Lear’s response

Preserved source reading copy
Subject: RE: Library Review Survey Document 
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2026 17:48:45 +0000

Emily-this document demonstrates A LOT of work and thought on your part. I'm looking forward to your further explanation tomorrow (I'm thinking the full Board will discuss tomorrow?). My concern: these questions, though laid out clearly in a chart form, are extensive and technical. Are they intended for a building administrator or a librarian? I don't know the percentage, but many schools do not have full-time or specifically trained librarians. There is also considerable turnover among all public ed teachers and employees. Some of the questions require background and historical information.  Is this realistic to expect from 160+ LEAs that may have their own procedures and forms for answering many(?) of these questions? I completely support the document if it is offered as an optional planning guide for LEAs. I'm not sure I support it as a required document for all LEAs.
I will be interested in the discussion.

Thanks,
Carol

From: Emily Green <[contact redacted]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2026 5:34 PM
To: Matt Hymas <[contact redacted]>; LeAnn Wood <[contact redacted]>; Amanda Bollinger <[contact redacted]>; Christina Boggess <[contact redacted]>; Sarah Reale <[contact redacted]>; Carol Lear <[contact redacted]>
Subject: Library Review Survey Document

Dear Fellow Board Members,

I hope this finds you well! I'm looking forward to seeing everyone this week.

Over the past several months, I have been working to develop a set of questions that I believe will help guide the Library Review approved by the Standards and Assessment Committee and Law and Licensing Committee.  While the review document provides a solid framework, I have not yet seen a comprehensive list of questions that will help us fully understand the processes and relationships involved in library procurement and collection development.

The attached document is intended to serve as a companion to the review document. It aligns with each section of the proposed review and offers questions that may help ensure our work is thorough, objective, and informative. My hope is that it can be used throughout the review as a reference to identify where additional information may be needed. This will help us better understand the front end of the library curation and procurement process, including how materials are selected, recommended, acquired, and ultimately placed in our school libraries.  A meaningful review requires understanding the entire ecosystem, including funding, purchasing, practices, distributor and vendor relationships, professional standards, and the roles of organizations that influence collection development.

These sections will follow the timelines as recommended in the Library Review Document currently in board backup to ensure it is done thoroughly and incrementally.

 I would greatly appreciate your feedback on these questions. If there are additional areas you believe should be explored, or questions that should be refined, please let me know.  My goal is to ensure this review is as comprehensive and useful as possible.  I'm sending this to all board members this evening and it has been submitted for board backup.  I hope this is helpful.

Thank you for your time, and I look forward to our discussion.

Sincerely,

Emily




[cid:image001.jpg@01DD24CF.C53FDCF0]