NOF ICTL for Public Library Staff Interim survey of training to meet Outcomes 2-8 and Advanced levels Chris Dodds, for Resource and NOF

Background  Concerns  Inform evaluation and impact assessment work being undertaken by NOF and Resource  Inform the continued development of the programme  Help build a body of materials  Phone calls, written submissions and 14 case studies. 61 authorities across UK

Summary of findings  Only a handful linked EOs and advanced to existing external qualifications  Authorities progressed much further than ECDL with a dedicated ICT Training Co-ordinator  Time taken to meet ECDL difficult to resource  Confidence and team spirit were the winners  Confidence high after ECDL so momentum carries to supplementary outcomes  Formal sessions preferred to distance learning  Intranets will be most likely hosts to training materials once PN is rolled out  Time consuming to develop or adapt materials

Summary of findings 2  Materials are predominantly paper-based  Services rely on small groups/individuals to create, edit or deliver the training  Services are celebrating achievement  Other training includes taster sessions, troubleshooting and other training areas  New staff get ECDL, other outcomes less likely  All staff get similar training, with some specialism  External training has high travel costs – used mostly for supp. and advanced. ECDL is local  Sustaining training without new resources will be hard

Summary of findings 3  Staff retention is a concern for highly skilled  Concern about unrealistically high expectations by public  Little customisation into community languages  Project work/ self-evaluation is the basis for the delivery of supp.  Most deliver supp. in-house  Only 6 authorities had created new material for all supp. And advanced outcomes  50% had started supp. Training and are still developing plans for delivery

Summary of findings 4  Progress with supp. Outcomes is improved where Educators are in place  Few external providers of supp. and advanced  Some innovative examples are available  Information Manager delivery is weakest, with IT Gatekeeper and IT Consultant poor  Most advanced training is consortium developed and externally provided  Net Navigator is delivered to all staff in most authorities surveyed. Often delivered by Educators with customised materials and delivered in-house

Assessment  Only small number formally test staff on supp.  In-house and cascaded training has some formal training and some homework and self- assessment  Most were using self-evaluation in supp. And advanced outcomes  Some used quizzes and informal in-house assessment of trainees  Portfolio development within training programme  NVQ framework and use of other awards, some time off, tickets to concerts and events,

Materials  About 50% plan to create a central repository  Many will host these on Intranets and PowerPoint  One authority has developed PN training programme materials for public and staff in each branch  Educators are taking the lead role in developing own materials  Some have set up discussion lists to disseminate and share information

Future Plans  All anticipated the need for refresher training  Some had staff development and appraisal systems in place as the mechanism for this  Some have mentors/educators, IT Dept or ICT training co-ordinators to deliver this  Refresher training may be needed as PN infrastructure is put in place  Concerns about funding for this and ECDL  Feeling that there should be an off the shelf solution  Reports of “astonishing turnaround in (staff) attitudes”

Problem areas  Conflict of Educator (ICT teacher) role not on job description  Length of time needed for ECDL  Changing the image of library to cutting edge service  Outcomes overlap and complicate the process  Need to improve Co-ordination of the training and infrastructure  On outcomes looked at troubleshooting (key for frontline staff)  Few external providers

Problem areas 2  Some external training failed to differentiate between advanced roles sufficiently  Difficulty developing supp. training materials, especially reader development  Concern about raising user expectations  IT Gatekeeper/Consultant/Manager role  Travelling to external course delivery  Resourcing  Retention  Continuing need to adapt materials

Scotland’s Input  Angus  Dumfries and Galloway  Dundee  East Renfrewshire  Edinburgh  North Lanarkshire  West Lothian