Academic Paper on Communication Commons in Academic Libraries

Browndorf, M. (2014). Student library ownership and building the communicative commons.  Journal of Library Administration, 54:2, 77-93, doi:10.1080/01930826.2014.903364

This recent scholarly paper is a must-read. Browndorf argues powerfully that prioritizing student participation within the library may be the best preparation for participation in the wider cultural commons post-graduation.” (Browndorf, M. 2014) She reviews existing literature, citing Birdsall’s 2010 “Communicative Commons” model as a means for connecting college students to a wider cultural commons and to more engaged communication. She moves on to cite Beagle’s knowledge commons (2006) as a model to which school and academic libraries can affordably aspire. Browndorf’s proposed transformations are deliberately student-centered and cost-effective: while her article is not a showcase of beautiful furniture, she focuses on how academic libraries can create a powerful shift in purpose through student engagement.

Browndorf sets up her proposed suggestions after thoroughly reviewing the origins of the use of the term “commons,” going back historically to shared grazing areas. She cites Hardin’s 1968 “Tragedy of the Commons,” in which no one takes responsibility for shared resources, resulting in their demise. She then moves though a psychological literature review regarding the positive impact of student ownership on student engagement and learning. Make no mistake: this is an academic paper. However, I can see that a teacher librarian may need to submit this to a district superintendent or wary board of trustees in order to gain support for a Learning Commons model.

Finally, Browndorf’s recommendations are sound: she proposes student advisory committees and councils as ways to create and assess learning commons models; she also recommends student creation and implementation of library orientation services, noting student-designed library web apps. This article offers a solid idea in conventional-enough packaging; it’s a good read and a potentially useful advocacy tool.

Evidence-Based Practice

Dallstream, Nadia

Bates, J., McClure, J., & Spinks, A. (2010). Making the Case for Evidence-Based Practice. Library Media Connection, 29(1), 24-27. Permalink: http://libaccess.sjlibrary.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ899899&site=ehost-live

This article discusses the need for assessment of school libraries. It also provides information on the type of data that can be collected and offers suggestions on how to collect it. The types of they collected include direct which was obtained through: collection statistics, accessibility data, usage statistics and collaborative instruction data. They also give reasons to and ways how to collect indirect data. Some of these ways include: pre and post tests and “ticket out the door” systems. It gives information on the data tracking tools that can easily be implemented like Promethean’s ActiVote System: http://www.prometheanworld.com/en-us/education/products/learner-response-systems/activote and Survey Monkey: http://www.surveymonkey.com/ . They used the data collected to demonstrate to teachers the need for instruction, and then after the instruction and collaboration they collected more data and showed the student’s progress in this way. 

The authors also give examples of how their own instruction and lessons have improved due to student feedback and performance. In addition they have evaluated other data such as the state tests to identify learning gaps and have addressed those skills specifically and collected the data to support that their intervention has made all the difference.

This is definitely an article worth reading. The authors successfully make their case on why collecting data and evidence-based practice is so important. They also give some very easy and practical tips to follow.