Discussion 4: Riedling's Approach

4. Riedling’s Approach

There seems to be a consensus that Riedling’s approach to the evaluation process is thorough and usable in most libraries.  As a new teacher librarian I can appreciate the description of each type of reference material and how they are to be evaluated with specific criteria, not one size fits all.  There is just enough detail and guidance to make the inexperienced TL feel comfortable with the daunting task of evaluating an entire reference section.  Other things that I pondered and others have on this topic has been the way to approach other teachers in regards to reference material and resources and weeding/timeline of weeding.

I believe that you have to tread carefully when making suggestions to other teachers regarding the work and resources that they use in their classrooms.  Riedling suggests that the  “school library media specialist should review on a regular basis textbooks used by all teachers, asses teachers instructional methods, and become aware of particular research and other methods assignments given by teachers” (Riedling 16).  I think that a TL may collaborate with classroom teachers but the word “asses” is a loaded word.  As teachers are job is not to asses each other.  I feel that if a TL assessed another teacher it could be seen as encroaching on that other teacher’s autonomy and authority within their own classroom.

One of the things that I really liked that came out of the discussions this week was the idea of a weeding party, thank you Hilary Montroy for the amazing idea.  If during a ProD a bunch of TL’s could tackle a library and weed through deciding what reference materials are worthwhile and relevant.  The idea of weeding through an entire secondary library brings on a feeling of dread.  Many hands and like minded ideals and knowledge would make the task bearable.