Libraries and Librarians in Schools

An article in response to an inciteful and thought-provoking podcast produced by Elizabeth Hutchinson with Darryl Toerien at https://www.elizabethahutchinson.com/podcast/episode/a55824cd/fosil-education-and-school-libraries-9a-vital-conversation-on-education-and-purpose

School library programs and educational programs are most certainly supposed to be aligned. Working at ‘crossed purposes’, I think should only be possible where there is a complete lack of understanding about the main goal or purpose required. But also, in a complete ignorance of the parameters of the information professional’s role and training – why teach librarians collection management if they aren’t considered essential to concerns regarding curricula? Why teach librarians about pedagogy - If they can’t be a part of the machine that determines the use of the curricula and the appropriate material that supports it to produce the well-rounded high school graduate.

It isn’t merely the case of schools understanding the librarian’s role, it is also the librarians themselves fully comprehending their situation. It could be considered that the insular culture gaslights the information professional somewhat to the point where they are unaware that they are needed beyond basic library function.

Individual efforts to establish cross-departmental committees and projects and disrupt the current culture are potentially locally helpful but are just not enough to affect the status quo nationally or globally. Concerted commitment from governing bodies is imperative and willingness of school governance to be more progressive is essential.

CILIP refers to linking libraries to the goals and objectives of education – A school librarian should be able to declare that they don’t just ‘work in a school library but work with and within the educational agenda of the school. But when the profession itself is not recognised as being a potential contributing factor, it is essentially locked out of the opportunity to value-add. This is at a cultural level so embedded as to be happening unconsciously – education systems seem to have a long-held entrenched belief that ‘teachers’ are educators, and all else are peripheral or ancillary.

Modern means and methods have all the appearance of being reactive to technologies and proactive in dealing with the social difficulties of the current generation, but often do not bend beyond supporting and extending the teaching profession and its members career goals where the purpose should remain primarily to educate the student. Professional development programs need to not be allowed to slide into irrelevant, self-serving exercises but respond to comprehensive theory on dealing with current educational issues and shortcomings. This PD is often not offered or shared to the information professionals in schools when this would appear the very ideal time to unify these two parts of the education equation.

I understand references to luxuries during financial difficulty, that the feeling is generally that it is better to have a librarian than a library because of the guidance and advice a librarian can offer in terms of acquiring research skills and a breadth of interest in the joy of engaging with language and knowledge. However, libraries should not be considered an expendable luxury and minimising the librarians’ resources is not appropriate.

The lack of inclusion of school librarians in discourse and decisions of curricula and pedagogy is indicative of a basic ignorance of the value of people outside of teaching – a singular insularity that is so professional biased as to literally ‘forget’ that librarians aren’t there just to buy nice books and issue them!