Alligood l policy

455 views
398 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
455
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Alligood l policy

  1. 1. Lora Wendy Alligood Weeding Library Media Material October 1, 2012
  2. 2. While many people may view a library collection as something that just gets larger over time, best practices contradict this mistaken belief. A library collection cannot be allowed to spread haphazardly like an English flower garden; its growth should be like that of a bonsai tree, slow and deliberate with shaping from frequent and judicial pruning. The Walton County (Public School System) Selection Policy states, “A good collection development plan must include weeding. The process of weeding is a key part of assessing the collection. It helps keep collections relevant, accurate, and useful; and it facilitates more effective use of space in the library media center” (Collection evaluation policy, 2012). Perhaps the standard for collection management is Larson‟s CREW method. CREW is an acronym for Continuous Review, Evaluation and Weeding. As the name implies, it is an ongoing process rather than a yearly task. Larson and many others suggest beginning with the facility‟s mission statement. That is to be the benchmark against which all acquisitions and all removals must be measured. If there is no mission statement, there is no clearly established direction. A mission statement should …declare what students will be able to do as a result of their learning in the library space (Zmuda, 2011). According to Colleen MacDonell (2001), a collection development policy and a weeding policy are essential documents for any library. Policy should be a guide for acquisition of materials that align with standards for student achievement, content, reading levels, targeted interests, and identified gaps in the collection (McNair, 2012). Conversely, policy should also dictate which materials should be removed from the collections and by whom as well as how they are to be handled after removal. Walton County Public Schools‟ policy states, “Although the final decision to withdraw materials from the library media collection is one that is made by the library media specialist, subject area
  3. 3. faculty members may be invited toreview the items marked for withdrawal. Withdrawn materials should not generally be sent to classrooms, since the same standard of quality should apply to other instructional materials as well” (Collection evaluation policy, 2012). Weeding policies generally include many of the same considerations. These include: the attainability of more suitable materials through Internet, interlibrary loan, and budget constraints; the relationship of a particular item to others in the collection; and the future usefulness of an item. CREW guidelines use the acronym MUSTIE (Larson). Each letter stands for a negative factor that would make an item eligible for weeding. M is for misleading or factually inaccurate. U is for ugly indicating that a book or other item is unattractive and beyond repair; the old saying about not judging a book by its cover is not true when weeding. One librarian found that kids are not likely to check out a book that has a plain cover, has small words, or looks old, (Martin). However, age does not automatically indicate a good candidate for weeding: “Copyright date should be considered; however, do not make a decision to weed based solely on the copyright date of the material. Some older material may be considered classic or may be of great historical value” (McNair). S stands for superseded by a better resource. T and I are for trivial or irrelevant. E means the material/information may be obtained expeditiously or elsewhere. Another consideration should be usage; something that has not been circulated in the last five or ten years may be considered for removal. Any potentially offensive materials such as those that are biased or portray stereotypes should be considered good weeding candidates. Usefulness may also be a factor; does the material “contain information which is inaccessible because they lack a table of contents, adequate indexing, and/or search capabilities” (McNair)?
  4. 4. The weeding policy should apply not only to the books, but to all library holdings including furniture and technology (Zmuda, 2011). The modern library is moving toward a learning commons format with more comfortable chairs, more tables, various types of learning spaces and a variety of tools. According to Joyce Valenza (2006), the future the library will be a blend of 40% physical and 60% virtual. “The emerging formula [is] 60 percent less on print, 60 percent more on electronic resources and e-readers” (McNair, 2012). Despite these benefits and the necessity of weeding, libraries often face criticism from the community when books and other materials must be discarded. Good public relations are vital in turning “perceptions of the weeding event from a negative „purge‟ to a much more positive „collection refreshment‟ event”(Booth, 2009). A disposal policy is an effective defense against public outcry. Materials that are in good condition can be sold or given to charities such as the Salvation Army. Those that are in poor condition should be recycled or destroyed. However, “none of the four major methods of disposal - destroying, recycling, selling and giving away – is without its drawbacks” (Alternatives to dumping). Destroying leads to complaints. Recycling may pay very little and pick up may not be available. Selling is labor intensive and may not yield much monetary gain. Both selling and giving away usually require library marks to be eradicated. Since most librarians love books and are somewhat loath to discard anything that mightone day be of use, McEwen (2012) cautions against harboring for personal sentimental reasons and retaining large sets of dormant books. Finally, while it must be done and in accordance with written policy, there is a time when weeding is wrong; in cases where a patron requests that a particular book be removed from the shelves for personal reasons, the selection
  5. 5. policy, which should be reviewed every few years by the board, guards against such instances (Scales).Weeding has six major benefits: it creates space, saves time, makes the collection more appealing, enhances the library‟s reputation, helps keep up with collection needs and provides feedback concerning the strengths and weaknesses of the collection (Larson, 2008). So, go ahead; judge that book by its cover!
  6. 6. References Alternatives to dumping.(1975), American Libraries 6(3), 144. Booth, A. (2009). Fahrenheit 451?: a 'burning question' on the evidence for book withdrawal. Health information and libraries journal, 26, 161-165. Collection evaluation policy: Weeding library media material. (2012). Retrieved from http://www.wcpsteacher.org/education/components/scrapbook/default.php?sectiondetaili d=7507&&PHPSESSID=f185ab95b7d4f188de2472b040929c14 Larson, J, ed. " CREW: A weeding manual for modern libraries." Texas State Library and Archives Commission. N.p., 2008. Web. 19 Sep 2012. Retrieved fromhttps://www.tsl.state.tx.us/ld/pubs/crew/index.html Martin, L. J. (2011). Needing a weeding: How judging a book by its cover can help. Library mediaconnection, 30(2), 18. McEwen, I. (2012). Separating the wheat from the chaff. Teacher Librarian, 39(4), 33-34. McNair, E. (2012). Print to digital: Opportunities for choice. Library Media Connection, 30(6), 28-30. Scales, P. When weeding is wrong.School Library Journal, 55(11). 18. Valenza, J. (Performer) (2006). Library fest with joycevalenza [Web series episode]. In EdTech talk. Online:http://edtechtalk.com/EdTechTalk53.
  7. 7. Zmuda, A. (2011, F). Six steps to saving your school library program. School library monthly, 27( 5), 45-8.

×