Who Needs Teacher-Librarians?

A Steady Decline

I spent much of my professional life promoting, defending, and developing the role of teacher-librarians in Ontario schools. So I note that the well-respected organization People for Education has just released an important report School Libraries and Information Literacy. Unfortunately, the report tracks, yet again, the decline of the teacher-librarian in this province:

• 56% of elementary schools have a teacher-librarian, most are part-time; this is a decline from 80% in 1997/98.
• 66% of secondary schools have a teacher-librarian, just over half are full-time; this is a decline from 78% in 2000/01.
• 57% of secondary schools and 40% of elementary schools have a policy on social networking.

The media in Ontario is all over the story today. I was delighted to see that the report contrasts these findings with the research demonstrating that professional library staff and strong library programs improve student achievement. Unfortunately, many administrators and politicians ignore this evidence. 

Dangerous Thinking 

As I see it, there are three positions driving the decline in the numbers of school libraries and teacher-librarians:

1. The curriculum should emphasize discrete subjects and disciplines. The school library is, ipso facto, outside the curriculum. Such a position severely limits learning and teaching. Actually, more than many classrooms, the school library environment promotes a real world curriculum, where all  students build knowledge through the networking of experts, making connections among subjects, and individualizing learning.
2. Schools should emphasize public accountability through increased test scoring and lower costs. The school library is an out-dated, costly, and pedagogically ineffective frill in the present climate. Such a position is itself out-dated. A strong information-literacy program, led by the teacher-librarian’s timely instructional interventions, yields improved results in all subjects, through extensive reading support, better designed activities, and richer, coordinated inquiry processes.
3. Today’s schools should emphasize modern technologies such as the Internet with its superior access to information. Library staff and collections are now unnecessary. Such a position is dangerously misinformed. Librarians and teacher-librarians were generally the first to develop the potential of digital resources and learning opportunities. Public, school, and online libraries continue to provide essential leadership and innovation in teaching both specific digital skills and   generic learning skills that help us all adapt to changing conditions. The digital world has expanded libraries’ horizons, not contracted them.

Students always sense bottom-line thinking and narrowed perspectives in their school. It may be their school, not their school library, that they will eventually view as dispensable. Britain’s expert, Stephen Heppell, looks forward to the “end of schools and the beginning of learning.”

Further Decline

As I see it, there are three reasons why the situation for school libraries will decline further, if steps are not taken immediately.

1. Cost. Too many administrators and politicians are gutting staffing and resourcing in the school library. A side panel in the People for Education report quotes their seeming lack of choice. As the education pie shrinks, the school library is an easy target, especially when administrative and Ministerial neglect compounds poor performance, in a tragic self-fulfilling prophesy.
2. Territoriality. This is a complex problem. Cuts in staffing force teachers to make choices that pit one discipline against another. Some teachers continue to view the school library as a drop-in centre or a unnecessary alternative to their structured curriculum. Here, the “hybrid” teacher-librarian is perceived as one who has carved out a specious specialization. 
3. Vision. Few jurisdictions understand that the learning revolution is already here, requiring the building of a new form of leadership. Even though educators read about the social, digital, and economic changes outside the school, they do not conceive of the teacher-librarian as the one trying to implement that vision inside the school.

Two Choices

We can’t go one like this for an other decade. What is the answer to People for Education’s findings? We can either

1. Kill the school library now! Put everyone out of their misery. Just make sure every teacher and teacher candidate is trained in and tested on the knowledge and skills teacher-librarians have now. Infuse everybody’s curriculum subject with standards reflecting information literacy, social media awareness, advanced research and inquiry, reading for life, and connected learning. Make sure that this new curriculum is as rigorously tested, updated, resourced, and in-serviced as core subjects. Re-hire teacher-librarians as mentors, one for every school staff, and pay them a consultant’s salary.
2. Re-vision schools and school libraries! Develop a new vision for and through the school library as a learning commons for the whole school and whole learner. No one is saying that every teacher-librarian is exemplary or the only one with the time, skill, and dedication to be the visionary. However, they are on the ground and in the field already, with networks in and outside schools to offer tested and selfless leadership. Use them. Re-use them. Help them learn even more about what they love.

Whatever alternative (perhaps both) schools, boards, and Ministries choose, the goal is is to face new learning challenges, not just for now but for life. I for one, don’t want to continue reading reports on the demise of the teacher-librarian. It’s like admitting that the whole system is broken. It isn’t, but the fragmentation in schools will accelerate without the strong partnership and collaboration of teachers and teacher-librarians.