I don't think it's hyperbole to say that actually reading the text of the CA study was transformational to my entire way of thinking. (HAVES, HALVES, AND HAVE-NOTS: SCHOOL LIBRARIES AND STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT IN CALIFORNIA Douglas L. Achterman)
First, I got a real sense of the history of school libraries in CA and why they are as bad as they are. Frankly, school libraries were never great in CA--we have never been at the head of the pack in terms of staffing levels and are sadly still behind (a LOT) in that arena. The issue was compounded when prop 13 passed and then again when ESEA funding that had been used to expand school library programs shifted into a block grant, giving local schools control of the funds--the result was that within a few years only 29% of the funding was being used for school libraries (likely a lower percentage now). With the exception of a short-lived funding "boom" around 1999-2000, school library funding in CA has been awful and is not protected. In addition, schools in CA are not required to have TLs to earn WASC accreditation (in an interview I watched with Lance, he mentioned that this was the saving grace for most high schools, but apparently not in CA!). The state legislature has never mandated funding levels for school libraries, even when funding was in place, probably because doing so would mean they would have to sustain funding (this is my conjecture). Libraries are "discretionary," and so when cuts must be made, the library is a prime target despite all the evidence that quality school libraries are essential to quality schools.
So, we were already lagging behind (FAR behind, as in last place), then got a little boom with the tech boom, but we never got caught up, particularly in terms of staffing levels, and then the tech bust killed that funding and the recession has caused additional cuts. Since California has never had strong libraries in most schools (around 1% of elementary schools and 30% of high schools are staffed at levels considered adequate), most teachers, administrators, and students have no concept of what the TL SHOULD be doing and how it would impact their school communities if they had strong school libraries. We have a history of ignoring research, or of taking notice but not making funding decisions based on it.
Maybe I should start a ballot initiative. . . but first I'd have to figure out how to pay for it.
I sent the pdf of the study to my daughter's school district superintendent, but seriously, I doubt he has time to read it and you can't squeeze blood from a turnip. What I CAN do is lobby for her school (which is parent participation) to offer something like "information literacy and technology" as one of their "enrichment" classes, which are parent lead, and offer to teach it (you know, when I'm finished with my degree and have time since I likely will not be employed). Maybe then I can wiggle my way into giving inservice trainings in the district and preach the TL gospel.
At any rate, my point was that I learned a LOT from this study that has nothing to do with collaboration and has helped me to understand school libraries in California. While this knowledge is, frankly, depressing, it is useful. I also found a TON of useful resources for my lit review. I could seriously have just mined this one study and gotten all my resources from it.
Something else I learned from reading this study: all the numbers and statistics make my head hurt. n=r whatever? Thank goodness for the textual analysis of those stats!
What is clear to me is that there is plenty of research on the impact of quality school libraries and TLs. There is also plenty of research on TL/CT collaboration. I'm excited to read the article cited in the CA study that details traits (including personality) of TLs that make teachers WANT to collaborate with them. Trends I see so far:
1. TLs must be viewed as leaders on campus before teachers want to collaborate with them.
2. Time must be given for collaboration, both for the CT and the TL. Without that time, collaboration tends not to happen or tends to be cursory and not as valuable.
3. The attitude of administration has a huge influence on the value placed on collaboration.
4. Even if collaboration is under-utilized, TLs can still impact student achievement by offering other services.
5. TLs who can help CTs infuse lessons with technology are more sought after for collaboration.
6. TLs who give inservice training, esp. w/ technology, are more sought after for collaboration.
7. TLs must make teachers aware that they want to do more than bring them resources--taking part in lesson delivery and assessment is vital.
No comments:
Post a Comment