ETL503 Mod 6 – Weeding

Do you feel the use of the term ‘weeding’ unconsciously denigrates this process and adversely influences perceptions of its importance? Would it be more professional and appropriate to use the term ‘deselection’?
No, weeding has a negative slant but in a good way! We want people to understand it is the weeding of unwanted/not useful items that we are doing – getting rid of the stale weeds that ruin a library. If we try to sugar coat to term people would have a harder time understanding when the librarian insists it’s necessary. Using a term everyone would understand would only help the matter. Also if everyone knows why weeding is taking place they can have a better understanding of why it is necessary and in the words of Beilharz (2007) tell everyone “We’re weeding! Isn’t that great!” (para. 16).

What do you consider are the criteria that should be employed in weeding a school library collection? Why? Are there any methods and approaches which you feel are of particular value here?
I really liked the 10/3/MUSTIE in the article. It combines quantitative with qualitative criteria (the Connections article also put them together but I like the memory aid of the eduscapes article)

Are there useful parallels between selection and weeding?
Plenty, you have to have criteria to help you do it, and to help defend the decisions. They both also remind you to constantly be thinking about the curriculum and its users – does this new item support the curriculum? Does this old item still support the curriculum?It is also important to realise censorship (conscious or not) can be an equally concerning issue during selection, acquisition, and weeding – a TL must be vigilant that at no point during any of these processes should public censorship, or self-censorship, come into play.

Is weeding a less important process than selection and acquisition? Why?
The literature has told me no ☺ How can you argue with Dillon’s (2001) argument of avoiding death by bibliochlothanasia!


Beilharz, R. (2007). Secret Library Business – part 2. Connections, 63. Retrieved Jan 14, 2013 from

Dillon, K. (2001). Maintaining collection viability. In K. Dillon, J. Henri & J. McGregor (Eds.), Providing more with less: collection management for school libraries (2nd ed.) (pp. 241-254). Wagga Wagga, NSW: Centre for Information Studies, Charles Sturt University.

Lamb, A. & Johnson, L. (2012). Information Access & Delivery: Collection Maintenance & Weeding, The School Library Media Specialist. Retrieved Jan 6, 2013 from


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s