NOF ICTL for Public Library Staff

Interim survey of training to meet Outcomes 2-8 and Advanced levels

Chris Dodds, for Resource and NOF

Background Concerns

Inform evaluation and impact assessment work being undertaken by NOF and Resource

Inform the continued development of the programme

Help build a body of materials Phone calls, written submissions and 14

case studies. 61 authorities across UK

Summary of findings Only a handful linked EOs and advanced to

existing external qualifications Authorities progressed much further than ECDL

with a dedicated ICT Training Co-ordinator Time taken to meet ECDL difficult to resource Confidence and team spirit were the winners Confidence high after ECDL so momentum carries

to supplementary outcomes Formal sessions preferred to distance learning Intranets will be most likely hosts to training

materials once PN is rolled out Time consuming to develop or adapt materials

Summary of findings 2 Materials are predominantly paper-based Services rely on small groups/individuals to create,

edit or deliver the training Services are celebrating achievement Other training includes taster sessions,

troubleshooting and other training areas New staff get ECDL, other outcomes less likely All staff get similar training, with some specialism External training has high travel costs – used mostly

for supp. and advanced. ECDL is local Sustaining training without new resources will be hard

Summary of findings 3 Staff retention is a concern for highly skilled Concern about unrealistically high expectations by

public Little customisation into community languages Project work/ self-evaluation is the basis for the

delivery of supp. Most deliver supp. in-house Only 6 authorities had created new material for all

supp. And advanced outcomes 50% had started supp. Training and are still

developing plans for delivery

Summary of findings 4 Progress with supp. Outcomes is improved where

Educators are in place Few external providers of supp. and advanced Some innovative examples are available Information Manager delivery is weakest, with IT

Gatekeeper and IT Consultant poor Most advanced training is consortium developed

and externally provided Net Navigator is delivered to all staff in most

authorities surveyed. Often delivered by Educators with customised materials and delivered in-house

Assessment Only small number formally test staff on supp. In-house and cascaded training has some formal

training and some homework and self-assessment Most were using self-evaluation in supp. And

advanced outcomes Some used quizzes and informal in-house

assessment of trainees Portfolio development within training programme NVQ framework and use of other awards, some

time off, tickets to concerts and events,

Materials About 50% plan to create a central repository Many will host these on Intranets and PowerPoint One authority has developed PN training

programme materials for public and staff in each branch

Educators are taking the lead role in developing own materials

Some have set up discussion lists to disseminate and share information

Future Plans All anticipated the need for refresher training Some had staff development and appraisal

systems in place as the mechanism for this Some have mentors/educators, IT Dept or ICT

training co-ordinators to deliver this Refresher training may be needed as PN

infrastructure is put in place Concerns about funding for this and ECDL Feeling that there should be an off the shelf

solution Reports of “astonishing turnaround in (staff)

attitudes”

Problem areas Conflict of Educator (ICT teacher) role not on job

description Length of time needed for ECDL Changing the image of library to cutting edge

service Outcomes overlap and complicate the process Need to improve Co-ordination of the training and

infrastructure On outcomes looked at troubleshooting (key for

frontline staff) Few external providers

Problem areas 2 Some external training failed to differentiate

between advanced roles sufficiently Difficulty developing supp. training materials,

especially reader development Concern about raising user expectations IT Gatekeeper/Consultant/Manager role Travelling to external course delivery Resourcing Retention Continuing need to adapt materials

Scotland’s Input Angus Dumfries and Galloway Dundee East Renfrewshire Edinburgh North Lanarkshire West Lothian