Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Howse - Selection Policy Analysis
Howse - Selection Policy Analysis
December 7, 2016
SELECTION POLICY ANALYSIS 2
Anne Arundel Public School System (AACPSS) has a thorough, 38 page selection policy,
Procedures for the evaluation and selection of instructional materials. This policy has high
standards and explicit protocol for approving materials. The Department of Curriculum and
Overall Observations
Throughout my analysis, I observed a focus on the protocol and logistics for evaluating,
selecting, and reevaluating materials. There was also a focus on local power; the school-level
committees and curriculum leaders led much of the material evaluations. Access and assistive
technologies were also promoted throughout the policy, however, there was a lack of emphasis
on physical text assistance, physical library access, and overall Universal Design for Learning
(UDL). Finally, the policy does not pay close enough attention to analysis of learners or variety
of students in the school system and globally. Despite these downfalls, the policy has a thorough
Collaborative Leadership
coordinators, committees, and various departments. The policy begins with the importance of
shared responsibility, which is highlighted further in the Legal Responsibility section of this
analysis. The majority of collaborative leadership through this policy occurs in county-level and
At the county level, program coordinators and instructional directors select at least three
library media specialists, consultants, citizens, parents (PTA, CAC) and students. The school-
SELECTION POLICY ANALYSIS 3
level’s committees are designated into committees for materials of instruction (not library books)
and committees for library books. The selection chairperson in both situations will be the
principal or designee. For approving instructional materials, committees will consist of the same
set of individuals as the county level. For library book approval, the school committee will be
The school-level committee also designates which departments will be included. At the
conclusion of a school committee meeting for material approval, they must forward their
Materials of Instruction form to the Review and Evaluation Office for final clearance and
processing. The school committees meeting for Inquiry and/or Reconsideration Procedure forms
will notify the Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction and forward information
and final decision to the program coordinator. Although the school meets on an as-needed basis,
the county committees must meet at regular intervals. Thus, collaborative leadership is required
frequently for the county-level, but only occurs as needed for the school levels. It is the school’s
responsibility to ensure that there is frequent school-level collaboration between library media
Legal Responsibility
AACPSS states that the Board of Education of Anne Arundel County and the
Superintendent of Schools are responsible for the purchase and use of materials and human
recourses and “must respond appropriately to the responsibilities vested in them by law”
(Department of Curriculum & Instruction, 1). The Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum and
Instruction or designee is responsible for coordinating the selection process. This encompasses
coordinating orientation workshops to acquaint staff with the evaluation process, ensuring that
(Department of Curriculum & Instruction, 2). Finally, the policy further designates responsibility
to the staff, claiming that “all staff must work together to ensure that the materials used in the
instructional program comply with the procedures outline in this document” and following
copyright law and fair use guidelines (Department of Curriculum & Instruction, 2).
Analysis of Learners
The analysis of individual learners is most prevalent in the selection criteria, but is
lacking in the definitions. The American Library Association’s 1998 program, The Information
Power: Building Partnerships for Learning, details literacy standards of learners. ALA organizes
these standards into three categories: Information Literacy, Independent Learning, and Social
AACPSS’s selection policies correspond with these standards in their criteria for
instructional materials. The first item states that the materials should “address the needs of
students as life-long learners,” which is parallel to the ALA’s Information Literacy standards of
Lanning, 10). The criteria also states the importance of assistive technologies, readability,
appropriate aids, and organization, which corresponds to the Independent Learning standards of
allowing students to independently relate to, seek, and generate information and knowledge
(Lanning, 11). The focus on life-long learners also highlights the importance of the social
responsibility standards. ALA states that students must recognize the power of information,
contribute positively through ethical use of information and technology, and participate in
pursuing and generating information within society (Lanning, 11). Therefore, Anne Arundel’s
criteria does reflect an analysis of learners through a requirement of materials which teach
The importance of these learners is intertwined in criteria, but is not obvious in the
definitions of materials. The Department of Curriculum and Instruction define basic texts as
materials “used to develop skills and content specified in curriculum documents related to a
program” (3). These definitions describe the materials’ role in education, but do not focus on
learners. In the same way, the policy states library media books are “published for the individual
reader.” (Department of Curriculum & Instruction, 12). Although this technically includes
individual learners, it does not highlight books’ influence on learners and their education.
Evaluative Tools
Kay Bishop writes in The collection program in schools: Concepts and practices that
evaluation of library collections “should be based upon how well the collection serves the needs
of its users” and the goals/objectives of the library program (139). Anne Arundel’s policy
contains a variety of evaluative tools through the selection process and material criteria.
supplemental, and library media materials. Much of the criteria falls into the categories of
The school-level selection committee must complete the Materials of Instruction (MOI)
Evaluation Form. The form requires the committee to choose “Highly Recommended,”
accordance with the recommended grade (Department of Curriculum & Instruction, 18). The
form also contains bibliographic information about the material, including media format. If the
committee is reviewing library books, the committee must enter the source reviews; if they are
reviewing software, they must log software test results. The majority of the MOI requires the
committee to state whether the material “meets criteria,” “does not meet criteria,” “requires
SELECTION POLICY ANALYSIS 6
The committee thus compares the source to each criteria item before making a decision. Finally,
there is a “Multicultural Diversity” checklist which requires analysis of race, ethnicity, regions,
religions, genders, socioeconomic status, age, and disabilities (Department of Curriculum &
Instruction, 19).
The combination of the criteria and process creates a thorough evaluation procedure at
therefore adding another layer of diversity in the process. The MOI process also requires that
approved resources fulfill COMAR Accessibility Standards, Children’s Internet Protection Act,
and the Children’s Online Privacy and Protection Act, which will be further discussed in the
following sections.
Access to information includes both physical and intellectual. Bishop states that physical
access refers to “the unimpeded location and retrieval of information” whereas intellectual access
“addresses students’ rights to hear, read, and view information; to receive ideas; to express ideas;
and to develop skills to receive, examine, analyze, synthesize, evaluate, and use information”
(157). Anne Arundel’s policies for access is influenced by the U.S. government and state of
United States acts and codes ensure that all government agencies are providing equal
opportunity. The United States Rehabilitation Act of 1973 contains Sections 504 and 508, which
protect individuals with disabilities. Section 504 requires agencies to provide equal opportunity
to participate in programs and benefit from services through appropriate aids (U.S. Department
SELECTION POLICY ANALYSIS 7
of Health & Human Services, 2016). Section 508 requires “Federal agencies to make their
electronic and information technology (EIT) accessible to people with disabilities” (GSA
Government-wide Section 508 Accessibility, 2016b). Therefore, AACPSS must provide both
physical and intellectual access. This is also outlined in The Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) of 1990, which “recognizes and protects the civil rights of people with disabilities” and
requires access state and local government services through technologies such as
For Maryland specifically, the COMAR 05.02.02 Maryland Accessibility Code: Building
and Material Codes requires buildings “to establish minimum requirements that will provide for
the accessibility and usability of buildings and facilities by individuals with disabilities”
(COMAR 05.02.02 Maryland Accessibility Code 1975). Therefore, not only must the information
be accessible, but the materials within the library must be available to the students.
In the AACPSS policy, the MOI and Internet/WWW Materials Evaluation forms require
the committee to check whether there is a multicultural diversity factor of disability in the text,
which focuses on representation of disabled students. If it is present, the students would have
intellectual access to information pertinent to their personal life. The Software Applications and
about the accessibility features; it states that the “applications shall not disrupt or disable
activated features of other products that are identified as accessibility features” (Department of
Curriculum & Instruction, 21). Therefore, the selection committee must ensure that accessibility
While the policy does focus on representation and access to technology, it lacks
information about physical access to texts. The MOI forms or criteria have no details of access
for text materials, such as braille or large print. Adding a section to the MOI forms which asks
the committee about other editions for increased accessibility would improve students’ access to
physical texts.
Assistive Technologies
The Department of Curriculum and Instruction must maintain these requirements of the
previous section, which is achieved with assistive technology required in the Assistive
Technology Act of 1998. This act supports grants to states which “address the assistive
technology needs of individuals with disabilities purposes” (GSA Government-wide Section 508
Accessibility, 2016). GSA also states that “Disability is a natural part of the human experience
and in no way diminishes the right of individuals to … benefit from an education,” including full
As previously stated, Anne Arundel’s selection policy and criteria focuses on assistive
technologies more than it focused on access to print materials. The MOI and Internet/WWW
Materials Evaluation forms require the committees to consider “equivalent access for users of
Curriculum & Instruction, 19). The Software Applications and Operating Systems form also
requires adaptable software features, such as color and contrast settings, requirements about
flashing/blinking objects or texts, and software compatible with assistive technology. The Web-
Accessibility Checklist) form has the most criteria for assistive technologies; It requires that
pages utilize scripts for displaying content, or that they create interface elements, so that the
SELECTION POLICY ANALYSIS 9
assistive technologies can read the text aloud (Department of Curriculum & Instruction, 25). The
document then continues to detail the appropriate scripting languages and difficulties with
“rollover” texts. The form finally requires the committee to consider the influence of time in
these applications, such as increasing wait for timed responses for individuals who require
additional time. Anne Arundel’s commitment to assistive technologies is evident in every feature
of material evaluation.
Similarly to physical access to materials, there are many policies which require public
school systems to grant intellectual access and intellectual freedom to students. AACPSS
balances intellectual freedom and internet safety through their technology standards. The policy,
however, lacks explicit information about web filtering and intellectual freedom.
The Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) was enacted in 2000 and states that
schools and libraries will not receive discounts for services and products unless they certify they
have technology protection measures in place. The schools and libraries must implement policies
addressing “access by minors to inappropriate matter on the Internet,” the safety and security of
(Children’s Internet Protection Act, 2001). The Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule
(COPPA) of 1998 is more focused on the websites and online services, in that it requires
information (Federal Trade Commission, 2016). Therefore, school systems such as AACPSS
must use some sort of web filtering and protect a child’s personal information.
These rules are important for the protection of children and continued funding of the
school system, but AAPCSS also wants to promote intellectual freedom. Paul Sturges argues in
SELECTION POLICY ANALYSIS 10
“Intellectual freedom, libraries, and democracy” that intellectual freedom “includes freedom of
opinion; freedom of expression; and freedom of access to information” (168). AACPSS’s six
technology standards promote intellectual freedom through technology systems for learning and
collaboration, communication and expression, problem solving, and decision making. The
standards also promote using and managing information and digital citizenship. Therefore,
freedom and safety for students is not explicit in the selection policy. Throughout this policy,
there is no evidence of web filtering itself. AACPSS has various websites describing the
importance of internet safety, including cyberbullying policies and resources for internet safety,
but does not list such details in the selection policy. And, while web filtering is not evident in the
overall policy, their online procedures for Electronic Resource Evaluation describes that, once
the MOI process is complete, materials “must be evaluated for compliance with the Children’s
Internet Protection Act and the Children’s Online Privacy and Protection Act” (Anne Arundel
County Public Schools, 2016). Thus, AACPSS is obviously following the requirements for the
school funding and child protection, but does not explicitly state so in the selection policy.
Deselection
Throughout this policy, Anne Arundel’s policy only describes the inquiry/reconsideration
process, but the Library Media Service’s “Collection Development Program” also has guidelines
The Inquiry and/or Reconsideration Procedure begins with a resident, parent, student, or
staff member discussing their inquiry or reconsideration with the principal. If they cannot find a
SELECTION POLICY ANALYSIS 11
resolution, the individual will complete the “Request for Reconsideration of Instructional
Materials/Library Media” form which asks for the material’s bibliographic information, some
information for contacting the individual, questions about the use of the material, and why the
individual finds it objectionable. The school-level Materials Evaluation and Selection Committee
makes a decision and if the individual may appeal the case to the county-level committees if they
remain unsatisfied. After the county-level committee comes the Superintendent of Schools and
finally the Board of Education. If at any point the committees deem the material unfit for the
schools, then the resources will be removed. This is the only description of deselection or
AACPSS’s Library Media Services also has a Collection Development Program which
describes the various stages and reasons for weeding. It states that library media specialists are
solely responsible for weeding, which should occur continually through a weeding schedule. The
Library Media Services also recommends weeding consideration if the material falls under one
of the following categories: poor condition, minimal circulation, outdated content or accuracy,
poor quality, old editions, unattractive, or nonfiction without a table of context/index (Library
Media Services, 2016). This procedure also explains disposal of weeded materials. Therefore,
while the AACPSS policy has the logistics of reconsideration of materials, this form outlines the
daily procedures for weeding. Although weeding is not necessarily a part of the initial selection
policy, a statement explaining weeding and importance of selecting quality replacements would
David E. Robinson and David R. Wizer state that Universal Design for Learning (UDL)
is “a set of principles for curriculum development that give all individuals equal opportunities to
SELECTION POLICY ANALYSIS 12
learn” (Robinson, 17). UDL is important in the selection policy because quality and diverse
materials allow for these equal opportunities. Flagg-Williams claims that educators must be
flexible and “include as many different types of students as possible in the learning process”
(Flagg-Williams, 165). Therefore, the selection committees and library media specialists must
approve of adaptable material which will serve a variety of students. The AACPSS selection
The material selection criteria highlights the importance of access, as seen in the previous
sections. However, just as the policy lacks an analysis of learners, it does not focus on the needs
of the various types of learners. The criteria includes engaging student learning, but this does not
describe the importance of variety in materials for individuals. The selection policy should
include a greater analysis of the learner and require variety in resources, which would guarantee
students more equal opportunities and reflect the diversity of learners within the school system.
Although UDL and student analysis is not prevalent throughout this document,
representation of diversity is evident in the criteria recommended book lists. In the criteria, the
committee must check whether the material “reflects population diversity wherever applicable”
and must check that multicultural diversity factors are represented (Department of Curriculum &
Instruction, 19). Therefore, on every text and web page, the committee will analyze the
representation of the student population. At the beginning of the recommended book list,
AACPSS states that the sources “provide a beginning point in your search for appropriate
promoting the diversity in source materials and encouraging library media specialists to seek out
This is a positive depiction of diversity in the school system, but exempts some of the
positive outcomes that result in accessing multicultural texts. The criteria states the materials
should reflect “population diversity wherever applicable,” which implies that these sources
importance of diversity in library programs and material collections for children” that children
need to see their own culture represented in conjunction with other cultures. Since libraries are a
place to connect to the larger world, students must encounter groups not necessarily represented
in their individual schools so they can “make cross-cultural connections and develop the skills
necessary to function in a culturally pluralistic society” (Naidoo, 5). Therefore, although the
committees are analyzing the diversity of each material, it should be revised so that they are
Conclusion
This selection policy clearly states the protocol for material evaluation, approval, and
reevaluation. AACPSS has created a policy which outlines the details of these materials, but the
policy could benefit for a more student-focused approach. This policy is applicable to the library
media program through its strengths and weaknesses. Analyzing a fictional, flawless policy is
would not present the complexities in creating a policy for all educators, staff, and students.
Analyzing a policy which a school system is continually working on improving shows the
importance of learning about students, materials, and the educational system. Towson’s library
media program specifically teaches the importance of access, assistive technology, UDL, and
student analysis throughout policies and material selection. Thus, analyzing this policy was an
effective tool in understanding the need for these concepts in a larger selection policy.
SELECTION POLICY ANALYSIS 14
References
Anne Arundel County Public Schools (2016). Electronic resource evaluation: Procedures.
Retrieved from
https://sites.google.com/a/aacps.org/electronicresourcesevaluation/procedures
American Library Association (1998). Information power: Building partnerships for learning.
Retrieved from
http://www.ala.org/PrinterTemplate.cfm?Section=informationpower&Template=/Content
Management/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=19935
Bishop, K. (2013). The collection program in schools (5th ed.). Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries
Unlimited
http://transition.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/cipa.pdf
http://dhcd.maryland.gov/Codes/Documents/AccessibilityCode/Maryland%20Accessibili
ty%20Code%20-with%202010%20ADA%20Standards%2011-18-2011.pdf
Department of Curriculum & Instruction (2011). Procedures for the evaluation and selection of
ProceduresDocumentConvertedJuly2011.pdf
Federal Trade Commission (2016). Children’s online privacy protection rule (“COPPA”).
proceedings/childrens-online-privacy-protection-rule
SELECTION POLICY ANALYSIS 15
Flagg-Williams, Joan B., & Bokhorst-Heng, Wendy D. (2016). Classroom audio distribution in
http://www.ahead.org/publications/jped.htm
GSA Government-wide Section 508 Accessibility (2016). Assistive technologies act of 1998.
GSA Government-wide Section 508 Accessibility (2016b). Section 508 law and related laws and
Lanning, Scott & Bryner, John. Essential reference services for today’s school media specialists
http://www.aacps.org/admin/articlefiles/1167-
Collection%20Development%20Program%20Preamble%202012-13.pdf
Naidoo, Jamie Campbell (2014). The importance of diversity in library programs and material
collections for children. Association for Library Service to Children. Retrieved from
http://www.ala.org/
Robinson, David E., & Wizer, David R. (2016). Universal design for learning and the quality
matters guidelines for the design and implementation of online learning events.
from http://www.sicet.org/
Sturges, Paul (2016). Intellectual freedom, libraries and democracy. Libri: International Journal
http://www.degruyter.de/journals/libri/detailEn.cfm
SELECTION POLICY ANALYSIS 16
United States Access Board (2016). Americans with disabilities act (ADA) of 1990. Retrieved
from https://www.access-board.gov/the-board/laws/americans-with-disabilities-act-intro
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (2016). What is section 504 and how does it
section-504/
SELECTION POLICY ANALYSIS 17
Appendix I
Collection Development Policy Criteria Table
Criteria Included in Policy Not Included in Policy Suggestions
(What are they missing
that is in some district,
state, national policy?)
Collaborative
leadership occurs in the
county- and school-
level committees for
material approval. Local school systems
These committees must ensure
Collaborative include staff, teachers, collaboration of their
Leadership specialists, citizens, committee between
parents, and students. evaluations and
The policy also reevaluations.
includes collaboration
between various
branches and
departments.
The Board of Education
for AACPSS and the
Superintendent for
Curriculum are
responsible for the
overall purchase and
Legal
use of materials and
Responsibility
resources.
The policy also outlines
the responsibility of all
educators to review
technology and monitor
use.
The analysis of learners
The policy should be
occurs in the criteria of
more student-focused.
Analysis of picking instructional
The definitions of
Learners materials, but is not
materials should focus
evident throughout the
more on learners.
policy.
This policy has a
wealth of evaluative
tools for materials. It
Evaluative
outlines the selection
Tools
process and criteria for
the county and school
level.
SELECTION POLICY ANALYSIS 18