January 2001
Staff -- School Library Journal, 1/1/2001
Beyond the Top Ten
Other automated library systems are just as effective as the 10 most popular cited. I appreciate School Library Journal's evaluations but was disappointed in the recent article on library automation systems ("'Losing Our Drawers,"' October 2000) because of what was ignored. In the article's top 10 tips, the authors stressed the importance of doing homework and looking toward the future, but they failed to follow their own advice. By using a random survey, which focused on systems that already have a broad-based presence in the schools, they looked to the past rather than the future, and overlooked several systems now moving into the school market that offer outstanding features.
After more than a year of evaluation and study, Poudre School District (CO) selected and migrated to Innovative Interfaces' Millennium system. Although this company does not have a large K-12 school presence, it offers a great product for this market. Denver Public Schools selected this system at the same time we did. This is the third system with which I have worked, and I am absolutely delighted with our choice. Using your evaluation criteria, I would give the Innovative system the highest marks for user friendliness, documentation, training, reliability, technical support, and vendor trustworthiness.
When I look at what respondents listed as things that they would consider in their next purchase, I credit Innovative with having already provided most of those options. The Web-based access has been a wonderful tool, allowing students access to library information from any computer with an Internet connection. The fact that our city and university libraries also use this product makes our role in teaching students how to access information even more relevant.
I hope that as school librarians read your article on library automation, they realize that it is unfortunately limited in scope and that the system that would best meet their needs may not even be mentioned. If anyone has questions about using Innovative Interfaces in a school setting, I would be happy to share my experience.
Judy S. MacDonald, Ph.D.
Director of Media & Technology
Poudre School District
Fort Collins, CO
Points of Difference
Two comments on articles in the October 2000 issue: in "'Shame on Us"', your introduction makes it sound as if these professionals disagree with computers in all schools. However, their quote specifically says "'elementary schools."' There's quite a lot of difference with questioning the use of computers in elementary schools versus questioning their use in all schools.
Second, regarding your article on automation systems and features to look for in the future ("'Losing Our Drawers,"' October 2000), it is commendable to look forward to linking all school libraries with public libraries via Z39.50 software. However, in our busy day, and with restrictive budgets, I wonder where we will have the time and/or personnel to deal with the new interlibrary loan tasks that will be created. In an ideal library world, it would be wonderful, but reality restricts many such advances.
Barbara Boucher, Librarian
Hollis/Brookline High School
Hollis, NH
Distance Is No Excuse
A comment in the article "'Raising the Bar"' (November 2000) makes one believe that the committee of librarians who drafted standards for the Texas Board of Education are living in the past. The excuse that "'it's really very difficult for some people in their gigantic state to get to a library school"' is no longer realistic in today's world of distance learning and computers. My son, who lives in Maine, is currently a candidate for the Master of Library Science (MLS) degree. The University of Maine provides for this degree using distance learning, affiliating with the University of South Carolina. Maine, unfortunately, does not have any MLS program available at any of its campuses.
Having a required master's degree in any subject, not specifically library science, does not insure that students in Texas will become library literate, with all its ramifications. Texas is fortunate to have library science degree courses available at the University of North Texas and the University of Houston, as mentioned in the article. It should be possible to expand that availability to those who cannot attend the university in person.
Joyce R. Pollack, Librarian
George W. Hewlett high School
Hewlett, NY
No Pets in the Library
Although I am not a school librarian, I do enjoy reading your magazine. My children and I learn at home and in our community. We are most commonly known as "'homeschoolers."' Modeling frequent use of our public libraries is a large part of our "'curriculum."' It is a skill that is critical to the development of lifelong learning; therefore, I don't object to education funds being allocated to school libraries.
Melanie Bonanza of Ralph R. Smith Elementary School in Hyde Park, NY, describes a very disturbing trend in schools, homes, and our society in general ("'Creatures Featured,"' April 2000). Why must we humans continually try to regain control of our lives by caging and training animals? I cannot think of a more abhorrent example to be setting for our children other than institutionalizing and coercing humans. Maybe, if we didn't have one, we wouldn't have the other.
As one who enjoys communing with nature should know, the study of animals is best carried out by unobtrusively observing them in the natural habitat. Bringing animals indoors is a crime against nature. Breeding and manipulating them for amusement or profit is a crime against humanity.
If a school or library is going to teach a course of study on the keeping of "'pets,"' then it is only ethical to include a unit on the history of animal domestication and how it has evolved into flagrant animal exploitation. Zoos, testing labs, black markets, destroyed ecosystems, and
influential media images should all be presented and examined with a critical eye. This is obviously not appropriate for younger children. Even older students and adults may feel a sense of betrayal once they realize the truth. It is nothing short of horrifying.
Just because Ms. Bonanza hasn't perceived any problems with smells or allergies, doesn't mean there aren't any. Animals emit odors, shed dander, slough skin, and make noise. This is normal and natural. Without exposure to the elements and freedom of movement, the inevitable happens: foul air, bacteria-laden environment, and neurotic or psychotic behavior. This cause-and-effect phenomenon applies to all species. The larger problem here is that the people to whom the children are entrusted all day are oblivious to it. If we all put our thinking caps on, perhaps we can come up with some alternatives to the constant assault on the dignity of the animal kingdom and its environment.
Barbara Ballard
Menasha, WI
