The first in a series by Cliff Lewis
If Library/Media Department Facilitator David Calender has his way, control of library budgets in the School District of Lancaster will shift from the hands of individual principals to a centralized, district-level process.
As it currently stands, each library in the district is funded as a line item in its individual school budget; the allocation is subject to the principal’s judgment. If one principal wants to budget $24 per student for library books, they can do it; if another principal wants to budget $0, that’s their call as well.
In her book, “Brain Friendly School Libraries,” Judith Anne Sykes explains how vital these libraries are and how easily they come to be neglected:
“If the teaching staff is operating collaboratively, the library is at the center of inquiry, like the ‘brain,’ and the school library is an exciting place of authentic research, supporting learning and teaching for students and staff,…it will not be seen as a ‘frill’ or that ‘place down the hall to get a book for something.’ When dollars are tight or programs are not seen as central, they will be eliminated. But imagine a human without the brain!”
Calender noted that whereas the rudimentary “science” of reading is often established in the classroom, the school library serves to foster the “art” of reading—“that is where we get kids to want to read,” Calender explained. Though this effort may be as simple as having the right book for the right student, it is crucial to turning these students into life-long readers: “The only thing that all the research agrees on is that reading improves reading,” Calender asserted, “If there was a magic program, we’d all be using it.”
For a school librarian, reading is an end in itself: They have to carry books that kids will want to read. Calender noted that students will often rise to a more challenging reading level when presented with a piece of material that catches their interest—this material could be a graphic novel, the latest teen fiction, or a classic work of literature.
“Graphic novels are great. My librarians can’t keep them on the shelves,” Calender said, noting that students with as low as a first reading level have been able to enjoy and actively discuss graphic novels from the Bone series, which is ranked higher than a sixth grade reading level.
Many District libraries, however, are not budgeted with enough annual funding to frequently stock their shelves with such materials, Calender said. The library at Buchanan Elementary, for example, was only budgeted $1.90 per student for books in 2009; Carter and MacRae, with an understandably strapped budget, officially allocated $0. Burrowes Elementary, on the other hand, budgeted $24.80 in 2009, more than doubling the High School’s allocation.
(The library at Carter and MacRae did, however, receive funding from a private donor in 2009.)
From Calender’s perspective, these variances amount to inexcusable inequities. Some principals, Calender contended, are far too prone to compromise on library funding when faced with all of the competing budgetary demands within their schools.
A centrally allocated library budget, Calender said, would “level the playing field” for district librarians, securing a definite yearly budget from which to plan and allowing all supplemental donations and grant funding to remain just that—supplemental. Calender also noted that shifting budget control to the hands of library specialists would help “get the most bang for our buck,” since these professionals, himself included, work hard to keep up with book reviews, school curricula, and industry standards.
Some district principals, however, disagree with Calender’s perception of the matter. For these administrators, the head of a school is most in touch the unique needs of that particular student body. Principals of this mind include Ollie Jones of Carter and MacRae as well as Gary Hess of Burrowes Elementary. Their perspective will be more closely discussed in the next installment of this series.
