Math Literature &

Collection Development
Tracy Howse
The Study
› School librarian staffing levels and student achievement as
represented in 2006-2009 Kansas annual yearly progress
data
› Mirah J. Dow; Jacqueline MaMahon-Lakin
› https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ994364
Summary
› What are the authors trying › What evidence did they use
to find out? in determining their
– How staffing levels affect conclusions?
student achievement – The authors analyzed five
subjects
› Specifically analyzing
› Reading
qualified staff › Math (My research focus)
– Kansas has “promoted library › Science
education and employment of › History/Government
state-license school › Writing
librarians” (Dow, 2)
– The study lasted 4 years
› 2006-2009
What did they learn from their research?
› Staffing
– State-license school librarians produce higher student proficiency
– Part-time LMS vs. full-time LMS: small to moderate difference

› Math proficiency
– Elementary and Middle School:
› Math was the most influenced by LMS staffing
– High School:
› Math was the 2nd most influenced subject area
Staffing: No LMS vs P/T or F/T LMS
Math Proficiency
Proficiency Proficiency › Researchers adjusted
Difference in Difference in
Math Reading
these observed results
by Root Mean Squared
Elementary 4.2 2.6 Error
Middle 3.9 3.0 › This accounts for
discrepancies comparing
High 4.1 5.4 various age levels

› The authors also converted this information into percentages,

which helps further application of “the practical significance of
the proficiency differences” (Dow, 7)
Recommendations
› Further research on proficiency and media specialists’
state-licenses
› Studying SLMP’s overall affect in high-poverty schools
– This study compared staffing with impoverished student
proficiency, and the results stayed consistent.
– They did not analyze how LMS influence before- and after-school
activities, accessibility to technology, supervising support staff.
Analysis
› Currency
– Study: 2006-2009
– Published: August 1, 2012
– Current topic of STEM and
SLMP collaboration
› Credibility
– Authors: experienced in
information management
– Publisher: School Library
Research Journal
› ALA approved
– Bias: Funded by Kansas
State Department of
Education
Reflection
› Do the students relate to anything else you have read?
– These students relate to my further research on math literacy.
› How this shaped my understanding of SLMPs?
– I expected reading to have the greatest difference of proficiency
due to staffing; this helped me realize the importance of the SLMP
for all subjects.
› How it changed my view of SLMP’s value?
– This study uses empirical evidence to represent SLMP’s value.
Although I understood it was important, this helps show the
concrete differences between schools with and without LMS.
Action Plan: Overall Incorporation of This Study
• LKMS SIP Target Math 1: “Increase the overall number of students meeting or
A exceeding the MAP benchmark from 61% to 67% (38 students)”

• LKMS SIP Strategies 1 & 7: “Staff will participate in cross-content collaboration”

B with a focus on Common Core Math Standards and “identifying and teaching
vocabulary.”

• My Strategy: Math literature in collection development.

C • This will increase the focus on math vocabulary and Common Core
Math Standards.
• Supporting Research:
• I’ll use this study to support the importance of SLMP and Math
collaboration.
• I’ll use additional articles to support math and collection development
(rather than only incorporating math through makerspaces).