Inside the locked room, part 1 – #ALAMW12

As reported last April, I’m serving on YALSA’s Excellence in Non-fiction for Young Adults committee. My term started November 1, 2011 and will end in January 2013 when we make those exciting phone calls – and in between there’ll be much discussion and reading. Liz Burns, on the outgoing committee, explains our charge and the process better than I possibly can.

So why this post? Because there’s a lot of mystery about the whole “locked room committee” thing. I’m here to give you a peek behind that door.

First of all, this time we didn’t meet in a locked room. As a matter of fact, the room didn’t lock and had a sliding glass wall out to the hotel’s atrium (where one could watch the Patriots/Ravens game – so glad that ended well! – bowl, eat and drink). If you’re good at lip-reading, this would have been a perfect spying opportunity. There was no bathroom,food or drink provided, but most of us either brought food with us (we started at 1:30) or suffered.

Our first meeting was mostly “housekeeping”: introductions (I’m the only school librarian on the committee), checking our addresses so that publishers can start to send us books, talking about the criteria and how we should structure our conversations (positives first, then negatives). A few titles were mentioned, and our intrepid Chair, Angela, gets to take on the task of contacting the publishers to ask they send the books to us. We also talked about fact-checking, which doesn’t mean that we’re doing the work the editorial staff should have done in real depth, but if the work is (to our knowledge) leaving out important information, that’s something to consider.

Because this is one of the few committees whose nominations are made public (to serve as a collection development tool) we have a lot of responsibility. To be honest, it’s a little scary. Now, that list isn’t our shortlist, it’s just all the books we thought worthy of serious consideration. The shortlist will be drawn from that list, ditto the eventual winner. And a book I love love love and nominate may ultimately be trashed by the rest of the committee. The fact that e-readers show books differently, that pictures may (or may not) be laid out the same in digital format, if they’re even truly visible, means that before nominating we have to check the print version.

Between now and Annual we’ll be reading, discussing and taking notes. Then we’ll meet, again in a possibly locked room, and talk about our favorites at that point.

Stay tuned.

Getting over myself

One of the biggest blows to one’s ego is watching the work one has done be supplanted by another’s vision. This always happens when you leave one job, and I’ve often felt a little guilty over the “blame the predecessor” game that goes on when jobs change hands. Watching (via twitter and personal blog posts) and hearing friend’s reactions to what’s happened in their schools – to the collection, to the website, to the program – after they left their posts has been instructive.

This is the second time I’ve left a position where I worked hard to create a collection and program that were creative, collaborative and met the school’s needs. My vision wasn’t completely fulfilled when I walked out the door for the last time (thanks to lack of money or administrative/colleague support, and even my own ability to do what I’d thought was possible), and it rankled that someone else would reap the benefits of my work – or dismantle it completely. The most difficult piece is getting over myself, recognizing that others have a vision, too.

Having had a few months to reflect and revisit triumphs and failures, I’m definitely “over” myself. In a recent conversation with a good friend about one library I worked in, the good and bad of both my and my successor’s regimes were discussed – a great reality check. And what a pity we couldn’t work together, blending our strengths and balancing our weaknesses to provide a great program. Being able to learn from peers is a blessing, but a bigger blessing is having the opportunity to learn from your own past performance long enough after the fact to not have ego about it.

And what a great way to move forward, with a clear idea about the good and bad and the ability to capitalize on the former while minimizing the latter. Here’s to a 2012 that provides more such opportunities.

2011 Round-up, part two

This year was filled with highlights and a few lowlights – but why dwell on the latter? The most important thing for me this year was learning with, and from, my friends, peers and colleagues. Some are librarians, some administrators, others teachers or “civilians”: my professional life has been made richer by knowing them. Note that I’m not using the overused acronym PLN or PLE, because I think a less jargon-filled world is a good thing.

2011 Round-up, part one

2011 in books via kwout

At AASL in October, Wendy exhorted us to read a book a day. While I didn’t manage that, a book every 1.46 days isn’t bad!

Cite nonsense

Last year a friend asked for my help with a paper she was writing for a class – how should she cite a YouTube video? Her professor didn’t know the proper format, and my friend knew that “Go to YouTube and look for [title of video]” wasn’t correct. At the LIRT session I attending during ALA10, the student voice on the panel said “there are more citation styles than MLA!”, and Joyce Valenza’s survey backs up this poor student’s experience. What wasn’t discussed (or asked) was how one cites in the paper itself: footnotes, endnotes or parentheticals?

Finding the Right Level

AASL has issued a Position Statement about Labeling Books with Reading Levels. Helen Adams wrote a wonderful blog post about this, including this quote:

“Recently I helped a student who came to me while his class was in the library browsing. As the librarian of a middle school library, I often see situations such as this one. The boy had been most recently reading about George Washington and Ben Franklin. His class assignment that day was to checkout two computerized reading program books within his tested reading level and thus was “allowed” only one free choice book. “But I’d rather not have to check out labeled books and there are some books I’d like today that don’t have the dots or reading level labels on the backs of the books. Does that mean Ican’t [sic] check them out?” he asks me.

Reflecting on my personal reading experience, I’m so very glad these programs didn’t exist when I was in school.  It’s probably no surprise to those who know me, but I was reading well above my age level throughout my school years (when I was in 7th grade, I tested at a college+ reading level).  Now, if I had been the above student, I’d have had a real problem: not too many grammar school libraries have high school (or higher) books.  So what could I have read that was “at my level”?

Looking at AR’s books, I learn that the Lord of the Rings trilogy is “Upper Grades”, but I read it in 5th grade.  Little Women is for Middle Grades, which I guess is good since most of my friends read it in 3-5th grade.  The non-fiction topics I studied aren’t even listed.   When I was in 6th grade there was a time when all I read was Nancy Drew, which prompted my librarian to speak with my mother because she felt I could be reading “better” books (my mother told the librarian that I could read what I wanted to, thank you very much).  My point is, had I been restricted to my “level” I wouldn’t have read Mistress of Mellyn in 6th grade, nor would I have enjoyed the works of Thornton Burgess at a high school senior.

Why so many schools have jumped on the reading level bandwagon is beyond me.  It’s sloppy teaching and librarianship to rely on some test (or tests) to give students a limited range of reading.  Years ago I had a kindergarten class and there was one boy who always borrowed Agatha “Cripsie” mysteries.  I knew he wasn’t reading them, but his parents read them to him – by the end of the year he was reading above level, but would he have been had we insisted on his borrowing picture books?  Evidence suggests not.  It also can be traumatic for students reading greatly above or below level to advertise their status, which is what happens if the books are labelled (and there are some libraries where there is no label other than the AR – or other program – level).

So let me take the opportunity to praise AASL’s statement.  My fear is that it’s too little, too late.  How do we get administrators to read this, and recognize the harm it does?  How do we convince teachers to do the same?  It’s not enough to write letters to the editor.  We must find better ways to encourage a return to broader reading, to allowing students to read for pleasure, whether they’re reading “at level” or not.  As reading experts, that’s a critical part of our jobs, right?

Not a sacraficial lamb to slaughter

The big buzz at AASL11 was Barb Stripling is running for ALA President. Yay?

Let’s try that again, shall we:

The big buzz at AASL11 was Barb Stripling is running for ALA President. YAY!!

Why the initial “yay?” from so many people? Many people know that she’s a great candidate but we also know that presidential candidates from the youth services divisions rarely get elected (not never, just rarely). Several people murmured that she doesn’t have a chance.

I had the honor of serving on the ALA Nominating Committee in 2010 and I can promise you that Barb wasn’t chosen because the committee really wanted Gina J. Millsap to be the ’13-’14 ALA President and needed someone to run as a sacrificial lamb against her. Trust me when I tell you that isn’t the case. The process is much more complicated and thoughtful than that. So herewith is both a backstage view of what happens and how Barb can have a realistic chance at getting elected.

First, when my committee met we started by looking at past potential candidates – could this be the year they ran? We also divided up the divisions and made plans to call their presidents to get names of people they felt were potential presidential candidates. All those names were then called. It went something like this:
Me: Hi, I’m calling on behalf of ALA’s Nominating Committee. Do you have a few moments to talk?
Potential Candidate: Uh… sure.
Me: Well, this is all confidential, but we’d like you to consider running as candidate for ALA President next year.

At this point, I’d get one of three responses: 1. “God no!”, 2. “Wow. Me?” or 3. “What would it entail?” (no one ever said “God no!” but ultimately there was a “no” response). What does it entail? It entails talking to your spouse/partner/family and your employer, because there will be a lot of travel. It entails participating in a way that you haven’t before, acting as the voice of ALA and American libraries. And it entails raising a campaign war chest of over $10,000.

Yes, folks. The candidate must fundraise for their own campaign and it’s expensive.

Several really qualified, wonderful people backed out after learning what was expected of them as president and as campaigner. Some said an initial “yes” and then backed out for various reasons. The names get whittled down and discussed and re-discussed. My concern was that we choose candidates that had some sort of on-line presence, someone who could speak to the younger, less engaged members of ALA. For each name I checked to see if they had a blog, a twitter feed, a Facebook page, a column in a publication: something that spoke to them having name recognition beyond their little corner of ALA. Other committee members had other concerns, and each was taken seriously. When we finally had a slate of candidates to present, there was much elation.

So the process of asking Barb to run wasn’t easy, and there’s no way of knowing who the other potential candidates were or why they didn’t run. What I do know is that the entire committee felt this was a viable candidate who could run a great campaign with a chance of winning, someone who would make a great president and spokesperson for ALA.

It’s important that the youth services divisions vote – statistically, historically, members of those divisions do not vote even for their own candidates. Why is a mystery. If those members all voted for Barb… but it will take more than just them. Barb needs to be a candidate who appeals to LITA, ACRL, PLA and RUSA, speaking out about their issues and concerns, not just linking youth services issues to theirs. She needs to have a significant presence on the web and at conferences and institutes. She needs to reach out to younger members who do not feel part of ALA (because it’s too large, it’s too expensive to come to conferences, because it’s not meeting their needs in whatever way) and make them feel that they are needed and included and that she speaks to and for them. How? By blogging and tweeting and e-mailing and speaking and doing all the things that we expect from our leaders, but don’t often get from ALA.

It’s not impossible for me to imagine Barb Stripling as ALA President. It is impossible for me to imagine that the Nominating Committee can’t see that as well.

The Role of Reading

The recent twitter effort to get our senators to remember school libraries/librarians during their ESEA discussions made me think about the role of librarians – or, to be accurate, it was one of the things that made me think about our role. 

Not Drinking the Kool-Aid

While at the recent AASL National Conference I had the pleasure of spending time with several people new to the World of AASL. They weren’t new to “Big ALA”, but they’d spent time in other divisions despite being school librarians (I know so many others that belong to ALSC or YALSA and have little to do with AASL, too).

While they enjoyed the presentations and the opportunity to see their peers outside the large ALA conference, they didn’t enjoy AASL. I understand why, but what saddens me is that so few others seem to – or if they do, they’re not interested in changing things. So, why?

• AASL encourages a Cult of Personality in a way that other divisions don’t seem to.  There are a group of Big Names who are definitely deserving of their fame, as they are often sources of inspiration and new ideas.  But there’s a sense that you cannot disagree with them and that citing others doing similar things is somehow disloyal.  Disagreement and some dissension is good for an organization, let alone for humans.  If you can’t take questioning about your ideas, methodology or pedagogy, isn’t that a huge problem? Other division have their Big Names, but the veneration isn’t there.
• AASL is not that welcoming to newbies and outsiders.  I’ve often decried the age issue at AASL’s All-Committee sessions: I should not be one of the youngest in the room.  One of my dining partners said that she’d joined an AASL committee after years in another division and at her first All-Committee session had been soundly ignored by the other, older (both in age and in AASL activity) members.  How is this helping with outreach to other divisions or encouraging new leaders?
• AASL is not growing new leaders.  Despite the wonderful leadership panel, very few of the AASL leadership is actively mentoring and sponsoring younger members, encouraging participation, committee work and leadership.  So few of the Emerging Leaders have actually emerged, and I know at more than one person who is giving more time and attention to another division despite being really good leadership material for AASL.   When I served on the mentoring committee, nothing was accomplished in part because the act of mentoring is difficult and while many members have had great mentors that helped them, they’re not interested in paying that forward.
• AASL is an echo chamber.  I’ve seen it on so many different social media platforms (especially twitter) and in presentations: I cite you, I applaud you, and you return the favor.  Publicly.  One recent tweet wasn’t even responding to Tweeter A’s comments, it was Tweeter B applauding that Tweeter A was tweeting so thoughtfully. And that comment got retweeted!  Why wasn’t that a DM?  Because in AASL, you need to be seen to be following and appreciating the Big Names.

I could go on, but those are the biggest gripes I’ve heard from people who would make great, insightful, productive, innovative, engaging members and leaders of AASL, but they feel so unwelcome in the association that they prefer to spend their time and energies in other divisions (or in some cases, other associations entirely).  That’s really too bad, but they’ve told me they’re not willing to drink the AASL Kool-Aid, to be ignored and discounted by the Big Names and leaders.  At least two won’t attend AASL13, even to present.  The problem isn’t that it’s just a few unhappy voices, it’s that these voices are being heard by others in the other divisions.  That is a huge image problem for AASL, when people other divisions consider to be Names (or even just names) can’t be positive about their experience with AASL members and conferences.

And sadly this lack of caring is institutionalized in the “home office”, which in this case equals those employed by ALA as well as those serving on the Board and in Affiliate Assembly.  There are a few who buck this trend, but when year after year social gatherings (like the ISS Networking Social) are ignored by the current President and when at the National Conference the President doesn’t make the rounds (ok, greeting 3000+ people can be difficult, but so many people have never spoken with the President up close) I can’t help but wonder what’s going on.  I’ve blogged about this before, written e-mails to friends that have been President (or Past, or Elect) and nothing changes.

Will this new post change anything?  I doubt it.  My voice within AASL is too small, and those with bigger voices won’t care.  My hope is that those outside AASL see this and realize that not everyone inside has drunk the Kool-Aid.

#AASL11 Reflections: HS – College Information Literacy

First of all, this wasn’t really about the entire continuum, it was more about the 12-13 disconnect. In other words, what we HS librarians think our students leave knowing, and what first year professors actually see when our students get there. The caveats of the study are that the students were from Catholic schools that essentially fed into the University of St. Thomas – I would love to see this replicated in other combinations (eg, independent schools to their top 20 acceptances or top state universities and the top high schools in their states).

The UST study found some differences from Megan Oakleaf/Patricia Owen’s research (see their article on TL). They approached it from the viewpoint of “what expectations should UST librarians have regarding the info lit skills of incoming freshmen”? (vs. the what do colleges expect = what HS wants to know approach) There has been much research into HS-College transition (the emotional issues, for example) but little empirical library research; there was a lot of introductory/trends/how I do it here/etc articles and presentations.

One practical suggestion was that students were lost when doing database research, as they’d come in looking for a product by provider/vendor name. Databases should never be arranged by vendors; they should be arranged A-Z or by subject, mimic academic libraries. This reiterates what I’ve heard at other presentations, when students get so comfortable with one database in high school that they don’t know there are others out there, or that the one they love may not be the most appropriate for their current research need.

The most interesting part was that UST looked at the comparison of HS librarians reporting to faculty reporting: we may think that we’re graduating information literate and skilled students, but their first year professors don’t see that. It was also interesting that for a large number of the faculty, the sense was that they could teach the appropriate skills in the classroom rather than bringing students (or sending them) to the library for instruction and assistance. I’ve seen this in high schools as well, from both “revered old timers” and “sweet young things” (and while some can teach the skills and guide students, often they really can’t or they don’t understand the school’s desired style and thus confuse students with competing expectations).

The ARCL standards were used, not AASL; I know there’s been a lot of work correlating AASL to NETS and AASL to Common Core, but how much work as there been on AASL to ACRL? I know one independent school that correlated NETS to ACRL, ignoring AASL completely. Radical thought? It might be really beneficial for HS librarians to ignore AASL’s standards and focus on ACRL’s as we prepare students for the next phase of their education.

Their research and presentation is online here (bibliography included). We were also advised to check out Megan Oakleaf’s work, Oakleaf’s work with Patricia Owen, and Head/Eisenberg’s Project Information Literacy.