shhh... don't tell the ala

Discuss the issues surrounding intellectual freedom, censorship, selection, and in loo parentis in school libraries. Do not restrict your comments to print format only, and consider how long standing programs (such as AR, or highly restrictive filtering) may play a role in intellectual freedom issues. How will you deal with these issues?

I love the ALA. I love that they’re fighting the good fight on important issues, and I am proud to be a card-carrying member of what I think is an important organization. I think that, theoretically, the ALA’s position statements on intellectual freedom are reasonable and aspirational and certainly well thought out. But to me, these statements deal too much in the realm of theory and don’t provide a lot of guidance to librarians in practice (which is fine-- this is just to say that they feel incomplete to me). It also seems, though I don’t know, that the ALA’s position statements apply more easily to public libraries, and that school libraries might face issues of intellectual freedom and censorship in different ways.

The ALA’s statement on Access for Children and Young Adults to Nonprint Materials states: “Recognizing that librarians cannot act in loco parentis, ALA acknowledges and supports the exercise by parents of their responsibility to guide their own children's reading and viewing” (www.ala.org, 2010). I understand that public librarians don’t (and needn’t) act in loco parentis, but I think that statement gets a lot blurrier in a school setting. Teachers do act in loco parentis in all sorts of ways.

Here is my question about nonprint materials: would the ALA condone unrestricted internet access in school libraries? I agree with the ALA’s statement that students should have unfettered access to “a diversity of content and format.” Surely, though, there is information that is so obscene or age-inappropriate that exposing children to it could be harmful to them. School libraries have collection development policies-- books that are appropriate for students are chosen by librarians. Not every book that is published is one that students have access to in school. I believe it should be the same for nonprint resources like the internet. I don’t think children should have unsupervised, unfettered access to the internet. I don’t know much about how filtering software works, but I feel that some level of guidance toward appropriate resources is necessary in school libraries.

As for labeling and rating systems, this is another area where the gap between theory and practice leaves something to be desired. I understand the ALA’s position that adding ratings or other labels to materials that aren’t part of the published product (ratings on movies or video games, for example) is a form of censorship, as it can either implicitly or explicitly limit a student’s access to library materials. However. I believe there are times where some guidance is appropriate and necessary. I think it’s important to consider the intent of the ratings, and the impact that they have. Are ratings there to provide guidance or to deliberately restrict access? It reminds me of the early 1990’s debate over warning labels on music, and the sale of certain music requiring parental consent. Here’s how I feel: warning label= okay; requiring parental consent= not okay. That’s essentially how I feel here.

The other question that comes up for me is, who is doing the labeling? When big bad Accelerated Reader adds ratings for its books, that makes me suspicious (though again, I don’t have a huge problem with it unless books rated MG+ aren’t made available to students who want to read them). If librarians create systems that work for their libraries and their communities, I have less of a problem with that. I realize that puts a lot of power in the hands of librarians, but I think we’re a pretty trustworthy bunch.

An example from the real world. I work in a K-8 private school library. The head librarian is a big proponent of YA literature, and has worked hard to create a teen section that will appeal to middle school readers. Books in the teen section that have particularly mature content or language have a red dot on the barcode-- 7th and 8th graders may check these books out freely, though K-6th grade students need parental permission to do so. I think the ALA would be super cranky about this. To me, it makes practical sense. A book for an 8th grader might really not be appropriate for a 2nd grader. Are the 2nd graders prohibited from browsing through the teen books? No. If a second grader wanted to borrow Twilight (or Breaking Dawn, for that matter), do I think a parent might want to weigh in? Yes. Could I find that second grader a really exciting book about love and vampires that was more age appropriate in the meantime? Sure. If the parent gave their consent, would I have a problem with a 2nd grader checking the book out? Nope.

Could guidelines such as the red dot system be misused and infringe on students’ intellectual freedom? Absolutely, but not necessarily. The head librarian at my school explained to me that this system has freed her up to develop a really rich and varied teen collection, without fretting too much about potentially mature themes or language. So it’s complicated.

No matter what a school library’s policies are regarding intellectual freedom and access to information, they should be clearly communicated to families, through collection development policies, letters home, or other means of family education. And we should of course continually be teaching students how to evaluate books and nonprint materials for themselves.

reflective journal: what's in a name?

What is in a name? Over the last 25 years (probably longer) the title of school librarian has morphed from school librarian to media specialist to teacher librarian. In Canada and California, and maybe other places we are officially teacher librarians. According to AASL we are school librarians. You would be amazed (or at least I am) at the debate and passion this issue incurs. A recent webinar explored the issue, right after AASL's announcement - yes, we are school librarians. What is your take? Does the name matter? Why? Which would you choose? Why?

I have a lot of thoughts about this seemingly innocuous question. Or two questions, really: What do we call ourselves? And, does it matter? I had to go with bullet points here, because my thoughts on this are flying in many different directions.

• It strikes me that this conversation, both the tone of the AASL discussion and the topic itself, reflects a profession that is somewhat in crisis, or at least in flux. If everything is hunky dory and things are going well, then you need to don’t devote a year of time to decide what to call yourself. The thrust of the AASL conversation was about branding and identity to the larger community, but I also feel that part of this question stems from the evolving self-identity of librarians, as well as the pressure of needing to continuously justify the importance of our work. So my first question is, who are we trying to define ourselves for? The public? Ourselves? Both?
  

• There was a lot of talk in the AASL webinar about the shift from an emphasis on information to an emphasis on knowledge. I like this. It reflects the shift in the research from a focus on “information literacy” to “guided inquiry." I think we’ve talked about this in class, too—the idea that information is the means, not the end. In some ways, I think this shift is about an acclimation to an information-saturated world. Perhaps 20 years ago the conversation was about, “Hey wow, look at all of this information!” And now it’s a given that the information is there, and the focus is on what we do with it.

• The move toward (or back to) school librarian as the “official” title for our profession is a way of re-encompassing what librarians do and are responsible for. I don’t know the whole history, but I can imagine that job titles like Library Media Teacher/Specialist and Information Technology High Priestess emerged due to changes in the profession and in school libraries. If librarians weren’t only reading books and helping with print reference anymore, but were doing more media and technology-related work, then perhaps some felt that a new title was needed to reflect these changes. Now I feel like there’s a move to bring it back and say, yes, libraries are changing and librarians are in charge of all of this— books and tech and computers and kindles and reference and databases and all of it— to sort of bring it all back in under the umbrella of librarianship. I appreciate that—it strikes me as a more integrative step than fracturing the job title. It’s post-postmodern!

• That said, I kind of think people should get to call themselves what they want, as a general rule, though I suppose professional associations get to be a little bit fascist about it, if they want to be. It was interesting for me to read some of the comments on the ALA and AASL websites about this issue—some school librarians clearly felt strongly about their professional identity and job title. So yes, names do matter. And I think there’s room for variation, too. I think what’s ultimately most important is that our role is clear to our students, teachers and families that we serve. “School librarian” is simple, direct, and to the point. I must say, I also like teacher-librarian. But maybe the “teacher” should be implied? Like all librarians are teachers?

• I identify myself a school librarian, so I am happy to accept this AASL guideline. I think it’s an appropriate name. It’s easily understood, and it’s broad enough to encompass the many facets of contemporary librarianship.
  

mission statements

School libraries are in a state of flux. As student needs change, and as technology becomes more central to our lives, and as libraries become “media centers,” we need to have an expanded definition of “literacy.” To me, literacy is at the goal of any school library’s mission. I feel that this sentiment is reflected in the AASL’s Common Beliefs, which celebrate reading and learning in many forms.

I feel as though some of the nine common beliefs could almost be mission statements by themselves. In terms of considering them through the lens of the mission statement, I think the most relevant and important beliefs are “School libraries are essential to the development of learning skills” and “The definition of information literacy has become more complex as resources and technologies have changed.” Both of these statements frame school libraries as central to learning, critical thinking, and skill building for 21^st century learners. Some of the other beliefs are important, but perhaps not at the core of what school libraries are about. For example, I agree that “Ethical behavior in the use of information must be taught.” But this isn’t quite big enough an idea for a mission statement, in my opinion.

If I was going to write a school library mission statement, I think the most important ideas to include would be:

• The goal of literacy in multiple forms (information literacy, media literacy) along with comfort and engagement with the printed word

• The goal of helping students critically evaluate information (from encyclopedias to databases to tweets), to better prepare them to engage with the world around them
• Promoting inquiry, curiosity, and self-directed exploration
• Integration of technology into teaching and learning in the library
• The library as a site where community members (students, teachers, parents, administrators, etc.) can come together to interact, collaborate, and learn.

Even as I’m looking at this list, I feel like maybe that’s too much for a mission statement. There’s a lot that I believe libraries can be, so it’s hard to whittle it down to just a few meaningful sentences.

I’m reminded of Joshua Prince-Ramus’s fabulous TED talk about designing the Seattle Public Library building. He presented a diagram that showed the evolution of the public library—how public libraries began with a narrower focus that has expanded over time.

Though he’s talking about public libraries, I feel like this evolution is echoed in the role of school libraries, due if nothing else to the expansion of information in our culture. That libraries can be many things to many people is part of their magic, and yet it’s important to have a clearly defined mission and message.

So I’m not sure if my reactions to the Common Beliefs have changed- I still think they’re pretty fabulous and definitely relevant. Some strike me as more “mission statement worthy” than others, but they are a reminder that defining our goals and beliefs is an important step in achieving them.