What the Research Says…

1. What the Research Says… School Library Media Programs Julia Bell Renee Janssen Ben Metcalfe

2. Minnesota Check It Out! The Results of the School Library Media Program Census, Final Report Published by: Susan J. Baxter and Ann Walker Smalley 2003

3. Minnesota: Purpose and Researching Agencies Purpose: To collect baseline data on Minnesota’s school library media programs and the Minnesota Standards for Effective School Library Media Programs. Researching Agencies: • Minnesota Educational Media Organization (MEMO) Legislative Committee • Department of Children, Families & Learning (CFL) • Library Development and Services (LDS) • Project Advisory Committee

4. Minnesota: Process Sample: • On-line Census Survey was sent to all regular Minnesota public schools; 1,172 schools responded (82% of total) • Site visits were conducted at 131 schools, one elementary and secondary school per state senate district Survey: • On-line census survey focused on 14 areas: • General Info, Service Hours, Staffing, Frequency of Staff Activities, Usage, Space and Capacity, Equipment, Collection, Computers and Intenet Access, Budget, Mission, Evaluation On-Site Visits: • Visited 131 schools to collect further information and confirm data gathered from the census survey

5. Minnesota: Results Survey Reading Achievement is related to school media center spending and to the number of hours media specialists work Media specialists are the most common workers in a school media center and their most common activity is “other library activities” (shelving, circulation, etc.) The smaller the school, the less likely of an automated catalogue or remote access to media center and statewide electronic resources

6. Minnesota: Results Site Visits Found large collections of old, worn books, run by part-time or non-licensed staff The more knowledgeable and supportive a principal and the more hours a licensed media specialist works the greater chance of an effective media center lack of money too few resources Unexpected findings: Presence of a district-level media coordinator Increase in computerized reading programs The current state of model programs

7. Minnesota: Recommendations Stakeholder expectations Commit to hire full-time professional Media Specialists and support staff Immediate investment in print collections Staff at the state level Maintain statewide resources Continue to conduct data collection All Media Specialists must become vocal advocates

8. Missouri Show Me Connection: How School Library Media Center Services Impact Student Achievement Published by: Quantitative Resources (RQ Squared) 2002/2003

9. Missouri: Purpose and Researching Agencies Purpose: To analyze school library media center services and to study their effect on student achievement, by testing three hypotheses Library Media Centers and Services display a positive relationship to student achievement Components of School Library Media Centers and Services have more of a relationship to student achievement than others Demographic characteristics have a high relationship to student achievement, they do not eliminate the positive relationships from hypothesis one and two Researching Agencies Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Missouri State Library

10. Missouri: Process Sample Core Data collected by MDESE on all 2,243 public schools 782 schools responded to the questionnaire 241 schools had complete data from both Data Collection Core Data included: Student Data, Library Media Data, Librarian Data, Teacher/Administrator Data, Technology Data Questionnaire 47 question web-based questionnaire Categories included: Library Management, Library Staff, Service Hours, Staff Activities, Library/Loan Use, Library Technology, Library Collection

11. Missouri Results Hypothesis 1: Academic Achievement & SLMC Proven: 12.6 p% of the variance of the Missouri Standardized Test can be explained by SLMC services Hypothesis 2: Impact of Components of SLMC Proven: Five components showed a statistically significant relationship to achievement on the Standardized Test (Library Usage, Summer Reading, Library Access, Library Budget, Technology) Hypothesis 3: Demographics Proven: SLMC services explained up to 10.6% of the variance in achievement not explained by the demographic variables

12. Missouri Recommendations Focus on Three Components Library Usage: Clerical Help Variety of Resources Summer Reading Program: Cooperate with Local Public Libraries Library Access: Library/Media Coordinator Online Resources

13. New Mexico How School Libraries Improve Outcomes for Children: The New Mexico Study Published by: Keith Curry Lance, Marcia J. Rodney, &Christine Hamilton-Pennell June, 2002

14. New Mexico: Purpose and Researching Agencies Purpose: • To confirm the findings of the first Colorado study in New Mexico and to explore several issues: • Student Achievement & SLMC services • Collaboration and Effectiveness of SLM programs • Role of Information Technology Researching Agencies: • New Mexico State Library • McCune Foundation • New Mexico State Department of Education

15. New Mexico: Process Sample 206 Elementary Schools (52%) 100 Middle Schools (56%) 72 High Schools (47%) Survey Questionnaire with eight sections: Respondent Information, Service Hours, School Library Staff, Paid Staff Activities, Library Usage, Technology, Resource Collection, Finances

16. New Mexico: Results Elementary Level fourth grade achievement levels tend to rise with increases in: Number of Library Staff Percentage of time LMS spend managing computer networks Number of computers in the school that provide access to the library catalog, licensed databases, and the internet Number of print volumes Number of electronic reference sources relative to students

17. New Mexico: Results Middle Level Eighth grade achievement scores tend to improve with increases in: Number of weekly hours the school library is open Extra time spent by the library staff on selected activities; planning with teachers and providing in-service training, developing library collections and creating incentives for students to read, managing school computer networks Number of print volumes in the library’s collection Number of computers with access to licensed databases

18. New Mexico: Results High School Level Tenth grade achievement scores tend to improve with: The general level of library staffing The extent to which classroom teachers and librarians teach cooperatively The frequency with which both individuals and groups visit the school library, especially - in the case of groups - for information literacy instruction Availability of library computers to students, particularly with access to the library catalog and the Internet The size of the library’s collection and its spending

19. New Mexico: Conclusion New Mexico achievement test scores tend to rise with increases in: School librarian and total library staff hours per 100 students Print volumes per student Periodical subscriptions, video materials, and software programs per 100 students School library expenditures per student Spending cannot exert a positive influence if it comes at the expense of other school programs Impact of SLMC at the high school level cannot be explained away by school & community differences

20. New Mexico: Definition of a Strong School Library/Librarian A strong school library is one: that is adequately staffed, stocked and funded whose staff are actively involved leaders in their school’s teaching and learning enterprise whose staff have collegial, collaborative relationships with classroom teachers that embraces networked information technology

21. New Mexico: Recommendations Five specific actions should be taken: Fund adequate professional and support staff, information resources, and information technology School library program cannot be limited to the LMC as a place, librarians must involve themselves in the design and delivery of instruction Information technology must be used to make resources available to teachers and students wherever they may be Ensure access to teachers and students to high-quality licensed databases Provide training to ensure teachers and students know how to use the information tools and assess and information resource

22. NORTH CAROLINA An Essential Connection: How Quality School Library Media Programs Improve Student Achievement in North Carolina Published by: Robert Burgin, Pauletta Brown Bracy, & With assistance from Kathy Brown June 2003

23. NORTH CAROLINA: WHY & WHO? Why: • To address the proven methods portion of the “No Child Left Behind Act”. • To determine the impact of school library programs on student achievement in North Carolina Public Schools. Who: • The collaborative efforts of: North Carolina Library Association, The State Library of North Carolina, The North Carolina School Library Media Association, and The North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (Brown, Bracy, & Burgin, 2003)

24. NORTH CAROLINA: METHODOLOGY Population Sampled: • Participants selected at randomfrom a data base of : • 2,138 School Libraries • and 2,529 School Library Media Specialists The Survey: • Type: Questionnaire to collect data in eight areas (Brown, Bracy, & Burgin, 2003)

25. NORTH CAROLINA: METHODOLOGY The Survey: • Number of Survey’s sent: Conducted two survey’s • Delivery: Mailed to selected schools Achievement: • Defined as: Percentage of students in the school who scored at or above passing on: (Brown, Bracy, & Burgin, 2003)

26. NORTH CAROLINA: RESULTS Scores on Standardized reading and English tests in the schools included in the study tended to increase when libraries in the schools: • Were staffed more hours during the school week • Were open more hours during the school week • Had newer books • Spent more money per 100 students on books and other print materials like magazines and newspapers • Spent more money per 100 students on electronic access to information • Were more likely to subscribe to online periodical services • Were more likely to subscribe to online CD ROM services (Brown, Bracy, & Burgin, 2003)

27. OHIO Student Learning through Ohio School Libraries: The Ohio Research Study Published by: The Ohio Educational Library Media Association, Dr. Ross Todd, & Dr. Carol Kuhlthau December 2003

28. OHIO: WHY & WHO? Why: • To provide scientific proof of how school libraries help students learn. • To provide data points for additional research, educational policy development as well as guideposts for school librarians to see how their library impact learning. Who: • The collaborative efforts of: The Ohio Educational Library Media Association, INFOhio, The Ohio Department of Education, and Rutgers University, The Center for International Scholarship in School Libraries, State Library of Ohio (Kahlthau, OELMA, & Todd, 2003)

29. OHIO: METHODOLOGY Population Sampled: • Participants : • 39 schools across Ohio • 13,123 Students; Grades 3- 12 • 879 Faculty The Survey: Type: questionnaires were used to collect participants responses to forty eight statements based on Likert scale and one open-ended qualitative question. Divided into seven categorically significant blocks of “How helpful the school library is:” (Kahlthau, OELMA, & Todd, 2003)

30. OHIO: METHODOLOGY The Survey: • Number of Survey’s sent: Two (one for both students & faculty) • Delivery: Web-based delivery to selected schools Achievement: • Defined as: Percentage of student/ faculty “Most Helpful” ratings on the Likert scale: (Kahlthau, OELMA, & Todd, 2003)

31. OHIO: RESULTS (Kahlthau, OELMA, & Todd, 2003)

32. OHIO: RECOMMENDATIONS • When effective school libraries are in place, students do learn. 13,000 students cannot be wrong… (Kahlthau, OELMA, & Todd, 2003)

33. OREGON Good Schools Have School Librarians: Oregon School Librarians Collaborate to Improve Academic Achievement Published by: Keith Curry Lance, Marcia J. Rodney, &Christine Hamilton-Pennell 2001

34. OREGON: WHY & WHO? Why: • Put off by the deterioration of the library media program throughout Oregon Public Schools. • To determine the impact of library media programs to share information with influential members of the community. Who: • The collaborative efforts of: The Oregon State Library and The Oregon Educational Media Association (Hamilton-Pennell, Lance, & Rodney, 2001)

35. OREGON: METHODOLOGY Population Sampled: • A total of 513 public schools participated: • 32% of Oregon’s public Elementary Schools • 49% of Oregon’s public Middle Schools • 63% of Oregon’s public High Schools The Survey: Type: Questionnaire to collect data in seven areas regarding their impact on reading scores. Library Media Center: (Hamilton-Pennell, Lance, & Rodney, 2001)

36. OREGON: METHODOLOGY/ RESULTS Achievement:Defined by: High test scores on the 2000 Oregon State Reading Assessment administered in 1999 to all 5th, 8th and 10th graders were used as indicators of students’ academic achievement. Results: Reading test scores increase when libraries in schools increase in: • Total staff hours per 100 students (including both professional and support staff) • Print volumes per student • Periodical subscriptions per 100 students, and • Library media expenditures per student. • Library media development alone accounts for 3%- 5% of variation in reading scores. • Whatever the current level of development of a school’s library media program, these findings indicate that incremental improvements in its staffing, collections, and budget will yield incremental increases in reading scores. (Hamilton-Pennell, Lance, & Rodney, 2001)

37. OREGON: DEFINING A STRONG LIBRARY MEDIA PROGRAM • That is adequately staffed, stocked and funded • Whose staff are actively involved leaders in the school environment • Whose staff have collegial, collaborative relationships with classroom teachers • That embraces networked information technology (Hamilton-Pennell, Lance, & Rodney, 2001)

38. OREGON: RECOMMENDATIONS • Funding for adequate professional & support staff, information resources and information technology. • Library Media Specialists must assert themselves as school leaders. • Principals’ support, encourage and have high expectations for collaboration • Information Technology accessible to students and teachers where they may be in school • Access to high-quality licensed databases with LMC providing the necessary training for students and staff (Hamilton-Pennell, Lance, & Rodney, 2001)

39. Pennsylvania Measuring Up to Standards: The Impact of School Library Programs & Information Literacy in Pennsylvania Schools Keith Curry Lance Marcia J. Rodney Christine Hamilton-Pennell February 2000

40. Pennsylvania: why? • Increasingly alarming condition of SLM programs • Only explanation were that decision makers were unaware of the impact of good SLM programs • Decided to be the first state east of the Mississippi to replicate the Colorado Study • Sought to confirm in PA these findings • AND expand on the results by determining the impact on academic achievement of: • Specific activities of certified school librarians; • Principal and teacher support of SLM programs; and • Information technology— particularly licensed databases and the Internet/WWW

41. Pennsylvania: Methodology • Academic Achievement Indicator • Scores on the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA) reading test from 1999 • The Sample • Includes 435 of the state’s 1,691 schools serving three tested grades: 5, 8, and 11 • 435 participating schools constitute an 87 % response rate from a 500-case sample

42. Pennsylvania: Methodology • The Survey: Questionnaire • Respondent Information • Hours of the School Library • School Library Staff • Paid Staff Activities • Usage of School Library Services • School Library Technology • School Library Resources • Annual Operating Expenditures • School Library Information Management

43. Pennsylvania: Findings • Reading scores increase with increases in the following characteristics of SLM programs: • Staffing • SLM hours • Support staff hours • Number of computers enabling teachers and students to utilize: • The ACCESS PENNSYLVANIA database • Licensed databases • Internet/WWW • Integration of information literacy into the curriculum

44. Pennsylvania: Indirect Findings • As these characteristics rise, so does the involvement of SLMS in teaching students and teachers how to find and assess information • Higher level of staffing predict: • Higher expenditures • Larger & more varied collections • Increased access to info technology for teachers and students • More integrated approaches to info literacy, standards, and curriculum

45. Pennsylvania: Distinguishing Results http://www.lrs.org/documents/fastfacts/164proof.pdf

46. Pennsylvania: The Bottom Line • It depends on… • Current status • What it improves • How much it improves • When all predictors are maximized, then: • How much can scores rise with good SLM programs? • PPSA scores tend to run 10 to 15 points higher!

47. Texas Texas School Libraries: Standards, Resources, Services, and Student’s Performance Ester G. Smith, Ph.D EGS Research & Consulting April 2001

48. Texas: Objectives • Examine school library resources, services, and use and update the standards so they better serve communities across the state • School Library Programs: Standards and Guidelines for Texas • Determine the impact that school libraries have on student performance • as measured by the percent of students who met minimum expectations on the reading portion of the statewide standardized test– the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) • Highlight library practices in the best performing schools

49. Texas: Methodology • The Sample • Random sample of 600 school libraries • Data collected through a self-administered mail survey • Responses obtained from 503 libraries = 84% response rate • Data from 500 responding libraries used: • The Survey: Questionnaire

50. Texas: Methodology • The Survey: Questionnaire