many different lenses allows students to develop empathy and intercultural understanding (Brown, 2016; Veltze, 2004).

 

Are school libraries and teacher librarians to disappear as teachers and students access resources directly online? Finding reliable, accessible and authoritative information online can mean sifting through a lot of unreliable and irrelevant resources in order to find what is needed. I wrote about this in my discussion post in Forum 2.4b and in my comments in Forum 2.4a on the work of Michelle Wheeler. Strong selection criteria combined with reliable selection aids ensure that resources included in the collection are reliable, authoritative and relevant to the school community. Yet, to make sure resources selected meet the needs and interests as closely as possible, it is desirable to include the school community in decision making processes (Viner, 2016). I discussed some strategies for this in my blog post, With Whom the Buck Stops. Regular review of the collection development policy and the selection criteria is desirable in order to ensure the collection continues to meet the needs, wants, interests and expectations of the school community. I discussed this in my blog post, Selection and Deselection. Part of the review cycle should include an evaluation of the collection. Doing this regularly is especially important in a time of rapid change to curriculum such as has been seen since the introduction of the Australian Curriculum and the related state syllabus documents. Keeping abreast of changes in syllabus documents and pedagogical developments allows teacher librarians to ensure resources and services provided remain up-to-date.

 

Changes in technology available in schools has and will continue to be rapid (Domeny, 2017). This has implications for the teacher librarian in determining how the development of digital collections will proceed. Changing software and hardware can mean that resources quickly become unusable, for example, many devices can no longer access CD and DVD resources as they do not have the necessary drives. Software that is developed for older operating systems may not be compatible with newer versions. Resources that can be accessed by iPads may be inaccessible to Android devices and so on. This should be kept in mind when selecting resources and access patterns: what is cutting edge now will likely be obsolete in five years time. The changing technology space brings some exciting new tools and pedagogies but it also brings new safety concerns. Gillies (2017) argues that digital security is a major concern in schools that requires more the virus protection, firewalls and content filtering. She advocates placing greater attention on digital citizenship and cyber security. These are, arguably, part of learning to navigate the digital information environment safely and effectively. The challenge is to keep students safe from inappropriate content without straying into censorship (Rumberger, 2019). Here, too, we must be ever mindful of the context. What is appropriate in one school may be positioned just over the line in another. I considered this in my discussion post in forum 6.2.

 

Part B References

 

ALIA & ASLA. (2005). ALIA-ASLA policy on school library resource provision. Retrieved from https://www.alia.org.au/about-alia/policies-standards-and-guidelines/alia-asla-policy-school-library-resource-provision

Brown, D. (2016). School libraries as power-houses of empathy: People for loan in the human library. International Association of School Librarianship.Selected Papers from the …Annual Conference, , 1-10. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/docview/1928619177?accountid=10344

Copyright Agency. (2017, February 28). Most teens prefer print books [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.copyright.com.au/2017/02/teens-prefer-print-books/

Domeny, J. V. (2017). The relationship between digital leadership and digital implementation in elementary schools (Order No. 10271817). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1896954900). Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/docview/1896954900?accountid=10344

Disher, W. (2014). Crash course in collection development. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com

Gillies, A. (2017). Creating a healthy digital environment for 21st century learners. Independence, 42(2), 60-61.

Johnston, N., & Salaz, A. M. (2019). Exploring the reasons why university students prefer print over digital texts: An Australian perspective. Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association, 68(2), 126-145.

Lamb, A. (2015). Makerspaces and the school library part 1: Where creativity blooms.

Loh, C. E., & Sun, B. (2019). “I’d still prefer to read the hard copy”: Adolescents’ print and digital reading habits. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 62(6), 663-672.

Oberg, D., & Schultz-Jones, B. (eds.). (2015). IFLA school library guidelines, 2nd revised edition. Den Haag, Netherlands: International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. Retrieved from https://www.ifla.org/files/assets/school-libraries-resource-centers/publications/ifla-school-library-guidelines.pdf

O’Connell, J., Bales, J., & Mitchell, P. (2015). [R]Evolution in reading cultures: 2020 vision for school libraries. The Australian Library Journal, 64(3), 194-208. doi:10.1080/00049670.2015.1048043

Richter, A. & Courage, M. L. (2017). Comparing electronic and paper storybooks for preschoolers: Attention, engagement, and recall. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 48, 92-102.

Rumberger, A. (2019). The elementary school library: Tensions between access and censorship. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 20(4), 409-421.

Veltze, L. (2004). Multicultural reading. School Library Media Activities Monthly, 20(9), 24-26,41. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/docview/237132103?accountid=10344

Viner, J. (2016). Collaboration : school libraries. Synergy, 14(2).

ETL503: Module 5.1 Collection Evaluation

Posted on by
Reply

Module 5 introduces a comprehensive chapter (Johnson, 2014) that deals with the many and various techniques teacher librarians could choose to employ in order to evaluate their collections. Johnson includes all types of libraries in her work, and this provides interesting comparisons with my (admittedly somewhat limited) experience with school libraries. Johnson identifies 11 possible strategies, to which I have added my thoughts on their usefulness in my context:

Evaluation Strategy Description Advantages Disadvantages Usefulness in context
collection profiling A statistical description of the collection at a point in time. It may list information such as a count of titles in a particular section of the collection, a count of titles by imprint year etc Provides baseline data for future collection development activities. Provides quantifiable data for presentation to stakeholders. Can identify areas that need improvement and support budget requests. Does not consider the breadth, condition or quality of the titles counted or how well those titles meet the identified needs of the school community. Collection of this data may be useful as a jumping off point, however, for meaningful evaluation to take place, complementary strategies would need to be employed.
list checking Librarians check items held against a trusted list of quality resources. Simple to apply. Lists are available that are relevant to many contexts. Credible and reliable lists are assured by the reputation of those compiling them. Lists used must be relevant to the specific context. Lists must be regularly updated. If a suitable list could be obtained that matched the specific context, this is a useful technique. This strategy could be combined with circulation analysis and curriculum/collection mapping
direct collection analysis A person who is familiar with what a quality collection includes in a particular field physically inspects the resources provided to meet those needs. Useful when the collection or scope is small. The physical state of the collection can be ascertained and plans for repair, replacement or augmentation framed. Useful for evaluating several aspects of the collection at once Only considers the condition of the resources actually on the shelf at the time. Best suited to small, narrow collections. Librarians might not be objective. To some extent, this is done in primary school libraries each year during stocktake.
comparative statistics Comparison of various vital statistics with those of a trusted, aspirational model. May include collection size, materials expenditure, staffing levels, etc Can assist in identifying the relative strengths and weaknesses of the collection. Data is readily available and quantitative comparisons simple to draw. Numerical counts can not measure quality or the extent to which the resources counted meet the identified needs of users. This sort of evaluation provides limited useful information in a primary school setting.
application of standards Collection and resource standards are compared with the current collection to determine the extent to which the collection meets the relevant standard. Clear areas of strength, weakness and non-strength can be identified and strategies extrapolated to move forward. Standards are the result of opinion. Different circumstances and contexts might require different standards (meaning they are no longer exactly “standard”). If a suitable set of standards could be sourced, this would be an interesting activity to undertake. I would assess one element or section at a time in order to improve the overall library experience over time.
citation studies Similar to list checking, librarians look for commonly cited texts in a particular field and then determine whether those titles are available in the collection. Identifies items for selection consideration. Data is readily available. Lists of commonly cited texts can be difficult to attain in the primary setting. Teacher librarians could study student bibliographies, however, this will be heavily weighted in favour of items that are present in the collection. In the primary school setting, citation of fiction texts is much less common than citation of non-fiction. Students may struggle to identify quality sources, so citations may be weighted in favour of what is already available. It may be difficult to seek citation aggregates from the wider community in this age group. List checking might be a more valuable tool in this area.
circulation studies Provides data about how frequently resources are circulated by interrogating LMS. Indicates that particular titles are being heavily used and may need additional copies purchased, or that resources are not being circulated. Can be used to compare patterns of usage and possible changing community needs. A negative circulation record does not indicate why the resource is not being borrowed. A positive circulation record only shows the resource is being borrowed, not how it is being used. Does not consider items that are not present in the collection, but desired by users. This data forms a valuable starting point and points to areas for further investigation, but is not conclusive in and of itself.
in-house studies Gathers data about resources that are used on site but not borrowed. Captures information missing from circulation studies. May interfere with user privacy perceptions. Only captures data about resources located, does not include unsuccessful searches. Requires all resources used onsite to be retrieved or reshelved by staff, which, given the available staffing levels, is not realistic in the primary school setting.
user surveys and focus groups Users are asked for feedback on target areas. Responses are analysed and aggregated. Can help to identify areas in which needs are not met. Data collected can be both quantitative and qualitative. Does not capture the feedback of non-users. Users might not have a sophisticated understanding of what a quality collection should be like. Users may be unaware that their intended uses and actual behaviours may vary. Structuring effective survey questions can be difficult. This could be an effective strategy for a primary school setting if care is taken to include a cross-section of the school community in the survey/focus groups.
interlibrary requests A user who checks the catalogue for a particular item, finds it absent and decides they still need it, might request the item from a partner library. Statistics can be obtained allowing librarians to study patterns in the requests. Could help identify resources for selection consideration. Gathering of statistics is simple. Any changes in this area could indicate a shift in user community needs. Does not capture users who go elsewhere to find required resources. Relies on inter-library loans being available. As primary school libraries are usually stand-alone entities, interlibrary loans are not common.
document delivery test Library staff simulate users. First, determine whether the library holds a particular item on a citation list, then go get it. See how long it takes to supply the target item. Provides an objective measure of the libraries ability to meet the needs of users. May identify issues relating to cataloguing or collection management. Library staff are more familiar with the collection than most users, so this test may not show up some issues. Compiling a list of representative titles can be challenging. This could be an interesting strategy for evaluating the fiction and junior fiction collections as students are often looking for particular titles or authors. In the primary school setting, users tend to seek non-fiction resources on specific topics rather than individual titles, so it might be more beneficial to take a collection mapping approach in this area.

 

Reference

Johnson, P. (2014). Fundamentals of collection development and management [American Library Association version]. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/lib/csuau/reader.action?docID=1711419&ppg=312

ETL503 Module 4.1: Copyright and music

Posted on by
Reply

Module 4.1 concerns copyright issues in schools. Copyright is the set of rights held by the creator of a creative work (National Copyright Unit, n.d.c). While the teacher librarian is not responsible for policing copyright, they are responsible for educating the school community about their copyright obligations and providing information about changes to copyright law as appropriate. It is also generally the responsibility of the teacher librarian to keep a record of any copyright transactions or applications. This was an interesting piece of information that I had not previously been aware of. I had thought it the responsibility of the person applying for use of a work who would keep the records, but of course, it stands to reason that a central place for maintaining such records would be needed and, as the information specialist in the school, the teacher librarian is, in my view, the most logical choice.

Module 4.1 suggests reviewing information regarding the use of music in schools. I have chosen to investigate two aspects of this that are commonplace in my school to determine whether current practises are satisfactory and if so, which part of the Act is to be relied upon to justify the use from a copyright perspective. If current practises are found to be inconsistent with the requirements and obligations, what changes should be made to ensure the school is meeting its statutory obligations? The two questions I have selected are:

Can students perform pieces of piano music at school assemblies during movement and transition times?

Can the band master provide copies of sheet music to all members of the school bands?

In relation to the first question, currently individual students are invited to entertain the assembly while classes are lining up and taking their seats and again while classes are dismissed at the end of the assembly. They are not provided with sheet music, though some do bring it with them, and they are not instructed as to the piece/s they play. Students generally perform the pieces on the piano. Assemblies are attended by students and teachers and are not recorded or communicated in any way. Initially, I thought this activity might be covered under section 28 of the Australian Copyright Act, however, upon closer reading, this exception only applies when there is an educational purpose. However, the performance would be covered under the APRA License, which is an agreement with the Australiasian Performing Right Association allowing students and staff of all public schools, Catholic schools and most independent schools to perform (but not necessarily communicate) music live at any event connected with school activities (National Copyright Unit, n.d.b).

The second question of whether the band master may copy and distribute sheet music to all members of the band has intrigued me for some years. When I was a student in primary school I noticed that the band members were issued with folders containing the music needed for that year’s program, but had to hand it back at the end of the year. I wondered why this was so. Later, as I began working in schools and had contact with more than one school’s bands, I noticed that this practise seemed to be the norm. I suspected that copying the sheet music in its entirety would be infringing copyright and therefore, the school must have had to purchase multiple copies for each student to have one. It would make sense for those copies to have been reused each year, much as sets of textbooks were. It turns out, though, that schools may, under the AMCOS Agreement, make copies of legitimately obtained sheet music (National Copyright Unit, n.d.a). However, schools are limited to 30 copies of each original.

References

National Copyright Unit (n.d.a) Copying sheet music in schools. Retrieved from http://www.smartcopying.edu.au/information-sheets/schools/copying-sheet-music-in-schools

National Copyright Unit (n.d.b). Performing and communicating music in schools. Retrieved from http://www.smartcopying.edu.au/information-sheets/schools/performing-and-communicating-music-in-schools

National Copyright Unit. (n.d.c). Smartcopying: 1.1 What is copyright?. Retrieved from http://www.smartcopying.edu.au/copyright-guidelines/copyright—a-general-overview/1-1-what-is-copyright-

 

ETL503 Module 3 – Acquisition and Accessioning

Posted on by
Reply

Module 3 discusses important aspects of acquiring and accessioning resources for the school library. Firstly budgeting is considered. Secondly acquisitions workflow and finally licensing arrangements for digital resources.

Section 1 encourages us to think about the budgeting procedures in our libraries. Sufficient funds are needed to purchase resources selected for inclusion, and to maintain a balanced collection. Teacher librarians are responsible for the considered use of funds available, and are sometimes to be involved in the setting of those budgets with the school leadership. In my school library, the teacher librarian sets out a list of requests for the following year’s budget, and this is then considered by the Principal and SAM in conjunction with the requirements of all the other programs operating within the school.

In section 2 we are encouraged to evaluate library suppliers and consider the features one should look for in developing a working relationship with a particular supplier. Possible outsourcing activities are also considered. Some suppliers offer pre-curated and selected collections. Some offer shelf-ready books, some offer downloadable MARC records etc. In my library, we use downloadable SCIS records for cataloging, and Australian Standing Orders for general collection building. It is important to review subscriptions such as the Standing Orders regularly. This particular service is offered by a specific publisher and exclusively provides content from that publisher. While the selections included are usually quality resources that do meet the needs of the school community, it is important to also consider the offerings of other suppliers.

In section 3: e-resources, we are encouraged to read about and ask questions such as:

  • Can I use this in a school?
  • Can I copy this content and distribute to multiple devices? How many copies? Can users distribute the content? Am I liable if they do?
  • Can I convert this content into a different format?
  • Can I share it with another school, eg interlibrary loan?
  • Will I own this content if I stop subscribing? What if the publisher removes it from sale? What if the content is superseded by a newer version of itself?
  • Can I preview this content, or receive a refund if it is not what I was led to believe