CLASSROOM BOOKS EVALUATION PROTOCOL

• US 20080145831A1
• Filed: 12/14/2007
• Published: 06/19/2008
• Est. Priority Date: 12/14/2006
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Scholastic Incorporated (Scholastic Corporation)
• Original Assignee: Scholastic Incorporated (Scholastic Corporation)
• Inventors: Mayer, Margery, Feldman, Allison
• Application Number:
  US11/957,235
• Publication Number:
  US 20080145831A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 434/353
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/00 Administration; Management

Abstract

The present invention is a method of evaluating the content, organization, and use of a school'"'"'s or a school district'"'"'s classroom libraries. The method is comprised of four distinct modules or modules that collect data from administrators and classroom teachers, analyze and interpret the data, and score the schools and districts. The product of this method is a report, which is both a quantitative and qualitative representation of the quality and use of the classroom libraries in the school or across all the schools in a district, and a recommendation for improvement of the classroom libraries therein.

Claims

1. A method of evaluating content of a library, comprising:

receiving data regarding the level of financial support for the library;

receiving data regarding the level of policy support for the library;

analyzing the financial support data;

analyzing the policy support data;

receiving data about the content of the library;

assigning a value to the content data;

creating a report based on the above steps regarding the content of the library.

2. A method of evaluating content of a library, comprising:

using a first module to collect data regarding the level of financial support for the library and the level of policy support for the library;

using a second module to interpret the data gathered using the first module;

using a third module to collect data about the content of the library;

manipulating the data collected by the third module into a result;

using a fourth module to interpret the result; and

creating a report by compiling the data gathered by the first module and the third module, and the interpretations by the second module and the fourth module wherein the report addresses the content of the library.

3. The method of claim 2, wherein the first module contains a questionnaire and a scoring form.

4. The method of claim 3, wherein the questionnaire comprises:

a set of questions and answers wherein each answer is associated with a value.

5. The method of claim 3, wherein the scoring form comprises:

a formula for converting the values from the questionnaire into a raw score.

6. The method of claim 2, wherein the second module contains a scoring guide and analysis rubric.

7. The method of claim 2, wherein the third module contains a questionnaire and a scoring form.

8. The method of claim 7, wherein the questionnaire comprises:

a set of questions and answers wherein each answer is associated with a value.

9. The method of claim 7, wherein the scoring form comprises:

a formula for converting the values from the questionnaire into a raw score.

10. The method of claim 2, wherein the fourth module contains a scoring guide and analysis rubric.

11. The method of claim 3, wherein the users of the questionnaire in the first module are district administrators.

12. The method of claim 7, wherein the users of the questionnaire in the third module are school teachers.

13. The method of claim 7, wherein the result is calculated by dividing the combined raw scores of all the users, by the number of total users.

14. A system for evaluating content of a library, comprising:

a module adapted to collect data regarding the level of financial support and policy support for the library;

a module adapted to interpret the financial support data and policy support data;

a module adapted to collect data about the content of the library;

a module adapted to assign a value to the content data;

a module adapted to create a report based on the above steps regarding the content of the library.

16. The system of claim 14, wherein the module adapted to collect data regarding the level of financial support and policy support for the library administers a questionnaire and a scoring form.

17. The system of claim 16, wherein the questionnaire comprises:

a set of questions and answers wherein each answer is associated with a value.

18. The system of claim 16, wherein the scoring form comprises:

a formula for converting the values from the questionnaire into a raw score.

19. The system of claim 14, wherein the module adapted to interpret the financial support data and policy support data performs a scoring procedure and analysis rubric.

20. The system of claim 14, wherein the module adapted to collect data about the content also collects data regarding quality, organization and use of the library and administers a questionnaire and a scoring form.

21. The system of claim 20, wherein the questionnaire comprises:

a set of questions and answers wherein each answer is associated with a value.

22. The system of claim 20, wherein the scoring form comprises:

a formula for converting the values from the questionnaire into a raw score.

23. The system of claim 14, wherein the module adapted to assign a value to the content data performs a scoring procedure and analysis rubric.

15. A system for evaluating content of a library, comprising:

means for receiving data regarding the level of financial support for the library;

means for receiving data regarding the level of policy support for the library;

means for analyzing the data regarding the level of policy support for the library;

means for receiving data about the content of the library;

means for manipulating the data about the content of the library into a result;

means for analyzing the result; and

means for creating a report based on the above steps regarding the content of the library.

24. A method of evaluating content of a library, comprising:

receiving data regarding the level of financial support for the library;

receiving data regarding the level of policy support for the library;

analyzing the financial support data;

analyzing the policy support data;

receiving data about the content, quality, organization, and use of the library;

assigning a value to the content, quality, organization, and use data;

creating a report based on the above steps regarding the content of the library.