Assignment+4-Weeding

=Assignment 4: Weeding=



=Introduction:=

====According to Bishop (2007), one of the most fundamental roles of the library media specialist is to preserve and maintain the materials and equipment in a collection (p. 120). Just as a gardener entrusted with the maintenance of her beds needs to know the difference between a weed and a flower, so must a teacher-librarian become a "specialist" in her realm. In large part, this involves making informed judgements about which materials fit the needs of the library's many user groups and which materials need to be "weeded out". Jo Anne Moore reinforces the importance of this professional practice as follows:====

===="The school library collection serves as the basis of the educational community. If students are to become problem solvers, decision-makers and lifelong learners in an information rich environment, they must be provided with resources that are relevant, reliable, accurate and up-to-date" (p. 1).====

====In the following assignment, I will attempt to create a Grade 4 Social Studies collection that is free of weeds and which contains only resources that meet Moore's above criteria. In so doing, hopefully the students and teachers of Ecole Davis Road Elementary will not only find a collection to "admire", but more importantly to //use// as a vital support for learning and growth.====

With this lofty goal in mind, I present my Weeding Report.
=Weeding Report:=

====Using criteria from our readings, along with both quantitative and qualitative data about Grade 4 Social Studies resources, I removed a total of 36 items from our Davis Road Library collection. These items have now been "officially" deselected from our catalogue using the district's automated system. At the time of this "automated weed", I was unsure what kind of information about deselected items could be generated automatically. For this reason, I chose to complete a manual report describing the items in question. I include this report here:====



====I'd like to offer a of point of clarification on the above report. The "Date Entered" column refers to the date a particular item was catalogued into our automated system. It does not refer to the publication date of a given resource. You will notice that there are many items with an August 10, 2001 indicator. This was actually the date Davis Road Library reverted from a manual to a computerized system. Evidently, many of these resources had been in the collection for years prior to the automation date. I was ultimately also able to generate an automated report, which I include here for your review:====



====Interestingly, while most items in this report have a publication date listed, there are several that do not. This information can be found, however, in the bibliographies generated for Assignment 3. Also, those 10 items included in my Rationale for Weeding all have publication dates included.====

=Rationale for Weeding:=

===="Physical qualities of a material, suitability of the content, recentness of the material, and accuracy of the information are all factors to be considered when making decisions to withdraw resources from a collection" (p. 121).====

====Also on page 121, Bishop includes a list of general criteria to inform weeding decisions and each of these was considered throughout my resource assessment process. I was also guided heavily, and perhaps more specifically, by Jo Anne Moore's "Obvious" (p. 4) and "Thoughful" (p. 3) weeds, along with her suggestions for deselection according to Dewey Class guidelines. The following describes my rationale for removing 10 of the 36 items that were weeded from the Davis Road collection:====

1. A First Atlas, Sue Hook, Angela Royston



 * ====Resource is 16 years old (Publication date 1995) and must be deemed out-of-date for a resource of this type.====

-Bishop (2007) also puts a 5 year expiry date on atlases (p. 122)

 * ==== Poor circulation record. ====

-Title has circulated 3 times since April 22, with the most recent check-out in March 2009

 * ====Contains outdated, incorrect factual content. A couple of examples are:====

-does not reflect current Canadian geography as it does not include Nunavut, which became a new territory on April 1, 1999. This is four years after the publication date of this resource.

 * ====Some information reflects stereotypical attitudes toward certain races that may biased and patronizing.====

-I would expect that certain references made to the Kanelo people of South America no longer represent an accurate depiction of current cultural practices.

 * ====While the physical condition of this resource is excellent, and its appeal surprisingly high considering its age, other negative factors must take priority when considering deselection.====

2. Wisdom of the Elders, Ruth Kirk



 * ====Resource is 25 years old (Publication date 1986) and must be considered outdated for a non-fiction title.====


 * ====Poor circulation record.====

-this item has been checked out only once since it was catalogued in April 2002 and this occurred 7 years ago (January 2004).

 * ====Contains dated factual content. This book is a self proclaimed "native chronicle about being native". While I am no expert on current First Nations issues, I can only assume that the modern realities of these communities would not be accurately portrayed in a resource that is 25 years old.====


 * ====No longer reflects current values and attitudes toward aboriginal communities. While the tone of Wisdom of the Elders seems respectful, with an obvious attempt to represent "Natives" in a just manner, frequent reference is made to "Northwest Coast Indians". This terminology is no longer considered appropriate when describing First Nations societies.====

====-Text is written at an inappropriate reading level for intermediate students and would definitely be beyond the reading/interest level of Grade 4 users. From a reading level/interest perspective, this resource would be better suited for a secondary or university level library.====
 * ====Resource is extremely text heavy, containing very small print.====


 * ====While this resource is in excellent condition, it does not have huge appeal for the target Grade 4 users. I imagine its "untouched" physical appearance can be attributed to the fact that it has, in fact, been essentially "untouched".====

3. The Portuguese Explorers, Walter Buehr



 * ====The Portuguese Explorers was published in 1966, making it 45 years old! While it seems entirely redundant to site a rationale for weeding beyond this point, I will do so strictly for academic purposes.====


 * ====Poor circulation record.====

-This title has never been checked-out since the automation of our library in 2001.

 * ====As evidenced in the above picture, the cover of this book has a terribly dated and unappealing appearance. Because the resource has had virtually no use over the years, it is in excellent physical condition. Nevertheless, it is the most "obvious" of Moore's "obvious weeds" (p. 4).====


 * ====Because The Portuguese Explorers was written at a time when little consideration was given to the ethics of colonialism and colonialist enterprises, many references are made to "brave explorers" and the "brave men" of Portugal. I would argue that this type of verbiage represents outdated interpretations, values and attitudes. Such lack of nuance also presents a very stereotypical and biased view of the heroes and villains in this historical context. For example, I was hard-pressed to find any reference to "brave women" in this book====


 * ====Books written in the 1960s were generally much more text heavy than those of current day. This is certainly the case here, making the title inappropriate for the needs of our Grade 4 students.====

4. People of the Ice, Heather Smith Siska

 * = [[image:093.JPG width="288" height="379"]][[image:094.JPG width="288" height="378"]] ||

====-As would be expected with such an old publication date, People of the Ice contains outdated and inaccurate information. For example, the new territory of Nunavut is not represented on the various maps of this text due to the fact that Nunavut would not be created until 19 years after its publication date.====
 * ====Resource is 31 years old (Published in 1980).====


 * ====Poor circulation record.====

-People of the Ice has been checked out only once this our system became automated 10 years ago. The last date of circulation was in January of 2006.
====-The cover is worn, dingy and, as you can see, the spine is damaged. While the pages are in fairly good condition, age has yellowed them considerably. Also the black and white images are of poor quality.====
 * ====Book is in poor physical condition and has a very unattractive appearance.====


 * ====I would rate the accessibility of information within this text to be on the poor side.====

-Although there is a Table of Contents and a Glossary, there is no Index, making it difficult for students to quickly access information on specific topics.

 * ====Inappropriate reading and /or interest level for students.====

-While the size of the print is appropriate for most Grade 4 students, the book is quite text intensive making it considerably less appealing and accessible for students of this age.

 * ====Uses language and imagery that is no longer representative of the values and attitudes of current times as they pertain to the Inuit.====

5. Revenge of the Tribes, Pierre Berton



 * ====Revenge of the Tribes was published as part of the Adventures in Canadian History Series in 1991. At 20 years old, it must be considered an old resource and assessed very critically.====


 * ====Poor circulation record.====

-Resource has never circulated in the ten years our library has been automated.

 * ====Physical appearance very unattractive.====

-Print is small.

 * ====Although I would not assert that the factual content of this book is outdated or incorrect, the language used to describe the various events is no longer in keeping with current values and attitudes====

-Continual reference made to "Indians" and "Tribes"

 * ====While Pierre Berton's text describes the aboriginal peoples involved in the War of 1812 in a favorable historical light, the imagery definitely does not. One need only look at the cover to see that this is the case. Those students who "read the pictures" could form inaccurate and biased opinions regarding the role of the First Nations in this conflict.====


 * ====Revenge of the Tribes is written in novel format, which is not appropriate to the reading/interest level of most Grade 4 students.====

6. The GIrl Who Loved Wild Horses, Paul Goble

 * = [[image:086.JPG width="320" height="423"]] ||= [[image:087.JPG width="320" height="423"]] ||

====-Moore suggests the following: "Discard works no longer in demand especially second and third copies of past bestsellers. Retain works of durable demand and/or high literary merit, but replace worn copies with new editions. Keep award books and those on reading lists" (p. 10).==== ====-This book is a Caldecott Medal winner and I may decide to replace it with a newer edition. I am questioning whether it might be more appropriate, however, to replace this piece of fiction with one a little more "home grown". I will make this decision when selecting new materials in Assignment 5.====
 * ====This story was published in 1978 and depicts the folklore of the North American Navaho people. While it is a dated resource at 33 years old, age alone does not necessitate the immediate deselection of a fictional resource without the consideration of other factors.====


 * ====Poor circulation record.====

-This story has been checked out twice since it was catalogued in 2002. It was most recently circulated this September.

 * ====Unattractive physical appearance.====

-While the illustrations are beautiful, this work is fairly text heavy and the print is small.

 * ====You will note that this is the only fictional work I am weeding from my Grade 4 Social Studies collection at this time. This decision is based on my physical assessment of these resources during Assignment 3. You may recall that I found our First Nations fiction and folklore to be of high quality and appeal. For the most part, they are the "flowers" of my Grade 4 Social Studies collection.====

7. Columbus and the Age of Exploration, Ken Stott



 * ====This resource was published in 1985. In its day, //Columbus// would have been considered a high quality resource as it has well organized content, and includes a Table of Contents, a Glossary, an Index, and a Table of Dates. This said, it is now 26 years old and must be assessed critically, with particular consideration for the criteria of accuracy and appropriateness.====


 * ====Poor circulation record.====

-This item has not circulated since our library was automated in August 2001.

 * ====This resource is in good physical condition as it has had very little wear and tear sitting on the shelf. This said, it is not an appealing item.====

-Cover gives a very poor impression.
====-A number of drawings are inappropriate and possibly disturbing for Grade 4 users (IE a visual depiction is presented of the fact that some explorers imagined The Americas to be full of "cannibals and strange creatures". This particular image shows a severed human leg going into a cannibal's cook pot).====

-Pages are yellowed and old looking.

 * ====Subject matter unsuitable for users.====

-Questionable images may be disturbing and therefore unsuitable for Grade 4 students.

 * ====Aboriginal cultures are portrayed in a biased and stereotypical manner.====

8. The Picture Atlas of the World, Brian Delf



 * ====This atlas was published in 1991 and is therefore a full 15 years beyond what Moore and Bishop (2007) consider the appropriate age for a resource of this type. Even a quick glance through the text validates their assertion by providing multiple examples of outdated and inaccurate information. For example:====

-Canada does not include Nunavut.
====-Population figures for countries and individual states and provinces within these countries are cited on almost every page. I anticipate that all these numbers will now be out of date. For example, the population of British Columbia is indicated to be 2,889,000 people. According to Statistics Canada, B.C. actually has a population in the neighbourhood of 4,602,748 citizens.====


 * ====Poor circulation record.====


 * ====While this resource would have been quite appealing when originally published, it is now in poor physical condition.====

-Spine is damaged.

 * ====In considering a replacement resource, I would tend to avoid any atlas that includes specific population figures as these are too quickly rendered out-of-date. The inclusion of such information is also unnecessary as current population figures are now quickly and easily available online.====

9. Life in New France, Rosemary Neering, Stan Garrod



 * ====Resource is 35 years old (Published in 1976).====


 * ====Poor circulation record.====

-Life is New France is actually one of the "highest performers" in this group of weeds, with a whopping 4 check-outs since our system was automated 10 years ago.

 * ====This book is in reasonable physical condition considering its age but it has a very unappealing appearance.====

-"Textbook style", complete with questions, would lessen it's appeal for many students.

 * ====Inappropriate reading level for many students in Grade 4.====

10. Those born at Koona, John and Carolyn Smyly



 * ====Resource is 38 years old (Publication date 1973).====


 * ====Poor circulation record.====

-This item has not been checked out at all since it was catalogued in April 2002.

 * ====Contains very specific text and photographic information "about the totem poles of Koona, their crest figures and their meaning". While the images are fascinating, the specificity of this resource makes it of limited use when addressing the broader aboriginal themes of our Grade 4 Social Studies curriculum.====

====-Text is written at an inappropriate reading level for intermediate students and would definitely be beyond the interest level of Grade 4 users. From a reading level/interest perspective, this resource would be better suited for a secondary or university level library.====
 * ====Resource is extremely text heavy, containing very small print.====

====-" We hope that the errors and omissions we may have made will cause some Haida person to say, I can do better than that," and set about the task as it should be done, written and illustrated by the descendants of those who once lived at Koona" (p. 12).==== ====-Due to the age of this resource, its authors make unavoidable references to "Indians" and "Indian art". No matter how respectful it may otherwise be, these terms no longer feel comfortable and appropriate in our current context.====
 * ====The tone of this resource is very respectful but it still contains outdated terminology.====


 * ====While this resource is in fairly good condition despite its age, it would have no appeal for the target Grade 4 users. Circulation statistics seem to substantiate this fact.====

=Reflection:=

"It does not matter how many books you may have, but whether they are good or not."
//Epistolae Morale// Lucius Annaeus SENECA 3 B.C.-65 A.D.

====The above quote is featured on the California Department of Education's "Weeding the School Library" brochure under the title "Why Weed?" It is both amusing and somehow comforting to note that those undertaking the care of books have been grappling with weeding issues for at least 1950 years! I found the California document to be very concise and helpful and, for this reason, I include it here:====



====As I wrestled with my personal weeding demons during this assignment, I was reassured by the fact that greater minds than my own have established solid arguments to support this vital collection development practice. Perhaps none are more forceful in their assertions than Doug Johnson (2007), who states quite categorically in his Head for the Edge column, "Poorly weeded collections are not the sign of poor budgets but of poor librarianship. Period" (p. 1). In response to this uncompromising call to action, I began "my attack" on the Grade 4 Social Studies collection of the Ecole Davis Road Elementary Library.====

Weeding: What I did Step by Step
====In the interest of clarity, I would like to summarize my process during this weeding assignment. My "attack strategy" was guided heavily by the outline provided by Joanne in her assignment overview. The following is what I did, step-by-step:====


 * 1) ====familiarized myself with school and district policies regarding weeding====
 * 2) ====used the notes I had previously added to my bibliographic data to physically pull from the shelves all resources which I had highlighted as "possible discards"====
 * 3) ====conferred with our Senior Library Technician Angela Gurney to determine how to generate precise circulation statistics for the items pulled====
 * 4) ====assessed each of my "possible discards" in detail and generated a manual report on a final 36 resources to be weeded====
 * 5) ====removed these 36 items from our automated catalogue and followed established procedure to mark these resources as no longer part of the Davis Road collection====
 * 6) ====generated an automated weeding report====
 * 7) ====formulated a plan to discard books according to district policy====

Step 1: Familiarized myself with school and district policies regarding weeding
====Before undertaking any weeding activity, it is essential to be familiar with school and district policies regarding the withdrawal and disposal of resources. As mentioned in previous assignments, Ecole Davis Road Elementary has had very little consistent teacher-librarian involvement for many years. In the five years before I was hired in September 2010, Davis Road had two different teacher-librarians, who worked one day per week. For two years within this same period, the principal was charged with fulfilling library functions. When considering this reality, I was not surprised to find that our library had no manual, nor any outlined procedures for weeding. I assume that my predecessors relied on district policy to guide withdrawal and disposal practices and I chose to do the same.====

Policy No. 4510P:


====It is interesting to note the reference made to a "Curriculum Advisory Body", which would undertake the role of developing and circulating to "schools, criteria covering the withdrawal of outdated or no longer relevant learning resources". Discussions with my teacher-librarian colleagues generated no additional district information regarding the withdrawal and disposal of learning resources. We have also been unable to locate the "Curriculum Advisory Body" mentioned in the above school district document.====

Step 2: Used personal notes on bibliographies to physically pull "possible weeds" from shelves
====The following data pertaining to our Grade 4 Social Studies resources was also presented in Assignment 3, as it was created during my collection evaluation project. I include the bibliographies again here, along with my personal notes, as they became essential tools as I undertook Assignment 4's weeding activities.====

Maps and Atlases:


====In Assignment 3, I chose to go beyond the self scanning strategies suggested by Franklin and Stephens (2009), and delve a little deeper into my collection. While undertaking Agee's (2005) model of "physical assessment" (p. 93) was time consuming, it greatly facilitated my determination of items "in need of a weed". My procedure was simple. I pulled each resource that appeared in the First Nations and Explorer bibliographies off the shelf and did a quick assessment. My assessment strategies were heavily influenced by Jo Anne Moore's practical document "Guidelines for Collection Evaluation and Weeding". In her paper, Moore provides excellent insights on what she calls "Thoughtful" (p. 3) and "Obvious" (p. 4) weeds. While my quick assessments shed more light on the "obvious" physical attributes of a resource, they also allowed me to form a first impression of an item's content. Moore makes reference to materials that include "condescending, stereotyped, patronizing or biased" (p. 3) information and "outdated interpretations, values and attitudes" (p. 3). Often such attitudes were in evidence simply by looking at the cover or title of a particular resource. While I relied heavily on Moore's criteria during my Rationale for Weeding, I was also grateful to use her ideas as a starting point for my weeding activities. Because I had already done most of the assessment "leg work" in Assignment 3, all I had to do for this weeding project was pull items I had already identified in my notes as "possible weeds".====

====You will observe that there are no notes on my Maps and Atlases bibliography. This is because I chose not to undertake quite the same assessment process for these items. Irrespective of the condition and general appeal of a title in question, my primary weeding criterion was publication date. I made this decision in an effort to follow Joanne's podcast advice to "be ruthless". Moore recommends that atlases be replaced every five years as this is their usual update period. Bishop (2007) offers the same advice in her "Age and Circulation Guidelines" found on page 122 of our text. This seems entirely reasonable considering the speed at which our geopolitical world changes. Included in my weeding list are all atlases in the Davis Road collection that were published before 2006. If this is not ruthless, I don't know what is!====

====As I mentioned in Assignment 3, while Agee-style physical assessment in not "hard", it is very time consuming. This said, I believe the only way to accurately determine whether a resource is appropriate or not is to use this type of collection-centered evaluative approach. Agee (2005) reaffirms this point as follows:====

===="Physical assessment provides a good indicator of the condition of the overall collection, but also allows examination of each individual book. This process is also an excellent opportunity to list books for deselection and in that way receive a valuable return on the investment of time and energy by the people involved" (p. 93).====

====While I was happy to make a large "investment of time and energy" (p. 93) for the purposes of this assignment, my two day per week position would not allow for such in-depth investigation on a regular basis. I am not asserting that it can't be done, only that I would do so selectively. As previously stated, the non-fiction collections of our library are in a sorry state. My plan is improve library support for one major curricular area per year through the allocation of a large portion of our budget to purchase resources. I would not consider spending a dime, however, before first undertaking collection evaluation and weeding activities as I have done here. This activity would take place during a 1 hour 45 minute block of administrative time that I have once per week. All weeding, however, does not have to be approached in such a "project" fashion. As Joanne says in her podcast:==== ===="Weeding is a cyclical process. Do it often and it won't be so overwhelming. If you undertake an enormous weeding project where you decide you're going to weed your entire collection in two weeks, you'll never get it done because it's just too overwhelming. So focus on doing small bits of your collection over a longer period of time, and then once you've finished your entire collection, start all over again".====

====Moore reinforces Joanne's point by advocating the "CREW method" (p. 2) for collection maintenance. **CREW** stands for **C**ontinuous **R**eview, **E**valuation, and **W**eeding. Moore's assertion that weeding should be "continuous" is particularly helpful and realistic considering my limited time in the library. It is much less intimidating to consider a continual strategy of deselection as it simply involves "constant weeding on a day-today basis as materials are carded and shelved" (p. 2).====

Gail Dickinson (2005) also sets forth a number of excellent weeding suggestions in her article Crying Over Spilled Milk. She states that weeding is best done (p. 24-25):

 * ====continuously throughout the year====
 * ====in small numbers at a time====
 * ====in targeted small sections of the collection====
 * ====quietly and without comment====
 * ====with the support of the principal and library media center advisory committee====

====As in Assignment 3, I found it very helpful to spend time with Angela Gurney discussing the various reports that may be generated through our automated system. As a result of this interaction, I can now effortlessly access a variety of specific circulation information. For example, I did not previously know where to find the last date a particular item was checked out. The fact that I can now do so quickly and easily is beneficial far beyond the context of this assignment.====

Step 4: Assessed each of my "possible discards" in detail
====While I would not say this was necessarily the "hardest part" of our weeding assignment, it was an activity that required a fair bit of thought and professional judgement, This element of challenge also made it an interesting and enjoyable experience. While I found it relatively simple to determine which items should be discarded according to Moore's "Obvious" (p. 4) physical parameters, it was not as straightforward to consider such issues as appropriateness, accessibility, incorrect factual content, and mediocre writing style. There is a reason Moore calls these decisions "Thoughtful" (p.3) as they do in fact "exercise the knowledge, analysis and professional expertise of the library media specialist" (p. 3). As I have learned through my own gardening experiences, it's not always evident which are the flowers and which are the weeds. For example, I must say I felt a bit of "weeding angst" when considering //Wisdom of the Elders// and //Those Born at Koona//. While these items are extremely dated, they are high quality works that deal with their subject matter in a very appropriate and thoughtful way. The images in both these books are beautiful and very representative of many aspects of First Nations culture. Both are hard-cover resources in excellent physical condition for their age. Although it was immediately evident that these titles were not meeting student needs for reasons of reading and interest level, I must admit it was a bit painful to consider discarding them. A big black line through the bar-code seemed such a harsh fate for such lovely books. This said, I heeded Joanne's call to "be ruthless" and did it anyway!====

====Another aspect of Step 4 that I really enjoyed was doing the little bits of research that were required to confirm that a book contained incorrect factual content. For example, I spent some time trying to determine exactly when Yugoslavia actually stopped being Yugoslavia and what happened that caused it to split into 6 different countries. This might have been somewhat of a digression but an interesting one none-the-less. It also made me realize that librarians really need to know their stuff. A sound grasp of history, geography, technology, science, and literature, for example, comes in extremely handy when assessing the value of a particular resource.====

Step 5: Removing items from the automated catalogue
====Joanne claims in her podcast that "weeding is really fun" and I would have to agree. One of the most enjoyable aspects of this assignment for me was pulling borrower cards out of the books as I was deselecting. In fact, I pulled a total of 14 cards during this activity, one stamped as far back as 1980! It was equally gratifying to take a big black marker to so many ridiculously old and ugly resources. I'm wondering, however, if I will get the same enjoyment when I have to start weeding items that I personally bought using hard-earned library dollars. For this assignment, most of the books discarded were so horrible that very little soul-searching was required to make weeding decisions. It simply felt good and right and entirely necessary. I anticipate that it will not be the same experience when I am forced to discard a book that I once thought really fabulous. As Moore says, unpopular, unused or unneeded "titles are perhaps the most difficult to discard because in some cases, it is an admission of a poor selection decision on the part of the library media specialist" (p. 4). I can imagine this would be a much less amusing activity. This said, Moore challenges us to forge ahead, stating the obvious fact that it is "detrimental to keep a collection clogged with deadwood" (p. 4).====

====I also question how it would feel to weed items out of my collection knowing that I have no budget to replace discarded resources. This is the reality for many librarians in my district. While my school-allocated budget is very small, at least I have some opportunity to buy new resources. I don't imagine I would be nearly as enthusiastic about weeding should new purchases not be possible. Doug Johnson (2007) has a very unequivocal position on how teacher-librarians should handle this type of scenario:====

===="Only two things can happen if library material replacement budgets are inadequate. The collection ages if the librarian does not weed. The collection gets smaller if the librarian does weed. That's it.====

===="If you went into your neighbor's pantry and saw the shelves filled with boxes of breakfast cereal, you'd conclude your neighbor had plenty to eat. But what if those boxes were empty? Shelves filled (with) books of no value are the equivalent of pantries full of empty cereal boxes" (p. 2).====

====I don't think it would be nearly as much fun to weed within the context of the above scenarios. This said, I hope that, bolstered by such expert advice, I would be able to rise to the challenge set out in Joanne's podcast: " ..in order to be an effective weeder, you need to be objective, you need to be critical and you need to be ruthless".====

Policy No. 4510P:


====As mentioned earlier, School District 68 (1995) does not provide specific criteria for weeding a library collection. It does, however, provide some fairly detailed parameters around the disposal of withdrawn resources. They stipulate two different categories for disposal. One set of procedures (Category A) applies to items that are "still in good condition but no longer useful". The other category (Category B) applies to those materials that are not in good condition. Most of my materials fall into Category B and the school district recommends that these be:====
 * ====given to local service clubs to support literacy programs====
 * ====sent to developing nations at not cost to the Board====
 * ====sold to the students or members of the community for a nominal cost====

Article 2.4 further dictates that items that cannot be disposed of in the above manner should be discarded using the "most environmentally sound method" possible.
====Interestingly, district documents make no mention of materials that, regardless of their condition, contain information which is inaccurate, inappropriate, or even harmful. I feel that the majority my weeded items fall into this category. Gail Dickinson (2005), in her article Crying Over Spilled Milk, has some pretty strong words for those who would advocate sending these types of items elsewhere. In her opinion, "books and other resources that do not qualify to remain in one library media center collection do not qualify enough to be in anyone else's collection either" (p. 25-26). I don't agree that this is always the case. For example, a duplicate copy of a high quality resource in fine condition deserves to find a "good home" elsewhere. In the case of most of my 36 weeds, however, I agree that offering these to students, service clubs, or "developing nations" would be like offering them "spoiled milk" (p. 26). Melissa Allen (2010), in her article Weed 'Em and Reap: The Art of Weeding to Avoid Criticism, reinforces this position and entreats librarians not to "make your weeded books a problem for someone else by just passing the buck" (p. 33).====

====With these arguments in mind, I plan to dispose of the majority of my discarded items by "trashing them" responsibly. In order words, by putting them into a school dumpster that has been designated for paper and cardboard products. Some of my 36 resources will be offered to the Grade 4 Social Studies teachers for classroom use. For example, the two books I agonized over somewhat because of their high quality images can be cut up and used for class projects. All atlases will also be passed along to teachers to be used similarly. There is also another book called //If you lived with the Indians of the Northwest Coast// that I weeded from my collection. This item was published in 2005 and is an attractive resource. //If you lived...// contains excellent information and is targeted perfectly for Grade 4 students. It is the title and other references to "Indians" that caused me to remove this book from our collection. I will also pass //If you lived...// along to one of my Grade 4 teachers as I feel it could be well used as a springboard for the discussion of appropriate First Nations terminology while still providing some excellent, age appropriate information.====

=Conclusion:=

====In her article, Allen (2010) quotes a Taoist proverb: "Fertile fields cannot produce good crops as long as the weeds are not cleared away" (p. 32). She then continues: "Students cannot efficiently find quality information if outdated, wrong, or poorly presented information is overcrowding your library shelves" (p. 32). This analogy drives a final nail into the coffin of the concept that books are sacred objects. While I have never considered weeding to be a sinister process, this assignment did require that I wrestle with certain insecurities. It facilitated a purging of my last vestiges of weeding guilt and made for a surprisingly enjoyable experience. As Dickinson (2005) affirms, weeding is a natural part of the collection management process. It is simply "selection in reverse-literally de-selection" (p. 24). Perhaps, the most valuable aspect of Assignment 4 is that is has added educationally valid tools to my arsenal. These "weapons" will allow me not only to more effectively attack the weeds in my collection, but to justify this attack to others. I can now weed with confidence and know exactly what to say to those who admonish me for throwing away "perfectly good books" (Johnson, 2007, p. 2). I would like to end with another quote from Doug Johnson, who I feel is the very embodiment of Joanne's concept of the "objective, critical, ruthless" librarian: "..we need to remember is that it is not books that are sacred, but the thought, inspiration and accurate information they contain. Weed! I'm not telling you again" (p. 2).====

=References:=