What’s On the Horizon for 2010? Peer Into the Future with the Horizon Report 2010 Preview

“Now, bring me that horizon.”

Captain Jack Sparrow, Pirates of the Carribean

The New Media Consortium recently released the Short List of Horizon Topics for 2010 and the Horizon Report 2010 Preview.  These documents, which you can view by visiting the Horizon Report Wiki, are the result of the rounds of discussions and voting by the Advisory Board members.  The final report will be officially released on January 20, 2010.

The report preview organizes topics by “time to adoption” and  includes a description of the topic; the relevance for teaching, learning, and creative expression; examples of how the topic is being applied, and suggestions for further reading.  In addition, the preview version of the report includes a section called “Critical Challenges” as well as a section for “Key Trends.”

Consider the six final topics:

• Time-to-Adoption Horizon: One Year or Less
  • Mobile Computing
  • Open Content
• Time-to-Adoption Horizon: Two to Three Years
  • Electronic Books
  • Simple Augmented Reality
• Time-to-Adoption Horizon: Four to Five Years
  • Gesture-Based Computing
  • Visual Data Analysis

Where are we as K12 libraries in preparing to utilize these technologies, particularly that of mobile computing and open source applications?  How can we as school librarians help lead the way for the integration of these tools not only into our libraries but also in our school classrooms?   What are K12 vendors doing to help school libraries prepare to adopt and integrate these technologies effectively?

I also find the “Critical Challenges” particularly interesting and encourage you to read the details of each challenge.

• The role of the academy—and the way we prepare students for their future lives—is changing.

• New scholarly forms of authoring, publishing, and researching continue to emerge but appropriate metrics for evaluating them increasingly lag behind or fail to appear.

• Digital media literacy continues its rise in importance as a key 21st century skill, but there is a widening training gap for faculty and teachers.

• Institutions increasingly focus more narrowly on key goals, as a result of shrinking budgets in the present economic climate.

These challenges leave me with many questions:

• Will it be school librarians who lead the resistance and coup de tant against the test driven school culture that is diametric to 21st century learning that values inquiry, creative expression, and collaboration?
• Are we teaching our students and teachers about new forms of scholarship?  How do we redefine authority and find new ways to evaluate and assess authority?
• How do we help posit new literacies (media, digital, transliteracy) as mainstream literacies for students and for teachers?
• How do we as school librarians turn budget crises into innovation?
• How do we tap into emerging technologies to create even more effective programs in the face of financially challenged circumstances?

What might happen if we as school librarians formed inquiry circles with public librarians, academic librarians, teachers, technology personnel, administrators, students, parents, and vendors to explore these questions, challenges, and trends?  How could we work together to find inventive and meaningful ways to harness the powers of these technologies?  What might learning look in both K12 and higher education if we engaged in inquiry and problem solving together?

Although these documents represent the “preview” and not the final draft of the report, please read the draft forms and put these ideas on your radar if they aren’t there already.  What is your response to the report preview?  How do you see K12 libraries meeting the challenges outlined in the draft?  How do you see the key trends impacting the 21st century school library and our practices?  I have cross-posted this entry on the AASL blog; please share your responses there as well as here.

Buffy Hamilton, Ed.S.
School Library Media Specialist
Creekview High School, Canton, Georgia

Filed under: Challenges, Issues, Learning 2.0, SLM Issues , Challenges, Horizon Report, New Media Consortium, technology, trends

Refuting Inertness or My Response to “Where Are the Others?”

“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.”
~Ralph Waldo Emerson~

The October 2009 issue of School Library Journal features the article, “Things That Keep Us Up at Night” by Doug Johnson and Joyce Valenza, two library professionals who are considered by many to be among our profession’s most thoughtful and forward thinking leaders. Some readers interpreted this article as a call to action and for us as school library professionals to step up our efforts to be cognizant of the shifts in the information landscape occurring in our profession.  Johnson and Valenza feel these approaches would create a proactive approach for providing students the information literacy skills they need to fully participate in today’s world.

However, others took offense to the article, particularly the sections, “The Challenge of Keeping Ahead” and “Failing to Embrace Networked Media.” For the last two weeks,  several librarians, including me, engaged in two lengthy conversations about this question with Beth Friese, a colleague,  via Twitter over Friese’s question and subsequent discussion, “Where Are the Others?” in her response to this article over at Johnson’s Blue Skunk blog.

These ideas and concerns shared in the SLJ article are not new—they were voiced as early as  September 2007 by Valenza and by Johnson in February 2008. Both Valenza and Johnson have blogged diligently to provide strategies and solutions to these challenges, yet it seems those efforts have fallen on many a deaf ear.  It is frankly a bit stunning and disturbing to me that so many in our profession are in a real state of denial the perilous state of school librarianship in the United States.

While I feel Friese presents an articulate response, I disagree with her and some of the individuals who responded on Doug’s blog  as well as Joyce’s blog on several points, so I would like to summarize Friese’s concerns and then share my responses to those statements.

Criticism: Finger Pointing and Exclusion

Beth addresses the authors, stating, “You point your finger right at them in this piece and tell them they are dragging us down. However, they never seem to enter the conversation. Many of us think we know some of these librarians. But they are absent from the debate.” Beth also shared she felt library leaders should be encouraging those who are “behind” rather than admonishing them.

I did not read the article as reflecting a “finger wagging” attitude, but instead, as an honest and constructive assessment of the state of our profession. If you asked any school librarian if he/she knows a colleague who is stagnant and taking no initiative to be a lifelong learner, they could identify not just one, but probably several, which I find disturbing.  For every principal who may not be savvy as to what he/she should expect from his/her school library media specialist, there is one who yearns for a school library media specialist who will be a catalyst for learning and change in the building.

In addition, leaders like Johnson, Valenza, and many others have done nothing but provide ongoing encouragement and idea sharing through both social media and print journal articles to the library community.  For those who are not in school districts that are adequately resourced, a personal learning network can accomplish the same goal, and in many ways, more effectively.   There are ample opportunities for school librarians to access and apply information about the latest tools, trends, and questions for debate, but they must be sought out.

Friese also takes issue over the statement that those who are failing to change are “dragging our profession down.”  In the section, “Failure to Embrace Networked Media”, Johnson and Valenza write:

“Librarians who don’t have PLNs, don’t attend conferences, don’t read cutting-edge professional literature—from both the library and the education worlds—are dragging our profession down. And good people are going with them. Professionals who lack an understanding of the power of professional networking disturb our slumbers.”

However, Chip R.  Bell and John R. Patterson remind us in The Hazards of Culture Change that “…without needed change the organization risks losing its competitive advantage. Losing its edge makes it harder to attract and retain the best talent and resources, and in today’s economy, the death knell begins.”  In his keynote speech, “Future Proofing Your Library” at the Georgia Council of Media Organizations (COMO) on October 8, 2009 , Steven J. Bell reminded us that our accomplishments of the past will not carry us into the future.  Look at the world we live in—I do not think it is possible or feasible to try and make a convincing argument that a school librarian should not be making an effort to be technologically savvy.

Before the advent of the read/write web, most educators engaged in professional growth through college coursework, local staff development, traditional conferences, or print professional publications; as email became more commonplace, many engaged with others through list servs. While those means still exist, there are now many exciting, dynamic, and FREE means for extending your professional learning and networking with others. While many may choose to enter these conversations about school librarianship through traditional mediums, more options than ever exist to do so at a time that is just right for you and your schedule: social media/networks such as Twitter or Facebook, blogs freely available to anyone for reading at a time that works for your schedule, print publications now available through your state/public virtual library or better yet, for free on the web, Google groups, virtual conferences (many of which are archived for viewing at a time that works for you), the social bookmarking networks of others as well as groups in social bookmarking services like Diigo and free webinars that are open to anyone who chooses to participate. No where did it state in the article you have to participate in all forms of communication; instead, find an entry point and grow your means of connecting with others at a pace and with the tools that are comfortable for you.

Friese feels those in disagreement with the ideas of the Johnson and Valenza’s article are absent from the debate, but I don’t see exclusion as a reason as to why the others aren’t “here.”  Unfortunately, many have adopted the mindset that learning stops once we complete graduate school and feel they do not need additional professional growth after graduation.   Beth calls for a “culture of curiosity”, but should that culture not already been well established in school librarianship?  We must leave behind the thinking that one’s MLS or SLM program can prepare you for everything you may encounter.   While it certainly should provide a solid foundation, graduate preparation is only the beginning of your journey as a library professional.   I see ongoing growth and learning as fun and challenging, not as a dreary chore that evokes a sense of being overwhelmed or overworked.

We also cannot limit our exploration of ideas to our comfort areas of interest—we must be willing to learn more about emerging trends and ideas that may not be our first love but may be the very thing that draws in our students. I cannot stress how much my PLN has influenced my practice; for nearly two years now, I have cultivated and continue to grow my personal learning network to include experts and knowledgeable others both within the field as well as those outside of it who have so many insights to offer that help me improve my practice .  If you aren’t willing to be organic, you exclude yourself from having a place at the table of school librarianship. How can you be effective if you are not making some effort to hone your talents and knowledge?

Can we really justify inaction and a failure to model lifelong learning, particularly when we know we have a significant perception problem about what we do and how we impact a school environment? Is there really any reason for not making an effort to keep your finger on the pulse of your profession and being proactive in your practice? Is there honestly any legitimate reason for any school librarian to NOT engage in ongoing reflection through some means?

I now ask you to look at our AASL Standards for the 21st Century Learners. The sampling of skills, dispositions, and responsibilities below reflect an emphasis on networked learning and social media:

• 2.1.4 Use technology and other information tools to analyze and organize information.
• 2.1.5 Collaborate with others to exchange ideas, develop new understandings, make decisions, and solve problems.
• 3.1.2: Participate and collaborate as members of a social and intellectual network of learners.
• 3.1.4: Use technology and other information tools to organize and display knowledge and understanding in ways that others can view, use, and assess.
• 3.1.5 Connect learning to community issues.
• 3.3.1 Solicit and respect diverse perspectives while searching for information, collaborating with others, and participating as a member of the community.
• 3.3.3 Use knowledge and information skills and dispositions to engage in public conversation and debate around issues of common concern.
• 3.3.4 Create products that apply to authentic, real-world contexts.
• 3.3.5 Contribute to the exchange of ideas within and beyond the learning community.
• 4.1.2: Read widely and fluently to make connections with self, the world, and previous reading.
• 4.1.4: Seek information for personal learning in a variety of formats and genres.
• 4.1.6: Organize personal knowledge in a way that can be called upon easily.
• 4.1.7: Use social networks and information tools to gather and share information.
• 4.2.1: Display curiosity by pursuing interests through multiple resources.
• 4.3.1: Participate in the social exchange of ideas, both electronically and in person.
• 4.3.3: Seek opportunities for pursuing personal and aesthetic growth.

Look at the ideas and concepts in these standards related to networked and connected learning.   It sounds an awful lot like inquiry and using social media to accomplish these tasks to me.  How can you teach what you do not practice?

Last but not least, numerous groups continue to sound the warning bell for the importance of positing transliteracy as an essential literacy. You can read more about my thoughts and reactions to the Knight Commission on the Information Needs of Communities in a Democracy at my blog post here, but in a nutshell, transliteracy is becoming the new cultural capital. While no one is saying to throw out the practices that work, the report does concur with Johnson and Valenza’s assertion that we must put the needs of today’s learners first. Recommendation 6 warns:

“It may be tempting for teachers and administrators who are themselves uncomfortable with new media to view digital and media competencies as “add-ons” to basic learning in “reading, writing and, arithmetic.” These competencies are, however, new forms of foundational learning. The consequences of neglecting this challenge can be dire. Students who are deeply immersed in the world of online communication outside of school may find classrooms [and hence, school libraries] that marginalize new technologies both tedious and irrelevant.”

Too many school librarians dismiss these kinds of literacies as fleeting and see them as irrelevant. They scoff at the conversations we attempt to have about networked learning, the emergence of social scholarship, and the need to teach our students ways to harness the power of social media. Are our schools providing our students the advantage through well-rounded information literacy instruction and learning activities that value digital and media literacy? Or do we privilege traditional literacies at the expense of this cultural capital our students need? As leaders in our school communities, a role we should be embracing, let us blaze the trail to create a culture of inquiry that encourages students to use these literacies as a lens for understanding more deeply how multiple kinds of texts function within our society. Who better to wave the banner for transliteracy than school librarians?

Criticism: Barriers

Beth identifies what she perceives to be a list of obstacles and roadblocks to change that she feels may explain why school librarians may not cultivate a personal learning network.

• basic internet access

• aging collections

• fixed scheduling

• no paraprofessional support

• outrageous student to library staff ratio

• test scores dictate instruction

• money to travel to conferences no longer exists

• filtering reigns

• they may face administrators who don’t support them

• teachers with no time to collaborate

• few obvious opportunities to develop whatever a PLN is

Some feel that these concerns are not shared by what Jim Randolph (Teacher Ninja) identifies as “first wave adopters”.   Are more progressive librarians immune from these challenges?  It is naïve to think that librarians who are considered ahead of the curve don’t worry about these challenges and/or face them in their library environment; the difference is that some of us choosing to not let these circumstances or barriers define who are or what we do as librarians.   We instead try to see these challenging situations and times as an opportunity to innovate,  not to dwell on the things we cannot do.

These are topics that should be of concern to every school library media specialist in the test driven culture and economically challenged times we work in.  They are not reasons, though, to fail to innovate and keep up.  I try to be very transparent about the challenges I face through my blog (many of which are on this list above); however, I also endeavor to demonstrate that there are obstacles and may also get discouraged at times, If I throw up my hands and give up, how can I hope to achieve the goals and vision I have for the library program if I don’t chip away at the problem?  I do believe that with continued and consistent efforts to educate and nurture decision and policy makers, I can slowly but surely eliminate barriers to change.  I also must be willing to challenge my thinking, seek out others who can help me analyze the obstacles from multiple perspectives, and also be willing to take risks to try and effect authentic change.  Our times call for “true grit” and our willingness to keep getting up even if we get knocked down more than once.

These concerns lead to the ideas of advocacy and leadership, which are addressed by Johnson and Valenza in the article. We have to remember that our efforts to tear down these barriers are about what is best for our students. At the end of the day, it’s really not about you, the school librarian.  Instead, we must keep our focus on what is best for students.  We cannot sit around and indulge in self-pity and endless complaining about the challenges we face.  Instead, we can choose to identify the problems and campaign for effective solutions that will provide the best possible learning environment for our students. We cannot sit and wait for someone to save us; we must save ourselves through grass-roots advocacy and effective marketing of our library programs.

School library advocate and “Washington Mom” Lisa Layera Brunkan reminded us at the School Library Journal Summit in October 2009 that our advocacy efforts should be focused on how these obstacles and cuts affect students; if we do not collect the appropriate data, demonstrate how we make a difference through transparent means (i.e. social media), cultivate our presence as one that is “indispensable” in our building, then we will continue to see the erosion and marginalization of our roles. Sara Kelley Johns, former AASL president and 2010 ALA presidential candidate outlined our roles as leaders at the SLJ Summit, asserting that “We have to be the leaders in the building whether they acknowledge us or not!”

Rather than seeing ourselves as victims who are helpless, we must work together to find creative solutions to the obstacles Beth has identified in her response. For those who feel powerless, engaging in creating a personal learning network can connect them others around the world who have faced similar challenges and found ways to overcome these seemingly insurmountable odds. Johns also reminds us that,

“Advocacy rests on solid programs—we may have good programs now, but we have to be learners ourselves. All of us need to be learners—whatever we can do to foster the most effective learning to students among our fellow librarians is one librarian’s mantra.”

The marvelous and brutally honest blog post, “Embracing Obstacles” from the Brand Builder Blog, offers many pearls of wisdom for dealing with barriers. I encourage you to read the blog post in its entirety, but Oliver Blanchard offers this perspective on how we should view and deal with obstacles:

Great project managers aren’t just natural multi-taskers. They’re also natural strategic masterminds. Improvisation kings (and queens). Crisis jugglers. Fearless creative acrobats. Their job (their nature) is to constantly find and implement solutions to problems, foreseen and not. Their job is to embrace hurdles and obstacles, because each one brings them one step closer to their goal. They thrive on making things happen. The more untraveled the road, the better. The more complex the gameboard, the better.
It takes a special kind of person to be able to a) do that kind of work well, and b) love every minute of it.  It isn’t for everybody. Excuses and blame don’t exist in this little world. There’s only what you did and what you didn’t do.  Sometimes, even the best laid plans just go awry.  For most people, that’s not a good thing…and for some of us, that’s when the real fun begins.

Are we not project managers? The AASL Empowering Learners: Guidelines for School Library Media Programs has added leader to our list of roles we play in our learning communities. How can you lead if you are not making an active effort to keep up with what is happening in the field and taking proactive measures to adapt? I am a firm believer in leading by example, and we cannot lead for our students, teachers, administrators, or parents if we are allowing perceived obstacles to impede us from our mission. Are you that special kind of person who leads and advocates for your library program in the face of these challenges? Are you what Stephen Walker defines as an “A” librarian who innovates in spite of adversity?  Chip R. Bell and John R. Patterson remind us in The Hazards of Leading Culture Change that “Planned change takes courage and tenacity.”

Criticism:  2.0 Is Not Our Brand

Friese writes, “ Our brand really can’t be social media. It can’t be databases. It can’t be 2.0. Not only will these things fade away, they exclude large parts of our profession from participation. I’d rather adopt our brand as “cultivating curiosity.” That will stand the test of time. And it’s something we can all gather around the table and talk about pushing toward.”

Based on our AASL Standards for 21st Century Learners, it seems to me that we should have already adopted and been cultivating a brand of inquiry and curiosity.   Are our library school programs instilling this value and mindset in students? Are there any legitimate reasons as to why every librarian would not already have this stance to some degree?

Secondly, I don’t think Joyce identifies any one of these “things” as our brand although I feel there is really no argument that they are indeed elements of our brand for now.   Go look at the manifesto linked in the article (and please note that every reader was invited to contribute) —does it look as though it is focused on single item to you? To me, that answer is no. Instead, the manifesto identifies critical issues that we must address and include as part of our library programs. And if you don’t agree with the brand, what would you add? Again, the invitation to engage and contribute is there, but if you aren’t participating, can you really complain?

You can be excluded only if you allow yourself to be by choice. If you choose to not join the conversations that are taking place in many spaces, then yes, you will be excluded.

Final Thoughts

Many of us interact with media specialists who are just in the process of cultivating their personal learning networks. I think we all make an effort to welcome the new voices and provide encouragement to those who want and ask for help—I won’t identify names for fear of omitting anyone, but I can identify several school librarians that I have helped through f2f interaction, Twitter, Gmail chat, and emails. The encouragement Beth prefers has been in place and continues to be there, but school librarians have to be willing to take those first steps to get started on the journey.  You cannot be helped if you are not willing to help yourself.

Jim Randolph mentioned my visit to his class (my alma mater, I might add, the University of Georgia) and stated that while he enjoyed the visit, some were overwhelmed by the information I was asked to deliver. While some may have reacted to the presentation in that manner, I can attest there were those who listened to my advice to start with one piece of the puzzle at the time and who have started sowing seeds of advocacy and leadership in their practice; never did I say that my practice was ideal or something that happened overnight. I can assure you any good I have done in my school is the result of hard work, persistence, and an unwavering belief that my library program does have relevance.   No one else is going to believe you and your work are relevant if you don’t believe yourself.

I don’t consider myself an exceptional librarian by any stretch of the imagination, but I do consider myself a learning and information professional who tries to embody the qualities of Librarian 2.0. I also try to convey I have miles to go in my growth and practice, but through ongoing reflection and assessment, I can feel confident that I am taking the right steps to be a lifelong learner. I think if we approach our “work” as play and joyful learning, then perhaps we might be better able to follow Seth Godin’s directive to “Stop trying to be perfect and start being remarkable!”

Doug Johnson concludes the blog post by asking these questions, “Do we owe an apology to those who struggle in silence? How can we give a voice to those who choose not to network?”

If you believe that constructive criticism is part of ongoing self-assessment and a key to growth, then the answer is no. If anyone is owed an apology, it is the students who are not getting the instruction and library program they deserve because they happen to be in a school in which their school librarian who chooses, for whatever reasons, to not at least make the effort to implement a library program that is responsive and proactive.  No one disagrees that each person will adopt these practices in different ways—we can celebrate that, but there is nothing to celebrate about those who won’t even make the effort to move forward.

As for the question about giving a voice to those who choose not to network, only they can give themselves a voice by choosing to participate in the community discussion rather than standing on the sidelines.  In conclusion, it is my firm belief that no one can “give” you your voice. You must find it yourself and then be willing to share it with others so that we may all learn and work toward moving our profession forward.

“Where Are the Others” is not really a question I think is most important.   Instead, I think this question is what we each need to ask ourselves as school librarians:

What will you do with your voice?

Filed under: Issues, Library 2.0, SLM Issues, librarianship, social media, social networking , Advocacy, Beth Friese, change, debate, Doug Johnson, Joyce Valenza, leadership, librarian 2.0, librarianship, Library 2.0, obstacles, personal learning networks, professional growth, school librarianship, technology

Disagreeing with Doug

This blog post originally began as a “brief” response to Doug Johnson’s post, “It’s not just AASL…”, but as I began writing this afternoon, it morphed and took on a life of its own.  I have cross posted my response here in case you may not follow Doug’s Blue Skunk blog.  This post was difficult to write as I normally agree with Doug!  Many thanks for my friends in my PLN for helping me think this one through.

---

July 22 Response to “It’s not just AASL…”

I must respectfully disagree with Doug’s position and with the comment from Debbie Stafford.

My Response to Doug

Doug, you state in your post, “It’s OK for my professional organizations to [be] fiscally prudent as well as cuttin’ edge and socially responsible.”

Are we developing standards merely for profit?  Should standards not be developed first and foremost with the purpose of improving education for students and not as a vehicle for making money?   How are we exemplifying cutting edge practices if an organization, whether it be AASL, ISTE, or any of the organizations you identified above, is not modeling 21st century practices by licensing content for use under one of the Creative Commons licenses?

The original wording on the permissions page for use of the standards (which apparently has changed since my blog post on July 15 at http://bit.ly/fQGj8 ) implied  room for interpretation by using verbiage indicating permissions were needed to even link to the PDF document.  Seriously—telling people (AASL members or not) they need permission to drive people to your document and your organization’s website? Standards that are the very heart of what we try to teach?   How is that cutting edge?  Instead, the appearance is given that control is the driving concern, not innovation.

The original permissions (as well as the examples you have quoted above) are not a “cutting edge” way of providing liberal and unencumbered use of the standards.  Instead, that kind of wording is 1.0; it is the old model of protecting one’s content.   Yes, we can claim “fair use”, but I think everyone knows there are always shades of gray and debate as to whether or not something falls under fair use.   In addition, fair use rules typically are limited to face to face interaction, not public presentations or other means of public sharing via print or digital medium.

The argument, “Everyone else is doing it this way” and “nobody, nobody, puts their work into the public domain, free of any restrictions” also holds no weight with me—at a time in which I see the clout of  our profession declining in the testing and standards driven climate of NCLB, I care about being able to put those standards in as many places as possible with as few restrictions as possible to show the value of what I do every day as a school library professional.  At least with a share alike non-commercial CC license, users would have more confidence that they were not violating copyright or have to wonder if their use fell under fair use.

AASL of course has every right to protect its intellectual property, which no one disputes, but the original permissions wording, which as I noted, has seemingly quietly changed to some extent to be “kinder and gentler” (see July 14 cache of the same page at http://bit.ly/z4DZM ) sometime in recent days, was overly restrictive.  The original wording included several references to “could be”, “must be”, and “may be charged a fee.”   Let organizations market conferences, journals, membership fees, and other services as a means for making profit, but let us not pin our financial hopes on the marketing of ideas and standards that should be produced and shared in the spirit of educational progress.

My Response to Debbie Stafford

Ms. Stafford, if you go back and reference the posts from Chris Harris and Joyce Valenza that I link to in my blog post, I think you will see that no one “went off…without thinking it through.”  On July 18, even Doug himself had this to say about the situation:

“Judging by the tenor of the discussion on various library lists, the ill-will being generated by the controversy is costing AASL a lot in lost membership and good will. A quick (oh, I forgot that that quick is not in AASL’s vocabulary) policy reversal, placing a share-alike, non-commercial use Creative Commons license on the standards would show it listens to its membership. (#FreeTheStandards ) AASL and ALA will need to move into the 21st Century someday, whether they want to or not.”

As for the “one person” you reference in your response, Chris Harris merely pointed out some of the legitimate problems with the original permissions wording and shared those concerns with the school library community.  Not only did he point out some of the problems, but he also provided a reasonable solution that met the interests of AASL and practitioners.  Joyce’s concern in her July 13 post, “I get the need for profit, but I wonder if we are looking at profit in a very small picture way in these times.  I wonder if our field is seriously misrepresented by our especially conservative approach to dissemination” reflects a serious and very real philosophical question about the purpose and mission of our library organizations.  In Joyce’s July 14 post, the esteemed David Loertscher shared a thoughtful analysis of the model “Return on Investment” and concluded with these thoughts:

“How can our voice get heard? Are we insular or promotional? Are we a business or a professional organization? A reminder, the intellectual content of the standards was given freely by volunteers. What is our intent?”

Obviously, more than one blog post shared similar concerns, and I don’t classify other library professionals debating and exploring those concerns in a methodical manner as going off “without thinking it through.”  Clearly, a great deal of thought was put into these posts if you read them in their entirety.

What can be learned from the #freethestandards debate and dialogue?

In her June 29, 2009 review and analysis of David Lee King’s book, Designing the Digital Experience, Valeria Maltoni (http://bit.ly/ecLAW) breaks down the three steps for “mapping a customer’s journey.”  Maltoni identifies the first step:

“Connect the dots between internal preparedness and external needs – the moment of truth in this step is literally overcoming communications barriers, internal bureaucracy, disbelief, and misconception stalls. When you do that, you’re taking your business from a position of unattractiveness, to one of interest in figuring out the points of interaction and staying focused on customer needs.”

If we posit ourselves as “customers” of AASL (or substitute any of the organizations mentioned by Doug above), then perhaps this situation with standards is an opportunity for AASL and other organizations to be “cutting edge” and “socially responsible” by focusing on the needs of its “customers”, the people who want to embrace and integrate these standards as seamlessly and as pervasively as possible.  While it appears the wording for acceptable use has been clarified on the permission page in recent days, why not go a step further and add the Creative Commons license?  Let us draw inspiration from George Bernard Shaw who said, “Some look at things that are, and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not?”  Why NOT free the content?  What does AASL have to lose except the confidence of its members?

As we celebrate the 40^th anniversary of the Apollo moon landing, it seems fitting that our organization could blaze trails for others by taking the bold leap of licensing this important content with the CC license and setting a precedent for idea sharing.   Should we really let how everyone else has approached the marketing and sharing of standards dictate our approach?  By doing so, AASL would be modeling Maltoni’s second step in mapping the customer’s journey, “Integrate what you say with what you do.”  Let us, AASL, be an organization that practices and incorporates the very principles of 21^st century digital citizenship.

Finally, Maltoni identifies the third step of mapping the customer experience:

“Innovate at each touch point - whenever you offer a customer something, do you think through the implications of delivering it to them, or them getting it however they find it easiest? What process or tool have you not updated for a long time and needs revisiting, for example? The moment of truth in this one is if your innovation is you-centered, in other words easy for you, or customer-centric, something that will make their experience better.”

This #freethestandards issue is the perfect opportunity for AASL to “innovate at each touch point” by rethinking how content may be “delivered” to its members and those who will want to use its intellectual property.  Is having to email or make a phone call to get written permission to use the standards the easiest way to share that content?  Absolutely not!  Why not “update the process”? Had the CC license been initially applied rather than the original permission wording, confusion and discontent could have been avoided on the part of those who want to reference and integrate the standards on a regular basis.  The experience of the AASL member at this particular “touch point” could have been better had intellectual profit been a priority over monetary profit.

Final Thoughts

In conclusion, I call upon AASL to be a leader in the educational realm by being innovative and offering the CC license that users can easily embed when they are using the standards in print or digital medium.  As we practitioners in the field attempt to redefine ourselves and bring innovation to the ways that school libraries can make a difference in schools, so too should our organization strive to practice the three steps of mapping the AASL member’s journey to build membership, support, and growth through creative customer service rather than business models that are becoming increasingly irrelevant in today’s culture.

#freethestandards

Filed under: Copyright and Fair Use, Issues, Librarian Stuff, SLM Issues , #freethestandards, AASL, AASL Standards, copyright

Free the AASL Standards

If you didn’t either attend ALA in Chicago in person or follow it from afar through assorted social media backchannels, then you may be blissfully unaware of an imperfect storm brewing called “Free the Standards.”

In the course of teaching a workshop on using the standards, Chris Harris discovered that our standards, the very ones that are to be our compass in our efforts to infuse information literacy as an integral and seamless part of all curricular areas, are subject to some rather restrictive copyright limitations.   In a nutshell, Harris learned that:

Under the new permissions for use, I actually had to tell librarians that they can no longer quote the standards that they are using within their lesson plan documents! Given the push to spread the standards and the whole Learning4Life initiative, this is surely in unintended outcome of AASL’s attempts to secure the standards. And yet, an over zealous locking down of the standards is unfortunately preventing most use.

As stated on the permissions page: “Permission must be requested for publishing or posting a portion of the text or the original document in a print or online publication or on a Web site as well as linking to the PDF.” [AASL] A lesson plan is a print or electronic document, therefore permission must be requested for quoting the standards as is usually done in a standard lesson plan format. Additionally, a lesson plan could be considered a derivative work under the current wording: “The learning standards document is considered the core content if the publication cannot be written without the use of the content of the learning standards document. Such usage requires a license agreement and may include a fee.”[AASL]

A fee for including the standards in each lesson plan?

Most librarians in the workshop assumed that the permission for educational use granted in the standards document covered use in lesson plans. I did as well…until I read the new permissions page. The permissions page limits educational use to only the pdf document itself. “The PDF versions available on the AASL Web site are intended for personal and educational use. Printing or forwarding copies for your own private use or to share with others for purely informational or educational purposes is acceptable.”[AASL] Any quoting of the document (i.e. listing standards on a lesson plan) would fall under the “Publishing or Posting Excerpts” section and would therefore require permission (and maybe a fee) for each lesson plan. ( July 10, 2009 post)

On July 11, Chris followed up with additional information on just how severely restricted we as school librarians are from even linking to the PDF document:

Under AASL’s current permissions for use, you CANNOT use the language. CANNOT put the standards into Rubicon Atlas (or another curriculum mapping program). CANNOT even link to the pdf document on your website or in an e-mail. I know that Alison Cline wrote back yesterday saying this could be “easily taken care of” but it cannot. We need to change the policy that guides use of the standards.

Your participation in this dialogue is critical in our efforts to freeing the standards for liberal non-commercial use.  Suggestions for a Creative Commons License have been made via various blogs, Twitter, and the AASL Forum discussion list.    I urge you to make your voice heard via one or more of these vehicles for conversation—how can we hope to integrate the standards into district and state curriculum if we are not allowed to even identify the standards in a lesson plan or link to the PDF document?

Here are some resources for getting up to speed and being an active part of the conversation for #freethestandards .

• Joyce Valenza has two thoughtful and analytical blog posts; you can read the first post from July 13 here; the second post from July 14 is available here. Heather Loy, a South Carolina school librarian, also has a helpful synopsis on her blog.
• Monitor the Tweets for the hashtag #freethestandards to see what other library professional are saying about this crucial issue; better yet, join Twitter and contribute to the conversation!
• If you are a member of AASL, subscribe to the AASL Members Forum discussion list.
• If you are so inclined, contact AASL and share your ideas and possible solutions to this dilemma in a professional manner.

This is a serious issue that is of concern to all school librarians.  What good does it do our profession and organization if everyone is too afraid to reference the standards for fear of violating copyright or being assessed a fee?

As school librarians, we face enough obstacles in trying to go above and beyond our mission of creating lifelong learners and infusing information literacy as an essential literacy for K-12. The current restrictions only make our task even more challenging—should it really be this difficult and worrisome to use our own standards?

Adding a Creative Commons licensing or some kind of compromise that allows more liberal use/referencing of the standards is a “do or die” in my opinion—if the current restrictions stay in place, our standards are sure to go absolutely nowhere in a hurry.   Whether or not you belong to AASL, the use of the standards is of concern to all—please take time to share concerns and possible solutions you may have in a professional and proactive manner.

Buffy Hamilton,
School Library Media Specialist
Creekview High School
http://theunquietlibrarian.wikispaces.com

#freethestandards

Filed under: Copyright and Fair Use, Issues, SLM Issues , #freethestandards, AASL, copyright, standards

Research to Challenge Our Assumptions About Teens, Media, Social Media, and Digital Divides

If you work with teens (or tweens) on a daily basis as I do, then you will want to read two important documents that came my way via Google Reader and my personal learning network.

The first resource, courtesy of Helen Blowers’ blog, has just been released from Nielsen and is entitled “How Teens Use Media”.  While there are many surprising findings in this study, the study also includes data that has implications for us as librarians who work with young adults:

• Social networks play an increasingly important role (about half of
  U.S. teens use Facebook) and now many teens access the Web over their phones (37% in the U.S).  How are we using social networks and which social networks are we using to reach out to teens?  How can we work with our school/district administrators and our vendors to develop applications that will help push our library resources to teens via their mobile phones?
• YouTube is their most popular source for online videos, yet it is still blocked in the majority of school districts.  What if we had freedom to allow our students to experience the educational and engaging videos available through YouTube during the school day?  I become frustrated when students can’t access that great news video from the Associated Press because the YouTube channel is blocked.  As we have a growing body of terrific resources, including Library of Congress, Smithsonian, and federal government agencies as well as educational materials via YouTube.edu and CitizenTube, we need to be able to provide our students access to these videos without having to get special passwords or permission.  In addition, unlimited access to YouTube would bolster our efforts to create library YouTube channels for book videos, tutorials, and screencasts.
• According to this study, “Sixty-seven percent of teen social
  networkers say they update their page at least once a week. And teens look to their social networks for much more than gossip and photo-sharing: to teens, social networks are a key source of information
  and advice in a critical developmental period: 57% of teen social networkers said they looked to their online social network for advice, making them 63% more likely to do this than the typical social networker.”  This finding has significant implications for the importance of teaching students how to use social networks responsibly and ethically.  Teens need instruction on the concept of digital footprints and information evaluation, skills that are even more important in light of this finding.
• 83% of the teens in the survey use their mobile phones for text messaging.  I need to be able to use my OPAC to send overdue notices or library announcements via a text message.   Right now, privacy policies adopted by many school districts impede our ability to do just this, or student information management systems are not designed to provide timely yet secure email/mobile phone information about our patrons.  The study notes, “As teens around the world continue to
  adopt mobile phones, mobile media and messaging, marketers will be paying attention.”  Does this  include library service vendors and those who make acceptable use policy decisions?

The second reading I encourage you to ponder is “The Not-So-Hidden-Politics of Class Online” by noted researcher danah boyd.   I follow danah boyd on Twitter and via her blog; I  have been fascinated by her work since discovering her about six months ago; this particular document came to my attention thanks to fabulous librarian Jessamyn West.  This document, her  notes/talking points  for an actual talk she just gave on June 30, explores the socioeconomic divide of users in social networks; in this talk, she focuses specifically on Facebook and MySpace.

Like Ms. West, I was struck by these statements from danah boyd:

For decades, we’ve assumed that inequality in relation to technology has everything to do with “access” and that if we fix the access problem, all will be fine. This is the grand narrative of concepts like the “digital divide.” Yet, increasingly, we’re seeing people with similar levels of access engage in fundamentally different ways. And we’re seeing a social media landscape where participation “choice” leads to a digital reproduction of social divisions. This is most salient in the States which is intentionally the focus of my talk here today.

There is nothing I can say here that will substitute for your taking 10-15 minutes or so to read this significant work.    As our nation grapples with the divide that still exists between ethnic and socioecnomic groups and the ramifications of that divide, so too does it play out in social worlds.   boyd obeserves:

In many ways, the Internet is providing a next generation public sphere. Unfortunately, it’s also bringing with it next generation divides. The public sphere was never accessible to everyone. There’s a reason than the scholar Habermas talked about it as the bourgeois public sphere. The public sphere was historically the domain of educated, wealthy, white, straight men. The digital public sphere may make certain aspects of public life more accessible to some, but this is not a given. And if the ways in which we construct the digital public sphere reinforce the divisions that we’ve been trying to break down, we’ve got a problem.

What does this mean to use as librarians?  Obviously, we want to teach students digital ethics as they use social networks and to use information to make decisions based on facts, not stereotypes or misinformation.  On a larger scale, though, boyd is urging us to look at social media (and I think to help our students as well) to examine the use of social media with a critical eye.

Her findings also have implications for the way we use social media to reach out to our students and parents.

So as we think about creating public spaces, what’s the meeting point for our conversations? Is it MySpace or Facebook? Twitter or IRC? What you choose matters. Where you and your colleagues hang out matters. The “voices” of the Internet that you get are biased by the people who are in the places that you hang out. But do you know this? Do you account for it? Are you working to represent all people or just the people that you can see and hear? When you’re trying to reach out to people, are you trying to reach out to all people or just the people in the environments that you understand? Are you embracing difference or are you only taking into account that with which you are comfortable?

These two readings are reminders that we need to think critically about how we are using social media and to be more aware of whom we may be including or excluding with the use of that social media.  This is the digital divide you may not realize exists, but it is just as important as the divide of equitable access.

I urge all of you who are educators or school librarians to take some time to read these two reports ; I would love to hear your thoughts and reflections on these readings!

Filed under: Challenges, Issues, SLM Issues, Web 2.0, social networking , class, danah boyd, digital divide, librarians, nielsen, research, social media, teens