Quality not Quantity Library Media Program Evaluation Frances Roscello, Associate School Library Media Programs Office of NYC School & Community Services New York State Education Department

Why evaluate your program? w To see your school library media program in relation to standards w To measure your program with other school library media programs w To plan for program improvement w To better meet the needs of your students in reaching higher standards

Why Rubrics?

Rubrics w holistic w analytic w indicators w task-specific w developmental

Numbers - pluses ++++ w Convenient w Easy to collect by anyone w Easy to collate data w Easy to monitor w Sets a minimum standard which is easy to measure w Can be based on best practice w Assures basic service levels

Numbers - minuses w Simplistic w One dimensional w One size doesn’t always fit all w Sometimes little relationship to program or standards w Usually does not indicate acceptable intermediate steps w Many times not very useful as a planning tool

New York State School Library Media Program Evaluation a combination of program indicators, a continuum of expectations, and minimum numbers in a rubric format

Evaluation Continuum Non-Existent In Progress Basic Proficient Exemplary

Target Indicators Professional Staff Support Staff Facility Climate Collection Scheduling Collaborative Planning Collaborative Teaching and Learning Library Automation Technology for Instruction and Access Networking Budget Administrative Support Professional Development LMP Advisory Committee

Professional Staff w None w Part-time w Full-time w Full-time + 0 In Progress Basic Proficient w More than 1 LMS to support the LMP and the number of students and teachers Exemplary

Support Staff w None w Less then half-time w Half-time w Full-time 0 In Progress Basic Proficient w Diversified staffing to support the LMP and the number of students and teachers Exemplary

Facility w No library w Traditional library w LMC accommodate whole class and some individuals w Large LMC 0 In Progress Basic Proficient w Very large, flexible LMC multi rooms teacher resources video/TV Exemplary

Climate w Students do not feel welcome w Traditional quiet library w Inviting, barrier free w Warm and inviting Students want to be there 0 In Progress Basic Proficient w Library is the hub of the school Exemplary

Collection w Old materials, disorganized w Older collection which needs weeding w Current collection resources/student Internet 0 In Progress Basic Proficient Exemplary w Large, current collection resources/student other languages variety of formats curriculum needs diversity

Scheduling w Closed 1/2 or more of day w Scheduled classes or cluster program w Open all day at least 1/2 day flexible w Open all day with flexible schedule 0 In Progress Basic Proficient w Open all day with flexible schedule, and before and after school Exemplary

Collaborative Planning w No planning scheduled or cluster w Collaboration on request from teacher w Many teachers collaborate with LMS w Most teachers collaborate with LMS 0 In Progress Basic Proficient w All teachers collaborate with LMS for all students Exemplary

Collaborative Teaching and Learning w No skills taught w LMS teaches “library skills” w LMS teaches “library skills” with content w Information literacy skills as part of resource-based teaching 0 In Progress Basic Proficient w Information literacy taught in multiple resource-based activities using newer technology Exemplary

Library Automation w None w Stand-alone system for overdues, etc. w Plan for automation weeding started records being converted w LMC is automated 0 In Progress Basic Proficient w LMC is automated and on the school LAN and/or WAN Exemplary

Technology for Instruction and Access w No computers w 3 or fewer computers w 4 or more computers video, etc. w Meet student needs current challenging information 0 In Progress Basic Proficient w Technology integrated within the school and integral to all teaching and learning Exemplary

Networking w No ILL w Informal ILL, no phone w Occasional ILL through SLS phone w Regularly uses ILL contributes to SLS 0 In Progress Basic Proficient w Full member of SLS contributes to SLS EDL collaborates with PL Exemplary

Budget w No funds w $6 State funds only w $6 State funds and local funds w $6 State funds, local funds, and Title I 0 In Progress Basic Proficient w Long range plan incorporated into budget process. Consisting of State, Federal, local, and grant funds Exemplary

Administrative Support w Library operates in isolation within building w Administration does not recognize role of library w Limited recognition of role of library program w LMP supported verbally and fiscally with some recognition of role. 0 In Progress Basic Proficient w Administration supports and articulates role of LMP w Administration actively advocates for LMP Exemplary

Professional Development w Librarian does not participate in prof development w Limited professional development w LMS attends cross- discipline activities at local and regional levels 0 In Progress Basic Proficient w LMS seeks, participates in and promotes prof dev at local, regional & national levels w LMS initiates and provides prof dev for self and others Exemplary

Library Media Program Advisory Committee w No committee w Informal group w Advisory committee meets infrequently procedural issues w Advisory committee which meets regularly 0 In Progress Basic Proficient w Advisory committee which has developed goals and objectives for the LMP and their implementation Exemplary

Suggested use of Library Media Program Evaluation w Evaluate your Library Media Program Principal Librarian Key staff w Note target indicators Below Basic w Plan strategies to bring all target indicators to Basic or beyond w Reevaluate periodically w Send copy for statistical purposes to SED

Library Media Program Evaluation w Used with SURR schools for 3 years w Results: Below Basic w Redesign Schools required to furnish plan for LMP improvement, if needed, based on LMP Evaluation Over 400 schools throughout State using as a tool for program improvement

SUPPORT STAFF

Future Plans for LMP Evaluation w Evaluate all SURR and Title I schools w Volunteer use throughout State w Data currently being analyzed w Comparison study - SURR/Non SURR w Comparison study - Correlation with State testing program

New York State Education Department