Think you'd like to present a preconference? They are now accepting applications...more information available here: http://www.ala.org/ala/aasl/conferencesandevents/national/charlotte2009/forpresenters/requestforproposal/rfp2009precon.cfm

The free books were real books that book publishers were giving away for free. If you haven't been to ALA or AASL, most of the vendors make a habit of giving out free books at a certain time on a certain day. You just have to be in the right place at the right time. Try it, you'll like it.

I wanted to take a few minutes to show that gaming also strongly corresponds to the many of the Common Beliefs laid out by the AASL.

Inquiry provides a framework for learning.
Games not only introduce basic skills which are applicable away from the table, they also provide the motivation to explore and refine those skills.

Ethical Behavior in the use of information must be taught.
Through positive experiences in gaming, students come to appreciate the validity of varying approaches to problems and the importance of ethical choices.

Individuals need to acquire the thinking skills that will enable them to learn on their own.
Games often make use of similar skill sets but vary the interface and mechanics through which they are employed allowing players to selectively apply and reinforce prior knowledge.

Learning has a social context.
Games provide opportunities for individuals to develop and practice the skills necessary to successfully share and learn with others.

Do you utilize the reports that can be run through vendor collection analysis packages that if shared, would give principals information about your collections and help justify their need to be updated, expanded? Did you complete the Colorado surveys of past years or the AASL survey that was due March 15^th ?   The report from this survey has valuable information to review with your principal as well - especially as your data compares with other schools similar to yours in Colorado or nation-wide.  The second year of AASL's longitudinal survey, "School Libraries Count!" just closed yesterday.  Participation from those who completed the survey last year is even more valuable this year to use in comparisons.  This data from Colorado’s past years is available on the Library Research Service’s website:  http://www.lrs.org/school_stats.php  

This year's survey posed additional questions about social networking and other electronic tools used in instruction by school library staff and their classroom teacher collaborators. The purpose of this annual survey is to provide longitudinal data for advocacy at the local, state, and national level. Data since the first year has appeared in articles by eSchool News, Education Week, and several general newspapers. Questions regarding the survey may be directed to aasl@ala.org or researched at http://www.ala.org/ala/aasl/slcsurvey.cfm 

Thank you for your comments and all you do for Colorado's kids.

PS:  Sizing Up America’s School Libraries: the First Annual Report on the AASL Longitudinal Survey of School Library Media Centers (AASL National Conference, Reno, October 26, 2007) is now available on the AASL website 

And, watch Keith Curry Lance talk about School Libraries Count! - FYI - I had to view this from home on my laptop to see it.

I know many who actually worked on the development of the instrument, and I've had the chance to sit on evaluation teams (as many of you know, ADEPT is not done by a sole administrator, but rather a team of no less than two evaluators, one an administrator and one a peer.) With many of us being "singletons" in our schools, that peer is usually another practicing LMS from a neighboring school. I've been involved in the evaluation of LMS's a couple of times using the instrument, and I must say it is a fair instrument that really reflects today's school library media program. As a matter of fact, I've used my presence on these teams to "educate" principals on the vernacular of a current best practice library, and gotten some of them look at their program compared to best practice, hoping to be a catalyst for change in a school (i.e. showing how a fixed schedule does not really fit the evaluation instrument--that only an open or flexible schedule fits the evaluation instrument.)

Have I been able to make changes for the schools where I served on the team--particularly ones using a fixed schedule and a librarian as a planning period? No, I cannot say I have. I did though get the last school that I served on the team with to increase the school library budget so that the LMS would not be cited in the instrument on the collection when no monies had been allocated at all. I am proud of that instrument too, and hope that our administrators will take a second look at it now--particularly now that we are getting attention from a national perspective. I am also glad to know that activists in our organizations like AASL President Sarah Kelly Johns and Doug Johnson are giving our state kudos for the evaluation program we use to assess LMS's. Do I think it will be a catalyst for major change? No. I will continue doing my part in educating administrators when I serve on evaluation teams, I promise. But we all know some things look good on paper, and that ometimes the reality bites. I wonder how many LMS's in our state that have been required to do ADEPT have passed with flying colors, even though they have pathetic budgets, outdated collections, and no time for true collaboration (b/c they are the planning time for teachers)? I would wager many. Also let's not forget the only LMS's who have to go through the evaluation program are LMS's who enter the profession as a first year educator, experienced LMS's who move into South Carolina (and that is not every district or school, even), or LMS's who work under progressive administrators who see the program and want to strive for change (and hope that the evaluation will be either a cure-all or cause a vacancy to fill.) Either way it is viewed, I still think the LMS Adept program deserves the merit and attention it is getting, and it makes me proud to work as a teacher librarian in the state of South Carolina.

One more note--for those of you who are using blogs for personal professional development, please note that the AASL Blog has relocated and renovated. Update your feeds to this address. Check out the new and improved AASL Weblog at http://aasl.ala.org/aaslblog or http://aaslblog.org

The Conference Travel Award is open to professionals employed as an information or visual resources specialist serving faculty and students in a school of architecture. The Student Travel Award invites applications from students who are currently enrolled in an ALA accredited graduate library school program or have recently graduated (within 12 mos. of graduation). Each award is worth $250.

Application forms plus the Conference program and registration information are available on the AASL website http://www.architecturelibrarians.org/
Please join us in Houston.

The AASL Conference Travel Award is intended to encourage attendance and
participation at the annual AASL conference and in the activities of the
organization, and to support the professional development goals of
librarians employed in architecture school libraries in the United States
and Canada.
The conference is being held in Houston, March 27-30, 2008.

Award Amount:
$250.00 for travel expenses

Eligibility:
Applicants must be professionals employed as an information or visual
resources specialist serving faculty and students in a school of
architecture.

Detailed information, guidelines, and the application form can be found on
the AASL webpage http://www.architecturelibrarians.org/

Application deadline is February 1, 2008

I will report on the conference when I return. I always have good intentions to blog while at a conference but it is hard to do because the days and evenings are so busy. So, by the end of next week I should be blogging again. Thanks for your patience.

PS A friend lent me guide book to Philadelphia and it indicated that you never call the city Philly unless you are from Philly. So, I'm going to Philadelphia!

I did not begin with these misgivings; instead, I initially felt the faint stirrings of excitement when I first read the “Common Beliefs.”   For me, the nine belief statements that preface the standards encapsulate the ideals that both guide and inspire our profession: reading is a window to the world; inquiry does provide a framework for learning; and school libraries are essential to the development of learning skills.  But doubt crept in when I noticed what is missing from the belief statements and what is not translated into action in the standards. My misgivings solidified as I considered how to teach the skills, dispositions, responsibilities and self-assessment strategies.  And I was moved to write, when I realized the implications not only for teaching, learning and collaboration, but also for how school libraries and by extension school librarians will be perceived.  

As AASL President Sara Kelly Johns notes in another context, “In a time of budget cuts and confusion about the role of library media specialists,” now is most emphatically not the time to fail to embed in national standards for students’ learning the critical importance of equitable access and school libraries; nor is it the time to fail to reaffirm the vital role of library media specialists.  Unfortunately, only the belief statements state the critical role of school libraries and library media specialists to student achievement and belief statements are not standards.  Standards drive instruction and assessment, not belief statements. 

Another problem is that not all of the belief statements have been translated into teachable and assessable standards and indicators.  Common Belief # 2 states: “Inquiry provides a framework for learning.  To become independent learners, students must gain not only the skills but also the disposition to use those skills, along with an understanding of their own responsibilities and self-assessment strategies.”  “The disposition to use those skills” is difficult and I would argue in some cases impossible to either teach or assess.  For example, Standard 1.2.6 states, “Display emotional resilience by persisting in information searching despite challenges.”  How do you teach/assess emotional resilience, especially at the middle and high school levels when library media specialists see students sporadically and to complete a specific task?

Unfortunately, the problems with the Dispositions in Action do not end with the twinned problems of assess-ability and teach-ability.  Other problems with Dispositions in Action include that it:

·        Prescribes the teaching of character traits

·        Usurps the role of parents

·        Not only usurps the role of parents, but also may directly contradict the cultural values and mores of many of our minority students; for example, Indicator 1.2.4 states, “Maintain a critical stance by questioning the validity and accuracy of all information,” which is most distinctly a white American value 

·        Can not easily or effectively be taught, measured and assessed although certainly any teacher worth his/her salt already discusses and illustrates the value of persistence, curiosity and teamwork to name but a few of the dispositions; the difference is that the second occurs naturally,  in situ 

·        Teaches dispositions that are not specific to success in information literacy

While possession of the dispositions is certainly desirable, our role is not to mold character, but rather to educate minds to employ the higher-order critical and creative thinking skills that are not only critical to our students’ successes, but also to maintaining the stability of our democratic society.

 In addition to teaching students how to use higher-order critical and creative thinking skills, we must also prepare our students to use the information literacy skills that are so critical to their success in the 21^st-Century; to do that we need a clear definition that provides guidelines for instruction.  Instead, Common Belief  #6 states:  “The definition of information literacy has become more complex as resources and technologies have changed.”  Neither the belief statement nor the standards answer the question, “What is the more complex definition?”  Based on the promise implicit in the title, Standards for the 21^st-Century Learner, I expected a definition that encompassed the 21^st-Century Literacies most would agree are “crucial skills for this century,” but found that the only literacies mentioned are visual, textual, digital, and technological – all of which are of course essential - but so too are mathematical, scientific, cultural, and economic literacies  (to include but a few of the critical knowledge bases our students will need to succeed).   

Even if you argued – and I of course would not – that mathematical, scientific, cultural and economic literacies are not the domain of the library media specialist, where is media literacy, not only an area traditionally taught by library media specialists, but an ever more increasingly important medium for delivering information?  Or is media literacy subsumed into digital literacy?  If that is the case, then, we have several problems.  The most widely cited definition of digital literacy is that provided by Microsoft, yet their definition encompasses only entry-level technology skills.  I assume we mean much more than the ability to use word processing software.   Should we then create a glossary that defines what librarians mean by digital literacy, or should we seek to use a common vocabulary with our colleagues in other disciplines?

Let us – just for the sake of argument – dismiss the concerns raised in the previous paragraphs as questions related to minor differences in semantics.  Let us further assume then that the belief statement does include the full range of literacies our students will need to succeed.  Even if we make these two leaps of faith, we are still left with the same inconvertible truths: standards, not belief statements, drive instruction and, unfortunately, not all of the belief statements have been converted into standards. Two of the most important – at least to ensure the future of school libraries – do not appear at all: “Equitable access is a key component for education” and “School libraries are essential to the development of learning skills” which is more than unfortunate because as Christopher Harris notes in School Library Journal, “School libraries are becoming marginalized by state and federal regulations. The No Child Left Behind Act, for example, does not recognize librarians as teachers. Moreover, the ‘65 percent solution,’ an education budget formula being enacted by many states, also jeopardizes library funding. Add to this the ‘Google effect,’ which has schools questioning the relevancy of libraries in an online world, and we are in real trouble” (June 2006).

            Another factor that might serve to marginalize the importance of our profession in the eyes of others is the move, clearly evident in Standards 1 and 2, from problem-based to inquiry-based learning.  The implications and potential outcomes of this shift are many and varied:

• One important distinction between problem-based and inquiry-based learning is that inquiry-based learning explores questions in much more depth for a greater period of time, possibly an entire semester.  Given the time constraints imposed by the test-driven environment created by NCLB, are we ignoring reality?
• Inquiry-based learning may or may not result in a product that can be evaluated which has clear implications for assessment.  In an era of data-driven decision-making, the lack of clearly quantifiable data marginalizes what we do in the eyes of administrators and other decision makers.
• Many of the information seeking process models in wide-spread use, like Big6, are problem, not inquiry-based.  As a result, new models will need to be created and/or existing models modified to include inquiry-based learning.  The question then is who will do this and when will the model(s) be available?
• The distinction between inquiry and problem-based learning is not clarified in the standards, nor is the level of inquiry-based learning (clarification/verification; structured inquiry; guided inquiry; or open inquiry) the standards hope to inspire.
• NETS –S is clearly problem-based so the alignment that existed with ISTE’s standards is now tenuous at best.  NETS-S is also clearly aligned with the requirements of NCLB and national curriculum standards.  The alignment between AASL’s new standards and NCLB, national curriculum standards, and NETS-S is only evident at the skill indicator level, not at the standard level.

Why not a more realistic statement that it is not an either/or; both inquiry-based and problem-based can form the basis of valid information-seeking process models?

Another area of concern is that some of the Responsibilities like 2.3.1, “Connect understanding to the real world,” are skills that need to be taught.  The ability to transfer knowledge is not only a higher-level skill, but also one that must be carefully considered and incorporated into the design of the lesson(s).  The same can be said of many of the Self-assessment Strategies, like “Interpret new information based on cultural and social context.” (4.4.4)  Perhaps, how and when students will be taught the prerequisite skills prior to their assumption of these Responsibilities and Self-assessment Strategies will be made clear in the Scope and Sequence.

Finally, it wasn’t until I read the indicators for Standard 4, “Pursue personal and aesthetic growth,” that I realized that concealed within this standard were some of the skills necessary to the development of reading comprehension and fluency.  Like Standards 1 & 2 which could have been used to build partnerships with technology and content area teachers, this standard could have been used to build collaboration with reading teachers and specialists.   As I have argued in Reading Is Our Business (2006), for too long library media specialists have abdicated our rightful position as critical partners in the development of reading comprehension. As a result, funds are being diverted from school libraries to purchase classroom libraries, library media specialists are being replaced by instructional assistants and when certified librarians are employed, they are not viewed as instructional leaders or as full partners in the learning process. 

While the consequences for our profession are dire, the repercussions for our students are even grimmer.    The correlation between poverty and low reading achievement is well documented.  Of people with the lowest literacy skills, 43% live in poverty, and 70% of prison inmates read at the lowest proficiency levels (U.S. Department of Education 2000).  Equally well researched is the link between passive readers and poor comprehension skills.  Passive readers are not engaged in meaningful ways with the text.  Disengaged readers will never choose to “Pursue personal and aesthetic growth.” Nor will they ever discover that “Reading is a window to the world” because these less-than-engaged readers do not know how to utilize comprehension strategies to increase either understanding or engagement.  Collaborative partnerships must be forged with reading teachers and specialists if we hope to transform passive readers into actively engaged members of a community of strategic readers and thinkers, yet only two indicators, 4.1.1 and 4.1.2, allude to reading.

In conclusion, much must be done before the promise from the AASL website, “‘Standards for the 21st-Century Learner’ offer vision for teaching and learning to both guide and beckon our profession as education leaders. They will both shape the library program and serve as a tool for library media specialists to use to shape the learning of students in the school,” is fulfilled. 

Today stands as the singular no-obligations day in the whole week: no appointments, no trains, no workshops, no planes. It started with a boom: my son's long hoped for college acceptance. So, now I can leave knowing that that particular sword of Damocles isn't hanging.

The afternoon brought a sad time however: saying an unwanted goodbye. I've left other cities and other friends before and each time, there's someone who stands out from the crowd of receding faces, the person I always believed would be in my life forever. The comfort, for me, is that each of these times that person hasn't been lost. Like that sappy song we had to sing in Brownies, "Make new friends/but keep the old/one is silver/and the other gold." But I don't think she knows that yet, doesn't know that she's gold and the friendship stays.

The new AASL Standards for the 21st Century Learner were unveiled on October 25 at the 13th National AASL (American Association of School Librarians) Conference in Reno, Nevada. 

"The new standards were developed by some of the best minds in the school library field," Johns said. "AASL hopes that these standards will provide a foundation for a strong library media program in every school, where our students will research expertly, think critically, problem-solve well, read enthusiastically and use information ethically. Our students will succeed."

Early in 2006, acting in accordance with the AASL strategic plan, the AASL Board of Directors voted to establish the Learning Standards Rewrite Task Force, whose charge was to develop new AASL standards for student learning in the 21st Century. The task force included co-chairs Cassandra Barnett and Gail Dickinson, Eugene Hainer, Melissa Johnston, Marcia Mardis and Barbara Stripling.

"The new AASL 'Standards for the 21st-Century Learner' are both a reflection of the current landscape and a vision for the future," said Gail K. Dickinson, task force co-chair. "Good standards have to be practical enough to teach today but flexible enough to be able to teach tomorrow."

The task force began with an intensive face-to-face meeting last September and worked virtually and during conferences over the next several months. To ensure that the new standards reflect the best of our thinking as a profession, the task force gathered input and feedback from the membership and other library media professionals throughout the whole process. Drafts were posted on the Web site for comment, AASL held an open forum for discussion of the draft during the 2007 Midwinter Meeting and a wiki was utilized for further input from the field.

The standards and common beliefs include:

Common Beliefs

The learning standards begin by defining nine foundational common beliefs:

• Reading is a window to the world.
• Inquiry provides a framework for learning.
• Ethical behavior in the use of information must be taught.
• Technology skills are crucial for future employment needs. 
• Equitable access is a key component for education.
• The definition of information literacy has become more complex as resources and technologies have changed.
• The continuing expansion of information demands that all individuals acquire the thinking skills that will enable them to learn on their own.
• Learning has a social context.
• School libraries are essential to the development of learning skills.

The Standards

The Standards describe how learners use skills, resources, and tools to

1. inquire, think critically, and gain knowledge;
2. draw conclusions, make informed decisions, apply knowledge to new situations, and create new knowledge;
3. share knowledge and participate ethically and productively as members of our democratic society;
4. pursue personal and aesthetic growth.

You can download the Learning Standards as an eight-page full-color pamphlet (PDF, 4 mb).

Do our practices as teachers and students truly reflect these beliefs in our school philosophy, learning activities, and teaching practices?  Do the mandates of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) intersect in reality with these new standards and beliefs?   How do we use these beliefs and standards as a framework for teaching and learning at Creekview High?

Hillary Wolfe Northview HS librarian Covina, CA

I was at a book club recently, and one of our members sheepishly admitted that she hadn’t actually read the book, but she had listened to it on CD. There is a pervasive bias out there that listening to a book is somehow cheating, and many secondary teachers are reluctant to make use of this strategy, fearing that they are encouraging their students to find an “easy way out” of homework. I don't agree—I think audiobooks are a great resource for educators.

See how Hillary helped change her school's perception of audiobooks, using listening centers to help struggling readers finish, and enjoy, required reading. Hillary will be appearing at the Recorded Books booth (#131) at this year's AASL conference in Reno. She will be available for questions and discussion, and will be doing presentations on Friday, October 26 at 3:00pm and Saturday, October 27 at 11:00am.

There will be lots of other fun things going on at the Recorded Books booth, including the chance to win a free audiobook! Stop by and say hello, and let us know here if there is anything you'd like to see at the conference.