School librarians are busy people. Really busy people. The textbook reading this week went over all of the managerial concerns of running a school library-- from budgets to advisory committees to creating complicated flow charts.
On the topic of scheduling: I have always been a fan of sticking it to the man, so the School Library Journal article by Doug Johnson about the positive aspects of fixed scheduling was a great read for me. Which is better: fixed scheduling or flexible scheduling? My answer to this question is yes-- you can create a successful library program with either. AASL has their opinion (which is absolutely in favor of flexible scheduling), but I agree with the author that both have their own pros and cons. I was a bit taken aback by the Johnson's assertion that librarians in fixed scheduling situations use this as an excuse for a lousy library program, and I would like to hear more about this stance and how it has been articulated in the past. The textbook seemed to imply that a fixed schedule reflects an educational climate that does not take into account the true worth of a school library. However, as we move toward librarians taking on more necessary instructional roles within their learning communities, we need to have a better understanding within our profession of best practices for fixed schedule librarians.
On the topic of scheduling: I have always been a fan of sticking it to the man, so the School Library Journal article by Doug Johnson about the positive aspects of fixed scheduling was a great read for me. Which is better: fixed scheduling or flexible scheduling? My answer to this question is yes-- you can create a successful library program with either. AASL has their opinion (which is absolutely in favor of flexible scheduling), but I agree with the author that both have their own pros and cons. I was a bit taken aback by the Johnson's assertion that librarians in fixed scheduling situations use this as an excuse for a lousy library program, and I would like to hear more about this stance and how it has been articulated in the past. The textbook seemed to imply that a fixed schedule reflects an educational climate that does not take into account the true worth of a school library. However, as we move toward librarians taking on more necessary instructional roles within their learning communities, we need to have a better understanding within our profession of best practices for fixed schedule librarians.
Another article we read was a school librarian's take on the Standards for 21st Century Learning, and the ways in which they have transformed her practice. Reading the standards myself was interesting, in terms of identifying what has become important for learners of this generation, but it all seemed too hypothetical. This article translated the standards into actual practices. While I usually get all bent out of shape about library literature not being as researchy as I like, I found Kathy Hribar's perspective to be very helpful in shaping my thinking on implementation. This gave a practical account of the process of transforming a traditional practice into inquiry-based study through inquiry-based study! Plus she cited Carol Kuhlthau, and that will always get you points in my book.
Good point about Kuhlthau. :)
ReplyDeleteI agree that great programs occur regardless of scheduling format.
Sticking it to the man- YES - you're funny. But, I agree- I can be an effective educator with either a fixed or a flexible schedule. I'm not going to be a babysitter. A fixed schedule provides the opportunity for the Media Specialist to work on a regular basis with a teacher's established curriculum. It's up to both educators to draft a plan that will accomplish this. Probably, the burden to do so will fall more on the Media Specialist.
ReplyDeleteFixed schedule or flexible...we're always flexible in our role as librarian. :)
ReplyDelete