BCTF research on staffing
Teacher-librarians in BC are certified teachers typically with further education beyond a bachelor degree in teacher-librarianship. The role of the teacher-librarian has been described as involving two main areas. One is to provide instruction for all grade levels in research skills and reading, and to enhance information and technological literacy. The second area is the development, maintenance, and management of a well-stocked school library. This includes selecting appropriate reading material in a variety of media (books, CD-ROM, interactive computer technology, for example), as well as ensuring the school library materials are current and complement curricula.
According to The United Nations (UNESCO, 2000), "the school library provides information and ideas that are fundamental to functioning successfully in today’s society, which is increasingly information- and knowledge-based. The school library equips students with lifelong learning skills and develops the imagination, enabling them to live as responsible citizens." Further, a strong relationship between the presence of a teacher-librarian in an accessible, well-stocked school library, and student success has been well documented (see Haycock, 2003).
Despite the demonstrated importance of teacher-librarians and libraries, library services was one of the areas hardest hit by funding cutbacks and teacher lay-offs resulting from removal of staffing formulas from teacher collective agreements, implemented by the provincial government in 2002.
Since that time, funding for K–12 public education has been partially restored and teacher-librarian staffing levels have slowly begun to improve. Table 1 shows the changes in library services (program area 1.07) staffing levels since 1997. For example, in 1997, there were 778 teacher-librarians and 20 administrators assigned to the library services program area.
Between 2001 and 2003, teacher-librarian staffing levels were cut by over 23%. It was not until the government removed a funding freeze and began to put money back into public education in 2005 that staffing levels began to recover. 2004–05 was the last year of a five-year decline in staffing levels and the 2005–06 school year saw an increase of 7% in teacher-librarian staffing. However, by 2006–07 there were still 175 fewer (19%) full-time-equivalent teacher-librarians compared to 2001.
Table 1 also shows that the number of administrators assigned to the library area has increased steadily over the 10-year period shown. Since 1997–98, FTE administrators working in the library services area have increased by over 50%.
The full report is on the bctf web site: bctf.ca/publications.aspx?id=5630.
Table 1: Library Services staffing, 1997–98 to 2006–07
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
New BCTF School Libraries web page
New content on the BCTF web site:
School libraries web page
http://www.bctf.ca/IssuesInEducation.aspx?id=13266
School libraries web page
http://www.bctf.ca/IssuesInEducation.aspx?id=13266
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Sunday, April 1, 2007
What is the school library’s role?
The following letter to the minister of education from teacher-librarians in School District 68 (Nanaimo) is printed here with their permission.
We, the teacher-librarians of School District #68, are very pleased with your commitment to improve literacy in BC. We have just read your recent press release, which outlines the millions of dollars to be spent enhancing the public library system, as well as increasing support to these programs: ReadNow BC, Ready Set Learn, Literacy Now, and Adult Education.
We are wondering, however, what role you see for the school libraries in British Columbia. Almost all children attend school in BC, and all schools have a library. Many international studies have shown that a professionally staffed and adequately funded school library will improve student literacy and achievement (Lance, Keith Curry, 2005).
School libraries not only provide access to quality literature, they are the focal point in the school for teaching research skills, the use of databases, and appropriate use of online information sources. School library collections are developed to support the K–12 curriculum, are age appropriate, and are staffed by teacher-librarians qualified to assist students with their literacy needs.
Public libraries do not share this mandate, as their audience is much larger and public library collections are not curriculum specific. School libraries are, therefore, an integral part of any literacy program, and need to be recognized and supported.
Equitable access to literacy materials is essential for all school-aged children. Unfortunately, many school-aged children are unable to access a public library due to geographic or social difficulties. This is not a consideration with school libraries, which, in theory, should be accessible to all school children each school day.
We would like you to explain, Ms. Bond, why your government is so completely silent on the important role played by school libraries in improving literacy for the children of BC? Why are school libraries not mentioned in any of your publications? We would like to hear from you how you intend to increase support for school libraries, which have been notoriously understaffed and underfunded for years.
Elsa Armstrong, Lynn Barnes, June Bouchard, Janice Brantner, Helen Fall, Linda Irvine, Karen Leeson, Margaret Litch, Cindy Lowry, Robert Lussier, Donna McDaniel, Kathy McKierahan, Iris Mennie, Katherine Miller, Robyn Mylett, Bonnie Palfrey, Ann Rainboth, Lene Rounis, and Elizabeth Sansoucy-Jones.
We, the teacher-librarians of School District #68, are very pleased with your commitment to improve literacy in BC. We have just read your recent press release, which outlines the millions of dollars to be spent enhancing the public library system, as well as increasing support to these programs: ReadNow BC, Ready Set Learn, Literacy Now, and Adult Education.
We are wondering, however, what role you see for the school libraries in British Columbia. Almost all children attend school in BC, and all schools have a library. Many international studies have shown that a professionally staffed and adequately funded school library will improve student literacy and achievement (Lance, Keith Curry, 2005).
School libraries not only provide access to quality literature, they are the focal point in the school for teaching research skills, the use of databases, and appropriate use of online information sources. School library collections are developed to support the K–12 curriculum, are age appropriate, and are staffed by teacher-librarians qualified to assist students with their literacy needs.
Public libraries do not share this mandate, as their audience is much larger and public library collections are not curriculum specific. School libraries are, therefore, an integral part of any literacy program, and need to be recognized and supported.
Equitable access to literacy materials is essential for all school-aged children. Unfortunately, many school-aged children are unable to access a public library due to geographic or social difficulties. This is not a consideration with school libraries, which, in theory, should be accessible to all school children each school day.
We would like you to explain, Ms. Bond, why your government is so completely silent on the important role played by school libraries in improving literacy for the children of BC? Why are school libraries not mentioned in any of your publications? We would like to hear from you how you intend to increase support for school libraries, which have been notoriously understaffed and underfunded for years.
Elsa Armstrong, Lynn Barnes, June Bouchard, Janice Brantner, Helen Fall, Linda Irvine, Karen Leeson, Margaret Litch, Cindy Lowry, Robert Lussier, Donna McDaniel, Kathy McKierahan, Iris Mennie, Katherine Miller, Robyn Mylett, Bonnie Palfrey, Ann Rainboth, Lene Rounis, and Elizabeth Sansoucy-Jones.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
A note from your teachers
A report from the BCTF to the members of the legislative assembly
http://www.bctf.ca/publications/NoteFromTeachers.aspx
http://www.bctf.ca/publications/NoteFromTeachers.aspx
Thursday, March 1, 2007
Good article on self censorship
I commend Murray Corren for his timely argument against a parent’s right to remove her child from parts of the curriculum ("A censor? Who, me?" Jan./Feb. 2007 Teacher). Last year I had a child removed from my class production of A Christmas Carol because the parents objected to the Christmas (not Christian) overtones. The child clearly wanted to participate in the play and, in my view, would have benefitted from doing so.
If it can be shown that parts of the provincial curriculum are harmful to the development of a child, reason would dictate that the curriculum be changed. The governmentally sanctioned policy of pulling one child out of the classroom seems wrong, not only because of what the child will miss, but because the other children would suffer—if indeed the curriculum was harmful. Of course no parent(s) has convinced the provincial
Also in your Jan./Feb. issue of Teacher, is a letter from Richard Peachey who maintains that a parent should, and does, possess the right to remove her child from parts of the curriculum for "genuine conscientious reasons." What Peachey finds objectionable is homosexuality. Yet the position of our courts and governments, as made plain in The Charter of Rights and Freedoms, is that homosexuality is acceptable in our society. As Corren rhetorically asks, how can a parent be allowed to restrict learning stimuli from her child that the society has affirmed to be worthwhile and in a child’s best interest to learn?
For "genuine conscientious reasons" our provincial government has included instruction on same sex families. I think it is timorous for the same government and school boards to permit some parents to dispense with parts of the curriculum, particularly instruction that promotes sensitivity toward people with a different sexual orientation. Peachey’s putative right to deny his child this instruction is not defensible in a society expressly opposed to bigotry and hate.
Jim McMurtry, Surrey
If it can be shown that parts of the provincial curriculum are harmful to the development of a child, reason would dictate that the curriculum be changed. The governmentally sanctioned policy of pulling one child out of the classroom seems wrong, not only because of what the child will miss, but because the other children would suffer—if indeed the curriculum was harmful. Of course no parent(s) has convinced the provincial
Also in your Jan./Feb. issue of Teacher, is a letter from Richard Peachey who maintains that a parent should, and does, possess the right to remove her child from parts of the curriculum for "genuine conscientious reasons." What Peachey finds objectionable is homosexuality. Yet the position of our courts and governments, as made plain in The Charter of Rights and Freedoms, is that homosexuality is acceptable in our society. As Corren rhetorically asks, how can a parent be allowed to restrict learning stimuli from her child that the society has affirmed to be worthwhile and in a child’s best interest to learn?
For "genuine conscientious reasons" our provincial government has included instruction on same sex families. I think it is timorous for the same government and school boards to permit some parents to dispense with parts of the curriculum, particularly instruction that promotes sensitivity toward people with a different sexual orientation. Peachey’s putative right to deny his child this instruction is not defensible in a society expressly opposed to bigotry and hate.
Jim McMurtry, Surrey
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Liberal budget fails students
BC students have been ignored in the Liberal government's budget-a document that fails to improve students' learning conditions-but focusses resources on additional bureaucratic government assessment and data collection.
"There is nothing here for our students," says Jinny Sims, president of the BC Teachers' Federation. "Public education does not benefit from BC's robust economy. Overall, education funding in relation to the province's GDP continues to decline, and the government continues to pay less per pupil than it did in 1990." The government would need to increase funding to school boards this year by more than $200 million to restore funding to 1990 per student levels.
Sims says, "This budget provides virtually nothing to improve education services for our kids, and certainly, there is nothing to ensure students receive the learning resources that are so lacking in our schools."
Sims says, "The premier's priority is literacy, but there is a disconnect in this budget as it does nothing to address the real needs of students in our classrooms. Instead, the government implements one-off literacy programs that are nothing more than photo ops.
The budget fails our most vulnerable students and the government concedes that its education system does not perform well in serving some groups. Sims says, "This budget provides nothing to help the critical needs of students who require additional assistance to succeed. Our students with special needs are ignored. Over the past four years, we have lost many of our specialist teachers, such as librarians, counsellors, and learning assistance and special education teachers."
Instead of providing our kids with the learning conditions they need, this government is focussing on the further bureaucratization of our schools and collecting data. Neither leads to improved learning.
"There is nothing here for our students," says Jinny Sims, president of the BC Teachers' Federation. "Public education does not benefit from BC's robust economy. Overall, education funding in relation to the province's GDP continues to decline, and the government continues to pay less per pupil than it did in 1990." The government would need to increase funding to school boards this year by more than $200 million to restore funding to 1990 per student levels.
Sims says, "This budget provides virtually nothing to improve education services for our kids, and certainly, there is nothing to ensure students receive the learning resources that are so lacking in our schools."
Sims says, "The premier's priority is literacy, but there is a disconnect in this budget as it does nothing to address the real needs of students in our classrooms. Instead, the government implements one-off literacy programs that are nothing more than photo ops.
The budget fails our most vulnerable students and the government concedes that its education system does not perform well in serving some groups. Sims says, "This budget provides nothing to help the critical needs of students who require additional assistance to succeed. Our students with special needs are ignored. Over the past four years, we have lost many of our specialist teachers, such as librarians, counsellors, and learning assistance and special education teachers."
Instead of providing our kids with the learning conditions they need, this government is focussing on the further bureaucratization of our schools and collecting data. Neither leads to improved learning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
