Joint use library standards for texas
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•435 views
The Delphi panel of library experts reached consensus on 42 joint use library standards across 11 categories adapted from current Texas public, school, and accreditation standards. The standards were compiled into a Joint Use Library Standards Checklist to help Texas school/public libraries assess the effectiveness of their services. The study aimed to develop the first joint use library standards for Texas by correlating existing requirements and surveying experts over three rounds, with high response and agreement rates indicating interest in the topic.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (14)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (15)
Similar to Joint use library standards for texas
Similar to Joint use library standards for texas (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Joint use library standards for texas
- 1. JOINT USE LIBRARY STANDARDS FOR TEXAS SCHOOL/PUBLIC LIBRARIES: A DELPHI STUDY Treatise Defense Presented in Partial Fulfillment for the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Education Dallas Baptist University February 2, 2016 Susan Waller Casstevens
- 3. Texas Joint Use School and Public Libraries Booker Crandall Guthrie Midlothian Shallowater Claude Dell City Howe Olney Venus Celina Earth Huntington Prairie Lea Wellington El Paso Forney Joshua Prosper White Oak Fort Hancock Marion Rocksprings Wills Point
- 4. Living Room of Learning Living Room of Learning Students and Faculty Parents and Children Senior Adults “A shared library is one of the few places where young and old, students, and adults can participate in learning” McNicol, 2008, p.14).
- 5. Delphi panel of library experts. Texas Library Leaders. Three Rounds of Surveys. Chapter 1
- 6. Current Texas Library Standards were correlated to develop Joint Use Library Standards. Texas Public Library Standards School Library Programs: Standards and Guidelines for Texas Minimum Requirements for Accreditation in the Texas State Library System
- 7. Background of the Study Serve K-12 and public community. Encourages sharing of resources, financially efficient, and promotes lifelong learning. More suited to our collaborative society than at any previous time.
- 8. Current Texas Standards Public • Ten Standard Categories. School • Six Learner-Centered Standard Categories. Accreditation • Texas Administration Code 1.71 - 1.85.
- 9. Statement of the Problem Joint use libraries have existed in the United States and internationally for more than a century. However, Texas joint use school/public libraries do not have joint use library standards by which to measure quality service.
- 10. Purpose of the Study From current library standards, the library expert panel identified categories and components for proposed joint use standards. Correlate current public, school, and accreditation requirements to create joint use library standards. Develop a checklist from the new standards for joint use library to assess effective services.
- 11. Research Questions Research Question 2: What are the joint use library standards recommended by the Delphi expert panel? Research Question 3 Can the joint use library standards result in a checklist that will help Texas school/public libraries measure effective library service? Research Question 1: Can the current Texas Library Standards be adapted to create new standards for Texas joint use libraries?
- 12. Significance of the Study Add to the professional status of librarians who serve joint use libraries. Relative to the rapidly changing world of information science and librarianship. Provide an authoritative document by which librarians may measure quality service.
- 13. Chapter 2 Literature Review Library Standards Joint Use Agreements National and Int’l Research Future Trends/Res ources Types of Joint Use Libraries Libraries as Community Anchors Critical Success Factors
- 14. Significance of the Study Administration Public Relations Collection Personnel Facilities Technology Finance Library Services Texas Public Library Standards
- 15. Significance of the Study Teaching and Learning Technology Leadership and Management Connections to Community Librarianship Library Environment Information Science Texas School Library Standards
- 16. Texas State Library Accreditation 13 Requirements Grants, Professional Development Interlibrary Loan Program State Databases
- 18. National and International Research on Joint Use libraries Continue to grow nationally. Collaboration is key. Quality of life and learning improved. More common in Canada and Australia. Provide library services to more people at a lower cost. Matthews, 2007; Bundy & Amey,2006 Fitzgibbons, 2000; Gunnels, 2012; Lankford, 2006
- 19. Types of Joint Use Libraries College/Public School/Public College/Public generally an easier partnership (Gunnels and Green, 2012). School/Public face challenges when you mix students and public (Dalton, 2006).
- 20. •Shared facilities are a practical form of service for 21st Century libraries. •Texas is an ideal location for continued and future joint use libraries (Lankford, 2006). •Funding for libraries is widely supported by Texas voters (Todaro, 2009). •Repeatedly identified as crucial to success of any combined library (Bundy, 2006). Joint Use Agreements Resource Management Critical Success Factors Future Trends for Joint Use Libraries
- 21. Proposed Joint Use Library Standards Critical Success Factors Communication and Collaboration Value of Library Services Highly motivated Library Director
- 22. Chapter 3 Methodology The Delphi Study
- 23. Delphi Methodology Round One Rounds Two and Three • Consensus from Library Expert Panel. • Demographics of Library Experts. • Open-ended questions. • Likert-type scaled questions for joint use standards.
- 24. Oracle of Delphi • Management • Medicine • Education 1950’s Rand Corporation • In post-WWI, used to identify a bomb target in the U.S. Anonymity of Expert Panel • Subjective opinions. • Iterative surveys. • Reach consensus. Delphi Research Design of Structured Communication (Linstone, 1975)
- 25. DataCollection Validity and Reliability (Hsu and Sanford, 2007; McMillan, 2004). Consensus (Cresswell, 2015). 70% 4.0 Mean, Median, Mode 1.0 Standard Deviation 1.0 Interquartile Range
- 26. Round Three Twenty-seven participants 18 Likert-type Scaled Questions Round Two Twenty-eight participants 45 Likert-type Scaled Questions Round One Twenty-nine participants Expert profiles, Categories, Components 62 Nominees Invited to Participate Professional Librarian Criteria Google forms for communication
- 28. Chapter 4 Results of Delphi Rounds Analysis of Data
- 29. Six-week study. Quantitative analysis from descriptive statistics. Emergent themes from qualitative content. Validity from data that is useful and appropriate to topic.
- 30. 10 school librarians. 5 University researchers. 4 Texas State Librarians. 5 published authors in Librarianship. 11 Public or Joint Use Librarians. 64% LIS graduate degrees. 20% doctorate degrees. 82% more than 5 years experience. 67% more than 15 years experience. 73% older than 50 years of age. Library Expert Panel 96% Response rate
- 32. Should not be included in joint use library standards. Unimportant for joint use library standards. Depends on circumstances if this item should be included in joint use library standards. Important to include in joint use library standards. Essential to include in joint use library standards. 1 = 2 = 3 = 4 = 5 =
- 33. 90% Consistent funding. 90% Meet Texas School Library Standards. 90% Meet Texas Public Library Standards. 90% Long range technology plan. 87% Clear roles for management. 80% Community connections. 80% Organization of monetary responsibilities. 80% Master’s degreed librarian. 73% Identify unique needs of community. 70% Accreditation requirements.
- 34. 97% Technology Standards. 97% Collection Standards. 90% Facility Standards. 90% Librarian Leadership Standards. 90% Personnel Standards. 83% State accreditation requirements. 79% Finance Standards. 79% Connections to Community Standards. 76% Library Service Standards. 70% Library Environment Standards. Categories Identified by Delphi Library Expert Panel to Include in Joint Use Library Standards
- 36. Comments from Round One Access for all patrons. Protection of children. Provide true public library service in a school-housed facility. Internet Filtering. Concern for small joint use libraries.
- 38. • Mean 4.0-4.78. • 78%- 97% Panel Agreement. Achieved Consensus • Acceptance into joint use library standards. Action:
- 39. • Mean, Median, Mode less than 4.0. • Less than 70% Panel Agreement. Did not achieve consensus. • Continue to Round Three. Action:
- 43. • Mean 4.2-4.8. • 78%- 96% Panel Agreement. Achieved Consensus. • Acceptance into joint use library standards. Action:
- 45. • Mean. Median, mode less than 4.0. • Less than 70% Panel Agreement. Did not achieve consensus. • Dismissed from joint use library standards. Action:
- 48. 1. Can the current Texas Public and School Library Standards be adapted to create joint use library standards for Texas school/public libraries? • The panel reached consensus on 42 of the 45 components of proposed joint use library standards that were developed from current Texas Library Standards. What are the proposed joint use library standards recommended by the Delphi expert panel? • Forty-two joint use library standards in 11 different categories. Can the joint use library standards recommended by the Delphi panel result in a checklist that will help Texas combined school/public libraries assess effective library service? • Yes. The Joint Use Library Standard Checklist is presented in Appendix O.
- 49. At the conclusion of the study, consensus was achieved for 42 joint use library standards. The Delphi method identified objectives, goals, and principles that the library experts agreed should be included in the standards. A checklist was developed for school/public libraries to assess effective library service.
- 54. Two-fold Purpose of Study 42 of 45 new standards achieved consensus. Create new joint use standards from current Texas standards. 42 new standards compiled into a Joint Use Library Standards Checklist.
- 55. High response rate indicates strong interest in the topic. Checklist to assess effectiveness of new standards. 80% of Panel master's degreed librarians. 29 completed Round One. 28 completed Round Two. 27 completed Round Three. 42 Joint Use Library Standards. 62 invited and 30 agreed to participate.
- 57. 0 points •No observation of this standard. 1 point •Very little observation of this standard - Insufficient 2 points •Moderately observed. Some improvement needed. 3 points •Complete. The standards is routinely observed.
- 59. Self-reporting Developmental process. Reliability Panel members may not reflect opinions of all librarians who qualify to participate in the study. Potential bias The proposed joint use library standards only apply to combined school and public libraries.
- 60. State • Evaluate and revise 42 joint use library standards. National • Qualitative studies of librarians and patrons who use standards checklist. International • Pilot test of standards checklist to the current joint use school/public libraries in Texas.
- 61. Dismissed standards included in joint use agreements. Accreditation requirements adjusted by size. Cluster joint use standards by community size.
- 62. Living Room of Learning Gunnels and Green (2012) predicted joint use libraries will become more common in the 21st century, because a shared facility offers more resources than an individual library can provide.
- 63. Living Room of Learning
Editor's Notes
- Thank you for the opportunity to present my doctoral study to you today – To Dr. Cynthia Brown as my committee chair, thank you for providing so many hours of communication, thoughtful suggestions, and impressive tutoring in Word formatting skills. Thank you for your kindness and patience, and especially your ever-calm encouragement that kept me writing. Dr. Lee thank you for being a consistent role model in class and in personal conversation. You are always prepared, positive, and know how to perfectly persuade doctoral students to keep working and writing. Dr. Lee, you beautiful weekly devotions to remind us from whom our inspiration and strength comes, our Lord and Savior. To Dr. Dugger and Dr. Watts - Thank you for your professional commitment and courtesy throughout the doctoral process To my Husband, David – the best person I have ever known – I am a lucky woman to be married to you. Joint Use Library Standards for Texas School/Public Libraries: A Delphi Study
- Currently, there are 24 joint use school/public libraries that serve K-12 students and public communities in Texas. However, there are no specific library standards to provide guidelines for this type of combined library. I utilized a Delphi Study to develop joint use library standards for school/public libraries in Texas.
- There is great diversity among joint use libraries of Texas: From a background survey previous to the beginning my Delphi study, these libraries indicated they serve a population range of 300 to 43,000 people, hold library collections from 800 to 43,000 and circulate 2000 to more than 100,000 items per year. These joint use libraries usually serve as the community’s only public library.
- Because these libraries serve K-12 students, school staff, adults and senior adults – a joint use library could be seen as multi-generational “ living room of learning.”
- The library expert panel who participated in my study included Texas library leaders from school, college, public, and joint use libraries. University researchers, authors, Texas State Library librarians, and Texas Library Association librarians also served on the Delphi panel.
- Current Texas Public and current Texas School Library Standards were correlated with the Minimum Requirements for Accreditation in the Texas State Library System – To develop Joint Use Library Standards
- Gunnels & Green, 2012 wrote that public libraries were created to allow educational resources to flow to a community. The Texas Library Association claims strong school library programs support curriculum and help increase student acheivement. Tx libraries serve 24 million Texans in 880 public libraries. School libraries support 6 million Texas students and teachers. College libraries help 1.4 million college students and faculties on higher education campuses. Joint use libraries have been criticized as inferior to separate or stand alone libraries, but because they serve more than one population- they may be better suited to our society now than during any previous time. Creating a set of formal standards for joint use libraries will provide a basis for quality library service in current and future shared libraries.
- There are separate standards for public, school, and college libraries in Texas. Since joint use libraries serve a combination of populations they need a separate set of standards be accepted as a credible form of library service.
- Because all libraries continually redefine their services to remain relevant to the rapidly changing information needs for those they serve, ALL libraries need specific library standards by which to measure quality service.
- The final goal of my study was to develop a checklist from the new library standards for joint use libraries to assess effective service.
- Using the Delphi technique, my doctoral study began with these research questions: read the questions
- The impact of my study could affect other shared libraries and provide valuable data that may be used to establish official Texas Joint Use Library Standards. These joint use standards could also add to the professionalism of library directors who serve blended libraries.
- I addressed nine areas of research in the Chapter 2 Literature Review.
- Texas Public Library Standards address the categories of adminsitration, library collections, facilities, finance, public relations, personnal, library services, and technology. The purpose of these standards is to - - - determine timely, quality, comprehensive, and appropriate measures that are relative to the population sizes of communities in Texas to make the standards relevant and meaningful.
- The purpose of the Texas School Library Standards is to Align expectations of the Texas Education Code to provide a tool for evaluating school library programs. The six learner-centered standards are based on research that shows a correlation between strong library programs and strong academic achievement.
- Public libraries that are accredited are members of the Texas State Library system – and are eligible for certain state services, such as the TexShare databases, interlibrary loan programs, grant opportunities professional staff development that is unavailable to those outside the state library system (Texas Administration Code, 2015). There are 13requriements from the Texas Administrative Code, such as the official calculation of the population that a public library Also, a public library must not charge for general library services to any person residing in the area served by the library nondiscriminatory statement from each public library must be on file at the state library in Austin
- Correlating the public, school, and accreditation standards allowed me to create a framework to develop joint use library standards. For example, in Texas Administrative Code a population served in a public library is directly related to the per capita requirements in the public standards for Collections, as well as the school standard for Connections to the Community. Or, the public standards for Facilities relates to the school standard of Library Environment, as well as the Texas Administrative Code for Legal Establishment. The school standard of Librarianship parallels the public standard of promoting intellectual freedom and state Texas Admin Code of Nondiscrimination.
- According to Fitzgibbons the essential ingredient to a successful joint use library is cooperation. The city and school district must share a vision, common goals for the library, establish joint use policies and procedures. Cooperative relationships improve library services, providing better information access to students and public library users. Gunnels, Green, and McNicol asserted that Joint use libraries continue to increase in number because of the current drive for economy. Ison conducted a 15-year study of joint use libraries in Australia, and concluded that separate libraries could never have delivered the level of curriculum support to students that the combined facilities he studied offered to schools and the community
- Joint use libraries can represent a variety of partnerships. Most often, a shared library is either a combination of a school and public library, or a college and public library. School/public libraries are usually situated in small rural areas, although they are present in bigger communities Some joint use libraries serve thousands of patrons. Hundreds of joint use libraries currently operate around the world. The following critical success factors were compiled by Matthews and Calvert (2007) to identify concrete elements that improve combined library services: A formal management agreement., One library manager with overall responsibility, Community support, Adequate size with room for expansion, Convenient location for all. Adequate staffing and operating hours, Membership in a larger library network, No restriction on collection for user group.
- McNicol pointed out that partnership in library services may save money, but there is the additional cost of time commitments and consistent communication efforts to make the partnership between a city library and a school library work well. On a negative note, long-time researcher John Moorman offered the advice of “Don’t Do It!”if a joint use library’s main purpose in a community is only economic Moorman found that the critical success conditions so rarely existed in any one community, that unless there are fewer than 3,000 people in a community and the joint use library is the only viable option for library service, then students and community members are better served with separate libraries, rather than a combined library.
- Over all, the literature was positive for the success of joint use libraries – if certain success factors were present: Lankford found that economic factors were not the most important measure of success for joint libraries. Quality of life improved for people who used a joint use library (Lankford, 2006). Lankford agreed that the missions of school/public libraries are different, but with stakeholder commitment to the idea of a shared library, materials and technology can be provided for the educational needs of students and community members, as well as a center for lifelong learning for community members of all ages (Lankford, 2006).
- The Delphi technique was originally used in the 1950’s to predict the future, specifically to elicit expert opinions about a possible U.S. bomb target after World War II . Later, Delphi studies were widely used as a decision-making tool in the research community (Marcoux, 1999). It is now an accepted method of research for the fields of library science and education.
- The Delphi methodology was appropriate for my research because it compiled the opinions of experts with similar professional perspectives. The panel of library experts completed three survey rounds that included: An initial set of seven profile questions to gather demographic questions about the panel members and identify categories and components to develop the joint use library standards. Two rounds of Likert-type scaled questionnaires to determine what standards to include or dismiss in the new joint use standards/
- The Delphi method is named for the oracle of Delphi, who was able to foresee the future. Delphi is most often used for research in the fields of management, medicine, and education. Delphi is an accepted method of gathering consensus on a topic from experts who have no direct interaction with each other. The experts refine their opinion on the research topic through controlled feedback the researcher provides – maintaining their anonymity. This eliminates any pressure from face –to-face interaction. Delphi studies are considered appropriate for studying topics that can benefit from subjective input form a group of highly qualified experts – such as the professional librarians in my Delphi Study.
- Cresswell reported that consensus was illustrated by the agreement between knowledgeable experts who are qualified to express their opinion in a given discipline. Consensus in my study was determined by descriptive statistics that were calculated on each survey item with a 5-point Likert-type scale: a minimum of 70% library expert panel agreement. A mean, median, or mode score of 4.0 or greater, a standard deviation score of 1.0 or less, and an interquartile range of 1.0 or less
- The expert library panel consisted of: Ten school librarians, Three college librarians, Two public librarian.sTen joint use librarians. Two Texas Library Association consultants, Two Texas State Library staff member.Three university researchers. Two professional library consultants. Five of the library expert panel members have authored scholarly articles and books about librarianship.
- Ethical survey research requires good practices. In my study, the confidentiality of the responses was protected. Hsu and Sanford emphasized the Delphi technique can be time-consuming to allow participants an adequate schedule to respond to the different rounds of questioning. There is a potential for low response rates in a Delphi study due to asking participants to respond to several rounds within a deadline. I did receive permission from the Dallas Baptist University Committee for the Protection of Human Participants. I provided adequate safeguards for the rights and welfare of the participants in this study. The research plans for the current Delphi study were in compliance with the research policies of Dallas Baptist University and the DHHS Regulations for the Protection of Human Subjects.
- . Chapter Four presents the results of the three Delphi rounds of surveys and the analysis of the gathered data.
- The current study required a panel of library experts approximately six weeks to complete three iterative rounds of questionnaires. The repetitive nature of the Delphi method increased the validity of the research. In my study, emergent themes provided meaningful qualitative content. Cresswell state that validity refers to whether the inferences that emerge from the data are useful, appropriate to the topic, meaningful, and correct.
- The individual profiles of the library expert panel provided important information for understanding the findings – The criterion to participate as a library expert required professional librarian experience in a school, college, public, or joint use library. The percentage of post-bacculareate education on the library expert panel was 93% Linstone and Turoff noted that If the background of the Delphi panel is similar – 10-15 members are sufficient. Less than fifty panel members for a Delphi study is recommended.
- Consensus was determined by the descriptive statistics pictured here as calculated on on each survey question. An interquartile range or standards deviation of 1.0 or less is an indicator of a high level of consensus.
- The five-point Likert-type scale pictured here included shows the choices on each survey question.
- The questions in Round One asked the library expert panel members to identify essential components in the areas of: Leadership and Administration, Library Collections, Library Environment, Finance, Public Relations, Technology, Library Services, Personnel, State Accreditation as a Texas Public Library, and Information Science and Librarianship 70% percent or more of the library expert panel agreed on the 10 components shown here to include in the proposed joint use standards.
- These are the categories 70% or more of the library expert panel agreed to include in the proposed joint use library standards. These categories originated from the current Texas library standards, as well as the requirements for accreditation in the Texas State Library System.
- Here is a summary of Round One Results- breathe!
- All of the panel comments from each round of the study are itemized in the appendices – the range of suggestions widened the scope for the content to include in the new standards. Access to library materials for all patrons should comply with local, state and federal laws for protection of children. Panel members asserted that accommodations should be in the standards for smaller joint use libraries because of their limited ability to meet standards due to reduced resources. One panel member succinctly summarized - No joint use library will succeed if the thinking of the administration separates school from public issues. Staff, hours, funds, all must be united. What goes for one goes for all.
- Round Two asked panel members to rate the components library experts identified in Round One. Round Two contained 45 questions, divided into the 10 categories identified by the panel in Round One. Based on feedback from Round One, the format of Round Two allowed panelists to rate each item on a 5-point Likert-type scale. 28 panel members completed Round Two, representing a 96% completion rate. As Skulmoski stated, Descriptive statistics were used to establish the level of consensus for each item. Interquartile ranges were calculated as measures of dispersion and the mean scores illustrated measures of central tendency. . .
- The proposed standards that reached consensus in Round Two are itemized in the Appendices.
- It is interesting to note which items did not reach consensus during Round Two. For instance, in the the category of Leadership, the assurance that the joint use library would meet all quantitative requirements for accreditation received more that 80% agreement, but panel members suggested revisions in the wording of the standard. Therefore, this item continued to the Round Three. All 18 items that did not achieve consensus were sent to panel for the Round Three survey. The statistical results from Round Two were included in the Round Three to inform the panel of the level of consensus from Round Two. This information is the controlled feedback the researcher can provide to Delphi panel members, while still maintaining anonymity of individual responses.
- The proposed standards that did not reach consensus during Round Two included items from all categories of joint use standards. The largest area of disagreement focused on the Library Environment category, where four proposed joint use standards did not reach the required level of agreement. The lowest percentage of agreement measured at 46%, in the Personnel category that would require the librarian to be a school certified librarian and hold a master’s degree. The ability of small joint use libraries to afford a librarian with these qualifications concerned the panel members who did not want a small facility to be penalized due to limited financial resources.
- Many of the comments from Round Two validated the proposed joint use library standards, evidenced by the fact that 27 of the 45 questions achieved consensus during Round Two A few examples: If there is one librarian in a joint use library – it should be a certified school librarian – a public librarian may not have the teaching skills of a school librarian. Instructional space for students should remain free from interruption by public patrons. Joint use libraries should not be housed in existing school buildings, but should be in separate library facilities to provide better access (to public patrons) than schools do.” Internet filtering was a big issue - panelists pointed out that public libraries must filter to qualify for Texas Erate funding, which allows them to maintain Internet access at a reduced cost. Another expert said that in a joint use library “adult patrons should not be limited in their information access by filters designed for students,
- 18 of the questions continued to Round Three and included some slight rewording to address the concerns voiced in the comments from Round Two. 27 panel members submitted the 18-question survey, representing a response rate of 96%. The Round Three questionnaire allowed the library expert panelists to rate 18 items that did not achieve consensus during Round Two. These 18 questions included at least one proposed joint use library standard from each of the ten categories, with the exception of the State Accreditation questions, all of which achieved full consensus during Round Two. Each Round Three survey question was followed by an optional comment box.
- In Round Three, 15 items in nine categories achieved consensus with a panel agreement of 78% - 96% and mean scores ranging from 4.2 – 4.8.
- This table briefly indicates the proposed joint use library standards that reached consensus during Round Three - these are completely detailed in the appendices. Each of the items that reached consensus were accepted as joint use library standards and included in the joint use library checklist
- Three items did not reach consensus during Round Three from the standard categories of Library Environment, Library Services, and Teaching and Learning. These items were dismissed from the list of joint use library standards.
- Signage is an important practice, but is not necessary as a standard Community access during school hours was controversial - One panelist remarked, “If you don’t allow this, you do not truly have a joint library facility.” However, some schools have libraries that only allow public access at times other than school hours.”
- There were comments for every single question in Round Three – just a few examples: A joint use library needs funding other than school district money - This is an example of why a separate set of standards would certainly benefit Texas joint use libraries.” “If collections are not accessible to all users then you do not have a joint library. This is totally against the spirit of a true joint “You can’t force a school to comply with somebody else’s standards. In most cases the school owns the building.” A “flexibility paragraph” was suggested for the standards list to prepare Joint use library are needed, but too many standards tend to stifle creativity and limit options for quality library service.”
- By the conclusion of Round Three, the expert panel determined that 42 of the original proposed joint use library standards should be included in a joint use library standard checklist. Only three of the 45 proposed joint use library standards did not reach consensus during the Delphi survey process.
- . The attrition rate between Round One and Round Three was 7%, with 27 or the original 29 panelists completing all three survey rounds. The expert panel accepted 93% of the survey items into the new library standards. The panel dismissed 6% of the items from the proposed joint use library standards. The slight rewording of several joint use standards in Round Two and Three resulted from the suggestions and comments of the panel members.
- Twelve categories and 42 components comprise the proposed Joint Use Library standards for Texas School/Public Libraries. The standards are detailed in the appendices.
- The new joint use standards established the guidelines for a library checklist to help joint use school/public libraries assess effective library service. The checklist is displayed in the appendices.
- Twelve categories and 42 components comprise the proposed Joint Use Library standards for Texas School/Public Libraries. The standards are detailed in the appendices.
- Professional opinions from scholarly articles and books alternately support and criticize different elements of joint use school/public libraries. However, all the literature suggests certain critical success factors that would improve joint use library service. These critical success factors could be expressed through joint use library standards.
- Consequently, there was two-fold purpose for my Delphi study. First, using the Delphi surveys, categories and components were identified by library experts from current Texas library standards and utilized to develop joint use library standards. Forty-two of the 45 proposed joint use library standards achieved consensus from the panel of library experts. These new joint use standards were compiled to create a checklist school/public Chapter Five presents a discussion of the findings of the current study, its implications, and recommendations for further research.
- The 27 panelists who completed the entire Delphi study represent a variety of librarianship roles. Eighty percent of the library expert panel hold masters degrees in information science. The high response rate between the 30 members of the panel and the 27 who completed all three rounds of surveys indicate the strong interest of the panel in the topic of joint use library standards.
- This figure briefly illustrates the compilation of the joint use library standards. The standards are completely detailed in the appendices. Each of the ovals represents a standard category with two to six principle that indicate quality library service. There are 10 categories of standards and one category of requirements for accreditation. Joint use libraries benefit two-fold from accreditation because school and public library users enjoy the privileges from membership in the state library system
- The joint use library standard checklist developed by my study is an evaluative tool to assess effective library services. The library director of a combined school/public library could utilize the joint use library standards checklist to numerically evaluate current library services. In addition to the librarian, stakeholders representing the public and the school population should also complete the checklist. As Burgin stated, because the checklist is a self-reporting assessment tool, the addition of various perspectives increases the objectivity of the evaluation. The assessor would assign each of the 42 standards a point value between 0 and 3.
- At the end of the checklist, the point values are totaled. A perfect score of 126 points would indicate the highest level of joint use library standards routinely observed in the library. The pictured indicators for the checklist represent the levels of library service: For example, If a joint use library scored a combined total of between 113-126 points (90-99%) on the 42 standards, that library would receive a rating of Exemplary. This rating illustrates that the joint use library needs very little improvement in its library services. However, if a combined facility only achieves between 75-89 points (60-69%), it would receive a rating of Below Standard. This rating would indicate that the joint use library has many areas of library service that need improvement.
- In a discussion of the limitations for the current study, there are areas of possible concern. Cresswell and Vernon stated because the experts were individually invited to participate, creating the limitation of potential bias from the panel, but in the Delphi process, the selection criteria for the expert panel are determined by the researcher and it is the expertise of the participants is what makes each member uniquely qualified to serve on the Therefore, the panel members may not have been representative of all the professional librarians affected by joint use library standards. Hasson indicated there is no reliability for a Delphi study, because the individual library expert panel members may interpret the same information differently. Clear instruction and well-written survey questions increase the reliability of expert responses during the Delphi rounds. Additional research to further develop joint use library standards for school/public libraries in Texas needs to occur to increase the reliability of the current study.
- Due to renewed interest in the collaboration of public and school educational resources, more research is RECOMMENDED in the area of how library standards create quality and improved library service in shared library facilities. The following topics are recommendations for additional research in this area. Evaluate and revise the 42 joint library standards created in this study.
- The checklist that was generated from the current study could be used to facilitate the collection of data from joint use libraries in Texas. A pilot test of the joint use library standards checklist would contribute to the research on the current topic. The 42 joint use library standards on the checklist could be presented to the 24 currently operating joint use school/public libraries in Texas. In addition, librarians could answer the following questions: Was the joint use standards checklist helpful as your library evaluated its library services? If it was helpful, how was it helpful? What would make the joint use library standards more effective? If any of the proposed joint use standards are dismissed from the checklist by individual libraries, perhaps those standards could become components in the joint use agreement a library establishes between a school district and city or county governing agency.
- Gunnels and Green (2012) predicted joint use libraries will become more common in the 21st century, because a shared facility offers more resources than an individual library can provide.
- The purpose of my study was to enhance joint use library service through the development of standards and a checklist to measure those standards, so that school/public libraries can be living rooms of learning For multi-generational library visitors. A joint use library brings together all ages, from toddlers to retirees in their 70s and older. During a typical week in a joint use library in Texas, preschoolers gather in eager anticipation for story time. Seated in a semi-circle, their bright upturned facies burst into laughter while listening to Ladybug Girl’s latest predicament or hearing Pete the Cat optimistically remind us that “It’s all good.” Two afternoons each week, senior library patrons sit at desktop computers. Proving that it is never too late to learn, the class focuses on mastering basic computer skills necessary to adapt in our ever-changing digital world. Meanwhile, students and faculty come and go throughout the day. They gravitate to the library to check out material, visit, or browse electronic devices. In a joint use library, a grandmother may share a sitting area with a 17-year old working on Algebra 2 problems, while other teens play card games and adults fill out job applications online. In this well-lit library, a living room of learning, there is space for all and everyone is welcome.