Implementation of the Texas School Library Standards
and Guidelines
Barbara Immroth
The 74th Texas Legislature mandated that the Texas State Library
and Archives Commission (TSLAC), in consultation with the State Board
of Education, adopt standards for school library services. To jumpstart
the process, the Texas Library Association formed an ad hoc School Library
Standards Committee that reviewed standards and guidelines from other
states as well as current research and practices. The TLA ad hoc committee
developed preliminary standards and gave the document to the Texas State
Library and Archives Commission where a broadly based committee reviewed
and refined it. Jeanette Larson, then the manager of consulting and continuing
education in the Library Development Division of the TSLAC, gathered input
at meetings around the state to incorporate into the standards. The TSLAC
adopted the new "School Library Programs: Standards and Guidelines for
Texas" on May 19, 1997. (http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/LD/pubs/schoolibstand.htm)
The standards have five component elements: Library Learning Environment;
Curriculum Integration; Resources; Library Program Management; and Facilities.
The guidelines establish three levels of school library programs that
meet or exceed standards, exemplary, recognized, acceptable, and one level
that is considered below standard.
In Summer 1998, I developed a brief, fast-response survey instrument for the
TSLAC. In Fall 1998, I sent the survey to 449 building-level librarians - a
stratified, random sample of the school libraries in Texas - to determine how
the standards and guidelines are being implemented. The intention was that the
information gathered would be useful as an indication of the current status
of school library development across the state, and the level of adoption of
the standards. The language of the survey questions is taken directly from the
standards. After mail and telephone follow-up requests, 349 surveys were returned
by December 1998. A discussion of responses to the ten survey questions follows.
LIBRARY LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
The first question concerns the amount of time the library is open and accessible
to the school community. Almost 29 percent of the libraries are open during
and beyond the instructional day for extended patron access; while almost
58 percent of the libraries maintain access to staff and resources during
the instructional day, with some access before or after school. In other
words, almost 87 percent of these school libraries are accessible to students
and staff for a reasonable amount of time.
CURRICULUM INTEGRATION
The question for this area focused on collaboration between librarians and
teachers and flexible schedules in libraries. Two-thirds of the respondents
are in the recognized or acceptable categories. Clarification of the ambiguous
definitions of flexible scheduling, modified flexible scheduling and the
difference between collaboration and cooperative planning with teachers
would make the measurement of this category more meaningful.
RESOURCES: Collection
The third question asks the size of the collection in each building. Over
a quarter of the building-level responses report an exemplary collection
as defined by the standards. 20 percent of the buildings report that their
collections are in the recognized category and 20 percent in the acceptable
category for a total of over two-thirds being at least adequate according
to the standards. The lack of a standard method for counting electronic
resources is a problem in counting the total number of items in the collection.
RESOURCES: Internet Access
This question asks about real-time access (access to online electronic resources
for library users that is available during actual connect time) to the Internet,
electronic databases, and participation in information sharing projects.
Almost 23 percent of the respondents reach the exemplary classification
in this aspect of the standards. 18 percent are recognized and 31 percent
are acceptable for a total of over 70 percent of buildings providing at
least an acceptable level of Internet access for users. Clearer definitions
of the levels of participation (full and limited) and the difference between real-time
and entry-level access would give a more meaningful picture of the type
of access available.
RESOURCES: Periodical Access
This question asks about the number of periodicals available for students
and staff at the three levels of elementary, middle, high schools that the standards
indicate. 13 percent of the schools are exemplary, almost 19 percent are recognized
and 31 percent are acceptable for a total of almost two-thirds meeting at least
an acceptable level as indicated by the standards. An adjustment for the access
to full-text databases by members of the Texas Library Connection, has not been
made in this category of the Standards.
LIBRARY STAFFING - BUILDING LEVEL
The Standards prescribe minimum staffing levels, for both certified and
paraprofessional, for ranges of average daily attendance for each level
of quality. About seven percent of the buildings have exemplary staffing;
almost 20 percent have recognized level of staffing, almost 26 percent have
acceptable staffing levels, or over half of the buildings have acceptable
levels of staffing. From the "half-empty glass" perspective, almost half
of the buildings do not have acceptable levels of staffing. One wonders
how acceptable levels of library programming are being carried on in these
schools.
LIBRARY STAFFING - DISTRICT LEVEL
The Standards prescribe minimum staffing level at the district level for
library programs. The categories list specific positions for a district
with a range of buildings in the district. 16 percent of the respondents
have district staffing within the exemplary range of the Standards; 19 percent
are at the recognized level and almost 21 percent are at the acceptable
level. A total of two-thirds have an acceptable level of district staffing.
In talking with respondents, some claim themselves as district staff while
assuming fulltime duties at a building level as well. Clarification of what
constitutes district staffing might lead to more standardized measurement
of this category.
LIBRARY PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
This question asks what percent of the total instructional annual budget
the library receives to acquire library materials, equipment and supplies in support
of the library programs. Fourteen percent report that their library receives sufficient
funding to be at the exemplary level; almost seven percent report that they are
at the recognized level, almost 20 percent are funded at the acceptable level;
almost half of the school libraries say that the "information is not available
to respondent." The Standards gives the following definition of Instructional
budget: "Generally would include all funds budgeted for salaries and related expenditures
associated with classroom teachers, aides, and assistants, and funds allocated
for the purchase, lease, or acquisition of supplies and materials, textbooks and
other reading materials, general supplies, consumable teaching and office items,
supplies for media and technology, workbooks, audiovisual materials, library books
and media, and other items necessary for the instructional process and/or for
administration."
This data can be obtained from the school budget by getting the total
amount in Function 11 and computing the library budget as a percentage
of the total. The school budget is public information.
FACILITIES-INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE
The last two questions on the survey address aspects of facilities, space,
and network access. The range of space is from space proportionate to enrollment
to limited space for access and use of information and limited space for
instruction. Over 80 percent of the respondents ranked their facilities
as acceptable or better.
NETWORK ACCESS
The question inquires about the digital drops, cable, fiber optic capabilities
for library functions and networked resources. Two thirds of the libraries provide
some level of acceptable access to networked resources. Unfortunately one-third
do not provide any access to electronic networks in the library.
The survey form is available from Anne Ramos at the TSL or on the UT GSLIS
web site -- http://www.gslis.utexas.edu/~l388k1bi/Survey.PDF
or at http://www.gslis.utexas.edu/~immroth/Survey.PDF
-- for those who wish to compare their school to the survey sample schools.
The next step in this study is converting the scores to a rating for each school.
Barbara Immroth is a professor in the Graduate School of
Library and Information Science at the University of Texas at Austin. The author
thanks the Texas Education Agency, Texas Library Association, Texas State Library
and Archives Commission, and The University of Texas at Austin, Graduate School
of Library and Information Science, for support of this study.
TLJ Contents
TLA
HOME