Before embarking on Lesson 3 I had no clue how to go about searching and selecting reference materials for a school library. The process seems daunting given that most print reference materials are becoming a thing of the past in favor of being replaced with their online counterparts.
The first thing that struck me was when “the collections of the [school library media center] are developed and evaluated collaboratively to support the school’s curriculum and to meet the diverse learning needs of students” (Rieding pg. 15, para. 1). This is evidently not the one size fits all model that many schools are subscribing to by centralizing library purchases. What works for one school will not work for another.
In regards to the evaluation process of reference materials I appreciated the text definition of “a good reference source is one that serves to answer questions and a bad reference source is one that fails to answer questions” (Rieding pg. 19). The issue thus becomes differentiating good reference source from a bad reference source. While I looked at the British Columbia Ministry of Ed. Document entitled: Evaluating, Selecting, and Managing Learning Resources I found the document to be outdated. The last printing was in 2002 and the library program has changed vastly in eight years. I found the most useful information in the text and what I took away from the section of the text regarding the selection of reference materials was a series of questions to ask myself when evaluating online or print reference resources:
1) How current are the contents? If not up to date then it is not worthwhile investing in.
2) Who is behind the information? Are there any biases because of sponsorship? If so it is not reliable.
3) Is the information appealing and accessible? Can the students read it? Is the material laid out in a way that is appealing, but not overwhelming?
4) Is this needed? Is this filling a hole in the current collection?
5) Is it in my budget? Often the biggest deciding factor.
When Rieding discussed issue of the maintenance of a reference collection I raised my eyebrows. I can only imaging Rieding taking a look at the library in our school. We would not have many books left if we weeded our collection of non-fiction books older than 5 years. Our school budget is $1500 a year. Which in five years amounts to $7500, hardly enough to maintain the entire library let alone replace all the non-fiction books in our school library. Hopefully with the advent of online reference resources the ability to keep up with up to date information will be easier; especially if school districts or provincial education ministries buy the rights at a group purchase price.
I read the section in Reference Skills regarding weeding with my eyebrows raised "personally take them to a dumpster and throw them in!" (Rieding pg. 21). If I remember correctly that happened somewhere in BC a few years ago. A few concerned members of the public saw this act and were outraged. They felt that schools could be not in dire need of more funding if they were throwing out what they saw as perfectly good resources. I guess they did not reading Riedings article! In the district I work in the disposal of outdated books is handled very discreetly to avoid this type of publicity. Some students online suggested the idea of donating the used books to third world countries. I completely disagree as I feel that we should not be sending used, outdated material even if it makes us feel good. As
Monika Coutts pointed out "these children need to have books that they can connect to. Not western values and circumstances that they cannot relate to. Better to use the money that would be used to ship them and buy them new books from their own country. That way their own economy is being tapped into, their own language is being used, and their own culture is being recognized and made valuable. I believe we better aid third world countries by providing them with the funding to buy books in their own countries.
I appreciated the comment by fellow course participant Carole Fleetham. Carole pointed out the article by "Crying Over Spilled Milk" by Gail Dickinson. Gail discusses the issue of discarding books and relates it to a jug of spoiled milk. If the milk in your fridge has gone bad, why would you keep it? Because you spent money on it? Or because your fridge might look empty? Gail uses the acronym MUSTY when weeding books. Misleading information, Ugly, Susperseded by better work, Trivial and Your collection has no use. This is easy and simple to remember.
The process of evaluating and selecting reference materials will continue to evolve as the materials do. As Doug Johnson pointed out in his article Managing Digital Resources “given the changeable nature of online resources, reviews may no longer reflect the actual product” (Johnson pg. 47).
Sources
Johnson, Doug. (2007, September). Managing Digital Resources. Library Media Connection 25(6), 46-49. Retrieved September 12, 2007, from Academic Search Complete database
Rielding, A. (2005). Reference skills for the school library media specialist: Tools and tips, 2nd ed. Worthington, Ohio: Linworth Publishing, Inc.
No comments:
Post a Comment