Conducting Action Research To Evaluate Your School Library

Conducting Action Research to
Evaluate Your School Library

This page intentionally left blank
Conducting Action Research to
Evaluate Your School Library
Judith Anne Sykes
LIBRARIES UNLIMITED
AN IMPRINT OF ABC-CLIO, LLC
Santa Barbara, California • Denver, Colorado • Oxford, England
Copyright 2013 by Judith Anne Sykes
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system,
or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or
otherwise, except for the inclusion of brief quotations in a review, without prior permission in
writing from the publisher.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Sykes, Judith A., 1957–
Conducting action research to evaluate your school library / Judith Anne Sykes.
pages cm
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978–1–61069–077–5 (hard copy) — ISBN 978–1–61069–078–2 (ebook)
1. School libraries—Evaluation. 2. School librarians—Rating of. 3. Teacher-librarians—Rating of.
4. Action research in education. 5. Educational evaluation. 6. School librarian participation in
curriculum planning. I. Title.
Z675.S3S9565 2013
027.8—dc23 2012051277
ISBN: 978–1–61069–077–5
EISBN: 978–1–61069–078–2
17 16 15 14 13 1 2 3 4 5
This book is also available on the World Wide Web as an eBook.
Visit www.abc-clio.com for details.
Libraries Unlimited
An Imprint of ABC-CLIO, LLC
ABC-CLIO, LLC
130 Cremona Drive, P.O. Box 1911
Santa Barbara, California 93116-1911
This book is printed on acid-free paper
Manufactured in the United States of America
To teacher-librarians—inspire, collaborate, learn, prosper, embed.
To Bob and Michelle, ever supportive in my writing.
Contents
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii
Part I Discovering Issues Affecting School-Librarians and

Their Use of Action Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Chapter 1 Questions, Mind Map, Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Chapter 2 Issue, Literature Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Chapter 3 The Journey (Goals, Outcomes, Plans, Events, Patterns/Themes,
Conclusions) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Chapter 4 Actions, Reflections, New Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Part II Work Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

Chapter 5 Action Research Templates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Part III Timely Ideas for Teacher-Librarians to Explore through

Action Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Chapter 6 Action Research Explorations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Chapter 7 Shared Project Ideas, Contacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Preface
“The things which are most important to us are the hardest to measure.”
—McBeath, 1999
“Celebrate the understood, not the found”
—Todd, 2003
Teacher-librarians today may find themselves in a variety of precarious positions. They
are either at the leading edge of innovative educational pedagogy in their schools or
districts; or they are fighting for their programs and positions. I have found that situa-
tions vary considerably among states, provinces, and countries—even among schools
themselves—and are highly dependent on the school or school district culture as well
as the leadership of the principal. Some of this variance is due to the fluctuating
economy; some of it is due to rapid changes in technology, educational theory, and
librarianship itself; however, there is also a great deal of misperception, unawareness,
and stereotyping in the broader educational community about the role of libraries
and teacher-librarians in schools, particularly related to learning and teaching as well
as the impact collaborative planning and teaching of curriculum can have on student
learning and school culture.
As school principals struggle with balancing budgets and leading schools (Sykes,
2002a), often the school library is viewed as superfluous, a luxury, or a place—book
warehouse—where students sign out books, perhaps as remembered from their past,
an outdated commodity, with few taking notice of the centrality of learning that trans-
formational school libraries can and have provided to students. This impact on the
centrality of learning a school library can have is notably addressed and championed
as a “transformation to a learning commons perspective” in the work of David
Loertscher, Carol Koechlin, and Sandi Zwaan. The transformation from a school
library to a learning commons requires a shift in whole school culture, where a key
indicator of collaborative inquiry and pedagogical change often involves a “profes-
sional learning communities” approach (Eaker, DuFour, and DuFour, 2002) that
focuses on each student’s success through personalizing learning based on a wide
range of student learning data. This learning commons perspective permeates within
and beyond the school environment 24/7 and is guided by specialists such as
x Preface
teacher-librarians and other teachers who are increasingly available virtually in inno-
vative and strategic ways. Ultimately, students are taken to broader and deeper levels
of learning. Over 30 years of research (Lance and Loertscher, 2005) provides docu-
mented effects.
Therefore, teacher-librarians and teachers (in schools in which teachers are

responsible for the school library, for example, learning commons lead teachers or
technology teachers) can benefit from the processes and tools of action research to
study their own professional practice to “focus on the teaching and learning process,
to solve a problem or institute a change, and to document professional growth”
(Alberta Teachers’ Association [ATA] 2000, 3). Using action research to study their
own school libraries will allow them to understand if they are doing everything pos-
sible to enable advanced student achievement through their efforts, rather than limit-
ing school library learning commons transformation to cleaning up or modernizing a
physical/virtual space, important steps certainly but not the heart of learning and
knowledge building that truly exemplifies best teacher-librarian pedagogical practice.
Teacher-librarians can study issues pertinent to their own professional growth and the
school’s student learning goals through action research as a professional development
tool in order to take action that facilitates a desired change or answers significant ques-
tions related to learning, teaching, and professional growth.
This book is intended to provide a practical look at enabling engagement in using

action research skills and processes for this intent. Action research skills, processes,
and tools will be modeled in Chapters 1 through 4 as I seek to discover what will most
help teacher-librarians be able to use action research in daily practice and create dedi-
cated working pages to support the process along the way. Favorite literature, other re-
sources, and experience with timely topics school librarians often find themselves
involved with are also chronicled in this book and are presented as “five favorites” to
give the reader a starting point for an action research process or topic. When making
these suggestions, I sought to keep to a manageable number of well-tested resources,
as quantity can overwhelm; as the teacher-librarians delve into their own research
within or beyond the suggestions, they will no doubt discover many additional re-
sources and other supports. The “favorites” suggestions are found in Chapter 5 to
accompany work space tables and charts for action research, and in Chapter 6 follow-
ing these possible topics for teacher-librarian action research—time for doing action
research, the emergence of the learning commons, reading: breadth and depth/child-
ren’s literature, studying student achievement data, collaborative planning and teach-
ing, new/emerging technology, interdisciplinary learning, and advocacy. Practitioners
who are using the action research process have kindly shared some of their projects
and reflections in Chapter 7 to hopefully inspire others to consider engaging in the pro-
cess.
As teacher-librarians become comfortable with the skills, processes, and outcomes

related to using action research in their daily practice, they are the ideal practitioners to
lead students and teachers through learning these processes to truly create a learning
commons perspective in the modern school library environment.
Acknowledgments
I would like to acknowledge the many school library leaders, practitioners, and
supporters who volunteered to reflect upon their experiences and suggestions regard-
ing action research in order to enable me to be able to help others embark on similar
journeys.
Introduction
The action research model (summarized in the chart later in this introduction) can
accommodate a blend of qualitative and quantitative research strategies that “provide
teachers with a systematic process to reflect, consider options, implement and evaluate
potential solutions” (ATA, 2000, 4). It is a self-reflective, cyclical process generally
thought to be rooted “in the USA during the 1940s through the work of Kurt Lewin,
a social scientist” and “also promoted (as) the idea of ‘teacher as researcher ’ “or
“practitioner-based research” (McNiff, 2002, pgs. 8, 11). Dr. Anna Richert, professor
of education and faculty director of the Mills Teacher Scholars Project at Mills College
in Oakland, California, defines the action research process as:
Different people have different ideas about what constitutes teacher action
research. Common to all is the idea of teachers studying their practice—
typically their students’ learning and their own teaching—in a systematic
way. Whereas all good teachers reflect on their practice to make sense of their
work, those who engage in teacher research do this reflection in a deep and
intentional manner . . . They include the need: 1) to carefully formulate a
research question; 2) to conceptualize and enact a systematic and intentional
plan for gathering and analyzing classroom and school-based data to answer
that question, and 3) to articulate and enact a plan for changed classroom
practice that reflects the teacher’s learning from the research process. (Cody,
2011, 1)
Keith Curry Lance reminds us:
As much of a supporter of action research as I am, I am not keen on the term
itself. Evidence-based practice, or self-assessment—terms I prefer—is
extremely important, both for informing one’s own professional practice
and for advocating for one’s program. The problem with the term action
research is its use of the term research. By definition, research, to be taken seri-
ously, must be objective, and nobody can study himself or herself objectively.
Still, self-assessment is extremely important. No field can claim to be a profes-
sion if its incumbents do not assess their own performance with the goal of
improving it. We talk about action research as if it was something entirely
new—some might even say a frill. On the contrary, it is absolutely fundamen-
tal to any kind of serious professional practice. As it happens—in the
xiv Introduction
environment in which school library programs find themselves these days—

it is also vital to survival. (Email interview November 2011)
A teacher researcher often enters into the action research process when engaged in
formal academic study. However, many could continue to use or discover the merits
of using the process to address a topic that they are curious or passionate about, a
question or issue that “nudges” at them as they go about their daily practice. This
could involve a challenge such as how to support the diverse reading needs of stu-
dents or how to create a collaborative inquiry project with the eighth grade social stud-
ies teachers. The topic can nudge at the professional as daily interactions occur or
when a question or comment from a student, teacher, or parent leads to a purpose for
study with the intention of creating action plans from the strategic gathering and
analysis of pertinent data.
Once a teacher-librarian comes to the decision to study his or her own school
library, and this could serve as a powerful form of professional development, he or
she begins to pose key questions to drive self-directed inquiry. These questions will
be modified and refined throughout the process as events unfold, but initially, the
action researcher will openly list many questions and types of questions as possible
drivers of research, exploration, and analysis. This process will eventually lead to
action, reflection, and further inquiry.
Each question unfolds through further brainstorming—creating mind maps,

charts, or lists that indicate what the researcher already knows about the question,
where he or she will begin to seek information, and what other questions lead off from
the initial questions.
These first few steps into action research help a teacher-librarian decide on a con-
text for research breadth and depth. Will he or she follow one student, a class, or many
classes? Remain within the school or go beyond? Will it involve working with other
colleagues, and how? What is the context of the school environment that he or she is
working in, and what is the role of the school library in that context? How does the
issue at hand parallel with other issues in the school, the context and culture of the
school, among colleagues? Are time or cost factors implicit in making decisions around
this professional inquiry?
Contextual decisions will lead the teacher-librarian to focus on the key issue and
to set parameters to be examined through action research. The key issue can be formu-
lated as a vision statement or a “hunch” that the researcher intuitively knows or
hypothesizes about in relation to the issue. He or she needs to study, think about,
reflect, and weigh what he or she envisions or predicts with what others can provide
and contribute to his or her learning.
These preliminary steps open up additional questions about the researcher ’s

topic, as well as give a boost of confidence about what is already known and where
expertise will be needed to inform ideas, questions, and views on the issue. At this
Introduction xv
point, the teacher-librarian will conduct a literature review to examine what the
experts in the field are investigating and documenting. Researchers can find affirma-
tion, discovery, and dissonance in the literature when exploring what others are bring-
ing to the topic. They should now be able to discern which experts in the field they
could contact or study further as they move into designing an action research plan—
setting goals and outcomes for specific activities to enable successful attainment of
the goals and outcomes. They will decide what their “journey” will involve, how they
will collect new and raw data about the topic as they “live in the question,” and how
they will document their journey through field notes that may resemble a diary or
log. With the literature review and data collecting, the teacher-librarian must decide
what merits study for their purpose(s) and what is extraneous to their particular
study’s goals and outcomes.
A series of at least three or more types of data collection tools, that is, triangulation of
data, will most benefit the study. Will the teacher-librarian collect both quantitative and
qualitative data? How? From whom? During what time period? What permissions will
be needed? Is there anyone who can help the teacher-librarian collect and interpret data?
Once a plan is formulated, the researcher is immersed in intense learning through

a journey of interventions or events that he or she has designed. As with a scientist, this
is experimentation in the field—engaging others in events such as surveys, interviews,
focus groups, and dialogue. This can be a fascinating journey and can result in collect-
ing a great deal of data.
When the researcher has fulfilled the data collection plan, analysis of the data for
patterns and themes will provide insight and answers, promote actions, or change the
dimensions of the teacher-librarian’s initial hunch, quest, or vision. Using a variety of
tools, the researcher codes or graphs the data to enable him or her to see the emergence
of key patterns, themes, or trends. Dominant patterns and themes will lead the researcher
to draw conclusions about his or her school library and professional practice, which he or
she can then translate into strategic action plans. The process will cycle as the researcher
acts, reflects upon actions, ponders what may be missing from the data or strategies, and
asks new questions or follows new directions that he or she may not have previously con-
sidered. The action research process restarts and can evolve into a way of “living” for the
practitioner, who develops an ability to live in questions, hypotheses, and experimenta-
tion that propels action, reflection, and growth. I would hope that teacher-librarians
living in this constructivist process will also engage their students and fellow teachers
in the process.
Action Research Model (summary and diagram)

Note: This summary and Figure I.1 appear in the chapter by Judith Sykes in
the anthology Growing Schools: Librarians as Professional Developers, Debbie Abilock,
Kristin Fontichiaro, and Violet H. Harada, editors. Copyright © (2012) by Debbie
Abilock, Kristin Fontichiaro, and Violet H. Harada. Reproduced with permission of
ABC-CLIO, LLC.
xvi Introduction
Figure I.1. Action Research Cycle Diagram

Source: This diagram appears in the chapter by Judith Sykes in the anthol-
ogy Growing Schools: Librarians as Professional Developers, Debbie Abilock,
Kristin Fontichiaro, and Violet H. Harada, Editors. Copyright © 2012 by
Debbie Abilock, Kristin Fontichiaro, and Violet H. Harada. Reproduced
with permission of ABC-CLIO, LLC.
The intent of action research is to enable the professional to “live in a ques-

tion” for a period of time and ultimately define ways to improve practice.
(Pascarelli as quoted in Sykes, 2002b, vii)
Action research is a process of defining a question related to one’s practice,
then designing, executing, reflecting upon, and changing that practice as a
result. It combines studying and reviewing literature, collecting and analyzing
quantitative and qualitative data, and structuring action plans to create continu-
ous cycles of informed professional renewal. Individuals (educators or stu-
dents), schools, school districts, and even states or provinces can adopt the
methodology of action research. As such, it lends itself to mobilization—indeed,
action and transformation—in enabling schools and school libraries to support
and advance the learning of each student. Developing skills and strategies for
formulating questions, amassing data, structuring events, and analyzing results
can lead to profound professional renewal and more responsive service to the
students and learning communities one serves.
Additionally, an action research fold-out chart has been provided following this
introduction as a handy reference to the researcher. See Figure I.2.
Topic
Begins with a topic that the researcher is curious or passionate about, a question or issue that is nudging at them as they engage in practice.
From Conducting Action Research to Evaluate Your School Library by Judith Anne Sykes.
It can involve a challenge such as how to support all of the student’s needs through the school library program and resources or how to get a
grasp on investing in the best technology enhancements to learn about for improving practice and student learning. It can nudge at the
professional as daily interactions occur, or a question or comment from a student, teacher, or parent might lead to a research topic that can be
studied on hand, every day, to lead to action and reflection.
Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited. Copyright # 2013.
Questions
Once a researcher realizes the need to examine a topic relating to their school and their own practice, a list of questions is developed to drive
the inquiry. These questions will be modified and refined throughout the research process as events unfold, but initially the researcher
openly lists as many questions as possible that could drive the topic’s exploration.
Mind Map
Each question further expands by brainstorming or creating mind maps that address what the researcher already know about the questions,
what they wonder and want to learn about it, where they think they can garner information from, and what other questions lead off the
initial questions.
Context
These initial steps lead the researcher into creating a context for the research, it’s breadth and depth. Will the research follow one student, a
class or many classes? Will it involve working with other colleagues, and how? What is the context of the school and how does the school
library fit into that context? How does the issue at hand parallel with the school, the context of the school, the culture of the school?
Issue/Hunch
The researcher intuitively knows or hypothesizes about what it is that they envision the research will accomplish or what they will discover.
Literature Review
The researcher is confidence about what they already know about the topic and where they need to seek expert information. At this point
conducting a literature review to examine key literature and what the experts are saying and finding out about the topic becomes evident.
Researchers will find affirmation, new learning and even dissonance when reading about the research of others in or beyond the field
relating to the topic.
Goals Outcomes Plan

The researcher is now able to discern which experts in the field to contact or study regarding their topic as they now move into setting goals
and outcomes for their specific research; and developing a plan to enable successful attainment of their own set outcomes. They will decide
xvii
how they want to “live in the question” and collect data about the topic. The researcher will need to decide what tools of action research will
xviii
most benefit their journey. How will they collect both quantitative and qualitative data? From whom? During what time period? What
permissions will be needed?
Journey Events: data collection

Once the plan is formulated, the researcher is immersed in action and must be prepared for intense learning through their journey of events.
Like the scientist, this is actual experimentation in the field, engaging in events such as surveys, interviews, dialogue, discussion and
discourse. This is a fascinating part of the journey, and can result in a vast amount of raw data.
Patterns/Themes Conclusions
When the researcher has fulfilled their data collection plan, it is time to analyze the data for patterns and themes to give insight, answers, or
change the dimensions of the researcher’s initial hunch, quest, or vision. Using a variety of tools such as color-coding the data or using digi-
tal graphing the researcher will start to see patterns and themes emerge. The dominant patterns and themes will lead the researcher to make
some conclusions about the issue and then move into creating actions.
Actions
The researcher now will have information and insight to create an action plan or actions for enhancing practice—specific strategies, timelines
and responsibilities will come into play.
Reflections
The researcher will examine the results of the actions in a reflective manner—what worked? What didn’t? Why did something work or not
work? What could be done differently?
New Question(s)
The researcher will discover that the process will lead them to asking new questions or following new directions that they may not have
previously considered. The action research process re-starts and repeats itself, becoming a way of self-reflective practice for professional
growth. To live in ideas, questions, hypothesis, and experimentation that leads to action, reflection, and growth ultimately is a process to
teach students and colleagues.
Figure I.2. Action Research Fold-Out Chart

Part I
Discovering Issues Affecting
School-Librarians and Their
Use of Action Research
Chapter 1
Questions, Mind Map,
Context
In order to provide teacher-librarians with a practical guide to enable action research

for reflective practice and planning on the job, and be able to bring students and teach-
ing colleagues into the process, I found that I would once again need to “live in the
question” as I had done previously in graduate school, school-based practice, and pro-
vincial research (Abilock, Harada, and Fontichiaro, 2012, 95–118) and examine what
thoughts teacher-librarians had related to their experiences using or thinking about
using action research to study their own school libraries and practice as a job-
embedded professional growth tool. I assumed that many teacher-librarians and other
educational researchers had familiarity with action research through graduate work,
yet may not have returned to it on-site due to the daily demands of work site designs
based largely on the industrial age school model rather than cultures of inquiry or
whole school learning commons. I wondered if teacher-librarians felt that the process
of engaging in action research to study their own school libraries and professional
practice would be doable with the limited number of hours, numerous expectations,
and fast-paced schedules that are inherent in schools, even as many schools are mov-
ing toward a more conceptual framework for twenty-first century learning and teach-
ing. I began to consider a question to drive the research: What do teacher-librarians
need to be able to do to use action research to study their own school libraries and professional
practice?
I refined this question a number of times so that I could collect responses as I pre-
pared to design a working guide for ongoing action research for teacher-librarians.
I began to further develop questions such as What benefits do teacher-librarians believe
action research would hold for them in studying their own school libraries and professional
practice? What would benefit their teaching colleagues? Their students? What do teacher-
librarians perceive to be challenges in using action research to study their own school libraries
and practice? Would any be willing to be interviewed on this topic, given the time constraints
many face? Was action research being modeled or introduced to students and teachers?
I needed to step away from the questions and spend some time thinking about how
I might refine the questions further and actually go about the process as I considered
3
Mind map
Figure 1.1.
Questions, Mind Map, Context 5
Figure 1.2. Triangulated Diagram
the work responsibilities, volunteer commitments, and family life that many teacher-
librarians would be also encountering.
There are many tools to facilitate brainstorming or mind-mapping for gathering

information and data to inform questions; yet I found myself jotting down thoughts
as they came to me in a notebook and as time permitted recording them digitally.
The notes became a diagram that is shown in Figure 1.1.
The diagram was refined a few times until I could visualize what I wanted to do
and could accomplish based on the parameters of time and other multiple commit-
ments. It was important to remind myself that by triangulating my approach, as
I had practiced in previous action research projects, I could garner sufficient knowl-
edge for new or affirmed understandings of my questions and then come to terms with
what was possible and probable to collect. I knew that the collection of data could
mushroom as conversations and connections began, so I began to relax with the pro-
cess and prepare for the excitement of hearing about new ideas, sources, and the pro-
fessional reflections and expertise others could offer as I worked through each event
in the journey.
Context
My sample diagram, Figure 1.1, helped me to establish parameters around context
so that I felt ready to build on what I had learned in past projects such as contacting
experts in the field—the school library leaders, university researchers, and association
presidents who could provide studied expertise and current thinking on the topic—
and then aligning that thinking and expertise with the reflective voices of practicing
teacher-librarians in specific schools or school districts. In so doing, I could develop
practical tools and ideas that would assist practitioners as they went ahead to try
action research in the specific context of their schools and practice as illustrated as a
triangulated approach in Figure 1.2.
I wondered how I would collect thoughtful responses in the timeliest fashion

possible—Phone? Email? Focus groups? Meetings? Again, I thought I would begin
6 Conducting Action Research to Evaluate Your School Library
with what I thought many of my contacts could reasonably handle in their personal
time by going digital, in this case using email, which I hoped would give the recipients
who volunteered to share their expertise or projects time to reflect and respond. If
needed, I could extend initial email contact into live meetings or conversations. I could
engage with what new knowledge transpired and what I would be able to learn about
from my growing bank of data on the questions.
Chapter 2
Issue, Literature Review
From the questions and mind-mapping outlined in Chapter 1, I began to see that a key
issue or hunch was forming. I was recalling a theory of action I had previously dwelt
upon regarding impacts on educational reform during my graduate studies, the con-
cept of teacher as researcher being the key to educational reform and transformation.
In this case, teacher-librarian as researcher—if the process is a constant of their
practice—as key to the transformation of school libraries impacting school culture
and advancing student learning.
I began to review literature in the areas of teacher as researcher, reflective practice,

and action research. In the province of Alberta, where I live and practice, certificated
teachers and administrators are required by government regulations (Alberta Educa-
tion, 1997) to develop and implement an annual Teacher Professional Growth Plan
(TPGP), which is due 30 days into the new school year. This professional growth plan
must outline goals, related resources, strategies, timelines, outcomes, and indicators of
success. These regulations very much support action research as a professional growth
tool, which in turn would receive the support of the school or district administrator(s).
The Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA) provides a self-paced online tutorial with
strategies, templates, and examples for teachers and administrators to use to develop
their plans. The importance of self-assessment, including action research, is outlined
in the following quote:
The self-assessment of teacher learning needs is critical to professional
growth. Teachers develop their professional practice throughout their entire
career. Therefore, self-assessment must be continuous and seamless with pro-
fessional growth. Self-assessment can take many forms from reflective prac-
tice and journals to action research; from analysis of student achievement
data to peer coaching and critical friends. Many tools exist to assist teachers
in assessing their professional learning needs. (ATA, 2010)
The document Action Research Guide for Alberta Teachers (ATA, 2000) was developed fol-
lowing the determination “that teachers would benefit from a practical resource
for action research focused on the Alberta educational context.” This practical docu-
ment focuses on the importance of action research to school improvement and the
7
changing nature of staff development. This changing nature is described in the guide
as having four key components:
Recent developments in the field of education have contributed to how we
think about professional development.
• Results Drive Education—decisions about curriculum and instruction should
be driven by what we want students to know and be able to do as a result of
instruction.
• Systems Thinking—systems thinkers see the interconnectedness of all things
and understand that causality is circular rather than linear.
• Constructivism—learners create their own knowledge rather than receiving
it from others. (ATA, 2000, 36)
Teacher-librarians considering engaging in action research could examine these
resources or could investigate their local state or provincial teacher growth, evaluation,
or development models and regulations to learn what supports might be available and
encouraged.
In 1999, the Alberta government introduced and provided funding for a highly
successful venture that supported teacher research for professional growth to advance
student learning success. All school boards in the province engage in the Alberta
Initiative for School Improvement (AISI), which is now going into its fifth cycle. AISI
is described as:
. . . a bold approach to improving student learning by encouraging teachers,
parents, and the community to work collaboratively to introduce innovative
projects that address local needs . . . AISI provides targeted funding to school
authorities to improve student learning and enhance student engagement
and performance. (Alberta Education, 2011)
Each school in the province is part of an AISI project in three-year cycles. The
fourth cycle ended in 2012. Cycle 5 will be in place from September 2012 to
August 2015. AISI projects are based on 12 attributes that include an action research
component, as demonstrated in the following list.
What Is AISI?
AISI is a bold approach to supporting the improvement of student learning
by encouraging teachers, parents, and the community to work collaboratively
to introduce innovative and creative initiatives based upon local needs and
circumstances. AISI is characterized by the following 12 attributes.
1. Partnership—AISI is a partnership among teachers, superintendents, trust-
ees, business officials, universities, parents, and government. By working
together, the partners continue to develop new relationships, strategies,
and practices that provide long-term benefits to teaching and learning in
our province.
Issue, Literature Review 9
2. Catalyst—AISI is a catalyst for change. The common goal targeted funding,

partnership, positive climate, and supportive infrastructure act in concert to
achieve significant change in teaching and learning.
3. Student Focused—AISI communicates a compelling commitment to school
improvement that aligns with the long-term vision of Alberta Education.
AISI projects continue to strengthen the focus on student learning and
accommodate the diverse learning needs of individual students and special
populations.
4. Flexibility—School authorities choose strategies that enhance learning in
the local context.
5. Collaboration—Projects are developed and implemented with meaningful
involvement of the school community. The active engagement of staff,
students, parents, and partners is critical to project success.
6. Culture of Continuous Improvement—AISI promotes a culture of continu-
ous improvement that is evident in schools and jurisdictions that clearly
align school improvement goals, classroom practices, and performance.
7. Evidence-based Practice—Evidence that educational practices benefit
student learning and performance, through the collection, analysis and
interpretation of data, is foundational to AISI. The use of multiple methods
and data sources gives Albertans confidence in the results.
8. Research-based Interventions—Solid research provides a reasonable
expectation that improvement will occur. Implementation of effective
instructional strategies is core to AISI projects. AISI is a vehicle for testing
the efficacy of these interventions in the Alberta context.
9. Inquiry and Reflection—A clear focus on student learning is the foundation
for inquiry and reflection. Analyzing strategies that worked and building
on them lead to continuous improvement. Strategies that did not work as
expected can provide important information about what needs to change
and what might be successful.
10. Building Capacity and Sustainability—Effective professional development
(PD) is planned, systemic, and sustained. Promising practices, tools, prod-
ucts, and processes developed and/or acquired through AISI will benefit
Alberta’s students in the future.
11. Knowledge—AISI contributes to the body of knowledge about teaching,
learning, and instructional improvement. The AISI family shares this
knowledge widely through conferences, reports, the Clearinghouse, and
provincial networking sessions.
12. Networks—AISI networks contribute to the exchange of information, ideas,
and resources as well as communication and knowledge dissemination.
Networks include face-to-face and digital interactions and may be local,
provincial, national, and/or international.
(Alberta Education, 2011)
AISI projects were developed in different ways by the province’s various school
boards, with about 99 school library–focused projects that teacher-librarians can access
through searching on the Alberta Education website “About AISI” for ideas, results,
and actions affecting school libraries.
During cycle 3 of the AISI projects, I was able to design and co-lead a project with 13
other principals entitled “21st Century Learning Environments.” The strategy was to:
develop and implement an information literacy strategy to enhance digital lit-
eracies, including educational technology with Information Learning Serv-
ices, principals, libraries, teachers and students . . . using best practice to
create 21st century learning environments, including libraries but not just
one location in the school, expanding the notion of classroom and library—
the classroom and library will be able to come to the learner instead of the
other way around.
(Alberta Education, 2011b)
Five learning leaders were hired, including an experienced teacher-librarian who
successfully worked in four schools to plan information literacy projects in large blocks
of scheduled instructional time to facilitate professional collaboration. An online pro-
fessional community was created to help bridge “the gap between teacher knowledge
in technology and student knowledge” and create “context for a more collaborative
and generative learning environment” (Alberta Education, 2011b).
The Ontario Ministry of Education’s Teacher Learning and Leadership program

(http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/teacher/tllp.html) is essentially a supported struc-
ture for teachers to carry out action research and share exemplary instructional strate-
gies. Participants in this program have shared a number of their projects in Chapter 3,
“The Journey,” and Chapter 7, “Shared Project Ideas, Contacts.”
Leaders in school librarianship from universities, teacher and teacher-librarian

professional associations, and school districts extensively practice, encourage, support,
and write about action research as a professional growth tool for teachers and teacher-
librarians. Most of the authors who are reviewed here also graciously agreed to be
interviewed for this book. Their interviews appear in Chapter 3 under the first event.
In The New Learning Commons, Where Learners Win! (Koechlin, Loertscher, and
Zwaan, 2008, 2012), the authors talk about the “power of action research” and refer-
ence Douglas B. Reeves, founder of the Leadership and Learning Center, in his book
Reframing Teacher Leadership to Improve Your School (ASCD, 2008), (who) “places action
research at the center of school improvement.” Indeed, action research is viewed as
the essence of the “experimental” aspect of the learning commons perspective that is
founded on collaboration, teaming, and evidence based practice. Additionally, a chap-
ter (Koelchin et al. 2008, 2012) is devoted to action research as the focus of the experi-
mental learning commons (87–93) and is followed by a list of key references and a
participatory wiki. The authors invite us to consider “Collaborative action-research
based teaching vs. isolated classroom teaching” (3) and emphasize that the collabora-
tive nature of the learning commons team should extend into the whole school, which
Issue, Literature Review 11
is an “important factor if experimentation and action research are to become part of the
whole school culture” (23). They provide a strong message with many practical exam-
ples related to measuring the impact of learning commons transformation in a triangu-
lated manner at the learner, teaching unit, and organizational levels (81). Moving into a
culture of inquiry empowers teachers to become reflective practitioners:
Teachers have the support of the teacher-librarian and other specialists in the
Learning Commons to help them determine what evidence to gather, how to
analyze the data, and then how to apply the findings to improve teaching and
learning. Becoming a reflective practitioner is a process of discovery. (84)
Violet Harada, professor at the University of Hawaii at Manoa, wrote about action
research studies in Librarians and Teachers as Research Partners: Reshaping Practices Based
on Assessment and Reflection (2005). The document provides a compelling discussion of
action research processes and practice conducted in four different elementary school
libraries in Hawaii over a 10-year period. Harada recently edited Growing Schools:
Librarians as Professional Developers (2012) with Debbie Abilock and Kristin Fontichiaro.
This anthology reinforces the importance of teacher-librarians being seen in the role of
action researcher in their schools. It includes action research as a method of leading
professional development.
Reflecting upon the 2007 Leadership Summit “Where’s the Evidence? Under-
standing the Impact of School Libraries,” which he led, Ross Todd, associate professor
at Rutgers University, emphasized evidence-based practice to “shift the focus from
articulating what school librarians do to what students achieve” (2008, 3). The summit
led to asking key questions related to the challenges inherent in moving from advocacy
for school libraries to evidence of the impact on student learning outcomes. Todd con-
cluded that “research needs to be repackaged to make it more accessible and to estab-
lish its practical utility and applicability . . . There’s a sense that research is not
consulted because it doesn’t address the real-world concerns of practicing librarians”
(Todd, 2008, 4, 5). This again suggests a change in the professional role of teacher-
librarians as researchers, identifying their “professional development needs in relation
to evidence-based practice” and getting training/learning to apply evidence-based
practice approaches (Todd, 2008, 7). Todd states that current thinking on evidence-
based school librarianship welds a three-dimensional, cyclical approach, which is out-
lined in Figure 2.1.
Todd advocates “mainstreaming of evidence-based practice initiatives as a dimen-

sion of best practice rather than it being perceived as an addition to current practice”
(2009, 92). He also emphasizes that teacher-librarians must learn to share this evidence
with their principals and school staffs to enable collaborative learning and teaching
practices that will impact student learning outcomes. For further reading for teacher-
librarians, Carol Gordon, associate professor at Rutgers University, conducted a
detailed study of action research as a tool of evidence-based practice in developing
school librarians. She described her research in A Study of a Three-Dimensional Action
Research Training Model for School Library Programs (2006).
Evidence FOR Practice FOUNDATION

Informational
Existing formal research provides the essential building blocks
for professional practice
Evidence IN Practice PROCESS
Applications/Actions Transformational
Locally produced evidence;
Data generated by practice is meshed with research-based evi-
dence to provide a dynamic decision-making environment:
librarian-observed evidence
Evidence OF Practice OUTCOMES
Results—impacts and outcomes; Formational
evidence of closing of gaps User-reported evidence
Learner changes as result of inputs, interventions, activities,
processes
Figure 2.1 Dimensions of Actionable Evidence: A Holistic Model of Evidence Based Practice for School
Libraries
Source: Originally appeared as Table 1: Dimensions of Actionable Evidence: A Holistic Model of Evidence Based Practice for School
Libraries in Ross Todd’s School Librarianship and Evidence-Based Practice: Perspectives, Progress and Problems, p. 89, 2009. Reprinted
with permission.
Many professional action research organizations exist to support teachers and

teacher-librarians who are engaged in action research projects. Both teachers and
teacher-librarians would benefit from learning about each other’s research journeys,
findings, actions, and reflections. Led by executive director Dr. Anna Richert, the Mills
Teacher Scholars Group at Mills College in Oakland, California, “in its twelfth year, is a
collaborative community of teachers who meet monthly to support each other in con-
ducting research about their practice in classrooms and other educational settings.”
The group includes “over 50 K-12 urban public school teachers who are investigating
an aspect of their teaching or of their students’ learning that they feel is crucial to
improving student learning outcomes” (Mills Teacher Scholars, 1998).
The Ontario Action Research Association’s Ontario Action Researcher

is a freely accessible, full-text, peer-reviewed electronic journal intended for
elementary, secondary, and university teachers who are concerned with
exploring the unity between educational research and practice. While
[its] primary aim is to serve the needs of educators in Ontario, [it] welcome[s]
readership and submissions from elsewhere in Canada and the world.
(Nipissing University, 1998)
Researcher submissions are peer reviewed and posted for others to learn about,
for example, “Improving Reading Comprehension of Junior Division Students as the
Teacher-Librarian: An Action Research Study” (Jensen, 2010). Relevant links to action
research associations, publications, and sites around the world are provided.
Chapter 3
The Journey (Goals,
Outcomes, Plans, Events,
Patterns/Themes,
Conclusions)
After having examined literature, I next needed to develop goals for collecting the data
I would like to have that could support teacher-librarians in engaging in their own
action research. I needed professional opinions from teacher-librarians and goals for
gathering this information with a timely, focused approach that—like the teacher-
librarians—I could manage and thus be able to recommend to other practitioners bal-
ancing life/work in their schools or districts. I needed to focus in on a few strategic
questions, of which I chose six, that I felt would provide me with sufficient information
to extract similar patterns but that would not overwhelm the volunteer respondents
when replying. I needed to reach an outcome of providing enabling strategies and
advice to potential action researchers that also aligned with what the experts in the
field, university researchers, and practicing teacher-librarians related to me. I provided
each of the groups with the same questions, as I believed this would provide me with
consistencies for purposeful design. I created what I felt to be a realistic timeline for
myself and the interviewees for gathering and analyzing responses, at the same time
thinking about the writing of it and creating working pages that would be useful in
encouraging teacher-librarians to begin their own projects. I planned my goals and
outcomes in steps using a calendar and colored stick-on notes (this step is also easily
done digitally, but the visual prompts in my home office and around the house helped
propel me to engage in the work around other everyday tasks).
I chose to collect the data I was seeking, professional reflections and insight,
through developing a series of what I refer to as events. I instigated three response
events—experts/university researchers, teacher-librarian practitioners, and school
library association presidents—that would enable me to receive a broad sampling of
response on the topic of what practicing teacher-librarians should know about or
13
would find useful to better enable engagement in action research as a professional

growth tool. I used the six questions I had created to pose at each event and refined
them with my editor. I discussed the matter of authenticity with my editor as well,
for in the past, because my action research had been conducted under the authority
of a university or educational jurisdiction, I was assured that doing the research for
Libraries Unlimited provided the authenticity. I would study the responses for general
patterns and themes, and cite/receive permission for any direct quotations that I felt
would be important to share as stated.
The questions I chose to explore in each event were:

1. Describe your school library/teacher-librarian/researcher background and
any other brief biographical notes you would like included.
2. What does action research mean to you?
3. What do you think would challenge or not appeal to teacher-librarians about
using action research as a professional growth tool?
4. What do you think teacher-librarians would find practical and useful to be
able to use action research to study their own school libraries and profes-
sional practice?
5. Do you know of a teacher-librarian(s) who has conducted a stellar action
research project and might be willing to be interviewed for the book?
6. Do you have other additional comments or questions?
I then proceeded to “open the events” and invited experts in the field whose work
I was familiar with, particularly around action research, as well as presidents of the
major school library associations and teacher-librarian practitioners whose work and
leadership I was familiar with. I had included a question (#5) that would allow any
of these representatives to also recommend others who they thought could also con-
tribute to the data collection. I then created an invitational message that was similar
in nature for each group. If I did not directly know the recipient, I added additional
background about myself and the intent of the project. Out of 40 contacts initially sent,
24 agreed to respond and also recommended 11 others to contact, who were pleased to
respond. In the end, I received 28 responses, many extensive. They represented a good
cross-section of the three groups (experts, practitioners, association leaders) to balance
what I already knew with what I was learning about regarding enabling teacher-
librarian practical action research.
Sample email invitation sent:

Dear ________________
I am writing regarding a forthcoming book for Libraries Unlimited (an

ABC-CLIO company) titled Engaging in Action Research to Study Your
School Library. I would like to interview you if possible via email as an
_____________________ (expert in the field, association president, teaching
colleague, etc.) for this forthcoming book. I seek to gather information about
The Journey 15
action research challenges for practicing teacher-librarians and what might be

done to overcome some of the challenges. Some of your thoughts may be
quoted in the book and others grouped with like responses to analyze them
for patterns and themes important to teacher-librarians embarking on an
action research project. I have attached six questions that I would like to
invite you to respond to between now and November 30th, 2011 via
judith.sykes@shaw.ca. At that time I will be reviewing the responses. I am
using email to give you time to ponder the questions and respond. If you
have any questions about or would prefer to respond by telephone please
do not hesitate to let me know and I will arrange to call. In the meantime
please let me know if it is possible for you to respond to the questions and
be included in the new book.
The responses began arriving, and I began to document the information as field
notes, using a simple color-coding system for management of the field notes’ emerging
patterns and themes. These patterns and themes began taking shape rather quickly,
and that enabled me to begin analysis and reflection upon what I was hearing. As
you follow the excerpts from the interviews recorded here, you will see patterns and
themes taking shape and perhaps will have experienced them in your own practice.
Four key themes seemed to be emerging from the data, which I color-coded in the
following list:
Yellow: Definitions of action research
Blue: Collaborative practice
Green: Administrator/leadership support
Red: Challenges, especially time
First Event: Expert and Researcher Interviews

The first event in my journey consisted of responses to the research questions
from recognized experts in the field consisting of noted authors, university research-
ers, and district leaders or specialists that gave me a great deal to think about around
the emerging themes. It also left me in awe of the support, experience, research,
and advice available to schools and teacher-librarians from this expert community,
as illustrated in transcripts from the interview field notes that follow.
Dr. Marlene Asselin is the coordinator of the teacher-librarian education programs

at the University of British Columbia and supervises the research of graduate students
both at the masters and doctorate levels, teaching courses in research methodologies
that include action research and teacher inquiry—her primary role is a researcher in
a large research-intensive university. She designs and conducts research in several
areas of literacy and teacher-librarianship, including information literacy, new litera-
cies, and the educational role of school and community libraries in developing coun-
tries. To her, action research is a means of identifying important questions about
one’s own practices, students, and resources, systematically collecting and analyzing
data within one’s own context (library, classroom), and finally changing practices
and perspectives based on the findings. She feels that a major challenge in conducting
action research is objectifying your perspective on your practices and your students
(and colleagues sometimes). Taking a step away from routines and automatic responses
is difficult and takes time to learn. The first time doing an action research project requires
extra effort in many ways and ideally a lot of support from at least another colleague to
keep going through the whole process. Another challenge is adding the time required
to carry out the research on top of a busy teaching day. Collaborative action research
may be a way of ensuring success, particularly when one is new to this way of approach-
ing teaching. As well, Asselin asserts that a professional culture of action research in the
school or linked with a group across a school district supports teacher-librarians entering
into action research. Identification of common and individual questions through profes-
sional study groups is helpful. Support at the district level is crucial at all stages. Particu-
larly important is sharing the changes in practices effected from action research, in
multiple means both informally and formally.
Lois Barranoik teaches in the Teacher-Librarianship by Distance Learning pro-

gram at the University of Alberta. Barranoik was a teacher-librarian in both elementary
and secondary schools. Her work included the opportunity to open a new junior high
school library, open a new high school library, and develop a library in a school for
pregnant and parenting teens. During two years as a learning resources consultant
for Edmonton Public Schools (in Alberta, Canada), she was part of a district action
research project involving the use of technology and its impact on student achievement
in grades 1 to 12. Her interest in research and the importance of making it meaningful
for all students brought her back to the university for further study; she completed a
doctoral program in school libraries at the University of Alberta in 2004. Barranoik’s
dissertation involved “an action research approach, in conjunction with a moderate
hermeneutic orientation, [which] guided the investigation of the experiences of one
classroom teacher and nine students as they completed a curriculum-based research
project in a senior level high school English course” (Barranoik, 2004). She found that
action research had many positive attributes to be considered. “Because action research
is practical and focuses on real-life problems, it invites collaboration and systematic reflection
among colleagues” (Barranoik, 2004, 48). “. . .there are two cultures of action research” (Judah
and Richardson, 2002, quoted in Barranoik, 2004, 49). The first seems to be more concerned
with control and improvement. For example, research within this culture is focused on chang-
ing practice through a process of action and reflection, the final outcome being a more socially
responsible application of knowledge in the workplace. The second culture is identified as “action
research as a living practice” (Carson and Sumara, 1997 quoted in Barranoik, 2004, 49). In this
view, action research is not as concerned with methodology but is more an attempt to understand
how to live a life of action research (Barranoik, 2004, 49). I would suggest that for teacher-
librarians and most teachers, action research implies acting on the knowledge gained through
reflection, contemplation, and discussion with all involved. It is an active term, rather than pas-
sive, and requires a mindset/belief that continually tweaking the process will make a positive differ-
ence. The ultimate goal is to change for the better—to make sure that the needs of students are
always being met. Barranoik also recognized the challenges faced by action researchers
such as the time that it takes to consider and reflect—the time it takes to work with col-
leagues and to meet for discussion; sometimes, even the time to record personal
The Journey 17
reflections seems onerous. There are times when teachers (and yes, teacher-librarians)
begin to feel resentful of all the expectations and encroachment on personal time that
could be perceived as conducting research (even action research) and creating personal
growth plans. Although it is her opinion that the benefits outweigh the challenges, action
research is a commitment, and it requires self-discipline and focus. Barranoik advises
potential researchers to read case studies and/or examples of excellent action research
with both positives and negatives outlined as well as how the research was applied to
the ongoing work of the school, such as those in the final chapter of this book.
Gerald Brown worked as a practitioner in elementary schools, secondary schools,

at university faculty of education, and as an international consultant. Brown taught at
elementary school in rural Manitoba from 1956 to 1965. He then transferred to school
librarianship in Winnipeg, where he co-established the first elementary school library
program in Manitoba. This project included implementation of a strategy of library
services integrated into the school curriculum delivery process. It involved organizing
central library support system for the 80 schools and 55,000 students in the district.
Working with a team of professional and clerical support, staff development programs
evolved to implement quality school library and information service programs at all
levels. As a sessional lecturer at University of Manitoba (and several other postsecond-
ary institutions across Canada from 1967 to 1998), Brown developed courses of study
for beginner teacher-librarians, for administrators, and for parents on how to use the
library effectively in their teaching. Since retirement in 1992, Brown has been doing
private consulting and mentoring in 49 countries around the world. He is known as
Canada’s School Library Ambassador.
Brown states that while there are many different models of action research, most
use some dimensions of the problem-solving model (PSM) taught and shared with stu-
dents in schools. They can be easily transferred to adult learning models. PSM can be
used to develop localized solutions for specific issues. It is a collaborative approach
usually involving a team of individuals who are concerned with improving practices
in their local circumstances to provide practical solutions to local problems. The PSM
involves practitioners in their own settings. They develop collaborative approaches
to understanding the scope of the local issue. They invite outside expertise as the par-
ticipants feel appropriate. There may be some degree of data collection and analysis
but usually not at a highly sophisticated level.
According to Brown, individuals may grow significantly as professionals using

this PSM approach. They come to see the issues from different perspectives and to dis-
cuss options for resolution. Teamwork is a strong component in the examination of the
issues. Individuals within the team are respected for their knowledge, experience, and
expertise. Each contributes to the positive and progressive resolution of his or her
concern. Different leaders may evolve at various stages in the approach, some as
(1) intuitors or dreamers who look at the big ideas and the options from a wider system
consideration; others as (2) thinkers and planners who consider the alternative courses
of action; some as (3) feelers related to the emotional impact of what is being said and
done in selecting a course of action or evaluating the consequences of an action; and
finally the (4) doers who take the ideas and test them out in practical ways. And in
the process, there will be the (5) recorder or writer who keeps track of the actions of
the group, and documents the statements of their achievements for others outside the
group to appreciate.
Brown contends that people learn best when they are doing something that helps
them clarify their thinking and apply what is being examined. They are more willing to
adopt PSM practices that involve them in the learning process and in which they have
a say in designing the action. When they examine and resolve the issue themselves,
they take more ownership for the product.
Action researchers also need a quiet, sensitive guide or mentor to help them
evolve their thinking and to facilitate their sharing of understanding, insights, and
reflection on what they are studying or resolving. This kind of mentorship requires
skill and expertise. It takes patience and practice to do it well. Mentoring may come
from with the school, departmental leadership, system administration, consultants,
or outside postsecondary expertise.
Action research may lead to academic credit, provided that planning and negotia-
tion have been done in advance with an accreditation agency. On the other hand,
highly successful individual and small group action research may be even more suc-
cessfully evaluated though the change in the local system, the resolution of a local
need, and the satisfaction of the users.
Brown joins most other interviewees in noting that action research takes time.
Often when people are involved in working out issues with colleagues of similar inter-
ests, they invest their time to make it work. People must feel that their ideas are being
heard, and that their input is respected. A strong collegial bond often develops as the
group creates time to work electronically and face-to-face in informal interactions.
Across Canada, the decline in the number of teacher-librarians and in the amount
of designated time that a teacher-librarian works flexibly in the school library makes it
speculative that individuals will have personal resources or energy to undertake action
research. As this teacher-librarian designated time within a school becomes more
unscheduled, the option for more PSM activities and related action research with
professional colleagues become possible.
Dependent upon the amount and kind of support staff in the library, it is possible
to determine the quality and quantity of professional activities and consultation
that are possible, versus the amount of time that is spent on organizational and
administrative tasks. With adequate support staff, it is possible for an experienced
teacher-librarian to extend the scope of the library into many more classrooms through
integrative activities. Development of these activities could certainly be considered
a kind of action research if they are cooperatively planned, implemented, and
evaluated.
The Journey 19
The teacher-librarian professional has many skills to bring to any group. The lead-
ership in the group could come from teacher-librarians as they become involved with
classroom teachers or with specialist or content-area groups. Being open to collabora-
tion is a necessity for teacher-librarians to be invited to work on the PSM team, as well
as being respected for their expertise.
Administrative leadership that encourages creative and innovative thinking must

be present to allow the individuals freedom to investigate alternative PSM approaches
or options. This authority may lie with the school principal, the local consultant, the
system superintendent, or the director. Encouragement may come in subtle ways,
such as invitations to present ideas to peers or other groups, financial support for a
project, release time to travel to conferences, professional development activities, or
willingness and openness to discuss alternatives.
Support, collective experience, and expertise can be channeled from local,

regional, national, or international professional organizations to help a group resolve
a local issue or concern. If the teacher-librarian is attuned to any of these networks, a
wealth of knowledge may be attained and shared. Conversely, the teacher-librarian
may be in a position to communicate local success stories to these organizations for
the rest of the world to see and appreciate. Teacher-librarians are in an ideal position
to report school successes internally and externally.
Evaluation must be a transparent component if action research is to be respected.

The group will find ways to establish the beginning baseline and then methods to
assess growth or change. Personal satisfaction with the progress of the group or the
success of the implementation becomes a synergizing force for the team. Support from
group mentors is important in helping them to assess the degree of success in reaching
satisfactory and practical solutions. Statistical reporting is usually less significant when
recording results of the projects.
Brown suggested a teamwork model that depicts where different leaders may
evolve at different stages in the PSM approach. Without a team, the action researcher
may see themselves in these roles at different times throughout the course of their
investigation. In Figure 3.1, Brown provides a visual demonstration of how he
envisions a teamwork action research model.
Any topic related to the evolution and implementation of quality school

library and information services programs can be open to action research. Since
teacher-librarians are prone to work in teams with teachers, they are in a natural envi-
ronment to support and stimulate colleagues to work on local issues. Some sample
topics might be:
• Integration of children’s literature into the basic reading curriculum with
consideration of the genres, themes, and characters of the field, appropriate
to various levels
Teamwork Action Research Model
Source: Based on Gerry Brown interview (November 2011).
Figure 3.1.
20
The Journey 21
• Application of specific independent learning skills as related to curriculum

needs, along with appropriate evaluation of individual student abilities
• Introduction and implementation of a problem-solving model for use by
children in their investigations
• Promotion of reading with boys
• Celebrations of literary events, within the school or among classes around the
world
• Strategies to unschedule the library to allow more in-depth program
integration
• Uses of the technology to facilitate student thinking and writing processes
• More effective use of staff time in the library relative to student face-to-face
contact
• Strategies for implementing reading promotion programs such as I Love to
Read Day, DEAR (Drop Everything and Read day), ISLM (International
School Library day/week/month), and global writers week
• Integrating problem-solving and information literacy activities in activities in
math and science areas, or other content areas
• Cross-school/cross-country networking for sharing information using
technology
• Scheduling options for the use of technology in the library
• Involving school staff in positive or preventative discipline approaches
• Steps to collaboration between reading recovery teachers, gifted and talented
teachers, special needs teachers, and the teacher-librarian and library staff
Dr. Lesley Farmer at California State University–Long Beach has worked in public
and private K-12 school settings. Most of Farmer’s research has been conducted with
California State University–Long Beach. However, she did earlier research on online
bibliographic instruction and information literacy for K-16. Farmer sees action
research as systematic participatory research that is contextualized in a specific setting.
She feels that all teacher-librarians should be reflective practitioners and that action
research provides a systematic approach to improve their practice, although the time
commitment and confidence to analyze data may deter the practitioner from this
approach. Two of Farmer ’s students elaborate on their projects in the practicing
teacher-librarian interviews further along in this chapter, as well as provide examples
and connections in Chapter 7.
Dr. Violet Harada at the University of Hawaii worked in the past as a university
partner with elementary school teams of librarians and teachers interested in examin-
ing what they were teaching and how practices might be improved to assist students
with information seeking and use. She discovered that being a partner with building-
level professionals provided her with a unique opportunity to (1) help practitioners
develop a focus on what they wished to investigate, (2) introduce related readings
and research that enriched their understanding of what they wanted to find out, and
(3) support them in determining best ways to collect data and interpret the findings.
The paper “Librarians and Teachers as Research Partners: Reshaping Practices Based
on Assessment and Reflection” highlights this work (and appears in her new book).
For Harada, action research is a critical form of reflective practice with the teacher-
librarians involved becoming practitioner-researchers, reflecting on what they learned
and how they valued what they learned. Harada spoke of three “tensions” or chal-
lenges present for teacher-librarians in conducting action research: (1) School pressures
to test and meet standards that force educators to “control” the curriculum against the
research-based findings that learning should be more student-focused and inquiry
driven. A lot of what practitioners want to do in terms of more student-centered learn-
ing is difficult in schools where they are still expected to “cover the textbook.” (2) The
traditional teaching paradigm emphasizes isolationism and staff working in silos
rather than providing incentives to open up their classrooms and share problems
and solutions together. There is a reluctance to admit problems and to consider an
outsider’s point of view. Action research is an activity during which the construction
of knowledge is both personal and social. This remains a challenge unless a climate
of trust and collegial but constructive study is established. (3) School infrastructures
restrict the amount of time that educators have to meet and collaborate. Typical school
schedules allow little room for in-depth study of teaching practices. This is where
administrative support is critical. It is critical to have administrators foster an
appropriate culture for this type of learning by providing resources and professional
development.
Consultant and author Carol Koechlin, one of the key leaders in school library to
learning commons pedagogy, reinforces that action research allows the professional
to gain so much from others. She has worked with many fabulous teachers and admin-
istrators who taught her the value of reflective practice. She has been an instructional
leader and consultant for school libraries for many years. In that capacity, she has
had formal training in action research, evidence-based practice, professional learning
communities, and other school improvement approaches such as journaling, mentor-
ing, and professional portfolios. She was a part-time instructor at York University (in
Toronto) for many years, designing and facilitating Additional Qualification
(AQ) Courses for School Librarianship. AQ courses at York—both face-to-face and
online—have an action research component. She received training from York and lots
of practical experience implementing action research with hundreds of teacher-
librarians in her courses. Most recently, Koechlin worked with a team at OSLA to
develop a Toolkit for Evidence Based Practice, in her mind an umbrella for all the
different approaches to improving one’s teaching methodology (see http://www
.accessola.com/osla/toolkit/intro.html).
Koechlin writes that in education, action research is a deliberate approach to

improving teaching practice and ultimately student achievement. It is a process of con-
tinuous and seamless reflection and action that starts with identifying a need, research-
ing for solutions, trying them out, tracking process, gathering and analyzing evidence,
and reworking approaches based on the evidence to improve teaching and learning. To
get the most out of the experience, the next step is to share results widely, which is so
easy today through school library PLNs (Professional Learning Networks). Ultimately,
The Journey 23
the action research undertaken by one person or group will inform and better the work
of others, thus raising the bar for school improvement.
Learning together is stronger—Action research is not necessarily an independent

process. Koechlin suggests that more insight will be achieved if a teacher conferences
with others along the way and discusses approaches and analysis of evidence as well
as the refinement of approaches for next time. Collaborative teams could also develop
and implement action research that impacts on more than one classroom, or even a
whole school or district. The results may end up being more realistic than research con-
ducted by a single teacher in a single classroom or library. The Experimental Learning
Commons component as we (Koechlin, Loertscher, and Zwaan, 2011, 2008) have devel-
oped it in our work will make action research a natural in the learning commons. Some
of the challenges Koechlin identified for teacher-librarians who engage in action
research include:
• Time (many teacher-librarians are not full-time in the library)
• Dependence on collaboration of staff and students to follow through
• Board policies and privacy concerns
• Lack of knowledge about action research
• Trying to be too scientific
• Isolation (no one in their buildings with the same responsibilities and prob-
lems)
Koechlin felt that to help teacher-librarians conduct action research, it would be
important to design:
• A simple process guide
• A website with practical tools and templates for each stage of the process
• A portal for sharing action research projects
• Examples that demonstrate different approaches and varying levels of
complexity
• Opportunities to publish and share research
• Knowledge of formal academic research in school library programming to
link to
• Knowledge of learning science and best practice for teaching
Koechlin believes there are significant benefits for teacher-librarians and schools
in action research as summed up here.
Teacher-librarians:
• Professionalism, efficacy, and empowerment
• Keeping up with new technologies and teaching approaches
• Creativity and innovation
• Raised profile with staff and administration
• Evidence to negotiate for improved budgets, facilities, time, and staffing
Schools:
• Building the reading habit
• Building 21st-century skills and schools
• Building a collaborative school culture
• Engaged students and enthusiastic teachers
• School improvement
Keith Curry Lance earned a doctorate in sociology and expected an academic career
but fortunately for libraries, ended up working for 22 years at the Colorado State Library
(in Denver). For the last 20 of those years, he was the founding director of the Library
Research Service (LRS). The 1993 Colorado study The Impact of School Library Media Cen-
ters on Academic Achievement, as well as its successors in Colorado, Alaska, and Pennsyl-
vania in 2000 were all LRS projects. His subsequent involvement in other studies has
been as a private consultant, most often as a contractor to the RSL Research Group, which
is based in metro Denver. Although a supporter of action research, he is not keen on the
term itself. He prefers “evidence-based practice,” or “self-assessment,” two terms that
are extremely important both when informing one’s own professional practice and when
advocating for one’s program. The problem with the term “action research” is its use of
the term “research.” By definition, research—to be taken seriously—must be objective,
and nobody can study himself or herself objectively. Still, self-assessment is extremely
important. No field can claim to be a profession if its incumbents do not assess their
own performance with the goal of improving it. We talk about action research as if it
was something entirely new—some might even say a frill. On the contrary, it is absolutely
fundamental to any kind of serious professional practice. As it happens—in the environ-
ment in which school library programs find themselves these days—it is also vital to sur-
vival. Most teacher-librarians already feel that they already have plenty to do. If they are
not already doing action research, adding it to their already heavy workloads is not the
easiest sell. The three biggest selling points are:
1. If done and used well, it will improve your chances of survival.
2. It is a very useful tool for communication with educator colleagues at all
levels.
3. It is a way to learn how to improve your performance and your program.
Lance recommends teacher-librarians read books such as my earlier Action
Research: A Practical Guide for Transforming Your School Library (2002), David Loertscher
and Ross Todd’s We Boost Achievement: Evidence-Based Practice for School Library Media
Specialists (2005), and for an inspirational model, Leslie Preddy’s SSR with Intervention:
A School Library Action Research Project (2007). For a lot of articles on “evidence-based
practice” (think action research), Lance recommends resources assembled by the Ohio
Educational Library Media Association (http://oelma.org/). Lance’s advice to teacher-
librarians is, as the Nike ads say, JUST DO IT! And, for what it is worth, he has never
heard of anyone doing it and regretting it.
David Loertscher, a noted expert in the school library field who is now leading the
learning commons evolution, stated that for his entire career, he has been
The Journey 25
recommending measures that would gauge the impact of teacher-librarians and their
programs on teaching and learning and has had them published widely. The most
notable is Powering Achievement (3rd ed.) by Keith Curry Lance and David Loertscher
(Hi Willow Research and Publishing, 2005). David sees that most teacher-librarians
teach the research process to children and teens without realizing that they are teach-
ing the scientific method on which action research is based. The steps of both personal
topical research and action research are the same: ask a question, decide on a plan to
answer that question, find information/collect data, analyze the data/information
you have collected, synthesize your findings, prepare some kind of product/report
of what you found, and share your findings with the appropriate audience. Action
research has one major difference from formal research. It is not generalizable, mean-
ing that your findings apply only to your school or the class or group you studied.
Your findings do not apply to other schools or to the nation, even if they seem sensible.
Your findings do not apply to next year’s students, but if repeated a number of times,
then you establish a pattern that anyone would be hard pressed to dispute. Action
research is as basic to success as acquiring materials or teaching information literacy.
It focuses our attention on results, on outcomes, on impact, on value added—all of
which we desperately need across the profession and in one’s own school district or
school building if one expects to hold a job for very long. Loertscher recommends that
measures teacher-librarians should collect and make a part of their own inquiry into
the impact of their programs are not hard to imagine or carry out. Lance and
Loertscher focused on three major measures: those at the learner level, those at the
teaching unit level, and organizational measures. Teacher-librarians often assume that
organizational measures are sufficient. These include the number of books owned and
circulated, the number of databases available, the number of items circulated, and the
number of classes taught. While informative, none strike at the heart of teaching and
learning. For example, If a book circulates, is it read? Does it help raise reading scores?
Does it contribute to a lifelong reading habit? Teacher-librarians must probe deeper to
demonstrate value added.
The second type of measure, impact on teaching units, is much more critical. Here,
teacher-librarians are trying to demonstrate that two heads are better than one. During
a collaborative teaching experience alongside a classroom teacher, what happens to the
deep understanding of the topic at hand and the learning skills that are used to build
that content knowledge? What percentage of learners meet or exceed expectations
when collaborative teaching happens? Is that percentage higher than if classroom
teachers were to “go it alone” in the classroom? Again, Loertscher poses, are two heads
better than one? Teacher-librarians begin to discover their impact only if they carry
through with a learning experience beyond the mere finding of information. They
not only help in the finding, but in the use of that information as it appears in created
products, sharing, assessments, and reflection. Data from information use and impact
on learning provide a foundational element of value added.
The third type of action research should happen at the learner level. Here, teacher-
librarians concentrate on individuals and how they flourish in information-rich and
technology-rich environments. What happened when challenged learners were given
iPads and engaging problems to solve? When Juan leaned about Creative Commons
and digital citizenship, what happened to the products he began to create? When
Maria created her own personal learning environment online, what happened to her
interest and skill development across schooling?
Mary-Ann Mitchell-Pellet is currently an assistant principal at a middle school in

a satellite community near Calgary, Alberta, Canada. She is engaged in research in a
formal manner through doctoral studies at the University of Calgary, and her work
in schools on two previous research projects involving looking at the impact the “arts”
and “reflection” has upon improving the social and emotional skills of students. In
both of these projects, Mitchell-Pellet utilized a phenomenological research approach.
Currently working on a doctoral degree in education, she is completing research that
is exploring the possible benefits of Eastern philosophy in developing the inner poten-
tial and capabilities of educational leaders and teachers. To Mitchell-Pellet, action
research is an ongoing, cyclic process of identifying a problem, posing and implement-
ing a solution, measuring the progress, reflecting on the findings, and then starting the
whole process again. It is actually a natural process that effective teachers and admin-
istrators use all the time. It is a natural reflective process that helps one to reflect on
practice, reflect on what one would like to change, and then take action to implement
and measure those changes, reflect on progress, and on goes the cycle.
Mitchell-Pellet thinks this process would challenge educators who do not want to
change and grow in their practice. The action research process is obviously action ori-
ented, and causes one to stop and reflect, plan, take action, reflect again, and so on. But
those not committed to this change and growth process will probably not engage in
this practice. That being said, some educators may want to actually do this but need
a framework to assist them. Thus a framework or model to help them through the pro-
cess, as well as the reflection process, might be valuable and persuade them to take
part in the process if they were lacking some of the requisite skills. As well, having
educators reflect on their own problem-solving processes could also help them realize
how “natural” action research really is in their day-to-day lives, as we use it all the
time to solve problems and find solutions to everyday situations. The process would
help them to grow and move their own practice forward, improving areas that require
change. They can help other educators and students implement the practice of action
research in their own teaching and learning—thus aiding others in their own growth
and learning process. Doing action research is also an important life-long skill that
has much to offer anyone at any stage of life. The process can be applied in any sector
or situation—even outside the educational context. Providing these skills to the regular
classroom teacher, the school administrator, and the classroom student would be price-
less. The action research process is an important problem-solving tool and can be a
way to enhance creative and innovative thinking—since we ourselves are part of the
problem and the solution.
Dianne Oberg is a professor in teacher-librarianship in the Faculty of Education at

the University of Alberta in Canada. Before coming to the university, she was a class-
room teacher and teacher-librarian in Edmonton Public Schools. Oberg’s research
The Journey 27
focuses on teacher-librarianship education and on the implementation and evaluation

of school library programs. Oberg co-authored with Jennifer Branch the award-
winning professional document Focus on Inquiry: A Teacher’s Guide to Implementing
Inquiry-Based Learning (2004). She was an early adopter of online technology for
graduate-level education. Information on the development of teacher-librarianship
by distance learning at the University of Alberta has been widely disseminated, most
recently in an IGI Global publication called Cases on Building Quality Distance Delivery
Programs: Strategies and Experiences (2011). Oberg co-edited, with Luisa Marquardt, a
new International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) publica-
tion called Global Perspectives on School Libraries: Projects and Practices (2011). She was
the founding editor of the peer-reviewed international journal School Libraries World-
wide, which she edited for 15 years.
Oberg states that action research involves a systematic and cyclical investigation
of problems of practice. It begins with reflection on one’s practice, usually in concert
with others, in order to identify problems or areas for improvement. Working together
with others, the action researcher develops a plan of action to address a selected focus
of the investigation. Often, data has to be collected and analyzed to provide a founda-
tion for the plan of action. The plan of action then is implemented, including gathering
data about the outcome of the implemented plan. The outcomes are examined and
reflected upon in order to plan a second cycle of action, data gathering and reflection.
The cycles of research continue as needed to address the problem or improve the situa-
tion. Often, new problems or areas for improvement emerge from the ongoing cycles of
research, and one or more of these may be selected for future investigations. Action
research is a demanding form of research, and it takes time for planning and reflection
as well as for careful documentation and analysis of data. Since teacher-librarians
rarely have the time to work in such an intensive way, and many teacher-librarians
do not have the research training that would allow them to undertake action research
on their own, working with a research mentor or facilitator is often the best way for-
ward to successful action research work. According to Oberg, the focus on problems
of practice makes action research both practical and useful for teacher-librarians. It is
a form of evidence-based practice, combining action with research. With some fore-
thought, much of the data needed for this kind of research can be gathered as part of
the teaching-learning process.
Leslie Preddy has been the school librarian at Perry Meridian Middle School in
Indianapolis, Indiana, since 1992 and a past recipient of AASL’s Collaborative School
Library Media Award and School Library Media Program. She is a past president for
the Association for Indiana Media Educators (AIME), a past general chair of the state’s
Young Hoosier Book Award (YHBA) program, and recipient of AIME’s prestigious
Peggy L. Pfeiffer Service Award. She is a former Metropolitan School District (MSD)
of Perry Township Teacher of the year and a 2010 finalist for Indiana State Teacher of
the Year. Preddy has published a variety of articles in professional journals, has co-
created online resources, and has served as an adjunct professor for Indiana Univer-
sity, Indiana State University, and Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis
(IUPUI). She has completed major action research projects related to collaboration,
information inquiry, and sustained silent reading. Her book, SSR with Intervention: A
School Library Action Research Project (Libraries Unlimited, 2007) was named one of
the Best Professional Books of 2007 by Teacher Librarian, and her book Social Readers:
Promoting Reading in the 21st Century (Libraries Unlimited, 2010) was Highly Recom-
mended by Library Media Connection. Preddy states that action research helps her
confirm (or disprove) her educator hunch. She may think she knows what is the right
thing to do for her students, what feels right from her experience as a school librarian
or teacher-librarian. That is not always enough, though. It is important to confirm by
knowing what are current best practices and what research studies show. Sometimes,
though, what is found is not conclusive, or some local validation may be needed.
Action research helps by forcing Preddy to evaluate what she is doing, why she is
doing it, examine the current research, and collect, analyze, and interpret her own
research. In this way, she is able to validate to her teachers, community, administration,
and self what is important and what matters for the students and their families.
What Preddy finds least attractive about action research is the intimidation factor
combined with the time it requires. Just like her students being uncomfortable with
research when she first begins teaching them how to properly and effectively research,
we as adults often find the task of action research daunting due to its breadth and
scope. It is also a challenge to find the time when our profession is already so overcom-
mitted with more to be done in a day than seems humanly possible. Action research
has to be made a personal priority, or it will continue to be something to be done some
other day instead of today. What Preddy finds most useful about action research is the
validation. She can quote the research about why she does something this way or why
she recommends a certain action should be considered, but there is something magical
and powerful about being able to say, “When we did our own action research and col-
lected our own data, we found our students . . . ” When Preddy is able to tell a new fac-
ulty member who seems unfamiliar with the idea of a teacher-librarian that her action
research showed that students are more successful at obtaining core research skills and
have a higher final product completion rate just by co-teaching research with the
school librarian, they are more willing to step out of their comfort zone and are more
receptive to the idea of collaboratively planning and teaching with the school librarian.
Nancy Stuewe has been a classroom teacher, including special education,

kindergarten, and primary grades; at one school, she was encouraged to take on many
leadership roles, including teacher-librarian designate. This setting very much sup-
ported teacher learning. Stuewe also became the school’s educational technologist,
completing a master of education specializing in educational technology and taking
on the role of an Alberta Initiative for School Improvement (AISI) learning leader for
the 21st Century learning project to support teachers in three schools with meaningful
learning with technology. Stuewe is now completing her dissertation for a doctor of
education specializing in educational technology with a case study of teacher experi-
ence with unfamiliar technology. The study highlighted personalized learning for not
only the student, but also the teacher. Her research described a framework of enablers
for teachers to entertain new technology to support personalized learning as well as
constraints that stand in their way. Stuewe states that action research is a kind of
The Journey 29
personalized learning that is responsive and reflexive toward those that go about the
work of teaching and learning. The kinds of questions asked are intrinsic, requiring
active experiential learning. Action research is participatory in nature. Rather than
being told what to do, teachers learn by doing and perhaps respond by pragmatically
doing what needs to be done. The teacher’s role becomes interactive and responsive
to the needs of the learner. The teacher becomes a role model for learning how to learn
and how to deal with mistakes. A teacher-librarian has the potential to support not
only the student, but also the classroom teacher as they work toward more powerful
collaborative learning. The social construction framework supports this kind of learn-
ing. Stuewe is concerned that too many teachers view research as being disconnected
from the practice that they do in schools. The word “research” may pose a restricting
distance for some teachers; the more research is done outside the classroom, the more
teacher participation is limited, which thus increases the distance. This sort of data
becomes a mystery to the classroom. The more that school boards hire outside
researchers, the more pressure is put on administrators to tell teachers what to do,
rather than teachers discovering through their own curiosity. It becomes a “teacher
must” scenario, thus robbing teachers of an opportunity to engage in a dialogue with
each other and what they think they know. Stuewe is also concerned that too many
schools do not lay a foundation for teachers to become reflective practitioners (Schon,
1983). Given the nature of the current shift in educational practice from sources such
as Inspiring Education (Government of Alberta, 2010) more than ever, teachers and
teacher-librarians are being asked to teach in ways that they themselves were not
taught. It is essential for educators to be given the affordances that we know all learn-
ers need. Teacher-librarians should be given the ability to invest in themselves, to per-
sonalize what data is collected and how it would be utilized based on their situation.
Participatory action research gives teacher-librarians shared ownership toward com-
munity action. As Dewey (1916) suggested, experience and intelligent action are
linked.
Ross Todd is an associate professor at Rutgers University’s School of Communica-

tion and Information, Department of Library and Information Science. He is also a
director of CISSL (Center for International Scholarship in School Libraries) at Rutgers
University. He states that in the educational context, action research typically centers
on the mutual identification of a significant learning problem/dilemma, the design of
evidence-based interventions to address the learning dilemma, the interrogation of
data to examine the efficacy of the interventions and establish further actions, and
reflection on the process and outcomes to rethink and redesign further learning expe-
riences. Todd elaborates that while there are many models of action research and some
disagreement about methodology, its goal to him is to engage critically and systemati-
cally with evidence in practice to improve practice, and to enable this as part of a cyclic
process of improvement and growth. It is a systematic process to examine learning
behaviors and processes in naturalistic settings. So it is practice-oriented, solutions-
oriented, and situated in reflective practice. It is structured thusly: identifying the
learning dilemma (using existing evidence), establishing a framework to engage with
and inquire into the problem, engaging with the evidence to establish claims about
the efficacy of and impact of the intervention, and reflecting on that as part of the
continuous improvement cycle. At a simplistic level, it involves question, plan, inter-

vention, analysis, outcome/new action, and reflection, which leads back to the ques-
tion in an iterative process. Action research is predominantly situated in the
instructional arena of education. It affords school librarians the opportunity to collabo-
rate on a significant learning dilemma, to develop a mutually negotiated and imple-
mented solution, and to understand, through the collection of formative and
summative evidence, the efficacy of the interventions. It provides a rich framework
for gathering evidence. Despite “collaboration” being part of the rhetoric of school
librarians, the practice of instructional collaborations reported in the research literature
would suggest that for a variety of reasons, a substantial number of school librarians
do not collaborate. Collaboration demands that existing data is available—data that
the school librarian may have collected or the classroom teacher may have collected
in the course of students doing research tasks and/or information tasks involving the
library. Often, there is some systematic data that can be used to provide the warrant
for action research in the first place. One key challenge for those that do engage in
action research would be to design the action research plan, implement a range of evi-
dence gathering strategies, as well as engage with the data in a deep way to tease out
outcomes, impacts, and opportunities; to draw conclusions; and to establish further
actions. Engaging in action research shows the researchers their engagement with con-
tinuous school improvement; it encourages them to address learning dilemmas in
systematic and across-school ways; it builds their profile as educators committed to
learning improvement in the school. Todd is not as keen on the focus of action research
as a tool for school libraries; he thinks the value comes when using team-based
action research to examine instructional interventions targeted at improving learning.
It provides insights into own instructional practices.
Second Event: Teacher-Librarian Association Presidents Interviews

My second event involved discovering what current (2012) professional teacher-
librarian association leaders thought about my questions. I contacted my provincial
association, the Alberta Teacher’s Association Alberta School Library Council (ASLC),
Canadian; Voices for School Libraries (formerly Canadian Association for School
Libraries); and the American Association of School Librarians (AASL).
In Alberta, Holly Huber, learning specialist for the Integrated Community Clerk-
ship in the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Alberta, is 2011–2012 president of
the ASLC. Her work as a classroom teacher focused on constructivism as a mode to
explore social studies and language arts. She was keenly interested in carrying out
inquiries with her students related to the themed units that she developed. When
Huber became her school district’s facilitator for the new Social Studies Program of
Studies implementation project, she saw the challenges of requiring teachers to carry
out inquiry in general and historical inquiry specifically without support from a learn-
ing professional in the school library. Huber completed studies in teacher-librarianship
at the University of Alberta at the same time that her school district eliminated many
teacher-librarian positions. Huber has found other ways to engage in the activities of
The Journey 31
a teacher-librarian and to advocate for the inclusion of specially trained educators in

the library or learning commons context.
As learning specialist for the Integrated Community Clerkship in the Faculty of

Medicine at the University of Alberta, Huber ’s role is closely related to that of a
teacher-librarian in that she assists faculty in designing problem-based learning
scenarios for use in an online learning platform. Huber’s role as ASLC president is
to advocate for the inclusion of specially trained educators in the library or learning
commons context. She is currently encouraging the government of Alberta to adopt
a revised school library policy that reflects the needs of 21st-century educators
and learners. In Huber’s view, action research refers to the identification of a burning
question or problem within my practice that pushes me investigate in order to understand
better or come to some sort of resolution. The greatest deterrent to action research as a
professional growth tool is lack of time. Most teacher-librarians have only a fraction
of their day to devote to the multitude of tasks required of them. There is little
time to identify problems for investigation, let alone examine them for their scope or
implications.
Also, action research involves skill sets that may be missing or rusty for the
teacher-librarian. They may ask, “Where do I start? How I do I define my question?
Do I need permission?” Finally, Huber wonders about the “ego” of the individual.
Do people feel comfortable exposing something problematic in their practice to study
and share with others? What if the research involves colleagues? What effect could this
have on collegial relationships or the use of the library? Reflective practice is the basis
of any educator’s work. Action research is taking that reflective practice one step fur-
ther by investigating an observation or reflection so that one comes to a deeper under-
standing or improved practice. Could the action research that teacher-librarians
engage in be utilized in an advocacy role? Perhaps with their school councils, boards,
or professional organization?
Linda Shantz-Keresztes, past president of the (former) Canadian Association

for School Libraries and currently the chairperson for the Canadian Library Associa-
tion (CLA) Advisory Committee for School Libraries and Co-Moderator for CLA Voi-
ces for School Libraries Network, is a former teacher-librarian and education
consultant specializing in school libraries transforming into learning commons.
Shantz- Keresztes works with schools, school boards, and library conferences through-
out the province of Alberta. She also designs and facilitates webinars and courses. As
district specialist for the Calgary Board of Education, Shantz-Keresztes’s work
included selection and evaluation of learning resources for school libraries. She was
also teacher-librarian consultant for a provincial AISI project Revitalizing School Libra-
ries: Building Information Literate Learning Communities. Shantz-Keresztes sees
action research as a reflective process involving inquiry strategies with the outcome
to change professional practice. It involves a collaborative approach to research and
authentic inquiry to provide meaningful data collection that seeks to initiate positive
change. Action research is a process of change that includes planning, action, and fact
finding for intended results. The investment of time needed to develop a trusting col-
laborative relationship with participants to reflect on current teaching practices with
the intent for positive change could be a deterrent for some teacher-librarians. Personal
and professional risk-taking on the part of the teacher-librarian to explore his or her
own need for professional change could be intimidating. Planning for action research
and data collecting could be overwhelming within the daily demands of the one’s
workday. Lack of knowledge and support regarding action research could also chal-
lenge some teacher-librarians. The authentic nature of action research would be
appealing to teacher-librarians for professional development and improved teaching
practice within the school library. Using the inquiry process through a personalized
approach would be familiar to teacher-librarians and provide meaningful intent for
changing teaching practice. Action research projects initiated along with administra-
tors’ support would provide an excellent catalyst for a teacher-librarian’s professional
growth on behalf of improved student learning. Practical steps in engaging classroom
teachers in an action research project would be most useful for a teacher-librarian new
to action research. As a high school teacher-librarian, Shantz-Keresztes successfully
collaborated with teachers in planning for personalized inquiry projects with their
classes. This was an informal action research project with the intent to change teacher
practice to better engage students through personally committing to a meaningful
research assignment. Shantz-Keresztes and the teachers were pleased with student
engagement and their subsequent deeper personal understanding of their projects out-
comes. Shantz-Keresztes finds that action research needs to be modeled for many
teaching professionals, including teacher-librarians. As instructional leaders within a
school, teacher-librarians would benefit greatly from the use of action research in pro-
moting improved teaching practices. The practical nature and inquiry approach of
action research aligns well with the collaborative planning practices already evident
between teachers and teacher-librarians.
Carl A. Harvey II, the award-winning school librarian, author, and conference pre-
senter from North Elementary School in Noblesville, Indiana, was the 2011–2012
president of the American Association of School Librarians (AASL). In AASL, Harvey
has also served as chair of the Affiliate Assembly; co-chair for the 2007 National
Conference in Reno, Nevada; and a member-at-large on the AASL Board of Directors.
Harvey is a past-president of the Association for Indiana Media Educators (AIME) and
the Indiana Library Federation (ILF). He has published several articles in various pro-
fessional journals—including School Library Journal, Library Media Connection, School
Library Monthly, and Teacher-Librarian. He has written three books: The Library Media
Specialist in the Writing Process (co-authored with Marge Cox and Susan Page, 2007);
No School Library Left Behind: Leadership, School Improvement, and the Media Specialist
(2008); and The 21st Century Elementary Library Media Program (2010) (Linworth).
Harvey has also presented at numerous state and national conferences. His awards
include Outstanding New Library Media Specialist (1999), Outstanding Media Spe-
cialist (2007), and the Peggy L. Pfeiffer Service Award (2007)—all from the Association
for Indiana Media Educators/Indiana Library Federation. The library media program
at North Elementary School has been recognized with the Blue Ribbon for Exemplary
School Media Programs by the Association for Indiana Media Educators (2005) and
The Journey 33
the prestigious National School Library Media Program of the Year Award (2007) from
the American Association of School Librarians. Harvey has served on advisory boards
for several different companies as well as part of the committee that revised the
Library Media Standards for the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards
in 2010. To Harvey, action research means determining a problem or concern using
available data, implementing a solution, collecting data to confirm the impact of the
solution, sharing the results, and then adjusting or making changes based on the
results. The data can be a piece to demonstrate the impact of the school library and/
or school librarian on the school. Data drives what is happening in schools, and having
local data for one’s school and library can tell powerful stories. It also is reflective
because you can think about what you do and why you do it. The data can help you
begin to think about what changes in your program might need to be made to move
forward, or it could solidify a long-standing practice as a crucial part of the program.
Harvey thinks that the research must be focused on instruction and student learning.
The core of the library program is the impact it has on students, so having data to tell
that story is important.
Third Event: Interviews with Practicing Teacher-Librarians and District

School Library Specialists
The third event was to discover what current practicing teacher-librarians in
schools or districts thought about my questions on action research. I contacted practi-
tioners with whom I had worked, knew through professional associations, or were rec-
ommended to me by other participants. I was curious to see how their responses
would compare with the experts, researchers, and association leaders.
Anita Brooks Kirkland is the consultant for K-12 libraries for the Waterloo Region
District School Board (in Ontario, Canada), supporting the library program in 118
elementary and secondary schools. She is a frequent workshop presenter at the
Ontario Library Association’s Super Conference, the Partnership’s Education Institute,
school districts, subject associations, and other education organizations. She has pub-
lished many articles in Teaching Librarian, School Libraries in Canada, and Partnership:
The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research. She served on the
Ontario School Library Association Council from 2002 to 2009 and was the associa-
tion’s president in 2005. She has worked on several projects for the association, most
notably as a member of the writing team for its recent guideline publication, Together
for Learning: School Libraries and the Emergence of the Learning Commons (2010). Currently,
Brooks Kirkland is co-chair of the Association of Library Consultants and Coordina-
tors of Ontario (TALCO), and was on the founding board of directors of Knowledge
Ontario. She was the 2009 recipient of the Ontario Library Association’s Larry Moore
Distinguished Service Award. Brooks Kirkland holds a master of library and informa-
tion science degree, having graduated from the Executive MLIS program at San José
State University’s School of Library and Information Science in 2010 (in San Jose,
California). Brooks Kirkland is an Ontario Certified Teacher and has additional teach-
ing qualifications as a School Library Specialist. She has 28 years of experience as a
teacher, teacher-librarian, and library consultant in Ontario’s public school system.
Brooks Kirkland views action research as providing an opportunity to explore the

efficacy of specific practices and instructional strategies in “real-life” situations. While
the results of one action research project should not be extrapolated as applying to
other situations, a body of action research can provide valuable insight for the profes-
sion and increased credibility in the educational community. Action research is the log-
ical next step in today’s context, where instructional strategies are expected to be more
precise and responsive to the differentiated needs of students. More and more educa-
tors are expected to use their school-based information to inform practice. In the learn-
ing cycle model, teachers use assessment data to respond effectively to emerging
needs. Where a few years ago, talk of evidence-based practice seemed mysterious
and vaguely threatening, it is now integral to practice. Action research can formalize
this already existing context to provide greater insight into teaching and learning
practice.
Why is action research critical for school libraries? Brooks Kirkland points out that
large co-relational studies have shown a relationship between school library programs
and student success but have not effectively answered specifically how those pro-
grams make that difference. And “how” is the question we are most frequently asked
and have the greatest difficulty answering. Individual action research projects can start
to explore how different aspects of the school library program and instructional strate-
gies used in those programs impact student learning. A body of action research has the
potential to answer some of those how questions more precisely and confidently.
Through action research, we can move beyond sweeping platitudes that sometimes
characterize old-style advocacy to provide clear and precise reasoning. Old-style advo-
cacy has at times been perceived as self-serving by the rest of the educational commu-
nity. Action research provides opportunities to explore how school library programs
advance the larger goals of K-12 education. Most importantly, good action research
can teach us about ourselves and help us to improve our own practice.
Many teacher-librarians and other school library professionals may not be aware
of the benefits of action research. Understanding that the key goal of action research
is insight into one’s own practice might encourage more to undertake projects. Seeing
the big picture, and where action research might help to move the profession forward,
is not at the center of attention for many. The whole idea of doing research within the
context of daily practice might seem daunting to many. Understanding the specifics
of action research might help to allay this fear and make the process seem more doable.
As with everything else, finding time is always a huge concern. However, Brooks
Kirkland reminds us that we manage to find time for the things that are important to
us. Understanding the benefits of action research for the person carrying it out as well
as for the larger profession might make it a stronger priority. Otherwise, it will always
be “one more thing.”
Most teacher-librarians work in some degree of isolation. While others in the

school may appreciate their contribution, the teacher-librarian, like other specialized
teachers in the school, may have few opportunities to bounce ideas off of another
teacher from their particular area of specialization. While many school districts have
The Journey 35
central support specifically for teacher-librarians and/or strong subject associations,

many do not. Taking on action research within this context may seem too daunting
for many. Where a library program is already compromised, carrying out action
research may seem like an impossible task. A teacher-librarian who has less than a
full-time schedule and who is required to fill half of that schedule with kindergarten
covering a kindergarten teacher’s class while the teacher is off having preparation
time, for example, may feel that they have nothing meaningful to contribute, and noth-
ing to learn, given their circumstances.
If teacher-librarians already perceive that their role is valued at the school and
school system in which they work, they may be more motivated to explore instruc-
tional strategies through action research. There might be more hope that their findings
would receive some attention and that the school might support subsequent innova-
tions in practice. In a school or school system where the role of the teacher-librarian
is already undervalued, motivation may be more of an issue.
While there are many resources available about action research, a rich online tool-
kit created by a credible professional organization would be a tremendous benefit.
Working within a defined structure might add some credibility to the research being
undertaken.
When we have the opportunity to work together as professionals, the results are
almost always better than when we work in isolation. Opportunities for teacher-
librarians to collaborate and support each other as they carry out action research may
be not only motivating, but would likely foster stronger research methodology and
therefore more credible results.
Whatever projects are undertaken, they need to be relevant to the current context
of K-12 and seek to align with current goals in education. We can say quite confidently
that library programs add value to education, but can we give precise examples of
how? Do the examples we provide demonstrate that our contributions move the
overall goals of education forward? If we cannot explain how what we do moves the
mission of the overall institution forward, we will continue to be perceived as super-
fluous. Action research is being used more and more in education as a whole for
exploring specific instructional strategies. Teacher-librarians’ action research needs to
be as credible as any other practitioner’s, and that means that we need to be seen as
being part of the whole, not a voice on the side.
Jo-Anne Gibson, past president of the Manitoba Teacher-Librarian Association,

has been a teacher-librarian for six years and a teacher for 27 years, primarily teaching
junior high band. She had taken one research course as part of her masters of education
program but had never formally conducted or written an academic research thesis or
paper. Gibson had conducted many action research projects as a band teacher in the
past and continues to do this as a teacher-librarian. To her as a teacher-librarian, action
research means undertaking any kind of reflective study, whether formal or informal,
which leads to the improvement of student achievement and students’ love of reading.
Gibson constantly looks for ways to improve the library program and believes this can
be accomplished, in large measure, by using the action research model to reflect on
what she does as a teacher. Gibson thinks the word “research” scares many teacher-
librarians away. If teacher-librarians think that they have to collect data and
then present it in a formal report, they may shy away from attempting any type of
“research.” Teacher-librarians need to understand that action research does not have
to consist of creating a formal research proposal and carrying out “traditional”
research. It can be that if they want, but in Gibson’s experience, the most rewarding
type of research she has conducted as a teacher-librarian has been thinking about her
students and their context, and brainstorming various ways the library program can
be improved for them.
Once Gibson decides on a plan, she carries it out, takes time to collect evidence of
what she is trying to achieve, and then reflects on whether the plan improved student
learning or the love of reading. Gibson sees action research closely linked to the con-
cept of evidence-based practice and is constantly collecting evidence about whether
what she teaches by herself or in collaboration with other teachers is making a
difference. This, to her, is action research. She then takes this research and adapts it,
if necessary, to improve the library program. It is this constant cycle of planning-
teaching-reflecting-planning that is at the heart of action research. Gibson provides
an example of how she used action research in the school library: “I was brainstorming
with a group of ELA teachers in our school about how to increase the amount of reading stu-
dents do over the course of the year and how to get some students even reading at all. I had just
attended an in-service led by Faye Brownlie and she had discussed a new approach to literature
circles that, among other things, allows students to read as many books as they want during the
course of the 3- to 4-week literature circle program. So we put together a study group to read
more about the program and then developed a plan of attack that we thought would work with
our students. We began by interviewing the students about their current reading habits; this
was our baseline data. We then introduced the new literature circle program (most were used
to being assigned roles and being able to ready only one book that the teacher often assigned)
and carried out the lessons according to our plan. The data we collected over the course of the
program allowed us to see that instead of reading just one book in the course of 3 or 4 weeks,
the majority of students read at least 2, if not 3, 4 or even 5 books during this time period. Even
our most challenged readers all finished at least one book, which for them was an improvement.
Our teaching team got together after the pilot program, tweaked a few of the assignments based
on what we observed, and then implemented the program in many more ELA classes through-
out the course of the year. We still can’t believe the amount of reading that’s now being done
by our students in our ELA classes as compared to past years.”
Heather Godden in Newfoundland has an undergraduate degree in elementary

education and a graduate degree in learning resources from Memorial University.
She has been teaching since 1986, with the major portion of her teaching experience
dedicated to the school library and teacher-librarianship. Her research began about
seven years ago when her sons were 10 and eight. Her husband used to declare himself
a “non-reader,” which concerned her related to her sons’ reading futures and inspired
her to want to change her husband’s self-perception, so Godden began reading
The Journey 37
literature about boys and reading. She developed a successful boys (only) reading pro-
gram called BURP—Boy’s Undercover Reading Program—which she presented to the
other teacher-librarians in her district. Several began the program in their schools. She
believes that action research means to research something to address/solve a problem
while simultaneously working on it. So one would develop an idea/plan (e.g., a boys
reading program), observe it in action (try it out with the help and cooperation of the
boys and teachers), adjust and modify to change an approach or technique (seek feed-
back from boys and teachers), and continue to work on it until the problem is solved
(the program flows smoothly, and time for reading increases in demand). Teacher-
librarians may find action research challenging because they are often asked to take
on alot in the schools. In Newfoundland, there is no provincial job description for a
teacher-librarian, and the ministry document that incorporates staffing requirements
is over 20 years old and dated with an allocation of one teacher-librarian to 750 stu-
dents. Most teacher-librarians in Newfoundland and Labrador thus work two jobs—
teaching in the classroom as well as the library—so their greatest challenge related to
action research is time to engage in the research. Godden was both professionally
and personally invested and passionate about what she wanted to know, which is
why she began her action research. She truly felt driven and once she began talking
to the boys in her school about their reading and what she proposed to do, she was fur-
ther inspired and made the time to begin her action research. She learned that as a
teacher-librarian with 25 years experience, you have to choose each year a particular
area of focus: whether it be planning, developing, and teaching resource-based units,
Internet safety, blogging, and so on rather than trying to “do it all” as she might have
done in her less experienced days.
An introduction to the formal idea of action research might plant a seed for
teacher-librarians who might otherwise not have thought of engaging in any. Godden
had not heard the term or concept before this year and really did not know that what
she was doing was actually known as a type of action research until introduced to it
by another colleague and her project. Finding time was difficult—sometimes an educa-
tional leave would be practical and useful or having help such as the parent and com-
munity volunteers in Godden’s case who took on some of the day-to-day clerical work
thus enabling the teacher-librarian to begin and carry out the research.
Donna Grove has 22 years of experience as a teacher-librarian in K-6 and K-8 rural
and urban schools, and served as a teacher-librarian consultant within the Calgary
Board of Education. She holds a diploma in school libraries from the University of
Alberta and one from the University of Calgary in curriculum and instruction. She
holds a bachelor of education from the University of Calgary and has recently com-
pleted a masters of administration at Gonzaga University (in Spokane, Washington)
with a capstone project entitled “Transforming Your School Library to a Learning
Commons.”
Grove’s understanding of action research is that it is an inquiry done by school

personnel—including teachers, administration, and support staff—within an over-
arching goal of increased student achievement. And it involves a lot of work. This
inquiry/action research is started with a question, a need, or identification of an area of

focus followed by collecting data. The work is to analyze and interpret the data that
have been collected, leading toward developing a plan of action. Grove found the book
by Craig Mertler Action Research: Teachers as Researchers in the Classroom a good refer-
ence. At the Calgary Board of Education, they work within the “data wise improve-
ment process or adjustment cycle” shown in Figure 3.2 (Parker Boudet, City, &
Murnane, 2005) for school improvement referenced within the board’s Three-Year
Education Plan.
This cyclical process is cemented within the professional learning community’s

conversations, which lead them to focused, teacher-driven results-oriented research
within the school learning community. Grove worked in this context as a teacher-
librarian consultant in an area with 45 schools. This work was funded by the Alberta
Initiative for School Improvement (AISI). The project was entitled “Revitalizing School
Libraries” (https://extranet.education.alberta.ca/aisiclearinghouse/Forms/Search
Projects.aspx?CHFileAction=Search&SearchID=1&C4N#SearchResult).
This project required a teacher-librarian consultant in each of five areas of the

Calgary Board of Education to have responsibility for all of the schools in that area
and collaborate with school personnel in building the capacity of students, teachers,
administrators, and parents to create information literate learning communities. As
required, the consultant teacher-librarian coordinated site-based professional develop-
ment in teaching and learning related to information literacy strategies. Grove worked
closely with the library staff of each school to provide the most appropriate resources
for the needs of all learners. She worked on library collection renewal and implement-
ing inquiry-based learning projects that would further the information literate learning
communities. The project had three improvement goals with 13 key strategies:
Goals
1. Support the understanding and development of information literate learning
communities through inquiry-based learning.
2. Revitalize school libraries.
3. Support the implementation of a new automated library system to improve
student achievement.
Key Strategies
1. Familiarize teachers and administrators with a variety of resources to meet
diverse learning needs.
2. Provide a variety of resources to support students’ inquiry-based learning.
3. Familiarize teachers and administrators with information literacy strategies
and characteristics.
4. Mentor and coach teachers and administrators to become information
literate learners.
5. Initiate site-based conversations about information literacy needs.
The Journey 39
Figure 3.2. The Data Wise Improvement Process

Source: “The Data Wise Improvement Process” figure, from Data Wise: A Step-by-
Step Guide to Using Assessment Results to Improve Teaching and Learning, by Kathryn
Parker Boudett, Elizabeth A. City, and Richard J. Murnane (eds.), 5. Copyright ©
2005 President and Fellows of Harvard College. All rights reserved. For more
information, please visit www.harvardeducationpress.org.
6. Support information literate learners through collection development plan-

ning, both electronic and print.
7. Offer professional development opportunities to teachers, administrators,
and library staff.
8. Meet with area directors and system assistant principals regarding system
renewal plans.
9. Meet with school administrators, teachers, and library staff regarding the
renewal of their school library.
10. Collaborate with other area and system AISI projects.
11. Support library staff in library management and circulation.
12. Provide support for readying the school library environment for teaching
and learning (physical facilities and collections).
13. Build teacher capacities to instruct students in the use of the online web
library catalogue.
Grove thinks that this Alberta Initiative for School Improvement (AISI) project on
21st-century learning is an example of action research; that the schools she worked
with attempted to promote inquiry-based programming with technology and informa-
tion literacy strategies for both teachers and students. Though it does not directly lend
itself to a specific library/learning commons action research project, it would not be
difficult to see that although many schools have identified projects such as writing,
mathematical problem solving, creativity, and inquiry as areas of growth, the role of
the instructional leader—whether it be a teacher-librarian, an administrator, or a
school technology teacher—has a strong influence in the adjustment cycle.
Grove feels that three challenges to a teacher-librarian embarking on action

research as a professional growth tool might include:
• The teacher-librarian’s research focus may not be a school-wide area for
growth; consequently, gaining support from other teachers and professional
staff may be an issue.
• Experience with collecting data—knowing what to collect, why one is collect-
ing it, and how to best interpret that data honestly.
• Finding time during the school day to conduct focus groups, data collection,
and so on may be challenging in schools of any size.
However, Grove feels that conducting action research as a teacher-librarian is practical
and useful. If we truly believe that the school library learning commons is central to student
learning—whether it is within the four walls of an identified space or philosophically the
learning commons as the entire school—then action research would only strengthen the
day-to-day work to enrich professional practice and continually advance student achieve-
ment. Too often, teacher-librarians, because they bring a unique professional skill set to the
learning environment, can become isolated. The notion of conducting action research through-
out an entire school learning community/information literate learning community enables
the teacher-librarian to be actively engaged as an instructional leader within the school.
Grove strongly believes in the use of focus groups with students as an effective
and enlightening tool to gain perception data about what is occurring in a learning
commons. The professional learning community would benefit from having this form
of data to make improvements in the delivery and structure that creates a learning
community that is engaging and based on inquiry. If we believe that the school library
learning commons is a place for collaboration, curiosity, critical thinking, communica-
tion (the four Cs), and creativity for learners, we must honestly and transparently ana-
lyze our work. This notion of the four Cs is taken from Craig Mason’s article entitled
“New Schools Are Shelving the Old Library” (2011).
As an experienced teacher-librarian, Grove thinks that if we want our school libra-

ries to survive the technological transition that the world is experiencing, we need to
be forward thinking in transforming the school library to a learning commons. The
library needs to move from being a warehouse of books to an inviting, collaborative,
resource-rich learning space. To do this successfully, an entire school staff needs to
engage in philosophical conversations about learning, assessment, teacher practice,
The Journey 41
and change theory because a learning commons is more than just a physical space; it is
a cultural shift within a school that through action research examines literacy, technol-
ogy, best practice, and development of student strategies that enable them to be active
participants in society.
Erin Hansen has been a teacher-librarian for nine years spanning grades K-12 and
professional, but mostly focused at middle and high school students. She is also a
senior education specialist (School Library Learning Commons, Evaluation and Selec-
tion of Resources) for the Calgary Board of Education in Alberta, Canada and is cur-
rently literacy, numeracy and school libraries manager for Alberta Education,
Alberta, Canada. Hansen has engaged in several informal action research projects with
staff and students in the schools where she has worked. She has also consulted on sev-
eral initiatives in her position as specialist. Topics had to do with issues related to
information literacy, digital citizenship, and technology integration within the library
learning commons. Hansen views action research as research that is current, relevant,
and happening right now. It is not in the abstract and is less philosophical than some
more formal types of research. It allows for somewhat immediate testing of a hypoth-
esis and viewing of results, and is less future-oriented. It can be very collaborative as
a participatory project and often is more hands-on and less about rigorous detached
observation. It is often less formal than other types of research and can require less
research design; the reporting process is often more informal than for other types of
research. Data is often more heavily focused on observation (qualitative). The term
“action research” has been around for quite a while so may seem “out of fashion” or
dated, yet Hansen does not believe that we have fully explored the potential of this
powerful tool; therefore, efforts to highlight the benefits would hopefully inspire
teacher-librarians to try it. The challenge is to make people realize that it can actually
be a teacher-librarian’s everyday work or an integral part of the work instead of an
add-on or extra to the workload. Teachers and schools in the Calgary Board of Educa-
tion are currently involved in a type of action research in schools where professional
learning communities (PLCs) are functioning well. Strategically making the connection
to this PLCs and perhaps making the intended action research a part of a PLC or an
extension of one would be a fantastic way for a teacher-librarian to validate an action
research project, thus making it more obviously part of the work. PLCs in the Calgary
Board of Education are often focused around the Adjustment Cycle, as described in
“The Data Wise Improvement Process” by Kathryn Parker Boudett, Elizabeth A. City,
and Richard J. Murnane (2005), which has strong links to action research and is a great
starting point for discussion (Figure 3.2), as it has already established common terms
and understandings to build from.
Hansen states that action research is useful to test a hypothesis rather than merely
guessing or predicting. It can be great to prove a point to teachers, students, adminis-
trators, and parents. It can allow for practical ways to collaborate with staff that allow
for loose rigor and less effort than more formalized protocols of research. It has a “here
and now” appeal. Results and lessons learned can be more immediate. The ability to
collaborate in learning/research supports the mandate of the teacher-librarian role.
Being able to demonstrate and engage in thoughtful processes around action research
that benefit student learning is of value to the teacher-librarian (in terms of justifying
and demonstrating the importance of the role), the teacher, and the student.
Lily Moayeri, teacher-librarian at the Edwin Markham Middle School, LAUSD,

conducted an action research project when she was previously teaching algebra and
geometry, entitled “Making Mathematics Meaningful through Project-Based Learn-
ing.” This action research explored alternative approaches to teaching mathematics
other than direct instruction that result in deeper comprehension and longer retention
of the material. A series of teacher-developed algebra and geometry projects incorpo-
rating literacy, personalization, personification, information literacy, and interdiscipli-
nary components are implemented over the course of a three-year period to students
at a gifted/high ability magnet school. Student project scores and overall scores are
examined quantitatively to determine correlation between the two variables. These
are then correlated with the students’ performance on the state standards test. This is
followed by qualitative student interviews to assess their feelings about the projects
and determine the long-term effects of the projects on comprehension and retention.
When asked about what challenged her in the action research, Moayeri found the
question itself to be very strange for a librarian to answer considering it is the core of
what we do and teach, but she found the search process for the literature review very
tedious. The process is so time-consuming that it could prove frustrating with both
the limited and unlimited results it generates. The best part of action research for
Moayeri is moving away from theoretical to practical. Instead of just speculating and
regurgitating what others have done, she feels that you get to put your own ideas into
action, as it were, and get quantifiable data from them—as a “math person,” she is all
about measurable results. Her projects generated a lot of interest from teachers, admin-
istrators, parents, and even students, but looking back and actually measuring their
impact took that interest to alot more of a concrete level.
Moayeri has moved to the library and has been working with the math depart-
ment at her new school, bringing them resources and trying to show them different
ways to teach the standards that have had better results for her. She has used some of
the information from her research to back up/reinforce what she has achieved with
her previous projects. Reporting or sharing the results of an idea put into action is
effective in either “proving” your ideas correct, or incorrect, as the case may be.
Moayeri reflects that more time to do the research for teacher-librarians in their
workplace would be a desirable factor for others in getting started, as well as the
cooperation of teachers.
Rhonda Morrissette is in her sixth year as teacher-librarian at the Winnipeg Adult

Education Centre, in her eighth year as a teacher-librarian, and her twenty-fourth year
as a teacher in the Winnipeg School Division. The physical library at the Winnipeg
Adult Education Centre is on the third floor of the Isbister School, a beautiful building
dedicated as a heritage or historical building in downtown Winnipeg. The library
serves seven diverse locations under the administrative umbrella of the Winnipeg
Adult Education Centre: Isbister School, Adult Learning Centre, Kaakiyow li moond
likol, River-Osborne, Taking Charge, Adolescent Parent Centre, and Transition,
The Journey 43
Education and Resources for Females. Over 1,100 students attend one or more location
at any given time over the course of the school year. The programs include adult liter-
acy through to regular grade 12 programs. A large proportion of students are new
Canadians who require instruction in English as an additional language. About 44 per-
cent of learners are Aboriginal. Given the distance and diversity of Morrissette’s school
programs, she makes every effort to maintain a virtual library environment and 24/7
access for off-site staff and students. Hers is the first school library in Canada to host
a school download library through Overdrive, which includes over 900 items of inter-
est and relevance to her adult and adolescent students (http://www.overdrive.com/
Solutions/Schools/K12/SDL/).
To Morrissette, action research means posing a question to research with students

in order to find practical solutions to a problem. One challenge may be limited access
to students for action research. Collaborating teachers often feel overburdened by cur-
ricular demands and “guard” student time very closely. There are transformational
changes happening in education, which Morrissette finds can lead to very exciting
times, but it is also challenging for those baffled by rapid changes. Action research
can help illuminate how education is changing from a student’s perspective and find
answers from within one’s own learning community to best meet specific student
needs.
For example, action research helped Morrissette solve a problem in her first year
at her new school library. Some staff and students told her the noise level in the study
area of the library was too high. They wanted a no-talking rule in place, which she felt
was not consistent with what we know about learning as a social process. They also
wanted music through earphones and ear buds banned. Challenged by lack of space
for quiet break-out rooms or other areas for groups to meet and discuss, she needed
to somehow balance the needs of those asking for quiet versus those needing discus-
sion to help them learn. She decided to create a short and simple survey to ask students
if the current noise levels in the library were acceptable, whether students should be
able to listen to music with their personal devices, and whether they should be able
to engage in discussions at the study tables (quantitative data). She left the survey on
the study tables for a week along with a box nearby for students to drop their anony-
mous responses. After a week of collecting responses, she collated them and left that
on the study tables for students to review. The overwhelming responses were that
the noise levels were acceptable, students should be able to listen to music on their per-
sonal devices, and they should be able to have quiet discussions in the library. Just
bringing up the topic up for consideration/reflection resulted in some positive
changes:
• The occasional loud laughter, raucous discussions and loud music from
personal devices was reduced.
• Those asking for a no-talking rule backed down after reading how important
being able to discuss (quietly) ideas was to many students.
• Library staff, including Morrissette, got a real sense of the nature and volume
of noise acceptable to most students.
Morrissette’s current action research involves one of the school priorities—inclu-

sion and respect for diversity. Her school developed an outdoor Medicine Wheel
Teaching Garden with the guidance of an Aboriginal elder. He left them with an
important task—to find symbolism to represent and resonate with all the students
and from all four directions that were to be placed in the teaching garden and around
the school, including the library and student lounge. As chair of the teaching garden
committee, Morrissette created a process to allow students to decide on the symbolism.
She called open student meetings and recorded qualitative data from their first brain-
storming sessions. She then synthesized the data and sent it back to all who attended
for their review/revisions. After a few minor suggestions were incorporated, she
wrote up the problem and suggestions from the focus group for the student newsletter,
including an invitation for any and all students to share their thoughts and ideas. The
draft chart is found in Figure 3.3.
Morrissette incorporated suggestions from other students as a result of the news-

letter article and presented to the garden committee and then the staff. Once students
and staff reach consensus, the suggested symbolism will be presented to the guiding
elder. Finally, an artist or artists will be commissioned to create imagery that reflects
the symbols of inclusion that are decided upon for posting in the circle garden, library,
and student lounge.
Sharon Seslija is a teacher-librarian in the province of Ontario with 21 years expe-

rience at both the elementary and secondary levels. Her school library experience is as
a secondary teacher-librarian, and her library program reflected the ideas in an Ontario
education document called “Partners in Action,” which advocated collaborative plan-
ning, teaching, and assessing with the classroom teacher. Currently, she is a teacher
consultant with the Greater Essex County District School Board, and her portfolio
includes School Libraries (K-12), Health and Physical Education (K-12), Secondary
English, New Teacher Induction Program (secondary), and secondary school profes-
sional learning support. Her current focus in school libraries is to support teacher-
librarians in their professional learning as they align their program with school and
board student achievement goals. One of the ways that they do this is through collabo-
rative inquiry.
Seslija states that “action research” was a term previously used in her board
involving the identification of an issue/problem/need by a teacher or group of teach-
ers; development of a research question, research, and teacher learning around the
question; implementation of an idea to address the issue, data collection, and analysis;
then a report and sharing of the information and next steps. They now call it collabora-
tive inquiry. The difference is that action research involves one teacher, whereas col-
laborative inquiry involves a group of teachers. For elementary teacher-librarians, the
challenge is their time in the school library and how they are scheduled based on stu-
dent numbers. As a result, there are small schools with teacher-librarians who are
scheduled as 0.2, meaning they have one or two periods a week to work exclusively
in the library. Obviously, being the teacher-librarian is a small part of their teaching
>
Figure 3.3 Morissette Project Chart
assignment, and they do not feel that they would commit to collaborative inquiry
around school library programs. Another barrier is what they are expected to do with
those scheduled library periods. Many of the teacher-librarians are designated as
“prep coverage,” which means they provide prep periods of classroom teachers where
the teacher-librarian teaches the class and the classroom teacher is given time out of the
class to prepare instruction. For secondary teacher-librarians, challenges are also
related to staffing. Secondary teachers are staffed either full time or half-time in Seslija’s
board. The full-time teacher-librarians are on a flexible schedule. Half-time teacher-
librarians are flexible when they have a library period but are teaching other courses
the rest of their schedule. At the secondary level, there are collaboration challenges
because content coverage is foremost in the classroom teacher’s mind; many often feel
that collaboration on inquiry-based learning takes too much time away from learning
content, not realizing that inquiry-based learning can be more engaging to students.
Collaborative inquiry is based on the teacher-librarian’s practice and what is seen as

student need within their schools. It is expected that library programs align with school
goals, so many of the collaborative inquiry projects are based on school achievement
data. Teacher-librarians, who are often considered peripheral staff, can have a venue to
demonstrate that what they do in the library has an impact on students. It also gives them
a job-embedded avenue for professional learning and development of their skills. Seslija
states that they have found that sharing the results of teacher-librarian collaborative
inquiry with administrators has assisted in providing evidence that the library program
is valuable and can have an impact on both teachers and students. This has resulted in
principals providing some positive movement related to staffing in their school libraries.
Lydia Elizabeth Smith-Davis (California State University–Long Beach) conducted

an action research project at Lutheran High School of Orange County, California:
“Bullying in the Digital Age: Implications for the Teacher Librarian.” Smith-Davis
was drawn to the issue because devastating student suicides and other unfortunate
incidents have made bullying in the digital age a hotly trending topic. The purpose
of her proposal was to determine if Lutheran High School was adequately addressing
and prepared for (cyber)bullying concerns and what the specific implications are for
the teacher-librarian. Three sets of data were analyzed: the Olweus Bullying Question-
naire, administered online to a representative sample of the school’s student popula-
tion; a survey titled “Is Your School Adequately Addressing or Prepared for Cyber
Bullying Concerns?” reprinted from Bullying beyond the Schoolyard: Preventing and
Responding to Cyber-Bullying by Sameer Hinduja and Justin W. Patchin (2009), given
to administrators; and an interview conducted with a focus group composed of the
Orange Lutheran Student Leadership Team. Implications for the teacher-librarian
included the need to collaborate, especially with the director of educational technology
to develop information literacy and digital citizenship curriculum materials “matched
to content standards and a plan to implement that curriculum”, (Ribble and Bailey,
2004, 14). In compliance with International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE)
Standards for Digital Citizenship, students should understand human, cultural, and
societal issues related to technology and practice legal and ethical behavior. Specifi-
cally, students should (1) advocate and practice safe, legal, and responsible use of
The Journey 47
information and technology; (2) exhibit a positive attitude toward using technology
that supports collaboration, learning, and productivity; (3) demonstrate personal
responsibility for lifelong learning; and (4) exhibit leadership for digital citizenship.
Students need to be taught about ethical use of information in a manner that allows
them to make decisions and understand the consequences of those decisions. The
teacher-librarian needs to work with students, teachers, administrators, parents, and
community members to create a forum for dialogue about ethical and unethical tech-
nology behavior (Ribble & Bailey, 2004). Resources and information need to be readily
accessible both from within the library learning commons and online. Policies regard-
ing acceptable use of technology need to be updated and staff development opportuni-
ties provided. Assessment should be conducted on a regular basis so that trend data
can be reviewed to determine whether certain problems are improving or worsening
over time (Hinduja and Patchin, 2009). Peer mentoring programs could be utilized.
The teacher-librarian could collaborate with advisors of campus programs such as
the Student Leadership Team, Ignite, and Student Ambassadors to teach Digital
Citizenship Curriculum. As a member of the Student Leadership Team focus group
anonymously noted: “No matter what we tell students, with surveys, stats, or
announcements, bullying will keep happening. But everything helps and we do need
to try to prevent it and offer help.”
The action research Smith-Davis conducted was in conjunction with her masters
degree, so it was all very new to her. What she found challenging about using action
research was finding colleagues who were willing to collaborate. Like any team effort,
priorities and personalities were a factor. Benefits of the action research included infor-
mation gathered from invested parties, especially the students. Long-term results
included informing plans for implementing changes in curriculum, instruction,
professional development, policies, and procedures, which was especially valuable
with regards to Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation.
Smith-Davis would absolutely use the process again and feels that in order to use
action research as a part of continued practice, teacher-librarians need to build rapport
with their administrators, colleagues, community, and especially the student body,
thereby garnering their support and cooperation.
Janice Sundar has been a teacher-librarian in a high school for the past five years.
Sundar views action research as the process of creating/expanding/building upon
one’s own knowledge or experience. She thinks that there are several factors that are
challenging when speaking about action research for practicing teacher-librarians.
Time is certainly one issue. The time to frame and carry out an action research project
can be daunting. However, she does not think time (or lack thereof) alone is the real
reason, though it is the most obvious reason, practicing teacher-librarians might not
carry out an action research project. Sundar thinks that practicing teacher-librarians
who are working in schools are most likely in schools with supportive administrations
that know and understand the value that they bring to their schools, based on the
understanding that there are not many teacher-librarians practicing in many schools
currently. For example, in Sundar’s school division, they have 43 schools and only
two full-time teacher-librarians and three part-time personnel. The days of teacher-
librarians in schools without strong administrative support are over. A part of this
strong support from administrators is most likely garnered through the teacher-
librarian’s strong communication/relationship with his or her administrative team.
In this scenario, action research or evidence-based practices are not really needed for
advocacy or to “prove their worth.” Therefore, the teacher-librarian’s time and energy
are better spent on actually working. This is not to say they are not reflective or trying
to improve their practice, just that framing it as action research would seem rather an
unnecessary task to them. Sundar thinks an even more pressing reason for the lack of
teacher-librarians’ engagement in action research is the fact that we (the collective
we) are still not entirely certain what a school library is supposed to be and do. There
is a strong case to be made for the teacher-librarian helping improve student learning
and academics, though that reasoning model may be hampering school libraries and
teacher-librarian employment instead of bolstering it because does anyone really care
if teacher-librarians improve students’ academic performance? We now know without
a doubt through published, peer-reviewed research that school libraries with qualified
teacher-librarians do impact student learning and achievement in positive ways. These
statistics are not disputed, yet still there is no great rush for schools to hire teacher-
librarians. After several landmark studies, school districts, school boards, and princi-
pals still did not find the motivation to hire. So any action research teacher-librarians
could do in this vein would seem useless in terms of advocacy. This point is summed
up in a recent conversation with a fellow teacher-librarian: “no one holds the guidance
counselor responsible for the math ‘outcomes’ and no expects the assistant principal to
be responsible for the science general outcomes.” So, tying teacher-librarians to stu-
dent achievement has failed to increase their number in schools. Principals employ
classroom teachers to meet curriculum outcomes. Therefore, in order to employ them,
principals need to see that teacher-librarians meet other goals. This is a large reason we
are not seeing more teacher-librarians’ action research on student achievement. Sundar
automatically thought about action research as a tool for advocacy instead of profes-
sional development (PD) as part of the challenge facing teacher-librarians today.
Because of diminishing numbers, they often get caught up in advocacy, which can take
time away from a teacher-librarian conducting action research. So, a lack of clear vision
about the role of teacher-librarians is central to this question about engaging in action
research. A new teacher-librarian might not even know what he or she is supposed
to do, and one who is still practicing may face the challenges described herein.
Where teacher-librarians have a major impact on the overall climate of the

school through community building, professional development, communication,
information management, and then through classroom collaborations, school libraries
are thriving. Sundar thinks that this is exactly where we need more teacher-librarian
action research—if one could say to any decision maker, “I know a way to improve
the feeling of community in your school and enhance student achievement by provid-
ing a staff member that can help with on-demand teacher professional development,
school goals, liaising between staff, administration, community and organizations,
provide help, encouragement, and inspiration collectively but also individually to
teachers and students, to help plan and implement school technology, literacy and
The Journey 49
research strategies, to provide innovative spaces for students to read and think and do,
to help locate resources for staff and students, to connect staff members to other staff
members or ideas, and to keep an eye on what is coming.” These possible tasks are
by no means exhaustive and are the things that are central to thriving school libraries.
But the problem is that there are no easy metrics available to quantify, or codify, these
aspects of the job. How does one quantify in a meaningful way if the school commu-
nity is improving through library practices? And a successful school library should
be woven through all aspects of the school—so how to winnow out one thread of the
job and frame it as action research? How to do it meaningfully and in a time-effective
way? Active teacher-librarians are aware of the large body of professional knowledge
available online and through social media, following movers and shakers on Twitter,
through blogs, and so on, and through speaking with other teacher-librarians and
library-type people. Teacher-librarians are lynchpin people these days—they are the
centers of many professional teaching networks (virtual and in person). They are com-
municators and connectors—and that is professionally rewarding, leads to incredible
professional growth, and also takes time; hence action research, not to devalue the
process, might lose out as a professional development tool.
Easy-to-use metrics that measure the intangibles of the job and that focus on the
impact of the teacher-librarian in areas other than academics would be useful to focus
on the embodiment of broad visions of school libraries. These metrics could also high-
light what teacher-librarians do outside of the impact on academic achievement. This
would help teacher-librarians better articulate their work to others in a meaningful
and concise way.
Sundar adds that public libraries are also in the throes of reinventing themselves
and are facing many of the same questions. What is important to measure (circulation
stats are not enough anymore)? Nor is counting the number of patrons entering the
premises. These are the kinds of easy metrics that would make action research an
easy-to-use tool. One can easily pull these kinds of statistics for a school library—the
same way that one can cite test scores, and so on. But what do those numbers really
say about the library program? Are they reflective of the way the day is spent? And
are they the real value added to a school? Sundar recently ran across a blog post that
has stayed with her that mentioned that in this day of the information age, it is the
people who work in the library that are the collection. The books and materials are
no longer the main reason libraries live and die. Information is available everywhere.
This again emphasizes the intangibles of the strengths a particular person/vision/
program—how could one accurately reflect this in an action research project?
Kathy Wajda has been a teacher-librarian for 16 years, 14 of them in Alberta.

To her, action research is a reflective process of problem solving by an individual
or group of individuals (community of practice) to improve the way they address
issues and solve problems. Action research involves following a plan to improve
practices and knowledge. Wajda reflects that there are few qualified and practicing
teacher-librarians in her school district. This lack of teacher-librarians makes it
challenging and less appealing to use action research because there may be little or no
support from administrators and colleagues. The demands of the job leave little time
for research. Forms that need to be completed by school boards for conducting
research may take extra time, and support from administrators at the school and dis-
trict level is critical. Teacher-librarians would benefit from resources (books, experts,
etc.) on how to conduct action research. A school culture of collaboration and accep-
tance for change (thinking and practice) make a difference in the ability to conduct
action research, as well as an opportunity to develop critical reflective ability.
I hope the readers of this book found the ideas, opinions and expertise shared by
the many practitioners who agreed to be interviewed as engaging as I did. Analysis
of the responses involved studying patterns that led me to themes or conclusions
about them. This can be one of the most intriguing parts in the action research process,
as it will affirm and/or create dissonance with the researcher’s hunch, knowledge, or
perceptions about their topic.
Key Patterns
By and large the single most reported challenge to practitioner action research in
school libraries was not having enough time, which was reported by all of the respond-
ents in all categories. In predominantly traditional school cultures and organizations, this
did not surprise me, as time is “filled” for many teachers, teacher-librarians and adminis-
trators with a multitude of tasks, duties, and often nonflexible schedules that are preva-
lent in a high majority of schools still operating on an industrial model of education
with plenty of pressure coming from high-stakes testing. As Ross Todd commented,
everyone already has plenty to do rather than design, implement a range of evidence
gathering strategies, as well as engage with the data in a deep way to tease out outcomes,
impacts and opportunities, to draw conclusions and to establish further actions. In the
opinion of Barranoik, the benefits outweigh the challenges; it is a commitment and
requires self-discipline and focus. Teacher-librarians need to clearly see the benefits in
order to use time management systems and action research tools to engage in practitioner
research. I am hoping that as they read about some of the inspirational projects men-
tioned by their colleagues throughout this book, they will consider the approach. Manag-
ing data, including reviewing literature, was also considered a time concern.
Many respondents either found or felt practicing teacher-librarians would find the
concept of “researching” to be intimidating—something done in university programs
or services and largely unshared or even ignored. “Too many theses and dissertations
in the educational field were sitting untouched or unused once completed” (Barranoik,
2004, 39). This felt strange to another respondent because bringing students into 21st-
century ways of knowing and conducting authentic research is really, as Moayari com-
mented, the core of what we do and teach.
A surprising discovery on challenges to action research was, as commented upon

by Todd and in other interviews, that a substantial number of school librarians do not
collaborate. This finding expressed by Todd was echoed in different ways through
The Journey 51
other interviews, with varied reasoning behind it. A teacher-librarian has to be profi-
cient in research and in working with people—action research can provide a means
for a teacher-librarian and colleague to work together to provide new and insightful
methods into teaching students. Isolating “library” and “professional practice” contra-
dict. There can be hesitancy or lack of skill on collaborative learning and teaching from
the teacher-librarian; or the teacher-librarian may find himself or herself in the all too
common traditional culture of schooling—as Harada stated in her email interview,
the “traditional teaching paradigm that emphasizes isolationism and staff working in
silos” where collaborative practice is still far from the norm and the teacher-librarian
is challenged to find ways and means to win over the faculty or key faculty members
to the art of collaborative learning and teaching experiences in the library learning
commons. Mitchell-Pellet wrote that a professional culture of action research in the
school or linked with a group across a school district would support teacher librarians;
not just for action research but for the collaborative learning and teaching facilitation
related to local issues that one would hire a teacher-librarian for. Many respondents
thought administrators need to be familiar with collaborative practice and action
research, and encourage and mentor cultures of such. As Brown commented, “Individ-
uals may grow significantly as professionals, as they come to see the problem from dif-
ferent perspectives, and as they discuss options for resolution. A strong collegial bond
often develops as the group finds time to work electronically and face-to-face in infor-
mal interactions.” Brown reflects upon past professional development projects at a dis-
trict level with the goal of preparing teacher-librarians to collaborate and team plan
and teach with teachers.
During the years 1975–92, Winnipeg (Manitoba) School District had an outstanding
program of INDEPENDENT LEARNING SKILLS, a precursor to the Information
Literacy Programs of today. It was spectacular in the way it helped teacher-
librarians work collaboratively with their classroom teachers. We spent many hours
of professional development time helping the teacher-librarians learn the skills neces-
sary to work with their teachers and to integrate the independent learning and process
skills into their classroom activities. Many fine teacher-librarians evolved presenta-
tion techniques, organizational skills, and public speaking skills that carried them
on to alternative positions elsewhere in the system and/or in the city. This would have
been classed as Action Research in action.
In the 1980’s when Jean Baptist and our WSD team produced the LITERARY
AND CULTURAL APPRECIATION module as part of our Quality School Library
and Information Services program in the Division. It was an ideal model for what the
Action Research advocates are now discussing. It involved many teacher-librarians in
research, reading, writing, and using literature across the grades in both structured
and unstructured teaching and learning situations. It was an innovative approach.
It was integrated well with the Language Arts, Social Studies and Fine Arts pro-
grams. We had many examples of collaborative teaching among these colleagues and
the teacher-librarian teams at different levels at that time.
Information, support, and practice for teacher-librarians on collaborative learning
and teaching are vital to the ability to create a community of researchers. An emerging
way of looking at this is through the concept of embedded librarianship. Webinars
such as the ALA TechSource Webinar Taking Embedded Librarianship to the Next
Level: Action Steps and Practices (February 2012) led by the “Unquiet Librarian” Buffy
Hamilton are excellent sources to learn more about embedding collaborative practice.
The concept involves the teacher-librarian supporting colleagues in the classrooms or
other areas besides the traditional library setting. This is also central to the purpose
of the physical and virtual learning commons and knowledge building centers
(Koechlin, Loertscher, and Zwaan, 2011, 2008).
Chapter 4
Actions, Reflections, New
Questions
One of the first actions from the data I felt was necessary was articulating an understand-
ing for action research that teacher-librarians could relate to in their own professional
practice and structure systematic frameworks of action around the constant cycle of
planning-teaching-reflecting-planning that would incorporate evidence for their own
learning and collegial learning. That is, I wanted “to provide practical solutions to local
problems”, as Brown commented in his interview. Or, in Huber’s interview, I wanted to
take “that reflective practice one step further by investigating an observation or reflection
so that one comes to a deeper understanding or improved practice.” Loertscher reminds
teacher-librarians that “action research is based on the scientific method—the steps of
both personal topical research and action research are the same: ask a question, decide
on a plan to answer that question, find information/collect data, analyze the data/infor-
mation you have collected, synthesize your findings, prepare some kind of product/
report of what you found, and share your findings to the appropriate audience . . . it is
not generalizable—your findings apply only to your school but if repeated a number
of times, then you establish a pattern that anyone would be hard pressed to dispute.”
Harvey sums up the process: Determine a problem or concern using available data, implement
a solution, collection data to confirm the impact of the solution, share the results and then adjust or
make changes based on the results. Following this approach, teacher-librarians can reframe
their own professional growth and impact changes within their own school libraries
and potentially even within the whole school culture.
Other actions I took included preparing suggestions or strategies related to the

issue of time as well as collaborative planning and teaching. I felt that these dynamics
required additional exploration (Chapter 6) to explore in more detail.
Reflection
How will what I have learned improve what I will suggest for strategies/work
spaces for teacher-librarian action researchers? Through the voices of the interviewees,
some of my earlier ideas held ground, and some of my designs changed focus. For
example, ideas to help me understand issues related to time and collaborative
53
planning/teaching became key challenges to address along with action research steps
and leadership support. I also felt pressed for time on many occasions as I researched
and wrote, and I learned that I needed to stop at certain points in collecting data and
self-impose deadlines. Conversations and new leads for future learning could continue
in other ways at other times.
An affirmation I was particularly pleased to come away with from the interviews
was the similarity of responses from those working in or beyond the school level and
those studying the issue as researchers. All projected an incredible support for and
richness of knowledge about the theme—indeed a vast community of knowledge—
for teacher-librarians to consider as they contemplate action research projects.
New Questions
As I finish journaling this part of the book prior to moving on to designing work
spaces and sharing other resources, new questions arose from the events. I wondered
why the educational community in general, including teacher training programs,
ignores the data on effective school libraries upon enhanced student achievement.
Why is the educational innovation of quality school libraries staffed by a teacher who
is also a librarian ignored? Why are teacher-librarians continually forced to be “advo-
cates,” and why must they use their research to further this advocacy? Why aren’t
school districts lining up to hire these skilled professionals to transform schools and
school libraries into learning commons instead of throwing dollars at other innova-
tions that haven’t worked? Why not restructure how we do things in schools so that
collaboration and action research are prevailing cultural norms?
Part II
Work Space
Chapter 5
Action Research Templates
The second section of this book was designed as a type of workspace or note space for
teacher-librarians studying their own schools, a place to get started with templates to
guide steps along the way, scribble in, extend, and perhaps serve as a framework to
key action research steps as teacher-librarians develops their own action research style
and what works best for them.
This section part includes reference to five favorite sources I have discovered
related to the steps to get started. Teacher-librarians may find the favorites themselves
useful, or these favorites may lead to other sources, ideas, and digital methods teacher-
librarians can use to record their action research steps if they do not prefer notebooks.
As mentioned in the preface, when I guide teacher-librarians’ action research, I usually
recommend about five key sources I have had success with or have evaluated on any
particular topic, with a hope to inspire rather than provide a long list that could over-
whelm, considering that time to engage in action research was a primary concern.
Questions, Mind Map, Context

When beginning an action research project, the researcher will need to develop
questions, brainstorm answers or potential references for answering the questions,
and decide on a context that narrows or broadens the research as pertinent to the
inquiry.
Five Favorites
1. Good questions form the basis of sound research. Jamie McKenzie, editor of
From Now On: The Educational Technology Journal, provides exemplary expertise
in technology, research, and inquiry to support the action researcher. On his
website FromNowOn.org, the “Questioning Toolkit” (1997; www.fno.org/
nov97/toolkit.html) is still one of the best classic exemplary resources for
developing questions for students and researchers. McKenzie’s ensuing publi-
cation, Leading Questions (2007), contains the toolkit and provides an essential
and practical analysis of the questioning process that covers such topics as
triangulation, interviewing, planning, and creating a culture of questioning.
57
2. A succinct summary of the action research process can be read on this

website by Margaret Riel of the Centre for Collaborative Action Research at
Pepperdine University (2010). The site strategically focuses on developing
good research questions and how to recognize weak ones (http://cadres
.pepperdine.edu/ccar/define.html).
3. The American Association of School Librarians (AASL) has recommended a
list of top websites annually since 2009. The recommended sites are refer-
enced to specific outcomes of the AASL Standards for the 21st-Century Learner
(http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/guidelinesandstandards/
bestlist/bestwebsitestop25.cfm) for a variety of purposes—in this case, for
example, MindMeister for mind maps (http://www.mindmeister.com/).
MindMeister is also available as an app.
4. A classic mind-mapping tool that I have often used over the years with suc-
cess with students and teachers (with a free educator’s trial) is Inspiration
(http://www.inspiration.com/).
5. There are many mind-mapping apps. Three that I have evaluated are Simple-
Mind (http://www.simpleapps.eu/simplemind/) for the iPhone or iPad;
Idea Sketch (http://www.nosleep.net/index.php/78-template-guide/
70-idea-sketch) for iOS, Windows 8, and iPhone 5; and iBrainstorm (http://
www.universalmind.com/work/ibrainstorm). I particularly like iBrain-
storm, as it emulates the use of stick-on notes (still something I use to keep
track of tasks!) but in a virtual way.
Figures 5.1 through 5.4 provide a work space to begin an action research
project.
Issue/Literature Review
At this point the researcher will want to narrow down or clarify the key issue for
their action research. This will enable them to begin to amass literature pertaining to
the issue.
Five Favorites
1. When reflecting on and collaboratively discussing the teacher-librarian or
school’s most burning issues, most teacher-librarians will see a direct path
to an action research topic. To develop a “hunch” or vision around this issue,
the teacher-librarian may wish to conduct a topical survey, or pre-survey,
using one of the many digital survey tools available such as Survey Monkey
(http://www.surveymonkey.com/), Flisti (http://flisti.com/), or Polldaddy
(http://polldaddy.com/?ad=automattic.com).
2. Teacher-librarians may also wish to examine trends that could influence or
impact their issues. Websites such as YPulse Daily (http://www.ypulse.com/)
look at teen trends, for example, percentages of 10- to 13-year-olds who own
smart phones. Google Trends (http://www.google.com/trends/) is another tool
available for trending information.
3. When conducting a literature review, the vast amount of data available on
any topic can overwhelm a researcher. Sorting, sifting through, reviewing,
Figure 5.1. Questions
Figure 5.2. Mind Map
Action Research Templates 61
Figure 5.3. Mind Map 2
and prioritizing sources are skills that teacher-librarians need in this part of
an action research project. Teacher-librarians need to make themselves
aware of significant starting points for a literature review where peer
reviewing on their topic may have already started, for example, state (e.g.,
Massachusetts School Library Association at http://www.maschoolibraries
.org/), provincial (e.g., Alberta School Library Association at http://aslc
.ca/), and national school library or curriculum association websites (e.g.,
American Association of School Librarians at http://www.ala.org/aasl/
and National Council of Teachers of English at http://www.ncte.org/).
These sites lead to university studies, publications, reports, and other
readily available literature in the field that the teacher-librarian might use
to begin a study. Depending on the nature of the study, the researcher can
then decide how far to go with the literature. As you will see in this book,
I tend to lean toward five strong favourite first sources and then check
new, secondary, and intriguing sources against the recommendations,
reviews, and stances of these favorites.
Figure 5.4. My Context
Action Research Templates 63
4. Libraries and librarians in other school, public, or academic libraries can pro-
vide extensive, time-saving assistance and often point out unique resources,
and directions. Most libraries have virtual portals and online reference assis-
tance available for the time-pressed practitioner to access. Many school
districts provide their own professional library services, for example, the
Calgary Board of Education provides staff and students with a model for
virtual library service (http://www.innovativelearning.ca/sec-rlc/rlc
-educational-resources.asp).
5. The literature review is a valuable research tool that will help focus the
issue/hunch/vision, provide background and insight, and let you know
who the leading writers and researchers are on the topic. Educational data-
bases such as ERIC (http://www.eric.org), ProQuest (http://www
.proquest.com/en-US/), and EBSCO (http://ejournals.ebsco.com/Home
.asp) are searchable online and some provide assistance from librarians.
Figures 5.5 and 5.6 follow to provide workspace for identifying the key
issue and key literature the researcher has discovered to date in their project.
The Journey
The next part of the action research journey can often be the most intense as the
researcher sets goals, collects data in a multitude of ways, and begins to analyze pat-
terns and themes. This stage is often compared to or referred to as a journey.
Five Favorites
1. Taking the time to effectively map out and refine research project goals, out-
comes, and plans allows the creation of a functional framework for manag-
ing an action research experience. “Smart goals,” as defined in the work of
Dufour and colleagues (Eaker, DuFour, and DuFour, 2002) on professional
learning communities, are highly effective planning tools for the educational
research environment and support the action research process. Ideas and
templates for formulating smart goals are available on the All Things PLC
(Professional Learning Communities) website (http://www.allthingsplc
.info/).
2. The collection of data will turn into the events of an action research journey.
Try to make the collecting process easy to manage: collect from observations,
student project samples, and other ongoing, already established events. You
can also organize events such as surveys, interviews, and focus groups.
Make use of digital tools to assist with data collection and analysis, and
aim for a triangulation of data (having three major sources for comparative
and analytic purposes). Sites like The Owl (Purdue University) provide guid-
ance for creating good survey or interview questions (http://owl.english.
purdue.edu/owl/resource/559/06/). Record the data as field notes in a
journal. You can record digitally—for example, on a tablet—adding ongoing
insights and reflections. Some events will find the researcher as a participant
observer, for example, at a focus group session.
Figure 5.5. My Key Issue
64
Publication Data
Title
Author
Why is this literature key to my action research?
My Literature Review
Figure 5.6.
65
3. As data is mined for patterns and themes, a simultaneous process of coding

and clustering is required. Note Taker HD for the iPad (http://www
.notetakerhd.com/) is an example of an app that assists the researcher with
recording and organizing data. Apps such as Speak It! (http://future-apps.net/
Speak_it%21_for_Mac/Speak_it%21_for_Mac.html) convert speech to text and
are good tools for interviews and focus groups, allowing the researcher to listen
and conduct the event, and then return to it for study and analysis.
4. Patterns, themes, conclusions: There are many ways to share and display data
to supports patterns, themes, and conclusions. Graphs, charts, and tables
provide succinct visuals to assist others in understanding what the research
has demonstrated. Google Chart Tools (Google, 2012a) (https://developers.
google.com/chart/) and Chartle (http://www.chartle.net/) are two of many
free web-based tools that can help you achieve this objective.
5. Various websites exist that include multiple tools to examine research, data
sharing, and data analysis. Teacher-librarian Joyce Valenza’s virtual high
school library (http://springfieldlibrary.wikispaces.com/) contains many
research tools and apps, and it is continually updated. Kathy Schrock’s
“Guide to Everything” (http://www.schrockguide.net/) provides the same
services. The wiki DIRT (Digital Research Tools Wiki; https://digitalresearch
tools.pbworks.com/w/page/17801639/About%20this%20wiki) “brings
together snapshot reviews of software that can help researchers—professors,
students, think-tankers, teachers, librarians, corporate intelligence gatherers, and
other inquisitive folks—do their work better.” The wiki was created and is main-
tained by academic librarians.
Figures 5.7 and 5.8 follow as examples of two types of spaces to frame action
research goals and outcomes. Figures 5.9 and 5.10 are data-recording/coding
examples and may need to be extended depending on the amount of data
being collected. Figure 5.11 assists with organizing patterns and themes that
will shed light on the inquiry.
Actions/Reflections
The action researcher should now have a much clearer picture of strategies or actions
that he or she could undertake to answer the questions he or she was seeking in their
inquiry. Although reflection will transpire throughout an action research project in the
various stages, theses actions formed from the patterns and themes arising from the
researcher’s data will lead to reflection on the process as a whole. Perhaps new questions
or the need for more research will develop through the reflective process.
Five Favorites
1. Action planning should reflect the five Ws—who, what, when, where, why—
and how. Planners should stress that those who are involved in the actions,
the who, realize what and when they have responsibilities (Eaker, DuFour,
and DuFour, 2002).
Figure 5.7. My Goals, Outcomes, and Plans 1
Figure 5.8. My Goals, Outcomes, Plans 2
68
Event # ___
Title of event:
__________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
Key Words/
DATE Event My Reflection Phrases
e.g., March 1 Met with the math teacher Positive meeting, she was time
(Teacher A) to see if very enthusiastic about
interested in planning trying this approach,
interdisciplinary math/ concerned about time
music project
Figure 5.9. Events—Display/Code Data (Field Notes)
69
Figure 5.10. Data Sources
2. Individual reflection: Whether using a digital or analog tool, reflective journal-

ing will bring new insights to the research and resulting actions. An interest-
ing reflective guide that I have used with my school staff, continuing on an
arts-centered perspective for the particular school, was a professional book
study using Michael Gelb’s How to Think Like Leonardo da Vinci. Each chapter
presents different strategies and enjoyable exercises that an individual or
group can engage in to focus on thinking, creativity, and reflection.
3. Collaborative reflection: The action researcher is strongly encouraged to share
research results, actions, and reflections with his or her school, community,
and colleagues. If the teacher-librarian has set up his or her project up as a
collaborative knowledge-building center, he or she will have already estab-
lished group thinking. In this day and age, there are many creative ways to
share results through social networking, for example, Google Groups (Google,
2012b) (http://groups.google.com/).
4. The teacher-librarian can model excellence in sharing action research with
well-crafted presentations that use standard tools such as PowerPoint
(http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/powerpoint/) or Prezi (http://prezi.
com/) and that incorporate video clips, a wordle pictograph (http://www.
wordle.net/), animation (Animoto for Education, http://animoto.com/
education?gclid=COCjkrfqvLACFQTsKgodVT0Jpw), XTranormal (http://
www.xtranormal.com/), or podcasting, for example, using a software tool
such as Garage Band (http://www.apple.com/ilife/garageband/).
PATTERNS /THEMES CONCLUSIONS
1. time to meet address flexible scheduling on our next PD day
time to shed. classes
time to assess

2.

3.

4.
Figure 5.11 Patterns, Themes, Conclusions
5. Pecha Kucha (http://www.pecha-kucha.org/) is a unique presentation pro-

cess that challenges the user to deliver his or her information via 20 images.
Figure 5.12 demonstrates a way to record action plans. Figure 5.13 poses
stems for reflection.
WHY: Improve student reading grades
WHAT: WHO WHEN/WHERE

E.g., Develop strategies to improve reading grades and Teacher-librarian January 15–February 30
pre/post assess. Language arts teachers Learning commons/classrooms
HOW: (Detailed tasks)
1.
Figure 5.12. Action Plans

Figure 5.13. Action Research Reflections
Part III
Timely Ideas for
Teacher-Librarians to Explore
through Action Research
Chapter 6
Action Research Explorations
In this section of the book, I am going to write about a variety of topics I have either
explored or would encourage teacher-librarians to explore through action research,
many of which are interrelated or will send teacher-librarian action researchers off into
other areas of study. I chose these topics because I have found in my recent research,
work, and travel to schools, districts, and school libraries that these ever-timely topics
are often raised: time, the learning commons, reading (breadth and depth as well as
children’s literature), studying student achievement data, collaborative planning and
teaching, new/emerging technology, interdisciplinary learning, and advocacy.
Time
Life as we know it is busy. and I think every generation has felt that they were
busy in their own way in their own time, but certainly we find ourselves more on
demand in a “24/7” world with little respite. Learning how to manage time around
our demands at both work and home is a critical for our own health and well-being.
Teacher-librarians are often individuals who go above and beyond to assist and edu-
cate their teachers and students; even when teacher-librarians do not have flexible
schedules, are teaching assigned classes, or are monitoring study periods, they can
be found missing breaks and giving much before- and after-school time to support
and engage the students and teachers. To contemplate undertaking a professional
growth activity such as action research, teacher-librarians must develop strategies to
be able to use time differently, that is, they must perfect the clichéd “work smarter
not harder.” By successfully doing this, they can become role models for staff and stu-
dents as they move toward cultures of collaborative inquiry, deep thinking, slower-
paced learning, and self-actualization rather than continuous contributions to cultures
of busyness. Teacher-librarians can be seen as the “go-to” person for moving learning
cultures into this area of research and inquiry because they traditionally teach research
skills and processes. Therefore, a move into action research to support real-life prob-
lem and project-based research makes sense. Projects can take staff and students into
in-depth study over long periods of time, which has proven much better for sustained
learning, comprehension, deep thinking, and creation of new knowledge. This explo-
ration of time in school culture is ripe for an action research project.
77
THINK ABOUT QUESTIONS—Time

Why do I feel so pressed for time in my school?
What does this say about the culture of my school? My profession?
Is this a new phenomenon in my profession? Is it the same for others in my
school? How do they feel about it?
How does the issue of time affect student learning?
Add your own questions . . .
Once again, though, finding or using time differently, especially when this issue is
part of a societal/learning culture shifting that is needed, is easier said than done and
applies to any facet of our life we would like to have more time for. I struggled with the
same issues in my complex world as I worked on this book. Since it was my fourth for-
mal action research project, I did find that I intuitively approach my work now as an
action researcher with the skills and processes of action research ingrained in the
way I operate and view the world. Again, one reason I choose to highlight five favorite
references in the previous chapter and in this chapter is to provide the reader with
entry points to the various topics that they can extend over time, as each recommended
source can—of course—lead to many others.
Finally, collaborative action research with colleagues at school or other teacher-

librarians can not only provide support, dialogue, and insight, it can also save time
as tasks are shared and put to action by more than one researcher. I have also heard
that working with one or more others on an action research project can be difficult to
organize due to everyone’s time constraints; therefore, researchers have to weigh the
pros and cons in each individual situation to assess what could be an outstanding col-
laboration.
The five favorites for the topic of time are tools I have found helpful as I have
searched for actual time to put thoughts, observations, reflections, and findings to text.
Five Favorites
1. Professional growth planning: Most school districts, such as the ones I have
worked in, have a framework or policy related to professional growth plan-
ning, expectations for employees to engage in professional growth, and often
supports for it that include credits, advanced certificates, research grants,
and scholarships. Some districts require professional development activities
for recertification. Teacher-librarians can consider action research as a venue
for professional growth and use or find out how this would adapt to work-
place expectations for professional growth and what supports are available.
Examples, guiding questions, and templates from teacher associations such
as “The Alberta Teacher’s Association (ATA) Professional Growth Plan”
(ATA, 2010) illustrate what this could look like. In this case, planning is
intrinsically linked to the Alberta association’s work and beliefs regarding
Action Research Explorations 79
action research as a professional growth strategy. Rather than passively

attending workshops, conferences, and so on, building those and other activ-
ities into an action research plan personalizes and focuses professional
growth activities on the reflective and analytical, creating satisfaction and
change in the individual and promoting collaboration and sharing so that
others will learn from your efforts as well.
2. If the action research is part of graduate degree work, a researcher may
indeed require longer, more sustained periods of time to accomplish the
study. Many school districts provide short- or longer-term educational
leaves in support of this work, especially for a researcher studying the dis-
trict’s key areas of focus. Districts in my province have supported leaves
for school library research projects on an ongoing basis for many years. Some
districts or teacher associations also provide study grants to support gradu-
ate research projects.
3. Meet with your principal! Whether the teacher-librarian’s research is con-
nected to formal degree work or not, the teacher-librarian should meet with
his or her principal to inform, brainstorm, and find out about support both
within in the school and throughout the district for the proposed research.
This will also engage your principal in the developmental work of yourself
as teacher-librarian and the school library, and will often be viewed as col-
lecting important data for whole school development. Perhaps others such
as volunteers or student pages could pick up some of the clerical duties some
teacher-librarians find themselves responsible for when the teacher-librarian
is immersed in practitioner research.
4. Think like a researcher. Instead of focusing on minutiae, the teacher-librarian
as action researcher can note how everyday actions and interactions can be
reflected upon, be added to in order to inform research questions, cause dis-
sonance, or promote new learning. Taking a moment or two to stop and
think when certain events, interactions, or discussions occur will contribute
to a framework of learning from living the research.
5. Like exercise, 10 minutes three times a day has been found to be as effective
as 30 minutes all at once. The teacher-librarian action researcher needs to
find a few minutes a day to attend to his or her question(s), add to a field
note, or respond to a particularly engaging email that they may have
received and thought about. Many can do this by making use of technology
such as smart phones or tablets to write reflections, send an email to them-
selves, or send a text message. Paper or electronic “sticky notes” served me
well in this aspect of observation, as I jotted down a few notes to turn to later
to reflect upon or elaborate on if merited.
The Learning Commons

The concept of the school library transforming or evolving to a “learning commons”
is a primary, complex, and emergent issue well suited to exploration through action
research. I have found in my travels that it can be often misconstrued or misdefined,
sometimes by teacher-librarians but often by other educators or decision makers in the
educational field. I have heard that it means there will be no more physical libraries or
books, that it is all about the virtual and digital library. I have heard it is a new name
for a library, such as media center or learning resource center were.
To explore the emergence of the learning commons in the school library, I have
used action research skills and processes when reviewing school library services and
resources for the provincial government of Alberta, Canada, a process that is docu-
mented in Growing Schools: Librarians as Professional Developers (Abilock, Harada, Fonti-
chiaro, 2012). My actions involved working with all library and school associations in
this province to collaboratively develop a draft provincial school library learning
commons policy with potential guidelines and support resources to align with this
province’s future curriculum redesigns and draft collaborative library policy that
involves school, public, and academic libraries. The draft school library learning
commons policy is anticipated to be released during the 2012–2013 school year.
From reviewing literature for this project, I discovered that the concept of the
learning commons was elemental, originating from the medieval village green, or
common and “has evolved from what was happening in many schools—a combina-
tion library/computer lab—into a full-service learning, research, and project space”
(Educause, 2011). Many colleges and universities were the first to go down this path
and have successfully transformed their libraries to a learning commons perspective.
A growing number of municipal libraries are also looking at the concept of community
learning spaces.
To me, an effective school library has always functioned as the school’s learning
commons. Inherently defined in those very words, the school library focused on
“learning” and in best teacher-librarian practice, collaboration (“in common”), which
is the philosophical underpinning for the work of a teacher-librarian in relation to co-
construction of knowledge throughout the curriculum and a driver for whole school
reform through creating a culture for schools as collaborative learning communities.
I often define the learning commons as the school library’s perspective—asking read-
ers to consider that school library is a noun and learning commons is a verb, whether
we are discussing the physical school library or what a virtual school library learning
commons is all about—a dynamic, inviting, collaboratively planned and taught envi-
ronment where students are actively immersed in their own learning and are sup-
ported by quality resources in all formats, including an important focus on literature.
The school library learning commons physical and virtual knowledge building is its
essence. It is about best whole school and school library practice in service of student
learning.
Dr. David Loertscher and colleagues Carol Koechlin and Sandi Zwaan, have pro-
vided and continue to provide extensive leadership and mobilization to this perspec-
tive in school libraries with their writing, models, presentations, teaching, and
consulting on how learning commons impact student—and teacher—learning. Their
work began with The New Learning Commons: Where Learners Win! in 2008 (a second edi-
tion was published in 2011). They advise teacher-librarians to consider the following
THINK ABOUT QUESTIONS—Learning Commons

What would I like to learn about the physical and virtual learning commons?
What about my principal, teacher, or teacher-librarian colleagues, students, and
parents—what would they like to know about the learning commons?
What might other library professionals in my community think about or know
about the learning commons perspective?
What are educators learning about school libraries or learning commons in their
leadership or teaching courses?
questions when embarking on an exploration of transforming a school library to a

learning commons: “What has intrigued you about the reinvention of school libraries
and computer labs into a learning commons for all? What are the benefits for your
school community? What would the problems be? Where are you now?” (Koechlin
et al., 2008, 119).
Five Favorites
1. When seeking to understand the learning commons perspective, the best
place to start is the “Learning Commons” books by Loertscher, Koechlin,
and Zwaan (http://lmcsource.com/Catalog/newlearningcommo.html) and
the corresponding wiki (Loertscher and Koechlin, 2012a) (https://sites
.google.com/site/schoollearningcommons/). Many resources in these books
and on the wiki will help teacher-librarians research the subject and start
transforming their schools. Dr. Loertscher and Carol Koechlin often offer
webinars or presentations on the learning commons. These can be accessed
live and are archived on the wiki, where you can also contact them.
2. Sometimes a teacher-librarian action researcher needs a brief overview to
begin collaborative discussion on the learning commons transformation.
The article Flip this Library: School Libraries Need a Revolution by David
Loertscher (http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/CA6610496.
html) certainly fits this bill, and if anything, will generate questions and com-
mentary for action researchers and the faculty that they are serving. The
article could be used at a staff, parent, or board meeting as well to stimulate
discussion.
3. The Alberta Education School Library Services Initiative website has up-to
-date information on Alberta Education school library policy and support
resources development. It also includes a background research paper on
the initiative’s principal survey, results, and conclusions; the survey itself;
and a slide presentation about the background and development of the
initiative. It is hoped that the survey and the background pieces will inform
teacher-librarian research, as teacher-librarians are welcome to adapt either
the survey or slide presentation to suit their context at the school or district
level (http://www.education.alberta.ca/department/ipr/slsi.aspx).
4. The Ontario School Library Association’s (OSLA) Together for Learning

(http://www.accessola.com/data/6/rec_docs/677_OLATogetherforLearning
.pdf) is an excellent document for action researchers and can be used as a
professional “book” study at schools. It encapsulates the theoretical premises
and necessity of the transformation to a school library learning commons
and although in document form, its richness merits a book study forum—
in real time or online. The OSLA will soon be launching a complementary
web support site.
5. INFOhio’s 21st Century Learning Commons (http://learningcommons.
infohio.org/) is a stellar example of a statewide, collaborative learning
commons with a learning commons certificate program. A teacher-librarian
can work through the “21 Essential Things” learning paths and have the
option to earn credits for them. The essentials range from learning about
evaluating student information literacy skills to “cool tools for 21st century
projects.”
Reading: Breadth and Depth and Children’s Literature

One of the most important functions of a school that a school library has always
provided leadership for is intellectual freedom, that is, engaging students in reading
and promoting reading, continuing the tradition of developing students who read both
critically and for enjoyment through exposure to quality children and young adult lit-
erature and authors. Loving reading is developed through students getting to know
the authors of children/young adult literature, past and present, and can be used to
enhance any curricular topic or interest. The teacher-librarian is often the one who
can find that “just right book” that sparks a student’s lifelong enjoyment of reading
and certainly develops reading skills along the way.
An excellent action research project would involve discovering what is new and
exciting in children’s literature and building the findings into the work of the school
library learning commons. Another great project would be to study the concept of
reading breadth and depth in other ways, for example, to be able to support and teach
students how reading may differ when using a variety of formats—how reading a
novel can be different than reading a poem, whether in printed or electronic format.
The physiological aspects of using print and digital formats could also become another
action research study.
Five Favorites
1. Organizing or attending a children’s conference could spark an interest in an
action research project or become a project unto itself. Recently, I was privi-
leged to serve as program chair for our provincial teacher association children’s
literature conference, Kaleidoscope 10 (http://www.kaleidoscopeconference
.ca/). Readers may enjoy listening to a podcast I participated in with
conference chairperson Linda Davis, which was moderated by local radio host
Donna McElligott of the Canadian Broadcasting Association’s daily radio
call-in show alberta@noon. The podcast is about the important role of the
THINK ABOUT QUESTIONS—Reading

What would I like to learn about children’s literature?
How does genre or format affect ability to read? How is a poem or book read in
print or digital versions?
What impacts do literature and standard reading programs provide in the
teaching of reading?
What type or reading instruction would serve my students best?
teacher-librarian and children’s literature, and the phone-in callers provide

testimony to the impact a teacher-librarian had on their lives inspiring them
to be readers (http://www.cbc.ca/albertaatnoon/episode/2012/11/01/
thursday-november-01-podcast/).
2. I would highly recommend reading Literacy, Libraries, and Learning: Using
Books and Online Resources to Promote Reading, Writing, And Research (2005)
edited by Dr. Marlene Asselin (one of the experts interviewed in Chapter 3
of this book) and Dr. Ray Doiron. The book can serve as a foundational piece
to an action research explanation of developing lifelong learners and readers
through developing literacy-rich physical and virtual environments.
3. The importance of developing readers who enjoy and appreciate reading for
information and pleasure is emphasized by the American Association of
School Librarians’ Standards for the 21st Century Learner (2007) (Standard 4:
Pursue Personal and Aesthetic Growth), as well as in the Canadian Library
Association’s Achieving Information Literacy: Standards for School Library Pro-
grams in Canada (Asselin et al., 2003) (Outcome 1: Uses Information with
Aesthetic Appreciation). Understanding how these standards fit into school
library goals and actions is critical. Although “reading” and “literature”
have been traditionally represented in English language arts curricula and
libraries, a challenging yet critical action research project could involve
implementing these standards throughout all subject disciplines to demon-
strate the importance of teaching reading in social studies, history, science,
mathematics, and the arts.
4. Under the heading “Reading Engagement,” the Ontario School Library
Association’s Together for Learning: School Libraries and the Emergence of the
Learning Commons: A Vision for the 21st Century (2010, 16–17) lays out a vision
for reading and literature in the emergence of the 21st-century learning
commons. This vision denotes reading and literature as important to the
learning commons perspective in motivating reading, connecting and sup-
porting readers, and fostering reading communities.
5. If you are not already familiar with journals that review children’s literature,
I would recommend subscribing to a few of them and enjoying their print or
virtual offerings. This is where you will find up-to-date information on the
best in children’s and young adult literature, along with a myriad of ideas
and opportunities to engage in. For example, School Library Journal is well
known in print and now has a comprehensive, participatory online presence.
In Canada, Resource Links allows teachers and teacher-librarians to provide
reviews of current children’s and young adult books, including French books
and professional resources, and professional articles on children’s and
young adult literature.
Studying Student Achievement Data

Connecting student learning goals from the school’s student achievement data
(tests, report cards, etc.) to the school library learning commons goals is an essential
component of making the learning commons relevant and responsive to students.
When discussing student achievement data, there is often a great deal of pressure to
focus on standardized testing and raising test scores. “Although the Alberta [and
almost every other] curriculum outlines the importance of research and the necessity
for students to develop their own understanding, the pressure in outcomes-based edu-
cation to meet external standards is very great” (Barranoik, 2004, 3). However, when
studied and used in purposeful ways, formative and summative student achievement
data is of critical importance to schools in helping students succeed. Understanding
how to look for and analyze student data in all forms is foundational to the work of
schools as professional learning communities. Inspired by the work of Reeves (2004)
and DuFour, DuFour, Eaker, and Karhnek (2004), as a school principal, I focused on
examining with my staff all of the student learning data we could amass to explicitly
look at the question How can inquiry-based arts-centered learning (fine and media arts)
improve student information literacy? In response, an information literacy professional
learning community (PLC) was formed.
One of the pieces of student data we extrapolated from our province-wide stand-
ardized achievement tests was examining questions on the tests that had been collabo-
ratively planned and taught through school library projects. Barranoik states that
“focusing curriculum-based research projects on exam-related issues may be one way
to help the students become literate researchers and to ease the tension felt by the
teachers” (2004, 51). Teachers were (pleasantly) surprised to discover that their stu-
dents had scored higher on exam questions taught through collaborative school library
projects, and this led to setting student learning outcomes, goals, and targets for the
forthcoming year that could be supported in this manner of co-planning and teaching.
Some of the action strategies collaboratively developed from collectively studying and
analyzing student data were:
• Differentiating instruction through team teaching and planning with special-
ists such as teacher-librarians, artists, technology teachers, learning leaders,
and fine arts teacher
• Advancing student information literacy skills by working with teachers and
all specialists on inquiry-based projects
• Creating common standards for assessing writing among all grades
• Examining report card data collectively each term rather than waiting for
annual standardized test results
THINK ABOUT QUESTIONS—Student Achievement Data

How is student achievement data collected and shared at my school?
How has student achievement data informed my practice in the school library?
How could student achievement data more fully support the centrality of my
practice in my school?
How could I work with teachers in examining and analyzing student achieve-
ment data to improve student learning?
Add your questions . . .
• Teaching test-taking strategies

• Providing more attention to student’s individual needs through small groups
The measures that we looked at included (think of similar ones in your school):
• End of the year (June) provincial achievement test scores
• November and March report card data
• Grade-level achievement data (June)
• Provincial surveys that led to each school receiving an “accountability pillar
report” (provincial average scores)
• Teacher anecdotal files and observations
• Alberta Initiative for School Improvement (AISI) surveys in the fall and June
• Extracurricular surveys in the fall and June
• School health surveys in the fall and June
• Library project numbers and types
• Number and types of referrals related to behavior
A lot of data to be sure, but if we were collecting it through mandate or choice, it

needed to be used to serve the needs of all students in all parts of the school, including
the centrality of the school library and what it could offer. Goals were set and reset
around the strategies measured in many areas. The teacher-librarian and school library
learning commons can play a central part in participating in or leading this topic,
which is a great one for using action research because there is a lot of firsthand data
to study. This topic also directly addresses student learning and standardized test
results as part of assessing a learning environment rather than focusing on standard-
ized testing as a reason not to enter into collaborative inquiry-based learning and
teaching.
Five Favorites
1. “The ‘Date Wise’ Improvement Process” (Parker Boudett, City, and
Murnane, 2006) (http://www.hepg.org/hel/article/297#home) is an
article introducing “eight steps for using test data to improve teaching and
learning.” The steps are organized in three phases—prepare, inquire, and
act—that are used by many school districts and universities. Recommended

by two of the teacher-librarians interviewed in Chapter 3, it provides another
way, which is succinctly demonstrated, of looking at using test data to set
strategic learning goals.
2. The Professional Learning Community writings, books, and online resources
(DuFour et al.) provide a foundational source for the action researcher to
learn about collaborative data study and analysis. Douglas Reeves (2004)
writes about accountability for learning that follows the principles of action
research. He makes a case for accountability in its truest sense being a posi-
tive mantra for helping students. Schools operating as professional learning
communities have been studied and documented as one of the most success-
ful innovations in school improvement in the last 20 years. This enduring
quality of professional learning communities is important to note because
many teachers and teacher-librarians have seen “innovations” come and go
and may think that “this too shall pass.” Perhaps even the most jaded will
give it a try if they understand that schools operating as professional learn-
ing communities have been one of the most successful methods of school
reform for advancing student learning, including students who have not
previously been successful.
3. School Library Impact Studies (http://www.lrs.org/impact.php): Twenty years
of school library impact studies cannot be ignored, and the replication of the
studies around student achievement and testing would be another key area
for an action research project. This comprehensive site has studies from 20
states and Ontario, summary reports that include slide presentations, and a
video, podcasts, news, data tools, and lots more. Much of this is made pos-
sible through the work and leadership of Keith Curry Lance (see his expert
interview in Chapter 3), a consultant at RSL Research and former director
of the Library Research Service.
4. Kathy Schrock’s Guide to Everything–Assessment and Rubrics (Schrock,
2012b) (http://school.discoveryeducation.com/schrockguide/assess.html)
provides many tools for collaborative learning, teaching, planning, and
assessing. Schrock, a former school district director of technology, has been
well known since 1995 for her Kathy Schrock’s Guide for Educators, which
she has moved to Kathy Schrock’s Guide to Everything, located at the previ-
ously mentioned URL. The “comprehensive and balanced assessment” re-
sources can be found under the Administrator heading on the guide and
can help support the study of student data to drive student success.
5. Ohio Educational Library Media Association (http://www.oelma.org/career-
resources/eba): Articles about evidence-based practice provide a compre-
hensive list of key articles, studies, and sources for further ideas for the
teacher-librarian investigating evidence-based practice. School library
experts and leaders such as Asselin, Loertscher, and Todd (who are inter-
viewed in Chapter 3) are represented on the site. They extensively write
and speak about evidence-based practice in relation to school libraries.
Creating a School-Wide Student Information Literacy Learning

Continuum via Collaborative Planning and Teaching
The essence of the school library learning commons is learning and learning
together. The teacher-librarian’s key role in the school library learning commons is
instructional leadership, which is best facilitated through the engagement of teachers
in collaborative planning, teaching, and assessing. This can also be a teacher-
librarian’s primary challenge as the teaching profession itself slowly shifts from a tra-
dition of teachers teaching in isolation to collaborative and reflective teaching practice.
Teacher-librarians might choose to explore their collaborative teaching skills and lead-
ership through action research. After discussing with the principal the best way to
inform and survey the faculty for such an endeavor, the teacher-librarian could share
an article that promotes discussion (e.g., “Flip This Library” [Loertscher, 2008]) at a
staff meeting to outline key shifts in a school library’s transformation to a learning
commons of collaborative learning and teaching teams. The teacher-librarian could
collect data from the staff to allow multiple entry points for the creation of a school-
based information literacy learning continuum that is achieved through collaborative
planning and teaching. Using online or paper surveys, the teacher-librarian could
request the following information from each teacher:
1. What do you teach?
2. What should we keep about our school library that supports a learning
commons perspective?
3. What should we consider changing about our school library that supports a
learning commons perspective?
4. The article “Flip This Learning” discusses collaborative planning and teach-
ing as an integral part of the learning commons perspective. Do you have an
idea(s) of how we could work together to support your students’ learning?
Depending on the culture and the context of the school, the teacher-librarian will
get a mixed response to these types of questions, along with data that will inform
and support what could be accomplished for the forthcoming year. He or she will learn
how the faculty view the school library, and at which stage each teacher is regarding
collaboration in practice. Some may be ready for “stage one” collaboration, or just get-
ting their feet wet, for example, discussing learning resources; others may wish to fully
embark on a cooperatively planned and taught curriculum experience.
Five Favorites
1. Focus on Inquiry (Alberta Education, 2004) outlines the collaborative learning
and teaching process through initiating inquiry-based learning processes.
The teacher-librarians of School District 76 in Medicine Hat, Alberta, recently
created an online Inquiry Skills and Search Help LiveBinder (http://www.
livebinders.com/play/play_or_edit?id=215441) for teaching the inquiry
process and digital citizenship based on Focus on Inquiry (Alberta Education,
THINK ABOUT QUESTIONS—Collaborative Planning and Teaching

How is collaborative planning and teaching addressed with me at my school?
What is working? What is not working? Why is there success in some areas and
not others?
What are some strategies I can try with some of my teachers who do not want to
plan and teach with me?
2004) and hope their creation will be useful to other teacher-librarians in

working with teachers.
2. An example of continuum development to share in a collaborative planning
and teaching session, in this case on the timely topics of digital literacy and
citizenship, are Common Sense Media curriculums. Often, sharing an exam-
ple such as the ones cited here will inspire many teachers to see the possibil-
ities of working together and creating or adapting such a continuum to
provide continuous support for student learning over the grades (http://
www.commonsensemedia.org/educators/curriculum/k-5 (Common Sense
Media, 2012a) and http://www.commonsensemedia.org/educators/
curriculum/6-8) (Common Sense Media, 2012b).
3. Violet Harada, an expert interviewee from Chapter 3, has written books for
teacher-librarian support as collaborative teaching partners. Librarians as
Learning Specialists: Meeting the Learning Imperative for the 21st Century (2008)
and presentations such as “Librarians and Teachers as Research Partners:
Reshaping Practices Based on Assessment and Reflection” (2005) provide
detailed background on and support for collaborative planning and teaching
skills as well as processes for teacher-librarians. Buffy Hamilton, also known
as the “un-quiet” librarian, has been creating presentations and information
about the concept of the embedded librarian, where the teacher-librarian
works with teachers in classrooms and other venues beyond the library.
Embedded Librarian webinars provide information to teacher-librarians
who may wish to use action research to explore this aspect of co-planning
and teaching.
4. Teacher-librarians should be familiar with the field of cooperative learning
and the multitude of strategies and designs available to form the basis of
quality cooperative learning experiences, especially in the strategic design
of small group work and activities. Foundational would be the writing and
supports developed by Spencer Kagan (Cooperative Learning) (http://
spencerkagan.com/). A great action research project would be to try some
of these techniques in cooperatively planned learning and teaching experien-
ces to see how effective strategically designed groups working, learning,
debating, and creating together either in the physical or virtual learning
commons can be—no more groaning about “group projects” or group work
from the students. Cooperative learning done right can also be an effective
tool to actualize personalized learning with large class sizes.
5. The teacher-librarian is also reminded that the collaborative planning and teach-
ing process includes collaborative assessment and reflection from the teacher-
librarian as part of the team. Teacher-librarians could use action research to
study best practice in assessment of learning. Many resources are available in
this area, and I tend to go to my local source, the Alberta Assessment Consortium
(http://www.aac.ab.ca/), which provides a good example of support resources
and models that any teacher-librarian might find useful to the cooperative plan-
ning process and could adapt to their own contextual situations.
Incorporating New and Emerging Technology in Learning

The teacher-librarian who is adept in working with teachers to seamlessly infuse
technology with learning will find that they are invaluable because they can support both
teachers who are novices or those who are experts in using technology for learning.
Teacher-librarians may want to explore this area through action research, and it will
be an area most teachers and students will be interested in exploring as well, in both
the physical and virtual learning commons places and spaces. The “Scoop it!” website
Bloom’s Taxonomy for 21st Century Learning (http://www.scoop.it/t/bloom-s-taxonomy
-for-21st-century-learning) would be an excellent tool to use when a teacher-librarian
and teacher are co-planning instruction and are deciding on the resources they will best
use to enhance the learning of their students. As Web 3.0 (and beyond) emerges,
teacher-librarians could add to the learner-centered principles and build applications into
where they might best fit for their students.
Another way of exploring technology and meta-cognition is examining digital ver-
sions of Bloom’s taxonomy such as what has been created by educator Mike Fisher, the
latest version of which is shared in Figure 6.1. Fisher has updated the “digital Blooms”
image several times since publishing his original idea because he realized that the tools
cannot live on just one level; they have to be fluid, and as educators, we need to think
of ways to use the tools on multiple levels. These concepts are depicted on the Visual
Blooms wiki (http://visualblooms.wikispaces.com/). Action research could be used to
develop a project related to incorporating, testing, adding to, and exploring this cognitive
concept with the teachers and students. Fisher has also written a blog post about media
specialists/librarians and the Common Core Standards (http://edge.ascd.org/
_Common-Core-for-Media-Specialists-Considerations/blog/5081899/127586.html).
Another fascinating and practical take on Blooms in the digital age can be found on
Kathy Schrock’s Guide to Everything site as she reimagines Blooms for applications—
“Bloomin Apps” shared in Figure 6.2 (Schrock, 2012a)—and incorporates charts to follow
the conceptual model with links to apps for the iPad, Google, Android, and Web 2.0.
Five Favorites
1. This Virtual Knowledge Building Center (Loertscher and Koechlin, 2012b)
(https://sites.google.com/site/schoollearningcommons/knowledge-
building-centers) section of Loertscher and Koechlin’s Learning Commons
Figure 6.1. Digital Blooms Visual (Fisher, 2012)

Visual Blooms.
Source: Based on the 2009 “25 Tools” A Toolbox for Learning Professionals, published at: http://www.c41pt.co.uk/25Tools/
index.html 2009 M. Fisher http://mikefisher.pbworks.com.
THINK ABOUT QUESTIONS—New/Emerging Technology

What would I like to know more about technology in learning?
How can new/emerging technology benefit student learning as well as collabo-
rative planning and teaching in my school?
How can I incorporate the best technology for the purpose and teach my
students how to do this as well?
How can my virtual school library learning commons be a place for the co-
construction of knowledge?
How do we get relevant online collaboration in learning and teaching in my school?
Figure 6.2. Kathy Schrock’s Guide to Everything: Bloomin’ Apps (Schrock, 2012a)
http://schrockguide.net/bloomin-apps.html
wiki provides an extensive overview, resources, learning opportunities, and

base for a teacher-librarian conducting action research related to using tech-
nology for learning and the development of their virtual learning commons
to knowledge building centers. Many fine examples of virtual learning
commons can be accessed from this wiki.
2. Teacher-librarian Joyce Valenza’s Guide for Teacher-Librarians (Spartan
Guides) (http://sdst.libguides.com/librarians) provides extensive resources
for teacher-librarians on every school library topic, including managing your
virtual space. Her actual high school library site (http://springfieldlibrary.
wikispaces.com/) also contains a plethora of digital resources and examples
of theory in action such as the video on apps co-created with her students
entitled “The Wizard of Apps” (http://www.slideshare.net/joycevalenza/
wizard-of-apps).
3. The NMC (New Media Consortium) Horizon Report (2011 with videos)
(http://wp.nmc.org/horizon2011/) presents key technology trends
impacting education and is updated yearly. Teacher-librarians will find it
worthwhile to follow this source on an annual basis and to share it with col-
leagues. The 2011 videos offer great topics for action research projects and
can be shared with teachers for professional day discussions such as technol-
ogies to watch, electronic books, augmented reality, and gaming.
4. The popular Webquest site includes resources for project-, problem-, and
inquiry-based learning including many ideas for teacher-librarians to use,
extend, or create for developing the virtual learning commons knowledge
building centers through action research and in collaboration with teachers
(http://webquest.sdsu.edu/materials.htm).
5. Noted futurist Thomas Frey’s papers on the future of libraries (2009) (http://
www.davinciinstitute.com/papers/) give a fascinating perspective on the
role of libraries and librarians in the near and far future—electronic outposts,
search command centers, periodical reading rooms, book download centers,
cyber cafes, gamer stations, studios, mini-theatres. Any one of them would
make an interesting and unique action research project on how technology
impacts learning in a physical and virtual school library commons.
Interdisciplinary Learning
Breaking the boundaries between disciplines in project- and problem-based learn-
ing through interdisciplinary studies puts the principles of brain-based research and
multiple intelligences into practice to impact student learning. Teacher-librarians using
action research to explore these areas will find that many teachers and students are
motivated and excited to join in. Barranoik stated, “Authentic problems provide the
basis for instruction and promote connections with society . . . ” and wondered about
the lack of a social action component in many of our curriculum-based research assign-
ments (Barranoik, 2004, 37, 126). The future of curriculum in many areas is increasingly
moving toward competencies, which facilitate interdisciplinary learning such as the
new Framework for Student Learning developed by Alberta Education (Alberta Educa-
tion, 2012a). Choosing to explore interdisciplinary learning automatically leads to the
THINK ABOUT QUESTIONS—Interdisciplinary Learning

What are the disciplines or domains of knowledge and how do they intercon-
nect?
How do our brains best process knowledge? What evidence do I see of this in
my school?
What strategies could I use in my school to connect different subject area teach-
ers to co-plan and teach with me?
Why would interdisciplinary learning be of benefit my students? What might
I want parents to know about interdisciplinary learning?
How could I engage students in interconnecting their learning?
teacher-librarian involving two or more teachers from different subject areas or spe-
cialists to collaborate on ways to impact and deepen student understanding through
cross-curricular connections. Interdisciplinary projects enliven the learning process
and enable learners to make connections in their learning. I used the processes of
action research to learn more about interdisciplinary learning and documented it in
the book Brain-Friendly School Libraries. I came to the conclusion that educators want
to learn about what science can tell us about the brain and how we learn best, and then
apply that knowledge pedagogically.
Five Favorites
1. Marilyn Sprenger’s book, Learning and Memory: The Brain in Action (1999)
explores how memory and deep understanding occur in the brain in five dif-
ferent ways. For each way (semantic, emotional, automatic, episodic, and
procedural) Sprenger offers practical applications to use in planning learn-
ing activities. Teacher-librarians might find this a fascinating action research
project—to collaboratively plan interdisciplinary study with teachers around
memory and note how student learning is impacted in each area.
2. Project-Based Learning: An Overview (Edutopia, 2012a) (http://www
.edutopia.org/project-based-learning-overview-video) and Five-Year-Olds
Pilot Their Own Project Learning (Edutopia, 2012b) (http://www.edutopia
.org/kindergarten-project-based-learning-video): These two web resources
offer the teacher-librarian more ideas and theory around project-based learn-
ing, including fascinating examples such as the one filmed in kindergarten.
These videos might support a teacher-librarian in using action research to
establish project-based learning in the school library learning commons,
which naturally lends itself to interdisciplinary work.
3. Eric Jensen’s work, including Brain-Based Learning, The New Paradigm of
Teaching (2nd ed.) (2008) is a wonderful introduction for teacher-librarians
studying interdisciplinary learning because the study will lead to learning
how we learn. Jensen is a pioneer in this area, which is relatively new area
because we have been able to study the living brain and how we learn
through technology such as Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) only in the

past decade or so. Teacher-librarians researching the brain and learning will
also find Jensen’s resources invaluable as they seek to educate fellow teach-
ers through exploring Jensen’s work together as he demystifies the science
and provides practical learning activities to be used to enhance student
learning.
4. Robert Sylwester is another expert on brain-based learning and a proponent
of interdisciplinary work and connections. His books such as A Biological
Brain in a Cultural Classroom: Enhancing Cognitive and Social Development
Through Collaborative Classroom Management (2nd ed.) (2003) support collabo-
ration and interdisciplinary learning as well as delve into questions about
using print and digital sources, and what brain science is saying about that.
5. Pat Woolf, also an expert on brain-based, interdisciplinary, and project-based
learning—including teaching reading—again takes readers through the sci-
ence and recommends strategies for improving practice in books such as
Brain Matters: Translating Research into Classroom Practice (2nd ed.) (2010).
Teacher-librarians might find reading teachers eager to embark on action
research with them after co-studying these works.
Advocacy
I have described some exciting areas for teacher-librarians to explore and study
through action research in the field of education and school librarianship. However,
as I mentioned in the preface, many schools do not have teacher-librarians and if they
do, many teacher-librarians find themselves with nonflexible schedules, teaching other
classes, covering teacher preparation periods, and the like. Many teacher-librarians
find themselves constantly needing to advocate for their libraries or positions. This
may be another key area a teacher-librarian could explore through action research as
I did within a large metropolitan public school system in Alberta (Sykes, 2002).
I wanted to understand why school libraries and teacher-librarians who brought these
libraries to life as learning commons were diminishing. What I discovered, which was
consistent with other literature, was that schools did indeed want:
• Equity of access for students to great school libraries (physical and virtual)
• Inquiry-based (constructivist) learning experiences that enhance the multiple
realms of literacy
• Purposeful use of technology for learning with support for technology
• School libraries that reach beyond “walls,” extending the classroom across
the curriculum and to other libraries and the world, and allowing the world
to come in to the school and classroom—what we now articulate as the learn-
ing commons
However, impeding these “wants” were:

• Gaps between resources and technology/technology support
• A general misunderstanding among teachers, principals, districts, and com-
munities about the importance of school libraries to student achievement
THINK ABOUT QUESTIONS—Advocacy

Why do teacher-librarians need to advocate?
What supports are available in my school or district to enable the school library
to flourish?
What strategies could be used in my own school to provide some flexibility for
collaborative teaching and learning?
Why should schools care about school libraries and teacher-librarians?
• Nonflexible scheduling of libraries

• Need for active administrator support
• Teacher-librarians who were not learning leaders
Certainly, these impediments need to be addressed. What a teacher-librarian will

find after researching this area is that there are some schools and school districts doing
magnificent work to support the advancement of the school library learning commons
and teacher-librarian leadership. In the next chapter, you will read about the Waterloo
Region District School Board in Ontario, Canada, and their projects. Advocacy may be
an area you want to explore to assist you with reflections and actions that could overcome
some of the impediments to your work as a teacher-librarian in your school library.
Five Favorites
1. On its website’s Advocacy page, the American Association of School Librarians
has one of the most comprehensive sections devoted to school library advo-
cacy, including tools, resources, toolkits, position statements, an intellectual
freedom brochure, and links to legislation (http://www.ala.org/aasl/
advocacy) (Canadian Library Association, 2011a). In Canada, the Canadian
Library Association (CLA) has reorganized library sectors into networks such
as the Voices for School Libraries network (Canadian Library Association,
2011b). Part of the role of this network is school library advocacy (http://
www.cla.ca/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Networks1&Template=/CM/
HTMLDisplay.cfm&ContentID=12222&FuseFlag=1). CLA also provides a
general advocacy page with tools and resources of benefit to any library sector
(http://www.cla.ca/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Advocacy&Template=/CM/
HTMLDisplay.cfm&ContentID=13414). Additionally, CLA is supporting the
rewriting of national school library standards in Canada for 2014.
2. State, provincial, and community branches of teacher-librarian associations
provide tremendous support and resources for many topics, are involved,
and have developed expertise in advocacy. For example, the California
School Library Association wiki (http://cslasos09.pbworks.com/w/page/
6987491/FrontPage) was developed to help teacher-librarians share strate-
gies, stories, and ideas for dealing with budget cuts.
3. Public and academic library associations both locally and nationally also
provide support for advocacy and for school libraries. For example, the
Library Association of Alberta’s advocacy page (http://www.laa.ca/page/
advocacy.aspx) contain many resources, including advocacy guidelines with
strategic planning charts, letter writing samples, and other tools that could
be adapted and used by a teacher-librarian (an adaptation of such might be
an action research project unto itself). University programs for teacher-
librarians often include an advocacy portion. The School Library Impact
project completed by Mansfield University (in Mansfield, Pennsylvania)
graduate students analyzed school library impact research studies for the
Pennsylvania school library association and published the project and find-
ings on their website (http://library.mansfield.edu/impact.asp) (2011).
4. Parents and parent groups at the school and community levels also can pro-
vide a great deal of support for the school library. Parents can become a
teacher-librarian’s strongest advocate. An example is the efforts of three
Spokane mothers to reduce cuts to teacher-librarians and perhaps provide
an advocacy model that others could adapt (http://www.schoollibrary
journal.com/article/CA6590045.html) (2008). Another example is the study
Exemplary School Libraries in Ontario (http://accessola.com/data/6/rec
_docs/477_Exemplary_School_Libraries_in_Ontario_2009.pdf) (2009)
published by the Ontario Library Association, Queen’s University, and the
nonprofit organization People for Education (http://www.peoplefor
education.ca/).
5. A teacher-librarian using action research to study advocacy for school libraries
can also find support through corporate sources such as the publisher
Scholastic and its third edition of Research Foundation Paper: School Libraries
Work! (2008) (http://listbuilder.scholastic.com/content/stores/LibraryStore/
pages/images/SLW3.pdf). The paper synthesizes and reports on over 20 years
of school library impact studies and the importance of school libraries and
teacher-librarians.
Chapter 7
Shared Project Ideas, Contacts
There are many examples of teacher-librarian action research projects being shared
through school districts and other venues such as university graduate programs. I con-
clude with a sampling of projects and contacts shared with me by interviewees (see
Chapter 3) for those considering an action research project to view for information and
ideas, and indeed, if the reader wishes to contact these researchers, questions would be
welcomed. Indeed, it is in the continued collaboration and sharing of projects and results
that teacher-librarianship will flourish and continue to impact student learning.
1. Meaningful Research Projects: Perspectives from High School Students and Their
Teacher (2004). Dr. Lois Barranoik (University of Alberta) explored the question of
meaningful research with high school students through action research methodology
documented in her dissertation, an outstanding example of action research defined
and lived in a study involving a teacher-librarian (Lois) and high school English
teacher working with a group of students in the exploration of making research mean-
ingful to students. Teacher-librarians can relate to this school-based study Lois under-
took and the many discoveries she reflects upon along the way. Many of her
discoveries relating to students and research resonate with what teachers and
teacher-librarians experience when thinking about doing a research project. Inter-
spersed with a lively reflective narrative, it is fascinating to engage in Lois’s journey
and learn from her findings. This must have been a key goal she had in mind when
designing this work with a mind open to new possibilities she might, and did, uncover
in this research. A key discovery was that becoming an adept researcher builds confi-
dence. And even more so, “empowerment became a key contextual element for the
findings of this study . . . students feeling that they had some control over school-
based decisions that affected them . . . Students equated understanding with empower-
ment” (2004, 115, 117).
Although localized to one setting, what Lois discovers from the struggles, chal-
lenges, and successes of the high school students and their research projects echoes
many of the same themes teacher-librarians think about when engaging in or contem-
plating engaging in any type of research—access to information, task perception and
understanding, time, support, formulating questions (which Lois states “may be the
most difficult part of the assignment” [30]), and purpose for their research. She found
97
that she relied on her “educational experience and understanding as one way to cope
whenever the path chosen for [her] study became somewhat obscure” (58).
2. Collaborative Inquiry Volumes I & II: Teacher-Librarian Reports (2011, 2012) (http://
gecdsblearningcommons.pbworks.com/w/page/38744378/Learning%20Commons)
from the Greater Essex County District School Board, Windsor, Ontario, were shared
by Sharon Seslija. Six inquiries involving 15 teacher-librarians engaged in collaborative
practice throughout this school district are detailed in the first volume, and 13 addi-
tional projects are in the second volume. All projects list the contact information of
the research teams. There is a great deal to learn from the actions and reflections of
these action researchers both in relation to the particular topics and in how they used
action research skills and processes, acted upon them, and reported reflections and
findings to inform their own professional practice and that of others. Projects are
focused largely on technology and learning, but also include topics such as on collabo-
rative inquiry, English as a second language (ESL), and differentiated learning.
3. Students of Dr. Lesley Farmer from California State University contributed to

this book the following projects undertaken in their school library graduate study.
Making Mathematics Meaningful through Project-Based Learning
Lily Moayeri, Teacher Librarian, Edwin Markham Middle School, Los Angeles
Unified School District (LAUSD; in Los Angeles, California), lxm2076@lausd.net
This action research explores alternative approaches to teaching mathematics

other than with direct instruction that result in deeper comprehension and longer
retention of the material. A series of teacher-developed algebra and geometry projects
incorporating literacy, personalization, personification, information literacy, and inter-
disciplinary components are implemented over the course of a three-year period to use
with students in a gifted/high ability magnet school. Student project scores and over-
all scores are examined quantitatively to determine correlation between the two varia-
bles. These are then correlated with the students’ performance on the state standards
test. This is followed by qualitative student interviews to assess their feelings about
the projects and determine the long-term effects of the projects on comprehension
and retention.
Bullying in the Digital Age: Implications for the Teacher Librarian
Lydia E. Smith-Davis lydia.smith-davis@lhsoc.org
Action Research conducted at Lutheran High School of Orange County, California,

California State University Long Beach
Because of devastating student suicides and other unfortunate incidents, bullying

in the digital age has become a hotly trending topic. The purpose of this proposal was
Shared Project Ideas, Contacts 99
to determine if Lutheran High School was adequately addressing and prepared for
(cyber)bullying concerns and what the specific implications are for the teacher-
librarian. Three sets of data were analyzed: the Olweus Bullying Questionnaire,
administered online to a representative sample of the school’s student population; a
survey titled “Is Your School Adequately Addressing or Prepared for Cyber Bullying
Concerns?” reprinted from Bullying beyond the Schoolyard: Preventing and Responding to
Cyber-Bullying by Sameer Hinduja and Justin W. Patchin (2009), given to administra-
tors; and an interview conducted with a focus group composed of the Orange
Lutheran Student Leadership Team. Recommendations and implications for the
teacher-librarian are provided.
4. Robyn Young, School Librarian rryoung@avon-schools.org
Avon High School, Avon Advanced Learning Center, Avon, Indiana
The Use of Graphic Novels to Motivate Reluctant Readers (presented results at an

American Association of School Librarians [AASL] conference and received an AASL
research grant for the project). Because of the popularity of graphic novels, the goal
of this study was to determine their educational benefits. For this study, “graphic nov-
els” are defined as book-length stories presented in comic strip images (i.e., artwork
with dialogue presented in a balloon over the speaker’s head). Using qualitative and
quantitative research methods, the following questions will be addressed: Can the
introduction and use of graphic novels improve reading comprehension and test
scores? Can the introduction and use of graphic novels enhance overall class perfor-
mance? Can the introduction of graphic novels motivate young adults to read more?
A pre- and post-test procedure will be used to gather data on the first question. Data
from faculty journals and student interviews will be collected to determine class per-
formance and reading patterns, respectively. The outcome of the proposed study will
be to provide school library media centers with research-based evidence that will sup-
port collection development and bibliographic instruction decision-making.
5. Anita Brooks Kirkland reports that Waterloo Region District School Board (in
Ontario, Canada) has been participating in the Powerful Learning Practice (PLP)
project, led by Will Richardson and Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach (http://plpnetwork.com/).
Waterloo Region District School Board has been fortunate to have a teacher-librarian team
for each cohort. Part of the expectations for PLP is for each group to carry out action
research. Projects can relate either to classroom practice or to professional learning. Last
year’s group (2011) did their action research on a different model for teachers to learn
about Web 2.0 technology. The group planned a full day of professional development
(PD) for all of the teacher-librarians on the Waterloo Region District School Board. The
event website gives some insight into the purpose and organization of the day (https://
sites.google.com/site/ownyourlearning/). The group used surveys and interviews to
collect data at all stages of the project, and put the interviews together into a video. They
presented their findings at the final PLP (Canadian) event in May 2011.
This year’s group (2012) was made up entirely of secondary teacher-librarians.

The purpose of their action research is to explore Carol Koechlin’s Knowledge Build-
ing Centre (KBC) model (https://sites.google.com/site/knowledgebuildingcentres/).
This research expands on work done previously by one of the team members, who
did a fabulous inquiry project with three grade 10 science classes collaborating online
for inquiry into climate change. The members of this year’s team (2012) each partnered
with another teacher at their school, using the KBC model for a collaborative inquiry
unit. Each school’s project was in a different subject area. The group explored how
the KBC model might help answer their guiding question: “How do we, as teacher-
librarians, deepen and enrich student research projects?” The results of this project
were very positive and were highlighted at the Canadian PLP 2012 culminating event
as well as at Treasure Mountain Canada 2012. An account of their project can be found
at https://sites.google.com/site/tlpeepswrdsb/.
One of the Waterloo Region District School Board’s secondary teacher-librarians,

Susan Danic, has done action research at her school (Kitchener-Waterloo Collegiate
Institute) but not in a formal way. She is on a mission to create readers. Her circulation
statistics are twice the next nearest high school in the board. She has explored very
specific strategies to connect reading to the school’s MSIP program (Multi-Subject
Instructional Period) and to assessment for learning strategies related to self-
regulation. Students using the library set specific learning goals. Danic has created a
simple method for quantifying their success and gathers that data systematically. She
can demonstrate in multiple ways how the library program contributes in a concrete
way to the school success plan. She has not written this up in a formal way but
presents the approach in this Prezi: http://prezi.com/57gchlht621g/supporting-
reading-and-the-library/.
6. Linda Shantz-Kereztes, currently an education consultant specializing in school

libraries transforming into learning commons, used action research processes and
skills for personal inquiry with secondary students in her former position as
teacher-librarian. The process and project are described in a paper written by Shantz-
Keresztes for Treasure Mountain II Canada (https://sites.google.com/site/
treasuremountaincanada2/). In summary, the project is based on collaborative plan-
ning and teaching between teacher and teacher-librarian based on this question:
“How can we better engage our students in their teen issues research projects for the
Personal Challenges/Wellness unit within the Grade 11 Career and Life Management
Program of Study?” using the Alberta Education document Focus on Inquiry: a Teacher’s
Guide to Implementing Inquiry-Based Learning. Students were given a personal chal-
lenges/wellness list of the various topics that they could choose (e.g., abuse, anorexia
nervosa, depression, suicide, violence in schools, body image, bullying, and drugs).
The expectation, which was met, was that the outcome for success would personally
benefit the learner both intellectually and emotionally.
Shared Project Ideas, Contacts 101
Shantz-Keresztes Personal Inquiry Project Timeline
Day 1: Introduction of unit (CALM Teacher)

Introduction to the inquiry model: focus on the planning
stage (teacher-librarian)
Brainstorming for 2–3 topics
Days 2–3: Selecting and finalizing the topic
Exploring background information on the topic
Developing key questions and essential question
Days 4–5: Introduction to credible information sources and search
strategies (teacher-librarian)
Identifying possible information sources and keywords for searches
Dividing up the work: key questions and information searches
Days 6–7: Retrieving information and note-taking
Days 8–9: Creating response to Essential Question
Day 10: Final PowerPoint completed
The students were familiar with choosing a topic for projects in other classes, but
taking ownership for a topic with a personal outcome was new to most of the students.
Shantz-Keresztes recorded comments such as: “Just tell me what you want me to study
and I will do it.” “Let me get on with looking for information on the topic and putting
it into my PowerPoint” “I just want to get the project done . . .” “I don’t like research
projects . . . boring.” However, the teacher and students were pleased with the success
of the personal inquiry project when completed—it had provided a meaningful
learning experience that resulted in presentations that dealt with personal responses
to real-life teen issues. For further information on the project, Shantz-Keresztes can
be contacted at ljshantz@shaw.ca.
Bibliography
Abilock, Debbie, Violet Harada, and Kristin Fontichiaro, eds. 2012. Growing Schools:
Librarians as Professional Developers. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.
Alberta Assessment Consortium. 2012. Everyday Assessment Tools to Support Student
Learning. Available: http://www.aac.ab.ca/ (accessed September 12, 2012).
Alberta Education. 2012a. Framework for Student Learning. Available: http://
education.alberta.ca/department/ipr/curriculum/framework.aspx (accessed
September 12, 2012).
Alberta Education. 2012b. School Library Services Initiative. Available: http://
education.alberta.ca/department/ipr/slsi.aspx (accessed September 6, 2012).
Alberta Education. 2012c. Teaching Quality Standard Applicable to the Provision of
Basic Education in Alberta. Available: http://education.alberta.ca/department/
policy/standards/teachqual.aspx (accessed September 9, 2012).
Alberta Education. 2011a. Alberta Initiative for School Improvement (AISI). Available:
http://education.alberta.ca/admin/aisi/researchers/about.aspx (accessed
September 6, 2012).
Alberta Education. 2011b. Alberta Initiative for School Improvement (AISI). 21st
Century Learning Environments, Project Synopsis 30273. Available: http://
education.alberta.ca/apps/aisi/cycle3/synop_cy3yr1.asp?id=30273 (accessed
September 6, 2012).
Alberta Education, 2010. Inspiring Education. Available: http://education.alberta.ca/
department/ipr/inspiringeducation.aspx (accessed January 6, 2013).
Alberta Education. 2010. Transforming Canadian School Libraries to Meet the Needs of
21st Century Learners: Alberta Education School Library Services Initiative:
Research Review and Principal Survey Themes. Available: http://education.
alberta.ca/department/ipr/slsi.aspx (accessed September 6, 2012).
Alberta Education. 2004. Focus on Inquiry: A Teacher ’s Guide to Implementing
Inquiry-Based Learning. Available: http://education.alberta.ca/admin/aisi/
themes/inquiry.aspx (accessed September 6, 2012).
Alberta Education. 1984. Policy, Guidelines, Procedures and Standards for School Libraries
in Alberta. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Education.
Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA). 2012a. Alberta School Library Association.
Available: http://aslc.ca/ (accessed September 9, 2012).
104 Bibliography
Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA). 2012b. Alberta School Library Association

Kaleidoscope 10. Available: http://www.kaleidoscopeconference.ca/ (accessed
November 10, 2012).
Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA). 2010. Professional Growth Plan. Available:
http://www.teachers.ab.ca/For%20Members/Professional%20Development/
Professional%20Growth%20Plans/Pages/Index.aspx (accessed September 9,
2012).
Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA). 2000. Action Research Guide for Alberta Teachers.
Edmonton, AB: Alberta Teacher’s Association. Available: http://www.teachers.
ab.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/ATA/Publications/Professional-Development/
ActionResearch.pdf (accessed January 8, 2012).
American Association of School Librarians. 2012. Advocacy. Available: http://www
.ala.org/aasl/advocacy (accessed November 12, 2012).
American Association of School Librarians. 2012. Best Websites for Teaching and
Learning. Available: http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/guidelinesand
standards/bestlist/bestwebsitestop25.cfm (accessed September 6, 2012).
American Association of School Librarians. 2007. Standards for the 21st Century
Learner. Available: http://www.ala.org/aasl/guidelinesandstandards/
learningstandards/standards (accessed September 6, 2012).
American Library Association. 1997–2012. American Association of School Librarians.
Available: http://www.ala.org/aasl/ (accessed September 10, 2012).
Anderson, Gary L., Kathryn Herr, and Ann Sigrid Nihlen. 1994. Studying Your Own
School: An Educator’s Guide to Qualitative Practitioner Research. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Corwin Press Inc.
Animoto Productions. 2012. Animoto for Education. Available: http://animoto.com/
education?gclid=COCjkrfqvLACFQTsKgodVT0Jpw (accessed September 11,
2012).
Apple. 2012. Garage Band. Available: http://www.apple.com/ilife/garageband/
(accessed September 11, 2012).
Asselin, Marlene, and Doiron, Ray, eds. 2005. Literacy, Libraries, and Learning: Using
Books and Online Resources to Promote Reading, Writing, and Research. Markham,
ON: Pembroke Publishers.
Asselin, Marlene, Jennifer L. Branch, and Dianne Oberg, eds. 2003. Achieving Informa-
tion Literacy: Standards for School Library Programs in Canada. Ottawa, ON:
Canadian School Library Association/Association for Teacher-Librarianship in
Canada. Available: http://www.clatoolbox.ca/casl/slic/ (accessed September 6,
2012).
Automattic. 2012. Polldaddy. Available: http://polldaddy.com/?ad=automattic.com
Bailey, Gerald D. & Ribbel, Mike S. 2004. Digital Citizenship Focus Questions for
Implementation. Learning and Leading with Technology 32 – (2): 14. Available:
http://digitalcitizenship.net/uploads/2ndLL.pdf (accessed January 6, 2013).
Barking Dog Studios. 2012. People for Education. Available: http://www.people
foreducation.ca/ (accessed November 13, 2012).
Bibliography 105
Barranoik, Lois K. 2004. Meaningful Research Projects: Perspectives from High School
Students and their Teacher. (Dissertation) University of Alberta: Department of
Elementary Education.
Calgary Board of Education. 2011. Educational Resources. Available: http://www
.innovativelearning.ca/sec-rlc/rlc-educational-resources.asp (accessed September
10, 2012).
Calgary Board of Education. 2010. Calgary Board of Education Annual Education
Results Report 2009–2010 Combined with the Three-Year Education Plan 2010–
2013. Available: http://www.cbe.ab.ca/aboutus/documents/0910AERR.pdf
Calgary Board of Education. 1999. School Libraries Supporting Quality Learning. Calgary,
Canada: Calgary Board of Education. Available: http://www.innovativelearning
.ca/sec-rlc/docs/lib-ql_libraries.pdf (accessed September 6, 2012).
California School Library Association. 2012. CSLA SOS 09 Wiki. PB Works Release
#588: PBWORKS. Available: http://cslasos09.pbworks.com/w/page/6987491/
FrontPage (accessed November 12, 2012).
Canadian Library Association. 2011a. Advocacy. Available: http://www.cla.ca/AM/
Template.cfm?Section=Advocacy&Template=/CM/HTMLDisplay.cfm
&ContentID=13414 (accessed November 12, 2012).
Canadian Library Association. 2011b. Voices for School Libraries Network. Available:
http://www.cla.ca/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Networks1&Template=/CM/
HTMLDisplay.cfm&ContentID=12222&FuseFlag=1 (accessed November 12, 2012).
Cicchetti, R. 2010. “Concord-Carlisle Transitions to a Learning Commons.” Teacher
Librarian 37(3): 52–58.
Cody, Anthony. 2011. “Improving Teaching 101: Teacher Action Research.” Education
Week, Teacher. Available: http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/
2011/10/improving_teaching_101_collabo.html?cmp=ENL-EU-VIEWS2
Common Sense Media. 2012a. Digital Literacy and Citizenship Curriculum for Grades
K-5. Common Sense Media, Inc. Available: http://www.commonsensemedia.org
/educators/curriculum/k-5 (accessed September 12, 2012).
Common Sense Media. 2012b. Digital Literacy and Citizenship Curriculum for Grades
6-12. Common Sense Media, Inc. Available: http://www.commonsensemedia.org/
educators/curriculum/6-8 (accessed September 12, 2012).
Dewey, J. 1916. Democracy and Education. Stilwell, KS: Digireads.com Publishing.Diggs,
V. (with editorial comments by Loertscher, D.). 2009. From Library to Learning
Commons: A Metamorphosis. Teacher Librarian 36(4): 32–38.
DIRT (Digital Research Tools Wiki). Available: https://digitalresearchtools.pbworks
.com/w/page/17801639/About%20this%20wiki (accessed September 10, 2012).
Dodge, Bernie. 2007. Webquest.org. San Diego State University. Available: http://
webquest.org/index.php (accessed September 12, 2012).
DuFour, Richard, Rebecca DuFour, Robert Eaker, and Gayle Karhnek. 2004. Whatever
It Takes: How Professional Learning Communities Respond when Kids Don’t Learn.
Bloomington, IN: National Educational Services.
106 Bibliography
Eaker, Robert, Richard DuFour, and Rebecca DuFour. 2002. Getting Started: Reculturing
Schools to become Professional Learning Communities. Bloomington, IN: National
Educational Services.
Ebscoe Industries. 1997–2012. EBSCO. Available: http://ejournals.ebsco.com/Home
.asp (accessed September 6, 2012).
Educause. 2011. 7 Things You Should Know about the Modern Learning Commons. Avail-
able: http://www.educause.edu/Resources/7ThingsYouShouldKnowAboutthe
Mo/227141 (accessed September 6, 2012).
Edutopia. 2012a. Project-Based Learning: An Overview. The George Lucas Educational
Foundation. Available: http://www.edutopia.org/project-based-learning-overview
-video (accessed September 12, 2012).
Edutopia. 2012b. Five-Year-Olds Pilot Their Own Project Learning (video). George
Lucas Educational Foundation. Available: http://www.edutopia.org/
kindergarten-project-based-learning-video (accessed September 12, 2012).
Erisa Industry Committee. 2010–2011. ERIC. Available: http://www.eric.org (accessed
September 6, 2012).
Feinberg, Jonathan. 2011. Wordle. Available: http://www.wordle.net/ (accessed
Fisher, Mike. 2012. Visual Blooms. Available: http://visualblooms.wikispaces.com/
Fisher, Mike. 2011. Media Specialists/Librarians and the Common Core Standards.
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD). Available:
http://edge.ascd.org/_Common-Core-for-Media-Specialists-Considerations/
blog/5081899/127586.html (accessed September 6, 2012).
Flisti. 2012. Flisti. Available: http://flisti.com/ (accessed September 6, 2012).
Frey, Thomas. 2012. Papers: The Future of Libraries. Louisville, CO: DaVinci Institute.
Available: http://www.davinciinstitute.com/papers/ (accessed September 12,
2012).
Future Apps. 2010. Speak It! Available: http://future-apps.net/Speak_it%21_for
_Mac/Speak_it%21_for_Mac.html (accessed September 10, 2012).
Gelb, Michael J. 1998. How to Think Like Leonardo da Vinci. New York: Bantam Dell.
Gerstein, Jackie. 2012. Bloom’s Taxonomy for 21st Century Learning. Scoop.it! Avail-
able: http://www.scoop.it/t/bloom-s-taxonomy-for-21st-century-learning
(accessed January 30, 2013).
Google. 2012a. Google Chart Tools. Available: https://developers.google.com/chart/
Google. 2012b. Google Groups. Available: http://groups.google.com/ (accessed
Google. 2008. Google Trends. Available: http://www.google.com/trends/ (accessed
Gordon, Carol. 2006. A Study of a Three-Dimensional Action Research Training Model for
School Library Programs. Chicago: American Association of School Librarians,
American Library Association. Available: http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/
aasl/aaslpubsandjournals/slmrb/slmrcontents/volume9/actionresearch.cfm
Bibliography 107
Greater Essex County District School Board, Windsor, Ontario. 2012. Collaborative
Inquiry. Reports: Teacher-Librarians. Volume II. Available: http://gecdsblearning
commons.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/57426058/TL%20Collaborative%20Inquiry
%20Volume%20I.pdf (accessed September 6, 2012).
Greater Essex County District School Board, Windsor, Ontario. 2011. Collaborative
Inquiry. Reports: Teacher-Librarians. Volume I. Available: http://gecdsblearning
commons.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/57426058/TL%20Collaborative%20Inquiry
%20Volume%20I.pdf (accessed September 6, 2012).
Hamilton, Buffy. 2012. ALA TechSource Webinar: Taking Embedded Librarianship to
the Next Level: Action Steps and Practices. Available: http://buffyjhamilton
.wordpress.com/2012/02/20/february-2012-ala-techsource-webinar-taking
-embedded-librarianship-to-the-next-level-action-steps-and-practices/ (accessed
September 6, 2012).
Harada, Violet H. 2005. Librarians and Teachers as Research Partners: Reshaping Practices
Based on Assessment and Reflection. Presented at CISSL-IMLS International Research
Symposium, New York, April 28, 2005.
Hinduja, Sameer, and Justin W. Patchin. 2009. Bullying beyond the Schoolyard: Preventing
and Responding to Cyber-Bullying. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Information Network for Ohio Schools. 2010. 21st Century Learning Commons. INFO-
hio. Available: http://learningcommons.infohio.org/ (accessed September 12,
2012).
Inspiration Software. 2012. Inspiration. Available: http://www.inspiration.com/
Jensen, Eric. 2008. Brain-Based Learning: The New Paradigm of Teaching, 2nd ed.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Jensen, Melissa. 2010. Improving Reading Comprehension of Junior Division Students
as the Teacher-Librarian: An Action Research Study. Ontario Action Researcher.
Available: http://oar.nipissingu.ca/reports_and_documents.htm (accessed
Johnson, L., R. Smith, H. Willis, A. Levine, and K. Haywood. 2011. The 2011 Horizon
Report. Austin, TX: New Media Consortium. Available: http://wp.nmc.org/
horizon2011/ (accessed September 12, 2012).
Kagan, Spencer, and Miguel Kagan. 2009. Kagan Cooperative Learning. San Clemente,
CA: Kagan Publishing.
Katchel, Debra. 2011. School Library Impact Studies Project. Mansfield University.
Available: http://library.mansfield.edu/impact.asp (accessed November 14,
2012).
Krachtus, Dieter. 2009. Chartle. Available: http://www.chartle.net/ (accessed September
10, 2012).
Klein, Astrid, and Mark Dytham. 2003–2012. Pecha Kucha. Available: http://www
.pecha-kucha.org/ (accessed September 11, 2012).
Klinger, D. A., E. A. Lee, G. Stephenson, C. Deluca, and K. Luu. 2009. Exemplary School
Libraries in Ontario. Toronto, ON: Ontario Library Association. Available: http://
accessola.com/data/6/rec_docs/477_Exemplary_School_Libraries_in_Ontario_2009
.pdf (accessed November 13, 2012).
108 Bibliography
Koechlin, Carol, and Anita Brooks Kirkland. 2012. Construction Zones for Learning.
Available: https://sites.google.com/site/knowledgebuildingcentres/ (accessed
Koechlin, Carol, David Loertscher, and Sandi Zwaan. 2011. The New Learning Commons
where Learners Win! Reinventing School Libraries and Computer Labs, 2nd ed. Salt
Lake City, UT: Hi Willow Research and Publishing. Available: http://lmcsource.
com/Catalog/newlearningcommo.html
Koechlin, Carol, David Loertscher, and Sandi Zwaan. 2008. The New Learning Commons
where Learners Win: Reinventing School Libraries and Computer Labs. Salt Lake City,
UT: Hi Willow Research and Publishing. Available: http://lmcsource.com/
Catalog/newlearningcommo.html
Lance, K. C., and D. Loertscher. 2005. Powering Achievement: School Library Media
Programs Make a Difference: The Evidence Moments, 3rd ed. Salt Lake City, UT: Hi
Willow Research and Publishing.
Langford, Linda. 1998. Information Literacy: A Clarification. School Libraries Worldwide
4(1): 59–72.
Library Association of Alberta. 2010. LA 2010 Advocacy Guidelines. Available: http://
www.laa.ca/page/advocacy.aspx (accessed November 12, 2012).
Library Research Service. 2012. School Library Impact Studies. Available: http://www
.lrs.org/impact.php (accessed September 12, 2012).
Lippincott, Joan K., and Stacey Greenwell. 2011. 7 Things You Should Know about the
Modern Learning Commons. Educause. Available: http://www.educause.edu/
library/resources/7-things-you-should-know-about-modern-learning-commons
Loertscher, David, and Carol Koechlin. 2012a. The New Learning Commons Discus-
sion Wiki. Available: https://sites.google.com/site/schoollearningcommons/
Loertscher, David, and Carol Koechlin. 2012b. The New Learning Commons: Knowl-
edge Building Centers. Available: https://sites.google.com/site/schoollearning
commons/knowledge-building-centers (accessed September 12, 2012).
Loertscher, David, Carol Koechlin, and Ester Rosenfield. 2010. Building a Learning
Commons: A Guide for School Administrators and Learning Leadership Teams. Salt Lake
City, UT: Hi Willow Research and Publishing.
Loertscher, David. 2008. “Flip This Library: School Libraries Need a Revolution.”
School Library Journal. Available: http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/
CA6610496.html (accessed September 12, 2012).
Mason, Craig. 2011. “New Schools Are Shelving the Old Library.” Daily Journal of
Commerce. Available: http://www.djc.com/news/co/12032455.html (accessed
September 6, 2012).
Massachusetts School Library Association. 2012. Members, Resource Members,
Helping and Sharing. Available: http://www.maschoolibraries.org/ (accessed
September 6, 2012).
McBeath. John. 1999. School Must Speak for Themselves. London: Routeledge.
McElligott, Donna. 2012. Judith Sykes, Linda Davis, Take Calls on the Importance of Teacher
Librarians and the Kaleidoscope Conference. alberta@noon: Canadian Broadcasting
Bibliography 109
Corporation. Available: http://www.cbc.ca/albertaatnoon/episode/2012/11/

01/thursday-november-01-podcast/ (accessed November 10, 2012).
McKenzie, Jamie. 2007. Leading Questions. Bellingham, WA: From Now On (FNO)
Press.
McKenzie, Jamie. 1997. A Questioning Toolkit. From Now On 7(3). Available: www.fno.
org/nov97/toolkit.html (accessed September 6, 2012).
Mcniff, Jean. 2002. Action Research for Professional Development, 3rd ed.
Available: http://www.jeanmcniff.com/ar-booklet.asp (accessed September 6,
2012).
Meister Labs. 2012. MindMeister. Available: http://www.mindmeister.com/ (accessed
September 9, 2012).
Mertler, Craig. 2009. Action Research: Teachers as Researchers in the Classroom. Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Microsoft. 2012. PowerPoint. Available: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/power
point/ (accessed September 11, 2012).
Mills Teacher Scholars. Established 1998. Understand Learning, Improve Teaching.
Available: http://millsscholars.org/ (accessed September 6, 2012).
Mueller, Lisa, Bryce Donauer, Rhonda Hunter, Kelly Marshall, Maria Thompson, and
Anne Rogers. 2011. Inquiry Skills and Search Help LiveBinder. Medicine Hat
School District 76: LiveBinders, Inc. Available: http://www.livebinders.com/play/
play_or_edit?id=215441 (accessed September 12, 2012).
National Council of Teachers of English. 1998–2012. National Council of Teachers of
English. Available: http://www.ncte.org/ (accessed September 10, 2012).
Nipissing University. Established 1998. Ontario Action Researcher. Available: http://
oar.nipissingu.ca/index.htm (accessed September 6, 2012).
Nosleep Software. 2012. Idea Sketch. Available: http://www.nosleep.net/index.php/
78-template-guide/70-idea-sketch (accessed September 10, 2012).
Ohio Educational Library Media Association. 2012. Evidence-Based Practice Articles.
Available: http://www.oelma.org/career-resources/eba (accessed September 12,
2012).
Ontario Ministry of Education. 2012. Teacher Learning and Leadership Program.
Available: http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/teacher/tllp.html (accessed
September 9, 2012).
Ontario School Library Association. 2010. Together for Learning: School Libraries and the
Emergence of the Learning Commons: A Vision for the 21st Century. Available: http://
www.accessola.com/data/6/rec_docs/677_OLATogetherforLearning.pdf
Parker Boudett, K., E. A. City, and R. J. Murnane. 2006. “Data Wise: A Step-by-Step
Guide to Using Assessment Results to Improve Teaching and Learning.” Harvard
Education Letter 22(1). Available: http://www.hepg.org/document/1/ (accessed
September 6, 2012).
Parker Boudett, K., E. A. City, and R. J. Murnane, eds. 2005. “The Data Wise Improve-
ment Process” figure from Data Wise: A Step-by-Step Guide to Using Assessment
Results to Improve Teaching and Learning. President and Fellows of Harvard College,
5. Available: www.harvardeducationpress.org.
110 Bibliography
Pascarelli, Joseph T. 1997. Key Elements of Action Research. Portland, OR: University of
Portland, Faculty of Education.
Prezi. 2012. Prezi. Available: http://prezi.com/ (accessed September 10, 2012).
ProQuest. 2012. ProQuest. Available: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/ (accessed
Reeves, Douglas B. 2004. Accountability for Learning: How Teachers and School Leaders
Can Take Charge. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development (ASCD).
Riel, M. (2010). Understanding Action Research, Center For Collaborative Action
Research. Pepperdine University. Available: http://cadres.pepperdine.edu/
ccar/define.html (accessed September 6, 2012).
Scholastic. 2008. “Research Foundation Paper: School Libraries Work!” Scholastic, 3rd
ed. Available: http://listbuilder.scholastic.com/content/stores/LibraryStore/
pages/images/SLW3.pdf (accessed September 6, 2012).
Schon, D. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Surry,
England: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
Schrock, Kathy. 2012a. Kathy Schrock’s Guide to Everything: Bloomin’ Apps.
Available: http://schrockguide.net/bloomin-apps.html (accessed September 4,
2012).
Schrock, Kathy. 2012b. Kathy Schrock’s Guide for Educators: Teacher Helpers,
Assessment and Rubric Information. Discovery Education. Available: http://
school.discoveryeducation.com/schrockguide/assess.html (accessed September 12,
2012).
Schrock, Kathy. 2011. Kathy Shrock’s Guide to Everything. Available: http://www
.schrockguide.net/ (accessed September 4, 2012).
Shantz-Keresztes, Linda. 2012. “Personal Inquiry for Secondary Students: A
Narrative.” Treasure Mountain Canada 2. Available: https://sites.google.com/
site/treasuremountaincanada2/ (accessed September 12, 2012).
Software Garden. 2012. Note Taker HD for the iPad. Available: http://www
.notetakerhd.com/ (accessed September 10, 2012).
Solution Tree. 2011. AllThingsPLC. Available: http://www.allthingsplc.info/
Sprenger, Marilyn. 1999. Learning and Memory: The Brain in Action. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
SurveyMonkey. 1998–2012. SurveyMonkey. Available: http://www.surveymonkey
.com/ (accessed September 10, 2012).
Sykes, Judith. 2006. Brain Friendly School Libraries. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Sykes, Judith. 2002a. “Accountability and School Libraries: The Principal’s Viewpoint.”
School Libraries in Canada 22(2): 31–33.
Sykes, Judith. 2002b. Action Research: A Practical Guide for Transforming Your School
Library. Greenwood Village, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
Sylwester, Robert. 2003. A Biological Brain in a Cultural Classroom: Enhancing Cognitive
and Social Development through Collaborative Classroom Management, 2nd ed.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Todd, Ross. 2009. School Librarianship and Evidence-Based Practice: Perspectives,
Progress and Problems. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice.
Bibliography 111
Available: http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/
4637/5318 (accessed September 6, 2012).
Todd, Ross. 2008. “The Evidence-Based Manifesto for School Librarians.” School Library
Journal 54(4): 38–43. Available: http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/
CA6545434.html (accessed September 6, 2012).
Todd, Ross. 2003. Learning in the Information Age: School Opportunities, Outcomes and
Options (Keynote Address). Durban, South Africa: International Association of
School Librarianship Conference.
Universal Mind. 2012. iBrainstorm. Available: http://www.universalmind.com/
work/ibrainstorm (accessed September 10, 2012).
Valenza, Joyce. 2012. Springfield Township High School Virtual Library. http://
springfieldlibrary.wikispaces.com/ Available: (accessed September 10, 2012).
Valenza, Joyce. 2011. Spartan Guides: Guide for Teacher-Librarians. Springshare.
Available: http://sdst.libguides.com/librarians (accessed September 12, 2012).
Whelan, Debra Lau. 2008. “Three Spokane Moms Save Their School Libraries.” School
Library Journal. Available: (http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/
CA6590045.html accessed November 13, 2012).
Writing Lab, the OWL at Purdue, and Purdue University. 1995–2012. The Owl: Purdue
On-Line Writing Lab. Available: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/
559/06/ (accessed September 10, 2012).
Woolf, Pat. 2010. Brain Matters: Translating Research into Classroom Practice, 2nd ed.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
xpt Software & Consulting B.V. 2012. SimpleMind for iOS. Available: http://www
.simpleapps.eu/simplemind/ (accessed January 8, 2013).
XTranormal. 2012. XTranormal. Available: http://www.xtranormal.com/ (accessed
Youth Pulse. 2012. YPulse Daily. Available: http://www.ypulse.com/ (accessed
Zmuda, A., & V. H. Harada. 2008. Librarians as Learning Specialists: Meeting the Learning
Imperative for the 21st Century. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Index
AASL, 30, 58, 61, 83, 95 literacy learning continuum, 87–89; on incor-
AASL Standards for the 21st-Century Learner, 58 porating technology in learning, 89–92; on
A Biological Brain in a Cultural Classroom: interdisciplinary learning, 92–94; on learning
Enhancing Cognitive and Social Development commons, 79–82; on studying student
through Collaborative Classroom Management, 94 achievement data, 84–87; time and, 77–79
Academic credit, 18 Action Research Guide for Alberta Teachers
Academic Library Association, advocacy and, 96 (ATA), 7–8
Achieving Information Literacy: Standards for School Action research organizations, 12
Library Programs in Canada, 83 Action-research process, 26, 58
Actionable evidence, dimensions of, 12 Actions, 53–54, 66, 70
Action Research: A Practical Guide for Transforming Administrative leadership, problem-solving
Your School Library, 24 model approaches and, 19
Action Research: Teachers as Researchers in the Administrators, support of, 22, 32
Classroom, 38 Advocacy, 48, 94–96
Action research benefit(s): Barranoik’s opinion AISI, 8–10
on, 17, 50; in changing and advancing AISI project, 40
programs, 33, 34; in confirmation and Alberta Assessment Consortium, 89
evaluation, 28; in engaging and testing Alberta Education, 9, 10, 92
processes, 41–42; on gathering information Alberta Education School Library Services
from students, 47; Kirkland’s view of, 34; in Initiative, 81
learning students’ perspective on education, Alberta government, 8
43; as life-long skill, 26; of moving the profes- Alberta Initiative for School Improvement (AISI).
sion forward, 34; as problem-solving tool, 26; See AISI
teacher-librarians and schools and, 23–24; val- Alberta Initiative for School Improvement (AISI)
idation as, 28 project. See AISI project
Action research challenge(s): design plan as, 30; Alberta School Library Association, 61
educators and, 26; of expressing perspective on Alberta Teacher’s Association Alberta School
practices, 16; Grove on, 40; Hansen on, 41; Library Council (ASLC), 30
Harada on, 22; Koechlin on, 23; lack of space Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA), 7
as, 43; limited access to students as, 43; All Things PLC (Professional Learning
objectifying perspective on practices and Communities), 63
students as, 16; planning, lack of knowledge American Association of School Librarians
and support as, 32; staffing as, 46, 47. See also (AASL). See AASL
Collaboration; Time ASLC. See Alberta Teacher’s Association Alberta
Action research explorations: on advocacy, 94–96; School Library Council (ASLC)
on breadth and depth and children’s literature, Asselin, Marlene, 15–16, 83
82–84; Brown sample topics on, 19, 21; on Assessment, regular, 47
creating school-wide student information ATA. See Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA)
114 Index
Attributes, of action research, 16 Conclusions, 50, 66

Authenticity, 14 Conferences, attending or organizing, 82
Constructivism, 8
Barranoik, Lois, 16–17, 50, 84, 92, 97–98 Context, 5, 57–58
Benefits, of action research. See Action research Cooperative learning, teacher-librarians
benefit(s) and, 89–90
Bloom’s Taxonomy for 21st Century Learning, 89 Credibility, 35
Board policies and privacy concerns, 23 Culture of continuous improvement, in AISI, 9
Brain-Based Learning, The New Paradigm of Culture of inquiry, 11
Teaching, 93
Brain-Friendly School Libraries, 93 Danic, Susan, 100
Brain Matters: Translating Research into Classroom Data Wise Improvement Process, 38, 39, 41, 85–86
Practice, 94 Davis, Linda, 82
Branch, Jennifer, 27 Design, of action research, 23
Brooks Kirkland, Anita, 33–35, 99 “Digital Blooms” visual, 89, 90
Brown, Gerald, 17–21, 51, 53 Digital format, psychological aspect of, 82
Building capacity and sustainability, in AISI, 9 DIRT (wiki), 66
Bullying beyond the Schoolyard: Preventing and Diversity in schools, Morrisette’s research
Responding to Cyber-Bullying, 99 on, 44, 45
Bullying in the Digital Age: Implications for the Doers, 18
Teacher Librarian, 46, 98 Doiron, Ray, 83
Calgary Board of Education, 63 Education, use of action research in, 35

California School Library Association wiki, 95 Educational community, action research benefits
Canadian Library Association (CLA), 83, 95 to, 34
Case studies, Barranoik advice on reading, 17 Educational databases, 63
Catalyst, in AISI, 9 Educational reform and transformation, teacher
Challenges, of action research. See Action research as researcher in, 7
challenge(s) Email, 5–6, 14–15
Chartle, 66 Embedded librarianship, 51, 88
Children’s literature, as project for action ERIC, 63
research, 82–84 Evaluation, action research and, 19
CISSL (Center for International Scholarship in Events: collection of data and, 13; expert and
School Libraries) at Rutgers University, 29 researcher interviews, 15–30; opening, 14;
City, Elizabeth A., 41 practicing teacher-librarians and district school
CLA. See Canadian Library Association (CLA) library specialists interviews, 33–52; teacher-
Coding and clustering process, 66 librarian association presidents interviews,
Collaboration, 40; in action research, 16, 23, 31; in 30–50
AISI, 9; school libraries and, 30, 50; Evidence-based practice: as attribute of AISI, 9;
teacher-librarians and, 19, 35; using technology Curry Lance and, 24; Koechlin and, 22; link to
to support, 47; vs. isolation, 35 action research, 36; Todd and, 11–12; use of, 34
Collaborative assessment, 89 Evidence-based school librarianship, dimensions
Collaborative inquiry, 44, 46 of, 11, 12
Collaborative Inquiry Volumes I & II: Teacher- Exemplary School Libraries in Ontario, 96
Librarian Reports, 98 Experimental Learning Commons, 23
Collaborative planning and teaching, 87–89 Experts, 5, 15–30
Collaborative reflection, 70
Collaborative relationships, time to develop, 32 Farmer, Lesley, 21, 98
Collection of data, 13, 32, 40, 63 Feelers, 17
Commitment, 17, 50 Field notes, 15, 63
Common Core Standards, 89 Five favorites. See Resources
Common Sense Media curriculums, 88 Five-Year-Olds Pilot Their Own Project Learning, 93
Communication, teacher-librarians and, 49 Flexibility, in AISI, 9
Index 115
Flip this Library: School Libraries Need a Revolution, Information gathering, tools for, 5
81, 87 Inquiry, 9, 32
Flisti, 58 Inquiry Skills and Search Help LiveBinder, 87
Focus, action research and, 17, 50 Inspiration (mind-mapping tool), 58
Focus groups, conducting, 40 Instructional leadership, 87
Focus on Inquiry: a Teacher’s Guide to Implementing Instruction and student learning, action research
Inquiry-Based Learning, 87, 100 and, 33
Formal research vs. action research, 25 Interdisciplinary learning, 92–94
Framework for Student Learning, 92 International professional organizations, teacher-
Frey, Thomas, 92 librarians and, 19
From Now On: The Educational Technology International Society for Technology in Education
Journal, 57 (ISTE) Standards for Digital Citizenship, 46
FromNowOn.org, 57 Interviews: with experts and researchers, 15–30;
with practicing teacher-librarians and district
Garage Band, 70 school library specialists, 33–52; with teacher-
Gelb, Michael, 70 librarian association presidents, 30–50
Gibson, Jo-Anne, 35–36 Intimidation factor, action research and, 28, 50
Goals, 13, 63, 85 Intuitors or dreamers, 17
Godden, Heather, 36–37 Investigation of problems, action research and, 27
Google Chart Tools, 66 Isolation, as challenge, 23, 34, 35, 40
Google Groups, 70 Isolationism, 51
Google Trends, 58
Gordon, Carol, 11 Jensen, Eric, 93
Graduate degree program, action research time Journaling, 22, 70
and, 79 The Journey, 63, 66
Grove, Donna, 37–41
Growing Schools: Librarians as Professional Kagan, Spencer, 88
Developers, 11, 80 Kaleidoscope 10, 82
Guide for Teacher-Librarians (Spartan Guides), 92 Key issues, 7, 58, 61, 63
“Guide to Everything,” 66, 89 Knowledge, 9, 22, 23, 32
Guide to Everything–Assessment and Rubrics, 86 Knowledge Building Centre (KBC) model, 100
Koechlin, Carol, 22–24, 80, 100
Hamilton, Buffy, 88
Hansen, Erin, 41–42 Lance, Keith Curry, 24, 25, 86
Harada, Violet, 11, 21–22, 51, 88 Leadership Summit, 2007, 11
Harvey, Carl A., II, 32–33, 53 Learner level, action research at, 25–26
High-school students, meaningful research Learning: incorporating technology in, 89–92;
through, 97–98 interdisciplinary, 92–94
Hinduja, Sameer, 99 Learning and Memory: The Brain in Action, 93
How to Think Like Leonardo da Vinci, 70 Learning commons, 87; experimental, 23;
Huber, Holly, 30–31, 53 exploration of, 79–80; favorites of, 81–82;
Hypothesis testing, action research and, 41 questions about, 81; transforming school
libraries to, 40–41
iBrainstorm (Mind-mapping application), 58 Librarians and Teachers as Research Partners:
Ideas development, contacting experts and, 5 Reshaping Practices Based on Assessment and
Idea Sketch (Mind-mapping application), 58 Reflection, 11
“Improving Reading Comprehension of Junior “Librarians and Teachers as Research Partners:
Division Students as the Teacher-Librarian: An Reshaping Practices Based on Assessment and
Action Research Study,” 12 Reflection,” 88
INDEPENDENT LEARNING SKILLS Librarians as Learning Specialists: Meeting the
program, 51 Learning Imperative for the 21st Century, 88
Individual reflection, 70 Librarianship, embedded, 51, 88
INFOhio’s 21st Century Learning Commons, 82 Library Association of Alberta’s advocacy page, 96
116 Index
Literacy, Libraries, and Learning: Using Books and Organizational measures, action research and, 25
Online Resources to Promote Reading, Writing, Outcomes, 13, 27
and Research, 83 The Owl (Purdue University), 63
Literacy and teacher librarianship research, 15
LITERARY AND CULTURAL APPRECIATION Parents/parents groups, at school and
module, 51 community levels, 96
Literature review. See Review literature Parker Boudett, Kathryn, 41
Loertscher, David, 24–25, 53, 80 Partnership, in AISI, 8
Lutheran High School of Orange County, Patchin, Justin W., 99
California, 46–47, 98–99 Patterns, 50–52, 66
Pecha Kucha, 72
Making Mathematics Meaningful through Project- Peer mentoring programs, utilization of, 47
Based Learning, 98 People for Education, 96
Massachusetts School Library Association, 61 Personalized learning, action research as, 29
McElligott, Donna, 82 Personal risk-taking, teacher-librarian and, 32
McKenzie, Jamie, 57 Planning, of goals and outcomes, 13, 32
Meaningful Research Projects: Perspectives from High Plan of action, 27
School Students and Their Teacher, 97 PLP project. See Powerful Learning Practice (PLP)
Mentoring, action researchers and, 18 project
Mertler, Craig, 38 Polldaddy, 58
Mills Teacher Scholars Group, 12 Powerful Learning Practice (PLP) project, 99
Mind-mapping: applications, 58; gathering infor- Powering Achievement, 25
mation using, 4, 5; sources for development of PowerPoint, 70
answers, 57–58; tool, 58 Practicing Teacher-Librarians and District School
MindMeister, 58 Library Specialists, interviews with, 33–52
Mitchell-Pellet, Mary-Ann, 26, 51 Practitioners, 5, 13, 22, 50
Moayeri, Lily, 42, 50 Preddy, Leslie, 24, 27–28
Morrissette, Rhonda, 42–44 Presentation tools, 70
Motivation, teacher-librarians and, 35 Prezi, 70
MSIP program (Multi-Subject Instructional Principal, teacher-librarians and meeting with, 79
Period), 100 Print format, psychological aspects of, 82
Multi-Subject Instructional Period (MSIP) Problem-solving model (PSM), 17–18, 19
program, 100 Process of change, action research as, 31–32
Murnane, Richard J., 41 Professional culture of schools, 51
Professional development, 8, 48, 51, 53, 99
National Council of Teachers of English, 61 Professional growth planning, 7, 78–79
Networks, AISI, 9 Professional learning communities (PLCs), 41, 86
The New Learning Commons, Where Learners Win!, Professional risk-taking, teacher-librarian and, 32
10, 80 Project-Based Learning, 93
NMC (New Media Consortium) Horizon Project ideas, shared, 97–101
Report, 92 ProQuest, 63
Note Taker HD, 66 PSM. See Problem-solving model (PSM)
Nussbaum-Beach, Sheryl, 99 Public libraries, Sundar on, 49
Public library association, advocacy and, 96
Oberg, Dianne, 26–27 Publisher Scholastic, 96
Ohio Educational Library Media Association,
24, 86 Question(s): on advocacy, 95; on children’s
Online tool-kit, 35 literature reading, 83; on collaborative
Ontario Action Research Association, 12 planning and teaching, 88; driving action
Ontario Action Researcher, 12 research, 3, 5; to explore events, 14; on
Ontario Ministry of Education’s Teacher Learning incorporating technology, 90; on
and Leadership program, 10 interdisciplinary learning, 93; interview, 63; on
Ontario School Library Association, 83 learning commons exploration, 81; sources for
Index 117
development of, 57–58; on student School Library Impact Studies, 86

achievement data, 85; on time exploration, 78; School Library Journal, 84
on transforming school and school libraries, School pressures, 22
53–54 Schools, benefits of action research for, 23–24
School-Wide Student Information Literacy
Rapport, building, 47 Learning Continuum, Creating, 87–89
Reading, think about questions, 83 Schrock, Kathy, 66, 86
“Reading Engagement,” 83 Scientific method, use of, 5323
Recording action plans, 73, 74 “Scoop it!” website, 89
Reeves, Douglas B., 10, 86 Self-assessment, 7, 24
Reflections, 53–54, 66, 70, 79 Self-discipline, 17, 50
Reflective practice, 3, 7, 22, 31, 53 Seslija, Sharon, 44–46, 98
Reflective practitioners, 11, 21, 29 Shantz-Keresztes, Linda, 31–32, 100, 101
Reframing Teacher Leadership to Improve Your School, Simple-Mind (Mind-mapping application), 58
10–11 Skills, of teacher-librarian professionals, 19, 31
Research, 15, 16, 25, 27, 36, 51 Smart goals, 63
Research-based interventions, in AISI, 9 Smart phones, for writing reflections, 79
Researchers: Barranoik advise to, 17; creating Smith-Davis, Lydia Elizabeth, 46–47
community of, 51–52; interviews with, 15–30; Social media, teacher-librarians and, 49
teams and, 19; thinking like, 79; university, 5 Social Readers: Promoting Reading in the 21st
Research Foundation Paper: School Libraries Work!, 96 Century, 28
“Researching,” as intimidating, concept of, 50 Space for meetings, 43
Resource Links, 84 Speak It! (application), 66
Resources: access to, 47; on actions/reflections, Sprenger, Marilyn, 83
66, 70; on advocacy, 95–96; on children’s SSR with Intervention: A School Library Action
literature, 82–84; on creating school-wide liter- Research Project, 24, 28
acy learning, 87–89; on incorporating technol- Staff/staffing, 18, 46, 47
ogy in learning, 89–90, 92; on interdisciplinary Standards for the 21st Century Learner, 83
learning, 93–94; on issue/literature review, 58, Student Achievement Data, 84–86
61, 63; on the Journey, 63, 66; on learning Students, 3, 9, 47
commons, 81–82; on questions, mind map, and A Study of a Three-Dimensional Action Research
context, 57–58; on studying achievement data, Training Model for School Library Programs, 11
85–86; on time, 78–79 Stuewe, Nancy, 28–29
Responses, collecting, 5–6 Sundar, Janice, 47–49
Results drive education, 8 Support, 16, 32, 35, 40
Review literature, 7–12, 42, 58, 61, 63 Survey Monkey, 58
“Revitalizing School Libraries,” 38–39 Surveys, 63
Richardson, Will, 99 Sylwester, Robert, 94
Richert, Anna, 12 Systems thinking, 8
Riel, Margaret, 58
Teacher as researcher, 7
School infrastructure, 22 Teacher-Librarian Association Presidents,
School librarians, action research and, 30 interviews with, 30–50
School librarianship, evidence-based, dimensions Teacher-librarian(s): building rapport to garner
of, 11, 12 cooperation, 47; in Canada, 18; collaborative
School library and information services inquiry, 46; communication, social media and,
programs, action research and, 19, 21 49; cooperative learning and, 89–90; engage-
School library(ies): action research and, 34, 49; ment in action research projects, 47; engaging
experts of, 5; Gibson use of action research in, in thoughtful processes, 41–42; impact on
36; transforming to learning commons, 40–41; school climate, 48–49; incorporating technol-
use of mind mapping to evaluate, 4 ogy in learning, 89–92; meeting with principal,
School Library Impact project, Mansfield 79; part-time, challenge of, 23; proficiency in
University, 96 research, 51; requesting information from
118 Index
teachers, 87; skills to bring to groups, 19. See 21st Century Learning Environments, 10
also Action research benefit(s); Action research 2007 Leadership Summit, 11
challenge(s); Time
Teacher librarianship research, 15 University programs for teacher librarians,
Teacher Professional Growth Plan (TPGP), 7 advocacy and, 96
Teachers, teacher-librarian support of, 11 University researchers, 5
Teaching paradigm, 22, 51 The Use of Graphic Novels to Motivate Reluctant
Teaching practice, 22–23 Readers, 99
Teaching-reflecting-planning, 36
Teaching unit level, 25 Valenza, Joyce, 66, 92
Teamwork, 17, 23 Validation, 28
Teamwork action research model, 19, 20 Virtual Knowledge Building Center, 89, 92
Technology, 47, 89–92 Visual Blooms wiki, 89, 90
“The Alberta Teacher’s Association (ATA) Voices for School Libraries (formerly Canadian
Professional Growth Plan,” 78 Association for School Libraries), 30
Themes, 15, 50, 66
Thinkers, 17 Wajda, Kathy, 49–50
Time, 18, 43, 77–79; advocacy and, 48; for Waterloo Region District School Board, 99
collaboration, 16; for conducting research, 21, Web-based tools, 66
28, 31, 32, 34; elementary teacher-librarians We Boost Achievement: Evidence-Based Practice for
and, 44; for focus groups and data collection, School Library Media Specialists, 24
40; to frame, and engage in research, 27, 37, 47; Webquest site, 92
for identifying problems for investigation, 31; “The Wizard of Apps,” 92
job demands and, 50; part-time teacher- Woolf, Pat, 94
librarians and, 23; professional vs. organiza- Wordle, 70
tional and administrative activities, 18; to Working pages, creating, 13
record personal reflections, 16–17; to work Working with people, teacher-librarian and, 51
with colleagues, 16, 18 Work spaces: to begin action research project,
Timeline, 7, 13, 101 58, 59–62; for data-recording/coding exam-
Todd, Ross, 11, 24, 29–30, 50 ples, 69, 70; to frame goals and outcomes, 67,
Together for Learning: School Libraries and the 68; for identifying key issues and literature,
Emergence of the Learning Commons: A Vision for 64, 65; for organizing patterns and
the 21st Century, 82, 83 themes, 71
Toolkit for Evidence Based Practice, 22
Tools, 5, 78–79, 81–82 XTranormal, 70
TPGP. See Teacher Professional Growth Plan
(TPGP) Young, Robyn, 99
Trending information, tools for, 58 YPulse, 58
Triangulated diagram, 5
Trust, climate of, 22 Zwaan, Sandi, 80
About the Author
JUDITH ANNE SYKES, BEd, EDDip, MEd, educational author, and consultant, is a
former teacher-librarian, school library specialist, principal and recently school library
services manager for the Ministry of Education in Alberta, Canada. Her published
works include Libraries Unlimited’s Library Centers: Teaching Information Literacy, Skills,
and Processes K-6, Action Research: Practical Tips for Transforming Your School Library, and
Brain-Friendly School Libraries.

Conducting Action Research To Evaluate Your School Library

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Conducting Action Research To Evaluate Your School Library

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Conducting Action Research to

Evaluate Your School Library

Judith Anne Sykes

Part I Discovering Issues Affecting School-Librarians and

Part II Work Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

Part III Timely Ideas for Teacher-Librarians to Explore through

Therefore, teacher-librarians and teachers (in schools in which teachers are

This book is intended to provide a practical look at enabling engagement in using

As teacher-librarians become comfortable with the skills, processes, and outcomes

environment in which school library programs find themselves these days—

Each question unfolds through further brainstorming—creating mind maps,

These preliminary steps open up additional questions about the researcher ’s

Once a plan is formulated, the researcher is immersed in intense learning through

Action Research Model (summary and diagram)

Figure I.1. Action Research Cycle Diagram

The intent of action research is to enable the professional to “live in a ques-

Goals Outcomes Plan

Journey Events: data collection

Figure I.2. Action Research Fold-Out Chart

In order to provide teacher-librarians with a practical guide to enable action research

Figure 1.2. Triangulated Diagram

There are many tools to facilitate brainstorming or mind-mapping for gathering

I wondered how I would collect thoughtful responses in the timeliest fashion

I began to review literature in the areas of teacher as researcher, reflective practice,

2. Catalyst—AISI is a catalyst for change. The common goal targeted funding,

The Ontario Ministry of Education’s Teacher Learning and Leadership program

Leaders in school librarianship from universities, teacher and teacher-librarian

Todd advocates “mainstreaming of evidence-based practice initiatives as a dimen-

Evidence FOR Practice FOUNDATION

Many professional action research organizations exist to support teachers and

The Ontario Action Research Association’s Ontario Action Researcher

would find useful to better enable engagement in action research as a professional

The questions I chose to explore in each event were:

Sample email invitation sent:

I am writing regarding a forthcoming book for Libraries Unlimited (an

action research challenges for practicing teacher-librarians and what might be

First Event: Expert and Researcher Interviews

Dr. Marlene Asselin is the coordinator of the teacher-librarian education programs

Lois Barranoik teaches in the Teacher-Librarianship by Distance Learning pro-

Gerald Brown worked as a practitioner in elementary schools, secondary schools,

According to Brown, individuals may grow significantly as professionals using

Administrative leadership that encourages creative and innovative thinking must

Support, collective experience, and expertise can be channeled from local,

Evaluation must be a transparent component if action research is to be respected.

Any topic related to the evolution and implementation of quality school

• Application of specific independent learning skills as related to curriculum

Koechlin writes that in education, action research is a deliberate approach to

Learning together is stronger—Action research is not necessarily an independent

Mary-Ann Mitchell-Pellet is currently an assistant principal at a middle school in

Dianne Oberg is a professor in teacher-librarianship in the Faculty of Education at

focuses on teacher-librarianship education and on the implementation and evaluation

Nancy Stuewe has been a classroom teacher, including special education,

Ross Todd is an associate professor at Rutgers University’s School of Communica-

continuous improvement cycle. At a simplistic level, it involves question, plan, inter-

Second Event: Teacher-Librarian Association Presidents Interviews

a teacher-librarian and to advocate for the inclusion of specially trained educators in

As learning specialist for the Integrated Community Clerkship in the Faculty of

Linda Shantz-Keresztes, past president of the (former) Canadian Association

Third Event: Interviews with Practicing Teacher-Librarians and District

Brooks Kirkland views action research as providing an opportunity to explore the

Most teacher-librarians work in some degree of isolation. While others in the

central support specifically for teacher-librarians and/or strong subject associations,

Jo-Anne Gibson, past president of the Manitoba Teacher-Librarian Association,