Criterios de aceptación

Funding is identified as central to the provision of a good school library that is learner centred, is managed by trained staff, and has an appropriate collection. Funding has a direct impact on the quality of the collection, staffing and the ability to support the learning of students. Tilke discusses the importance of a budget based on a formula to quantify and cost a school library budget to protect from budget cuts within schools. He identifies a number of methods of formulating this budget, most related to collection development. The Australia School Library Association guidelines propose a foundation collection, with a sliding scale of recommended items per student and a recommendation that 10% of items should be replaced annually. In contrast, UK resourcing is based on a formula of 13 items per child to reflect the school curriculum, with a recommended 20% increase built in to give a ‘stock figure of 15.6% per pupil’ in the UK (Tilke 2002:122). However, although the recommended spending figures for reading books had, in 2008, been calculated at £10 per pupil for primary schools and £14 for secondary schools, 61% of primary schools and 92% of secondary schools reported a library spend below this (Creaser and Travis (2008:29).

Hughes-Hassell and Wheelock for the AASL (2001:123) take a different approach, advocating curriculum mapping to inform a budget that reflects the needs and priorities set, with the warning to resist pressure to cuts costs on books when funds are tight and to avoid fixed formulas dictating specific percentages of school library media funding to

47

be earmarked for books, magazines, or multimedia material to determine purchases. This challenge is likely to be even greater today with the addition of online subscription resources into the mix.

It is important however, in trying to balance the budget, not to lose sight of the school library user. Young makes the important observation that

Everything in a library media program is for the benefit of the students, so any purchases made should be with student achievement in mind. The needs of the learner are identified and drive the content description for the budget (Young,

2008:16).

In order to prepare and manage resources effectively and control spending, Barnett (1997) advocates the use of an annual budget cycle commencing with an audit of stock and an identification of current and expended demand, priorities and curriculum projects to help to set out a school library budget. Tilke (2002:127) reminds the librarian that identifying ‘value for money’ is an important aspect of managing spending, specifically through direct ordering and the use of suppliers and agents; use of subscription agents; keeping a library inventory; careful management of existing library furniture and resources, and use of the school library services resource collections. These allow the school librarian to demonstrate to school that the school library is value for money.

Adams (2007) raises concerns about the way that school budgets affect the librarian’s ability to buy appropriate books and resources for the collection which she says ultimately affect students’ intellectual freedom. She cites the ALA who makes the important point that school library media specialists assume a leadership role in promoting the principles of intellectual freedom within the school by providing resources and specialist knowledge.

However, she raises the issue of the effect of financial cuts on library staff, observing

It is no secret that as school district financial resources shrink, administrators began to look for additional cuts in the school budget. Under the No Child Left Behind Act (NLCB); “a highly qualified” teacher must be in every classroom, however, library media specialists are not included in that classroom designation (ALA Washington Office) (Adams, 2007:30).

48

School library funding has been noted by Ofsted (2006) who have reported that funding for libraries varied markedly, even across the schools with good libraries. Their survey found a direct link between well funded libraries and effectiveness. However, gaps in resourcing were less significant overall than under-use or poor management.

The complex relationship between the book industry business, the trained librarian and the student are highlighted by Crandall. She reports on the impact of budget cuts in two key markets for children’s publishers (public libraries and school libraries), on the publishing industry, observing,

The Educational Publishers Council calculates that primary spending on school books is at its lowest level since 1996/1997, at £12.31 per head. Thirty-two per cent of UK primary schools spend less than £10 per head on books, and 47% of UK secondary schools spend less than £20 per head (Watson 2002). Thus, not only have book budgets declined, but the book industry can no longer rely on a cadre of trained professionals to intermediate between publisher and child, and to guide readers towards more challenging material (Crandall, 2006:5).

The ALA, in their State of America’s Libraries report (2010:16) identify a significant increase (19%) in the overall average of expenditure per school, from $11,390 in 2009 to $13,525 in 2010. However, at the 50th percentile, 75th percentile, and 95th percentile levels, there are only decreases compared with the previous year. In other words, a significant proportion of schools experienced a decrease in funding for information resources, and the averages in Table 2.2 may be deceiving in that they are affected by the very small percentage of schools that had significant increases.

2007 2008 2009 2009 increase

All schools $11,169 $11,390 $13,525 +2,135 (19%) All elementary schools $7,032 $6,720 $7,772 +1,052 (15.6%) All Middle Schools $10,563 $11,173 $11,892 +719 (6.4%) All High Schools $16,473 $18,550 $23,679 +5,129 (27.6%)

49