Tag: design thinking

Applying spatial changes and design thinking to middle school reading– a three phase collaborative approach

Introduction

There is a long history of research into the value of and elements contributing to the success of classroom libraries. They have an important role in ensuring accessibility of written works to promote fluency and skill in literacy and thereby contributing to academic achievement. But the literature appears to concentrate on elementary schools (Hopenwasser & Noel, 2014; James, 1923; Jones, 2006; Krarup, 1955; Powell, 1966; Sanacore & Palumbo, 2010; Todd, Gordon, & Lu, 2011; Worthy, 1996). Although partnership and collaboration with the school and/or public library and librarian is recommended, the literature often deals with the two spaces in isolation. Further, the problem of aliteracy in middle school – whereby students can read but don’t want to – is well documented (Kelley & Decker, 2009; Krashen, 2004; Lesesne, 1991; Sheldon & Davis, 2015; Worthy, 1996). This case report will show how the two environments library and classroom, can successfully be seen as extensions of each other through the principles of design and design thinking and explicit cooperation between the language humanities (Eng/Hum) teachers, literacy coach and school librarian in order to promote voluntary reading.

Case development

United World College South East Asia East (UWCSEA-East) is a K-12 international school located in Singapore. It commenced operations in 2008 and took occupancy of a purpose built campus in 2011. In this campus, the secondary school library initially served around 500 middle school students – see table 1. It now caters to three distinct communities, middle school, high school and the International Baccalaureate (IB) – see Table 2.
Screen Shot 2015-10-11 at 11.27.14 am
Despite consultation with the librarian in the planning phase, certain spaces of the library were designated different functions than agreed upon and furnished accordingly by the architect and building manager. One such area was upstairs overlooking the main school plaza with purpose built magazine racks. The idea was it would be a well-frequented showcase area for magazine reading. In reality a number of factors prevented this from being realised:
  • The furniture design didn’t accommodate its purpose as it was not deep or high enough and the storage area didn’t fit back copies
  • The zoning of the library post occupancy meant that materials affording quick casual reading such as graphic novels and periodicals were better located in the “noisier” and fast turnover area which allowed food and beverages, i.e. downstairs.
  • The trend in libraries is to move away from physical magazines and periodicals towards online providers including online databases and aggregators such as PressReader that provide the same product at a lower cost and without delays and issues with cataloguing and maintenance.
The question of what to do with the space was resolved by noticing that as the secondary school reached post occupancy capacity the lowest students in the pecking order i.e. middle school students were increasingly marginalised with students of higher sections taking over the prime library real estate (students are visually distinct due to different coloured polo shirts for their uniforms). In addition, middle school students no longer had library visits planned into their schedule. Furthermore, the large influx of new students and teachers meant that reading books in the classrooms were unevenly distributed both in terms of volume and quality without any structured form of classroom library, which the students had become accustomed to in the primary section. Finally, Eng/Hum teachers were noticing a decline in voluntary reading as students moved up through middle school.
These issues were addressed initially through collaboration between the librarian and Eng/Hum teachers and more recently by the new literacy coach over a period of three years as follows:
  • The conversion of the magazine area into a middle school reading zone
  • The establishing of a core library for each of the three middle school grades (Day, 2013b)
  • The creation of middle school classroom libraries in a formal and structured manner with materials integrated into the library catalogue (Day, 2015d)
  • The integration of informational / nonfiction texts into both areas
This is an on-going process and worth a critical analysis to examine the choice process, latent or existing attitudes and assumptions, exterior pressures and design constraints and collaboration and communication.

Critical analysis

Choice of process

The spatial change in the library was conceived and led by the teacher-librarian (TL) with the Eng/Hum teachers joining in the collaboration as the process evolved. Since the TL has experience in design thinking (Day, 2013a, 2015a, 2015c) the process followed the design thinking cycle of inspiration, ideation, iteration and getting to scale (Brown, 2008; IDEO, 2014).
This was achieved by:
  • Agreeing on a “core library” of 30 titles per grade for grades 6-8 which were prominently displayed
  • Adjusting shelving to accommodate front facing books
  • Relocating books of interest to this age group from the fiction collection
  • Using large posters to highlight the favourite books of middle school teachers in the library and class corridors and classroom walls
  • Ensuring multiple copies of books, by using class and literary circle sets
  • Adequate lighting, comfortable furniture and the creation of a private space
The above steps and final spatial design incorporated the elements that are recommended as enhancing school library spaces (Cha & Kim, 2015; Elliott-Burns, 2003; La Marca, 2008; A. McDonald, 2006; Serafini, 2011).
The design elements that contribute to successful classroom libraries are not dissimilar and include:
  • Sufficient space which is a focal area but partitioned and private
  • Comfortable furniture
  • Variety of material in range of complexity including different literary genres and informational texts
  • Category organisation and shelf labelling
  • Combination shelving allowing for quantity of books and display (front facing)
  • Advertising by means of posters and notices on whiteboards
  • Graphic organisation either thematic or by connections
  • Involvement of students in selection, organisation and maintenance (Fractor, Woodruff, Martinez, & Teale, 1993; Hopenwasser & Noel, 2014; Reutzel & Fawson, 2002, cited in Sanacore & Palumbo, 2010)
Discussion and research on the elements predominantly come from the elementary school environment, and the adoption to middle school requires some adjustments to account for the fact that students do not remain in one classroom, lessening the sense of ownership of a space on the part of students, and teachers needing to cater to multiple classes with different profiles and interests. Learning spaces are also typically smaller relative to the size of the students.
The creation of the library and classroom reading spaces and populating them with books is “necessary but not sufficient” (McGill-franzen, Allington, Yokoi, & Brooks, 1999). Other components of encouraging reading include training teachers to enhance their instructional routines to incorporate the material, and to ensure that teachers are familiar not only with their literary canon, but also the latest in good young adult fiction (Day, 2015b; McGill-franzen et al., 1999). The school has invested in training with Penny Kittle to assist in the instructional routines (Raisdana, 2015), while the librarian is working with the teachers on the latter.

Latent or existing attitudes and assumptions

An international school is blessed with diversity in cultures, languages and backgrounds both of their students and teachers. This results in a context of people coming from different systems with different attitudes, assumptions, beliefs and experiences around education, reading and libraries. In just the middle school, teachers come from Australia, United States, Philippines, Ireland, Canada and the United Kingdom, each with their own literary core. In addition, there are personal preferences and beliefs, for example around young adult literature (see Raisdana, 2014). Teachers may not be used to or have experience of collaboration with the TL, the benefits thereof, nor aware of the ways in which libraries have evolved (Gibbs, 2003; Montiel-Overall, 2006, 2008; Sullivan-Macdonald, 2015). And naturally there are assumptions around what constitutes an ideal learning or reading space and the balance between the two (Elliott-Burns, 2005). In a meta-review of access to print and educational outcomes, Lindsay (2010) concluded that limiting choices with a larger distribution interval led to more reading, particularly if it was accompanied by activities such as training and book talks. This is in contrast to the assumption that collections should be as large as possible. It also suggests that rotation of materials leads to better outcomes.

Exterior pressures and design constraints

The creation of the complementary spaces faced a number of constraints, design and otherwise. These included a small budget, limited time and variability in the reading level of students. In design thinking the presence of constraints is seen as a positive force that encourages creative solutions and exploring options that would not otherwise be considered, and this proved to be true in this case study (Brown & Katz, 2011; Hill, 1998; Ness, 2011).
Naturally budget was an important constraint that shaped the way in which the space was converted and books and furniture was acquired or moved and repurposed. As discussed earlier, the librarian was involved in the “fuzzy front end” (Sanders & Stappers, 2008, p. 6), of the secondary library design and once the space was completed it was not possible to change the space, only to adapt its purpose. In the classrooms the availability of furniture in the room to hold the books and the available space for the classroom library vis-à-vis other learning spaces determined how many books could effectively by stored and displayed. In this respect creative design thinking was deployed, for example by taking the doors off built-in cupboard space both in the classrooms and in the library, creating additional shelving. Comfortable furniture was either acquired by donations from the community or purchased to ensure equity between the classrooms.
Although the library and classes each have a budget for the acquisition of books, both wanted to ensure that existing resources were not wasted – for example the books already owned in multiple copies. However their repurposing had to be examined within the constraints of the reading level of the students and the curriculum themes for each grade.

Collaboration and communication

Collaboration and communication between the TL and teachers has received a lot of attention as has the ways in which spatial design and design thinking can enhance collaboration (Avallon & Schneider, 2013; Ferer, 2012; Gibbs, 2003; Knapp, 2014; Montiel-Overall, 2006; Williamson, Archibald, & McGregor, 2010). Enhancing collaboration between the TL and the Eng/Hum department has occurred on a number of fronts, both physical and virtual – such as book chat mornings to book talk new books, encouraging teachers and students to be involved with the selection of books for the Red Dot Awards (ISLN, 2015), processing and cataloguing the books, and the creation of a virtual space for the books (Day, 2015b).
Given time constraints and curriculum pressures, additional moments for collaboration and communication have had to be designed into the process. For example teachers can book the reading zone space to conduct lessons, and invite the TL to book talk new or noteworthy books. In addition the library receives supervision assistance from teachers during lunch, recess times and after school. The Eng/Hum teachers have first priority in requesting this duty, creating the opportunity for the important “casual conversations” that result in informal learning and information exchange (Oblinger, 2006; Somerville & Brown-Sica, 2011).

Conclusion

The process can neither be criticized for its efficacy nor results. Teachers, students and the librarian have largely viewed the change positively. Due to making small iterative changes to the spaces, starting with a small budget and a limited number of books in the first year, and subsequently adapting the choice of books, the selection and weeding process based on experience and feedback, the combined library / class library spaces appear to have grown organically despite a lot of “behind the scenes” work on book processing, cataloguing and making books classroom / shelf ready.
There are five main recommendations arising from the analysis of this case study, all which can be tackled through employing design thinking rather than further changes to the current spatial design:
  • Balance the contradictory forces of novelty and familiarity through how books are selected, displayed and rotated
  • Focus efforts on the most efficacious element of encouraging reading – book talks
  • Expand the space to include the home environment, particularly in the case of bilingual students
  • Increase involvement of students in the spatial design and change process
  • Quantify the benefits of this spatial / design thinking collaboration through evidence based research.
These will be elaborated in the next section.

Recommendations

Balance novelty and familiarity

Students like and respond to novelty in display and a constant supply of “new” titles, they would also possibly benefit from choice limitation (Iyengar, 2011). This can be achieved by a rotation of titles between spine and front facing, and through a rotation between the books in the various classes (Lindsay, 2010). At present the core and class libraries are refreshed annually and the class libraries are not rotated between classes or teachers. It is recommended this be considered to prevent staleness. The class library placement of books in bins rather than shelves with a mixture of front and spine facing, allowing changes is display is not best practise, nor is having all books available simultaneously (Fractor et al., 1993; Lindsay, 2010; Sanacore, 2000; Sanacore & Palumbo, 2010).

Book talks

The importance of teachers’, librarians’, students’ and the community’s increasing exposure of diverse books in all genres by book talking can’t be overstated (Bentheim, 2013; Gallo, 2001; L. McDonald, 2013; Serafini, 2011). But, as examined in the analysis, a number of barriers stand in the way of regular book talks. In addition, requiring reading related tasks from students runs the risk of resulting in unfavourable associations with reading and further reluctance (Eriksson, 2002; Gallo, 2001; Miller, 2009).
Many practioners have described how digital innovation and the creation of virtual spaces can enhance and augment traditional book talks as well as expand transliteracy skills of students (Dreon, Kerper, & Landis, 2011; Gogan & Marcus, 2013; Gunter & Kenny, 2008; Ragan, 2012). It is recommended that students be given ownership of exploring the potentials of the digital realm in this respect as a guided design thinking exercise.

Mother tongue material and the home environment

Access to mother tongue materials continues to be a weakness in the library and even more so in the classroom library. There are logistical and financial constraints including the wide spread of languages, the undervaluation of low status languages, and misinformation and misunderstanding on the value of reading in the mother tongue amongst students and parents (Bailey, 2014a, 2014b, 2015; Boelens, Cherek, Tilke, & Bailey, 2015). This is an area that would benefit greatly from increased collaboration between the college and parent body where previously “unknowable” resources could be tapped into through utilizing the analytical and process skills of design thinking (IDEO, 2014; Landis, Umolu, & Mancha, 2010; McIntosh, 2015).

Student involvement

While literature indicates collaboration by all stakeholders is essential for acceptance, particularly in learning environments (Hamilton, 2013; Jones, 2006; Sanders & Stappers, 2008), this has largely been a librarian / teacher initiative with some student involvement in book selection. Moving forward, the virtual or digital sphere is an area where students can also be encouraged to carve out a presence and take ownership with teachers taking on an enabler role as use of all seven learning spaces are maximised (Grisham & Wolsey, 2006; McIntosh, 2010; Thornburg, 2007; Wilson & Randall, 2012).

Quantify the benefits

Despite numerous hurdles in providing data and making analysis founded on circulation figures or student attainment records, there is considerable value in documenting and providing evidence for practises – not the least that it supports budget requests.
Circulation records do not provide a complete record or necessarily correlate with reading because:
  • Books may be read in library / class without being checked out
  • In affluent multi-cultural communities, students may have access to large personal libraries, including books in their mother tongue
  • Students may be borrowing books from the public library
Despite this, circulation is still the best proxy for reading. The decentralised nature of the class libraries results in less control over book checkout. Even in the library, that has no exit barriers, at the end of 2014/5 academic year roughly 20% of returned books had not been checked out of the system. While this can be lauded as an indication of the high moral and ethical standards of the students, it does pose difficulties in creating any evidence based data on the actual impact of either separating part of the library or decentralising the collection to class libraries in terms of increases in circulation.
It is recommended that both current and longitudinal research be carried out to see if there is any correlation between increased access to text, the amount of reading / circulation and other objective measures of attainment such as the annual PISA or TIMS tests. This will take the initiative beyond transformative individual anecdotal stories to evidence based research. The CLEP (Classroom Literacy Environmental Profile) (McGill-franzen et al., 1999; Wolfersberger, Reutzel, Sudweeks, & Fawson, 2004) and more recently the TEX-IN3 (Hoffman, Sailors, Duffy, & Beretvas, 2004) tools have successfully been used in the evaluation of elementary school class libraries and could be adapted for the middle school environment.
The recent inclusion of informational (nonfiction) texts in both the middle school zone and the classroom libraries is also one worth further investigation. Whether the expansion of the collections has impacted on the space, the ability to choose, and the completion of summative assessments in the individual subjects can be investigated in the light of the existing literature on the matter (Hopenwasser & Noel, 2014; Ness, 2011; Sanacore & Palumbo, 2010; Young & Moss, 2006; Young, Moss, & Cornwell, 2007).

References

Avallon, J., & Schneider, A. (2013). Building collaboration into workspace design. Facility Management Journal, (September / October), 34–38. Retrieved from http://cdn.ifma.org/sfcdn/fmj-supporting-documents/building-collaboration-into-workspace-design-fmj-sep-oct-2013.pdf?sfvrsn=0
Bailey, N. (2014a, November 12). Building a LOTE collection at an international school [Web Log]. Retrieved October 4, 2015, from http://informativeflights.blogspot.sg/2014/11/building-lote-collection-at.html
Bailey, N. (2014b, November 12). Research summary on language [Web Log]. Retrieved November 12, 2014, from http://informativeflights.blogspot.sg/2014/11/research-summary-on-language.html
Bailey, N. (2015). Digital language learning ecology. Singapore: iBooks. Retrieved from https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/digital-language-learning/id1000588637?ls=1&mt=11
Bentheim, C. A. (2013). Continuing the transition work from traditional library to learning commons. Teacher Librarian, 41(2), 29–36. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=92991111&site=ehost-live
Boelens, H., Cherek, J., Tilke, A., & Bailey, N. (2015). Communicating across cultures: cultural identity issues and the role of the multicultural, multilingual school library within the school community. Presented at the “The school library rocks” IASL 2015, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84–92. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=heh&AN=32108052&site=ehost-live
Brown, T., & Katz, B. (2011). Change by Design: Change by Design. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(3), 381–383. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00806.x
Cha, S. H., & Kim, T. W. (2015). What matters for students’ use of physical library space? The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(3), 274–279. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2015.03.014
Day, K. (2013a, January 14). Carol Kuhlthau meets Tim Brown: Guided Inquiry {Design} Thinking [Web Log]. Retrieved October 3, 2015, from http://www.thelibrarianedge.com/libedge/2013/01/carol-kuhlthau-meets-tim-brown-guided.html?rq=design%20thinking
Day, K. (2013b, November). Liberate your book cupboards and create a more true “bookstore” model in your school library [Web Log]. Retrieved August 2, 2015, from http://www.thelibrarianedge.com/libedge/2013/11/liberate-your-book-cupboards-and-create.html
Day, K. (2015a, August 30). Expert learning in the library…. and classroom [Web Log]. Retrieved October 3, 2015, from http://www.thelibrarianedge.com/libedge/2015/8/30/a-sociologist-who-loves-the-research-process?rq=
Day, K. (2015b, September 3). Professional learning for teachers who read books students might read [Library Guide]. Retrieved September 6, 2015, from http://research.uwcsea.edu.sg/eastlibsec/classlibs
Day, K. (2015c, September 5). Design thinking for the research process (e.g., the IBO Extended Essay) [Web Log]. Retrieved September 6, 2015, from http://www.thelibrarianedge.com/libedge/2015/8/30/design-thinking-for-the-research-process
Day, K. (2015d, September 28). Center and satellite collections: connections between classrooms and the library [Web Log]. Retrieved October 3, 2015, from http://www.thelibrarianedge.com/libedge/2015/9/26/middle-school-classroom-libraries-and-the-central-library
Dreon, O., Kerper, R. M., & Landis, J. (2011). Digital storytelling: A tool for teaching and learning in the YouTube generation. Middle School Journal, 42(5), 4–9.
Elliott-Burns, R. (2003). Space, place, design and the school library. Journal of the Australian School Library Association, 17(2).
Elliott-Burns, R. (2005). Designing spaces for learning and living in schools: perspectives of a flaneuse. Presented at the Australian Curriculum Studies Association Biennial Conference, Queensland, Australia: University of the Sunshine Coast. Retrieved from http://eprints.qut.edu.au/4345/1/4345.pdf
Eriksson, K. (2002). Booktalk dilemmas: Teachers’ organisation of pupils’ reading. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 46(4), 391–408. http://doi.org/10.1080/0031383022000024570
Ferer, E. (2012). Working together: library and writing center collaboration. Reference Services Review, 40(4), 543–557. http://doi.org/10.1108/00907321211277350
Fractor, J. S., Woodruff, M. C., Martinez, M. G., & Teale, W. H. (1993). Let’s not miss opportunities to promote voluntary reading: Classroom libraries in the elementary school. The Reading Teacher, 46(6), 476–484. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20201114
Gallo, D. R. (2001). How classics create an aliterate society. The English Journal, 90(3), 33–39. Retrieved from http://moormangb.ced.appstate.edu/5730_f11_h/unit1/Gallo.pdf
Gibbs, R. (2003). Reframing the role of the teacher-librarian : the case for collaboration and flexibility. Scan, 22(3), 4–7. Retrieved from http://search.informit.com.au.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/fullText;dn=129538;res=AEIPT
Gogan, B., & Marcus, A. (2013). Lost in transliteracy – how to expand student learning across a variety of platforms. Knowledge Quest, 41(5), 40–45.
Grisham, D. L., & Wolsey, T. D. (2006). Recentering the middle school classroom as a vibrant learning community: Students, literacy, and technology intersect. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 49(8), 648–660. http://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.49.8.2
Gunter, G. A., & Kenny, R. F. (2008). Digital booktalk: Digital media for reluctant readers. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 8(1), 84–99.
Hamilton, B. (2013, November 14). A visit to the Lovett School story studio: Redesigning learning spaces, rewriting narratives of learning [Web Log]. Retrieved August 8, 2015, from https://theunquietlibrarian.wordpress.com/2013/11/14/a-visit-to-the-lovett-school-story-studio-redesigning-learning-spaces-rewriting-narratives-of-learning/
Hill, A. M. (1998). Problem solving in real-life contexts: An alternative for design in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 8, 203–220.
Hoffman, J., Sailors, M., Duffy, G., & Beretvas, S. N. (2004). The effective elementary classroom literacy environment: Examining the validity of the TEX-IN3 observation system. Journal of Literacy Research, 36(3), 303–334. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15548430jlr3603_3
Hopenwasser, C. B., & Noel, A. M. (2014). Tackling text complexity with your classroom library. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 50(2), 81–84. http://doi.org/10.1080/00228958.2014.900851
IDEO. (2014). Design thinking for libraries – a toolkit for patron-centered design (p. 121).
IDEO, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.designthinkingforlibraries.com
ISLN. (2015). Red Dot Book Awards 2015-2016 [Google Site]. Retrieved October 8, 2015, from https://sites.google.com/site/reddotbookawards20152016/
Iyengar, S. (2011, November). How to make choosing easier [Video file]. Retrieved October 8, 2015, from https://www.ted.com/talks/sheena_iyengar_choosing_what_to_choose
James, M. E. (1923). Use of classroom libraries to stimulate interest and speed in reading. The Elementary School Journal, 23(8), 601–608. http://doi.org/10.2307/994550
Jones, J. A. (2006). Student-involved classroom libraries. The Reading Teacher, 59(6), 576–580. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/203284680?accountid=10344
Kelley, M. J., & Decker, E. O. (2009). The Current State of Motivation to Read Among Middle School Students. Reading Psychology, 30(5), 466–485. http://doi.org/10.1080/02702710902733535
Knapp, J. (2014, May 1). Google Ventures: your design team needs a war room. Here’s how to set one up. Retrieved August 8, 2015, from http://www.fastcodesign.com/3028471/google-ventures-your-design-team-needs-a-war-room-heres-how-to-set-one-up
Krarup, A. (1955). Classroom libraries are not enough. The Reading Teacher, 8(4), 215–219. http://doi.org/10.2307/20196863
Krashen, S. D. (2004). The power of reading: insights from the research. Westport, Conn.; Portsmouth, N.H.: Libraries Unlimited ; Heinemann.
La Marca, S. (2008). Reading spaces (pp. 1–12). Presented at the 38th Annual Conference of the International Association of School Librarianship, Padua, Italy: International Association of School Librarianship. Retrieved from http://www.kzneducation.gov.za/Portals/0/ELITS%20website%20Homepage/IASL%202008/professional%20papers/lamarcaspacespp.pdf
Landis, D., Umolu, J., & Mancha, S. (2010). The power of language experience for cross-cultural reading and writing. The Reading Teacher, 63(7), 580–589. http://doi.org/10.1598/RT.63.7.5
Lesesne, T. S. (1991). Developing lifetime readers: Suggestions from fifty years of research. English Journal, 80(6), 61. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/237285282?accountid=10344
Lindsay, J. (2010). Children’s access to print material and education-related outcomes: Findings from a meta-analytic review. Naperville, IL: Learning Point Associates. Retrieved from http://rif.org/documents/us/RIFandLearningPointMeta-FullReport.pdf
McDonald, A. (2006). The ten commandments revisited: the qualities of good library space. LIBER Quarterly, 16(2). Retrieved from http://liber.library.uu.nl/index.php/lq/article/view/7840/8010
McDonald, L. (2013). Literature for children and young adolescents. In A literature companion for teachers (pp. 1–7). Newtown, Australia: Primary English Teaching Association Australia (PETAA).
McGill-franzen, A., Allington, R. L., Yokoi, L., & Brooks, G. (1999). Putting books in the classroom seems necessary but not sufficient. The Journal of Educational Research, 93(2), 67–74. http://doi.org/10.1080/00220679909597631
McIntosh, E. (2010). Clicks & Bricks: When digital, learning and physical space meet. Educational Facility Planner, 45(1&2), 33–38. Retrieved from http://media.cefpi.org/efp/EFP45-1and2McIntosh.pdf
McIntosh, E. (2015, July). The unknown unknowns – test out your ideas [Web Log]. Retrieved July 19, 2015, from http://edu.blogs.com/edublogs/2015/07/the-unknown-unknowns-test-out-your-ideas.html
Miller, D. (2009). The book whisperer: awakening the inner reader in every child (1st ed). San Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass.
Montiel-Overall, P. (2006). Teacher and teacher-librarian collaboration: moving toward integration. Teacher Librarian, 34(2), 28–33. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/224885770?accountid=10344
Montiel-Overall, P. (2008). Teacher and librarian collaboration: A qualitative study. Library & Information Science Research, 30(2), 145–155. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2007.06.008
Ness, M. (2011). Teachers’ Use of and Attitudes Toward Informational Text in K-5 Classrooms. Reading Psychology, 32(1), 28–53. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pbh&AN=57420253&site=ehost-live
Oblinger, D. (2006). Learning spaces. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE.
Powell, W. R. (1966). Classroom libraries: their frequency of use. Elementary English, 43(4), 395–397. http://doi.org/10.2307/41387579
Ragan, M. (2012). Inspired technology, inspired readers – How book trailers foster a passion for reading. Access, March, 8–13.
Raisdana, J. (2014, March 10). Well-versed In books [Web Log]. Retrieved October 3, 2015, from http://www.jabizraisdana.com/blog/well-versed-in-books/
Raisdana, J. (2015, February 9). Leave with a suggestion [Web Log]. Retrieved October 3, 2015, from http://www.jabizraisdana.com/blog/leave-with-a-suggestion/
Sanacore, J. (2000). Promoting the lifetime reading habit in middle school students. The Clearing House, 73(3), 157–161. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/196889420?accountid=10344
Sanacore, J., & Palumbo, A. (2010). Middle school students need more opportunities to read across the curriculum. The Clearing House, 83(5), 180–185. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/744358835?accountid=10344
Sanders, E. B.-N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign, 4(1), 5–18. http://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068
Serafini, F. (2011). Creating space for children’s literature. The Reading Teacher, 65(1), 30–34. http://doi.org/10.1598/RT.65.1.4
Sheldon, S., B., & Davis, M., H. (2015). “I wish everyone had a library like this” (The Baltimore Elementary and Middle School Library Project No. Year 2 Report). Baltimore, USA. Retrieved from http://baltimore-berc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/ALibraryLikeThisJune2015.pdf
Somerville, M. M., & Brown-Sica, M. (2011). Library space planning: a participatory action research approach. The Electronic Library, 29(5), 669–681. http://doi.org/10.1108/02640471111177099
Sullivan-Macdonald, D. (2015, October 1). Teach more, librarian less, say SLJ leadership summit panelists [Web Log]. Retrieved October 3, 2015, from http://www.slj.com/2015/10/schools/teach-more-librarian-less-becoming-essential-panel-at-the-slj-leadership-summit/
Thornburg, D. (2007, October). Campfires in cyberspace: Primordial metaphors for learning in the 21st Century. TCPD. Retrieved from http://tcpd.org/Thornburg/Handouts/Campfires.pdf
Todd, R. J., Gordon, C. A., & Lu, Y.-L. (2011). One common goal: Student learning (Report of Findings and Recommendations of the New Jersey School Library Survey Phase 2). New Jersey, USA: New Jersey Association of School Librarians. Retrieved from http://www.njasl.info/wp-content/NJ_study/2011_Phase2Report.pdf
Williamson, K., Archibald, A., & McGregor, J. (2010). Shared vision: A key to successful collaboration? School Libraries Worldwide, 16(2), 16–30. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lih&AN=55415805&site=ehost-live
Wilson, G., & Randall, M. (2012). The implementation and evaluation of a new learning space: a pilot study. Research in Learning Technology, 20(2), 1–17. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=86214889&site=ehost-live
Wolfersberger, M., Reutzel, D. R., Sudweeks, R., & Fawson, P. (2004). Developing and validating the Classroom Literacy Environmental Profile (CLEP): A tool for examining the “print richness” of early childhood and elementary classrooms. Journal of Literacy Research, 36(2), 211–272. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15548430jlr3602_4
Worthy, J. (1996). Removing barriers to voluntary reading for reluctant readers: The role of school and classroom libraries. Language Arts, 73(7), 483–492. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/196851690?accountid=10344
Young, T. A., & Moss, B. (2006). Nonfiction in the classroom library: A literacy necessity. Childhood Education, 82(4), 207–212. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/210392168?accountid=10344
Young, T. A., Moss, B., & Cornwell, L. (2007). The classroom library: A place for nonfiction, nonfiction in its place. Reading Horizons, 48(1), 1–18. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/236486012?accountid=10344

INF536: Critical Assessment

Looking back on this last semester, I can only sum it up by saying that change, beauty and progress in thought and learning is not only wrought by avalanche and volcano but also by the constant erosion by drops of water and bits of sand.  That combined with space and time.

9616353114

In the same way, this course has offered me space and time for learning by:

  • Forcing me to carve time out of a schedule that would otherwise be occupied by busyness
  • Exposing me to a variety of ideas, research, thoughts and concepts that I wouldn’t otherwise naturally encounter in my day-to-day professional or personal life
  • Making me DO things I’d otherwise shrug off as impossible (Bailey, 2015b)
  • Giving me a framework within which to analyse problems “wicked” and otherwise (Bailey, 2015a, 2015g; Buchanan, 1992; IDEO, 2014)
  • Grouping me with a set of people who are all approaching the course from a different context and set of experiences and knowledge
  • Creating a virtual (and at times physical) space for us to encounter each other and comment and share our learning – both formally and informally (“#INF536 – Twitter Search,” n.d.; McIntosh & CSU, n.d.)

 

It has be quite an experience, and, as someone once said – it’s not so much what you’ve learnt as what you remember. What has left a lasting impression is design thinking, the value of constraints and learning at the extremes.

 

As someone new to the education field, new to librarianship, operating under all kinds of constraints, the design thinking concepts of inspiration, ideation and implementation (Brown, 2008; Brown & Katz, 2011; IDEO, 2014) fits perfectly with that other concept of living and teaching in constant beta (Schroeder, 2013). As a fairly grounded, not terribly artistically (of the drawing and painting type) creative person this is the aspect of “design” that appeals to me as it is achievable with observation, thought, logic and research. However it also demands that I embody the principle of risk-taking and not just pay lip service to it sprouting it to my PYP (IB primary year program) students at regular intervals. There is something very empowering in the process of observing, thinking, asking, making small or not so small changes, and failing or succeeding, learning and trying again without fear and knowing that every time again one is moving every so slightly forward and nudging one’s students in the same direction.

 

My most effective intervention resulting from a budgetary constraint
My most effective intervention resulting from a budgetary constraint

 

Constraints, rather than hampering us, force rethinking options, relooking at alternatives and collaborating, asking, connecting in a way that is not always necessary when one is overwhelmed by choice and abundance. As documented in my blog posts: design – space, thinking and time 1, 2, 3 & 4 (Bailey, 2015c, 2015d, 2015e, 2015f) operating within the constraints of limited time, no budget, a small and almost unalterable space can result in creative solutions that are as ad hoc as they are successful.

 

 

 

We can learn a lot about education and learning in extreme conditions (Chohan, 2011; Leadbeater & Wong, 2010). But more immediate and accessible are the extremes in our own communities the students at the challenging edges of all the continuums we create. The teachers and parents who don’t toe some invisible line.

 

 

The name of my series of blog posts also reflects my thoughts about designing learning spaces. It’s not just about the physical space, it’s about reconstructing how we think about time and what we do in it, and carving out a presence physically, virtually and even emotionally. No matter how beautifully our surroundings have been designed, how much money has been spent on the furnishings and fittings, how much time is built into the curriculum if our students do not feel safe and have a willing and open space in their hearts and minds for learning, nothing will make an impact.

16807472897

References:

Bailey, N. (2015a, July 23). On the box, off the box – INF536 Blog Post 1 [Web Log]. Retrieved October 11, 2015, from http://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/informativeflights/2015/07/23/on-the-box-off-the-box/

Bailey, N. (2015b, August 7). Blog 2: Observation – Dog Walk [Web Log]. Retrieved October 11, 2015, from http://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/informativeflights/2015/08/07/blog-2-observation-dog-walk/

Bailey, N. (2015c, August 23). Design – space, thinking and time (1) [Web Log]. Retrieved October 4, 2015, from http://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/informativeflights/2015/08/23/design-space-thinking-and-time-1/

Bailey, N. (2015d, September 6). Design – space thinking and time (2) [Web Log]. Retrieved October 4, 2015, from http://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/informativeflights/2015/09/06/design-space-thinking-and-time-2/

Bailey, N. (2015e, September 20). Design – space, thinking and time (3) [Web Log]. Retrieved October 4, 2015, from http://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/informativeflights/2015/09/20/design-space-thinking-and-time-3/

Bailey, N. (2015f, October 4). Design – space, thinking and time (4) [Web Log]. Retrieved October 11, 2015, from http://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/informativeflights/2015/10/04/design-space-thinking-and-time-4/

Bailey, N. (2015g, October 11). INF536: Assessment 4 – Part A: Applying spatial changes and design thinking to middle school reading – a three phase collaborative approach [Web Log]. Retrieved October 11, 2015, from http://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/informativeflights/2015/10/11/inf536-assessment-4-part-a-applying-spatial-changes-and-design-thinking-to-middle-school-reading-a-three-phase-collaborative-approach/

Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84–92. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=heh&AN=32108052&site=ehost-live

Brown, T., & Katz, B. (2011). Change by Design: Change by Design. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(3), 381–383. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00806.x

Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5–21. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1511637

Chohan, A. (2011, January 25). Learning without frontiers [Video file]. Retrieved October 11, 2015, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EARTcJkNrDA

IDEO. (2014). Design thinking for libraries – a toolkit for patron-centered design (p. 121). IDEO, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.designthinkingforlibraries.com

#INF536 – Twitter Search. (n.d.). [Twitter]. Retrieved October 11, 2015, from https://twitter.com/search?q=%23INF536&src=typd

Leadbeater, C., & Wong, A. (2010). Learning from the extremes. CISCO. Retrieved September 2, 2015 from https://www.cisco.com/web/about/citizenship/socio-economic/docs/LearningfromExtremes_WhitePaper.pdf

McIntosh, E., & CSU. (n.d.). Discussion Board – S-INF536_201560_W_D @CSU [Discussion Forum]. Retrieved October 11, 2015, from https://interact2.csu.edu.au/webapps/discussionboard/do/conference?toggle_mode=read&action=list_forums&course_id=_6652_1&nav=discussion_board_entry&mode=view

Schroeder, M. (2013, November 6). Living in beta [Video file]. Retrieved October 6, 2015, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nnYI3ePrY8

 

 

 

 

INF536: Assessment 4 – Part A: Applying spatial changes and design thinking to middle school reading– a three phase collaborative approach

Introduction

There is a long history of research into the value of and elements contributing to the success of classroom libraries. They have an important role in ensuring accessibility of written works to promote fluency and skill in literacy and thereby contributing to academic achievement. But the literature appears to concentrate on elementary schools (Hopenwasser & Noel, 2014; James, 1923; Jones, 2006; Krarup, 1955; Powell, 1966; Sanacore & Palumbo, 2010; Todd, Gordon, & Lu, 2011; Worthy, 1996). Although partnership and collaboration with the school and/or public library and librarian is recommended, the literature often deals with the two spaces in isolation. Further, the problem of aliteracy in middle school – whereby students can read but don’t want to – is well documented (Kelley & Decker, 2009; Krashen, 2004; Lesesne, 1991; Sheldon & Davis, 2015; Worthy, 1996). This case report will show how the two environments library and classroom, can successfully be seen as extensions of each other through the principles of design and design thinking and explicit cooperation between the language humanities (Eng/Hum) teachers, literacy coach and school librarian in order to promote voluntary reading.

Case development

United World College South East Asia East (UWCSEA-East) is a K-12 international school located in Singapore. It commenced operations in 2008 and took occupancy of a purpose built campus in 2011. In this campus, the secondary school library initially served around 500 middle school students – see table 1. It now caters to three distinct communities, middle school, high school and the International Baccalaureate (IB) – see Table 2.

Screen Shot 2015-10-11 at 11.27.14 am

Despite consultation with the librarian in the planning phase, certain spaces of the library were designated different functions than agreed upon and furnished accordingly by the architect and building manager. One such area was upstairs overlooking the main school plaza with purpose built magazine racks. The idea was it would be a well-frequented showcase area for magazine reading. In reality a number of factors prevented this from being realised:

  • The furniture design didn’t accommodate its purpose as it was not deep or high enough and the storage area didn’t fit back copies
  • The zoning of the library post occupancy meant that materials affording quick casual reading such as graphic novels and periodicals were better located in the “noisier” and fast turnover area which allowed food and beverages, i.e. downstairs.
  • The trend in libraries is to move away from physical magazines and periodicals towards online providers including online databases and aggregators such as PressReader that provide the same product at a lower cost and without delays and issues with cataloguing and maintenance.

 

The question of what to do with the space was resolved by noticing that as the secondary school reached post occupancy capacity the lowest students in the pecking order i.e. middle school students were increasingly marginalised with students of higher sections taking over the prime library real estate (students are visually distinct due to different coloured polo shirts for their uniforms). In addition, middle school students no longer had library visits planned into their schedule. Furthermore, the large influx of new students and teachers meant that reading books in the classrooms were unevenly distributed both in terms of volume and quality without any structured form of classroom library, which the students had become accustomed to in the primary section. Finally, Eng/Hum teachers were noticing a decline in voluntary reading as students moved up through middle school.

 

These issues were addressed initially through collaboration between the librarian and Eng/Hum teachers and more recently by the new literacy coach over a period of three years as follows:

  • The conversion of the magazine area into a middle school reading zone
  • The establishing of a core library for each of the three middle school grades (Day, 2013b)
  • The creation of middle school classroom libraries in a formal and structured manner with materials integrated into the library catalogue (Day, 2015d)
  • The integration of informational / nonfiction texts into both areas

This is an on-going process and worth a critical analysis to examine the choice process, latent or existing attitudes and assumptions, exterior pressures and design constraints and collaboration and communication.

Critical analysis

Choice of process

The spatial change in the library was conceived and led by the teacher-librarian (TL) with the Eng/Hum teachers joining in the collaboration as the process evolved. Since the TL has experience in design thinking (Day, 2013a, 2015a, 2015c) the process followed the design thinking cycle of inspiration, ideation, iteration and getting to scale (Brown, 2008; IDEO, 2014).

 

This was achieved by:

  • Agreeing on a “core library” of 30 titles per grade for grades 6-8 which were prominently displayed
  • Adjusting shelving to accommodate front facing books
  • Relocating books of interest to this age group from the fiction collection
  • Using large posters to highlight the favourite books of middle school teachers in the library and class corridors and classroom walls
  • Ensuring multiple copies of books, by using class and literary circle sets
  • Adequate lighting, comfortable furniture and the creation of a private space

 

The above steps and final spatial design incorporated the elements that are recommended as enhancing school library spaces (Cha & Kim, 2015; Elliott-Burns, 2003; La Marca, 2008; A. McDonald, 2006; Serafini, 2011).

 

The design elements that contribute to successful classroom libraries are not dissimilar and include:

  • Sufficient space which is a focal area but partitioned and private
  • Comfortable furniture
  • Variety of material in range of complexity including different literary genres and informational texts
  • Category organisation and shelf labelling
  • Combination shelving allowing for quantity of books and display (front facing)
  • Advertising by means of posters and notices on whiteboards
  • Graphic organisation either thematic or by connections
  • Involvement of students in selection, organisation and maintenance (Fractor, Woodruff, Martinez, & Teale, 1993; Hopenwasser & Noel, 2014; Reutzel & Fawson, 2002, cited in Sanacore & Palumbo, 2010)

Discussion and research on the elements predominantly come from the elementary school environment, and the adoption to middle school requires some adjustments to account for the fact that students do not remain in one classroom, lessening the sense of ownership of a space on the part of students, and teachers needing to cater to multiple classes with different profiles and interests. Learning spaces are also typically smaller relative to the size of the students.

 

The creation of the library and classroom reading spaces and populating them with books is “necessary but not sufficient” (McGill-franzen, Allington, Yokoi, & Brooks, 1999). Other components of encouraging reading include training teachers to enhance their instructional routines to incorporate the material, and to ensure that teachers are familiar not only with their literary canon, but also the latest in good young adult fiction (Day, 2015b; McGill-franzen et al., 1999). The school has invested in training with Penny Kittle to assist in the instructional routines (Raisdana, 2015), while the librarian is working with the teachers on the latter.

Latent or existing attitudes and assumptions

An international school is blessed with diversity in cultures, languages and backgrounds both of their students and teachers. This results in a context of people coming from different systems with different attitudes, assumptions, beliefs and experiences around education, reading and libraries. In just the middle school, teachers come from Australia, United States, Philippines, Ireland, Canada and the United Kingdom, each with their own literary core. In addition, there are personal preferences and beliefs, for example around young adult literature (see Raisdana, 2014). Teachers may not be used to or have experience of collaboration with the TL, the benefits thereof, nor aware of the ways in which libraries have evolved (Gibbs, 2003; Montiel-Overall, 2006, 2008; Sullivan-Macdonald, 2015). And naturally there are assumptions around what constitutes an ideal learning or reading space and the balance between the two (Elliott-Burns, 2005). In a meta-review of access to print and educational outcomes, Lindsay (2010) concluded that limiting choices with a larger distribution interval led to more reading, particularly if it was accompanied by activities such as training and book talks. This is in contrast to the assumption that collections should be as large as possible. It also suggests that rotation of materials leads to better outcomes.

Exterior pressures and design constraints

The creation of the complementary spaces faced a number of constraints, design and otherwise. These included a small budget, limited time and variability in the reading level of students. In design thinking the presence of constraints is seen as a positive force that encourages creative solutions and exploring options that would not otherwise be considered, and this proved to be true in this case study (Brown & Katz, 2011; Hill, 1998; Ness, 2011).

 

Naturally budget was an important constraint that shaped the way in which the space was converted and books and furniture was acquired or moved and repurposed. As discussed earlier, the librarian was involved in the “fuzzy front end” (Sanders & Stappers, 2008, p. 6), of the secondary library design and once the space was completed it was not possible to change the space, only to adapt its purpose. In the classrooms the availability of furniture in the room to hold the books and the available space for the classroom library vis-à-vis other learning spaces determined how many books could effectively by stored and displayed. In this respect creative design thinking was deployed, for example by taking the doors off built-in cupboard space both in the classrooms and in the library, creating additional shelving. Comfortable furniture was either acquired by donations from the community or purchased to ensure equity between the classrooms.

 

Although the library and classes each have a budget for the acquisition of books, both wanted to ensure that existing resources were not wasted – for example the books already owned in multiple copies. However their repurposing had to be examined within the constraints of the reading level of the students and the curriculum themes for each grade.

Collaboration and communication

Collaboration and communication between the TL and teachers has received a lot of attention as has the ways in which spatial design and design thinking can enhance collaboration (Avallon & Schneider, 2013; Ferer, 2012; Gibbs, 2003; Knapp, 2014; Montiel-Overall, 2006; Williamson, Archibald, & McGregor, 2010). Enhancing collaboration between the TL and the Eng/Hum department has occurred on a number of fronts, both physical and virtual – such as book chat mornings to book talk new books, encouraging teachers and students to be involved with the selection of books for the Red Dot Awards (ISLN, 2015), processing and cataloguing the books, and the creation of a virtual space for the books (Day, 2015b).

 

Given time constraints and curriculum pressures, additional moments for collaboration and communication have had to be designed into the process. For example teachers can book the reading zone space to conduct lessons, and invite the TL to book talk new or noteworthy books. In addition the library receives supervision assistance from teachers during lunch, recess times and after school. The Eng/Hum teachers have first priority in requesting this duty, creating the opportunity for the important “casual conversations” that result in informal learning and information exchange (Oblinger, 2006; Somerville & Brown-Sica, 2011).

Conclusion

The process can neither be criticized for its efficacy nor results. Teachers, students and the librarian have largely viewed the change positively. Due to making small iterative changes to the spaces, starting with a small budget and a limited number of books in the first year, and subsequently adapting the choice of books, the selection and weeding process based on experience and feedback, the combined library / class library spaces appear to have grown organically despite a lot of “behind the scenes” work on book processing, cataloguing and making books classroom / shelf ready.

There are five main recommendations arising from the analysis of this case study, all which can be tackled through employing design thinking rather than further changes to the current spatial design:

  • Balance the contradictory forces of novelty and familiarity through how books are selected, displayed and rotated
  • Focus efforts on the most efficacious element of encouraging reading – book talks
  • Expand the space to include the home environment, particularly in the case of bilingual students
  • Increase involvement of students in the spatial design and change process
  • Quantify the benefits of this spatial / design thinking collaboration through evidence based research.

These will be elaborated in the next section.

Recommendations

Balance novelty and familiarity

Students like and respond to novelty in display and a constant supply of “new” titles, they would also possibly benefit from choice limitation (Iyengar, 2011). This can be achieved by a rotation of titles between spine and front facing, and through a rotation between the books in the various classes (Lindsay, 2010). At present the core and class libraries are refreshed annually and the class libraries are not rotated between classes or teachers. It is recommended this be considered to prevent staleness. The class library placement of books in bins rather than shelves with a mixture of front and spine facing, allowing changes is display is not best practise, nor is having all books available simultaneously (Fractor et al., 1993; Lindsay, 2010; Sanacore, 2000; Sanacore & Palumbo, 2010).

Book talks

The importance of teachers’, librarians’, students’ and the community’s increasing exposure of diverse books in all genres by book talking can’t be overstated (Bentheim, 2013; Gallo, 2001; L. McDonald, 2013; Serafini, 2011). But, as examined in the analysis, a number of barriers stand in the way of regular book talks. In addition, requiring reading related tasks from students runs the risk of resulting in unfavourable associations with reading and further reluctance (Eriksson, 2002; Gallo, 2001; Miller, 2009).

 

Many practioners have described how digital innovation and the creation of virtual spaces can enhance and augment traditional book talks as well as expand transliteracy skills of students (Dreon, Kerper, & Landis, 2011; Gogan & Marcus, 2013; Gunter & Kenny, 2008; Ragan, 2012). It is recommended that students be given ownership of exploring the potentials of the digital realm in this respect as a guided design thinking exercise.

Mother tongue material and the home environment

Access to mother tongue materials continues to be a weakness in the library and even more so in the classroom library. There are logistical and financial constraints including the wide spread of languages, the undervaluation of low status languages, and misinformation and misunderstanding on the value of reading in the mother tongue amongst students and parents (Bailey, 2014a, 2014b, 2015; Boelens, Cherek, Tilke, & Bailey, 2015). This is an area that would benefit greatly from increased collaboration between the college and parent body where previously “unknowable” resources could be tapped into through utilizing the analytical and process skills of design thinking (IDEO, 2014; Landis, Umolu, & Mancha, 2010; McIntosh, 2015).

Student involvement

While literature indicates collaboration by all stakeholders is essential for acceptance, particularly in learning environments (Hamilton, 2013; Jones, 2006; Sanders & Stappers, 2008), this has largely been a librarian / teacher initiative with some student involvement in book selection. Moving forward, the virtual or digital sphere is an area where students can also be encouraged to carve out a presence and take ownership with teachers taking on an enabler role as use of all seven learning spaces are maximised (Grisham & Wolsey, 2006; McIntosh, 2010; Thornburg, 2007; Wilson & Randall, 2012).

Quantify the benefits

Despite numerous hurdles in providing data and making analysis founded on circulation figures or student attainment records, there is considerable value in documenting and providing evidence for practises – not the least that it supports budget requests.

 

Circulation records do not provide a complete record or necessarily correlate with reading because:

  • Books may be read in library / class without being checked out
  • In affluent multi-cultural communities, students may have access to large personal libraries, including books in their mother tongue
  • Students may be borrowing books from the public library

Despite this, circulation is still the best proxy for reading. The decentralised nature of the class libraries results in less control over book checkout. Even in the library, that has no exit barriers, at the end of 2014/5 academic year roughly 20% of returned books had not been checked out of the system. While this can be lauded as an indication of the high moral and ethical standards of the students, it does pose difficulties in creating any evidence based data on the actual impact of either separating part of the library or decentralising the collection to class libraries in terms of increases in circulation.

 

It is recommended that both current and longitudinal research be carried out to see if there is any correlation between increased access to text, the amount of reading / circulation and other objective measures of attainment such as the annual PISA or TIMS tests. This will take the initiative beyond transformative individual anecdotal stories to evidence based research. The CLEP (Classroom Literacy Environmental Profile) (McGill-franzen et al., 1999; Wolfersberger, Reutzel, Sudweeks, & Fawson, 2004) and more recently the TEX-IN3 (Hoffman, Sailors, Duffy, & Beretvas, 2004) tools have successfully been used in the evaluation of elementary school class libraries and could be adapted for the middle school environment.

 

The recent inclusion of informational (nonfiction) texts in both the middle school zone and the classroom libraries is also one worth further investigation. Whether the expansion of the collections has impacted on the space, the ability to choose, and the completion of summative assessments in the individual subjects can be investigated in the light of the existing literature on the matter (Hopenwasser & Noel, 2014; Ness, 2011; Sanacore & Palumbo, 2010; Young & Moss, 2006; Young, Moss, & Cornwell, 2007).

References

Avallon, J., & Schneider, A. (2013). Building collaboration into workspace design. Facility Management Journal, (September / October), 34–38. Retrieved from http://cdn.ifma.org/sfcdn/fmj-supporting-documents/building-collaboration-into-workspace-design-fmj-sep-oct-2013.pdf?sfvrsn=0

Bailey, N. (2014a, November 12). Building a LOTE collection at an international school [Web Log]. Retrieved October 4, 2015, from http://informativeflights.blogspot.sg/2014/11/building-lote-collection-at.html

Bailey, N. (2014b, November 12). Research summary on language [Web Log]. Retrieved November 12, 2014, from http://informativeflights.blogspot.sg/2014/11/research-summary-on-language.html

Bailey, N. (2015). Digital language learning ecology. Singapore: iBooks. Retrieved from https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/digital-language-learning/id1000588637?ls=1&mt=11

Bentheim, C. A. (2013). Continuing the transition work from traditional library to learning commons. Teacher Librarian, 41(2), 29–36. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=92991111&site=ehost-live

Boelens, H., Cherek, J., Tilke, A., & Bailey, N. (2015). Communicating across cultures: cultural identity issues and the role of the multicultural, multilingual school library within the school community. Presented at the “The school library rocks” IASL 2015, Maastricht, Netherlands.

Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84–92. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=heh&AN=32108052&site=ehost-live

Brown, T., & Katz, B. (2011). Change by Design: Change by Design. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(3), 381–383. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00806.x

Cha, S. H., & Kim, T. W. (2015). What matters for students’ use of physical library space? The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(3), 274–279. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2015.03.014

Day, K. (2013a, January 14). Carol Kuhlthau meets Tim Brown: Guided Inquiry {Design} Thinking [Web Log]. Retrieved October 3, 2015, from http://www.thelibrarianedge.com/libedge/2013/01/carol-kuhlthau-meets-tim-brown-guided.html?rq=design%20thinking

Day, K. (2013b, November). Liberate your book cupboards and create a more true “bookstore” model in your school library [Web Log]. Retrieved August 2, 2015, from http://www.thelibrarianedge.com/libedge/2013/11/liberate-your-book-cupboards-and-create.html

Day, K. (2015a, August 30). Expert learning in the library…. and classroom [Web Log]. Retrieved October 3, 2015, from http://www.thelibrarianedge.com/libedge/2015/8/30/a-sociologist-who-loves-the-research-process?rq=

Day, K. (2015b, September 3). Professional learning for teachers who read books students might read [Library Guide]. Retrieved September 6, 2015, from http://research.uwcsea.edu.sg/eastlibsec/classlibs

Day, K. (2015c, September 5). Design thinking for the research process (e.g., the IBO Extended Essay) [Web Log]. Retrieved September 6, 2015, from http://www.thelibrarianedge.com/libedge/2015/8/30/design-thinking-for-the-research-process

Day, K. (2015d, September 28). Center and satellite collections: connections between classrooms and the library [Web Log]. Retrieved October 3, 2015, from http://www.thelibrarianedge.com/libedge/2015/9/26/middle-school-classroom-libraries-and-the-central-library

Dreon, O., Kerper, R. M., & Landis, J. (2011). Digital storytelling: A tool for teaching and learning in the YouTube generation. Middle School Journal, 42(5), 4–9.

Elliott-Burns, R. (2003). Space, place, design and the school library. Journal of the Australian School Library Association, 17(2).

Elliott-Burns, R. (2005). Designing spaces for learning and living in schools: perspectives of a flaneuse. Presented at the Australian Curriculum Studies Association Biennial Conference, Queensland, Australia: University of the Sunshine Coast. Retrieved from http://eprints.qut.edu.au/4345/1/4345.pdf

Eriksson, K. (2002). Booktalk dilemmas: Teachers’ organisation of pupils’ reading. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 46(4), 391–408. http://doi.org/10.1080/0031383022000024570

Ferer, E. (2012). Working together: library and writing center collaboration. Reference Services Review, 40(4), 543–557. http://doi.org/10.1108/00907321211277350

Fractor, J. S., Woodruff, M. C., Martinez, M. G., & Teale, W. H. (1993). Let’s not miss opportunities to promote voluntary reading: Classroom libraries in the elementary school. The Reading Teacher, 46(6), 476–484. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20201114

Gallo, D. R. (2001). How classics create an aliterate society. The English Journal, 90(3), 33–39. Retrieved from http://moormangb.ced.appstate.edu/5730_f11_h/unit1/Gallo.pdf

Gibbs, R. (2003). Reframing the role of the teacher-librarian : the case for collaboration and flexibility. Scan, 22(3), 4–7. Retrieved from http://search.informit.com.au.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/fullText;dn=129538;res=AEIPT

Gogan, B., & Marcus, A. (2013). Lost in transliteracy – how to expand student learning across a variety of platforms. Knowledge Quest, 41(5), 40–45.

Grisham, D. L., & Wolsey, T. D. (2006). Recentering the middle school classroom as a vibrant learning community: Students, literacy, and technology intersect. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 49(8), 648–660. http://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.49.8.2

Gunter, G. A., & Kenny, R. F. (2008). Digital booktalk: Digital media for reluctant readers. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 8(1), 84–99.

Hamilton, B. (2013, November 14). A visit to the Lovett School story studio: Redesigning learning spaces, rewriting narratives of learning [Web Log]. Retrieved August 8, 2015, from https://theunquietlibrarian.wordpress.com/2013/11/14/a-visit-to-the-lovett-school-story-studio-redesigning-learning-spaces-rewriting-narratives-of-learning/

Hill, A. M. (1998). Problem solving in real-life contexts: An alternative for design in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 8, 203–220.

Hoffman, J., Sailors, M., Duffy, G., & Beretvas, S. N. (2004). The effective elementary classroom literacy environment: Examining the validity of the TEX-IN3 observation system. Journal of Literacy Research, 36(3), 303–334. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15548430jlr3603_3

Hopenwasser, C. B., & Noel, A. M. (2014). Tackling text complexity with your classroom library. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 50(2), 81–84. http://doi.org/10.1080/00228958.2014.900851

IDEO. (2014). Design thinking for libraries – a toolkit for patron-centered design (p. 121). IDEO, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.designthinkingforlibraries.com

ISLN. (2015). Red Dot Book Awards 2015-2016 [Google Site]. Retrieved October 8, 2015, from https://sites.google.com/site/reddotbookawards20152016/

Iyengar, S. (2011, November). How to make choosing easier [Video file]. Retrieved October 8, 2015, from https://www.ted.com/talks/sheena_iyengar_choosing_what_to_choose

James, M. E. (1923). Use of classroom libraries to stimulate interest and speed in reading. The Elementary School Journal, 23(8), 601–608. http://doi.org/10.2307/994550

Jones, J. A. (2006). Student-involved classroom libraries. The Reading Teacher, 59(6), 576–580. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/203284680?accountid=10344

Kelley, M. J., & Decker, E. O. (2009). The Current State of Motivation to Read Among Middle School Students. Reading Psychology, 30(5), 466–485. http://doi.org/10.1080/02702710902733535

Knapp, J. (2014, May 1). Google Ventures: your design team needs a war room. Here’s how to set one up. Retrieved August 8, 2015, from http://www.fastcodesign.com/3028471/google-ventures-your-design-team-needs-a-war-room-heres-how-to-set-one-up

Krarup, A. (1955). Classroom libraries are not enough. The Reading Teacher, 8(4), 215–219. http://doi.org/10.2307/20196863

Krashen, S. D. (2004). The power of reading: insights from the research. Westport, Conn.; Portsmouth, N.H.: Libraries Unlimited ; Heinemann.

La Marca, S. (2008). Reading spaces (pp. 1–12). Presented at the 38th Annual Conference of the International Association of School Librarianship, Padua, Italy: International Association of School Librarianship. Retrieved from http://www.kzneducation.gov.za/Portals/0/ELITS%20website%20Homepage/IASL%202008/professional%20papers/lamarcaspacespp.pdf

Landis, D., Umolu, J., & Mancha, S. (2010). The power of language experience for cross-cultural reading and writing. The Reading Teacher, 63(7), 580–589. http://doi.org/10.1598/RT.63.7.5

Lesesne, T. S. (1991). Developing lifetime readers: Suggestions from fifty years of research. English Journal, 80(6), 61. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/237285282?accountid=10344

Lindsay, J. (2010). Children’s access to print material and education-related outcomes: Findings from a meta-analytic review. Naperville, IL: Learning Point Associates. Retrieved from http://rif.org/documents/us/RIFandLearningPointMeta-FullReport.pdf

McDonald, A. (2006). The ten commandments revisited: the qualities of good library space. LIBER Quarterly, 16(2). Retrieved from http://liber.library.uu.nl/index.php/lq/article/view/7840/8010

McDonald, L. (2013). Literature for children and young adolescents. In A literature companion for teachers (pp. 1–7). Newtown, Australia: Primary English Teaching Association Australia (PETAA).

McGill-franzen, A., Allington, R. L., Yokoi, L., & Brooks, G. (1999). Putting books in the classroom seems necessary but not sufficient. The Journal of Educational Research, 93(2), 67–74. http://doi.org/10.1080/00220679909597631

McIntosh, E. (2010). Clicks & Bricks: When digital, learning and physical space meet. Educational Facility Planner, 45(1&2), 33–38. Retrieved from http://media.cefpi.org/efp/EFP45-1and2McIntosh.pdf

McIntosh, E. (2015, July). The unknown unknowns – test out your ideas [Web Log]. Retrieved July 19, 2015, from http://edu.blogs.com/edublogs/2015/07/the-unknown-unknowns-test-out-your-ideas.html

Miller, D. (2009). The book whisperer: awakening the inner reader in every child (1st ed). San Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass.

Montiel-Overall, P. (2006). Teacher and teacher-librarian collaboration: moving toward integration. Teacher Librarian, 34(2), 28–33. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/224885770?accountid=10344

Montiel-Overall, P. (2008). Teacher and librarian collaboration: A qualitative study. Library & Information Science Research, 30(2), 145–155. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2007.06.008

Ness, M. (2011). Teachers’ Use of and Attitudes Toward Informational Text in K-5 Classrooms. Reading Psychology, 32(1), 28–53. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pbh&AN=57420253&site=ehost-live

Oblinger, D. (2006). Learning spaces. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE.

Powell, W. R. (1966). Classroom libraries: their frequency of use. Elementary English, 43(4), 395–397. http://doi.org/10.2307/41387579

Ragan, M. (2012). Inspired technology, inspired readers – How book trailers foster a passion for reading. Access, March, 8–13.

Raisdana, J. (2014, March 10). Well-versed In books [Web Log]. Retrieved October 3, 2015, from http://www.jabizraisdana.com/blog/well-versed-in-books/

Raisdana, J. (2015, February 9). Leave with a suggestion [Web Log]. Retrieved October 3, 2015, from http://www.jabizraisdana.com/blog/leave-with-a-suggestion/

Sanacore, J. (2000). Promoting the lifetime reading habit in middle school students. The Clearing House, 73(3), 157–161. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/196889420?accountid=10344

Sanacore, J., & Palumbo, A. (2010). Middle school students need more opportunities to read across the curriculum. The Clearing House, 83(5), 180–185. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/744358835?accountid=10344

Sanders, E. B.-N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign, 4(1), 5–18. http://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068

Serafini, F. (2011). Creating space for children’s literature. The Reading Teacher, 65(1), 30–34. http://doi.org/10.1598/RT.65.1.4

Sheldon, S., B., & Davis, M., H. (2015). “I wish everyone had a library like this” (The Baltimore Elementary and Middle School Library Project No. Year 2 Report). Baltimore, USA. Retrieved from http://baltimore-berc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/ALibraryLikeThisJune2015.pdf

Somerville, M. M., & Brown-Sica, M. (2011). Library space planning: a participatory action research approach. The Electronic Library, 29(5), 669–681. http://doi.org/10.1108/02640471111177099

Sullivan-Macdonald, D. (2015, October 1). Teach more, librarian less, say SLJ leadership summit panelists [Web Log]. Retrieved October 3, 2015, from http://www.slj.com/2015/10/schools/teach-more-librarian-less-becoming-essential-panel-at-the-slj-leadership-summit/

Thornburg, D. (2007, October). Campfires in cyberspace: Primordial metaphors for learning in the 21st Century. TCPD. Retrieved from http://tcpd.org/Thornburg/Handouts/Campfires.pdf

Todd, R. J., Gordon, C. A., & Lu, Y.-L. (2011). One common goal: Student learning (Report of Findings and Recommendations of the New Jersey School Library Survey Phase 2). New Jersey, USA: New Jersey Association of School Librarians. Retrieved from http://www.njasl.info/wp-content/NJ_study/2011_Phase2Report.pdf

Williamson, K., Archibald, A., & McGregor, J. (2010). Shared vision: A key to successful collaboration? School Libraries Worldwide, 16(2), 16–30. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lih&AN=55415805&site=ehost-live

Wilson, G., & Randall, M. (2012). The implementation and evaluation of a new learning space: a pilot study. Research in Learning Technology, 20(2), 1–17. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=86214889&site=ehost-live

Wolfersberger, M., Reutzel, D. R., Sudweeks, R., & Fawson, P. (2004). Developing and validating the Classroom Literacy Environmental Profile (CLEP): A tool for examining the “print richness” of early childhood and elementary classrooms. Journal of Literacy Research, 36(2), 211–272. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15548430jlr3602_4

Worthy, J. (1996). Removing barriers to voluntary reading for reluctant readers: The role of school and classroom libraries. Language Arts, 73(7), 483–492. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/196851690?accountid=10344

Young, T. A., & Moss, B. (2006). Nonfiction in the classroom library: A literacy necessity. Childhood Education, 82(4), 207–212. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/210392168?accountid=10344

Young, T. A., Moss, B., & Cornwell, L. (2007). The classroom library: A place for nonfiction, nonfiction in its place. Reading Horizons, 48(1), 1–18. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/236486012?accountid=10344

 

Assessment Item 3: Literature Critique

 

The challenges of the school library as an evolving learning space

Word Count: 2,628

 

Bibliographic details:

IDEO. (2014). Design thinking for libraries – a toolkit for patron-centered design (p. 121). IDEO, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Retrieved from www.designthinkingforlibraries.com

Haycock, K. (2007). Collaboration: Critical success factors for student learning. School Libraries Worldwide, 13(1), 25–35.

La Marca, S. (2008). Reading spaces (pp. 1–12). Presented at the 38th Annual Conference of the International Association of School Librarianship, Padua, Italy: International Association of School Librarianship. Retrieved from http://www.kzneducation.gov.za/Portals/0/ELITS%20website%20Homepage/IASL%202008/professional%20papers/lamarcaspacespp.pdf

Lin, P., Chen, K., & Chang, S.-S. (2010). Before there was a place called library – Library space as an invisible factor affecting students’ learning. Libri: International Journal of Libraries & Information Services, 60(4), 339–351.

Oblinger, D., G. (2006). Learning how to see. In D. Oblinger G. (Ed.), Learning Spaces (pp. 14.1–14.11). Boulder, CO: Educause. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/learningspaces

Willis, J., Bland, D., Hughes, H., & Elliott-Burns, R. (2013). Reimagining school libraries: emerging teacher pedagogic practices. Presented at the International Conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Adelaide, South Australia. Retrieved from http://eprints.qut.edu.au/66925/7/66925.pdf

 

Outline

This essay will specifically focus on the libraries of educational institutions – in particular school libraries – their role in learning and the way in which design, design thinking and the design process can optimise student outcomes given the financial, physical and time constraints inherent to the school environment.

 

A critique of literature necessitates criterion from which to evaluate the material. One of the weaknesses in design literature in general and school library design in particular is the reliance on single story or anecdotal evidence to support decisions and change. The aforementioned six pieces of literature will be judged to see whether they incorporate an understanding and discussion of

  • how research-based educational discourse has influenced the design space,
  • the relationships between educational trends and physical and virtual spaces,
  • the incorporation of technical and physical standards of interoperability, usability and sustainability,
  • how collaboration can be enhanced through the design process, design thinking or physical, virtual or temporal spatial design

Educational Discourse

A number of themes characterise current educational discourse. Following a meta-analysis of evidence-based influences on student achievement, the conclusion was reached that major sources of variance in student’s achievement lie in the learners themselves (50%) and their teachers (30%) (Hattie, 2003, 2009). Claxton’s work on the qualities of successful learners and their underlying motivations – including responsibility, respect, real world application, choice, challenge and collaboration are of relevance to this discussion (McIntosh, 2011), as are any ways in which design thinking or changes to physical, virtual or temporal spaces can enhance the work of teachers in particular collaboration, co-planning and co-teaching with teacher librarians (Loertscher, 2014; Montiel-Overall, 2006, 2008; Todd, 2008).

 

Literature supports evidence that learner needs can be met by creating physical and virtual spaces, as well as using design thinking to allow learners greater autonomy (La Marca, 2008). Users should be involved in the design of learning spaces and programs (IDEO, 2014; Oblinger, 2006). Greater choice is provided by spaces that accommodate different learning styles, and promote informal learning while extending learner experience. Well-designed social spaces have a positive impact on motivation and the ability to learn by encouraging ‘conversations’ and interaction between faculty and students and intra-faculty collaboration (Haycock, 2007; IDEO, 2014; La Marca, 2008; Lin, Chen, & Chang, 2010; Oblinger, 2006; Willis, Bland, Hughes, & Elliott-Burns, 2013).

Educational Trends

The trends that have been identified that impact on the school library as a space include; learning no longer being limited by geography, time or physical spaces, the emergence of digital and virtual spaces (Joint, 2011; Kurvink, 2008; La Marca, 2008; Oblinger, 2006), a movement away from a fixed curriculum to inquiry based learning (Kuhlthau & Maniotes, 2010; Kuhlthau, Maniotes, & Caspari, 2012; Short, 2009), rapid globalisation with more multi-lingual/cultural learners in any learning environment, (Gee & Hayes, 2011; Kutner & Armstrong, 2012; Vega, 2014) learning no longer confined to educational institutions but becoming life-long and personalized (Gee & Hayes, 2011; McLoughlin & Lee, 2009) and learning is moving away from being individual, school bound and information based to being collaborative and interactive with an emphasis on analysis, thinking problem solving and knowledge building (Chau & Cheng, 2011; Ellis & Phillips, 2013; Sinclair, 2007; Vasiliou, Ioannou, & Zaphiris, 2014; Vaughan, Nickle, Silovs, & Zimmer, 2011). One of the merits of design thinking is that while it cannot always anticipate educational trends, it provides librarians and educators with the tools to respond to the challenges inherent in change (IDEO, 2014) – provided of course they are recognised on time. Oblinger (2006) also encourages experimentation, innovation and prototyping in educational spaces.

 

Education space is no longer defined by physical rooms and teaching but by learning and the means of providing access to shared specialist resources both physical and virtual that is flexible, responsive to individual needs, allows self-directed learning and opportunities for interaction and collaboration (La Marca, 2008; Oblinger, 2006; Willis et al., 2013). Instead of grades and diplomas “learning is the unit of success” (IDEO, 2014, p. 97), even when the outcome appears not to be favourable.

Technical and physical environment

The literature appears to agree on the importance of setting pedagogical, philosophical and social goals before planning learning spaces and evaluating these e against the mission and values of the organisation (La Marca, 2008; Lin et al., 2010; Oblinger, 2006; Willis et al., 2013). Discussions range from the social construction of space, and how this can catalyse encounters (Oblinger, 2006) and impact on functional areas, relationships and the service philosophy (Lin et al., 2010), power structures and the messaging of signage (Willis et al., 2013) to more practical issues around the importance of useable, interoperable, flexible and sustainable spaces with a discussion of physical elements, ambiance, lighting, colour, acoustics temperature, display and ‘agile’ furniture (La Marca, 2008; Willis et al., 2013).

 

Sustainability is an important theme due to the longevity of building structures relative to internal components such as hard/software and furnishings with an emphasis on the importance of continual flexibility and renewal to ensure the environment aligns with pedagogy, curricula, assumed practices and social factors (Hauke & Werner, 2012; Lin et al., 2010; Oblinger, 2006; Willis et al., 2013). The employment of design thinking allows for the rapid prototyping, mini-piloting and implementation responding to changes while working within constraints and involving all stakeholders in the space (IDEO, 2014).

Collaboration

A substantial body of research points to the value of teacher and librarian collaboration (Ferer, 2012; Gibbs, 2003; Haycock, 1998, 2007; Jones & Green, 2012; Kachel, 2013; Loertscher, 2014; Lonsdale, 2003; Montiel-Overall, 2006, 2008; Todd, 2008; Williamson, Archibald, & McGregor, 2010), yet little practical implementable advices is given on how libraries can change their physical, virtual or temporal spaces, or even implement design thinking in order to improve the likelihood of collaboration and integration.

 

Literature primarily focuses on the need to merge the academic and social dimensions of learning through flexible and adaptive spaces which cater for collaborative learning amongst users and patrons, recognising the communal character of knowledge and allowing for spontaneous user interactivity (Lin et al., 2010). A convincing argument is made for considering the way in which the new constructivist pedagogies of collaboration, interactive learning and analytic thinking have impacted design practices in order to situate physical and digital information geographically and symbolically into the social context of learning in order to advance and perpetuate knowledge (Lin et al., 2010). To meet these changes, library space design has evolved to favour ample ‘agile’ mobile spaces and flexible movable furnishings to facilitate the creation of a third space that offers resources and services above and beyond what the home, office or classroom is able to provide (La Marca, 2008; Willis et al., 2013) while flexible scheduling allows the “temporal space” within which collaboration has the time to occur (Gavigan, Pribesh, & Dickinson, 2010; Haycock, 1998, 2007).

Collaboration with users allows them to be acknowledged and heard, and the design thinking process offers some practical advices with a methodology which can be extended to enhancing collaboration within programs, services, spaces and systems (IDEO, 2014).

 

Analysis

One of the first hurdles in considering which practices translate best into practice is how to evaluate the success of an educational library space. While schools and teachers can be assessed on common standards, examination results, literacy and numeracy scores, the librarian is tasked with providing evidence for the more nebulous concepts of enhancing student and teacher learning, resourcing the curriculum, providing access to information and a pleasant physical environment (Gillespie & Hughes, 2014). Research attempting to quantify a link between achievement in the form of test scores and school libraries suggests the following characteristics of a successful school library:

  • Integration of information literacy skills in the curriculum
  • Adequate staffing, resourcing and funding
  • Collaborative planning between librarians and teachers
  • Extended library and staff hours
  • In-service training by librarians to teachers
  • Good quality, larger and newer collections
  • More student visits
  • Flexible scheduling (Kachel, 2013; Lonsdale, 2003).

 

However, academic achievement is just one aspect of the outcome indicators identified by the Victoria Department of Education in their evaluation of built learning spaces – others include engagement, interpersonal interactions, physical and psychological wellbeing and behavioural features – (Blackmore, Bateman, Loughlin, O’Mara, & Aranda, 2011). These features presume pre-conditions for learning receptiveness that learning spaces are burdened with assuming, and for which research indicates there is little empirical evidence.

 

Unfortunately this appears to also be the case with respect to the design considerations that most easily translate into practice, the “low hanging fruit” – often extolled by “library design” workshop participants (Hennah, n.d.-b) including an emphasis on ambiance, contemporising spaces, employing visual display and retailing techniques that probably all contribute to increased footfall and perhaps circulation, which however has no rigorous evidence based research that can link it with enhancing learning.

 

La Marca’s writing on Reading Spaces (2008) comes closest to looking at the links between library spaces and achievement attesting that giving an activity a space gives it value. Building on her own (La Marca, 2003) and other’s research (Elliott-Burns, 2003; Lackney, 2001) she identifies ambiance, access and ownership, flexibility, individuality, physical and student concerns as elements contributing to successful library reading space design, which, by implication, create successful readers with the resultant improvement in academic attainment. One could challenge this type of assumed causality as a case of post hoc fallacy.

 

Interestingly, none of the articles referred to above at any time indicate that any of the positive effects attributed to changes in design or placement of space may be a result of the “Hawthorne” or “novelty” effects, in which improvements may be a result of change in the environment and people’s interest in and response to the innovation or the feeling of being accorded attention when the spatial change is researched. In fact, school libraries may be doing themselves a disservice by following literature, research or anecdotes based on public libraries or perceived user needs. While innovation and novelty can increase footfall and circulation figures, (Bentheim, 2013; Hennah, n.d.-a) as Lippincott (2006) points out, after entry the library has to engage the patron in order to enhance learning and scholarship. In fact, research from museums seems to indicate that decreasing novelty could help create a non-distracting familiar environment where learning can take place (Kubota & Olstad, 1991). The need for novelty was experienced recently where, following a successful Valentine’s Day pink and red wrapped “book date” campaign (Eastlib, 2015a), the following month’s black covered “mystery book” campaign attracted little attention (Eastlib, 2015b).

 

Despite the importance of librarian / teacher collaboration on academic attainment, there is little mention of how physical and virtual space can enhance this – most articles focus exclusively on peer-to-peer or teacher-to-student collaboration. In an article on library staff spaces a wide range of issues is covered with only a brief mention of collaborative spaces and learning – that is focused on internal staff interaction (Felix, 2015). One has to look outside the discipline for suggestions as to how spaces can ‘manipulate and order engagement’ (Elliott-Burns, 2003, 2005; Willis et al., 2013) or ‘catalyze social encounters’ (Oblinger, 2006) – practices that have become the norm in business organisations such as Pixar, Apple and Google with their “braintrusts”, single staircases, war rooms and free meals allowing both for deliberate collaboration and ‘serendipitous interaction’ (Avallon & Schneider, 2013; Catmull, 2014; Knapp, 2014). Although Haycock (2007) includes environment, process and structure, communication and resources among the factors that positively influence collaboration, no mention is made of reconstruction of physical or virtual spaces or applying any type of design thinking to facilitate collaboration.

Conclusion

Peer-learning is a valuable but under-utilized method of engaging students, (Hattie & Yates, 2013), and could also assist the professional development of teachers and teacher-librarians. Communal learning spaces in libraries transformed to “learning commons” or “information commons” encourage peer-learning and collaboration between students of different ages, interests and values (Hay, 2006, 2010; Hay & Todd, 2010; Oblinger, 2006), however discussion of inter-collegial teacher / teacher librarian use of spaces is neglected. The ability to book spaces, librarians or other specialists online as well as the affordances of large flexible accommodating spaces impact how teachers learn, balancing equilibrium and disequilibrium, collaborative and individual space and enhancing shared beliefs (Willis et al., 2013).

 

Acoustics is mentioned with relative frequency in the literature, however discussion appears to be limited to the desirability of consideration of controlling noise levels or managing them according to the purpose of the space and acoustic standards (Blackmore et al., 2011; Cha & Kim, 2015; Elliott-Burns, 2005; Lackney, 2001; Lin et al., 2010; McDonald, 2010; Treasure, 2012). In practice, space, design or financial constraints may lead to sub-optimal acoustic environments which are difficult or expensive to remedy once a building is in use, standards change or when spaces are re-purposed (Hauke & Werner, 2012).

 

Much of the design literature and related research is “front-loaded” to the planning and design stages, with little literature and less evidence available on the implementation and transition phase; consolidation phase; and sustainability/re-evaluation phase with more emphasis on anecdote and design standards than educational practice and student outcomes (Blackmore et al., 2011). This may be due to the aforementioned “novelty effect” – once a new or renovated space is taken into operation, attention is on the new “next big thing” and few people are interested in measuring actual experience with design briefs or mock-up promises – this is unfortunate since significant learning is thereby neglected (Latimer, 2011). Spending time on post-occupancy evaluation (POE) literature is probably as worthwhile a pursuit as the emphasis on the design process and planning – including practical real life experiences, involving the voice and feedback of users who may not have been involved in the design process or may have had their comments and suggestions ignored (Baker, 2011; DeClercq & Cranz, 2014; Latimer, 2011).

 

Discussion on building and interior planning and design forms the bulk of discourse, in the chosen readings, but IDEO’s toolkit (2014) will possibly prove to be the most significant in practice. Design thinking is an empathic and intuitive process that assesses and responds to learner’s needs in as much as it is transformative and provides innovative solutions at the intersection of desirability, viability and feasibility (IDEO, 2014).

 

While not specifically geared to school libraries, it methodically takes the reader through the design thinking process of inspiration, ideation and iteration (Brown, 2008; Kimbell, 2011, 2012; Kuratko, Goldsby, & Hornsby, 2012) giving practical advice and concrete examples of implementation and results. Due to its public library focus however, it emphasizes meeting patron needs. It is suggested that school librarians would have to distance themselves somewhat from patron’s perceived and expressed needs and work towards applying these tools to the “wicked” (Buchanan, 1992) and “ill structured” (Simon, 1973) problems such as integration of information literacy into the curriculum, collaborative planning, extended hours, and flexible schedules, that, if solved, can best contribute to enhancing learning in the school community (Kachel, 2013; Lonsdale, 2003).

 

Haycock (2007) reminds us that educator / librarian collaboration is the single behaviour that most affects student achievement and that this behaviour models partnership, cooperative planning and teaching to students and other members of the community while integrating the library program into the curriculum and changing the role of the librarian from resourcer to learning facilitator. Design thinking interventions that have been observed include: giving language-arts teachers first opportunity to sign up for recess and lunch-time library supervision enhancing opportunity for deliberate and chance encounters with the librarian, as do booktalk pre-school “coffee mornings” (Day, 2015a); moving the library into the classroom through class libraries – for all subjects not just for language-arts classrooms (Day, 2013); and incorporating design thinking teaching into the research process (Day, 2015b). In practice, design thinking type interventions are likely to have lasting impact on teaching practice and enhanced student learning and merit more attention and research.

References:

Avallon, J., & Schneider, A. (2013). Building collaboration into workspace design. Facility Management Journal, September / October, 34–38. Retrieved from http://cdn.ifma.org/sfcdn/fmj-supporting-documents/building-collaboration-into-workspace-design-fmj-sep-oct-2013.pdf?sfvrsn=0

Baker, L. (2011). What school buildings can teach us: Post-Occupancy Evaluation surveys in K-12 learning environments (Master’s Thesis). UC Berkeley, California, USA. Retrieved from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/2kw2g6rs

Bentheim, C. A. (2013). Continuing the transition work from traditional library to learning commons. Teacher Librarian, 41(2), 29–36. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=92991111&site=ehost-live

Blackmore, J., Bateman, D., Loughlin, J., O’Mara, J., & Aranda, G. (2011). Research into the connection between built learning spaces and student outcomes (Literature review No. 22). Melbourne, Australia: Victoria Department of Education and Early Childhood Development. Retrieved from http://www.deakin.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/365202/built-learning-spaces.pdf

Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84–92. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=heh&AN=32108052&site=ehost-live

Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5–21. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1511637

Catmull, E. (2014, March 12). Inside the Pixar Braintrust. Retrieved August 8, 2015, from http://www.fastcompany.com/3027135/lessons-learned/inside-the-pixar-braintrust

Cha, S. H., & Kim, T. W. (2015). What matters for students’ use of physical library space? The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(3), 274–279. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2015.03.014

Chau, J., & Cheng, G. (2011). A comparative study of using blogs and wikis for collaborative knowledge construction. International Journal of Instructional Media, 38(1), 71–78. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA273786679&v=2.1&u=csu_au&it=r&p=EAIM&sw=w&asid=697a2b7ca89f45e1ef9b982cfe6ddf75

Day, K. (2013, November). Liberate your book cupboards and create a more true “bookstore” model in your school library? [Web Log]. Retrieved July 26, 2015, from http://www.thelibrarianedge.com/libedge/2013/11/liberate-your-book-cupboards-and-create.html

Day, K. (2015a, September 3). Professional learning for teachers who read books students might read [Library Guide]. Retrieved September 6, 2015, from http://research.uwcsea.edu.sg/eastlibsec/classlibs

Day, K. (2015b, September 5). Design thinking for the research process (e.g., the IBO Extended Essay) [Web Log]. Retrieved September 6, 2015, from http://www.thelibrarianedge.com/libedge/2015/8/30/design-thinking-for-the-research-process

DeClercq, C. P., & Cranz, G. (2014). Moving beyond seating-centered learning environments: Opportunities and challenges identified in a POE of a campus library. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(6), 574–584. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2014.08.005

Eastlib. (2015a, February 10). Pick up your blind date with a book in the… [Tumblr]. Retrieved September 6, 2015, from http://kmlib.tumblr.com/post/110669646836/pick-up-your-blind-date-with-a-book-in-the

Eastlib. (2015b, March 2). Last month’s Blind Date with a Book was so… [Tumblr]. Retrieved September 6, 2015, from http://kmlib.tumblr.com/post/112508706586/last-months-blind-date-with-a-book-was-so

Elliott-Burns, R. (2003). Space, place, design and the school library. Journal of the Australian School Library Association, 17(2).

Elliott-Burns, R. (2005). Designing spaces for learning and living in schools: perspectives of a flaneuse. Presented at the Australian Curriculum Studies Association Biennial Conference, Queensland, Australia: University of the Sunshine Coast. Retrieved from http://eprints.qut.edu.au/4345/1/4345.pdf

Ellis, J., & Phillips, A. (2013). Re-defining the service experience: forging collaboration between librarians and students. Library Management, 34(8/9), 603–618. http://doi.org/10.1108/LM-10-2012-0070

Felix, E. (2015). Rethink the staff workplace – Library by design. Library Journal, Spring, 7–9. Retrieved from http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2015/05/buildings/lbd/rethink-the-staff-workplace-library-by-design-spring-2015/

Ferer, E. (2012). Working together: library and writing center collaboration. Reference Services Review, 40(4), 543–557. http://doi.org/10.1108/00907321211277350

Gavigan, K., Pribesh, S., & Dickinson, G. (2010). Fixed or flexible schedule? Schedule impacts and school library circulation. Library & Information Science Research, 32(2), 131–137. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2009.10.005

Gee, J. P., & Hayes, E. (2011). Language and learning in the digital age (1st ed). New York, NY: Routledge.

Gibbs, R. (2003). Reframing the role of the teacher-librarian : the case for collaboration and flexibility. Scan, 22(3), 4–7. Retrieved from http://search.informit.com.au.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/fullText;dn=129538;res=AEIPT

Gillespie, A., & Hughes, H. (2014). Snapshots of teacher librarians as evidence based practitioners. Access, (September), 26–40. Retrieved from http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ann_Gillespie/publication/265786959_Snapshots_of_teacher_librarians_as_evidence-based_practitioners/links/541b93f80cf2218008c4b8c2.pdf

Hattie, J. (2003). Teachers Make a Difference: What is the research evidence? Camberwell: Australian Council for Educational Research. Retrieved from http://www.decd.sa.gov.au/limestonecoast/files/pages/new%20page/PLC/teachers_make_a_difference.pdf

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London ; New York: Routledge.

Hattie, J., & Yates, G. (2013). Visible Learning and the Science of How We Learn. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=649114&site=ehost-live

Hauke, P., & Werner, K. U. (2012). The second hand library building: Sustainable thinking through recycling old buildings into new libraries. IFLA Journal, 38(1), 60–67. http://doi.org/10.1177/0340035211435394

Haycock, K. (1998). What works: Collaborative cultures, team planning and flexible scheduling. Emergency Librarian, 25(5), 28. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/224890121?accountid=10344

Haycock, K. (2007). Collaboration: Critical success factors for student learning. School Libraries Worldwide, 13(1), 25–35. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lih&AN=25545933&site=ehost-live

Hay, L. (2006). School libraries as flexible and dynamic learning laboratories … that’s what Aussie kids want. Scan, 25(2), 19–27. Retrieved from http://search.informit.com.au.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/fullText;dn=151835;res=AEIPT

Hay, L. (2010). Shift happens. It’s time to rethink, rebuild and rebrand. Access, 5–10.

Hay, L., & Todd, R. (2010). School libraries 21C: A school libraries futures project. New South Wales, Australia: School Libraries and Information Literacy Unit, Curriculum K–12 Directorate, NSW Department of Education and Training. Retrieved from http://www.curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/schoollibraries/

Hennah, K. (n.d.-a). Library experience [Website]. Retrieved August 30, 2015, from http://www.kevinhennah.com.au/libraries/library-experience/

Hennah, K. (n.d.-b). Testimonials – Kevin Hennah [Website]. Retrieved September 5, 2015, from http://www.kevinhennah.com.au/testimonials/

IDEO. (2014). Design thinking for libraries – a toolkit for patron-centered design (p. 121). IDEO, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.designthinkingforlibraries.com

Joint, N. (2011). If Google makes you stupid, what should librarians do about it? Library Review, 60(4), 269–278. http://doi.org/10.1108/00242531111127839

Jones, S. A., & Green, L. S. (2012). Transforming collaboration. Teacher Librarian, 40(2), 26–31. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1271626536?accountid=10344

Kachel, D. (2013). School library research summary (A graduate class project) (p. 16). Mansfield, PA: Mansfield University. Retrieved from http://sl-it.mansfield.edu/upload/MU-LibAdvoBklt2013.pdf

Kimbell, L. (2011). Rethinking design thinking: Part I. Design and Culture, 3(3), 285–306. http://doi.org/10.2752/175470811X13071166525216

Kimbell, L. (2012). Rethinking design thinking: Part II. Design and Culture, 4(2), 129–148. http://doi.org/10.2752/175470812X13281948975413

Knapp, J. (2014, May 1). Google Ventures: your design team needs a war room. Here’s how to set one up. Retrieved August 8, 2015, from http://www.fastcodesign.com/3028471/google-ventures-your-design-team-needs-a-war-room-heres-how-to-set-one-up

Kubota, C. A., & Olstad, R. G. (1991). Effects of novelty-reducing preparation on exploratory behavior and cognitive learning in a science museum setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(3), 225–234.

Kuhlthau, C. C., & Maniotes, L. K. (2010). Building Guided Inquiry Teams for 21st-Century Learners. School Library Monthly, 26(5), 18.

Kuhlthau, C. C., Maniotes, L. K., & Caspari, A. K. (2012). The research behind the design. In Guided inquiry design: a framework for inquiry in your school (pp. 17–36). Santa Barbara, California: Libraries Unlimited.

Kuratko, D. F., Goldsby, M. G., & Hornsby, J. S. (2012). The design-thinking process. In Innovation acceleration: transforming organizational thinking (1st ed, pp. 103–123). Boston: Pearson.

Kurvink, W. (2008). A new paradigm for reference librarians in the on-line world: developing relationships around research and learning with library users. In Libraries / Changing Spaces, Virtual Places. Melbourne, Australia: VALA. Retrieved from http://www.valaconf.org.au/vala2008/papers2008/133_Kurvink_Final.pdf

Kutner, L., & Armstrong, A. (2012). Rethinking Information Literacy in a Globalized World. Communications in Information Literacy, 6(1), 24–33.

Lackney, J. (2001, updated: 2007). Thirty-three educational design principles for schools and community learning centers [Digital Document]. Retrieved from http://schoolstudio.typepad.com/school_design_studio/33-educational-design-pri.html

La Marca, S. (2003). The enabling adult: The role of the teacher-librarian in creating a reading environment (PhD Thesis). University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.

La Marca, S. (2008). Reading spaces (pp. 1–12). Presented at the 38th Annual Conference of the International Association of School Librarianship, Padua, Italy: International Association of School Librarianship. Retrieved from http://www.kzneducation.gov.za/Portals/0/ELITS%20website%20Homepage/IASL%202008/professional%20papers/lamarcaspacespp.pdf

Latimer, K. (2011). Collections to connections: Changing spaces and new challenges in academic library buildings. Library Trends, 60(1), 112–133. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/903206239?accountid=10344

Lin, P., Chen, K., & Chang, S.-S. (2010). Before there was a place called library – Library space as an invisible factor affecting students’ learning. Libri: International Journal of Libraries & Information Services, 60(4), 339–351. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=55774124&site=ehost-live

Lippincott, J. K. (2006). Linking the information commons to learning. In D. Oblinger (Ed.), Learning Spaces (pp. 7.1–7.18). Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE.

Loertscher, D. V. (2014). Collaboration and coteaching: A new measure of impact. Teacher Librarian, 42(2), 8–19,71. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1637635976?accountid=10344

Lonsdale, M. (2003). Impact of school libraries on student achievement: a review of the research. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.

McDonald, A. (2010). Libraries as places: challenges for the future. In S. McKnight (Ed.), Envisioning future academic library services initiatives, ideas and challenges (pp. 31–54). London: Facet. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=558450

McIntosh, E. (2011, November 29). Guy Claxton: What’s the point of school? [Web Log]. Retrieved September 6, 2015, from http://edu.blogs.com/edublogs/2011/11/guy-claxton-whats-the-point-of-school.html

McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. J. W. (2009). Personalised learning spaces and self-regulated learning: Global examples of effective pedagogy. Presented at the ASCILITE, Auckland. Retrieved from http://bilby.unilinc.edu.au:1801/webclient/StreamGate?folder_id=0&dvs=1430638262238~769&usePid1=true&usePid2=true

Montiel-Overall, P. (2006). Teacher and teacher-librarian collaboration: moving toward integration. Teacher Librarian, 34(2), 28–33. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/224885770?accountid=10344

Montiel-Overall, P. (2008). Teacher and librarian collaboration: A qualitative study. Library & Information Science Research, 30(2), 145–155. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2007.06.008

Oblinger, D., G. (2006). Learning how to see. In D. Oblinger G. (Ed.), Learning Spaces (pp. 14.1–14.11). Boulder, CO: Educause. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/learningspaces

Short, K. (2009). Inquiry as a stance on curriculum. In S. Davidson & S. Carber (Eds.), Taking the PYP forward (pp. 11–26). Melton, Woodbridge U.K.: John Catt Educational Ltd.

Simon, H., A. (1973). The structure of ill structured problems. Artificial Intelligence, 4, 181–201.

Sinclair, B. (2007). Commons 2.0: Library spaces designed for collaborative learning. Educause Quarterly, 4, 4–6. Retrieved from http://er.educause.edu/~/media/files/article-downloads/eqm0740.pdf

Todd, R. J. (2008). The dynamics of classroom teacher and teacher librarian instructional collaborations. Scan, 27(2), 19–28.

Treasure, J. (2012, June). Why architects need to use their ears [Video file]. Retrieved August 8, 2015, from http://www.ted.com/talks/julian_treasure_why_architects_need_to_use_their_ears/transcript?language=en#t-30790

Vasiliou, C., Ioannou, A., & Zaphiris, P. (2014). Understanding collaborative learning activities in an information ecology: A distributed cognition account. Computers in Human Behavior, 41(0), 544–553. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.057

Vaughan, N., Nickle, T., Silovs, J., & Zimmer, J. (2011). Moving to their own beat: Exploring how students use Web 2.0 technologies to support group work outside of class time. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 10(3), 113–127. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=69835261&site=ehost-live

Vega, V. (2014, April 21). Research supports global curriculum. Retrieved April 22, 2014, from http://www.edutopia.org/stw-global-competence-research?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=post&utm_content=stw&utm_campaign=JSISresearch-repost#graph2

Williamson, K., Archibald, A., & McGregor, J. (2010). Shared vision: A key to successful collaboration? School Libraries Worldwide, 16(2), 16–30. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lih&AN=55415805&site=ehost-live

Willis, J., Bland, D., Hughes, H., & Elliott-Burns, R. (2013). Reimagining school libraries: emerging teacher pedagogic practices. Presented at the International Conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Adelaide, South Australia. Retrieved from http://eprints.qut.edu.au/66925/7/66925.pdf