The proposed Four Year Implementation Plan of the Policy Framework for School Library Standards (South Africa, Ministry of Education 2000a) provided guidance for the implementation of these models in schools. The first is a critical analysis of the KwaZulu-Natal School Library Policy, and the second its feasibility. The researcher was a panel member of the task team that developed the KwaZulu-Natal School Library Policy.
A key point of the campaign was to get people to read and build a nation of readers (South Africa. Department of Education 2001c). The campaign is a collaborative project between the Prime Minister's Office and the Provincial Department of Education. 91 of 1998 (South Africa 1998b) – The South African Library for the Blind was established under this Act to provide library and information services to the blind and print disabled.
6 of 2001 (South Africa 2001) – The National Council for Library and Information Services (NCLIS) was established and inaugurated in 2004 to coordinate LIS in South Africa and to advise the Ministers of Education and Arts and Culture on matters of LIS. The discussion paper (South Africa. Department of Education 1997c) addressed the importance of school libraries as an integral part of the outcomes-based curriculum in South African schools. In January 2000, a draft document, the Four Year Implementation Plan for the Policy Framework for School Library Standards, was developed by SCHELIS (South Africa. Department of Education 2000a).
In 2006, a revision of the 2005 document, the National School Library Policy (South Africa. Department of Education 2006c), was subsequently finalized by heads of school library services in all provinces.
It also identifies the critical role of the school library and teacher librarians as key factors in delivering curriculum outcomes and achieving educational goals. He identifies eight different levels of school library operation - ranging from the library that plays no role in the life of the school (and the teacher who uses stand-alone teaching methods) to the library that is crucial to the survival of the school. school. These phases can provide a useful framework for evaluating the potential impact of the KZN school library policy, as measured by an initial evaluation report of 60 schools in the School Library Development Project (SLDP)10 (KwaZulu-Natal. Department of Education 2007d ).
To arrive at a conceptual framework for a critical evaluation of the KZN School Library Policy and its suitability for implementation in the province, several policies. This research, using a Delphi survey, will retrospectively unpack and evaluate the policy choices made in the formulation of KwaZulu-Natal's school library policy. In an attempt to arrive at a holistic interpretation of the KwaZulu-Natal school library policy and its.
Many of the issues discussed impact the school library sector in South Africa to varying degrees. The variables that influence the use (and often underuse) of the school library by teachers and students include factors that exist in the community, the school and the school library itself (Olën). Moreover, the government has neglected development opportunities for school libraries, such as Curriculum 2005 and the subsequent revision of the curriculum, and.
These include the size of the school-going population, rural poverty, the apartheid legacy of the school. School library policy may be a provincial or state responsibility (eg in Canada), but many policies were not implemented. The majority of respondents to Galler's survey indicated that the development of school library policy was the responsibility of the Ministry of Education/Education and.
The review of the literature on school library standards in South Africa provides insight into the status quo of the current policy process. However, the delay in the adoption and implementation of school library policy may provide an opportunity to review some aspects of the Policy Framework to identify others. Modification of the results that can be achieved by modifying the policy in light of the evaluation.
The elements of policy design described here under 3.3.3 were included in the Delphi questionnaire to enable panel members to identify key elements of the KZN school library policy and their relevance in terms of policy design and development. The following section provides an overview of the Delphi technique as a research methodology in library and information services.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
Panelists also commented on the suitability of the policy for implementation in the province. The epistemological basis for the Delphi was discussed in 3.3.2, and the use of the methodology in Library and Information Services was summarized under 3.4.4.1 in the literature review. This definition, as defined in chapter 1, guided the methodology for the critical analysis of the KwaZulu-Natal School Library Policy and its feasibility for implementation in the province.
Iteration, the presentation of the questionnaire over several rounds, allows respondents to reconsider their answers. Other group approaches to reach consensus were considered, but were found to be less suitable for evaluating the policy and its suitability for implementation in the province. Some authors have questioned the reliability, validity and credibility of the Delphi technique as a research methodology.
The researcher's personal views were listed in Chapter 1 under 3, Assumptions of the Study. To examine the views of LIS professionals on the future of the profession in the light of changes in ICT (formulate new goals and objectives). Hanafin and Brooks point out that panel size can vary depending on the topics covered, the different perspectives involved, and the time and money available to the researcher.
Pre-testing in 2005 and a two-round pilot study with 10 people who were not part of the panel led to changes in the questionnaire. An analysis of the key studies used in this research (Table 5) showed that Custer, Scarcella and Stewart (1999) pre-tested the questionnaire on a small sample before sending it to the panelists, while Hanafin and Brooks (2005) . None of the problems described in the table occurred probably due to the panel size for this study.
Hanafin and Brooks cite Waldron's findings that there is a relationship between increasing Delphi study quality and time between completions. In other words, in the end, the study may be at the mercy of the researcher's worldview and bias. In addition, Powell suggests that criteria of goodness “are based on the rationale of detailed decision-making and rigor in the conduct of the study.
Anonymity will be ensured and the names of the panelists will not be published at any stage of the research or in the final thesis. The next chapter will record the results of the data collected in Delphi and the analysis of the secondary data.
RESULTS OF THE STUDY
Direct quotes of observations or suggestions from panelists are italicized in the text. Content analysis was used to identify categories and themes in the first part of the questionnaire. In the second and third rounds they receive feedback from the previous rounds and can make further comments if necessary.
The data collected in the first section of the Delphi questionnaire will be presented under these headings. Four panel members agreed with this statement in the second round, one neither agreed nor disagreed, and noted the dichotomy where the constitution places policy below the national level and its implementation below the provincial level. In the second and third rounds, panelists could indicate whether they agreed, disagreed, or neither agreed nor disagreed with the observations made by the other panelists and provided feedback.
Management must see the need for library materials: four panelists in the second round agreed, and one neither agreed nor disagreed. Four panel members agreed with this statement in the second round (one neither agreed nor disagreed). Three panelists agreed in the second round (two neither agreed nor disagreed), noting that the document should not lose its sharp educational focus.
Another comment in the second round was that social inclusion could be difficult to measure. Four panelists agreed and one disagreed in the second round, commenting that basic literacy around all medical conditions is important. Three panelists agreed with this statement in the second round (one disagreed, one neither agreed nor disagreed), commenting that the other options could be considered subordinate and maintain inequities.
Three members of the commission agreed with this finding in the third round, one disagreed, and one neither agreed nor disagreed. Two members of the commission agreed with the statement in the second round, three neither agreed nor disagreed. Three panelists agreed in the second round, one disagreed, and one neither agreed nor disagreed.
