1. Strong School Library Media Programs Make a Difference in Academic Achievement

2. Gaver Study, 1963: Academic achievement is higher when:
There is a centralized library in the school.
The library collection is large and easily accessible.

3. Lance Study Finding, 1993:
Academic Achievement was higher in Colorado schools when:
There was a professional library media specialist
The library media specialist collaborated with teachers to build exciting units of instruction
The library collection was very large

4. Four Major Studies: 933 Schools, published 2000
Alaska schools, grades 4, 8, 11
Pennsylvania schools, grades 5, 8, 11
Colorado schools, grades 4, 7
Massachusetts schools, grades 4,8,10

5. Two Major Studies in 2001 Oregon 513 schools, grades 5,8, 10
Texas schools, grades 4, 8, 10

6. Two Major Studies, 2002 Iowa 506 schools, grades 4, 8, 11
New Mexico 380 schools, grades 4, 8, 10

7. The 21st Century Library Media Center
Consists of a quality information-rich environment:
Books
Multimedia resources
Databases
Electronic periodical collections
Quality Internet sites

8. The New Library Media Center:
Is available not only in the LMC, but
In the classroom, and
On beyond into the Home.
And, is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

9. Library Media Center Programs:
Build capable and avid readers
Teach every learner to become effective users of ideas and information
Partner with teachers to create exciting learning experiences
Prepare learners to compete in the information age

10. First, Invest in People Strong Library Media Programs have:
A competent library media professional
The human interface
Paraprofessional staff
Organization/service functions
Technical staff
Technology support for the school

11. Strong Library Media Specialists:
Collaborate with teachers to build quality learning experiences
Teach information literacy (finding, using, and communicating information effectively)
Promote reading

12. Findings from 5 States Colorado (2000) 200 schools
Oregon (2001) 513 schools
Texas (2001) 600 schools
Iowa (2002) 506 schools
New Mexico (2002) 380 schools

13. Comparison of Top & Lowest 25 Scoring Schools in 5 States
Library media specialist hours per week per 100 students
Elementary: vs % difference
Middle: vs % difference
High: vs % difference

14. Conclusion
The level of professional library media specialist staffing is a key difference between strong and weak library media programs
… and between higher and lower scoring students on achievement tests.

15. Comparison of 25 Highest & Lowest Scoring PA Schools
Professional staff hours/week
5th grade vs % difference
8th grade vs % difference
11th grade vs % difference
Support staff hours/week
5th grade vs % difference
8th grade vs % difference
11th grade vs % difference

16. Conclusion for Pennsylvania
Support staff was the key difference between strong and weak library media programs in PA.
That is, professionals alone cannot make a major difference because of the load of clerical and technical work.

17. Conclusion:
The total LMC staff size contributes to academic achievement.

18. Second, Invest in Materials and Technology
Create a quality information-rich and technology-rich environment easily accessible by students and teachers.

19. Large School Library Collections Supply:
Large rotating classroom collections
Large bedside collections for teachers and students

20. Research Findings:
Rich curriculum-centered collections boost learning.
Information technology delivering information to the desktop of the learner enhances learning.

21. Today’s LMC Collections are accessible through a library web page including:
Quality Internet sites
Electronic periodicals
Databases
Attractive information books
Multimedia collections
Materials meeting special needs
Materials of high quality

22. Conclusion:
Quality collections are expensive, but they earn their way by boosting achievement.

23. Results of the total investment:
Scores can be expected to be 10-20% higher than in schools without this emphasis.

24. Results are not explained by:
Teacher/pupil ratio
Teacher characteristics (education, experience, salaries)
Student characteristics (poverty, race/ethnicity)
Community demographics (educational attainment, poverty, ethnicity)