Judy Bivens, Ed D

1
Judy Bivens, Ed D

• Trevecca Nazarene University

2

• The Relationship Between Selected Tennessee
  Elementary and Middle School Library Media
  Centers and TCAP Reading Test Scores

3
Statement of Problem

• Historically libraries have not been recognized
  as an integral component to teaching, learning,
  and student achievement
• Consequently, funding for libraries has
  vacillated depending on political connections and
  educational theories of instruction.
• There has not been adequate empirical data to
  defend library advocacy.

4
Statement of the Problem

• Tennessee State Department of Education has paid
  little attention to the value and needs of school
  librariesno state coordinator
• Librarians are not highly qualified
• There continues to be a decrease
  in funding from both state and
  local education agencies for
  school library materials.

5
Purpose of the Study

• Examine the relationship between elementary and
  middle school library programs and student
  reading achievement scores on TCAP in grades 3-8.
• Predictor variables include
• Library collection size
• Library visits and book checkouts
• Services delivered by librarians based on best
  practices according to ALA standards

6
Significance of the Study

• Adds significant data toward a Tennessee state
  study regarding the impact of school libraries on
  student achievementadvocating for more funding
• Helps identify characteristics of highly
  qualified library media specialist based on ALA
  standards used for best practices
• Can be used as pertinent data toward advocating
  for a state library coordinator

7
Review of Literature

• Historically libraries have been viewed as
  accessories rather than necessities.
• Michie and Holton (2005). Some school
  administrators and librarians did not see
  libraries as having a primary instructional role,
  but rather as having a supportive role for
  principals and teachers

8
History of School Libraries

• 1950s--Only 36 of United States schools had
  designated library media centers.
• (ESEA) in 1965 demonstrated that the federal
  government was publicly recognizing the critical
  need for school libraries linking them to student
  achievement.

9
History of School Libraries

• 1974, block grants- many schools when given the
  option of where to spend money, chose to fund
  mathematics and science programs, allocating less
  to school libraries.
• 1980s time of little support for librariesfocus
  on standards and scientific based
  assessmentNation at Risk
• White House Conferences-1991 and 2002

10
Current Concerns

• 2003California budget cuts lead to dismissal of
  librarians
• 2006--Federal Way (Seattle) district principals
  recommended cutting 27 teacher librarian
  positions because libraries were an area that
  would least affect student achievement
• 2007 California at least half of schools do not
  have librarians

11
Background of Lance Scientific Research Based
Studies

• A half century of previous school library
  researchnot related to student achievement
• The political climate of education libraries in
  the 80sNation at Risk
• 1993-The first Colorado studyfirst to use
  student achievement data
• The political climate of education libraries in
  the 90s Goals 2000 and ESEA (prof dev)
• The second Colorado study successor studies by
  Lance, Rodney Hamilton-Pennell

12
National Library Impact Studies

• Since 2000, 19 states
• AK    CO FL     IA     IN     IL    
• MA     MI     MN     MO     NC     NM     NY    
  OH     ON     OR     PA     TX     WI
• Over 8,700 schools
• Elementary, middle and high
• school libraries serving an
• estimated 2.6 million students
• (Lance, 2005)

13
Library Predictors of Academic Achievement
(Lance, 2005)

• Staff Activities
• Learning Teaching
• Information Access Delivery
• School library hours of operation
• School library usage
• Program Administration

14
Methodology

• Three research questions guided the study
• 3 null hypotheses tested
• 1 rejected
• 2 retained
• Research Method
• Correlational study

15
Methodology

• Population include public elementary and middle
  school libraries in Middle Tennessee
• Sample included those school library information
  specialists who are members of TASL listserv, TNU
  alumni, 13 counties directly contacted

16
Methodology

• Sample Respondents
• 252 from across TN (189 useable)
• 162 from Middle TN Knox and Hamilton
• 25 West TN
• 36 East TN
• 47 counties represented
• 20 Middle TN
• 12 West TN
• 15 East TN

17
Methodology

• Survey, adapted from Lance (2005) and Crafford
  (2006) focused on gathering data from elementary
  and middle school library information specialists
  regarding the 3 predictor variables of
• Library collection size
• Library visits and book checkouts
• Services provided by the library
  information specialists based on
  best practices identified by ALA

18
Methodology

• Research focused on collecting criterion variable
  data regarding TCAP Reading test scores from the
  State Report Card web site
• Controlled variables were collected from the same
  State Report Card web site
• Enrollment
• Attendance
• Non-minority
• Economically disadvantaged

19
(No Transcript)
20
Data Analysis

• Data for the predictor variables a) library
  collection size, b) library visits and book
  checkouts, and c) the services delivered by
  librarians were analyzed separately in a
  multiple regression analysis to determine their
  relationship with the criterion variable of
  reading test scores, as well as the controlled
  variables of school attendance rates, ethnicity
  percentages, percentages of economically
  disadvantaged, and total school enrollment.
• Descriptive statistics were generated to identify
  the profiles of respondents.

21
Findings Library Staff by Credentials

• Table 1
• School Library Staff by Credentials
• Classification n
• M.S. Library and Teacher Cert 167
• M.S. Teacher Certification 5
• M.S. Neither Certification 4
• B.S. Library and Teacher Cert 27
• B.S. Teacher Certification 8
• B.S. Neither Certification 20
• Less than B.S.
  74
• TOTAL 267

22
Findings School Level Divisions

• Table 1 School Level Divisions
• Variable n Percent
• 1 (3, 5) 66 34.9
• 2 (3) 42 22.2
• 3 (3, 5, 8) 24 12.7
• 4 (5, 8) 27 14.3
• 5 (8) 25 13.2
• 6 (5) 1 .5
• Missing 4 2.1
• Total 189 100.0

23
Findings Criterion Variable

• Table 5 School Level Divisions TCAP Reading
  Scores
• Variable n Mean
• 1 (3, 5) 66 58.55
• 2 (3) 42 52.36
• 3 (3, 5, 8) 24 57.33
• 4 (5, 8) 27 53.04
• 5 (8) 25 59.28
• 6 (5) 1 53.00
• Total 185 56.25
• State average 56

24
Findings Predictor Variables

• Table 7 Mean and Standard Deviation for Survey
  of Middle Tennessee Public Elementary and Middle
  School Libraries Variables
• Variables Mean Stand Deviation
• TOTAL (collection) 10,971.602 4034.34267
• RATEVISIT 1.1574 1.05968
• RATECIRC 1.7332 1.15789
• Significant relationship between
  RATEVIST and RATECIRC p.026

25
Findings Predictor Variables

• Table 8 Mean and Standard Deviations for Library
  Media Specialists Variable
• Variables Mean Standard
  Deviation
• LEARNTEACH 8.8975 8.96257
• INFOACCESS 31.4853 17.07069
• PROGRAMADMIN 18.5750 16.11317
• Time spent weekly in each activity

26
Research Questions

• 1. Does collection size (number of books,
  magazines, and audio-visual items in a school
  library media center affect the results of
  student performance as measured by Reading
  scores on the TCAP in
  schools located throughout
  Middle Tennessee?  

27
Findings Collection Size

• Table 9 Multiple Regression Analysis with
  Hierarchical Stepwise Procedure for Library
  Collection Size Variable with Three Controlled
  Variables
• Variable entered
• Step R R2 Increment Sig. T
• In R2
• ECON DIS .875 .766 .766 .000
• NONMIN .876 .768 .002 .308
• ATTEND .894 .799 .031 .000
• ENROLL .894 .799 .000 .638
• TOTAL (collect) .899 .808 .009 .039

28
Findings Collection Size

• 81 of the variance in the criterion variable,
  the Reading composite score can be attributed to
  the four controlled variables and the one
  predictor variablelibrary collections size (R2
  .808)
• Collection size accounts for
  3.9 of the Reading test score
  on TCAP for those schools
  responding. p.039 p lt.05

29
Research Questions

• 2. Does the number of student visits to the
  library media center and the number of books
  checked out by students influence the reading
  achievement as measured by Reading scores on the
  TCAP of students in schools located throughout
  Middle Tennessee?

30
Findings Library Visits

• Table 11 Multiple Regression Analysis with
  Hierarchical Stepwise Procedure for Frequency of
  Student Library Visits Variable with Three
  Controlled VariablesVariable entered
• Step R R2 Increment Sig. T
• ECON DIS .875 .766 .766 .000
•  
• NONMIN .876 .768 .002 .301
•  
• ATTEND .894 .799 .031 .000
•  
• RATEVISIT .895 .801 .007 .404
•  

31
Findings Library Visits

• Analysis indicates that the controlled variables
  account for 80 of the effect on TCAP Reading
  scores R2 .801
• There is no significant data to correlate
  RATEVISIT with Reading scores.

32
Research Questions

• 3. Do the services performed by library media
  specialists impact student
• achievement as measured by Reading scores on
  the TCAP of students in schools located
  throughout Middle Tennessee?
•  

33
Findings Library Services

• Analysis for the library services was based on 17
  items in the survey related to ALA best practices
• Analysis was run by all 3 methods
• Each of the 17 items
• 3 ALA categories LEARNTEACH, INFOACCESS,
  PROGADMIN
• TOTALHOURS sum of all hours spent

34
Findings Library Services

• Table 12 Multiple Regression Analysis with
  Hierarchical Stepwise Procedure for Services
  Provided by Library Media Specialists Variable
  with Three Controlled VariablesVariable entered
• Step R R2 Increment Sig. T
• In R2 
• ECON DIS .875 .766 .766 .000
•  
• NONMIN .876 .768 .002 .232
•  
• ATTEND .894 .799 .031 .000
•  
• ENROLL .894 .799 .000 .580
•  
• TOTALHOURS .894 .799 .000 .907

35
Findings Library Services

• Using TOTALHOURS as the variable, 80 of the
  effect on Reading scores was based on the 4
  control factors R2 .799.
• None of the 3 methods of running the multiple
  regression found significance.
• LEARNTEACH p.498
• INFOACCESS p.722
• PROGADMIN p.735

36
Conclusions

• The size of the school library media center
  collection of books and videos has an impact on
  student achievement in reading in grades 3-8.
• Based on the responses to the survey, library
  visits and book checkouts and the services
  provided by the library information specialist
  were not found to have a significant impact on
  student achievement in grades 3-8.

37
Conclusions

• The findings of this study confirm Crafford
  (2006) West TN findings where p.015 where plt.05
  and the current study p.39 where plt.05
• The findings corroborate those of Lance (1993,
  2005) and the other state studies influenced by
  his research methods.

38
Conclusions

• These findings affirm the Illinois Study by
  Lance, Rodney, and Hamilton-Pennell (2005) which
  asserts that test scores are higher where larger
  collections are available
• Lance (2002) White House Conference with larger
  collections of print and electronic
  resourcesstudents tend to earn higher scores on
  state reading tests

39
Implications for Practice

• School library media specialists and library
  coordinators must advocate to local and state
  education agencies for funding to support and
  extend resources to support literacy as
  referenced in No Child Left Behind
• Access to economically disadvantaged students is
  crucial.

40
Recommendations for Future Research

• Limitations of the study provide impetus for
  further research
• Information regarding private schools vs public
  schools in resources and services
• Information regarding secondary schools

41
Recommendations for Future Research

• Research including an emphasis for a total state
  study
• 3 regions of the state are diverse
  socio-economically
• Funding differences among the regions
• Diverse student support for
  libraries by region

42
Recommendations for Future Research

• Timing of survey
• Orientation of survey questionsmultiple choice
  vs fill in the blank
• Consideration of qualitative components
• Principal
• Teacher
• Student

43
Recommendations for Future Research

• Gathering data more directed toward NCLB
• Teaching and Learningcollaboration
• Flexible vs fixed scheduling
• Extra curricular services
• Reading and library media specialists

44
Final Conclusions

• School librarians must advocate for their role in
  the instructional process. Many do not recognize
  the importance of collecting, analyzing, and
  reporting data relevant to student achievement.
• Failure to acknowledge the role of scientific
  research based, data driven instruction may
  result in the continued demise of library
  information specialists

45
Questions?

• Contact me
• Dr. Judy Bivens
• MLIS, IT, and IE Coordinator
• Trevecca Nazarene University
• jbivens_at_trevecca.edu