Search

In an academic setting, sources of information that can help the author answer a question or make sense of a problem are judged on competence and trustworthiness. As she locates a written text, an image, or a person, and "interrogate" it, the author is working through a series of judgment calls that end in a summative assessment of credibility. That final, overall assessment is an iterative process and is based on three factors: (1) definition of credibility; (2) specific attributes of the source; and (3) application of rules of thumb that have worked in the past to identify credible information. In this article, the author discusses how to evaluate the trustworthiness of information and how to teach evaluation as inquiry. (Contains 7 figures and 1 footnote.)

Professionally, school librarians are faced with an explosion of choices--search engines, online catalogs, media types, subscription databases, and Web tools--all requiring scrutiny, evaluation, and selection. In turn, this support "stuff" forms a basis for making additional choices about how and what they teach and what they assess. Whereas once school librarians would ask "whether" evaluating students was appropriate to their role, now many are intent on learning "how" and "which" evaluations and assessments to use, as well as "what" to assess and "why", and feeling less satisfied with their final decisions. In recent years, in the face of pressure to document the value of the library's program to faculty and administration, to gain credibility with students and parents, and even to improve the attractiveness of graduating seniors in a highly competitive admissions process, some school librarians have chosen standardized information literacy evaluation instruments. They turn to these tests to help them systematically evaluate student growth, improve the library's program, and compare their students' performance against that of other students in similar institutions. Given the difficulty that people encountered when selecting from an array of jams, school librarians are also wondering how they will ever be able to choose from a cornucopia of evaluation tools. Whether librarians choose formative (ongoing) or summative (end-state) assessments, the author asserts that the key is backwards design (Wiggins and McTighe 2005), in which the type of assessment is matched to the kind of knowledge being assessed. Here, the author stresses that in certain cases, school librarians must decide to satisfice because "the goal of maximizing . . . can make people miserable--especially in a world that insists on providing an overwhelming number of choices, both trivial and not so trivial" (Schwartz 2004). In choosing assessments, the author suggests to read widely beyond the professional literature and experiment. Then pick only a few goals and match the assessment to them.

Includes 19 articles that address issues related to library skills and Canadian school libraries. Topics include information literacy; inquiry learning; critical thinking and electronic research; collaborative inquiry; information skills and the Big 6 approach to problem solving; student use of online databases; library skills; Internet accuracy; and Web sources. (LRW)

Outlines myths about gifted readers. Suggests that librarians are vital in nurturing gifted children by developing collections which respond to high abilities and diverse intelligences while honoring the chronological age of these readers, by creating responsive learning environments and using flexible teaching strategies, and by supporting variable groupings which respond to the needs, interests, and abilities of this population. (AEF)

The American Association of School Librarians (AASL) "Standards for the 21st-Century Learner" were released just as the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) was refreshing its National Educational Technology Standards for Students in late 2007. These standards outline what students will know and be able to do with educational technology. In June 2008 ISTE released its National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers, which enunciated five ways in which teachers should integrate educational technology: "Facilitate and Inspire Student Learning and Creativity; Design and Develop Digital-Age Learning Experiences and Assessments; Model Digital-Age Work and Learning; Promote and Model Digital Citizenship and Responsibility; Engage in Professional Growth and Leadership" (ISTE 2008). How do these standards relate to the professional practice of school librarians? As the authors reflected upon this question, they realized that these categories mapped effectively to the "School Librarian's Bill of Responsibilities." This mapping shows that the roles of classroom teachers and of school librarians are tightly aligned. (Contains 1 figure.)

A brand is an idea in the minds of one's constituents that is created by what one says or does. The American Association of School Librarians (AASL) describes itself as a professional membership organization, serving the needs of 10,000 school library media specialists in the United States, Canada, and around the world. In this article, the author questions whether AASL knows that its brand represents the approximately 66,000 full- and part-time certified library media specialists from the more than 95,000 schools in the United States. She contends that librarians now have a rare opportunity to build an inclusive participatory culture. They need to nourish a participatory culture and sustained innovation in order to advance the authority and credibility of their entire profession.