Assessment #3
Assessment #3: Collection Development Policy Manual
(Assessment of candidate ability to plan to meet program needs)
Description of Assessment and Use in Program
Assessment #3 is the collection development policy manual, required in EDSL503,
Media Selection and Evaluation. As candidates analyze their library settings, develop policies
and procedures for collection development, and provide for consideration of collection analysis
data, they demonstrate that they can effectively plan to meet the needs of the school library
program.
How Assessment Aligns with Standards Cited
The collection development policy manual aligns with 1.2 as candidates show awareness
of trends in reading material for children and youth and as they select materials in multiple
formats to address the needs and interests of diverse young readers and learners; 2.1 as they
provide materials which support the learning of all students; 3.1 as they set policies for
connections to other libraries and the larger library community for resource sharing and
networking; 4.1 as they select, analyze, and evaluate print, nonprint, and electronic resources
using professional selection tools and evaluation criteria to develop a quality collection designed
to meet diverse curricular and personal needs, as they utilize collection evaluation data to ensure
a balanced collection which reflects diversity of format and content, and as they ensure that
policies and procedures are in place to support intellectual freedom; and 4.2 as they develop and
evaluate policies and procedures that support the mission of the school and address specific
needs of the library media program such as collection development and maintenance and
reconsideration of challenged materials.
Analysis of Data Findings
During the 2006-2007 academic year, 75 candidates enrolled in EDSL503, Media
Selection and Evaluation, completed the collection development policy manual assignment. All
candidates earned an overall acceptable or target score on the assignment.
As scores are analyzed by rubric item, five of 75 candidates scored at the unacceptable level for
identifying the philosophy of the school, one of 75 candidates scored at the unacceptable level
for stating selection policy, seven of the 75 candidates scored at the unacceptable level for stating
acquisition policies, one unacceptable for resources/networking, two unacceptable for
intellectual freedom statements, two unacceptable for procedures for handling challenges, one
for revision of the policy, and two of 75 candidates scored at the unacceptable level for inclusion
of appropriate appendices. On all other rubric items, all candidates scored at the acceptable or
target levels.
During the 2007-2008 academic year, 51 candidates enrolled in EDSL503, Media
Selection and Evaluation, completed the collection development policy manual assignment. All
candidates earned an overall acceptable or target score on the assignment.
As scores are analyzed by rubric item, the following items evidence unacceptable scores:
philosophy of school, two candidates; philosophy of library, one candidate; selection, two
candidates; acquisition, one candidate; intellectual freedom statements, two candidates;
resources/networking, one candidate; evaluation of collection, two candidates; weeding of
collection, one candidate; revision of policies, two candidates; and appendices, one candidate.
On all other rubric items, candidates scored at the acceptable or target levels.
1
Assessment #3
During the 2008-2009 academic year, 31 candidates enrolled in EDSL503, Media
Selection and Evaluation, completed the collection development policy manual assignment. All
candidates earned an overall acceptable or target score on the assignment.
As scores are analyzed by rubric item, the following items evidence unacceptable scores:
philosophy of school, one candidate; acquisition, one candidate; intellectual freedom statements,
three candidates; evaluation of collection, one candidate; weeding of collection, one candidate;
revision of policies, one candidate. On all other rubric items, candidates scored at the acceptable
or target levels.
In fall 2009, five candidates enrolled in EDSL503, Media Selection and Evaluation,
completed the collection development policy assignment. All candidates earned an overall
acceptable or target score on the assignment. There were no unacceptable scores.
How Data Provides Evidence for Meeting Standards
Examination of data by standards addressed on this assessment demonstrates that the
majority of candidates performed at the acceptable or target levels for mastery of standards 1.2,
2.1, 3.1, 4.1, and 4.2. In fall 2006, all candidates mastered all standards. In spring 2007,
standards 1.2, 3.1, and 4.2 were each not mastered by one candidate. All candidates mastered all
standards in summer 2007, while in fall 2007, two candidates failed to perform at the acceptable
level for standard 1.2 and two for standard 4.2. In spring 2008 all candidates mastered all
standards at the acceptable level or higher with the exception of one candidate for 3.1. While the
number of candidates not achieving mastery of each standard at the acceptable level is small,
program faculty, nonetheless, examined these standards, how they are reflected in the
assignment, and how best to help all candidates achieve an acceptable level of performance.
Faculty developed a detailed checklist to accompany the rubric for the assignment. In addition,
they also divided the assignment into smaller increments on the syllabus so that after each class
session, candidates know which sections of the policy they should now be ready to complete.
Candidates are encouraged to complete those sections prior to the next class and are given time
to peer review them and/or to receive informal instructor feedback. Candidates have indicated
that these strategies have helped them to produce a better final product. Instructors have also
noticed an overall improvement in the final product. All candidates mastered all standards in
summer 2008, spring 2009, and fall 2009.
Assessment, Scoring Guide, Candidate Data
Assessment Tool/Description of Assignment
EDSL503: Media Selection and Evaluation
Collection Development Policy
Develop and write a collection development policy for a hypothetical school library. The
introductory statement should include the name of the school, age of the building, grade
levels and number of classes in each grade, population of the student body, economic
level of the area, geographical setting, and whether or not it is served by a District Media
Center. Be sure to include all elements of the policy as discussed in class:




Philosophy of the school
Philosophy, goals, and objectives of the library
Selection statement
Acquisitions statement
2
Assessment #3









Gifts statement
Cooperative resources and networking statement
Weeding/deselection statement
Intellectual freedom statement
Policies and procedures for handling challenges
Technology
Evaluation of collection
Policy for revision of the policy
Appendices/Forms
o Two Library "Rights" statements (as stated in notes)
o Gift form
o Reconsideration form
o Bibliography of tools used to construct policy
AASL/NCATE Standards Addressed:
Standard 1: Use of Information and Ideas
1.2 Literacy and Reading
Standard 2: Teaching and Learning
2.1 Knowledge of Learners and Learning
Standard 3: Collaboration and Leadership
3.1 Connection with the Library Community
Standard 4: Program Administration
4.1 Managing Information Resources: Selecting, Organizing, Using
4.2 Managing Program Resources: Human, Financial, Physical
Scoring Guide
EDSL503: Media Selection and Evaluation
Collection Development Policy
REQUIRED
ELEMENT
A. Introductory
analysis of
school (2.1)
UNACCEPTABLE
(0)
No or minimal
analysis of school
setting
B. Philosophy
statements—
school
(4.2)
No school
philosophy
statements given
ACCEPTABLE (0.5)
TARGET (1)*
Basic required
information (name of
school, age of building,
grade levels and number
of classes, population
and description of
diversity, economic
setting, geographic
setting) given
School philosophy
statements given
Basic required
information given,
explained, and fully
developed, including
statement as to how these
demographics impact the
library media program
School philosophy
statements given,
including statement as to
how these statements
impact the library media
program
3
Assessment #3
C. Philosophy
statements—
library (4.2)
No library
philosophy
statements given
D. *Selection
statements
(1.2, 4.1)
No selection
statement, criteria,
etc. given
E.
*Acquisitions
statements (4.2)
No acquisitions
statement given
F. Gift
statement (4.1)
No gift statement
given
G. Cooperative
resources and
networking
statement (3.1)
No mention made of
resource sharing,
networking, or
interlibrary loan
H. Intellectual
freedom
statements (4.1)
No intellectual
freedom statements
given
I. *Policy and
procedure for
handling
challenges (4.2)
No policy or
procedure given for
handling challenges
J. Technology
No position
Library philosophy
statements given
Library philosophy
statements given,
including statement as to
how the library program
interfaces with the
philosophy and mission of
the school
Criteria for selection of
Criteria for selection of
print, nonprint, and
print, nonprint, and
electronic resources
electronic resources
given.
given.
Selection aids mentioned. Standard professional
Policy for reviews
selection aids to be used
mentioned.
given.
Policy for reviews given.
Basic policies and
Policies and procedures
procedures for
given for acquisition of
acquisition of materials
materials demonstrate
given.
accepted management
principles and practices.
Policy for acceptance of
Policy for acceptance of
gifts given.
gifts includes right of
disposal and “no
appraisement” statement.
Statement given
Statement given
concerning availability of concerning availability of
resource sharing,
resource sharing,
consortium participation, consortium participation,
interlibrary loan
interlibrary loan
capabilities.
capabilities, including
recognition of
implications for program
from partnerships with the
larger library community.
Statement given in
Statement given in
support of intellectual
support of intellectual
freedom and privacy of
freedom and privacy of
users based on
users based on appropriate
appropriate ALA and
ALA and AASL
AASL positions.
positions.
Clearly outlined policy
Clearly outlined policy
and basic procedure for
and detailed procedure for
handling challenges,
handling challenges,
aligned with school
aligned with school
division policy, given.
division policy, given.
Statement made that new Statement made that new
4
Assessment #3
statement (4.1)
statement on new
technologies given
K. *Policy for
evaluation of
collection (4.2)
No policy for
evaluation of
collection given
L. Weeding/
deselection
statement (4.2)
No
weeding/deselection
statement given
M. Policy for
revision of the
policy (4.2)
No policy for
revision of policy
N. Appendices
(4.1)
No appendices
O. Forms
No forms
P. Bibliography
of tools used to
construct
manual
No bibliography.
technologies will be
evaluated and
implemented as
appropriate.
technologies will be
evaluated and
implemented as
appropriate, including
recognition of potential
impact of technologies on
student learning.
Policy and procedures
Policy and procedures
given for regular and
given for regular and
systematic evaluation of
systematic evaluation of
collection.
collection, including
rationale for maintaining a
quality, up-to-date
collection.
Basic
Detailed
weeding/deselection
weeding/deselection
statement given with
statement given with
criteria for weeding and
criteria for weeding, a
division-approved policy weeding schedule, and
and procedures for
division-approved policy
disposal of materials.
and procedures for
disposal of materials.
Statement given as to
Statement given as to
policy and procedures for policy and procedures for
revision of policy.
revision of policy,
including rationale for
need of revision.
One to two intellectual
More than two intellectual
freedom position
freedom position
statements (ALA, AASL, statements (ALA, AASL,
etc.) included.
etc.) included.
Forms such as those for
Forms such as those for
suggestion of materials
suggestion of materials
for library collection and for library collection,
for reconsideration of
sample purchase order,
challenged materials
gift form, and
included.
reconsideration of
challenged materials (both
complainant and
committee review)
included.
Bibliography of tools
Bibliography of tools
used to construct manual used to construct manual
given in required format. given in required format.
5
Assessment #3
16 categories; Target =1; Acceptable=.5; Unacceptable=0; *except for D, E, I, and K in which
Target=2, Acceptable=1, Unacceptable=0
RATING SCALE
Score
16-20
11-15
10
0-9
Grade
A
B
C
F
AASL/NCATE Standards Addressed:
Standard 1: Use of Information and Ideas
1.2 Literacy and Reading
Standard 2: Teaching and Learning
2.1 Knowledge of Learners and Learning
Standard 3: Collaboration and Leadership
3.1 Connection with the Library Community
Standard 4: Program Administration
4.1 Managing Information Resources: Selecting, Organizing, Using
4.2 Managing Program Resources: Human, Financial, Physical
Candidate Data
Fall 2006:
Candidates N=21
Scoring Element
Introduction
Philosophy—School
Philosophy—Library
Selection
Acquisition
Gifts
Resources/Networking
Intellectual Freedom
Challenges
Technology
Evaluation
Weeding
Revision
Appendices
Forms
Bibliography
Unacceptable
0
0
0
0
1 (5%)
0
0
1 (5%)
1 (5%)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
By Standard Addressed:
Standard
Unacceptable
Acceptable
14 (67%)
14 (67%)
10 (48%)
8 (38%)
2 (10%)
5 (24%)
8 (38%)
1 (5%)
7 (33%)
1 (5%)
4 (19%)
4 (19%)
3 (14%)
2 (10%)
3 (14%)
1 (5%)
Acceptable
Target
7 (33%)
7 (33%)
11 (52%)
13 (62%)
18 (86%)
16 (76%)
13 (62%)
19 (90%)
13 (62%)
20 (95%)
17 (81%)
17 (81%)
18 (86%)
19 (90%)
18 (86%)
20 (95%)
Target
6
Assessment #3
1.2
2.1
3.1
4.1
4.2
Spring 2007:
Candidates N=34
Scoring Element
Introduction
Philosophy—School
Philosophy—Library
Selection
Acquisition
Gifts
Resources/Networking
Intellectual Freedom
Challenges
Technology
Evaluation
Weeding
Revision
Appendices
Forms
Bibliography
0
0
0
0
0
Unacceptable
0
5 (15%)
0
1 (3%)
4 (12%)
0
1 (3%)
1 (3%)
1 (3%)
0
0
0
1 (3%)
2 (6%)
0
0
By Standard Addressed:
Standard
Unacceptable
1.2
1 (3%)
2.1
0
3.1
1 (3%)
4.1
0
4.2
1 (3%)
Summer 2007:
Candidates N=20
Scoring Element
Introduction
Philosophy—School
Philosophy—Library
Selection
Acquisition
Gifts
Resources/Networking
Intellectual Freedom
Unacceptable
0
0
0
0
2 (10%)
0
0
0
8 (38%)
14 (67%)
8 (38%)
1 (5%)
3 (14%)
Acceptable
12 (35%)
12 (35%)
13 (38%)
6 (18%)
9 (26%)
2 (6%)
13 (38%)
1 (3%)
2 (6%)
7 (21%)
7 (21%)
4 (12%)
9 (26%)
1 (3%)
1 (3%)
1 (3%)
Acceptable
6 (18%)
12 (35%)
13 (38%)
3 (9%)
6 (18%)
Acceptable
1 (5%)
4 (20%)
1 (5%)
2 (10%)
5 (25%)
1 (5%)
3 (15%)
1 (5%)
13 (62%)
7 (33%)
13 (62%)
20 (95%)
18 (86%)
Target
22 (65%)
17 (50%)
21 (62%)
27 (79%)
21 (62%)
32 (94%)
20 (59%)
32 (94%)
31 (91%)
27 (79%)
27 (79%)
30 (88%)
24 (71%)
31 (91%)
33 (97%)
33 (97%)
Target
27 (79%)
22 (65%)
20 (59%)
31 (91%)
27 (79%)
Target
19 (95%)
16 (80%)
19 (95%)
18 (90%)
13 (65%)
19 (95%)
17 (85%)
19 (95%)
7
Assessment #3
Challenges
Technology
Evaluation
Weeding
Revision
Appendices
Forms
Bibliography
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
By Standard Addressed:
Standard
Unacceptable
1.2
0
2.1
0
3.1
0
4.1
0
4.2
0
Fall 2007:
Candidates N= 19
Scoring Element
Introduction
Philosophy—School
Philosophy—Library
Selection
Acquisition
Gifts
Resources/Networking
Intellectual Freedom
Challenges
Technology
Evaluation
Weeding
Revision
Appendices
Forms
Bibliography
Unacceptable
0
1 (5%)
0
2 (11%)
1 (5%)
0
0
2 (11%)
0
0
2 (11%)
0
0
0
0
0
By Standard Addressed:
Standard
Unacceptable
1.2
2 (11%)
2.1
0
3.1
0
4.1
0
4.2
2 (11%)
1 (5%)
1 (5%)
1 (5%)
4 (20%)
1 (5%)
9 (45%)
4 (20%)
1 (5%)
19 (95%)
19 (95%)
19 (95%)
16 (80%)
19 (95%)
11 (55%)
16 (80%)
19 (95%)
Acceptable
2 (10%)
1 (5%)
3 (15%)
1 (5%)
1 (5%)
Target
18 (90%)
19 (95%)
17 (85%)
19 (95%)
19 (95%)
Acceptable
10 (53%)
8 (42%)
9 (47%)
8 (42%)
4 (21%)
3 (16%)
14 (74%)
2 (11%)
7 (37%)
7 (37%)
5 (26%)
13 (68%)
4 (21%)
4 (21%)
8 (42%)
1 (5%)
Acceptable
8 (42%)
10 (53%)
14 (74%)
6 (32%)
5 (26%)
Target
9 (47%)
10 (53%)
10 (53%)
9 (47%)
14 (74%)
16 (84%)
5 (26%)
15 (79%)
12 (63%)
12 (63%)
12 (63%)
6 (32%)
15 (79%)
15 (79%)
11 (58%)
18 (95%)
Target
9 (47%)
9 (47%)
5 (26%)
13 (68%)
12 (63%)
8
Assessment #3
Spring 2008:
Candidates N=15
Scoring Element
Introduction
Philosophy—School
Philosophy—Library
Selection
Acquisition
Gifts
Resources/Networking
Intellectual Freedom
Challenges
Technology
Evaluation
Weeding
Revision
Appendices
Forms
Bibliography
Unacceptable
0
1 (7%)
0
0
0
0
1 (7%)
0
0
0
0
0
1 (7%)
1 (7%)
0
0
By Standard Addressed:
Standard
Unacceptable
1.2
0
2.1
0
3.1
1 (7%)
4.1
0
4.2
0
Summer 2008:
Candidates N= 17
Scoring Element
Introduction
Philosophy—School
Philosophy—Library
Selection
Acquisition
Gifts
Resources/Networking
Intellectual Freedom
Challenges
Technology
Evaluation
Weeding
Revision
Unacceptable
0
0
1 (6%)
0
0
0
0
0
0
1 (6%)
0
1 (6%)
1 (6%)
Acceptable
1 (7%)
1 (7%)
1 (7%)
1 (7%)
1 (7%)
1 (7%)
2 (13%)
2 (13%)
1 (7%)
1 (7%)
2 (13%)
2 (13%)
1 (7%)
9 (60%)
1 (7%)
1 (7%)
Acceptable
1 (7%)
1 (7%)
2 (13%)
1 (7%)
2 (13%)
Acceptable
1 (6%)
1 (6%)
1 (6%)
1 (6%)
2 (12%)
2 (12%)
4 (24%)
5 (29%)
1 (6%)
3 (18%)
3 (18%)
4 (24%)
2 (12%)
Target
14 (93%)
13 (87%)
14 (93%)
14 (93%)
14 (93%)
14 (93%)
12 (80%)
13 (87%)
14 (93%)
14 (93%)
13 (87%)
13 (87%)
13 (87%)
5 (33%)
14 (93%)
14 (93%)
Target
14 (93%)
14 (93%)
12 (80%)
14 (93%)
13 (87%)
Target
16 (94%)
16 (94%)
15 (88%)
16 (94%)
15 (88%)
15 (88%)
13 (76%)
12 (71%)
16 (94%)
13 (76%)
14 (82%)
12 (71%)
14 (82%)
9
Assessment #3
Appendices
Forms
Bibliography
0
0
0
By Standard Addressed:
Standard
Unacceptable
1.2
0
2.1
0
3.1
0
4.1
0
4.2
0
2 (12%)
3 (18%)
1 (6%)
15 (88%)
14 (82%)
16 (94%)
Acceptable
2 (12%)
1 (6%)
5 (29%)
2 (12%)
3 (18%)
Target
15 (88%)
16 (94%)
12 (71%)
15 (88%)
14 (82%)
Fall 2008: EDSL503 not taught during Fall 2008 semester.
Spring 2009:
Candidates N=31
Scoring Element
Introduction
Philosophy—School
Philosophy—Library
Selection
Acquisition
Gifts
Resources/Networking
Intellectual Freedom
Challenges
Technology
Evaluation
Weeding
Revision
Appendices
Forms
Bibliography
Unacceptable
0
1 (3%)
0
0
1 (3%)
0
0
3 (10%)
0
0
1 (3%)
1 (3%)
1 (3%)
0
0
0
By Standard Addressed:
Standard
Unacceptable
1.2
0
2.1
0
3.1
0
4.1
0
4.2
0
Acceptable
6 (19%)
5 (16%)
5 (16%)
3 (10%)
5 (16%)
4 (13%)
7 (23%)
1 (3%)
2 (6%)
1 (3%)
4 (13%)
5 (16%)
5 (16%)
2 (6%)
2 (6%)
1 (3%)
Acceptable
3 (10%)
6 (19%)
7 (23%)
2 (6%)
4 (13%)
Target
25 (81%)
25 (81%)
26 (84%)
28 (90%)
25 (81%)
27 (87%)
24 (77%)
27 (87%)
29 (94%)
30 (97%)
26 (84%)
25 (81%)
25 (81%)
29 (94%)
29 (94%)
30 (97%)
Target
28 (90%)
25 (81%)
24 (77%)
29 (94%)
27 (87%)
Summer 2009: EDSL503 not taught during Summer 2009.
Fall 2009:
10
Assessment #3
Candidates N=5
Scoring Element
Introduction
Philosophy—School
Philosophy—Library
Selection
Acquisition
Gifts
Resources/Networking
Intellectual Freedom
Challenges
Technology
Evaluation
Weeding
Revision
Appendices
Forms
Bibliography
Unacceptable
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
By Standard Addressed:
Standard
Unacceptable
1.2
0
2.1
0
3.1
0
4.1
0
4.2
0
Acceptable
1 (20%)
0
0
1 (20%)
1 (20%)
1 (20%)
0
0
0
0
1 (20%)
0
1 (20%)
0
0
0
Acceptable
1 (20%)
1 (20%)
0
0
0
Target
4 (80%)
5 (100%)
5 (100%)
4 (80%)
4 (80%)
4 (80%)
5 (100%)
5 (100%)
5 (100%)
5 (100%)
4 (80%)
5 (100%)
4 (80%)
5 (100%)
5 (100%)
5 (100%)
Target
4 (80%)
4 (80%)
5 (100%)
5 (100%)
5 (100%)
11