LM_NET: Library Media Networking
Here are the results of the survey on flexible scheduling in elementary
school library media programs that was conducted this past April for a
graduate research project. A special thanks to those who volunteered to
participate!
The study was titled _Implementing and Maintaining Successful Flexible
Scheduling in Elementary School Library Media Programs_. The purpose of
the study was to determine what factors contribute to implementing and
maintaining successful flexible scheduling in elementary school library
media programs and what can be done to improve the chances of flexible
scheduling becoming a reality for all elementary schools.
Library media professionals throughout the United States and Canada
responded to notices posted over Internet requesting volunteers to
participate in the study. Surveys were completed by elementary library
media specialists who have implemented and continue to maintain flexibly
scheduled library media programs.
Data collected from the surveys was tallied and presented as percentages of
the total number of respondents included in the study. The total number of
respondents was twenty-seven.
Background information gathered about those responding to the survey included
the number of years of experience each had as a LMS, the number of students
and teachers, the grade levels, and the size of the LM staff in each building.
The number of years of experience for library media specialists ranged from
two to twenty-four years. The median was eight years of experience. Seventy-
four percent of the LMS had thirteen or fewer years of experience.
Student population per building ranged from 300 to 850 students. The average
student population per building was 554 students; the median was 550. Forty-
six percent of the elementary schools ranged from 500 to 650 students.
Thirty-one percent had fewer than 500 students; twenty-three percent had more
than 650 students.
The number of teachers per building ranged from twelve to forty-two teachers.
The average number of teachers per building was twenty-nine; the median was
thirty-two.
Over ninety percent of the elementary buildings included grades kindergarten
through fifth grade. Slightly more than half included sixth grade. Less than
twenty percent included pre-kindergarten and transitional first grade as other
grade levels. (Table 1)
Grade levels involved in flexible scheduling varied. One hundred percent of
the upper elementary grades (fourth, fifth, and sixth) were involved in
flexible scheduling. The lower elementary grades (kindergarten, first,
second, and third) were less involved. As the grade levels increased, so did
participation in flexible scheduling. (Table 1)
Table 1
Grade Levels and Flexible Scheduling
Grade levels per building Grades involved in flexible scheduling
Responses Percent Responses Percent
K 26 96% K 12 46%
1 27 100% 1 19 70%
2 27 100% 2 19 70%
3 27 100% 3 23 85%
4 26 96% 4 26 100%
5 25 93% 5 25 100%
6 14 52% 6 14 100%
Other* 5 19% Other* 3 60%
* pre-kindergarten, transitional first grade, seventh grade
The most common combination of LM staff (about one-third of those participating)
included one full time LMS and one full time clerical aide. The least common
combination was a part time LMS and a full time clerical aide. Two respond-
ents included others as part of the paid LM staff. One title was computer
lab assistant; the other title was library technician. (Table 2)
Table 2
Library Media Professional and Clerical Staff
Staff Responses Percent
Full time LMS
& full time clerical 9 33%
Full time LMS & part time clerical 6 22%
Full time LMS & no clerical 7 26%
Part time LMS & full time clerical 1 4%
Part time LMS & part time clerical 4 15%
Volunteers were a large part of the LM staff. Seventy-four percent of all
respondents reported having volunteer workers. Ninety-five percent of the
respondents who had volunteer workers used adult volunteers. Ninety-five
percent of the adults were parents; five percent were senior citizens.
Forty-five percent of the respondents who had volunteer workers used both
adult and student volunteers. The percent of volunteer use increased as the
combination of professional and clerical positions decreased. (Table 3)
Table 3
Size of Library Media Staff and Use of Volunteers
Staff size Use of volunteers
Full time lme
Full time LMS & full time clerical 67%
Full time LMS & part time or no clerical 77%
Part time LMS & full time or part time clerical 80%
Respondents were asked to describe the structure of their lib
Respondents were asked to describe the structure of their LM schedule.
Twenty-six percent reported having a completely flexible schedule while
seventy-four percent reported a combination of flexible and fixed scheduling.
(Table 4)
Table 4
Structure of Library Media Schedule
Structure of Schedule Responses Percent
All time completely flexible, no set schedule 7 26%
A combination of flexible and fixed scheduling 20 74%
Class sessions with primary grades was repot
Class sessions with primary grads was reported by eighty-five percent of
those with some fixed scheduling. Fifty percent indicated that book
circulation was on a fixed schedule. Only fifteen percent indicated that
they regularly scheduled planning time with teachers. (Table 5)
Table 5
Activities on Fixed Scheduling
Activities Responses Percent
Class sessions with primary grades 17 85%
Book circulation 10 50%
Cooperative planning time with teachers 3 15%
Administrative duties 3 15%
Other* 2 10%
* class sessions with grades 4-6, student supervision duties
(The rest of the survey will presented simply as table information. Readers
may draw their own conclusions.)
Table 6
Preliminary Planning/Research Prior to Implementing Flexible Scheduling
Activities Responses Percent
Review of professional literature 23 85%
Interviews with other LMS using flexible scheduling 22 82%
Review of LMP's goals, objectives, mission, philosophy 22 82%
Evaluation of current LM services 18 67%
Re-educaton of teachers and administrators 18 67%
Staff development sessions 12 45%
Evaluation of students' current information skills 9 33%
Public relations campaign 7 26%
Survey of teacher attitudes 6 22%
Information from graduate classes, college professors 6 22%
Other* 4 15%
*use of _Information Power_ video, principal's directive, sessions at
professional conferences
Table 7
Most Challenging Aspects of Implementing Flexible Scheduling
Challenges Responses Percent
Gaining teacher support 20 74%
Scheduling activities at appropriate or desired times 9 33%
Providing the kind of services desired because of the
current LM staff size 8 30%
Providing adequate staff development 6 22%
The physical structure of the LM center 6 22%
Finding a way to cover teacher prep time 5 19%
Gaining administrative support 4 15%
Providing the kind of services desired because of the
current LM resources 3 11%
Other* 3 11%
* finding time to plan with teachers, had no challenges
Table 8
Covering Teacher Prep Time
Methods Responses Percent
Class time extended with specialists (art, music, P.E.) 5 19%
Length of student contact time changed 2 7%
Instructional aides or parent volunteers monitor students
during certain activities 2 7%
Length of school day changed 0 0%
Did not apply to my situation 13 48%
Other* 5 19%
* computer lab, science lab, additional teachers hired, floating class sessions
with primary grades
Table 9
Most Challenging Aspects of Maintaining Flexible Scheduling
Challenges Responses Percent
Planning and evaluating lessons cooperatively with teachers 22 82%
Integrating information skills for all students at every
grade level 11 41%
Providing adequate LM staff and resources 11 41%
Providing the kind of services desired by teachers and students 11 41%
Maintaining teacher support 10 37%
Scheduling activities at appropriate or desired times 8 30%
Continuing staff development 7 26%
Maintaining administrative support 3 11%
Other* 2 7%
* keeping a high profile, no challenges
Table 10
Administrative Support for Flexible Scheduling
Support Support considered Support actually
essential given
Responses Percent Responses Percent
Supporting, encouraging,
recognizing successful results
of curriculum integration and
cooperative planning 24 89% 21 78%
Allowing time for cooperative planning 23 85% 12 45%
Communicating effectively the purpose
and benefits of flexible scheduling to
the school community 23 85% 15 56%
Stressing the use of LM resources and
cooperative planning when hiring new
teachers 15 56% 6 22%
Allowing time for staff development 14 52% 14 52%
Including the use of LM resources and
cooperative planning in teacher
evaluations 14 52% 3 11%
Allowing time for curriculum
development 13 48% 10 37%
Participating in LM activities 11 41% 9 33%
Increasing LM staff 8 30% 3 11%
Increasing LM budget 4 15% 0 0%
Other* 0 0% 3 11%
* allowed LMS to try flexible scheduling, arranged meetings between LMS and
unhappy teachers, none of the above applied
Table 11
Highest Priorities for Maintaining Successful Flexible Scheduling
(respondents could choose only four of the following)
Highest priorities Responses Percent
Planning and evaluating lessons cooperatively with teachers 24 89%
Integrating information skills for all students at every
grade level 15 56%
Maintaining effective communication with administrators
and teachers 15 56%
Providing adequate LM staff and resources 13 48%
Scheduling activities at appropriate or desired times 12 45%
Providing the kind of services desired by teachers/students 12 45%
Maintaining a strong public relations campaign supporting the
need and benefits of flexible scheduling 10 37%
Systematically evaluating the LM program, its staff,resources,
and services 7 26%
Continuing staff development 5 19%
Other 0 0%
Table 12
Promoting Flexible Scheduling and the Role of the Library Media Specialist
(respondents could only choose four of the following)
Most effective means Responses Percent
Integrating more LM use with classroom curriculum in
teacher training programs at colleges and universities 27 100%
Including more discussion of the role of the LM program
in administrative training programs at colleges/universities 23 85%
Publishing more LM articles in professional journals read by
administrators and teachers 18 67%
Developing an informal network of LMS who share experiences
about flexible scheduling and offer advice to others 14 52%
Having professional organizations address the topic of flexible
scheduling at regional, state, and national meetings 8 30%
Developing an extensive public relations campaign 6 22%
Lobbying the legislature for more funds to improve LM programs 6 22%
Increasing professional research 4 15%
Other* 1 4%
* gathering testimonials of teachers who support flexible scheduling
Table 13
Words of Advice to Other Library Media Specialists Wishing to Implement
Flexible Scheduling
Words of advice Responses Percent
Meet teachers more than half way, encourage involvement,
offer suggestions, offer extras, be indispensable 16 59%
Educate administrators and teachers about the benefits
and "how to's" of flexible scheduling 12 45%
Gain administrative support 11 41%
Realize it will take time, have a 3-5 year plan 11 41%
Regular planning/communication with teachers essential,
develop a trusting working rapport 7 26%
Prepare yourself (read research, visit other schools) 5 19%
Be committed to the philosophy of flexible scheduling,
have a vision 5 19%
Be proactive, "Go for it!" 4 15%
Start with a few teachers and build from there, let the
word spread 3 11%
Evaluate program each year 2 7%
Solicit for more help from volunteers, additional staff 1 4%
Summary
The LMS participating in this study have been in the field of library media
education for a relatively short period of time. Half have been LMS for eight
or fewer years. Seventy-four percent have been LMS for thirteen or fewer years.
The average elementary building in which respondents worked had 554 students and
twenty-nine teachers. Slightly more than half of the elementary buildings had
a full time LMS and a full or part time clerical aide. Parents made up the
majority of the volunteer workers.
Seventy-four percent of all LM programs involved a combination of fixed and
flexible scheduling. The majority of fixed scheduling was designed to
accommodate class sessions with primary grades and book circulation. This
explained why one hundred percent of the fourth, fifth, and sixth grades were
involved in flexible scheduling and why kindergarten, first, second, and third
grades were less involved.
Common strategies for the preliminary planning stage of implementing flexible
scheduling involved reading professional literature and making contacts with
other LMS using flexible scheduling. Finding a way to cover teacher prep time
did not apply to almost half of the respondents. Gaining teacher support was th
e most challenging aspect of implementation, while cooperative planning with
teachers was the most challenging aspect of maintaining flexible scheduling.
Respondents were basically satisfied with administrative encouragement of
their efforts but indicated that they could be more active in providing the time
needed for cooperative planning and stressing LM use with teachers.
Respondents reported that cooperative planning, integrating skills for all
students, and maintaining communication with teachers and administrators were
their highest priorities.
Respondents indicated that more should be done to educate teachers and
administrators about the role of the LM program in education in their
training programs at colleges and universities. This same need to educate
teachers and administrators and gain their support for the LM program was
reflected in their words of advice to other LMS wishing to implement
flexible scheduling.
Recommendations
The following recommendations for library media professionals are based on
conclusions from this study and a review of the literature.
1. LM professionals should voice their concerns and opinions to their
professional associations demanding that more be done to inform teacher and
administrative training programs at colleges and universities about the role
of the LM program in education.
2. LM professionals can begin to develop an organized, yet informal means of
discussing flexible scheduling by becoming involved in Internet LISTSERVs
such as LM_NET and MEMO-net which already exist to serve LM professionals
and their concerns.
3. LM professionals should consider publishing articles in educational
journals read by teachers and administrators and also consider the
opportunities to speak at association meetings and conferences which serve
teachers and administrators.
4. LMS wishing to implement flexible scheduling in their programs should
(a) have a vision of what they want to accomplis, (b) read the research,
(c) visit other schools with flexible scheduled programs, (d) educate and
gain the support of their administration and teachers, (e) insist on quality
time for cooperative planning with teachers, (f) keep communication efforts
positive and effective, and (g) continually acknowledge their success and the
benefits that result from a flexibly scheduled LM program.
The following recommendations for colleges of education are also based on
conclusions from this study and a review of the literature.
1. Teacher educators should regularly integrated information skills and
LM resources when demonstrating teaching practices and developing curriculum-
related experiences for students.
2. Teacher and administrative educators should discuss the importance of
integrating LM resources and informations skills throughout the curriculum.
Curriculum integration and cooperative planning are essential to developing
optimal learning experiences for students.
3. Teacher and administrative educators should strongly advise the use of
LM resources and technology, and the integration of information skills in the
expectations of hiring new teachers and in the evaluations of practicing
teachers.
4. The college departments of Curriculum and Instruction, Educational
Administration, and Library Media Education should develop integrated classes
and/or learning experiences for students which would demonstrate practices
being discussed. Suggestions include LM professionals as guest speakers,
field trips to local school LM centers, on-site demonstrations of curriculum
integration using cooperative planning and teaching methods, and cooperative
teams consisting of college instructors, classroom teachers, LM professionals,
and building principals that supervise student teachers and administrative
interns.
Closing Remarks
Flexible scheduling in elementary school library media programs has been slow
in materializing. Developing a flexibly scheduled LM program takes dedication
and true commitment from those involved in implementing and maintaining such a
program. LMS who have taken on the challenge of flexible scheduling are now
beginning to share their experiences with others through professional literature
and informal discussions. Their experiences are laying the groundwork for othe
rLMS who wish to follow. Continued efforts to share knowledge and experiences
with other LM professionals will certainly increase the chances of flexible
scheduling becoming a reality for everyone.
The single best source on flexible scheduling I was able to find was a book
written by Jan Buchanan titled _Flexible Acess Library Media Programs_
Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, 1991. I highly recommend that anyone
serious about flexible scheduling should own this book!
A copy of this study will be available through the Mankato State University
Library and ERIC. The same results of this study will also be published in
_Minnesota Media_ this fall.
Marilyn K. Oswald
Mankato State University
Mankato, MN 56002
oswald@vax1.mankato.msus.edu
LM_NET
Archive Home