Nilobon Wimolsittichai Thesis

i
SCHOOL LIBRARIES AND THEIR ROLES IN RURAL THAILAND:

PERCEPTIONS OF PUBLIC PRIMARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS
Nilobon Wimolsittichai
Master of Information Technology and Management
Bachelor of Art (Library Science)
Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy
School of Information Systems
Science and Engineering Faculty
Queensland University of Technology 2017
ii
i
Keywords
Rural school, Small school, School library, School principals, School administration, Library
administration, Perceptions, Principals’ perceptions, Student academic achievement.
ii
iii
Abstract
Background: Thailand continues to face a serious long-term problem developing effective school
libraries, particularly in rural small public primary schools. Even though the Thai government has
developed school library standards and supports many projects to help all schools establish effective
libraries, most rural small public primary schools still struggle to improve their libraries enough to
reach even the minimum criteria of the standards (Thailand Knowledge park 2011). Thai government
and policy makers appear to overlook the special management, guidelines and standards challenges
for libraries in rural small public primary schools. The lack of expenditure in Thailand on research and
development of rural small public primary school libraries has led to a minimum of related primary
data and studies, giving very little indication of ways to improve the quality of those libraries
effectively.
Objectives and Methods: This research, which aims to explore principals’ perceptions of public
primary school libraries, library characteristics and effectiveness, employs a research method using
questionnaires to survey 375 school principals in 6 regions in Thailand. Survey part 1 requested basic
information about principals, their schools and their school libraries. Survey part 2 asked principals to
illustrate the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and limitations of their school libraries. Survey
part 3 was a semantic scale for principals to rate their perceptions about the impact of the school
library on students’ academic achievement. Both quantitative and qualitative data are used in this
research: quantitative data were analysed through 3 analysis techniques including descriptive,
cluster and multiple regression; qualitative data were analysed through thematic analysis.
Findings: This research found that in general small public primary school libraries lack resources for
their collections, physical facilities, and staff. Of the 6 regions surveyed, libraries located in the North
and Northeast regions face the greatest lack of resources. Principals participating in this study
perceive the necessity for an effective administration, sufficient staff and sufficient library physical
facilities to overcome the limitations of their libraries. Most principals understood very well the
impact that school libraries have on students’ academic achievement, particularly in enhancing
students’ literacy levels. The research also found that principals aged younger than 51 years tended
to have more positive perceptions about this impact of libraries on students’ academic achievement.
iv
Recommendations: At a policy level, the Thai government should urgently equip the small schools in
rural areas with Information and Communications Technology (ITC). It needs to reauthorise and
modernise the National Education Act 1999 to mandate the importance of the pedagogical role of
school libraries and school librarians. Clear library policies are required for both school libraries in
general and for the provision of library services in rural small public primary schools. Moreover, the
Thai government should assign the Thai Library Association to develop new national school library
standards. The Thai government should also acknowledge the role of parents and local community
participation in education development. The Thai government should conduct and support research
on existing barriers to developing effective education and learning resources in rural small public
primary schools.
At a practitioner level, principals, teacher librarians and school library stakeholders are crucial for
developing effective libraries. Principals need to know and understand the school library standards
and the policy related to learning resources development; they also need to be prepared to convert
traditional school libraries into modern libraries by integrating ICT in library administration,
collections, services, activities and staff. Importantly, principals need to support teacher librarians
and staff, enhancing their knowledge and skills in library and information fields; equally, they need to
collaborate with school library stakeholders, in both internal and external school communities, to
develop effective libraries and to promote and enhance their capacity.
Conclusion: This research identified a much-needed foundation for developing an effective library in
rural Thailand. Although principals have an important role in directing and managing change in
libraries, collaboration among library stakeholders is also a significant factor leading to the
development and enhancement of effective school libraries. In the light of this research, the
researcher recommends for the Thai government and school library stakeholders pay more
attention to and to prioritise dealing with school library issues. The researcher also expects that this
research will help build international cross-cultural understanding beyond the school libraries of
small public primary schools in rural Thailand, to developing countries more widely. Such knowledge
would be beneficial to the Thai government, and to school library communities and stakeholders,
both in Thailand and internationally, to establish and develop effective school libraries that lead to
educational success.
v
Table of Contents
Keywords .................................................................................................................................. i
Abstract .................................................................................................................................. iii
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................... v
Table of Tables ...................................................................................................................... viii
Table of Figures ..................................................................................................................... xii
Table of Charts ...................................................................................................................... xix
List of Abbreviations .............................................................................................................. xx
Glossary ................................................................................................................................ xxi
Statement of Original Authorship .......................................................................................xxiv
Acknowledgements ..............................................................................................................xxv
Chapter 1: Introduction............................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Background ................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Research approach ..................................................................................................... 5
1.3 Research contribution ................................................................................................ 7
1.4 Document outline ....................................................................................................... 8
Chapter 2: Literature review .................................................................................................... 9
2.1 Theoretical foundation ............................................................................................. 10
2.2 School libraries in Thailand ....................................................................................... 18
2.3 Keys to influence an effective school library ............................................................ 32
2.4 Role of the school library for impacting student learning ........................................ 48
2.5 Role of rural school libraries: impact on student learning ........................................ 59
2.6 Rural school library development in international context...................................... 62
2.7 Student academic achievement in rural areas ......................................................... 67
2.8 Summary of the roles and impacts of school libraries in rural Thailand .................. 75
2.9 Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 76
Chapter 3: Research Methodology ........................................................................................ 79
3.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 79
3.2 Research design ........................................................................................................ 79
3.3 Population and sampling strategy ............................................................................ 81
3.4 Data collection instruments and procedures ........................................................... 83
3.5 Validity and reliability of the instruments ................................................................ 88
3.6 Data analysis ............................................................................................................. 89
vi
3.7 Ethical considerations ............................................................................................... 93

3.8 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 93
Chapter 4: School libraries’ characteristics ............................................................................ 95
4.1 Characteristics of respondents................................................................................ 96
4.2 Schools’ characteristics ........................................................................................... 105
4.3 School libraries’ characteristics ............................................................................... 124
4.4 Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and limitations of libraries ........................ 160
4.5 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 167
Chapter 5: Pattern of library characteristics ........................................................................ 168
5.1 Number of clusters ................................................................................................. 168
5.2 Clusters description ................................................................................................ 173
5.3 Summary of the pattern of library characteristics ................................................. 197
5.4 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 198
Chapter 6: Principals’ perceptions and impacts influencing their perceptions ................... 200
6.1 Principals’ perceptions about the potential impact of school libraries on students’
academic achievement.......................................................................................... 200
6.2 Factors that drive the principals’ perceptions about the potential impact of school
library on students’ academic achievement ......................................................... 206
6.3 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 231
Chapter 7: Discussion ........................................................................................................... 232
7.1 Overview of the research........................................................................................ 232
7.2 Discussion of findings.............................................................................................. 233
7.3 Key findings ............................................................................................................. 273
7.4 Limitations .............................................................................................................. 276
7.5 Suggestions for future research.............................................................................. 277
7.6 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 278
Chapter 8: Recommendation ............................................................................................... 280
8.1 Recommendations for policy makers ..................................................................... 282
8.2 Recommendations for practitioners ....................................................................... 290
8.3 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 296
References ........................................................................................................................... 300
Appendix A: Infographic: School libraries and their role in rural Thailand: Perceptions of
public primary school principals............................................................................ 346
vii
Appendix B: Informed consent ..................................................................................... 349

Appendix C: The Survey Regarding the public primary school library, and its role and
the impact of the library on students’ academic achievement in rural Thailand . 351
Appendix D: The Survey Regarding the public primary school library, and its role and
the impact of the library on students’ academic achievement in rural Thailand (in
Thai) ....................................................................................................................... 357
Appendix E: Pre-testing and pilot study ........................................................................ 365
Appendix F: Cluster comparison by dot plots and boxplots ......................................... 409
viii
Table of Tables
Table 1: Population and sample size of rural small public primary schools in Thailand .......... 82
Table 2: Examples of checklists, open-ended questions and contingency questions asking
school principals to give information about school library’s demographics .......... 84
Table 3: Examples of the open-ended questions asked about current limitations of and
opportunities for rural small public primary school libraries ................................. 85

Table 4: Example of the semantic differential scale questions ................................................ 86
Table 5: Gender of principals .................................................................................................. 97
Table 6: Age of respondents ................................................................................................... 97
Table 7: Highest academic qualification of principals ............................................................ 98
Table 8: Years of experience as a school principal ................................................................. 99
Table 9: Gender of principals of schools with libraries ......................................................... 100
Table 10: Age of principals of schools with libraries ............................................................ 100
Table 11: Highest academic qualification, academic field: principals, schools with libraries
............................................................................................................................... 101
Table 12: Years of experience as a school principal ............................................................. 102
Table 13: Gender: principals of schools without libraries ..................................................... 103
Table 14: Age: principals of schools without libraries ........................................................... 103
Table 15: Highest academic qualification and academic fields: principals without libraries 104
Table 16: Years of experience: school principal of schools without libraries ....................... 105
Table 17: Regions and provinces of participants’ schools .................................................... 106
Table 18: Distance from school to city ................................................................................. 107
Table 19: Transport access types available to the schools ................................................... 108
Table 20: Range of numbers of students in school in 2016 .................................................. 110
Table 21: Numbers of teachers in 2016 ................................................................................ 110
Table 22: Teacher–student ratio in 2016 .............................................................................. 111
Table 23: Number of computers ........................................................................................... 111
Table 24: Size of schools budget in 2016 .............................................................................. 112

ix
Table 25: Regions and provinces of participants’ schools with libraries .............................. 113
Table 26: Distance from school with libraries to city ........................................................... 114
Table 27: Transport access types available to the schools with libraries ............................. 114
Table 28: Numbers of students in schools with libraries in 2016 ......................................... 115
Table 29: Teacher–student ratio in schools with libraries in 2016 ....................................... 116
Table 30: Ratio of teacher–student in schools with libraries in 2016 .................................... 116
Table 31: Number of computers in schools with libraries in 2016 ....................................... 117
Table 32: Size of budget of schools with libraries in 2016 ................................................... 118
Table 33: Regions and provinces of schools without libraries ............................................. 118
Table 34: Distance from schools without libraries to city .................................................... 119
Table 35: Transport access types of schools without libraries ............................................. 120
Table 36: Numbers of students in schools without libraries in 2016 ................................... 121
Table 37: Numbers of teachers in schools without libraries in 2016 ................................... 122
Table 38: Teacher–student ratio of schools without libraries in 2016 ................................... 122
Table 39: Number of computers ........................................................................................... 123
Table 40: Size of schools budget in school without libraries in 2016 ................................... 123
Table 41: Number of schools with and without libraries ..................................................... 125
Table 42: Reasons for not having a school library ................................................................ 125
Table 43: The plan to set up a school library in the near future .......................................... 126
Table 44: Current conditions of libraries .............................................................................. 127
Table 45: Causes contributing to the current conditions of libraries ................................... 129
Table 46: Principals’ perceptions of the role of small public primary school libraries in
relation to students’ academic achievement ...................................................... 131
Table 47: Principals’ perceived requirements for improving the condition of libraries of small
public primary schools in rural Thailand .............................................................. 133

Table 48: Proportion of school library budget derived from the national budget ................... 136
Table 49: The school libraries staff ....................................................................................... 137
Table 50: Separate room for a library ................................................................................... 138

x
Table 51: The library condition of the schools without a separate room ............................ 139
Table 52: Library name ......................................................................................................... 139
Table 53: Library size ............................................................................................................. 140
Table 54: Number of wi-fi connections available in library .................................................. 141
Table 55: The availability of furniture and equipment to facilitate library services ............ 142
Table 56: Number of books ................................................................................................... 144
Table 57: Number of Journals/ magazines ............................................................................ 145
Table 58: Numbers of newspaper subscriptions .................................................................. 146
Table 59: Numbers of audio visual materials ....................................................................... 146
Table 60: Number of electronic media ................................................................................. 147
Table 61: Library classification system .................................................................................. 149
Table 62: Types of library’s classification systems ................................................................ 149
Table 63: Library management systems ................................................................................. 150
Table 64: Types of library management systems ................................................................. 150
Table 65: Regular library activities for all users .................................................................... 152
Table 66: Promotion of library services and activities .......................................................... 153
Table 67: Number of days open for library ........................................................................... 154
Table 68: Number of staff working in the library ................................................................. 156
Table 69: School library volunteer students ......................................................................... 156
Table 70: Number of volunteer students ............................................................................. 157
Table 71: Collaboration between librarian and principal in curriculum development ........ 157
Table 72: Collaboration between librarian and teachers in supporting library for teaching and
learning ................................................................................................................. 158

Table 73: Collaboration between school libraries and other libraries ................................. 160
Table 74: Auto-Clustering ....................................................................................................... 170
Table 75: Cluster distribution ................................................................................................. 171
Table 76: The principals’ perceptions about the potential impact of school libraries on
students’ academic achievement .......................................................................... 203

xi
Table 77: Lists of recommendations ...................................................................................... 280
Table 78: Highest academic qualification of principals in pilot study .................................. 370
Table 79: Regions and provinces of participants’ schools in pilot study .............................. 371
Table 80: Distance from school to city in pilot study ........................................................... 372
Table 81: Numbers of students of schools in pilot study ..................................................... 374
Table 82: Current conditions of libraries ................................................................................ 377
Table 83: Causes contributing to the current condition of libraries of small public primary
schools in rural Thailand in pilot study ................................................................ 378

relation to students’ academic achievement in pilot study ................................ 379
Table 85: Principals’ perceived requirements for improving the condition of libraries of small
public primary schools in rural Thailand .............................................................. 379

Table 86: Numbers of seats in pilot study ............................................................................ 383
Table 87: Numbers of library computers in pilot study ........................................................ 383
Table 88: Numbers of books in pilot study ........................................................................... 385
Table 89: Numbers of journals/magazines in pilot study ...................................................... 385
Table 90: Numbers of newspapers in pilot study ................................................................. 386
Table 91: Numbers of audio visual materials in pilot study ................................................. 387
Table 92: Numbers of digital media in pilot study ................................................................ 387
Table 93: Size of library budget in pilot study ...................................................................... 390
Table 94: Limitations of libraries in pilot study .................................................................... 399
Table 95: Strengths and opportunities of libraries in pilot study ......................................... 401
students’ academic achievement in pilot study .................................................... 404

xii
Table of Figures
Figure 1: Loertscher’s model of the school library media program ......................................... 11
Figure 2: The four keys of the principal’s organizational taxonomy. ....................................... 12
Figure 3: The principal’s taxonomy of library media programs ............................................... 13
Figure 4: Conceptual framework .............................................................................................. 17
Figure 5: Village water supply of a respondent’s school located in Southern Thailand ........ 109
Figure 6: Auto-Clustering, BIC line graph ................................................................................ 170
Figure 7: Cluster size ............................................................................................................... 171
Figure 8: Model summary ...................................................................................................... 172
Figure 9: Predictor importance .............................................................................................. 173
Figure 10: Cluster comparison by dot plots ........................................................................... 176
Figure 11: Within-cluster variation for 10 greatest variables that define two clusters ......... 178
Figure 12: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of regular activities for
all users ............................................................................................................... 181

Figure 13: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of regular library
promotion of library services and activities for all users .................................... 182
Figure 14: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of library assessment
............................................................................................................................. 182
Figure 15: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the achievement of minimum
standard for school library .................................................................................. 183

Figure 16: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of library organisation
structure .............................................................................................................. 183

Figure 17: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of adequate furniture
and equipment for library services ..................................................................... 184

Figure 18: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of easy access to library 184
Figure 19: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of library classification
system ................................................................................................................. 185

Figure 20: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of existence of a good quality library
outdoor environment ........................................................................................... 185

xiii
Figure 21: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of appropriate zoning for
users and services ................................................................................................ 186

Figure 22: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of implementation a library plan into a
school development plan ..................................................................................... 186

Figure 23: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of existence of adequate library budget . 187
Figure 24: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of library volunteer ....... 187
Figure 25: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of librarian–teacher
collaboration in supporting library for teaching and learning ................................ 188

Figure 26: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of library wi-fi connection
............................................................................................................................. 188
Figure 27: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of availability of information literacy
instruction ............................................................................................................ 189

Figure 28: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of library management
system.................................................................................................................. 189
Figure 29: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of teachers and staff to
manage school library .......................................................................................... 190

Figure 30: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of existence of good quality indoor
environment ........................................................................................................ 190

Figure 31: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of librarian and principal
collaboration in curriculum development ............................................................. 191

Figure 32: Within-cluster mean and standard deviation of books ............................................ 191
Figure 33: Within-cluster mean and standard deviation of seats .......................................... 191
Figure 34: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of library space for users,
library staff, shelving and other services ............................................................... 192

Figure 35: Within-cluster mean and standard deviation of library computers .......................... 192
Figure 36: Within-cluster mean and standard deviation of library sizes ................................... 193
Figure 37: Within-cluster mean and standard deviation of digital media ................................. 193
Figure 38: Within-cluster mean and standard deviation of total library budget ....................... 193
Figure 39: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the library opening days ................... 194
xiv
Figure 40: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of availability of reading promotion and
learning activities ................................................................................................. 194

Figure 41: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of library administrator 195
Figure 42: Within-cluster mean and standard deviation of library budget sourced from the
national budget .................................................................................................... 195

Figure 43: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of libraries in each region ....................... 195
Figure 44: Within-cluster mean and standard deviation of supplementary library budget sourced
from local communities ........................................................................................ 196

Figure 45: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of library staff......................................... 196
Figure 46: Pattern of library characteristics ........................................................................... 197
Figure 47: The Pearson’s correlation coefficient value .......................................................... 209
Figure 48: Variables in the model of overall potential contribution’s criteria of school library
on student academic achievement ..................................................................... 210

Figure 49: Model summary of the overall potential contribution’s criteria of school library on
student academic achievement .......................................................................... 211

Figure 50: Statistical significance of the overall potential contribution of the school library
program to student academic achievement....................................................... 211

Figure 51: Estimated model of the overall potential contribution of school library program on

Figure 52: Excluded variables of the overall potential contribution of school library program
on student academic achievement ..................................................................... 212

Figure 53: Normal P-P Plot of regression standardized residual dependent variable: A.......... 212
Figure 54: Variable in the model of the potential for library administration to increasing

Figure 55: Model summary of the potential for library’s administration on increasing student
academic achievement ....................................................................................... 214

Figure 56: Statistical significance of the potential for library administration’ to increase

Figure 57: Estimated model of the potential for library’s administration on increasing student

xv
Figure 58: Excluded variables of the potential for library’s administration on increasing

Figure 59: Normal P-P Plot of regression standardized residual dependent variable: B ........ 215
Figure 60: Variable in the model of the potential for library physical facilities on increasing

Figure 61: Model summary of the potential for library physical facilities on increasing
student academic achievement ......................................................................... 217

Figure 62: Statistical significance of the potential for library physical facilities on increasing

Figure 63: Estimated model of the potential for library physical facilities on increasing

Figure 64: Normal P-P Plot of regression standardized residual dependent variable: C ........ 218
Figure 65: Variable in the model of potential for library collections and activities on
increasing student academic achievement ........................................................ 219

Figure 66: Model summary of the potential for library collections and activities on increasing

Figure 67: Statistical significance of the potential for library collections and activities on
increasing student academic achievement ........................................................ 220

Figure 68: Estimated model of the potential for library collections and activities on increasing

Figure 69: Normal P-P Plot of regression standardized residual dependent variable: D ....... 221
Figure 70: Variable in the model of the potential for library services to increase student

Figure 71: Model summary of the library collections and activities potential on increasing

Figure 72: Statistical significance of the library services potential on increasing student

Figure 73: Estimated model of the potential for library collections and activities to increase

xvi
Figure 74: Excluded variables of the library services potential on student academic
achievement........................................................................................................ 224
Figure 75: Normal P-P Plot of regression standardized residual dependent variable: E ........ 224
Figure 76: Variable in the model of the potential for library staff to increase student

Figure 77: Model summary of the potential for library staff to increase student academic
achievement........................................................................................................ 225
Figure 78: Statistical significance of the potential for library staff to increase student

Figure 79: Estimated model of the library staff’s potential for increasing student academic
achievement........................................................................................................ 226
Figure 80: Normal P-P Plot of regression standardized residual dependent variable: E ........ 227
Figure 81: Variables in the model of overall potential of library administration, physical
facilities, collection and activities, services and staff for increasing student
Figure 82: Model summary of the overall potential of library administration, physical
facilities, collection and activities, services and staff to increase student

Figure 83: Statistical significance of the overall potential of library administration, physical
facilities, collection and activities, services and staff to increase student

Figure 84: Estimated model of the overall potential criteria of the school library’s effect on

Figure 85: Excluded variables of the overall criteria of school library’s potential to increase

Figure 86: Normal P-P Plot of regression standardized residual dependent variable: X_ALL 230
Figure 87: Principals lacked the potential to unlock Keys 1, 2 and 4 of the principal’s
organisational taxonomy to establish effective libraries.................................... 241

Figure 88: A much-needed effective rural library framework ................................................ 296
Figure 89: Output for Cronbach’s Alpha................................................................................. 367

xvii
Figure 90: Item-statistics ........................................................................................................ 367
Figure 91: Item-total statistics ................................................................................................ 368
Figure 92: Gender of principals in pilot study ....................................................................... 369
Figure 93: Age of respondents in pilot study ........................................................................ 369
Figure 94: Highest academic qualification of principals in pilot study ................................. 369
Figure 95: Years of experience as a school principal in pilot study ...................................... 370
Figure 96: Years of experience as a school principal in pilot study ...................................... 371
Figure 97: Transport access types available to the schools in pilot study ............................ 373
Figure 98: Availability of electricity supply in pilot study ..................................................... 373
Figure 99: Availability of water supply in pilot study ............................................................ 373
Figure 100: Information on the existing school libraries ...................................................... 375
Figure 101: Reasons for not having a school library ............................................................. 375
Figure 102: The plan to set up a school library in the near future ....................................... 376
Figure 103: Library name in pilot study (n=37) ....................................................................... 380
Figure 104: Library room condition in pilot study (n=37) ....................................................... 381
Figure 105: Library facilities in pilot study ............................................................................ 382
Figure 106: Library size in pilot study ................................................................................... 382
Figure 107: Wi-fi connections available in library in pilot study ........................................... 384
Figure 108: Types of books available in library in pilot study ............................................... 384
Figure 109: Qualities of library collections in pilot study ..................................................... 388
Figure 110: Currency of library collections in pilot study ..................................................... 388
Figure 111: Library classification system in pilot study ........................................................ 389
Figure 112: Library management system in pilot study ....................................................... 389
Figure 113: Library policy in pilot study ................................................................................ 390
Figure 114: Library budget in pilot study .............................................................................. 390
Figure 115: Sources of library budget in pilot study ............................................................. 391
Figure 116: Proportion of school library budget deriving from the national budget ............... 391
Figure 117: Library staff in pilot study .................................................................................. 392

xviii
Figure 118: A number of staff working in the library ........................................................... 393
Figure 119: Qualifications of staff working in the library in pilot study ............................... 393
Figure 120: Collaboration between librarian and principal in curriculum development in pilot
study .................................................................................................................. 394

Figure 121: Quality of collaboration between librarian and principal in curriculum
development in pilot study ............................................................................... 394

Figure 122: School library users in pilot study ...................................................................... 395
Figure 123: Number of open days for library in pilot study ................................................. 395
Figure 124: Library services in pilot study ............................................................................ 396
Figure 125: Library instruction program in school curriculum in pilot study ....................... 396
Figure 126: Library activities ................................................................................................. 397
Figure 127: Collaboration between teacher librarians and teachers in pilot study ............. 397
Figure 128: Collaboration between teacher librarians and teachers in teaching in pilot study
............................................................................................................................. 398
Figure 129: Collaborations between teacher librarians and teachers in increasing the ability
of teachers in teaching in pilot study ................................................................ 398

xix
Table of Charts
Chart 1: Electric supply, water supply and internet connection .......................................... 109
Chart 2: Electric supply, water supply and internet connection of the schools with libraries
............................................................................................................................... 115
Chart 3: Electric supply, water supply and internet connection of schools without libraries
............................................................................................................................... 120
Chart 4: Policy and plan of school library .............................................................................. 135
Chart 5: Sources of the library budget in 2016 ..................................................................... 136
Chart 6: Number of seats ...................................................................................................... 140
Chart 7: Number of computers in library ............................................................................. 141
Chart 8: The library physical facilities .................................................................................... 143
Chart 9: Types of books ........................................................................................................ 148
Chart 10: Library activities .................................................................................................... 151
Chart 11: Library services ...................................................................................................... 154
Chart 12: School library users ............................................................................................... 155
Chart 13: Types of library collaborations between the librarians and teachers .................. 159
Chart 14: Library strengths ................................................................................................... 161
Chart 15: Library weaknesses ............................................................................................... 162
Chart 16: Library opportunities ............................................................................................. 164
Chart 17: Library limitations impact on student achievement ............................................. 166
Chart 18: The worst limitations of libraries in pilot study .................................................... 400
Chart 19: The greatest opportunities of libraries in pilot study ........................................... 402
xx
List of Abbreviations
AASL American Association of School Librarians

AITSL Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership
ALIA Australian Library and Information Association
CSAP Colorado Student Assessment Program
EFA Education for All
ICT Information and Communications Technology
IFLA International Federation for Library Associations and Institutions
OBEC Office of Basic Education Commission, Thailand
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
OHEC Office of Higher Education Commission, Thailand

ONEC Office of National Education Commission, Thailand
ONESQA Office for National Education Standards and Quality Assessment
ONFE Office of the Non-Formal and Informal Education, Thailand
OPEC Office of Private Education Commission

PISA Programme for International Student Assessment
SPSS Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
TAAS Texas Assessment of Academic Skills
TK park Thailand Knowledge park
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
xxi
Glossary
Collaboration with teachers: Librarians or teacher librarians and teachers helping each other
to plan and select strategies for student improvement such as identifying information
needed, and selecting and using the appropriate reading and learning materials.
Collaboration with principals: Librarians or teacher librarians and principals working
together to establish library policy and curriculum development, support a school library
program and encourage teachers to collaborate in planning and teaching.
Collaboration with other libraries: The school library working with other school libraries,
public libraries, and academic libraries in order to help improve programs and activities for
teaching and learning.
Collection development: Quality of printed, non-printed and electronic resources acquired
by the school library in support of curriculum, instruction and student achievement.
Educational policy: The Thailand educational policy
Librarian: A professionally trained person responsible for the care of a library and its
contents, including the selection, processing, and organisation of materials and the delivery
of information, instruction, and loan services to meet the needs of its users (Reitz, 2004)
Library activities: The creative learning activities organised by the school library, such as
book clubs, storytelling activities and reading promotion activities
Library budget: An estimate of expected income and expenditures for a library per year
Library characteristics: The typical feature and attributes describing library conditions such
as the quality of collections, facilities and environment, and services.
Library policy: The responsibilities of school principals, librarians or teacher librarians and
staff in relation to the programs of the school library (NSW government, 2005)
xxii
Library services: The performance of all activities of a library relating to the collection and
organisation of library materials and making the material and information of a library
available to users (Office of the Federal Register (U.S.), 1991).
Library stakeholder: Individuals, people or agencies who affect or are affected by the school
library, such as students, teachers, principals, parents and community.
Principal: The educator who has executive authority for a school
Principal’s education background: The principal’s graduate degree and the field of study
Principal’s experience: Number of years working as a school principal
Proactive services: Services or action of library staff, which take actions before any action
required. For example library staff recommends new books to teachers, which might be
appropriate to their fields and benefit to their teaching (Cayaban, 2009).
Rural area: Area in Thailand with an estimated population of less than 7,000 people, a
population density less than 3,000 per square kilometre and located outside of a municipal
area (Faculty of Architecture and Environmental Design, Maejo University, 2006).
School budget: An estimate of expected income deriving from the Thai government and the
expenditures per year
School curriculum: All planned learning outcomes for which the school is responsible
(Popham & Baker, 1970)
School facilities: Classrooms and related facilities, including permanent and semi-permanent
structures such as machinery, laboratory equipment, teacher’s tools and other equipment
(Oyesola, 2000)
School library: “A school’s physical and digital learning space where reading, inquiry,
research, thinking, imagination, and creativity are central to students’ information-to-

xxiii
knowledge journey and to their personal, social, and cultural growth” (IFLA school libraries
section standing committee, 2015, p. 15).
School library media program: “The integration of the services coordinated by the school
library media specialist including but not limited to those within the school library media
centre” (American Library Association, 2003, p.39).
School library media specialist: “The professional licensed school library media teacher with
specialized training and education in the school library media profession” (American Library
Association, 2003, p.39).
Small public primary school: Public primary schools that have fewer than 120 students and
are administered under the Office of Basic Education Commission (OBEC), the Ministry of
Education (MOE), Thailand.
Small school: Schools with fewer than 120 students
Students’ academic achievement: The determination of students’ academic success in
school which can be measured through students’ grades and standardised test scores (Bates,
Shifflet & Lin, 2013).
Student-centred learning: Learning process in which students and teachers collaborate and
decide about content and teaching method to the students’ interest (Brown, 2008).
Teacher-centred approach: A teaching approach in which the teacher dominates instruction,
while the students are passive learners (Keengwe, 2017).
Teacher librarian: A teacher who is responsible for managing the library who does not have
librarianship qualification.
Teacher-librarian: “A person who holds recognised teaching qualifications and qualifications
in librarianship” (ALIA, 2014, para.1).

xxiv
Statement of Original Authorship
The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted to meet requirements
for an award at this or any other higher education institution. To the best of my knowledge
and belief, this thesis contains no material previously published or written by another
person except where due reference is made.
Signature: QUT Verified Signature
Date:
xxv
Acknowledgements
I would like to express the deepest appreciation to my supervisory team. To Prof. Christine
Bruce, thank you very much for being my doctoral supervisor. I appreciate your kind endless
help, your generosity, and your advice throughout this study. To: Dr. Andrew Demasson,
thank you for your kindly support, particularly at the end of my study. To: Dr. Taizan Chan, I
am grateful for your advice and support in completing the dissertation. To: Prof. Chutima
Sacchanand, I would like to express my extremely sincere thanks for your valuable
comments, support, and dedication. You make me see light at the end of the tunnel.
I would like to acknowledge Chiang Mai Rajabhat University (CMRU), which provided the
necessary financial support during this study. I also would like to acknowledge the support of
Queensland University of Technology and its staff, in particular for the scholarship of a
Postgraduate Research studentship, and especially Prof. Acram Taji, who offered the
program to CMRU.
I would like to express my special gratitude to my family for their greatest encouragement
and generous support. To my dad, I hope you can see my achievement from somewhere in
heaven. To my beloved and supportive mom, I thank you for your moral and financial
support. To my mother-in-law and sisters-in-law, I thank you for taking care of my daughter
and my husband. To my brother and his wife, my thanks for taking care of grandma, mom
and dad. Thank you, my beloved husband and lovely daughter, for the love you give me; for
always being concerned and patient, particularly in times of disappointment.
I would like to thank my colleagues and friends both QUT and CMRU for their friendship,
sharing and support during the ups and downs of a PhD student life. In addition, I am
thankful to those principals in the small public primary schools in rural Thailand who
participated in my study. Without all of you, this PhD thesis would definitely not be
completed.
I would like to thank Jennifer Beale who provided copy-editing and proofreading services
according to guidelines laid out in the University-endorsed national policy guidelines.
Dedicated to Boonlerd Kuntawong, my beloved dad

xxvi
1
Chapter 1: Introduction
Rural school libraries in Thailand continue to face a serious long-term problem in developing
effective school libraries. Even though the Thai government and policy makers have tried to
enhance the quality of school libraries across the entire country by developing school library
standards and by supporting many reading promotion projects, rural school libraries in small
schools in particular still struggle to reach the minimum criteria of an effective school
library. Special challenges facing rural schools, such as type and size of school, administration
capabilities, regional geography, and politics create these issues (Hildreth, 2007).
Thailand lacks a large-scale study that would provide primary data related to rural school
library characteristics, rural school library development, and the perception of school library
stakeholders regarding the impact of school libraries on students’ academic achievement.
Such data are vital to clarify libraries’ situations and their local context before implementing
the standards and guidelines that contribute to effective libraries (International Federal of
Library Associations and Institutions, 2015). This thesis captures a snapshot of the current
characteristics of small public primary school libraries in rural Thailand, the principals’
perceptions of the impact of the school library on rural students’ academic achievement,
and the much-needed basis for identifying the components of an effective library for small
public primary schools in rural Thailand.
This introductory chapter gives a brief background about the roles a school library plays and
identifies the important role of principals in developing such an effective school library. This
background also outlines information related to Thailand’s educational system and the
current situation of school libraries in rural areas. The research direction, research
contribution, and research approach are described, and the overall document design listed.
1.1 Background
There is no doubt that effective school libraries make up one part of successful education.
They play an essential role as a hub of learning, facilitating a wide range of materials and
learning services, in order to advocate an appropriate learning environment for members of
2
school communities (UNESCO/IFLA, 2002). The role of the school library associates highly
with student success in broader aspects, such as communication skills, creative thinking and
problem solving (Hughes, 2013; Lau, 2005; Rodney, Lance, & Hamilton-Pennell, 2002;
Ranaweera, 2008; Siqueira, 2015).
Essential keys making school libraries fully functioning comprise professional school
librarians, library-information literacy instruction, collaboration between teachers and
librarians, and support from senior managers and policy makers (Barrett, 2010). Professional
school librarians are meaningful persons administrating and operating libraries. However,
school librarians have not been able to establish effective school libraries when they have
had to work independently (Henri, Hay & Oberg, 2002a). Strong collaboration and full
participation among school library stakeholders, such as principals and teachers, are very
important.
For example, teachers help teacher-librarians to understand the conditions, concepts and
needed content for supporting students’ learning (Doiron & Davies, 1998; Haycock, 2007;
Lance, 2001; Riedling, 2003). Principals need to lead and support full participation between
teachers and librarians, enabling trust for collaboration and building the school’s culture to
promote working together (Todd, Gordon & Lu, 2011)
In the case of school library development, school principals are the most important
elements influencing the establishment and development of an effective school library. They
have the authority to direct and manage, thereby facilitating change in the school (Hartzell,
2002; Van Hamersveld, 2007). In particular, principals are responsible for establishing the
school’s library policy, which has to be integrated with the school’s curriculum to define and
ensure that library priorities, goals and services share the same vision (UNESCO/IFLA, 2002).
Having only administrative support of the school’s library policy is not enough to fully
develop school library effectiveness. Principals also need to realise the value of school library
programs. A high level of awareness among principals about the roles and values of school
libraries affects the priorities, for both library programs and the role of teacher librarians, in
3
enhancing students’ learning outcomes, and supports the development of collaborative
partnerships with school library stakeholders (Campbell, 1991; Haycock, 2003; Hartzel,
2002c; Henri & Hay, 1995; Lance, Rodney & Russel, 2007; Pearson, 1989; Shannon, 2009). In
this way, the principals’ support toward library policy and library value will contribute to
effective school libraries, influencing the quality of library budget, facilities, learning
resources and personal resources (IFLA, 2015).
In the digital era and in 21st century learning, school libraries are shifting their roles and
image away from a traditional library to a modern library (Sugiharto, 2014). The modern
library is the concept of a library integrating ICT in library administration, collections, services,
activities and staff who play a role as information agents supporting and giving opportunities
for children to learn independently by providing access to information resources and
engaging students to construct their own knowledge (Hay & Todd, 2010). School libraries in
the digital era not only support students to become life-long learners, but also support the
country’s establishment of a sustainable, value-based and holistic education for a
sustainable future, in terms of life, culture, economic and society (Australian School Library
Association, 2009; Jareonsettasin, 2016; Office of the Minister, 2016).
Most school libraries in developed countries, particularly those located in urban areas, are
transforming their features, collections, services and activities from traditional libraries to
learning commons (Loertscher, Koechlin, & Zwaan, 2008; Scholastic Library Publishing, 2016).
Those school libraries have created digital learning environments by using ICT, changed their
image to modern libraries and naming their libraries differently, such as learning centre,
information centre, iCentre, innovation centre, e-library and digital library, in order to
empower the new role of libraries as the heart of 21st century learning (Gordon, 2014; Hay &
Todd, 2010, Hough, 2011; Loertscher et al., 2008).
Most school libraries in developing and underdeveloped countries still face challenges, as do
some in developed countries, particularly in rural areas. Such challenges include a lack of
qualified librarians, ICT, library funds and lack of principals and teachers’ attention and
awareness about the value of school library programs to enhance students’ academic
4
achievement (Hildreth, 2007; Ngorosho, 2011; OECD, 2010; Sangkharat, 2013). These
challenges arise from different factors such as type and size of school, problems, capabilities
and regional geography, and politics (Hildreth, 2007).
In the case of Thailand, rural school libraries, particularly in small schools, face the worst
situation: developing a rural school library is not the first priority for education
development, as this comes well below developing better classrooms. Therefore, most rural
school libraries lack funds and resources in their collections, physical facilities and staff
(Krolak, 2005; Oradee, 2004; Pradit, 2006; Praphansarn, 2013; RIN, 2010). Support and aid
from the Thai government come very slowly and cannot support libraries as well as schools
require (Choh, 2013). School libraries, left behind, have had to solve problems by themselves.
Not surprisingly, most rural school libraries do not have a professional librarian
(Hansapiromchoke & Kakeaw, 2014). Therefore, teachers and school principals need to
organise the library without a librarian, even though they do not really understand how to
manage a school library effectively (Bureau of Academic Affairs and Educational Standards,
2010).
Rural school libraries have rarely developed effective libraries, particularly small schools.
Rural school libraries’ issues are challenging, and may need specialised management.
Hildreth (2007) observed that being successful in library development depends on various
factors, such as type and size of school, problems, administration capabilities and regional
geography and politics. The International Federal of Library Associations and Institutions
(2015) emphasised the importance of understanding the situation of libraries before
implementing the standards and guidelines that contribute to establishing an effective

library.
The challenges of developing effective school libraries in rural Thailand can be seen to be
caused by a lack of information, particularly that stemming from large-scale research
focused on the characteristics, situation and development of rural small public primary
school libraries. Without such knowledge, it is difficult to understand the root causes behind
5
the failure to develop effective school libraries, and the ways to improve the quality of
school library effectively, particularly in small schools in rural Thailand.
1.2 Research approach
This study aimed firstly to identify the characteristics, to clarify the challenges and to outline
the opportunities of small public primary schools in rural Thailand. Secondly, it examined
both the school principals’ perceptions about the impacts of school library on students’
academic achievement and the factors that drive these perceptions. The study provides a
snapshot of the current characteristics of rural small public primary school libraries and the
principals’ perceptions relating to the impacts of school libraries on students’ academic
achievement in rural areas.
In order to achieve these aims, the following research questions were addressed:
RQ1: What are the characteristics of school libraries in small public primary
schools in rural Thailand?
RQ2: What challenges and opportunities do school libraries face in Thailand, as
perceived by the principals?
RQ3: How do school principals perceive the impacts of school libraries on
students’ academic achievement?
A survey research method was used to address these research questions. The study’s
population was a proportional stratified random sample of 375 school principals in 6 regions
in Thailand: North, Central, Northeast, East, West and South. The school principals were
invited to participate using hard copy or online surveys because of the limited internet
connection in some areas. KeySurvey software was used to create the online survey in this
study.
The demographic data of libraries of small public primary schools in rural areas were
collected with a closed-ended questionnaire; while the open-ended part of the
questionnaire asked school principals to describe the strengths, weaknesses, challenges and
6
opportunities facing their schools and school libraries. The results illustrated the current
situation, providing a much-needed basis to identify the components of an effective library
for those schools. In addition, semantic differential questions asked the school principals to
rate seven point scales between weak and strong perceptions about the impacts of school
libraries on students’ academic achievement in order to clarify how the principals perceive
this impact. The results were used to further examine the correlation between the
principals’ perceptions and the factors influencing those perceptions.
Supervisors, researchers and school librarians reviewed the questionnaires. The
questionnaire’s draft in English was revised after the experts had identified weaknesses
such as poor instructions, unnecessary questions and missing questions (Connaway &
Powell, 2010). The researcher and second bilingual person translated the English
questionnaire into Thai after the questionnaire had been reviewed. The Thai language
questionnaire was pre-tested by Thai research librarians in order to check their
understanding of the questions. After the questionnaire had been pretested, the pilot study
was conducted across forty public primary schools in Thailand.
Participants received a set of questionnaires through e-mail and gave comments in the
online survey or replied by e-mail because it was convenient to the researcher to collect
data in a short time, saving costs. Comments provided by participants from the pilot studies
helped refine the completeness, errors and missing information that reflected any pitfalls in
the questions. These comments of pilot-study participants enabled the researcher to
construct completed questions that would be clear, relevant and meaningful to the
respondents (Neuman, 2011).
In this study, the researcher used three techniques in the Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences (SPSS) for Windows to analyse quantitative data: descriptive analysis, cluster
analysis, and multiple regression analysis. The descriptive analysis described and
summarized current strengths, weaknesses, limitations and opportunities of these school

libraries such as the budget average, teacher-student ratio and frequency of library
7
resources. The cluster analysis, which classified the characteristics of libraries of small public
primary schools in rural Thailand, addressed the similar and dissimilar patterns of these
school libraries (Norušis, 2012). The multiple regression analysis examined the factors that
drove the perceptions of principals about the impact of school libraries on students’
academic achievement. For example, the research sought the correlation of variables, with
dependent variables being the principals’ perceptions, and independent variables including
the principals’ ages, educational backgrounds, experiences, experiences at current school
and budget given by government.
For the qualitative research, thematic analysis sought evidence of participants’ views related
to the strengths, weaknesses, limitation and opportunities of libraries of small public

primary schools in rural Thailand. Information from the open-ended questionnaires was
coded, clustered and interpreted into the same theme. Microsoft excel was used as a tool to
analyse the qualitative data.
1.3 Research contribution
This study is significant as it provides a snapshot of the current characteristics, limitations

and opportunities of school libraries in rural Thailand, and addresses the school principals’
perceptions of the impacts of the school library on students’ academic achievement in rural
Thailand, and the factors driving their perceptions. The results of this study contribute to
knowledge related to the much-needed basis for identifying the components of an effective
library for a rural small public primary school. This knowledge will help the Thai government
and the school library stakeholders to increase their attention to and their priorities for the
quality of the libraries in small public primary schools in rural Thailand. It will also help build
international cross-cultural understanding beyond the libraries of small public primary
schools in rural Thailand and to developing countries more widely. The knowledge will
support the Thai government, the school library communities and the stakeholders in
Thailand, and internationally will address school library issues linked to education success in
Thailand. This knowledge can provide a foundation for further research in library and
information fields.
8
1.4 Document outline
This introductory chapter provides background, research direction, research contribution,

research approach, and document outline. Chapter 2, a literature review, presents an
integrated overview of school library research related to rural school libraries and students’
academic achievement in international and Thai contexts, and identifies the research gaps
that this study aims to address. Chapter 3 builds the theoretical frameworks on which the
research is based. Chapter 4 presents the research methodology and research design.
Chapters 5 to 7 present the research results; Chapter 8 discusses the results and provides
research implications, limitations and suggestions for further research. Chapter 9 offers
recommendations for policy makers and practitioners to deal with school library issues in
order to develop effective school libraries in rural Thailand.
9
Chapter 2: Literature review
In order to investigate principals’ perceptions of the impact of rural small public primary
school libraries on students’ academic achievements, library characteristics and
effectiveness, it is important to critically examine the existing literature on public primary

school libraries in Thailand and elsewhere. This interdisciplinary literature review examines
relevant papers from both educational and library and information fields. For example, the
themes of student academic achievement and principals’ perceptions related to the roles of
the school library are investigated from an education perspective, while school library
effectiveness and the impacts of school libraries are reviewed through a library and
information lens.
This literature review identifies that rural school library development and the characteristics
of rural school libraries in Thailand have never been investigated before. Research shows
that school libraries worldwide face many problems such as insufficient infrastructure,
librarians and materials. In many developed and developing countries, rural libraries can
overcome these problems and organise effectively. For example the United States and
Australia have strategies, guidelines and standards for school libraries (Coker, 2015;
Fitzgibbons, 2000; Dent, Goodman & Kevane, 2014; Liu, 2005; Plumber, 2015; Marie, 2007;
Rocket & Win, 2014). Thailand still struggles to achieve an effective library in rural schools
due to a lack of a clear government policy: the Thai government spends little on research
and development in rural school libraries.
As Loertscher’s model of a school library media program forms an important conceptual
framework for this study, this literature review first describes it. The school library media
program model provides (1) lenses to basic components making a school library fully
functioning, and (2) a concept of school principals’ potentials to build an effective school
library. The literature review then identifies the development and the situation of school
libraries in Thailand, the literature related to school library and student academic
achievement to support the understanding about the keys influencing to an effective school
10
library, and the impacts of the school library on students’ academic achievement to the
researcher and readers.
2.1 Theoretical foundation
This research takes the conceptual framework of Loertscher’s model for its design.
2.1.1 Loertscher’s model of the school library media program
David Loertscher’s model, first developed in 1988, has been explored over a ten-year period
based on his experiences as a school librarian, school library media specialist, researcher
and lecturer, and on the recommendations of library experts across 26 states of USA. The
model was developed to provide ways to explore the role of the modern school library
media centre, to evaluate the potentials of school library stakeholders, and to maximise
their potentials in developing and supporting a school library media centre (LMC)
(Loertscher, 1988).
The model of the school library media program illustrates significant elements leading to the
enhancement of the qualities of the library’s educational programs and the students’
academic achievements. The model not only provides the basic components for making the
school library fully functional but also delivers concepts of school library stakeholders’
potentials to build an effective school library media program. The concepts are distributed
through the roles and responsibilities of school library stakeholders: library media specialist,
teacher, student and administrator. Significantly, Loertscher (2000) noted that to build an
effective library media program on the model, the component of each part must be in its
appropriate place.
Loertscher (2000) illustrated the model as three basic foundation stones. The first stone refers
to information infrastructure that involves a storehouse of materials, equipment and facilities.
The second stone focuses on direct services including individual attention provision, a
reference service, public relations and support for teaching and learning. The third stone
comprises four program areas involving collaboration, reading, and enhancing learning
11
through technology and information literacy. Significantly, Loertscher depicted that this last
foundation stone directly impacts on increasing the quality of the school library’s educational
program and enhancing students’ academic achievement.
These three foundation stones are distributed into two triangles representing (1) the
professional role, and (2) the technical and paraprofessional role. The technical and
paraprofessional role emphasises greater time and energy spent on a major responsibility
for information infrastructure, a minor role of collaboration in direct services to teacher and
students, and a small role of the four LMC centre program areas. The professional role
focuses on the ability and talent of the school library media specialist, assuming a major
responsibility for creation, execution and evaluation of these four program areas and a
minor responsibility for the time spent providing direct services to teachers and students
and supervising information infrastructure.
The school library media specialist in this model refers to a school librarian who was educated
firstly as a teacher, then secondly gained a master’s degree or graduate certificate in library
science, or in education with a specialisation in library services (Loertscher, 1988). Some countries
require a special certificate for school library media specialists. For example, a school library media
specialist in Pennsylvania, USA must have a master’s degree in Library science and an instructional
teaching certificate in Library Science, K-12 (University of Pittsburgh, 2017).
Figure 1 shows the model of the school library media program representing the three
foundation stones, divided into their two roles, with its resulting apex of increased academic
achievement.
Figure 1: Loertscher’s model of the school library media program

(Loertscher, 2000, p. 13)
12
Loertscher theorises four taxonomies for school library media programs: for library media
specialists, teachers, students and administrators. The administrator taxonomy posits that
the principals are key people impacting on school library development. Principals play a key
role in the four stages of school library development, including acquiring the basics, building
the organisational structure, exerting leadership and assessing the result. Loertscher’s four
stages are the principals’ organizational taxonomy of the library media program. Figure 2
shows this model, with the principal as a key control on each stage of the library media
centre development.
Figure 2: The four keys of the principal’s organizational taxonomy.
Loertscher also theorises an 8-level principal’s organizational taxonomy for the library media
program. The eight different levels are tools to help principals assess their support for the
school library media program. Figure 3 details the principal’s taxonomy of library media
programs in these eight different levels.

13
Figure 3: The principal’s taxonomy of library media programs

14
The eight different levels of the principal’s taxonomy of library media programs begin with
the principals having no meaningful role in level 1. Level 2 to 8 follow with increasing levels
of many kinds of support, which significantly change the role of how school libraries
contribute to student academic achievement. Loertscher’s four keys, which identify the
principals’ potential in developing an effective school library, are relevant for the eight
levels.
Level 1 indicates an ambivalence towards or neglect of the library media program,

associated with a lack of awareness of principals about the role of the school library
program. Consequently, a principal at level 1 has no meaningful role in developing effective
school library media program.
Levels 2 to 4 are about acquiring the basics (Key 1). To be in possession of these levels, the
principals are expected to have a deep understanding that the school library is a significant
part of the educational program. These levels are involved with the principal’s capability to
develop and maintain an effective library media program by sharing vision of the school
library’s impact, and by collaboration with school committees and library media specialists.
Level 5 is connected with Key 2, “building the organisational structure”. In order to reach this
key, principals have to create an organisational structure that supports the library media
centre program becoming an effective library, such as providing a flexible open hour, easy
access, sufficient facilities and technology infrastructure.
Levels 6 to 7 focus on the leadership of the principal in supporting the school library media
centre. Their support is in terms of both financial support and the four program elements of
the library media centre, including reading, collaboration with teacher, information literacy
and enhancing learning through technology. Those two levels contribute to achieving Key 3,
which is about exerting leadership.
Level 8, the highest level of the principal’s taxonomy of library media programs, focuses on a
principal’s assessment about the impact of the school library media centre on students’
academic achievement. This level expects that principals have adequate data to evaluate the
15
impact of library in their schools. Significantly, the data that will be used to assess the impact
of the school library relies on the four central program elements of the library media centre
(reading, collaboration with teacher, information literacy and enhancing learning through
technology). Therefore, level 8 is a factor in achieving Key 4 of the principal’s organisational
taxonomy.
Loertscher’s theory was relevant to the aim of this research, to investigate the
characteristics of school library in rural Thailand, with particular examination of the

perceptions of school principals about the impact of school libraries on students’ academic
achievement. The components of the structure building the school library media program
became a foundation to categorise the characteristics of school libraries in rural Thailand.
The three basic foundation stones of the school library media program model and the
principal’s organisational taxonomy were used to frame the design of data collection
instruments, themes of qualitative data analysis and research discussion. In the
development of the first and second parts of the questionnaire, this model emphasised
three components that contribute to school library effectiveness. Consequently, the first and
second sections of the questionnaire part 1 were developed to gather data related to
schools and school libraries’ infrastructures, demonstrating the capabilities of rural school
libraries to support students’ learning.
For example, Question 27 asked principals to list services offered by their libraries. This
question gathered the data based on the second foundation stone [Direct services to
teachers and students]. Question 34 asked principals to indicate librarians’ and teachers’
collaborations in supporting the library for teaching and learning. This question gathered the
data based on the third foundation stone [Collaboration, one of the four LMC program
areas]. (See Appendix C)
The third sections of the questionnaire part 1 contained 35 questions, divided into five
categories: administration, physical facilities, collections and activities, services and staff. All
five categories were shaped based on all three basic foundation stones. The gathered data
16
were used to seek the capability of rural school libraries in supporting student’s learning,
and to reflect the barriers of these libraries to enhance students’ academic achievement. For
example, questions 19-26 requested data related to libraries’ collections and activities,
which can represent the information environment of the libraries.
This research adopts the principal’s organisational taxonomy of library media programs. The
eight levels of the organisational principal’s taxonomy shaped the questions in all parts of
the questionnaire, which was used to collect and examine the levels of principals’ support
and engagement in establishing an effective library, and their perceptions about the
potential impacts of libraries in increasing students’ academic achievement. For example,
Question 9 [Questionnaire part 1 section3] asked about the library policy and plan linking to
Key 3 [Exerting leadership] of the principal’s organisational taxonomy of library media
programs. The results of this question reflected the leadership of principals in building
financial support for their libraries.
In qualitative data analysis, the three basic foundation stones of the school library media
program model were used to identify the themes of qualitative data analysis. For example,
library’s physical facilities were identified as a theme relying on the first foundation stone of
the school library media program. This theme comprises a storehouse of materials,
equipment and facilities.
In the discussion of the findings, the model and taxonomy were used to confirm the level of
principals’ support of and engagement with their libraries, and the availability and
potentiality of their library administration, physical facilities, collections and activities,

services and staff. The discussion of the findings, which was shaped based on the model and
taxonomy, contributed to the knowledge related to the much-needed basis for identifying
the components of an effective library for a rural small public primary school.
2.1.2 Conceptual framework
This study adapted Loertscher’s model of the school library media program to frame its
design. Three basic foundation stones and the principal’s taxonomy of library media program
17
of the model of the school library media program were adapted in order to realize the basic
components of a fully functional school library and to understand concepts of principals’
potentials to build an effective school library media program. The elements of the three
basic foundation stones and the eight levels of principal’s taxonomy of library media
program were considered in this study as independent variables to find the library
characteristics, situation and principals’ potential in developing effective libraries. The
following figure shows the conceptual framework of this research.
Figure 4: Conceptual framework
Schools & Libraries Principals’ demographics

demographics - age
- - School data - education background
- - Library data - experiences as a school principal
- experiences as a school principal
- Administration
- Libraries - Principals’ at present location
- Facilities
- Collections & characteristics perceptions
activities - Libraries’ - Impacts that
- Services limitations & drive the Principals’ perceptions about
- Staff
opportunities principals’ impacts of school library on
Libraries’ limitations
perceptions students’ academic
& opportunities
- Strengths achievement
- Weaknesses - Administration
- Opportunities - Facilities
- Threats A much-needed effective rural - Collection & activities
- Services
school library
- Staff
Figure 4 embodies the design of this research. Inputs consist of principals, their schools and
libraries demographics, libraries’ limitations and opportunities, and principals’ perceptions
about the impact of school library on students’ academic achievement. The output includes
library characteristics, limitations and opportunities, and principals’ perception and factors
that drive their perceptions about the impacts of school library on students’ academic
achievement.
This conceptual framework shows that school and school library demographics are analysed
and clustered to demonstrate the current characteristics of rural school libraries and the
patterns of these libraries across the 6 regions of Thailand. This information is combined
18
with the data of the libraries’ limitations and opportunities and the principals’ perceived
impact of school library on students’ academic achievement to seek a much-needed basis of
effective rural school library.
In order to clarify the understanding of principals about the impact of the school library on
students’ academic achievement, this study further examined the relationship between the
principals’ perceptions and the principals’ and schools’ demographics that drive their
perceptions. Thus, the dependent variable is the principals’ perceptions; the independent
variables are the principals’ age (AGE), the highest academic qualification (EDU), the years of
experience as a school principal (EPX1), the years of experience as a school principal at
present location (EXP2), and the school budget (BUDGET).
Finally, the results of these library characteristics, limitations, opportunities and principals’
perceptions are evaluated together to provide a snapshot of the current characteristics of

school libraries in rural Thailand and to seek for the much-needed basis for identifying the
components of an effective library for small public primary schools in rural Thailand.
2.2 School libraries in Thailand
This section outlines the development of school libraries in Thailand. Section 2.3 gives the
current scenario of libraries in all kinds of schools and the scenario specific to rural schools.
Lastly, this section discusses the school library standards in Thailand.
2.2.1 School library development in Thailand
Ministry of Education (1998) stated that the first evidence of a school library in Thailand was
in 1871, when King Chulalongkorn (Rama V) established a school in the grand palace and set
up the Department of Education. While there is evidence that the palace had a library, it is
unknown whether students had access to that library.
The first initiative to develop school libraries came in 1957, when the Education Ministry
established the education development project. The project aimed to implement in 12
19
provinces an education service that included the development of school libraries. However,
the libraries were neglected and abandoned because schools lacked the budget, material
and professional staff to manage them (Ambhanwong, 1967).
In 1962, Gelfand, a UNESCO library expert, investigated the development of libraries in

Thailand. The study found that there were 103 school libraries in Thailand, but out of the
24,609 primary schools only 5 had a school library. Kaser, Stone, and Byrd (1967) also stated
that there were very few school libraries in Thailand, and these lacked supportive principals
to develop effective libraries. Most teacher librarians were not qualified librarians and their
main responsibility was teaching.
In 1967, the Department of Technical and Economic Cooperation realised that libraries were
not successfully established and did not have library policies. Therefore, the department
developed their five-year library plan and library standards. The standards were created to
cover all types of libraries, such as special libraries, academic libraries, primary school
libraries and secondary school libraries. However, the government did not adopt the
standards. Therefore, these standards were still not either certified or officially declared
(Intarakamhang & Ratanakorn, 1981). It is unclear why the government did not accept the
standards; unfortunately, literature from the Thai government during this time is not
available.
In 1978, the first school library standards for primary and secondary schools by the Ministry
of Education were established. Because the Office of the National Primary Education
Commission was interested in library development and understood the role of school
libraries (Panmekha, 1982), its brief included the school library development project in the
Fifth National Economic and Social Development Plan (1982-1986). This project aimed to
establish a library in every school. Bookmobiles were introduced instead of libraries because
the government had an inadequate budget.
These bookmobiles, wooden cupboards or boxes with 80-100 books, were circulated among
8-10 nearby schools. They served approximately 28,000 schools across the country (Chavalit,
20
1990; Panmekha, 1982). The bookmobiles were supplied by the Office of the National
Primary Education Commission, UNICEF, Members of the House of Representatives and

private donors. These bookmobiles were found to be ineffective because of lack of staff, the
bookmobiles’ size and their poor circulation (Sirichote & Manmart, 1989).
Therefore, during 1982-1986, the government provided schools with a library budget to
purchase books. The library budgets allocated depended on the number of students (Office
of National Primary Educational Commission, 1984). Panmekaha (1982) found that only a
small number of schools had a library. The schools without libraries provided book corners,
but these had been abandoned. In 1986-1992, the government encouraged schools to
develop effective libraries by providing an award for outstanding libraries. Although the
government tried to establish school libraries across the country and provided an annual
book budget, school library development was very slow because of the lack of books in Thai
language, the lack of support in library use and the inadequate funding (Sirichote &
Manmart, 1989).
At the same time the Office of Basic Education Commission (OBEC) formulated the Minimum
Standards for School Libraries (Office of the National Primary Education Commission, 1992).
The standards were later revised in 1996 to improve the quality of standards.
Consequently, 17,000 of 34,000 schools had a library, but most rural schools still had none
(Cheunwattana & Fitzgibbons, 1999). Most schools located in rural areas lacked libraries, and
the existing libraries were in dilapidated condition, and were poorly resourced because of
the lack of funding and the expensive reading materials (Chavalit, 1989; Cheunwattana,
1999; Moya, 2004; Sadiman, 2004). Thailand Knowledge park (TK park) (2011) claimed that,
although the Ministry of Education had given support and guidance for libraries to be reach
the Primary School Library Standard since 1996, until then some school libraries still
struggled to manage well, and could not reach the minimum criteria of an effective school
library.
In 1999, the government formulated the Education Act of B.E.2542 (1999), including
Education Reform, which emphasised developing reading habits and providing adequate and
21
effective learning resources to support students becoming lifelong learners (Israsena, 2007).
The Education Act, amended in 2002, focused on student-centred learning and on
developing ICT for learning across the country (Office of the National Education Commission,
1999). In order to achieve the purposes of the Education Act, many school libraries provided
many reading promotion campaigns. The government also provided school library awards
for the most outstanding contributions to reading activities. Since 1999, three hundred
schools have achieved this award. The government offers one award per Education Service
Area in the case of primary schools; for secondary schools, the awards are offered per
province (OBEC, 2015).
At the same time, the Thai government found inequity of information and communication
technology in rural schools. Small schools in particular lacked computers and internet
connections. As small schools had little chance to purchase assets with high prices, the Thai
government has provided computer mobile units for 56 Educational Service Areas since
1999 (OBEC, 2013). The computer mobile units, which contained up to 21 computers
depending on the types of car which can access the areas, serve each school for 2-5 days per
semester (Chuenka, 2007; Moya, 2004; OBEC, 2016). Even though the computer mobile units
are valuable for schools without computers, their services are inadequate to support
teaching and learning needs.
In the 21th century, the Office of Basic Education Commission launched the school library
standards and indicators in 2009; its standards involve school administrators, teachers,
students and resources. The purpose of setting this standard is to establish an effective
library with good environments, teacher librarians and collections. In 2013, the Office of
Basic Education Commission revised the school library standards because teacher librarians
and educational supervisors reasoned that some standards, indicators and standard scores
should be revised and more practical. Physical facilities for libraries were added as a new
section of the school library standard 2013 (OBEC, 2013).
The school library standard and indicator of 2009 provided guidelines about an effective
library involving good collections, environment and teacher librarians. The Office of Basic
22
Education Commission launched the Thai Khem Khaeng project to improve the libraries’
qualities by using 3Gs models [3 Characteristics of Good Library] in 2010; its concept
comprised good collections, a good environment and good librarians. “Good collections”
involves good quality and adequate textbooks, reference-books, fiction and toys, and a
student–books ratio in each library of 5 books per student. “Good environment” refers to a
library which needs to occupy at least 1 classroom, provides good indoor and outdoor
environments, and provides an appropriate zoning for users and services. “Good staff”
comprises teacher librarians or professional librarians who are dedicated to libraries and
who work effectively (Pisitpan, 2008; OBEC, 2009; Sacchanand, 2010; Winitjakul, 2011).
Schools governed under the Office of Basic Education Commission were encouraged to use
the model to improve their library quality (OBEC, 2009). The government launched a policy
implementation on reading habit promotion at the primary education level in formal and
non-formal education in 2014. The government also provided library awards for the most
outstanding contribution to effective libraries.
The Thai government has proposed continuous campaigns related to school libraries,
particularly in reading promotion activities. Pradit (2006) revealed that most schools located
in the Bangkok Metropolitan Area had successful programs in reading promotion because
they had supportive principals and teachers, professional librarians, and adequate library
budgets. In contrast, TK park (2011) found that the unsuccessful reading promotion programs
were mostly found in rural schools because of the obstacle to implementing library
infrastructure and library expertise. Koondee (2012), who looked for the evidence of 3Gs
library effectiveness in primary schools in Ubon Ratchatani province, found that those 3Gs
libraries operations were at moderate levels, with the principals and teacher librarians
claiming that, in order to contribute to an effective library, the government and local
affiliation needed to provide support for the library buildings, adequate budget allocation,
and qualified librarians or sufficient teacher librarians.
Ard-am (2010) reasoned that the failure of reading promotion projects in Thailand came
from the top-down process of the government. The Thai government rarely monitors and
evaluates the results, capabilities, potentials and risks of its projects; it also rarely conducts
23
research or implements the projects’ results. Since the library enactment in 1999, and its
revisions in 2002 and 2010, section 25 makes clear that the Thai government is required to
support and establish all kinds of learning resources including public libraries, museums, art
centres, zoos, parks, botanic gardens, science parks, sport centres, information resources
and others, although the Act did not directly list school and academic libraries (Office of
National Education Commission, 2010). The Thai government did not emphasise the role of
school libraries as important learning resources impacting Thai learners’ academic
achievement and life-long learning skills, despite the fact that young people use schools and
school libraries as the first and foremost formal places to educate themselves and enhance
their knowledge (Peterson, 2009).
A library law, which can empower the roles of the school library and librarians, would enable
a school to fulfil a school library standard by supporting students’ learning development and
life-long learning skills (IFLA, 2016). Thailand still lacks a library law, which has been seen to
be a significant factor enhancing the quality of libraries’ effectiveness (Chaisena, 2006;
Sacchanand, 2007; Wondsirinawarat, et al., 2010).
School library laws have been enacted in many countries such as Sweden, Japan and South
Korea. As evidence, Sweden shows that the School Library Laws significantly enhanced the
role of school libraries in their education. Since 1996, Sweden has included the School
Library Act in its Education Act. In 2010, the New Education Act made school libraries
mandatory and all students in educational institutions have to have access to libraries (IFLA,
2012).
Similarly, the School Library Law in Japan acknowledges school libraries and professional
librarians as playing a vital role in education (Sakai, Nakamura, & Kitamura, 2002). The
Japanese government granted a large part of the budget (one million AUD) to improve
libraries’ collections and facilities, and emphasised the need for information literacy
instruction in supporting the concept of student-centred learning (Japan Library Association,
2016). In South Korea, the School Library Law was enacted in 1963, making the library
mandatory in every school. This law specified that a teacher-librarian must complete at least
24
240 hours of training in school librarianship (Kent, 1987). In 2006, the South Korean
government enacted its Reading Promotion Act, which enhanced the number of libraries
and improved the library programs (Lee, 2011). As can be seen, the School Library Law has
helped these countries succeed in contributing to effective school libraries impacting their
students’ academic achievement.
In Thailand, the success or failure of school library developments in the big picture is
currently unknown. The lack of knowledge about the way to improve the quality of school
library results from having only one large-scale study related to school library effectiveness
in Thailand, which was limited, and most research investigated Thailand’s school library
conditions in specific districts, provinces and Education Service Areas. Despite the fact that
the Thai government has continuously supported school libraries, programs related to
reading promotion and developing an effective school library across the country continue to
be inadequate (Ard-am, 2010). Therefore, it is necessary to identify an appropriate way to
develop effective libraries in Thailand.
2.2.2 School libraries in Thailand: the current scenario
School libraries in Thailand are in different scenarios and conditions depending on the types
of education [formal, informal and non-formal education], the types of schools [public,
private, international], and the school governance and geographical location [capital, large
and small city, rural areas]. For formal education, public schools are governed under the
OBEC, local municipalities and the OHEC, while private schools are governed by the Office of
Private Education Commission (OPEC). Non-formal and informal schools are governed under
the ONIE (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development/United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, 2016).
The formal school system has the largest enrolments across the country, in particular with
its approximately 5 million students in the public primary schools (UNESCO-UIS, 2015). The
Office of the Permanent Secretary (2014) clarified that there were about 2.6 million students
enrolled in non-formal education; 20% of students in formal education were enrolled in

25
private schools. The proportion of students in each type of school varies by region. For
example, 42% of primary students in Bangkok are enrolled in private schools. In contrast,
most students in remote areas are enrolled in public schools governed by OBEC, and some
schools are governed and supported by the Royal Border Patrol Police.
The variety in Thailand’s education system, with its types of schools, affects both school
library policies and the standards influencing library administration and operation. As
previously noted, the Thai government had a policy implementation on reading habit
promotion at the primary education level in formal and non-formal education in 2010, and
encouraged all schools to improve their libraries’ quality by using the 3Gs model (OBEC,
2009). Meanwhile, some private schools had a policy to convert their libraries to digital
libraries (Phraharuthai Nonthaburi School, 2012; Suankularb Wittayalai School, 2006).
The OBEC library standards of 2013 continue to guide public and private schools (OBEC,
2013). Private schools also have a manual for private school evaluation involving the library
evaluation developed by the Office of the Private Education Commission (Office of the
Private Education Commission, 2014). Non-formal schools, which use the public library
standard developed by the Thai Library Association, have implemented the policy for
developing 3Gs libraries, as the Thai national agenda has required all schools to develop
effective library and reading promotion since 2010.
Other standards and indicators related to school library have been established by
organisations such as the Thai Library Association and Thailand Knowledge park (TK park).
The Thai Library Association established Library Standard 2006 comprising primary school
libraries, secondary school libraries, public libraries and academic libraries. TK park
developed TK park Living Library Standards and Indicators, a concept for a living library,
which has been implemented for school libraries (Sacchanand & Prommapan, 2011).
Differences in school systems lead to differences in library governance, administration and

operation; so the condition and quality of school libraries across the country are dissimilar.
Generally, private schools are more likely to have better library quality and conditions than
public schools (OECD, 2013a; PISA, 2012; Sungchai, 1989; Suwanthanongchai, Jenkwao, &
26
Sithitool, 2015). Comparison of the conditions and problems between public and private
primary school libraries in Pathumthani by Suwanthanongchai, Jenkwao and Sithitool (2015)
showed that the private primary schools libraries had more advantages in decision making
processes and had supportive school administrators. These administrators allocated funds
for their libraries directly and quickly, whereas public school libraries faced many stages and
processes in decision making.
Some public schools also had effective school libraries. In particular, schools with large
numbers of students had more opportunities to receive large amounts of funding from
either the national budget or subsidies allocated per head of students per year (OBEC, 2013).
These schools were flexible enough to allocate for and operate their library resources,
services and activities (Pradit, 2006). On the contrary, some small schools had effective
libraries because they received extra funds from the local community, and from public and
private organisation donations. Schools located in wealthier areas had more chances to
receive large amounts in donations than those in areas with more poverty (Atagi, 2011;
Pinyapong, Virasilp & Somboon, 2007). Some small schools that were assisted developed
effective libraries through library partnerships and collaborations with universities, public
libraries, other schools and libraries networks (Buaraphan, 2013; Dheeranond, 2014).
While in Thailand some effective libraries are established across the country, most libraries
in rural small public schools still face many problems developing effective libraries. These
schools not only face the library development problems but also face overwhelming
problems in administration, teaching and operation. Therefore, developing a rural school
library may not be the first priority for school development in rural areas (OBEC, 2013;
Shoraku, 2008; Laovakul, 2009).
Nevertheless, school libraries are important resources for rural students because they can
provide and support information-rich learning environments, benefiting enhancement of
students’ academic achievements and life-long learning skills (Kuhlthau, 2001). In particular,
students need a variety of learning materials, resources and information technology as tools
to retrieve a variety of information resources that enable them to be 21st century learners
27
(O’Connell, 2012). The next section outlines the current scenario of school libraries in rural
Thailand, and clarifies from existing evidence why those libraries have been ineffective.
2.2.3 School library in rural Thailand: the current scenario
Schools in rural Thailand have struggled with the problem of developing effective libraries
for a long time (Ponpaiboon, 2011). Most had no libraries; existing libraries had poor
conditions (Chavalit, 1989; Cheunwattana, 1999; Cheunwattana & Fitzgibbons, 1999;
Rukumnuaykit & Palakawong-na-ayudhya, 2015). Although the Thai government tried to give
support and guidance to these libraries, some still struggled to reach the minimum criteria
of an effective school library (TK park, 2011).
Rural schools find developing an effective library difficult because library problems are
challenging; such schools may need specialised management. Hildreth (2007) stated that
successful library development depends on several factors: type and size of school,
problems, capabilities and regional geography, and politics. Therefore, clarifying the
situation of libraries in their local context is vital before implementing standards and
guidelines that contribute to an effective library (International Federal of Library
Associations and Institutions, 2015).
Currently, the 15,506 rural small public primary schools make up approximately 50% of the
schools in all of Thailand (OBEC, 2014). The situation of the libraries in these schools is in
deadlock because developing a rural school library is of low priority for education
development in Thailand, where developing classrooms has been uppermost. For library
administration, the Thai government allocates school funding depending on the number of
students, so schools with a small number of students, mostly located in rural areas, continue
to receive a smaller budget, affecting both library resources allocation and administration
(Krolak, 2005; Oradee, 2004; Pradit, 2006; Praphansarn, 2013; RIN, 2010). Shoraku (2008) and
Laovakul (2009) noted that students in North Eastern Thailand received the lowest education
subsidy per head, and that the subsidy was lower than the overall national average. By 2014,
28
the National Statistical Office confirmed that students living in the Northeast region faced
educational inequality (National Statistical Office, 2014).
Rukumnuaykit and Palakawong-na-ayuadhya (2015) calculated that a small school (fewer
than 120 students) receives a library budget of around 3,000 baht per year (115 AUD). With
this budget, the school can buy approximately 15 informational books per year. As early as
2006, Pradit noted that an effective library budget must allocate at least 10,000 baht per
year (400 AUD); by 2013, OBEC required that the minimum standard of library budget for
small school must be higher than 5% of the school budget. A large portion of school budgets
was spent on teacher and staff salaries, so the rest of the school’s budget was inadequate to
support the libraries. Consequently, these libraries rarely acquired good quality books for
young students such as hard cover books and picture books (Imsuwan, 2011; Pradit, 2006).
OBEC in 2013 indicated that schools with a large number of students received more funding
sourced from the national budget, subsidies, and local community, public and private
organisation donations (OBEC, 2013).
Regarding donated funds, the schools located in wealthier areas were more likely to receive
a greater amount in donations than those in areas with more poverty (Atagi, 2011;
Pinyapong, Virasilp, & Somboon, 2007). Therefore, the schools in wealthier areas, which had
larger number of students, had more opportunities and flexibility to allocate and operate
library resources, services and activities or even to hire contract teachers, librarians and
staff (Atagi, 2011; Pinyapong, Virasilp, & Somboon, 2007; Pradit, 2006).
The Thai government had tried to give support and guidance to libraries on how to be
effective by providing the primary school library standard 2013, a policy implementation on
reading habit promotion, and reading promotion campaigns (see Section 2.1). However,
Choh (2013) claimed that the Thai government lacked practical and clear policies for school
library development, and Panmekha, a school library expert, noted that Thai government
policy did not completely support the development of school libraries (Pradit, 2006).
29
Even though school libraries are important learning resources facilitating student-centred
learning, the government has tended to overlook the role of the library and qualified
librarians and has not referred to these roles in education policies (Pradit, 2006). Professional
librarians are not mandatory in Thailand schools. Subsequently, most rural school libraries
do not have a professional librarian. Therefore, teachers and school principals need to
organise the library instead of a librarian, even though they do not really understand how to
manage a school library effectively (Bureau of Academic Affairs and Educational Standards,
2010).
Several studies have recorded the state of the art over the decades. Moya’s study (2004)
indicated that most rural school libraries were in a dilapidated condition and lacked a good
library environment. Pradit (2006) noted that most rural library buildings were old and
library environment looked like a storage room. The small schools lacked computers and
information and communications technology (ICT) to support teaching and learning. This is
because they had little chance of receiving assets with high prices from the government
(OBEC, 2013; OECD, 2013a). Even though the Thai government has provided computer
mobile units since 1999, these services with digital advances were inadequate for
supporting teaching and learning needs because of the small number of mobile computer
units (Chuenka, 2007; Moya, 2004; OBEC, 2016).
The library collections in rural school libraries lack good quality books for students. With a
small budget, schools cannot afford good quality books with high prices (Imsuwan, 2011).
Many researchers noted that most books in rural school libraries were donated books,
outdated and inappropriate for student age (Moya, 2004; Pedcharat, 2011; Oradee, 2004).
Lacking computers and ICT in rural schools affected the libraries’ ability to use a digital
library management system. Although OBEC provided OBEC lib, an open source software, as
a school library management system, these libraries still struggled to use the software
because of their lack of ICT, library experts, and computer technicians or teachers who are
expert in computer and information technology management (OBEC, 2011).
30
Professional librarians are important people to build collaborative relationship with school
libraries’ communities, and stakeholders (Church, 2007; Hughes, 2013; Lance, Rodney &
Hamilton-Pennell, 2000a, 2000b). A lack of qualified librarians occurs in all public primary
schools across the country. This lack of professional librarians has affected library
administration, and has also influenced library services and activities (Butterfly Book House,
2008; MGR online, 2006; Sangkharat, 2013; TK park, 2011). Many researchers noted that
most school libraries in rural areas lacked collaboration among their stakeholders (Chaisena,
2014; Suwantha & Pisarnpong, 2014; Thepkraiwan, 2011)
In some rural areas, non-government organisations, private groups, charity organisations,
and universities, realising the importance of advocating school libraries, ran many projects
to develop effective school libraries in Thailand, such as book donation programs, library
building maintenance and reading promotion programs. Some libraries cooperated with
Non-Government Organisations, private groups and charities, but these were still unable to
support all rural school libraries. Moreover, support from these organisations and volunteers
is not guaranteed to continue as a sustainable development for rural school libraries (Krolak,
2005).
In Thailand, the little primary data and few studies that related/relates to rural small public
primary school libraries in Thailand can give hardly any indication of the way to improve the
quality of those libraries effectively. Issues of rural small public primary school libraries are
challenging and urgently need a sustainable solution. Most rural school libraries in Thailand
cannot be effective libraries without budget, infrastructure, facilities and professional

librarians (TK Park, 2011). Therefore, rural school libraries need long-term plans and
strategies for library facilities, programs and services, outreach programs and customer
service (UNESCO/IFLA, 2002).
2.2.4 School library standards in Thailand
As noted, the first school library standards were developed in 1978 by the Ministry of
Education to assist school library professionals and decision makers to develop an effective
31
library (Panmekha, 1979). Those standards involved minimum standards for library
administration, services, location and space, facilities, collections, budget and staff at both
primary schools and secondary schools (Intarakamhang & Ratanakorn, 1981).
In 1996, the Office of Basic Education Commission formulated its minimum standards for
primary school libraries in order to give support and guidance to enable libraries to be
effective (the Office of the National Primary Education Commission, 1992). The standards
were divided into two main sections: basic and quantity. The basic standards involved library
administration, services and activities, collections, technical work, and physical facilities. The
quantity standards comprised library materials, location, space and facilities (OBEC, 1992).
In 2006, the Thai Library Association developed the School Library Standards to support the
policy of the Thai government in developing effective learning resources supporting Thai
learners. These standards, for primary school library, secondary school library, public library
and academic library, provided broad guidelines to develop effective library administration
but did not provide indicators for library evaluation.
In 2009, the Office of Basic Education Commission launched its school library standards and
indicators for school library development. These standards and indicators were developed
based on a UNESCO survey of students’ learning through school libraries in Thailand, and on
the standards and quality assessment of the Office for National Education Standards and
Quality Assessment (ONESQA). These standards involved the school administrator, teachers,
students and resources. The objective of developing these standards was to establish an
effective library with good environment, school librarians and collections (OBEC, 2009).
In 2013, the school library standards and the indicators for school library development of
2009 were revised because teacher librarians, educational supervisors and the evaluation
and assessment of education reform in the decade before the 2013 revision reflected that
some standards and indicators should be revised and more practical. In addition, OBEC
revised the standards based on the policy of improving libraries into 3Gs libraries, The
National Economic and Social Development Plan 2002-2016, and the concept of 21st century
skills. This document comprised five standards: library administration, teachers, students,
32
resources, and physical facility. The aim of revising these standards was not only to assist
schools to evaluate their libraries proficiency continuously, but was also to support the
educational supervisors to evaluate, assess, and advise the school libraries in order to
enhance the quality of libraries, towards effective libraries (OBEC, 2013).
Even though Thailand has had school library standards that aimed to help all schools to
establish effective libraries, rural small public primary schools still struggled to improve their
libraries, with most unable to reach the minimum criteria of the standards (TK park 2011).
This is because the Thai government and policy makers have overlooked the challenges for
rural small public primary schools: specialised management, guidelines and standards; lack
of expenditure on research and development for rural school libraries.
2.3 Keys to influence an effective school library
Effective school libraries can be described as “dynamic agents of student learning and
academic achievement” (Todd, 2004, p. 20). Effective school libraries support the needs,
interests and abilities of school library stakeholders, thus affecting students’ learning
outcomes and academic success (Daly, 2007). Keys to effective school libraries include
professional school librarians, library–information literacy instruction, collaboration
between teachers and librarians, and support from senior managers and policy makers
(Barrett, 2010).
An effective school library has to facilitate a wide range of materials and learning services
and must advocate for an appropriate learning environment for members of school
communities (UNESCO/IFLA, 2002). The significant outcome of an effective school library will
reflect on students’ literacy and performances, supporting them to be lifelong learners
(Frantsi & Salminen, 2002).
The UNESCO/IFLA Library Manifesto of 2002 emphasises that a school library must have an
effective and accountable operation that meets four objectives. Firstly, the school library’s
policy has to be integrated with the school’s curriculum to define and make sure library
priorities, goals and services have the same vision. Secondly, a school library must be well-
33
managed by a qualified professional. Thirdly, all school members and stakeholders must be
able to access school library services. Lastly, a school library must cooperate with teachers,
the school principals, parents, other librarians and community groups (UNESCO/IFLA, 2002).
This review demonstrates four main keys influencing school library development: principals,
librarians, teachers and ICT.
2.3.1 Principals
School principals play an important role in developing an effective school library because
they have authority to direct and manage the facilitation of change in the school (Van
Hamersveld, 2007). IFLA (2015) echoed this in 2015, noting that the administration’s support
toward the school library policy is important to realise the value of a school library program.
A clearly structured policy framework with school ethos, mission, aims and objectives
should have majority support from school principals (Doran, 2004). The benefit of having
principals’ support through the library policy contributes to an effective school library, as it
influences the quality of library budget, facilities, learning resources and personal resources
(IFLA, 2015).
Numerous studies have demonstrated that school principals are essential in supporting and
developing effective school library. In particular, school principals have to realise that the
role of school library program as the hub of the instructional program of the school
(Buchanan, 1982; Henri, Hay & Oberg, 2002a; Kolencik, 2001; Pearson, 1989; Oberg, 1996).
Campbell (1991) noted that the awareness of school principals about the important of school
library programs influences the success of the school library. Principals have to support
school library programs through adequate funding, high expectations, personal

commitment and promotion of the program to teachers and students. Henri and Hay (1995)
also noted that effective library media programs occurred when principals have personal
commitment and support sufficient funding to libraries.
Many studies have proved that high expenditure on school libraries is associated with
students’ academic achievement (Baughman, 2002; Kachel & Graduate Students, 2011;
34
Lance, Rodney & Hamilton-Pennell, 2005; Lance & Schwarz, 2012). Financial support is a vital
factor that influences effective school libraries. For example, the budgetary decisions of
school principals influence the quality and quantity of library facilities, staff, collections and
information technology (Hartzell, 2002c).
Tallman and Van Deusen (1994) studied the influence of principals’ expectations on the
consultative work between teacher librarians and classroom teachers. The result showed
that the consultative work between them is much higher when principals have high
expectations. Therefore, the principals’ high expectations can make a positive difference in
the amount of consultation, contributing to an effective collaboration among them.
Collaboration between principals and librarians is a crucial factor impacting effective school
libraries. The collaboration between them makes principals understand the role of librarians
or teacher librarians in school library programs, as an integral part of the school instructional
environment (Campbell, 1991; Henri & Hay, 1995; Pearson, 1989). Significant evidence from
Oberg’s study demonstrated that principals can have influence by encouraging teachers to
realise the value of the school library. Those principals have promoted the school library
programs for teachers and made them into a vital part of instruction by providing in-service
training and time for the staff meeting program (Oberg, 1996). Lance, Rodney & Russel
(2007) also asserted that the school principals who valued their meetings with librarians and
committees made a positive impact on their student’s academic achievement and school
performance.
In addition, collaboration among principals, parents, people in the local community, and
public and private organisations benefits schools to produce effective libraries. Many Thai
research across the decades has noted that parents and local community can support school
libraries by providing library volunteers and labour (Buaraphan, 2013; Dheeranond, 2014;
Pradit, 2006). A strong relationship among principals, public and private organisations
benefits libraries in terms of money and education material support. These collaborations
not only have the power to increase and expand capacity in helping and collaboration
widely but also enable library capacities to manage effectively, which influences their
35
students’ academic achievement (Dechwittayaporn et. al., 2009; Vasuwattanased &
Kamnuansilpa, 2012).
In summary, research has revealed the principal to be the key person who supports and
contributes to an effective school library. Therefore, school libraries require active support
from school principals in order to set up a clear library policy, support a school library
program and encourage librarians and teachers to collaborate in planning and teaching
(Kolencik, 2001).
2.3.1.1 Principals’ perceptions of the role of school library
Numerous studies in developed countries, such as the United States, Canada and Australia,
examined the perceptions of school principals on the role of school libraries. Many found
school principals less likely to be aware of the importance of school libraries and librarians
(Dorrell & Lawson, 1995; Hartzell, 2002c; Van Hamersveld, 2007). Dorrell and Lawson (1995)
noted that Missouri high school principals had limited understanding of how the benefit of
school library programs can contribute to school quality: they saw the role of school libraries
as book warehouses, and considered the role of librarians to be book keepers.
In 1994, Hartzell investigated the support of school principals in libraries in California. The
finding showed that the principals lacked any attention and awareness of the value of
school library programs. School librarians worked in isolation and did not play a large role as
teachers in education (Hartzell, 1994). Hartzell’s later study still found that some school
principals did not present strong support and were less likely to be aware of the value of
instructional library programs, which did not even exist in some schools. Librarians were not
involved with curriculum development, teaching, and budget and facilities management
(Hartzell, 2000c). In the same area, the American Library Association and the Association for
Educational Communications and Technology (1998) found that principals and teachers did
not see the role of librarians as important, and had little understanding of the potential for
the instructional role of librarians.
36
Van Hamersveld (2007) summarised four reasons that principals had no awareness about the
value of school libraries and the potential of school librarians:
(1) The lack of communication, education and mutual understanding of school

principals about the value of school libraries
(2) The lack of support in the instructional library programs
(3) The lack of librarians’ self-promotion
(4) The lack of a strong, vocal advocate for the impact of library programs on
students’ academic achievement
Haycock (2003), who investigated the crisis in Canada school libraries, found that most
libraries had part-time librarians performing a role of baby-sitting. Haycock also argued that
strong instructional leadership is a key to developing effective library programs. Librarians
should collaborate with principals to set the goal of a school library program in order to
support the learning objective and school goals. As can be seen from the results of some
studies, collaboration between principals and teacher-librarians has a positive impact on
students’ information literacy, students’ learning outcomes and schools’ performance
(Campbell, 1991; Henri & Hay, 1995; Lance, Rodney & Russell, 2007; Pearson, 1989).
Kolencik (2001) studied the perceptions of principals of the role of school libraries and library
media specialists in Pennsylvania. The study showed that principals perceived the role of the
library media specialists as keepers and circulators of library materials and as persons who
manage the technology in the library. Moreover, they also perceived that the major
limitation of libraries is budgetary challenges. Meanwhile, Marcoux (2005) and Kaplan (2006)
found similar results: that school principals have less expectation about the instructional role
of the librarians and lack understanding about the value of the instructional role in
enhancing students’ learning outcomes.
In contrast, a study in Indiana showed that the principals of better-performing schools
placed a higher value on the instructional library programs, had regular meetings with
librarians and committees, and collaborated with teachers and librarians in curriculum
37
design (Lance, Rodney & Russell, 2007). Similarly, Lau (2002) found that 242 principals in the
United States believed that school libraries have the potential to enhance students’
academic achievement. Furthermore, many studies also found that supportive principals not
only gave attention to budget allocation but also considered the support of librarians and
teacher collaboration, instructional library programs and in-service training (Campbell, 1991;
Henri & Hay, 1995; Haycock, 2003; Hartzel, 2002c; Lance, Rodney & Russel, 2007; Pearson,
1989).
In Australia, Lupton’s study (2016) investigated the role of teacher-librarians from the
perspective of Queensland’s principals. Lupton showed that nine principals had various
perspectives of the role of teacher-librarians, depending on the nature of the schools. Most
principals had high expectations of the roles of teacher-librarians, but they perceived the
teacher-librarians’ role of teacher to be more important than that of school librarian.
Likewise, Hughes (2013) investigated the contribution of teacher-librarians in Gold Coast
schools. The principals perceived that the roles of teacher-librarians varied: learning
manager, literacy leaders, and technology integration specialists. Moreover, Hughes
indicated that those principals were aware that the roles and the value of school libraries
impact students’ literacy development.
In developing countries, there are very few studies investigating principals’ perceptions
about the roles of school libraries. In China, Warning and Henri’s (2012) study illustrated that
principals of rural China schools had both negative and positive perceptions about the roles
and values of school libraries. Positively, the principals believed that libraries can enhance
students’ academic performance affecting their school reputation; negatively, some
principals viewed the roles of libraries as book warehouses that had no impact on students’
learning outcomes.
A study in Gauteng province, South Africa compared the principals’ understanding of the
roles of school libraries and teacher librarians in schools with and without fees. The
principals in low or no fee-paying schools had less awareness than those in fee-paying about
38
the roles and values of libraries and teacher librarians affecting school library development
(Paton-Ash & Wilmot, 2015). Hart and Zinn’s study (2007) claimed that the barriers to
establishing effective school libraries were that teachers, principals and policy-makers in
South Africa lacked awareness of the roles of school libraries. Conversely, Shandu (2014)
argued that principals of the Katlehong secondary schools in Gauteng province understood
that the roles of school libraries impact teaching and learning by facilitating resources for
teaching and learning, developing independent learners and enhancing critical thinking and
writing skills.
In Thailand, Nganlert, Sirisanglert & Nakfon (2016) studied the role of learning resource
administration by school principals of Sa-Keaw province. They noted that the principals of
small schools played the roles of learning resource administrator less often than in large and
medium schools because the small schools had limitations in their learning resources and
budget. This is similar to observations by Sermvitoon, Techataweewan & Wajiraprechapong
(2011) that principals of small schools gave less support to libraries than did the principals of
large schools. Similarly, OBEC’s study (2011) found that supportive principals from medium
schools understood the impact of school libraries on students’ academic achievement. Along
these lines, Sacchanand (2011) and Singh, Diljit and others (2005) found that Thai principals
understood the important of libraries impacting students’ information literacy and learning,
but Sangkharat (2013) found that principals of Nakorn Ratchasrima Primary Educational
Service Area Office 6 lacked awareness of library administration.
School principals’ understanding and awareness of the role of school libraries and school
librarians is very important for developing an effective library. The studies reviewed show
that the issues and concerns regarding the role of school library and librarians still exist. The
main reason is that the principals provide little administration support, including a lack of
communication, knowledge and mutual understanding (Van Hamersveld, 2007).
39
2.3.1.2 Source of school principals’ perceptions
School principals’ perceptions related to the importance of school libraries and librarians is
an important factor indicating school library effectiveness. Their perceptions can
demonstrate their knowledge and concern about school library media programs (Church,
2007). Several research findings show that most school principals lacked awareness about
the importance of school library and librarians. These factors influence the school principals’
perceptions at the personal professional level, the education level and the level of work
experience (Alexander, Smith, & Carey, 2003).
Numerous studies showed that the importance of the school library’s role was not included
in teacher and principal preparation courses (Hafsteinsdottir, 1997; Pearson, 1989; Veltze,
1992; Wilson & MacNeil, 1999). Therefore, most school principals were less likely to have
knowledge about the role of a school library. Veltze (1992) showed that a lack concern about
the role of school libraries arose not only because content about the role of school libraries
was not included in the principal preparation coursework, but also because of a lack of
gaining knowledge from professional library journals.
Naylor and Jenkins (1988) showed that principals perceived the role of school libraries and
librarians based on their own teaching experiences [as a teacher]. They assessed the
librarians’ job performance through the observations by and feedback from members of
school communities and their conversation with librarians. Pearson (1989) noted that a
librarian is a significant person who can inform and educate school principals to be aware of
and to have concern about how the role of school libraries impacts on students’ learning
achievement. The North Carolina study indicated that school principals have gained their
knowledge about the role of school library from librarians (Campbell, 1991).
Hartzell (2002a) noted that school principals lacked knowledge about the role of school
library because of two factors: the occupational invisibility of school librarians, and the
occupational socialisation of school principals. Librarians are more likely to suffer from
occupational invisibility because the nature of the librarian’s work is in isolation as an

40
individual staff member in the school. Despite the fact that librarians empowered other
members of school communities to be successful in teaching and learning, the principals

tended to undervalue the school librarians’ role because librarians do not play a large role in
teaching. Librarians have also had a low profile in educational literature. Principals have thus
gained limited knowledge about how the role of librarian impacts on the quality of teaching
and learning.
Alexander, Smith & Carey (2003) noted that librarians suffer from this occupational
socialisation by school principals. The awareness of school principals related to the role of
school libraries and librarians has derived from their educational experiences as students
and classroom teachers. Some develop their perception from their principal preparation
coursework, which rarely mentioned the importance of school libraries and librarians. The
impacts that drive the school principals’ perceptions are parallel with their interaction and
experiences of school libraries and librarians in their own studying and teaching.
2.3.2 Librarians or teacher-librarians
To ensure the best educational outcomes, the professional in charge of a school library is a
specialist teacher librarian with dual qualifications as a teacher and as an information
professional. A teacher-librarian is qualified across the fields of education and librarianship,
and is responsible for managing library collections, providing library services and activities,
and advocating for many literacy skills (ALIA, 2001; Carol, 1997). A librarian or teacher-
librarian contributes to an effective school library (IFLA, 2015, p. 18). Therefore, a librarian
makes the library meaningful: a valuable contribution to an effective education (Tilke, 2002,
p.3). Loertscher (2000) proposed that librarians are responsible for four programmatic
elements of libraries: library programs, collaboration, reading literacy, and information
literacy.
To develop effective library programs, the Australian Library and Information Association:
ALIA (2001) advised that teacher-librarians should have a basic knowledge of management
and administration, and should also be involved in financial decision making and curriculum
41
planning. Moreover, good communication skills are important, enabling librarians to
communicate effectively with school library stakeholders.
Similarly, MaGhee and Jansen (2010) identified that teacher-librarians are important
partners in curriculum planning, benefiting principals and teachers by working

collaboratively at both strategic and operational levels. Carr (2008) and the American
Association of School Librarians and Association for Educational Communications and

Technology (1998) supported the position that teacher-librarians play a significant role as
instructional partners, program administrators and collaborators, accommodating the

requirement of teachers and students in establishing appropriate library programs and a
curriculum to meet the schools’ goals. The American Association of School Librarians (2009)
noted that the collaborative network of school libraries and school members supported
students to learn effectively and independently to become life-long learners.
Many studies found that all school members benefited from collaboratively working with
teacher-librarians (Lassonde & Israel, 2010; Oberg, 1990; Wimberley, 2001). Oberg’s study
(1990) showed that the collaboration between teachers and teacher-librarians, in designing
lesson and improving instructional programs, enhanced students’ academic achievement in
the schools. Similarly, Wimberley (2001) wrote that collaboration between teachers and
teacher-librarians had a significantly positive impact on students’ academic achievement.
However, many studies found that teachers lacked collaboration with teacher-librarians, and
lacked awareness of the roles of teacher-librarians, impacting effective teaching and
learning (Hartzell, 1997; Lance, Rodney & Schwarz, 2010; Latham, 2013; Montiel-Overall,
2010).
In terms of enhancing students’ reading literacy, a sufficient collection is not the only
important element to motivate students to have reading engagement; teacher-librarians are
also extremely important people, supporting and encouraging students to engage in reading
effectively (Lonsdale, 2003). This is because teacher-librarians have knowledge and skills to
evaluate appropriate collections, to develop students’ abilities to access information
resources, and to provide a variety of activities and services developing reading habits and
42
reading culture, all of which contribute to the development of life-long learners (Brozo, Shiel
and Topping, 2007; Fitzgibbons, 2000; OCED, 2010)
Studies by Baughman (2000) and by Lance, Rodney and Hamilton-Pennell (2000, 2002, 2005)
addressed the role of full-time teacher-librarians or qualified librarians in enhancing student
reading literacy and reading scores through school library programs. In particular, Lance,
Rodney and Hamilton-Pennell (1992, 2000, 2010) conducted longitudinal studies confirming
that school library programs provided by qualified librarians not only affected students’
reading scored but also closed the achievement gap for students with unsatisfactory
Colorado Student Assessment Program scores (CSAP).
Smith (2001) also found that student reading scores on the Texas Assessment of Academic
Skills (TAAS) increased when librarians spent more time meeting with teachers and principals
to collaboratively affect curriculum planning, instructional program and team teaching.
Similarly, an Iowa study found that the collaboration between teachers and library media
specialists in planning and teaching has a significant influence on students’ reading scores
(Rodney, Lance, & Hamilton-Pennell, 2002).
Teacher-librarians not only assist students to enhance their reading skills; they also develop
other important skills that are necessary for education in the 21st century, such as
information, computer, media, ICT and digital literacy skills (Ranaweera, 2008). Hughes
(2013) found that teacher-librarians are important in assisting students to develop these
skills through school library programs and with individual support. Regarding 21st century
education, teacher-librarians’ roles are shifting, from librarians to cybrarians or information
technologists or digital librarians, by enhancing their knowledge and skills related to ICT and
new technologies (Dey, 2012). ICT knowledge and skills benefit teacher-librarians, enhancing
their abilities in information resources management, information sharing and networking,

and information technology development, which will expand library services and make
access to information resources more convenient for teachers and students (Fagbola,
Uzoigwe, & Ajegbomogun, 2011).

43
In line with the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL) standards for
teachers, it is evident that teacher-librarians are important for supporting students with a
variety of literacy skills through resource-based learning programs (ALIA school, 2014).
Teacher-librarians not only select, provide, and organise both printed and electronic
resources effectively, but also help users to access and use these resources responsibly and
ethically. ALIA (2014) emphasises that teacher-librarians lead and support users to select and
use ICT effectively in order to enhance the learning opportunities and knowledge of
students.
Carol (1997) noted that in the electronic age, teacher-librarians not only needed to expand
their services via ICT, but also must share and collaborate with teachers and curriculum
experts to establish effective services in order to develop 21st century skills for students.
Similarly, Lance, Rodney, and Hamilton-Pennell’s study (2000b) found a correlation between
school library staff activities and integrating information literacy. The staff activities involved
planning and teaching cooperatively with teachers, providing in-service training to teachers
and meeting with principals and committees. These activities affected students’ information
literacy and students’ learning outcomes, as students knew how to access and use varied
learning resources effectively through information technology.
As can be seen, teacher-librarians can significantly support students becoming 21st century
learners. To develop an effective school library, the teacher-librarians need to enhance their
capabilities in information management to use ICT effectively. Collaborations among school
members are also essential for teacher-librarians to ensure and enhance the effective
integration of the information resources and ICT that affect students’ learning outcomes
(ALIA, 2001).
2.3.3 Teachers collaboration
Collaboration between teachers and school librarians is important to develop effective

school libraries (Montiel-Overall, 2008). Especially in the 21st century, creating a successful
learning environment is vital for developing students to achieve the goals of 21st century
44
learners. However, teachers take account of their place as a key instructor in education; they
have to enhance students’ academic achievement by providing resources suited to students’
abilities and needs, to encourage students to learn independently, to stimulate

experimentation and to create a critical thinking culture (Loertscher, 2000; Russel, 2000).
With these purposes, teachers can achieve these goals by collaborating with school
librarians to teach the skills students need in the 21st century.
A good example of a country that has an awareness of the collaborative network among
schools, community, government, public and private organisations is USA, where the United
States Department of Education aimed to encourage 21st century learners to acquire 21st
century skills, including information, media and ICT literacies (Partnership for 21st Century
Skills, 2007). The American Association of School Librarians (AASL) also provided their
standards for the 21st century learner, which emphasise multiple literacies such as digital,
technology, information literacies as vital skills in this age (AASL, 2007).
Loertscher (2000) suggested five components that make a successful collaboration with
teachers: (1) regularly collaborating in teaching; (2) attending department meeting; (3) having
awareness about teachers’ and students’ needs, facilitating and sharing teaching units
among teachers; (4) having enthusiasm for collaborating in curriculum development; and (5)
being involved in curriculum planning. Along these lines, many researchers have
demonstrated that strong collaboration among teachers and teacher-librarians has
enhanced students learning because the collaboration contributed to effective library

programs, services and activities, mutual respect and strong relationship among staff
members, thereby empowering the role of libraries and librarians in teaching and learning
(Haycock, 2007; Lance, 2001; Riedling, 2003).
Doiron and Davies (1998) indicated that successful collaboration occurred when teachers
brought to teacher-librarians their conditions, concepts and knowledge related to content
needed for teaching and learning. Teacher-librarians could then assist the teachers by
supporting and developing appropriate learning environments for teachers and students.
Such collaboration not only broadly affected the use of resources, but also contributed to
45
developing several literacy skills, benefiting students’ academic achievement and life-long
learning skills.
Much research showed that collaborative relationship among teachers and teacher-
librarians has a positive impact on students’ academic achievement. Collaboration develops
effective learning programs, and library programs, which empower and benefit students’
learning (Draper, 2008; Immroth & Lukenbill, 2007; Lance, Rodney & Russell, 2007; Montiel-
Overall, 2012; Wimberley, 2011). Many studies proved that collaboration among teachers
and teacher-librarians benefits students’ academic achievement. However, some studies
revealed that teacher-librarians face challenges in establishing collaborative work with
classroom teachers (Montiel-Overall, 2008; Hartzell, 1997, 2002; Henri & Boyd, 2002;
Hughes, 2013; Ragle, 2011), mainly because many teachers were unaware of the
opportunities for collaboration and of the role of school library and librarians in teaching
and learning (Bishop & Larimer, 1999; Hartzell, 2002).
Haycock (1999) supported these findings that teachers continued to work as independent
teachers and lacked awareness about collaboration. Leonard (2002) showed that teachers
understood the positive impact of collaboration with teacher-librarians in enhancing
student’s academic performance, but still lacked collaboration in practice. Lance et al.
(2000a, 2000b) noted that important factors contributing to effective collaborations came
from mutual respect, and from inclusive communication among principals, teachers and
teacher-librarians. Similarly, Haycock (2003) and Lambert (1998) indicated that teacher-
librarians need to increase their communication skills and leadership skills in order to build
trust and mutual respect with teachers, benefiting the strong, close relationship in order to
develop effective collaborations.
Lance, Rodney & Russell (2007) argued that principals offer essential contributions by
encouraging strong collaboration and full participation among staff members, giving regular
meeting and having collaborative planning and teaching sessions. In the same vein, Todd,
Gordon and Lu (2011) claimed that principals are significant people leading and supporting
46
full participation between teachers and teacher-librarians, enabling trust for collaboration,
and building the school’s culture to promote working together.
As can be seen, a teacher-librarian does not work most effectively alone (Henri, Hay &
Oberg, 2002a). Collaboration from classroom teachers is necessary to establish effective
school libraries impacting students’ academic achievement. Teachers help teacher-librarians
to understand the conditions, concepts and content needed for supporting students’
learning. Consequently, teacher-librarians can help provide and support teachers and
students with appropriate learning environments, effective learning programs and library
programs, all of which will support students to enhance their academic achievement and
become life-long learners (Doiron and Davies, 1998; Haycock, 2007; Lance, 2001; Riedling,
2003).
2.3.4 Information and Communications Technology (ICT)
ICT influences the role of school libraries by increasing their capability for providing
electronic resources and by facilitating, through digital media and electronic devices, various
kinds of services and activities that contribute to a school library, impacting students’
academic achievement (Afolabi & Abidoye, 2011). School libraries have changed their roles
from providing information storage to being a dynamic agent of student learning that
provides all formats of resources and makes online access and sharing information
resources possible through various devices without the limitations of place and time
(Fastrack, 2014; IFLA, 2016; Todd, 2004).
Many school libraries have transformed their features, collections, services and activities
from traditional libraries to learning commons (Loertscher, Koechlin, & Zwaan, 2008;
Scholastic Library Publishing, 2016). Those school libraries created digital learning
environments by using ICT, changed their image to modern libraries and renamed their
libraries, becoming learning centres, information centres, iCentres, innovation centres, e-
libraries and digital libraries in order to empower the new role of libraries as the heart of
21st century learning (Gordon, 2014; Hough,2011; Loertscher et al., 2008).
47
In the 21st century, ICT is necessary for school library operations and services to be effective,
supporting 21st teaching and learning (Australian School Library Association, 2009). IFLA
(2016) stated in their school library guidelines of 2016 that even though the librarians or
library staff are few, technology can facilitate user access to information resources at all
times. Similarly, Gordon (2013) noted that IT infrastructure and digital spaces are vital
elements of library facilities in this era. Libraries are no longer places for storage
information, but are now the hub for providing, accessing, creating and sharing information
to support 21st century teaching and learning.
Library operations in many school libraries use library management software to enhance
their abilities in managing library routines and processes such as cataloguing, classification
and circulation management (Futalibrarian, 2013). The School Library and Learning
Information Landscape: Guidelines for New Zealand Schools suggested that school libraries
need to have effective ICT equipment and systems supporting users’ requirements and need
to provide sufficient internet for information access (Ministry of Education and National
Library of New Zealand, 2002). These elements help develop the broad role of school
libraries as an agent of the educational network by increasing and enabling access to

information resources.
The advancement of ICT creates and changes information in a variety of formats accessible
via internet and network. These changes affect school library services, which are required to
provide 24/7 access to information, to support connectivity through library and information
networks, and to update technologies in order to increase interaction and build engagement
among libraries, users and networks (ASLA, 2013; Evans & Alire, 2016; Taylor & Francis
Group, 2014). In Australia, over 3000 primary schools reinvented their tradition libraries,
turning them into iCentres (Hay, 2010b; Hay & Todd, 2010). An iCentre is an information
learning hub comprising high technology facilities that supports students acquiring 21st
century skills. Students have more flexible access to information from within school libraries
and external resources via mobile and handheld technologies (Hay, 2010a).
48
Extensive research has proved that ICT have added value to library services (Hay, 2006;
Lance, 2000c; Rodney, Lance, & Hamilton-Pennel, 2002b). For example, Hay (2006b) found
that school library computers and networks assisted students to acquire relevant
information from both within the school libraries and external resources, which enhanced
students’ information literacy skills. Online service provision from school libraries helped
students to create and share their interested information and knowledge such as blogs, wiki
and podcasting. These library services encouraged students to enhance computer, digital
and media literacies, necessary skills for the 21st century learners (Hay, 2005b).
Lance (2000c) found that students in Pennsylvania increased their reading scores when
schools provided sufficient information technology and integrated information literacy into
the curriculum. This is similar to a further study of Rodney, Lance and Hamilton-Pennel
(2002b), that effective library programs embracing network information technology
impacted student’s academic achievement.
ICT not only values the school libraries in establishing an information learning environment
but also empowers school librarians to work, providing services and activities for teachers
and students efficiently (Australian School Library Association, 2009). Furthermore, library
services and programs integrate with ICT support students to enhance various literacy skills
affecting their ability to achieve academically and to become life-long learners (Hay, 2010b;
Hay & Todd, 2010).
2.4 Role of the school library for impacting student learning
The school library is an essential resource for learning. It provides fundamental materials,
supports learning services and equips an appropriate learning environment for students and
members of school communities (UNESCO/IFLA, 2002). School library activities involve
providing information literacy learning, servicing teacher training, managing computer

networks, operating with public libraries and integrating information technology into the
curriculum (Lance, Rodney and Hamilton-Pennell, 2000a & 2000c). The role of school libraries
is highly associated with student success in broader aspects, such as communication skills,
creative thinking and problem solving, effective school library provision therefore has a
49
significant impact on student performance through funding, collections management,

services and professional expertise (Hughes, 2013; Rodney, Lance, & Hamilton-Pennell,
2002; Lau, 2005; Ranaweera, 2008; Siqueira, 2015).
Since the 1990s, extensive research has helped to confirm the positive impact of libraries on
students’ academic achievement. Most of these studies are from the USA, Canada and the
UK. The majority of these studies investigated the relationship between student attainment
and variables related to school libraries (Hughes, 2013). Student attainment can be
measured through many indicators, including test scores, reading scores and information
literacy; while the variables related to school libraries include qualified teacher-librarian,
supportive school principal, library program and library budget (Kachel & Graduate Students,
2011).
Internationally, most large-scale studies adopt a quantitative method. Lance (2001)
conducted more than seventy-five studies related to the impacts of school libraries on
students’ academic achievement. Many of those studies demonstrated that school libraries
have a strong impact on increasing students’ academic performance. These school library
impacts come from qualified librarians, the quality of library collections, the integration of
information technology in the library and the collaboration between school libraries and
other types of libraries (Lance, 2001).
After the 1990s, the number of studies related to the impacts of library on students’
academic achievement has increased. Most findings illustrated that qualified teacher-
librarians who have full-time status, spent more hours per week, and are dedicated to
collaborating with teachers in instructional plans, in-service training, attending meetings and
teaching students, had a strong impact on students’ academic achievement (Baughman &
Eldringhoff, 1999; Kachel & Graduate Students, 2011; Lance, Rodney & Hamilton-Pennell,
2000a; Rodney et al., 2002).
A qualitative method was adopted in some studies to investigate the nature of the outcome
of a relationship between school libraries, teacher-librarians and students’ academic
50
achievement. For example, Williams, Wavell & Coles (2002) used a systematic review
methodology to examine the evidence from research supporting the view that school
libraries have a positive impact on students’ learning outcomes. In the context of Australian
schooling, Hughes and others examined the impacts of school libraries and teacher-
librarians on student outcomes, using evidence-based practice (Hughes, 2013; Hughes,
Bozorgian & Allan, 2014).
2.4.1 Impacts of school library
As noted, studies related to the impacts of school libraries on student academic

achievement were mostly conducted in USA. In particular, Lance, Hamilton-Pannel and
Rodney ran large-scale studies that investigated school library concepts in many states,
including Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, New Mexico, Oregon and
Pennsylvania (Kachel & Graduate Students, 2011). Most of their studies investigated the
relationship between several impacts of school libraries on students’ test scores, particularly
the reading scores. These studies demonstrated not only that qualified librarians and staff
have a strong impact on students’ academic achievement: other factors such as library
budget, library collections, access to ICT network also have positive impacts on students’
test score.
In the UK, some studies have been related to the impacts of school libraries on student
academic achievement. For example, Williams, Coles and Wavell (2002) studied the
relationship between school libraries, education attainment and learning activities. This
study illustrated that the collaboration among librarians and teachers is essential to
enhance students’ learning. They are considered to be the key persons who can help and
support students to understand the use of information in the school context of the school
library resource centre.
Many studies related to the impacts of school libraries on students’ academic achievement
investigated the variables between student attainment and school libraries such as library
program, library activities, library budget, librarian and library collection. Some studies
51
examined the variables, between students’ outcomes and school libraries that were
controlled by social factors such as socio-economic background, educational background
and school infrastructure components (Lance, Rodney & Hamilton-Pennell, 2005; Lance &
Schwarz, 2012).
Furthermore, some studies sought for the evidence of a specific impact of the school library
on students’ performance or learning outcomes. For example, the studies of Hughes,
Bozorgian and Allan sought the impacts of the school library and the librarian on student
learning outcomes (Hughes, Bozorgian & Allan, 2014). Coker (2015) investigated the impacts
of certified teacher-librarians and library quality on student achievement.
All these studies affirmed that school libraries have significant impacts on students’
academic achievement. The next section reviews the studies that relate to specific impacts
of school libraries on many skills, including general impacts, impacts on reading and impacts
on information literacy.
2.4.1.1 General impacts
In the 1990s in USA, Lance conducted many large-scale studies showing that school libraries
have a positive impact on student academic achievement. This positive impact related to the
quantity and quality of library funding, collections, programs, librarian and staff levels,
librarian’s collaboration with teacher, school library collaboration with other libraries, and
supportive school principals. Such impacts were seen to influence students’ test scores and
learning outcomes (Lance, 1994).
Further findings from the USA and the UK supported Lance’s finding about the impact of
library funding on student academic achievement. In 1999, a study in Massachusetts showed
that high library expenditure per student has a significant impact on student test score
(Baughman & Eldringhoff, 1999). Lance further investigated the impact of library
expenditures on student academic achievement in many studies with other researchers,

such as the Colorado study (Francis, Lance & Lietzau, 2010), the Iowa study (Rodney, Lance &
Hamilton-Pennell, 2002), the Minnesota study (Baxter & Smalley, 2003) and the Pennsylvania
52
study (Lance & Schwarz, 2012). Other research, such as the Texas study (Smith, 2001), the
California study (Acherteman, 2008) and the Massachusetts study (Baughman, 2002), shared
the same findings: that the high expenditure in well-funded libraries has a positive impact on
Lance (1994) found that the library size, the up-to-date resources and the variety in the
collections had the greatest impact on student academic achievement. Further findings in
the United States also indicated that school library activities were associated with high test
scores of secondary students. Similarly, other studies found that larger and more varied
collections were linked to the students’ improvement in library-related skills and study skills
(Achterman, 2008; Burgin, Bracy & Brown, 2003; Rodney, Lance & Hamilton-Pennell, 2002).
Library programs have also been shown to have impact on students’ learning outcomes.
Lance, Rodney, & Hamilton-Pennell (2000 cited in Scholastic Research & Results, 2008) noted
that information literacy programs from librarians increased the frequency of students’ visits
to the library, and that students benefited when they worked on their assignments in the
school library because the library was instrumental in helping students get better scores on
their assignments and thus improve their academic performances (Todd & Kuhlthau, 2005).
The Indiana study also found that an effective school library program plays a role in
increasing student test scores in reading, mathematics and combined results (Lance, Rodney
& Russel, 2007).
Many studies that considered the influence of having a qualified librarian found that
qualified librarians or teacher-librarians with full-time status have a positive impact on
student academic achievement. Such professional librarians provide and support library
services and activities that enhance students’ literacy skills (Ainsworth, 1969; Didier, 1982;
Hale, 1969; Wilson, 1965). A recent study of Washington state school libraries showed that
certified teacher-librarians have a strong impact on students’ academic achievement
because students are taught how to retrieve information through information technology
and library facilities (Coker, 2015).
53
Some studies compared student outcomes between schools with and without qualified
librarians. The results showed that students in schools with professional librarians
performed better in reading than students in schools without professional librarians (Becker,
1970; McConnaha, 1972; McMilen, 1965). Baughman & Eldringhoff (1999) considered that
having a school library is good but not good enough without a teacher-librarian: although
provision of a school library is important, best learning and literacy outcomes occur where a
qualified teacher-librarian manages the school library.
Some studies investigated the effect of having librarians spend more hours per week and
provide flexible library hours. Baughman & Eldringhoff (1999), as well as a later study from
Illinois (Lance, Rodney, & Hamilton-Pennell, 2005), revealed that more open hours and
flexible scheduling hours per week directly increased reading and writing scores. Many
studies such as those in California, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Massachusetts and North Carolina,
also affirmed that service hours influence student academic achievement (Acherteman,
2008; Baumbach, 2002; Baughman, 2002; Burgin, Bracy & Brown, 2003; Lance, Rodney &
Schwarz, 2009).
Having a supportive school principal is another significant factor for libraries and teacher
librarians. The key finding of the Indiana study showed that strong school libraries evolved
with principals who believed that the school library has a high value in teaching and learning
(Lance, Rodney & Russell, 2007). Hughes (2013) shows significant evidence in an Australian
study that school principals play a significant role in supporting libraries and teacher-
librarians, particularly those school principals who, realising that the library is essential for
developing students’ literacy and that librarians help increase students’ literacy outcome,
are aware of the need for library funding, staffing and resources.
Collaboration between librarians and teachers has a significant impact on student

performance. Williams, Coles and Wavell (2002) showed that dedicated time for
collaborating with teachers and students in the UK primary schools influenced students’
academic performance, especially in reading literacy. Librarians collaborated with teachers
towards identifying learning and teaching resources. Moreover, librarians guided library
54
instruction and trained students in order to develop their information literacy: the ability to
recognise their information needs, to locate and retrieve information, and to analyse and
synthesise the information obtained (Tiefel, 1995 cited in Chen & Tsai, 2012). Many studies
also found that librarians and staff who collaborated with teachers in instructional plans, in-
service training, attending meetings and teaching students had a significant impact on
student performances (Baughman & Eldringhoff, 1999; Kachel & Graduate Students, 2011;
Lance, Rodney & Hamilton-Pennell, 2000a; Rodney et al., 2002).
Two interesting studies explored school library collaboration with outside sources. Lance,
et.al (2000c) investigated the connection between student academic achievement and
cooperation between school libraries and public libraries in Pennsylvania; Heeks (2000)
conducted equivalent studies in the UK. Findings in both studies were that students
enhanced their reading scores when the school libraries provided online access, shared
catalogues from the State library and cooperated with reading activities.
Findings from these previous studies can be used to summarise the following positive
impacts of school library on students’ academic achievement:
(1) high library expenditure per student

(2) up-to-date resources and varied collections
(3) effective library programs

(4) qualified librarian, teacher librarians and staff
(5) flexible library hours
(6) supportive school principal
(7) collaboration between librarians and teachers
(8) collaboration between school libraries and other libraries
The benefits of these capacities influence the frequency of students’ visits, help students on
their homework and help increase students’ learning skills. With these benefits, students
tend to improve those reading, writing and information literacy skills that are associated
with achieving high test scores in reading, writing and combined studies.
55
2.4.1.2 Impacts on reading
School libraries are an essential resource that can provide and encourage students to
development reading and literacy capabilities (Siqueira, 2015). Reading and literacy
capabilities not only develop the abilities to read and communicate but also engage with the
enjoyment of reading, which not only benefits students’ academic achievement but also
engages them through personal enjoyment and enrichment (IFLA, 2015).
Numerous studies investigated the relationship between several aspects of school libraries
and student reading scores, with similar results. Students increased their reading scores
when school library programs were fully developed (Lance, et al., 2000a; Lance et al., 2000b;
Todd & Kuhlthau, 2005), when schools hired full-time and qualified librarians (Baughman,
2000; Lance, Rodney & Hamilton-Pennell, 2000, 2002, 2005), when teacher-librarians
collaborated with teachers (Lance, et al, 2000; Rodney, Lance, & Hamilton-Pennell, 2002;
Smith, 2001) and when instructional programs were provided for students (Lance, et al.,
2000).
For example, Colorado studies highlighted the impact of school libraries on students’
reading ability. The Colorado studies, investigated by Lance and others three times (1992,
2000 and 2010) showed that the libraries helped to close the achievement gap in students
with unsatisfactory Colorado Student Assessment Program scores (CSAP). The factors that
helped to increase the CSAP scores included having full-time endorsed librarians, larger
collections, networked online resources and heavier library use (Francis, Lance & Lietzau,
2010).
In 2001, Smith investigated the relationship between library media programs and the
students’ reading scores in the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS). The finding
showed that the librarians who spent more time meeting with teachers and principals could
help students to have higher reading scores. The collaboration between these stakeholders
benefits curriculum planning, the instructional program, and team teaching (Smith, 2001).
Similarly, the Iowa study found that collaboration between library media specialists and
56
classroom teachers in planning and teaching has a significant influence on students’ reading
scores (Rodney, Lance, & Hamilton-Pennell, 2002).
School libraries provide reading materials and motivate students to have a reading
engagement (Lonsdale, 2003). Brozo, Shiel and Topping (2007) showed that the components
of reading engagement involve the diversity of reading, the frequency of leisure reading and
the attitude toward reading. The results of this study indicated that students who enjoy
reading have stronger reading skills that help improve their vocabulary and comprehension
skills.
The Ontario Library Association (2006) focused on the factor of reading enjoyment in
improving student learning outcomes. The finding showed that the reading enjoyment of
students correlated with the existence of teacher-librarians. Subsequently, students who had
developed reading enjoyment achieved higher reading scores on the provincial test than
were achieved by students in schools without qualified librarians.
These findings revealed the association between students and the reading skills that are
indicated through many test scores. Having professional staff or a qualified librarian was a
significant factor that enabled school libraries to have a positive impact on student’s reading
scores because the professional staff involved with teaching and learning, such as the
collaboration with teachers in planning, providing instructional programs to teachers, and
teaching information literacy skills to students.
2.4.1.3 Impacts on information literacy
School libraries and librarians are significant resources that contribute to students’
information literacy (Hughes, 2013). Information literacy, the ability to locate, evaluate, and
use information, is a necessary skill for students in the 21st century (Loertscher, 2000).
Information literacy skills not only empower students’ academic performance but also help
them to develop critical thinking and to become life-long learners (Ranaweera, 2008). Bruce
(1997) indicated that library skills influence and correlate with information literacy. Many
57
other studies have shown that school libraries have a positive impact on students’
information literacy through instructional programs from librarians and staff.
For example, the Pennsylvania study found a correlation between school library staff
activities and integrating information literacy. The staff activities included with planning and
teaching cooperatively with teachers, providing in-service training to teachers and holding
meeting with principals and committees. These activities affected students’ information
literacy and their learning outcomes. The students know how to access and use varied
resources effectively through information technology (Lance, Rodney, & Hamilton-Pennell,
2000b).
Further study by Lance and others (2005) found that library activities provided by a higher
level of librarian staffing influenced students’ information literacy in Alaskan schools
because the librarians provided information literacy instruction to the students. The results
also showed that students achieved high test scores in schools that provided more frequent
information literacy instruction. Similarly, in a study in New Jersey, the findings showed that
a large amount of collaboration between librarians and teachers has an impact on

developing students’ information literacy. The concept of students’ information literacy in
New Jersey schools includes the abilities of knowing about the school library, accessing
information efficiently and effectively, knowing how to find, evaluate, select and use
appropriate sources, and using information technology responsibly and ethically (Todd,
Gordon, & Lu, 2010, 2011).
Trebbe’s study (2015) also showed that school library programs helped develop information
literacy skills. Students of Western High school, Massachusetts claimed that the library
program benefited them by developing their awareness related to the ethical use of
information. The educators who participated in the study noted that school library programs
affected students’ information literacy when the school had an effective collaboration
among teachers and teacher-librarians in developing lesson plans, performance tasks and
assessment.
58
School libraries and librarians help develop students’ information literacy skills by providing
information literacy instruction, services and activities that affect their learning outcomes.
Effective information literacy instruction comes from teacher-librarians but needs the
collaborative partnership that also includes teachers and school members.
2.4.2 Impacts of librarians or teacher-librarians
School librarians play a significant role in facilitating and assisting student learning and
knowledge construction (Todd, 2005a, 2005b). Lance, Rodney, & Hamilton-Pennell (2000, p.
11) stated that “The school librarian is in a unique position to help students develop the
information literacy skills which will enable them to achieve standards”. In particular, full-
time, certified librarians have more potential for administrating effective school libraries
that provide library services and activities than do the schools without full-time, certified
librarians (Todd, Gordon & Lu, 2011).
Research clearly shows that librarians and teacher-librarians have a strong impact on
students’ academic achievement through the provision of school library programs,
collaboration with principals and teachers in planning and teaching, instructional programs
in library information skills, and the provision of in-service training for teachers
(Cheunwattana, 1999; Church, 2007; Hughes, 2013; Lance, Rodney & Hamilton-
Pennell,2000a, 2000b; Leowarin, 2010; Siltragool, 2007; Sungsri, 2009; Thanakulkit, 2005).
For instance, one Canadian study indicated that qualified teacher-librarians assisted
students to perform well on achievement tests for reading comprehension because the
librarians provided a strong library program and collaborated with teachers in planning and
teaching (Asselin, Branch, & Oberg (Eds.), 2003). A strong library program occurs with full-
time certified librarians providing and facilitating large and robust collections, flexible library
access and information literacy skills instruction for students (Asselin, 1999; Krashen, 2009).
Many studies cited so far point particularly to the impact of collaboration between librarians
and teachers, in general and on both reading and information literacy and students’ learning
outcomes (Rodney, Lance, et al., 2000; Rodney, Lance, & Hamilton-Pennell, 2002; Smith,
59
2001; Williams, Coles, & Wavell, 2001). Their findings have asserted that students enhanced
their scores when librarians dedicated more hours meeting with principals and teachers to
collaborate on curriculum planning, the instructional program and team teaching.
The New Jersey study investigated the fundamental elements of school libraries and found
that qualified librarians helped improve student learning in terms of reading, information
literacy, computer and media literacy. These improvements were associated with students’
learning outcomes (Todd, Gordon, & Lu, 2011). Walker (2005) explained that qualified
librarians are knowledgeable about the way to support students’ reading development
through libraries. Similarly, other findings showed that qualified librarians have motivated
students to enjoy reading and to read more, which has enhanced their reading test scores
(Coatney, 2009; Edmunds & Bauserman, 2006).
Coatney (2009) also demonstrated that school librarians are in a unique position to support
the instructional literacy programs for school communities. Many studies show that school
librarians not only help students to learn how to use information effectively but also provide
in-service training to help teachers and staff use library resources more effectively in their
work with students.
2.5 Role of rural school libraries: impact on student learning
Rural school libraries are important for giving access to learning materials: printed, as well as
audio and electronic media (Ontario Library Associations, 2006). Rural school libraries help
equalise opportunities for the educational achievement for students by broadening readers’
limited access to reading resources and literacy support in the home environment of many
rural students. They especially support students of poor, unemployed, low-income families
living in rural areas, where their families are unable to provide learning resources,
knowledge and abilities to support an information-rich environment, or even a print-rich
environment for their children (Hay & Todd, 2010).
A print-rich environment at home is a primary source of literacy experiences for children
(Prior & Gerard, 2004). Print-rich environments feature many forms of printed materials,
60
such as books, signs, and poems (Kadlic & Lesiak, 2003). Such environments help children to
develop and enhance their literacy by making a connection between informal literacy
experiences at home and formal literacy experiences at school (Prior, 2009). A longitudinal
study of African-American children from low income families in small southern cities in the
USA showed that a home literacy environment is a consistent and strong predictor of
children’s later language and literacy skills (Roberts, Jurgens, & Burchinal, 2005). Many
studies have identified that a child’s home learning environment is a significant aspect
affecting the development and acquisition of reading and writing ability (Ngorosho, 2011).
Parents in low income families are often unable to provide a print-rich environment, so
children from low socioeconomic status are more likely to have low literacy skills and
experiences (Sclafani, 2004). Therefore, the print-rich environments provided by classrooms
and school libraries offer valuable resources in terms of practicing literacy behaviour and
language (Roskos & Neuman, 1994). The print-rich environments lead students to have good
progress in vocabulary growth, spelling and writing (Lonsdale, 2003). School libraries also
help remove barriers and constraints to learning with information technology, online
databases and the internet (Hay & Todd, 2010). Providing and supporting an information-rich
learning environment is essential to “educate students for living and learning in an
information-rich technological world” (Kuhlthau, 2001, p.3).
An information-rich environment provides information in any format that is useable for
learning. Libraries offer information-rich environments in order to support learning,
recreation and entertainment purposes (Neuman, 2011). In the 21st century, students need a
variety of learning materials and resources, such as printed materials, digital media and
digital devices. Students use information technology as a tool to retrieve a variety of reading
and other information resources delivered digitally (O’Connell, 2012). Students not only
develop their abilities to read but also to use many forms of literacy including information,
digital, media, technology and computer. Many school libraries have shifted their roles to
those of information agents who support and give opportunities for children to learn
61
independently by providing access to information resources and engaging students to

construct their own knowledge (Hay & Todd, 2010).
From this point of view, school libraries are important resources. School libraries are not
only the places that facilitate print-rich environments; they also provide an information-rich
environment, which helps students to develop their academic performance and literacy (Hay
& Todd, 2010).
The evidence from rural school libraries in Tanzania showed that rural parents have
difficulty in providing an information-rich environment or even a print-rich environment at
home due to their low socioeconomic status. In rural Tanzania, school and village libraries
are valuable places for rural students, providing access to reading resources in both printed
collections and electronic resources for which students can continue reading at home.
Moreover, activities from the school libraries, such as children’s book projects, encourage
the students to read and write. The strengthening of school libraries gives a clear value to
enhancing literacy skills and has a positive impact in helping students learn (Ngorosho,
2011).
Despite the fact that disadvantaged students lack role models for being enthusiastic and
engaged readers because their parental education backgrounds are at very low levels and
they lack reading materials at home, students are provided an opportunity to develop a
reading habit and to enjoy reading in their school libraries (OECD, 2010). The reading habits
of rural students thus have an impact on their academic achievement. In particular, students
from the lowest socio-economic backgrounds who have interest in reading are able to
achieve higher reading scores and learn more effectively than students who come from
advantaged family backgrounds (OECD, 2010).
Another study in two rural Uganda schools provided important evidence that students who
studied in rural schools with libraries embraced a reading culture. Students were
encouraged to read and learn in libraries during leisure time. The study indicated that
students benefited from using the space and materials from school libraries and the amount
62
of leisure reading hours impacted students’ performances (Dent, 2006). Dent also noted that
there were very few studies related to the impact of rural school libraries on student
academic achievement in Sub-Saharan Africa and worldwide. Some studies focused on the
impacts of rural village libraries on students’ academic achievement because many rural
schools use rural village libraries or rural community libraries, public libraries and joint-use
libraries instead of school libraries due to limited budget, infrastructure and facilities, as in
China, Israel, Thailand and some countries in Africa (Dent, 2012; Liu, 2008).
In spite of the limited number of studies about the impacts of rural school libraries on
students’ academic achievement, the evidence from existing studies suggests that rural
school libraries are valuable places for rural students. Rural school libraries provide
opportunities for rural students to access learning resources that develop reading culture,
help learning and enhance literacy skills. Even though rural school libraries are in poor
condition, rural students can acquire knowledge and enhance their academic performance
with the support of school librarians or teacher librarians. Moreover, students who are in
rural school libraries that provide access to electronic and digital resources not only increase
their reading skills but also enhance their information technology skills, benefiting them as
effective 21st century learners.
2.6 Rural school library development in international context
Students with low socioeconomic status generally have little chance to access print-rich and
information-rich environments at home. Rural school libraries can be valuable places that
provide a learning environment which helps rural students to have knowledge progression
(Duke, 2000 & McQuillan, 1998 cited in Johnson, 2012; Krashen, 2004). However, a rural
library can play its role effectively only if the library is well-structured and well-planned
(Iwhiwhu, 2008).
Internationally, rural school libraries generally have poor conditions (Uhegbu, 2001). Rural
school libraries face many problems, such as lack of financing, librarians or academically
trained staff, materials, infrastructure and technology. Moreover, the libraries that face the
63
most unique challenges are often rural small school libraries (Gillespie, 2008). Rural schools
seek solutions to increase their libraries’ qualities in many ways such as establishing joint-
use libraries, community libraries, and requesting the assistance of non-government
organisations, private groups, charity organisations and universities (Coker, 2015;
Fitzgibbons, 2000; Dent, Goodman & Kevane, 2014; Liu, 2005; Plumber, 2015; Marie, 2007;
Rocket & Win, 2014).
Developed countries such as the USA and Australiastill face challenges in developing
effective libraries in rural areas (Coker, 2015; Fitzgibbons, 2000; Marie, 2007). Coker (2015)
found that the qualities of school libraries of Washington State public schools are significant
lower in rural areas. Schools in the Illinois community lack full-time librarians (Fitzgibbons,
2000). Rural school libraries in Australia have faced several challenges such as lack of funds,
outdated collections and lack of full-time teacher-librarians (Robert, 2010)
The USA and Australia have increased the quality of rural school libraries by successfully
using joint-use libraries (Mudd & Heavens, 2009). Joint-use libraries are collaborations
between public and school libraries to maximise the use of resources, increase the diversity
of collections, reduce costs and increase efficiency. Such small-scale joint-use facilities were
found to be effective, especially in rural communities (Marie, 2007). In California, the asset-
based community development model was developed to increase the quality of rural and
small libraries through improving library activities based on the capacities, skills and asset of
a community (Hildreth, 2007). As noted earlier, in schools in Illinois that lacked a full-time
librarian, the library’s youth service department helped to enhance students’ reading habit
and literacy skill by providing full-time staff (Fitzgibbons, 2000).
South Australia has the most effective operation of school community libraries. It has a
memorandum of agreement, partnership agreement and handbook of school community

libraries, all strongly supported by the State government (The Local Government
Association, 2014). In 2012, South Australia developed a partnership model to improve the
library services for the school community libraries (KPPM Organization strategists, 2012).
Forty-four community libraries in South Australia were proven to be successful in using joint-
64
use libraries by providing access to a greater number of library resources on a small budget,
and by increasing and enhancing students and public awareness in current education
practice (Rishworth & Australia Parliament House of Representatives Standing Committee
on Education and Employment, 2011).
In developing countries, such as Thailand, the funding of small school libraries depends on
the number of students. Some rural schools do not have a librarian. Consequently, libraries
are managed by a teacher or school principal who lacks library management knowledge,
which affects library programs, such as library instruction, guided reading and classroom
libraries (Butterfly Book House, 2008; Cheunwattana, 1999; MGR online, 2006; Pradit, 2006;
Sangkharat, 2013; TK park, 2011). Thailand has also used joint-use libraries or school public
libraries to increase the quality of rural school libraries, but most schools using those
libraries are non-formal schools.
Furthermore, rural school libraries in Thailand increase the libraries’ quality by private
donations, non-government organisations, charity organisations and universities (Dent,
Goodman & Kevane, 2014; Liu, 2005; Plumber, 2015; Rocket & Win, 2014). For example,
support from public and private organisations included providing money and education
materials, establishing library building, and supporting libraries’ services and activities. Some
organisations have supported rural libraries continuously, while others have undertaken
short-term projects (Krolak, 2005).
The problems of school libraries in another developing country, Nepal, include lack of
management, budget constraints, inadequate resources and facilities, and a lack of trained
and skilled staff. In terms of management, an absence of government policy to implement,
monitor and evaluate library programs in schools affects library school budgets because an
allocated budget does not cover library expenses. Schools then lack the ability to obtain
library infrastructure and resources. Many school libraries face poor and outdated
collections and insufficient funds to recruit a professional librarian or trained staff, which
influences proper management. Moreover, principals, teachers, parents and students lack
65
concern about the importance of school libraries. These problems in Nepal are an obstacle
to achieving an effective library (Siwakoti, 2009).
However, the Jhuwani community library is an example of a successful library in Nepal. This
library is supported by charitable organisations administrated by a library management

committee and subcommittees. The Jhuwani library has worked with many local and
national partners. With the support of so many partners, the library not only supports a
place to read but also provides essential facilities for local people, such as a mobile
telecommunication tower and ambulance. The library makes a sustainable contribution and
becomes “an umbrella of information, a social development organisation and store house of
knowledge and information” for local people (Shrestha, 2013, p. 8-9).
The Jhuwani community library provides services for 35,000 people in the Central
Development Region, Narayani Zone and Chitwan District in Nepal, in collaboration with
government and non-government partners. The library management committee consists of
15 members who work voluntarily. The committees and subcommittees come from six
divisions: Women, Agriculture & Livelihood, ICT, Education, Children and Community
Solutions (Shrestha, 2013).
School libraries do not exist in primary schools in Bangladesh. Since 1986, there have been
some libraries in secondary schools, but these are mostly unorganised. Library collections
are kept locked on shelves, without any classification system. Moreover, these schools lack
professional librarians or staff to manage the libraries. The government does not take any
action on school library establishment and development, so a few non-government
organisations provide funds and learning materials, and arrange librarianship training
programmes for teachers in the Rural School Library Enrichment Programme. Through this
programme, the amount of reading materials in 300 rural schools has increased. There are
approximately 700-800 books for each school. Teachers are trained to manage school
libraries and have to report on the activities’ progress every three months (Munshi, 2005).
66
In another region of the developing world, Africa, rural community libraries or rural village
libraries were created to serve both public and school library purposes because of a lack of
school libraries and a low level of literacy of local people. Therefore, rural community
libraries can help develop a reading culture for students and local communities. Rural
community libraries in Africa are important places that provide not only a great number of
books, reading programmes and activities but also self-published books in English and native
languages for children and adults (Goodman, Kevane, & Dent, 2014).
A study in Africa affirmed that rural village libraries support student reading and have a
positive impact on students’ academic achievement (Dent, Goodman, & Kevane, 2014). The
Kitengesa community library and other village libraries in Ghana, Uganda and Burkina Faso
are examples of libraries that play an active role in increasing access to opportunities in
order to increase the learning, reading and literacy skills of local people (Dent, Goodman &
Kevane, 2014; Kevane & Sissao, 2008).
To sum up, rural school libraries in both developed and developing countries are often
confronted with many problems that form barriers to their becoming effective libraries. In
particular, in a developing country nation like Thailand, in spite of insufficient infrastructure,

librarians and materials, there are some strategies available for rural school libraries to
overcome the problems and to organise effectively, such as using joint-use libraries. Many
countries gain support making effective libraries from non-government organisations,
private groups, charity organisations and universities. Some programs are sustainable
developments, while others are short-term. Issues of school libraries in worldwide might be
similar, but the situation and challenges of school libraries in each country are often
different. However, the issues for all rural libraries are challenging and urgently need a
sustainable solution to develop and maintain their qualities as effective school libraries in
which the significant outcome of an effective school library correlates with school quality
and student accomplishment.
67
2.7 Student academic achievement in rural areas
This section first provides a brief overview of students’ academic achievement in rural areas
in the international context. The review then points out the current situation of students’
academic achievement in rural areas of Thailand.
2.7.1 Overview and student academic achievement in rural areas
Achievement is the determination level of understanding in subjects from surface to in-
depth understanding, level of successful attainment in each subject and the perspective of
learning improvement. Student achievement does not exist in isolation from every facet of
education (Hattie & Anderman, 2013). It is a multifaceted construct that considers various
criteria impacting student academic achievement, such as background, quality of school,

teachers and staff, and learning environment (Cunningham, 2012). Internationally, academic
achievement of students is measured through students’ grade and standardised test scores
(Bates, Shifflet, & Lin, 2013). Even though there are many criteria to measure student
academic achievement, the objective of measuring academic success is to indicate students’
learning outcomes (Joshi & Srivastava, 2009).
Raising student achievement is the most important aspect of educational progress at any
level (Hattie & Anderman, 2013). Improving the quality of education is a priority objective of
many countries. An effective education is a significant factor that contributes to students’
academic success and their success in the future. Moreover, an effective education can
eradicate illiteracy and poverty, which benefits the individual, the social outcomes and the
countries’ development (Barrett et al., 1991).
Thus, there is a great deal of valuable evidence about the predictors of academic
achievement and the various influences on students’ academic achievement. Bates, Shifflet,
and Lin (2013) stated that the two main factors affecting student academic achievement are
individual factors and contextual factors. Individual factors comprise intelligence and
motivation, while contextual factors include family, socioeconomic status, community and
school (Bates, Shifflet, & Lin, 2013). Even though various aspects affect students’ academic
68
achievement, significant evidence from many studies illustrates how low-achieving students
are associated with repeating grades and dropping out of school (Bates, Shifflet & Lin, 2013;
Tyler& Lofstrom, 2009; UNESCO, 2012).
The characteristics of poor academic performance in school include “deficits in specific
capabilities, lack of the development of reading skills, lack of emotional freedom to learn,
and lack of motivation” (Blai, 1975, p. 6). Students who drop out leave school before they
reach a level of sustainable literacy in compulsory education (Nicaise, Tonguthai, & Fripont,
2000).
The problems of students who are unable to graduate are associated with poverty, family
issues, adaptation to study and migration. Student background, family background and
quality of school are three main factors causing school dropouts, which are very likely to
happen in rural areas. Meanwhile, low family income is another major cause of dropout,
especially when students leave school to become child labour or to work at home to earn
money for their family. Moreover, low levels of parent education impact on promoting
academic achievement (Rumberger, 2001). Lastly, the poor quality of schooling, such as
distance to school, inadequate facilities, overcrowded classrooms, and teacher absenteeism,

affect the quality of learning and teaching (Colclough, et al., 2000).
Low academic achievement is usually related to disadvantaged students living in rural areas
(Bloom, 1982; Carroll, 1989; UNESCO, 2015). UNESCO (2012) revealed that the highest
numbers of students who demonstrate low academic performance are in sub-Saharan
Africa, and in South and West Asia. Sub-Saharan Africa has the highest number of primary
education repeaters, while South and West Asia have the highest number of enrolled
students who drop out before graduating (UNESCO, 2012). Hunt (2008) has shown other
strong evidence from many studies that rural areas experience higher rates of repetition
and early school leaving, due to obstacles of travel to school, difficult home environment
and lack of schooling resources and facilities.
69
Many countries in Africa, such as Burkina Faso, Uganda and Tanzania, have a small number
of state schools in outer districts. Students who live in rural areas far away from schools
suffer from traveling a long way each day. Rural parents are more likely to withdraw
students earlier from primary education because of transport difficulties, as the distances
are too great for younger children. Moreover, girls’ parents are afraid of sexual harassment
that will happen during travel to school (Boyle et al, 2002; Mfum-Mensah, 2002; Nekatibeb,
2002; Porteus et al, 2000 cited in Hunt, 2008).
The greater distance to school not only affects rural students but also affects teachers.
Alcazar et al. (2006) conducted research about teacher absence in Peru. The study found that
teacher absence occurred in poor and rural communities because of transport difficulties
and working in poor conditions. Consequently, rural schools are more likely to lack teachers,
which influences the quality of teaching and learning (Alcázar, Rogers, Chaudhury, Hammer
Kremer, & Muralidharan, 2006; Bloom, 1982; Boelens, Boekhorst, & Mangale, 2012; Carroll;
1971; Lincharearn, Ardwichai & Chanin, 2009).
In rural areas, household contexts are associated with other factors, such as financial
circumstances and the parental education background, which influence students’ academic
achievement (Hunt, 2008). Normally, most households in rural areas are poor. Rural parents
have low incomes, which affect rural students. For example, rural parents in Malawi and
Ethiopia have difficulties paying schooling costs, such as school fees, exercise books and
uniforms. Specifically, when parents are faced with an income crisis, rural parents pressure
their children to work. Therefore, rural children are more likely combine work with school.
This problem affects students’ academic achievement and leads them to drop out of schools
(Rose & Al‐Samarrai, 2001).
Moreover, rural students whose parents are less educated or uneducated are less likely to
receive education support, and lack role models in higher education (Hunt, 2008). For
example, in China, Bangladesh, Uganda and Nepal, rural parents lack understanding of the
benefit of schooling. Rural parents give priority to employment above education because
they believe that jobs can eliminate economic difficulties, assist their economic survival and
70
sustain their family (Boyle et al., 2002). Similarly, the perception of rural parents related to
education in Ghana is that education is not relevant to future prospects (Pryor & Amphiah,
2003).
Lack of schooling resources and facilities is another problem influencing students’
performances. Schooling resources involve schooling systems, human resources and in-
school resources (Hunt, 2008). For example, Turkey has faced difficulty in improving the
quality of education in rural areas. The poor schooling system affects whether rural schools
achieve the national standard. Moreover, rural schools face a shortage of teachers as well as
insufficient school buildings, libraries, laboratory equipment and computers. These
problems, which make the learning environment unsafe and less able to motivate students’
learning, affect students’ academic achievement (Engin-Demir & Taneri, 2011). These
situations happen in rural areas in many countries, such as South Africa, Peru, India and
Thailand (Bertelsmann Stiftung, 2014; Hite, 2006; Hunt, 2008; Gardiner, 2008).
2.7.2 Thai students’ academic achievement in rural areas
In Thailand, most schools in rural areas are small schools that have fewer than 120 students
(Pithiyanuwat, 2005 cited in Yonemura, 2007). In 2014, fifty percent of 31,116 schools under
the supervision of the Office of the Basic Education Commission were small schools.
Approximately one million students were then enrolled in those small schools
(Wannagatesiri, Nukultham, Kruea-In, & Thongperm, 2014). Significant evidence from the
National Institute of Educational Testing Service has shown that the proficiency of Thai rural
students is at a very low level (The National Institute of Educational Testing Service, 2009).
The ordinary national educational test (O-Net) is used to measure the proficiency of Thai
students in grade six, nine and twelve. The 2012 O-Net illustrates that grade six students
have significantly low test scores. The average scores are less than fifty percent in six out of
eight major subjects including Thai language, Mathematics, Science, Social Science/Region/
Culture, Foreign language, and Art. Moreover, significant evidence shows that students in
71
small schools have the lowest average scores comparing to those in other schools (The
National Institute of Educational Testing Service, 2009).
Furthermore, Thailand’s educational system also measures educational quality through the
Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). PISA testing is used to evaluate the
academic performance of 15-year-old school students in over seventy participating countries
every three years (PISA, 2014). This test not only measures the students’ academic
performances but also reflects the performance of teachers, schools and education systems
(Saengpassa & Khaopa, 2012). The average scores of Thai students are at the top half of the
bottom 25 percent: the PISA 2012 score ranking of Thailand is at number 50 out of 65 (OECD,
2014).
The results of the PISA test in 2012 indicated serious inequalities between urban and rural
students in Thailand (Fry, 2013). For example, in 2012 students in the most advantaged
group had an average reading score that was higher than the most socio-economically
disadvantaged groups. The gap between scores is 142 points (Programme for International
Student Assessment, Thailand & the Institute for the Promotion of Teaching Science and
Technology, 2014). These scores indicate that students in the most advantaged group have a
reading performance that is more than four school years ahead of most disadvantaged
group (Saiyasombat & Siam voices, 2012).
During the last decade, Thai student O-Net and PISA scores have declined. The results reflect
the quality of Thai education, specifically the quality of teachers (National Institute of
Educational Testing Service, 2013). Over recent decades, the Thai government has
attempted to improve the quality of education system through educational reforms. After
two sets of reforms, the problems of small school quality still remain (National institute of
educational testing service, 2013).
Poverty is a major cause affecting the gaps in PISA achievement (Draper, 2014). Socio-
economic background influences students’ academic performance. Students who live in
disadvantaged areas face many problems including student background, family background
72
and quality of school (Fry, 2013). A significant number of disadvantaged students in small
schools come from poor families and migrant families (Symaco, 2013). Despite the
government supporting free education for students for fifteen years, poor families still
struggle to pay for other schooling costs, including transport and hidden fees such as
school electricity bills, air conditioning fees, computer class fees and foreign tutor fees
(Intathep, 2012; Nicaise, Tonguthai & Fripont, 2000). Therefore, low income family students
are more likely to work after school hours or to leave school to be child labourers or helping
hands on the parents’ farm (Watkin, 1999 cited in Nicaise, Tonguthai & Fripont, 2000).
Most rural Thai students lack the inspiration to study in higher education and lack role
models in their local communities (Nicaise, Tonguthai & Fripont, 2000). Those rural parents
and students who strongly believe that education is not necessary for them, and who get a
job rather than studying further, do not seem to appreciate or understand the importance
of achieving higher education (Lincharearn, Ardwichai, & Chanin, 2009). Conversely, some
students want to study at a higher level, but the obstacles from poverty force them to drop
out of school and to be child labourers or help their parents to earn more income.
Moreover, early marriage is more likely to happen among hill tribe children in Northern
Thailand and Muslim children in Southern Thailand. Thus, the academic performances of
rural students are at a low level because of low educational expectation, lack of parental
encouragement and high frequency of absenteeism (Lockheed, Fuller & Nyirongo, 1989).
Research about causes of low O-Net scores of grade 6 and grade 12 students in Thailand
indicates that family background is a significant factor affecting students’ academic
achievement. Students of poor, unemployed, low-income families who live in rural areas, in
particular, have less opportunity to study in cram schools and lack adequate parental care or
have no parental care. For example, a rural small school student in Phitsanulok province
reveals that his parents work in Bangkok and he lives with his grandmother, who cannot
teach or give any advice on his assignments. Moreover, rural school teachers cannot provide
extra time to teach students after school hours because they have to go home to the city,
far away from the school. Generally, those rural students cannot afford to study in tutorial
schools in the city. Another student lives with his seventy-year-old grandfather because his
73
parents died. He cannot concentrate well on his study because he has to earn money to
support his grandfather and himself (Lincharearn, Ardwichai, & Chanin, 2009).
Quality of school is an important factor influencing rural students’ academic achievement.
Low performing schools are more likely to be in rural areas (Lounkaew, 2013). Twenty
percent of small schools are not able to pass the minimum quality requirement of Quality
Assurance in Basic Education in Thailand (ONESQA, 2008). Generally, small schools in
Thailand face limited funding, personnel, resources and materials (Buaraphan, 2013). In the
same vein, Fry (2013) points out that schools in rural areas lack equity in resource allocation,
lack a strong reading culture and lack expenditure on research and development. These
critiques also corroborate Yonemura’s report (2007) that small schools have a shortage of
resources and an inefficiency in administration.
For instance, the government budget allocated to small schools depends on the number of
students. The teacher–student ratio in a small school is from 1:8 to 1:11, while other schools’
ratio is 1:25 (Yonemura, 2007). Some small schools with 40 students have only two teachers
to teach six grades, being multigrade-teachers (Paichayontvijit, 2014). Moreover, teachers
not only teach many grades but also have to work on extra tasks (Wannagatesiri,
Nukultham, Kruea-In, & Thongperm, 2014).
In the same manner, Samakoses (2013) found that an insufficient number of rural teachers
who were multi-grade teachers were teaching several subjects for which they were
unqualified. Moreover, they were required to work on extra tasks, such as secretary, teacher
librarian and financial reports (Paichayontvijit, 2014; Thailand Development Research
Institute, 2015; SEAMEO Secretariat, 2001; Wannagatesiri, Nukultham, Kruea-In, &
Thongperm, 2014; Yonemura, 2007).
Low quality unqualified teachers and the shortage of teachers affect students’
performances. Teachers in rural small public school teach many subjects for which they are
not qualified (Paichayontvijit, 2014; Thailand Development Research Institute, 2015;
Thongperm, 2014; SEAMEO Secretariat, 2001). In particular, rural small public primary
74
schools lack qualified teachers in foreign languages (primarily English), mathematics and
sciences (Thongperm, 2014; Wannagatesiri, Nukultham, Kruea-In). Moreover, these schools
are faced with a shortage of teachers due to poor conditions of living, teaching materials
and resources, and hard work (Yonemura, 2007).
In 2014, the Office of the Education Council set the standard ratio for a small school at 1:16,
which seems to be good for teaching and learning. Lowering class sizes may benefit students
as they would receive more individualised attention and would interact spontaneously with
teachers in the classroom. However, the small ratio does not guarantee the school’s
effectiveness because it depends on many factors, such as the class size, quality of teachers,
curriculum, and leadership of schools, and not just the teacher–student ratio (Kornfeld,
2010). Moreover, the Office of Basic Education Commission revealed that lowering class
sizes raised per-student costs (OBEC, 2007).
Some schools in rural areas used Distance Learning Television (DLTV) and Teacher Television
(Teacher TV) to solve the problems of insufficient teachers and the lack of qualified teachers
(Khaopa, 2011; Vajarodaya, 2007). The DLTV, the project of His Majesty King Bhumibol
Adulyadej, aims to close the inequality gap in education and to enhance the quality of rural
schools in Thailand (Khaopa, 2011; Saengpassa, 2016; Vajarodaya, 2007). The DLTV includes
15 educational channels broadcasting from the Wang Klaikangwon Palace School, Hua-Hin. It
broadcasts through the THAICOM satellite to approximately 17,000 schools across the
country.
Teacher TV, the project of the Office of the Higher Education Commission (OHEC), aims to
provide effective learning material and resource to teachers and to increase the quality of
teaching. Burapa University is responsible for the Teacher TV administration. Teacher TV
broadcasts over 3,000 lessons via satellite and website, and teachers can interact with
teacher communities through webboard. Teachers who cannot access through the internet
can ask for the free recorded CD (Yamkasikorn, 2010). Hoxsuwan (2012) investigated the
channels of information affecting the inspiration for Thai teacher teaching: the results
75
indicated that Teacher TV was the most interesting channel, the lessons were easy to
understand, and the programs gave inspiration for teachers to develop their own teaching.
Thai rural students’ low academic performances are caused by many aspects. Most rural
students are influenced by their socio-economic background, related to students’ abilities
and family background. Moreover, the poor quality of rural schools significantly affects
students’ academic performances because of the limitations of budget, personnel, resources
and materials. According to these limitation problems, rural students study in inappropriate
learning environments that cannot support and motivate them toward academic
achievement. Consequently, the proficiency of Thai rural students leads them to go to work
instead of pursuing higher education. Thus, low academic achievement affects rural students
well into their future.
The low proficiency of Thai rural students is an important factor influencing overall Thai
learning performances, which are at such a low level. This low proficiency appears to reflect
the failure of the Thai government in educational administration to meet the urgent need to
eradicate inequities, inadequacies and the inefficient rural learning environment in order to
improve the qualities of Thailand’s educational system (Hallinger, 2012).
2.8 Summary of the roles and impacts of school libraries in rural Thailand
School libraries in rural Thailand do not play a large role in supporting teaching and learning
because these schools have given priority and paid attention to core learning priority areas
more than to libraries (Sermvithoon, Techataweewan & Wajiraprechapong, 2011). The Thai
government has tended to overlook the role of the library and qualified librarians and does
not refer to the role of the library and librarians in education policies (Pradit, 2006).
Professional librarians are not mandatory in Thailand schools. Subsequently, most rural
school libraries do not have a professional librarian. Therefore, a lack of a clear policy affects
school principals and teachers, causing them not to be aware of the roles and impacts of
school libraries and qualified librarians that influence students’ academic achievement.
76
Most rural school libraries were in a dilapidated condition and lacked a good library
environment. Most rural library buildings were old and the library environment looked like a
storage room (Pradit, 2006). With a small budget, in rural schools particularly, the small
schools lacked resources in their collections, physical facilities, computers and information
and communications technology (ICT), as well as staff to support teaching and learning.
Importantly, a lack of professional librarians affected library administration, services and

activities, which influences the development of effective school libraries (Butterfly Book
House, 2008; MGR online, 2006; Sangkharat, 2013; TK park, 2011).
In Thailand, some studies have investigated the impacts of school libraries on students’
academic achievement but no study as yet focuses on the impact of rural school libraries.
Therefore, no evidence is available to identify how rural school libraries impact on students’
academic achievement. This very important information is needed to clarify the value and
impacts of school libraries influencing educational development.
2.9 Conclusion
Findings from the literature review showed consistent impacts of school libraries and
teacher-librarians on students’ academic achievement, in the form of reading skills, literacy,
information literacy, and improved learning outcomes. The positive impacts of school
libraries involve many factors, such as the quantity and quality of library funding; the
collections, programs, librarians and staff levels; the librarian’s collaboration with teachers,
the school library’s collaboration with other libraries, and having a supportive school
principal.
A school principal is essential for supporting and developing an effective school library
because the school principal has the authority to direct and manage the facilitation of
change in the school. Therefore, the administration’s support of the school library policy is
an important contribution for an effective school library program, as it influences the quality
of the library budget, facilities, learning resources and personal resources.
77
In Thailand, some studies have investigated the impacts of school libraries on students’
academic achievement but there is no large-scale study focusing on rural school libraries.
Importantly, the characteristics of rural school libraries have never been previously
investigated, despite the fact that understanding their characteristics is important
information for school library development. Additionally, school principals’ perceptions on
the impacts of school libraries in rural Thailand have also not been investigated. This
research aims to close these gaps by investigating the current characteristics of school
libraries, clarifying their limitations, and outlining the possibilities of those libraries. Because
principals are such an important influence, this study examines the perceptions of the
school principals regarding the impacts of school libraries on students’ academic
achievement in rural Thailand, and seeks the factors that drive these principals’ perceptions
of this academic achievement.
The following chapter, on methodology, describes the method, research design, population
and sampling, data collection instrument and procedure, validity and reliability of the
instrument, and the data analysis of the study, and indicates the study’s limitations.
78
79
Chapter 3: Research Methodology
3.1 Introduction
The aim of this research is to (1) investigate the characteristics of school libraries of small
public primary school in rural Thailand; (2) clarify the limitations and opportunities of
libraries; (3) investigate the school principals’ perceptions about the impacts of school library
on students’ academic achievement; and (4) examine the factors that drive the principals’
perceptions about how the libraries impact students’ academic achievement. The findings
will provide a snapshot of the current characteristics, limitations and opportunities of the
school libraries. The result of this research will provide a much-needed basis for identifying
the components of an effective library for Thai rural schools. In order to achieve the overall
aim of this research, three research questions will be addressed.
RQ1: What are the characteristics of school libraries in small public primary schools
in rural Thailand?
RQ2: What challenges and opportunities do school libraries face in Thailand, as
RQ3: How do school principals perceive the impacts of school libraries on
students’ academic achievement?
This chapter presents the methodology and research design. It addresses the survey
research method, the survey research design, the population and sampling, the data
collection instrument and procedure, the validity and reliability of the instrument, data
analysis, and the limitations of the study.
3.2 Research design
The research design of this study is quantitative in nature. Survey data assists researchers in
describing the population’s characteristics, opinions, behaviours and experiences (Leedy &
Ormrod, 2013), giving the relationship between specific variables, or making comparisons
80
between populations (Thayer-Hart, Dykema, Elver, Schaeffer, & Stevenson, 2010). Two broad
types of survey, descriptive and explanatory, can be applied in the same study (Pickard,
2007; Williamson & Johanson, 2013).
The kind of descriptive survey used in this study seeks the nature of the current situation,
trends and patterns of a study’s population, while an explanatory survey usually seeks the
cause and effect relationships that have already been established in existing phenomena
(Burn, 2000). Descriptive surveys, which usually seek information, are interpreted in a brief
narrative and summarised in descriptive statistics such as percentages and frequency counts
(Pickard, 2007).
This research collected data through a questionnaire from 375 principals of rural small
public primary school across 6 regions in Thailand. The school principals were invited to use
either hard copy or online surveys because of the limited internet connection in some areas.
The questionnaire was designed to generate data related to the research questions (Pickard,
2007). The demographics of schools, school libraries and school principals, the limitations
and opportunities of the school libraries, and the perceptions of school principals about the
impact of libraries on students’ academic achievement were collected with a closed-ended
questionnaire. An open-ended questionnaire asked school principals to provide more
information about the challenges and the opportunities that face their schools and school
libraries.
For example, school principals were asked to answer a variety of questions covering the
number of libraries, the number of teacher librarians, the qualifications of teacher
librarians, the amount of budget, materials and resources, and the problems of school
libraries in broader terms. The school principals were also asked about their perceptions of
the impact of school libraries on students’ academic achievement.
Using a quantitative approach through questionnaires is an efficient means of drawing

conclusions for large populations, and has the advantage of investigating the relationships
between the data and the controlling bias (Creswell, 2015). Questionnaires are beneficial in
reaching a large and wide geographic population in a short time at a low cost (Pickard, 2007).
81
Moreover, respondents have less chance to give bias because questionnaires can provide
fewer verbal or visual clues (Neuman, 2011).
In this study, the results of the descriptive survey offer significant data, never previously
investigated, about small public primary school libraries in rural Thailand. The results deliver
an important insight into the current state of the libraries in such small public primary
schools, which is currently not recorded, and contribute to the foundation for building
effective libraries for student academic achievement in rural schools in Thailand.
3.3 Population and sampling strategy
This section presents a description of the population that participated in the study, including
the population’s characteristics and the details of the sampling techniques and sampling
size.
3.3.1 Population
A population is a set of elements such as people, institutes and objects that contains at least
one specific characteristic that the researcher needs to study. Due to the size of the possible
population in this research, the researcher was unable to include whole populations
because of the limitations of time, budget and feasibility. To ensure that the study has a
population that is adequate to fully represent the target population, the researcher
therefore needed to carefully select a sample of the population.
The target population for this study displays three main categories:
(1) public primary schools that are administered under the Office of the Basic Education
Commission (OBEC), the Ministry of Education (MOE), Thailand
(2) with fewer than 120 students

(3) located in rural areas which have an estimated population of fewer than 7,000
people, a population density less than 3,000 per square kilometre; and that are
located outside the municipal area (Faculty of Architecture and Environmental
Design, Maejo University, 2006).

82
According to the educational database of the Office of Basic Education Commission,

Thailand (2014), 15,506 public small schools are located in rural areas. Therefore, the whole
population of this study includes 15,506 schools spread over six regions in Thailand:
Northern, Central, North-eastern, Eastern, Western and Southern.
3.3.2 Sampling techniques
As the population of this study is so large (15,506 schools), proportional stratified random
sampling was used to select school principals from the sampling frame in the six regional
groups. The study selected a stratified random sampling, since this is suitable for drawing
strong, accurate samples of the populations influenced by geographic location (Williamson
& Johanson, 2013). The proportion of population in each region was sampled equally in order
to guarantee the inclusion of a sample in each group and to reduce data collector errors
(Daniel, 2012; Leedy & Ormrod, 2013).
3.3.3 Sampling size
The sample of 375 schools was identified by using the Krejcie & Morgan table (1970), at the
95% of confidence level and with an accepted margin of error of ±5%. The proportion in each
group was sampled equally (Leedy & Ormrod, 2013).
Table 1: Population and sample size of rural small public primary schools in Thailand
Size of School Size of School

Region
Population Sample
Northern 2,265 55
Central 3,072 74
North-eastern 7,128 173
Eastern 708 17
Western 545 13
Southern 1,788 43
Total 15,506 375
83
3.4 Data collection instruments and procedures
This section explains the data collection instruments and procedures that were used to
gather data through questionnaires.
3.4.1 Questionnaires
Questionnaires, data collection tools that have the advantage of reaching a large and wide
geographic population in a short time at a low cost (Pickard, 2007), are suitable for gathering
broad data. The study’s questionnaires were designed using two types of questions, closed-
and open-ended. The participants were invited to complete the questionnaires by hard copy
or online survey because of the limited internet connection in some areas.
The questionnaire was designed in three main sections. The first section, “Respondent
background, school background and school library information”, collected basic information
about the respondents, and about the demographics of schools and school libraries. The
purpose of this section was to clarify the current condition of libraries of small public
primary school in rural Thailand. This section included both closed- and open-ended
questions (Johnson & Turner, 2003). The second section, “Limitations and opportunities of
school library”, focused on the challenges and opportunities of libraries of small public
primary schools in rural Thailand. The third section, “Perceptions of the impact of school
library on students’ academic achievement”, sought the perception of school principals
about the impacts of school libraries on students’ academic achievements.
In the first section, the questions were designed to use a mixture of three types of question:
closed-ended, open-ended and contingency. A check-list, a technique using closed-ended
questions, was used to gather data. Respondents were asked to respond by checking
appropriate answers about the characteristics of their school library. The questions not only
focused on the school’s basic information, such as name, district, transport access type,
electricity supply and water supply, but also asked about library information such as the
number of libraries, staff information, and the library management system. Closed-ended
84
questions provided a fixed set of answers that were primarily quantitative data, to allow the
researcher to quickly code and analyse this data (Connaway & Powell, 2010). Examples of
checklists, open-ended questions and contingency questions asking school principals to give
information about school library’s demographics are shown in Table 2.
Table 2: Examples of checklists, open-ended questions and contingency questions asking

school principals to give information about school library’s demographics
III. Provide basic information regarding your school library

1. Does your school have a library?  Yes  No
If your answer to question number 1 is NO, please answer questions 2 to 8 only and thank you for your co-
operation. If the question number 1 is YES, please go to question 5 and answer all the remaining questions.
2. Which of the following describe the reason for not having a school library at your school? (Select all
that apply)
 Inadequate funds
 The library is not all that important
 The library is not a priority for now and we have other commitments to do
 Using community library instead of school library
 Others (Please specify) ____________________________________________
3. Are you planning to set up a school library in the near future?

 Yes  No (Please give reasons and go to question 5)
_____________________________________________________________________
4. If your answer to question 3 is YES, how soon do you intend to set up a school library?
 When funds are made available
 Starting this year
 Next year
 After two years
 I do not know
5. What is your opinion regarding the current condition of the small public primary school library in
rural Thailand? Please describe.
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
Open-ended questions seek specific pieces of information that provide more detailed
information and meaningful answers (Pickard, 2007). Such questions ask respondents to
formulate their own answers, which may provide further in-depth information for
85
researchers (Babbie, 2013). To gather more detail about the characteristic data of libraries of
small public primary school in rural Thailand, the open-ended questions asked for the
attitudes and opinions of respondents (Taylor-Powell, 1998).
Using a combination of question types makes the questionnaires more interesting for
respondents and more flexible to design (Babbie, 2013). Checklists are efficient forms for
seeking data, as they provide alternative answers that are known by respondents, are
limited in number and are clear-cut. Open-ended text questions help the researcher to
derive more efficient data because respondents are free to answer. Therefore, open-ended
questions are useful when the issue is complex and has unknown relevance dimensions
(Connaway & Powell, 2010).
In the second section of the questionnaire, the researcher aimed to seek information about
current limitations and opportunities of rural small public primary school libraries in a broad
picture. Therefore, the questionnaire was designed to use open-ended questions. Examples
of the open-ended questions are shown in Table 3 below.
Table 3: Examples of the open-ended questions asked about current limitations of and
opportunities for rural small public primary school libraries
1. What are the current limitations of your school library impacting on students’ academic
achievement?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
2. What are the current opportunities of your school library impacting on students’ academic
achievement?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
In the last section of the questionnaire, the researcher aimed to gather the perceptions of
school principals by asking them to rate their attitudes about the impacts of school library
on students’ academic achievement through scaled response questions (Babbie, 2013). A
semantic differential scale was used in this study. The semantic differential questions are
easy and fast for respondents to answer and the data easy for the researcher to process
86
(Babbie, 2013). The semantic differential scale was designed to identify the potency
dimension, which is the strength or importance of the object or concept (Pickard, 2007).
The questions in this part asked the respondents to rate the particular impacts of school
libraries on students’ academic achievement, using a seven-point scale between weak and
strong perceptions. The results were then used to examine the correlation between the five
factors (principals’ age, principal’s education qualification, principals’ working experiences,
principals’ working experiences at the present location, and budget given by government)
related to the principals’ perceptions about the impact of school libraries on students’
academic achievement. An example of the semantic differential scale questions, which
asked school principals to rate these perceptions, is shown in Table 4.
Table 4: Example of the semantic differential scale questions

Strong Impact
Strong Impact
Strong Impact
Slightly weak
Weak Impact
Weak Impact
Extremely
Extremely
Neither
Slightly
No.
Impact
Statements
Very
Very
7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Overall potential contribution of school library program to increase student achievement through the
following criteria
1. Academic grades
2. Standardised test scores
3. Students’ literacy levels
4. Students’ information literacy levels
5. Amount of time students spend reading during school
6. Amount of time students spend reading outside school
7. Amount of time students spend reading for pleasure
Administration potential for increasing student academic achievement through the following criteria
The implementation of library policy in the school
8.
curriculum
9. Practical and clear library policy
10. Sufficient school library budget
Collaboration in library administration among school
11.
library stakeholders
As noted, the questionnaires were made available to school principals in both online and
hardcopy. The online survey was developed through Key Survey, an online survey software
package developed by QUT, which offers data collection, data analysis, bias elimination and
87
data representative tools. As it is compatible with SPSS and Microsoft excel, these were used
to analyse the quantitative and qualitative data in this study.
Questionnaire evaluation, pre-testing and pilot study
Before distributing questionnaires to respondents, the researcher needed to ensure the

reliability and validity of the questionnaire with people who are expert in research
methodology and school libraries. Eight senior researchers, academics and academic
librarians were consulted. They included my principal and secondary supervisors, four Thai
university professors and one graduate student from within the area of information studies.
Those experts were selected on the basis of their extensive experiences and knowledge in
Library and information Sciences, particularly those who work and have research
experiences in Thai school libraries. Then, the researcher revisited and revised the English
version of the questionnaire after the experts provided feedback regarding the weaknesses
such as poor instructions, unnecessary questions and missing questions (Connaway &
Powell, 2010).
After careful examination of the questionnaire, it was determined by the expert group to be
both valid and reliable (Czaja, 1998). The researcher then reviewed and translated the
questionnaire into Thai. The researcher employed a back-translation technique to avoid the
translation mistakes in order to ensure the original meaning of questions by a second

bilingual person. The Thai questionnaire was pre-tested by 5 Thai research librarians to
check the respondents’ understanding of the questions. A pre-test allowed the researcher to
identify problems with questions which may be misunderstood by respondents (Connaway
& Powell, 2010).
After the questionnaire was pretested, the pilot study was conducted in forty schools with
conditions similar to the main study, making them relevant populations (Krosnick & Presser,
2010). The pilot study’s respondents were asked to answer questions through the online
survey because it was convenient to collect data in a short time and saved costs. Results of
the pilot study were automatically evaluated through the KeySurvey system. Comments of
88
participants from the pilot study helped to refine the questionnaire’s completeness, catch
errors and provide missing information. Moreover, the comments of participants enabled
the researcher to confirm questions that were clear, relevant and meaningful to the
respondents (Neuman, 2011).
3.5 Validity and reliability of the instruments
The validity and reliability of the instruments are important components of research quality
(Connaway & Powell, 2010). The validity of an instrument is its ability to test the truthfulness
of the research data, while the reliability of an instrument refers to its ability to test the
accuracy of the data (Sagor, 2000). As noted earlier (See data collection instruments and
procedures section), the survey questions were reviewed by supervisors and experts in
research methodology and school libraries. Reviewing their suggestions and advice helped
construct the content validity of the research. Content validity indicates the relationship
between questions and contents, which represents the efficiency of the instrument in
measuring every content area of the study (Connaway & Powell, 2010). For this study, the
questions in parts 1 and 2 of the questionnaire were developed in the form of a mixture of
closed- and open-ended questions to gather the descriptive data. Therefore, the validity of
the instrument was evaluated in terms of readability, layout and style, clarity of wording
and feasibility. Expert reviewer comments pointing to unclear, ambiguous and erroneous
questions helped the researcher to reword, revise and redesign effective questionnaires
(Zohrabi, 2013).
As an additional validity check, the translated questionnaire was also checked through pre-
testing and tested using a pilot study. The cluster and multiple regression analyses were not
tested in the pilot study: the sample size was not large enough to evaluate the reliability of
the data, and the aim of conducting this pilot study was not to test the hypotheses.
However, the reliability of the third part of the questionnaire containing rating scale
questions was checked by using Cronbach’s Alpha technique in SPSS. The results of the pilot
study are provided in Appendix E.

89
3.6 Data analysis
The data analysis describes the procedure of analysing the research data, both quantitative
and qualitative. Quantitative and qualitative data analysis methods are described separately.
3.6.1 Quantitative data analysis
In this study, the researcher used three techniques to analyse quantitative data: descriptive
analysis, cluster analysis, and multiple regression analysis. Descriptive analysis was used to
analyse schools and libraries demographics, libraries’ limitations and opportunities of rural
small public primary schools, and the principals’ perception about the impact of library on
students’ academic achievement in broad terms. Cluster analysis was used to investigate the
characteristics of rural small public primary school libraries. Multiple regression analysis was
used to examine the impacts that drive the perceptions of school principals about the
influence of school libraries on students’ academic achievement.
The software for analysing and interpreting the quantitative data was the Statistical Package
for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 23. SPSS suited the quantitative data analysis of this
study because it is a powerful tool supporting both the basic and advanced analytics
projects that this study required. For example, it provides a wild range of analytics
techniques, contributes a variety of reports, and is flexible and compatible with other
programs (IBM, 2014). As noted, the online survey of this study was created using KeySurvey,
and its report can be exported to SPSS and Microsoft excel. Therefore, SPSS was used to
further analyse basic and advance analytics tasks from the exported data from the
KeySurvey report, including the descriptive analysis, cluster analysis and multiple regression
analysis.
Descriptive analysis was the first technique that the researcher used to identify and
summarise the basic features of the numerical data (SAS Institute, 1999). The data included
the schools and libraries demographics, the limitations and opportunities of libraries, and
the level of principals’ perceptions about the impact of school libraries on students’
academic achievement. These data were derived from the checklist questions, open-ended
90
questions, and rating scales. Before analysing the quantitative data, answers from the
questionnaires were checked for missing data and errors. The answers derived from the
open-ended questions were then coded and clustered. Descriptive analysis was used to
analyse the frequency, mean, median, mode and correlation of the data with simple graphic
analysis. These results were significant in determining the current situation of these school
libraries, and the level of principals’ perceptions about the impact of school library on
Cluster analysis, a multivariate method, classifies similar samples of subjects or cases into
the same group (Norušis, 2012). Cluster analysis reveals a collection of data items similar to
one another within the same cluster or dissimilar to the object in another cluster (Burns &
Burns, 2009). Because of the lack of prior knowledge about the characteristics of libraries of
small public primary school in rural Thailand, using cluster analysis helped show the similar
and dissimilar patterns of these school libraries in rural Thailand. Two-step cluster analysis
was used to analyse and categorise qualitative data from questionnaires, including interval
scale, ratio scale, count data and binary data.
The researcher chose as many as possible variables relating to the school library
characteristics in order to find the different patterns of school libraries in rural Thailand: 26
categorical variables and 8 continuous variables derived from the descriptive analysis results
were chosen. For example, the categorical variables were regions, number of library staff,
and library budget, while the continuous variables were amount of school budget, seats and
computers (See all variables in Section 5.1: Number of clusters). The selected algorithm, the
Schwarz Bayesian Criterion (BIC), can measure the efficiency of the parameterised model by
predicting a large amount of data, such as the 350 samples in this study. The results of this
analysis showed the patterns of rural small public primary school libraries in Thailand.
Multiple regression analysis was used to examine the correlation and association between
the principals’ perceptions about library impacting students’ academic achievement and the
demographic of principals and schools. The principals’ perceptions data were derived from
the semantic differential questions of the last part of the questionnaire, while the
91
demographic of principals and schools came from the first part of the questionnaire.
Stepwise regression and enter regression were used in this analysis.
This study used stepwise regression, with the cases having more than one predictor,
because stepwise regression tests every predictor individually. Every time a predictor is
added, the system will remove a predictor that is not important to the model. Therefore, the
results will illustrate the predictor(s) that associate and correlate with the dependent
variable; in this case the dependent variable of this study is the principals’ perceptions. Cases
having only one predictor were analysed through the enter method because this method of
regression forces all predictors into the equation at one time. Then the results show how
each predictor fits or does not fit the models (Sheskin, 2004). The results of this analysis
reflected how 5 factors (principals’ age, highest academic qualification, years of experience
as a school principal, years of experience as a school principal at the present location, and
school budget) correlate and associate with the principals’ perceptions about the impact of
school libraries on students’ academic achievement.
3.6.2 Qualitative data analysis
The qualitative data in this study was analysed using thematic analysis, a qualitative analytic
method that focuses on identifying, coding and classifying data into themes or patterns of
meaning (Guest, MacQueen, & Namey, 2012). The interpretation of the thematic analysis
reveals the code frequencies, cohesion, and correlation within themes (Mills, Durepos, &
Wiebe, 2010). Thematic analysis is a useful method that is suitable to organise, then
summarise or interpret a great volume of data that has complex meanings (Boyatzis, 1998).
Furthermore, a thematic analysis is able to analyse a wide range of textual data such as
transcripts of interviews, open-ended questionnaire answers, digital audio files and video
files (Mills, Durepos, & Wiebe, 2010).
This study analysed the qualitative data from the open-ended questionnaire, which required
categorising into clusters of similar school libraries and identifying the challenges and
opportunities of the libraries of rural small public primary schools. The information from the
92
open-ended questions was coded, clustered and interpreted into the same themes. These
analysed data were used to quantify explicit words or phrases addressed in the data, and to
classify and describe the implicit and explicit ideas inside the data (Guest, MacQueen, &
Namey, 2012). A recurrent theme or relationship between data was inspected and sorted
into individual categories of description. These correlations between categories were
detailed for later framework-building (Mills, Durepos, & Wiebe, 2010).
This study used a deductive approach to analysing qualitative data because this study had
pre-determine the thematic areas before analysing the data (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The
theme areas were identified based on the school library media program framework
developed by David Loertscher (Loertscher, 2000). Even though the thematic analysis has the
limitation of producing themes from large volumes of data, the analysis data was effective if
the data were clearly focused, described and interpreted (O'Reilly, Ronzoni, & Dogra, 2013).
Despite the collection of a large volume of qualitative data sourced from 375 principals, the
qualitative data, in terms of short-terms or short-answers, was derived from the open-ended
questions. Therefore, the large volume of data of this study was easy to focus, interpret and
analyse, without a barrier to the production of themes in the thematic analysis.
Microsoft excel, the software package used to analyse the qualitative data, is a useful tool to
handle large quantities of qualitative data by collecting, categorising and calculating
frequencies of categories and coding (Albright, Winston, & Zappe, 2009). It supports the
worksheet’s size up to 1,048,576 rows by 16,384 columns (Microsoft, 2017). In particular,
Microsoft excel has functions for sorting, finding and filtering data, which helped the
researcher to gather data sorted by thematic area. Moreover, multiple spreadsheets are
convenient for the researcher to manage data, particularly for copying and moving data to a
new spreadsheet making researcher separately coded and clustered qualitative data into
the same theme from the difference questions. On the contrary, research can restart and
repeat coding several times, as often as required, to finally generate the themes and sub-
themes suitable for the study.

93
3.7 Ethical considerations
This study, conducted in Thailand, involved the participation of humans. A human ethics
application was submitted as a human-low risk category. It was approved on 28 January
2015 by Queensland University of Technology Research Ethics Committee for collecting data
for the pilot and main study (approval number 1500001154). In this study, the ethical
clearance protected participants who were involved with pilot studies and surveys. They
were informed that their participation was voluntary and their e-mail responses were
anonymous. The respondents’ privacy would be protected by removing the direct identifiers
from the information and replacing them with code; therefore, it has used no detailed
demographics or other information that might be able to identify principals and schools in
any publication.
All survey data were collected in an electronic folder on the QUT server using QUT
username and password. The hard copy questionnaires were kept in a locked filing cabinet
at QUT; the electronic survey data were kept in the KeySurvey server. All files will be held
securely for a minimum of 5 years. Physical files will then be destroyed, and electronic files
deleted from the computer hard-drive and server.
3.8 Conclusion
Chapter three has explained the survey research design methodology adopted for the study.
The study’s research questions were listed. The chapter then detailed the research
population and sampling strategy, explained the data collection instruments and showed
some examples of questions used in the questionnaires to ask the principals about small
public primary schools in rural Thailand. The data collection procedures were explained,
including the questionnaire evaluation, the pre-testing and the pilot study. The next section
explained the validity and reliability of the instrument. The last section included outlines of
descriptive, cluster and multiple regression analyses, the three techniques used in this
study’s data analysis.
94
The next chapter presents results related to the school library characteristics that provide
the demographics of school principals, school and libraries in rural Thailand. Moreover, it
provides the strengths, weaknesses, limitations and opportunities of school libraries in rural
Thailand.
95
Chapter 4: School libraries’ characteristics
This chapter presents the survey findings of parts 1 and 2, obtained from 375 principals of
public primary schools in rural Thailand. Survey part 1 asked the principals to provide basic
information about themselves, their schools and their school libraries. Survey part 2
contained open-ended questions that asked the respondents to illustrate the strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities and limitations of their school libraries.
The survey found five key findings:
(1) Although there are many school libraries in rural Thailand, they lack resources, in
terms of collections, physical facilities and staff.
(2) Principals know the value of the school libraries but are powerless because of
budgetary and infrastructure constraints.
(3) There are two clusters of school libraries in rural Thailand: high- and low-level groups.
Libraries of the low level group face more serious problems in administration,
physical facilities and activities than the high level group. Libraries of the low level
group occur most in the North and Northeast regions.
(4) Most commonly the principals perceived that the libraries had an extremely strong
impact on students’ academic achievement.
(5) One factor that drove the principals’ perceptions about the impact of school libraries
on students’ academic achievement was their age. Principals aged 50 years or
younger tended to have more positive perceptions about the school libraries’ impact
on students’ academic achievement.
The details of these findings are illustrated in the first three sections of the chapter, which
encompass the characteristics of the respondents (4.1), the schools (4.2), and the school
libraries (4.3). The analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and limitations of
these libraries appears in 4.4, which is followed by a summary of the chapter (4.5).
96
4.1 Characteristics of respondents
This section provides the characteristics of the 375 principals involved in the survey, first in
general (4.1.1) for all 375, then for 350 of them at schools with libraries (4.1.2) and for 25 at
schools without libraries (4.1.3).
Part 1 Section 1 of the survey captures the background of the respondent. The information
presented in Tables 5 to 16 relates to principals’ gender, age group, highest academic
qualification, and academic field, and their years of experience as a school principal and
years of experience as school principal and as school principal at present location.
4.1.1 Principals’ characteristics: general
The target population for the survey was principals who work in small public primary
schools in rural Thailand. In 2014, spread through the rural areas of six regions of Thailand
were 15,506 small public primary schools, each with fewer than 120 students (The Office of
Basic Education Commission Thailand, 2014). The six geographical regions, divided by natural
features including relief, drainage, soil, climate and human cultural patterns, include North,
Central, Northeast, East, West and South (Hafner, Keyes, & Keyes, 2016). These schools are
administered under the Office of Basic Education Commission (OBEC), the Ministry of
Education (MOE), Thailand. Rural areas are defined as those which (1) have an estimated
population of less than 7,000 people, (2) have a population density less than 3,000 per
square kilometre, and (3) are located outside the municipal area (Faculty of Architecture and
Environmental Design, Maejo University, 2006).
Key findings in Tables 5-8 illustrate the principals’ characteristics: 72.5% were male; 32.3%
were in the 51-55 age range; 78% held a master degree in Education Science and Teaching
Training; 28% had been school principals for 1 to 5 years; and 64% had experienced 1 to 5
years at their present schools as school principal.
Table 5 shows the gender of the full survey sample. The majority of the principals were
male, 272 (72.5%), only 103 (27.5%) were female.

97
Table 5: Gender of principals (n=375)
Gender N %
Male 272 72.5
Female 103 27.5
Total 375 100.0
Table 6 presents the age distribution of survey participants, showing that one-third (32.3%) of
the participants were principals aged 51-55, and almost one-quarter (23.7%) were aged 55-60
years. Another 78 principals (20.8%) were aged between 41 and 45 years old. The lowest
percentage (0.5%) occurs in the youngest age group, 26-30 years.
Table 6: Age of respondents (n=375)
Age N %
26-30 2 0.5
31-35 10 2.7
36-40 39 10.4
41-45 78 20.8
46-50 36 9.6
51-55 121 32.3
55-60 89 23.7
Total 375 100.0
Table 7 presents the profile of the highest educational qualification and the academic fields
of the 375 principals. The majority of principals had achieved a master’s degree 293 (78.1%),
and a few held a Bachelor degree 59 (15.7%). A small number of principals achieved a
doctoral degree 23 (6.1%). Table 7 also shows their academic fields. The distribution of the
principals by completed number and percentage of their academic field revealed that 207
principals (55.2%) graduated with a master Degree, 20 (5.3%) with a bachelor Degree and 17
(4.5%) with a doctoral Degree, respectively, of Education Science and Teacher Training.
Noticeably, most principals’ academic fields were in Education Science and Teacher Training,
98
such as Education Administration, Elementary education, and Curriculum and Instruction.
Others were in fields such as Humanities, Social Sciences and Natural Science.
Table 7: Highest academic qualification of principals (n=375)
Academic field Bachelor Master Doctoral Total

degree degree degree
N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%)
Education Science and Teacher Training 20 207 17 244
(Education administration, Elementary education, Curriculum and (5.3) (55.2) (4.5) (65.1)
instruction, Early childhood education, , Physical education, Educational
technology, Educational research and evaluation, Educational measurement
and evaluation, Educational management, Curriculum and supervision ,
Educational psychology and counselling, Supervision and curriculum
development, Teaching English as foreign language, Health education,
Leadership in education administration, Environmental education
Humanities, Religions and Theology 1 0 0 1
(History) (0.3) (0.0) (0.0) (0.3)
Social Sciences 4 3 0 7
(Psychology, Public administration, Political science) (1.1) (0.8) (0.0) (1.9)
Natural Science 5 2 0 7
(Chemistry, General programmes in mathematics) (1.3) (0.5) (0.0) (1.9)
Not specify 28 82 6 116
(7.5) (21.9) (1.6) (30.9)
Total 58 294 23 375
(15.5) (78.4) (6.1) (100.0)
Table 8 indicates the distribution of the participants by total number of years and
percentage of their years of experience as a school principal (EXP1) and their years of
experience as a school principal at their present location (EXP2). The percentages were
calculated based on a total sample of each region. The most common period of working
experience as a school principal was 1-5 years, for approximately 105 (28.0%), followed by
the periods of 6-10 years (78, 20.8%) and 21-25 years (75, 20.0%). Only 5 principals (1.3%) had
from 26 to 30 years of experience.
As shown in Table 8, the most common length of experience working as a school principal at
their present location was 1-5 years, (241, 64.3%), followed by 6-10 years (67, 17.9%), and 11-
15 years (37, 9.9%). Few (5, 1.3%) had been school principal in their current location for 26-30
years.
99
Table 8: Years of experience as a school principal (n=375)
1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30

N N N N N N
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
Year
EXP1 EXP2 EXP1 EXP2 EXP1 EXP2 EXP1 EXP2 EXP1 EXP2 EXP1 EXP2
Region
North 7 33 14 13 12 6 11 1 10 1 1 1
(12.7) (60.0) (25.5) (23.6) (21.8) (10.9) (21.2) (1.8) (19.2) (1.8) (0.3) (1.8)
Central 24 53 17 10 9 5 9 5 15 1 0 0
(32.4) (71.6) (23.0) (13.5) (12.2) (6.8) (12.2) (6.8) (20.3) (1.4) (0.0) (0.0)
Northeast 56 115 32 27 25 18 26 6 31 4 3 3
(32.4) (66.5) (18.5) (15.6) (14.5) (10.4) (15.0) (3.5) (17.9) (2.3) (1.7) (1.7)
East 3 9 5 3 2 3 4 2 3 0 0 0
(17.6) (52.9) (29.4) (17.6) (11.8) (17.6) (23.5) (11.8) (17.6) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0)
West 1 4 4 4 4 3 2 0 1 1 1 1
(7.7) (30.8) (30.8) (30.8) (30.8) (23.1) (15.4) (0.0) (7.7) (7.7) (7.7) (7.7)
South 14 27 6 10 1 2 7 3 15 1 0 0
(32.6) (62.8) (14.0) (23.3) (2.3) (4.7) (16.3) (7.0) (34.9) (2.3) (0.0) (0.0)
Total 105 241 78 67 53 37 59 17 75 8 5 5
(28.0) (64.3) (20.8) (17.9) (14.1) (9.9) (15.7) (4.5) (20.0) (2.1) (1.3) (1.3)
4.1.2 Characteristics of principals: school with libraries (n=375)
In order to differentiate the patterns between schools which have and do not have libraries,
this section provides the characteristics of principals who had libraries in their schools,
gender, age and experience (EXP1 and EXP2), followed by the information they provided
regarding their schools’ and school libraries’ characteristics.
Of the 375 schools, 350 schools had libraries, and 25 schools had no libraries. Table 9 shows
the gender of the principals of schools having libraries (n=350), presented through 7 groups:
the whole country, North, Central, Northeast, East, West and South regions. A majority of
principals were male (255, 72.9%), with only 95 (27.1%) female. For the proportion between
male and female principals of the 6 regions, the Northeast had the greatest percentage of
male principals (82.4%), followed by the North and West (76.9%), and the East regions (75.0%) :
the Central had the highest percentage of female principals (47.8%), followed by the South
(36.6%), and East regions (25.0%).

100
Table 9: Gender of principals of schools with libraries (n=350)
Male Female Total
Region N % N % N
North 40 76.9 12 23.1 52
Central 36 52.2 33 47.8 69
Northeast 131 82.4 28 17.6 159
East 12 75.0 4 25.0 16
West 10 76.9 3 23.1 13
South 26 63.4 15 36.6 41
Total 255 72.9 95 27.1 350
Table 10 identifies the age distribution of principals of schools with libraries among 6
regions. The most common age range of principals in all regions was 51-55 (114, 32.6%),
except for the East, which had a majority of principals aged 56-60 (5, 31.3%). A minority of
principals in the North (15, 28.8%), Central (18, 21.6%) and West regions (3, 23.1%) were aged
56-60, while the principals of the East region were aged 51-55 (4, 25.0%), and the principals of
the Northeast region were aged 41-45 (44, 27.7%). Principals in the youngest age group, 26-30
years, were found in the North and Central regions (1, 1.9%).
Table 10: Age of principals of schools with libraries (n=350)
Age 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60

Region N N N N N N N
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
North 1 1 4 6 5 20 15
(1.9) (1.9) (7.7) (11.5) (9.6) (38.5) (28.8)
Central 1 0 6 17 5 22 18
(1.9) (0.0) (8.7) (24.6) (7.2) (31.9) (26.1)
Northeast 0 2 16 44 17 48 32
(0.0) (1.3) (10.1) (27.7) (10.7) (30.2) (20.1)
East 0 2 3 2 0 4 5
(0.0) (12.5) (18.8) (12.5) (0.0) (25.0) (31.3)
West 0 0 0 3 1 6 3
(0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (23.1) (7.7) (46.2) (23.1)
South 0 1 7 1 5 14 13
(0.0) (2.4) (17.1) (2.4) (12.2) (34.1) (31.7)
Whole sample 2 6 36 73 33 114 86
(0.6) (1.7) (10.3) (20.9) (9.4) (32.6) (24.6)
101
Table 11 shows the academic fields of principals with libraries in their schools. The
distribution of the respondents by completed number and percentage of their academic

field revealed that 197 (52.5%) principals graduated with Master Degree of Education in
Education Science and Teacher Training, with Bachelor degree 18 (4.8%) and with Doctoral
Degree 16 (4.3%). Noticeably, most principals’ academic fields were in Education Science and
Teacher Training, such as Education administration, Elementary Education and Curriculum

and instruction. Others were in fields such as Humanities, Social Sciences and Natural
Science.
Table 11: Highest academic qualification, academic field: principals, schools with libraries
(n=350)

N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%)
instruction, Early childhood education, Physical education, Educational
Leadership in education administration, Environmental education)
Humanities, Religions and Theology 1 0 0 1
(History) (0.3) (0.0) (0.0) (0.3)
Social Sciences 4 3 0 7
(Psychology, Public administration, Political science) (1.1) (0.8) (0.0) (1.9)
(6.4) (20.3) (1.1) (27.7)
Total 52 278 20 350
(13.9) (74.1) (5.3) (100.0)
Table 12 shows years and percentages of the respondents’ experience as principals (EXP1).
The percentages were calculated based on a total sample of each region. The most common
period of working experience as a school principal was 1-5 years (94, 26.9%), followed by
those in the 6-10 years range and the 21-25 years range (both 73, 20.9%), and then those
with 16-20 years of experience (56, 16.0%). The 26-30 years range had only 4 principals (1.1%).
A majority of principals of the Central (20, 29.0%) and Northeast regions (51, 32.1%) had 1-5
102
years of working experience, while a majority of principals of the North (14, 26.9%), East (4,
25.0%) and West regions (4, 30.8%) had 6-10 years of working experience. The majority of
principals of the South region (14, 34.1%) had 21-25 years of working experience.
Table 12 further shows their experience as a school principal at their present location (EXP2).
A majority of principals in the whole country had experience at their present schools for 1-5
years (225, 64.3%), followed by 6-10 years (61, 17.4%), and 11-15 years (35, 10.0%). Those few
principals who had worked at their present schools for 25-30 years were in the North (1,
1.9%), Northeast (2, 1.3%) and East regions (1, 7.7%).
Table 12: Years of experience as a school principal (n=350)
Year range 1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30

N N N N N N
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
Region
EXP1 EXP2 EXP1 EXP2 EXP1 EXP2 EXP1 EXP2 EXP1 EXP2 EXP1 EXP2
North 6 32 14 12 10 5 11 1 10 1 1 1
(11.5) (61.5) (26.9) (23.1) (19.2) (9.6) (21.2) (1.9) (19.2) (1.9) (1.9) (1.9)
Central 20 48 16 10 9 5 9 5 15 1 0 0
(29.0) (69.6) (23.2) (14.5) (13.0) (7.2) (13.0) (7.2) (21.7) (1.4) (0.0) (0.0)
Northeast 51 106 29 23 24 18 23 6 30 4 2 2
(32.1) (66.7) (18.2) (14.5) (15.1) (11.3) (14.5) (3.8) (18.9) (2.5) (1.3) (1.3)
East 3 9 4 2 2 3 4 2 3 0 0 0
(18.8) (56.3) (25.0) (12.5) (12.5) (18.8) (25.0) (12.5) (18.8) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0)
West 1 4 4 4 4 3 2 0 1 1 1 1
(7.7) (30.8) (30.8) (30.8) (30.8) (23.1) (15.4) (0.0) (7.7) (7.7) (7.7) (7.7)
South 13 26 6 10 1 1 7 3 14 1 0 0
(31.7) (63.4) (14.6) (24.4) (2.4) (2.4) (17.1) (7.3) (34.1) (2.4) (0.0) (0.0)
Total 94 225 73 61 50 35 56 17 73 9 4 4
(26.9) (64.3) (20.9) (17.4) (14.3) (10.0) (16.0) (4.9) (20.9) (2.6) (1.1) (1.1)
4.1.3 Characteristics of principals at school without libraries (n=25)
Twenty-five of the 375 schools were without libraries; such schools appeared in every region
except the West. Characteristics of principals in these schools without libraries include
gender, age groups, highest academic qualification, academic field, years of experience as a
school principal and years of experience as a school principal at present location.
Table 13 presents the gender of the principals of schools without libraries (n=25). The gender
103
was presented through 7 groups including the whole country, North, Central, Northeast,
East, West and South regions. A majority of principals were male (17, 68.0%), while only 8
(32.0%) were female. Comparison of the proportion between male and female principals of
the 6 regions showed that the East region had 100% of male principals, while the South
region had 100% of female principals. The majority of principals in the North (2, 66.7%) and
Northeast regions (12, 85.7%) were male; in the Central region, female (3, 60.0%). The West
region had 100% of schools with libraries and therefore had no ‘school without libraries’ data
about principals’ gender.
Table 13: Gender: principals of schools without libraries (n=25)

Region Male Female Total
N % N % N
North 2 66.7 1 33.3 3
Central 2 40.0 3 60.0 5
Northeast 12 85.7 2 14.3 14
East 1 100.0 0 0.0 1
South 0 0.0 2 100.0 2
Total 17 68.0 8 32.0 25
Table 14 identifies the age distribution of principals of the schools without libraries among 6
regions. Most principals were aged 51-55, in all regions except the North and South.
Noticeably, there were no principals aged below 31 years among the entire regions.
Table 14: Age: principals of schools without libraries (n=25)

Age 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60
Region N N N N N N N
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
North 0 1 0 1 1 0 0
(0.0) (33.3) (0.0) (33.3) (33.3) (0.0) (0.0)
Central 0 0 0 2 1 2 0
(0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (40.0) (20.0) (40.0) (0.0)
Northeast 0 2 3 2 0 5 2
(0.0) (14.3) (21.4) (14.3) (0.0) (35.7) (14.3)
East 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
(0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (100.0) (0.0)
South 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
(0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (50.0) (0.0) (50.0)
Total 0 3 3 5 3 8 3
(0.0) (12.0) (12.0) (20.0) (12.0) (32.0) (12.0)
104
Table 15 shows the academic fields of principals of schools without libraries. The distribution
of the principals by completed number and percentage of their academic field revealed that
10 (40.0%) principals graduated with a master degree of Education in Education Science and
Teacher Training, then followed by bachelor degree (2, 8.0%) and doctoral degree (1, 4.0%).
The academic fields of all principals were in Education Science and Teacher Training,
including Education administration, Curriculum and instruction, Physical education, and
Educational technology. Noticeably, almost half of the principals did not provide their
academic fields.
Table 15: Highest academic qualification and academic fields: principals without libraries
(n=25)
N N N N
(%) (%) (%) (%)
(Education administration, Curriculum and instruction, Physical education, (8.0) (40.0) (4.0) (52.0)
Educational technology)
(16.0) (24.0) (8.0) (48.0)
Total 6 16 3 25
(24.0) (64.0) (12.0) (100.0)
Table 16 shows years and percentages of the principals’ experience (EXP1). The percentages
were calculated based on a total sample of each region. The most common period of
working experience as a school principal was 1-5 years, for approximately 11 (44.0%). A
majority of principals of the Central (4, 80.0%), Northeast (5, 35.7%) and South regions (1,
50.0%) had 1-5 years of working experience, while a majority of principals of the North region
(2, 66.7%) had 11-15 years of working experience. The majority of principals of the East region
(1, 100.0%) had 6-10 years of working experience.
Table 16 further shows the years of principals’ experience at their present location (EXP2). A
majority of principals in the whole country had experience at their present schools for 1-5
years (16, 64.0%), followed by 6-10 years (6, 24.0%), and 11-15, (2, 8.0%). Across all regions, no
principals had worked at their present schools for the period of 16 to 25 years.
105
Table 16: Years of experience: school principal of schools without libraries (n=25)
1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30

Year N N N N N N
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
Region EXP1 EXP2 EXP1 EXP2 EXP1 EXP2 EXP1 EXP2 EXP1 EXP2 EXP1 EXP2
North 1 1 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
(33.3) (33.3) (0.0) (1.9) (66.7) ((33.3) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0)
Central 4 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(80.0) (100.0) (20.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0)
Northeast 5 9 3 4 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 1
(35.7) (64.3) (21.4) (28.6) (7.1) (0.0) (21.4) (0.0) (7.1) (0.0) (7.1) (7.1)
East 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(0.0) (0.0) (100) (100) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0)
South 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
(50.0) (50.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (50.0) (0.0) (0.0) (50.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0)
Total 11 16 5 6 3 2 3 0 2 0 1 1
(44.0) (64.0) (20.0) (24.0) (12.0) (8.0) (12.0) (0.0) (8.0) (0.0) (4.0) (4.0)
4.2 Schools’ characteristics
Survey questions in part 1 section 2 asked the principals to provide basic information about their
schools, including province, Educational Service Area, distance from school to city, transport
access types, electricity supply, water supply, internet connection, numbers of students,
numbers of teachers, numbers of computers and value of budget in 2016.
In order to clarify the differences between schools with and without libraries, this section
includes 3 subsections: the characteristics of the entire 375 schools, the characteristics of 350
schools with libraries and the characteristics of 25 schools without libraries.
4.2.1 Entire schools’ characteristics (n=375)
Data related to the basic information of the 375 schools is presented in Tables 17- 24 and Chart 1.
Table 17 presents the basic information of respondents’ schools, including region, province
and Educational Service Area of the respondents’ schools. Because the target populations of
this research spread through 6 regions of Thailand, the number of schools in each region
differs depending on population. Therefore, the proportion of schools in each region was
106
sampled equally. Table 1 in Chapter 3 provides a detailed breakdown of the population and
sample size of the rural small public primary schools included in this study.
Thailand is divided into 76 provinces and 1 special administrative area, Bangkok. Each
province has a capital city or Amphoe Muang (National Statistical Office, 2016). As shown in
Table 17, the responses of 72 provinces were acquired (4 exceptions: Rayong, Phuket, Tak
and Krabi). Bangkok was not included in this study because it is a special administrative area
and it is not rural.
The schools are governed under the Office of Basic Education, which has educational service
areas to administer primary education and secondary education. There are approximately
225 educational service areas in the 76 provinces. Each educational service area is
responsible for 200 educational institutions (OBEC, 2015). Table 17 shows the education
service areas that are responsible for the principals’ schools.
Table 17: Regions and provinces of participants’ schools (n=375)
Region Province No. of Educational N %

Service Area
North Chiang Rai, Chiang Mai, Nan,Phayao, Phrae, 1-6 55 14.7
Mea Hong Son, Lampang, Lamphun, Uttaradit
Central Kamphaeng Phet, Chai Nat, Nakhon Nayok, Nakorn 1-3 74 19.7
Pathom, Nakhon Sawan, Nonthaburi, Pathum Thani,
Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya, Phichit, Phitsanulok,
Phetchabun, Lop Buri, Samut Prakan, Samut
Songkram, Samut Sakorn, Sing Buri, Sukhothai,
Suphan Buri, Saraburi, Ang Thong, Uthai Tani
Northeast Kalasin, Khon Kean, Chaiyaphum, Nakhon Phanom, 1-5 173 46.1
Nakhon Ratchasima, Bueng Kan, Buri Ram, Maha
Sarakham, Mukdahan, Yasothon, Roi Et, Loei, Si Sa
Ket, Sakon Nakhon, Surin, Nong Khai, Nong Bua Lum
Phu, Amnat Charoen, Udon Thani, Ubon Ratchathani
East Chanthaburi, Chachoengsao, Chon Buri, Trat, 1-2 17 4.5
Prachin Buri, Sakaeo
West Kanchanaburi, Prachuap Khiri Khan, Ratchaburi, 1-3 13 3.5
Phetchaburi
107
Region Province No. of Educational N %

Service Area
South Chumphon, Trang, Nakhon Sri Thammarat, 1-2 43 11.5
Narathiwat, Pattani, Phangnga, Phatthalung, Yala,
Ranong, Songkhla, Satun, Surat Thani
Total 375 100.0
Table 18 shows the distance in kilometres of respondents’ schools to city by region. The
average distance from school to city among regions was between 14 and 19 kilometres
(comparing between regions). The furthest school distance to a city, in Chiang Rai, the
northernmost province of Thailand, was about 92 kilometres. Next was a school located in
the Northeast (75 km), and two schools located in the North and Central regions (70 km). The
nearest school distance to a city was about 1 kilometre, found for three schools located in
the North, Northeast and South regions. Table 18 also shows that most (284) schools were
located from 1 to 20 kilometres from a city, 74 were 21 to 40 kilometres away, and 13 were
41 to 60 kilometres from a city.
Table 18: Distance from school to city (n=375)
Region 1-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-100 Minimum Maximum Average

(N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (km)/(N) (km)/(N) (km)
North 40 10 3 1 1 1/1 92/1 19
Central 55 14 4 1 0 2/1 70/1 17
Northeast 133 36 3 1 0 1/1 75/1 16
East 13 3 1 0 0 4/1 50/1 17
West 10 1 2 0 0 3/1 50/1 17
South 33 10 0 0 0 1/1 40/1 14
Total 284 74 13 3 1 1/3 92/1 16
Question 3 of the questionnaire Part 1 Section 2 asked the principals to choose all answers
that apply to transport access types. Table 19 shows that a great majority of the entire
schools can be accessed by paved road (371, 98.9%). Thirty-four schools (9.1%) can be accessed
by unpaved road and 8 (2.1%) by path. However, 3 schools (0.8%), located in the Central, East
and West regions, can be accessed only by sea, lake or river.

108
Table 19: Transport access types available to the schools (n=375)

Type N %
Paved road 371 98.9
Unpaved road 34 9.1
Path 8 2.1
Sea, lake or river 3 0.8
#Multiple responses
Chart 1 presents the availability of electric supply, water supply and internet connection for
the schools. As can be seen, 100% of those schools had access to electricity, while 43 (11.5%)
of them were without a water supply. Those schools without a water supply had village
water supplies that collect water from surface water and groundwater. Figure 5 illustrates
the village water supply of a respondent’s school located in Southern Thailand. Chart 1
shows that 364 (97.1%) schools had internet connections; while 11 (2.9%) schools were
without internet connection.
Of 43 schools without a water supply, the Northeast region had most (24), followed by the
North, Central, West and South regions (4 each). The West region had the highest
percentage of schools without water supply among the 6 regions: approximately 30.0%. The
South region had the highest percentage of schools without internet connection among the
6 regions: approximately 10.0%.
109
Chart 1: Electric supply, water supply and internet connection (n=375)
100% 7
375 43 11 55 4 55 74 4 74 173
24
17 17 13 13 43 4 4
90% 3
4
80%
364 166
Number of schools
70%
60%
332 51 70 149 14 9 39 39
50%
40% NO
30% YES
20%
(%)
10%
0%
Electricity
Water
Electricity
Water
Electricity
Water
Electricity
Water
Electricity
Water
Electricity
Water
Electricity
Water
Internet
Internet
Internet
Internet
Internet
Internet
Internet
Whole
Total North Central Northeast East West South
country
Figure 5: Village water supply of a respondent’s school located in Southern Thailand
(Source: A principal of a school located in Southern Thailand, 2016)
Table 20 shows the number of students in the surveyed schools in 2016. The information
includes the range, minimum, maximum and average number, divided into 7 groups, of the
total schools surveyed in the 6 regions. Based on the data of 375 schools, the minimum
number of students was 3, in a school located in Amnat-Charoen province in the Northeast
region. The maximum number of students was found in a school located in Chiang Rai
province in the North region (121). The average number of students across all regions was
about 73.
The data divided by region show that the majority of schools in every region had students in
the approximate range of 61-80 (105), followed by 81-100 (76), and above 100 (75).
110
Noticeably, five schools in the Northeast region and one school in each of the North,
Central, and West regions had fewer than 20 students.
Table 20: Range of numbers of students in school in 2016 (n=375)
Region 1-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-100 Above Minimum Maximum Average
(N) (N) (N) (N) (N) 100 student student
(N) (N) (N) (N)
North 1 10 13 14 6 11 19 121 67
Central 1 14 9 19 15 16 11 120 73
Northeast 5 21 29 53 37 28 3 120 71
East 0 0 4 5 3 5 49 118 83
West 1 0 0 6 2 4 17 109 79
South 0 3 8 8 13 11 30 119 81
Total 8 48 63 105 76 75 3 121 73
Table 21 shows the number of teachers in 2016. The information includes the range,
minimum, maximum and average number, which was divided into 7 groups, including the
total surveyed for all regions and for 6 regions. Based on the data across all regions, the
minimum number of teachers was 1, in schools located in the Central and Northeast regions.
The maximum number of teachers was found in schools located in the North and Central
regions (14). The average number of teachers for the surveyed schools was about 6. The data
divided by region shows that the majority of schools of every region had approximately 4 to
6 teachers (181), followed by 100 schools in the 7-9 teachers range and then 66 in the 1-3
range of teacher numbers. Noticeably, many schools located in the Central (14) and
Northeast regions (33) had between 1 and 3 teachers.
Table 21: Numbers of teachers in 2016 (n=375)

(N) (N) (N) (N) (N) teacher teacher
(N) (N) (N)
North 1 23 13 7 1 2 14 6
Central 14 35 20 4 1 1 14 6
Northeast 33 87 48 5 0 1 12 5
East 1 9 6 1 0 3 11 6
West 1 10 2 0 0 2 8 5
South 6 17 11 9 0 3 12 7
111
Total 66 181 100 26 2 1 14 6
Table 22 presents the teacher–student ratio in 2016. The information was divided into 7
groups, including the numbers across all surveyed schools and across the 6 regions. It was
found that the teacher-student ratio across all regions was 1:12. The West region had the
highest ratio, about 1:16; the lowest ratio occurred in the North regions (1:11).
Table 22: Teacher–student ratio in 2016 (n=375)
Region Teacher: Student ratio
North 1:11
Central 1:12
Northeast 1:14
East 1:14
Table 23 shows Region Teacher: Student ratio that the greatest

number of West 1:16 computers in
one school was South 1:12 about 50, while
the lowest Total 1:12 number of
computers across all regions was 0. The highest numbers of those computers were found in
the Central region (50), followed by the Northeast (40) and South regions (34), respectively.
The lowest numbers of computers across all regions (0) occurred in the Northeast and South
regions. The average numbers of computers among the 6 regions were between 8 and 12.
Table 23: Number of computers (n=375)

Region 0 1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 Minimum Maximum Average
(N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N)
North 0 34 17 4 0 0 1 30 11
Central 0 40 26 4 3 1 2 50 12
Northeast 2 132 33 7 1 0 0 40 8
East 0 13 3 1 0 0 3 25 10
West 0 10 3 0 0 0 5 20 10
South 4 30 11 1 1 0 0 34 9
Total 6 259 93 17 5 1 0 50 10
112
The school budget for 2016 is provided in Table 24. The highest school budget, found in the
Northeast region, was about 4,796,225 baht (184,470 AUD). The top three school budgets
were found in the schools located in the Northeast (4,796,225 THB/184,470 AUD), North
(4,082,467 THB/157,017 AUD) and Central regions (1,095,716 THB/42,142 AUD). The lowest
school budget, found in the Northeast region, was only 20,000 baht (770 AUD). The average
budgets across 6 regions ranged widely between 220,000 and 370,000 baht (8,460-14,230
AUD).
A majority of schools across all regions except the West region were allocated a budget of
between 200,001 and 400,000 THB (132). Noticeably, 11 schools located in the West region
had a budget allocation of from 100,001 to 200,000 THB (3,846-7,692 AUD) and 2 schools
had a budget allocation from 400,001-1,000,000 THB (15,384-38,461 AUD). Budget
allocations of schools in the North, Central and Northeast regions were up to 4.7 million
baht (180,770 AUD) and budget allocations of schools in the East and South regions were up
to a million baht (38,461 AUD).
Table 24: Size of schools budget in 2016 (n=375)
Region 1- 50,001- 100,101- 200,001- 400,001 - Above MIN MAX AVG

50,000 100,000 200,000 400,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 (THB) (THB) (THB)
THB THB THB THB THB THB
(N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N)
North 1 5 21 21 4 3 35,700 4,082467 368,986
Central 2 8 18 30 15 1 40,000 1,095,716 295,668
Northeast 6 15 62 59 27 4 20,000 4,796,225 305,418
East 0 1 8 4 4 0 85,500 934,370 272,611
West 0 0 11 0 2 0 119,000 691,859 220,302
South 0 3 12 22 6 0 66,000 811,500 273,243
Total 9 32 132 136 58 8 20,000 4,796,225 304,079
4.2.2 Characteristics of schools with libraries (n=350)
This section provides the information about the 350 schools with libraries, including
province, Educational Service Area, distance from school to city, transport access types,
113
electricity supply, water supply, internet connection, numbers of students, numbers of teachers,
numbers of computers and numbers of budget in 2016.
Table 25 presents the education service areas that are responsible for the 350 schools.
Table 25: Regions and provinces of participants’ schools with libraries (n=350)
Region Province No. of N %
Educational
Services Area
North Chiang Rai, Chiang Mai, Nan,Phayao, Phrae, 1-6 52 14.9
Mea Hong Son, Lampang, Lamphun, Uttaradit
Central Kamphaeng Phet, Chai Nat, Nakhon Nayok, Nakorn 1-3 69 19.7
Pathom, Nakhon Sawan, Nonthaburi, Pathum Thani,
Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya, Phichit, Phitsanulok,
Phetchabun, Lop Buri, Samut Prakan, Samut
Songkram, Samut Sakorn, Sing Buri, Sukhothai,
Suphan Buri, Saraburi, Ang Thong, Uthai Tani
Northeast Kalasin, Khon Kean, Chaiyaphum, Nakhon Phanom, 1-5 159 45.4
Nakhon Ratchasima, Bueng Kan, Buri Ram, Maha
Sarakham, Mukdahan, Yasothon, Roi Et, Loei, Si Sa
Ket, Sakon Nakhon, Surin, Nong Khai, Nong Bua Lum
Phu, Amnat Charoen, Udon Thani, Ubon Ratchathani
East Chanthaburi, Chachoengsao, Chon Buri, Trat, 1-2 16 4.6
Prachin Buri, Sakaeo
West Kanchanaburi, Prachuap Khiri Khan, Ratchaburi, 1-3 13 3.7
Phetchaburi
South Chumphon, Trang, Nakhon Sri Thammarat, 1-2 41 11.7
Narathiwat, Pattani, Phangnga, Phatthalung, Yala,
Ranong, Songkhla, Satun, Surat Thani
Total 350 100.0
Table 26 shows the distance in kilometres from the schools with libraries to a city, by region.
The average distance from school to city among regions was between 14 and 19 kilometres.
The farthest and shortest distances between regions were the same as presented in Table
18. A majority of these schools were located 1-20 kilometres from a city (269); 67 were 21-40
kilometres from a city, and 11 schools were from a city 41-60 kilometres.
114
Table 26: Distance from school with libraries to city (n=350)

(N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (km) (km) (km)
North 38 9 3 1 1 1 92 19
Central 52 14 3 0 0 2 60 16
Northeast 125 31 2 1 0 1 75 15
East 12 3 1 0 0 4 50 18
West 10 1 2 0 0 3 50 18
South 32 9 0 0 0 1 40 14
Total 269 67 11 2 1 1 92 16
Table 27 presents the transport access types. A great majority of the schools can be
accessed by paved road (346, 98.9%). Thirty-two schools (9.1%) can be accessed by unpaved
road. No schools had access only by path or by sea, lake or river.
Table 27: Transport access types available to the schools with libraries (n=350)
Type N %
Paved road 346 98.9
Unpaved road 32 9.1
Path 0 0.0
#Multiple responses
the schools with libraries. All schools had access to electricity, but 38 (10.8%) of them were
without water supply. Three hundred and forty (97.1%) schools had internet connections; only
10 (2.9%) schools were without internet connection.
Of the 38 schools without water supply, the Northeast region had the highest number of
schools (21), followed by the West and South regions (4). The West region had the highest
percentage of schools without water supply among the 6 regions: approximately 30.0%. The
South region had the highest percentage of schools without internet connection among the
6 regions: approximately 10.0%.
115
Chart 2: Electric supply, water supply and internet connection of the schools with libraries
(n=350)
100% 350 10 52 3 52 69 3 69 159 6 16 16 13 13 41
38 21 4 4
90% 3
4
80%
70% 340 153
Number of schools
60%
50% 312 49 66 138 13 9 37 37
40% NO
30% YES
20%
10%
(%)
0%
Electricity
Water
Electricity
Water
Electricity
Water
Electricity
Water
Electricity
Water
Electricity
Water
Electricity
Water
Internet
Internet
Internet
Internet
Internet
Internet
Internet
Whole
Total North Central Northeast East West South
country
Table 28 shows the number of students in the 350 schools with libraries in 2016. The
information includes the range, minimum, maximum and average number, which was
divided into 7 groups, including the numbers of the surveyed schools and 6 regions. Based
on the data for the surveyed schools, the minimum number of students was 3, in a school
located in the Northeast region. The maximum number of students were found in a school
located in the North region (121). The average number of students in the 350 schools was
about 74. The data divided by region show that the majority of schools in every region (101)
had student numbers in the 61-80 range, approximately, followed by the range above 100
(73), and that of 81-100 (70) Noticeably, five schools in the Northeast region and one school
in the North, Central, and West regions had fewer than 20 students.
Table 28: Numbers of students in schools with libraries in 2016 (n=350)
(N) (N) (N) (N)
North 1 8 12 14 6 11 19 121 69
Central 1 13 8 19 13 15 11 120 72
Northeast 5 15 28 50 33 28 3 120 73
East 0 0 4 4 3 5 49 118 84
West 1 0 0 6 2 4 17 109 79
South 0 3 7 8 13 10 30 119 81
116
Total 8 39 59 101 70 73 3 121 74
Table 29 presents the number of teachers in schools with libraries in 2016. The information
includes the range, minimum, maximum and average number, which was divided into 7
groups, including the numbers across all regions and 6 regions. Based on the data for all
regions, the minimum number of teachers was 1 per school, in schools located in the Central
and Northeast regions. The maximum number of teachers per school were found in schools
located in the North and Central regions (14). The average number of teachers for all regions
was about 6. The data divided by region show that the majority of schools of every region
(172) had approximately 4-6 teachers, followed by 97 with between 7 and 9 teachers, and 54
in the range of 1 to 3 teachers.
Table 29: Teacher–student ratio in schools with libraries in 2016 (n=350)

(N) (N) (N) (N) (N) Teacher(N) teacher(N) (N)
North 1 22 13 7 1 2 14 6
Central 12 34 18 4 1 1 14 6
Northeast 26 81 47 5 0 1 12 5
East 0 9 6 1 0 4 11 6
West 1 10 2 0 0 2 8 5
South 6 16 11 8 0 3 12 7
Total 54 172 97 25 2 1 14 6
Table 30 presents the teacher–student ratio in surveyed schools with libraries in 2016. The
ratio was divided into 7 groups, including the numbers of all regions and 6 regions. The ratio
was calculated from the average numbers of teachers and students. It was found that the
ratio across all regions was 1:12. The West region had the highest ratio of teacher to student,
which was about 1:16, while the lowest ratio of teacher to student occurred in the North,
Central, and South regions (1:12).
Table 30: Ratio of teacher–student in schools with libraries in 2016
Region Teacher: student ratio

North 1:12
117
Central 1:12
Northeast 1:15
East 1:14
West 1:16
South 1:12
Total 1:12
Table 31 shows that the greatest number of computers in one school across all regions was
about 50, while the lowest number of computers in the surveyed schools was 0. The highest
number of those computers (50) were found in the Central region, followed by the
Northeast (40) and South regions (34), respectively. The lowest number of computers across
all regions (0) was found in the Northeast and South regions. The average numbers of
computers among the 6 regions were between 8 and 13.
Table 31: Number of computers in schools with libraries in 2016 (n=350)

Region 0 1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 Minimum Maximum Average
(N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N)
North 0 31 17 4 0 0 1 30 11
Central 0 37 24 4 3 1 2 50 13
Northeast 2 117 32 7 1 0 0 40 8
East 0 12 3 1 0 0 3 25 12
West 0 10 3 0 0 0 5 20 10
South 4 25 10 1 1 0 0 34 9
Whole sample 6 232 89 17 5 1 0 50 10
The budget of schools with libraries for 2016 is provided in Table 32. The highest school
budget, found in the Northeast region, was about 4,796,225 baht (184,470 AUD). The lowest
school budget, found in the North region, was only 35,700 baht (1,373 AUD). The average
budgets across 6 regions ranged widely between 220,000 and 385,000 baht (8,460-14,807
AUD). A majority of schools of the 350 surveyed schools (127) were allocated a budget of
between 100,001 and 200,000 baht (3,846-7,692 AUD), followed by 200,001-400,000 baht
(7,692-15,384 AUD) for 125 schools, and 400,001- 1,000,000 baht (15,384-38,461 AUD) for 58
118
schools. Noticeably, the budgets of schools in the North, Central and Northeast regions were
up to 4.7 million baht (180,770 AUD).
Table 32: Size of budget of schools with libraries in 2016 (n=350)

Region 1- 50,001- 100,101- 200,001- 400,001 - Above Minimum Maximum Average
50,000 100,000 200,000 400,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 (THB) (THB) (THB)
THB THB THB THB THB THB
(N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N)
North 1 4 18 21 4 3 35,700 4,082467 384,739
Central 2 8 19 25 15 1 40,000 1,095,716 295,509
Northeast 6 11 58 55 27 4 20,000 4,796,225 315,209
East 0 0 10 3 3 0 117,000 934,370 284,336
West 0 0 11 0 2 0 119,000 691,859 220,302
South 0 3 11 21 7 0 66,000 811,500 275,992
Total 9 26 127 125 58 8 35,700 4,796,225 311,302
4.2.3 Characteristics of schools without libraries (n=25)
This section presents the characteristics of 25 schools without libraries. The information
include province, Educational Service Area, distance from school to city, transport access types,
electricity supply, water supply, internet connection, numbers of students, numbers of teachers,
numbers of computers and numbers of budget in 2016.
Table 33 shows the basic information of schools without libraries including region, province
and Educational Service Area of the respondents’ schools. As can be seen, the Northeast had
the highest number of schools without libraries (14), followed by the Central (5) and the
North regions (3). Five provinces (Samut Songkram, Samut Sakorn, Mukdahan and Phangnga)
did not have the number of Educational Service Area, which was divided by Amphoe
(District) but they still have the education service areas, which govern the schools located in
the entire provinces.
Table 33: Regions and provinces of schools without libraries (n=25)

Educational
Services Area
North Chiang Rai 4 3 12.0
Nan 1
Mea Hong Son 2
119

Educational
Services Area
Central Kamphaeng Phet 2 5 20.0
Phitsanulok 2
Samut Songkram -
Samut Sakorn -
Saraburi 2
Northeast Kalasin 3 14 56.0
Khon Kean 1
Chaiyaphum 1
Bueng Kan -
Maha Sarakham 2
Mukdahan -
Loei 2
Surin 1
Nong Bua Lum Phu 1,2
East Prachin Buri 1 1 4.0
South Phangnga - 2 8.0
Yala 2
Total 25 100.0
Table 34 shows the distance of schools without libraries to a city in kilometres, by region. The
average distance from school to city among regions was between 5 and 22 kilometres. The
furthest school distance to city, in Phitsanulok province, Central Thailand, was about 70
kilometres; the next were schools located in the Northeast (42 km), and North regions (30
km). The nearest school distance to city was about 5 kilometres, found in three schools
located in the Central, East and South regions. Table 34 shows that a majority of schools
were located 1-20 kilometres far from the city (14), 8 were 21-40 kilometres from a city, and
2 were 41-60 kilometres to a city.
Table 34: Distance from schools without libraries to city (n=25)

Region 1-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 Minimum Maximum Average
(N) (N) (N) (N) (km) (km) (km)
North 2 1 0 0 12 30 19
Central 3 0 1 1 5 70 29
Northeast 7 6 1 1 7 42 22
East 1 0 0 0 5 5 5
South 1 1 0 0 5 22 11
Total 14 8 2 1 5 70 22
120
Table 35 provides the transport access types. All these schools can be accessed by paved
road (25, 100.0%). Four schools (9.1%) can also be accessed by unpaved road. No school (0.0%)
needs to be accessed by path or by sea, lake or river.
Table 35: Transport access types of schools without libraries (n=25)
Type N %
Paved road 25 100.0
Unpaved road 4 16.0
Path 0 0.0
#Multiple responses
the 25 schools without libraries. As can be seen, 100% of those schools had access to
electricity, while 5 (20.0%) of them were without water supply. Chart 3 shows that 24 (96.0%)
schools had internet connections; only 1 school (4.0%) located in the Northeast region was
without an internet connection. The Northeast region had the highest number of schools
without water supply (3), followed by the North and Central regions (1 each).
Chart 3: Electric supply, water supply and internet connection of schools without libraries
(n=25)
25 20 3 3 5 5 14 1 1 1 2 2
100% 1 0
1
90% 1 3
80% 1 13
Number of schools
70%
60%
2
50% 24 4 11 2
40%
NO
30%
(%)
20% YES
10%
0%
Electricity
Electricity
Water
Water
Electricity
Water
Electricity
Water
Electricity
Water
Electricity
Water
Internet
Internet
Internet
Internet
Internet
Internet
Total
Whole country North Central Northeast East South
121
Table 36 presents the number of students in the 25 schools without libraries in 2016. The
information includes the range, minimum, maximum and average number, which was
divided into 7 groups, including the numbers of the 25 surveyed schools and the number of
6 regions. Based on the data for the 25 surveyed schools, the minimum number of students
was 25, in a school located in the Northeast region. The maximum number of students, 114,
was found in a school located in the North region.
The average number of students across all regions was about 58. The data divided by region
show that that a majority of 9 schools across all regions had a range of 21 to 40 students, 6
had a range of 81 to 100 students and 6 were in the range above 100 students. Noticeably,
no school had fewer than 20 students. The average number of students in schools in 5
regions ranged widely: the South region averaged about 78, followed by the Central (75), and
East regions (64). The North region had an average of only 36 students.
Table 36: Numbers of students in schools without libraries in 2016 (n=25)
(N) (N) (N) (N)
North 0 2 1 0 0 0 29 44 36
Central 0 1 1 0 2 2 39 114 75
Northeast 0 6 1 3 4 4 25 89 54
East 0 0 0 1 0 0 64 64 64
South 0 0 1 0 0 0 50 105 78
Total 0 9 4 4 6 6 25 114 58
Table 37 shows the number of teachers of schools without libraries in 2016. The information
includes the range, minimum, maximum and average number, which was divided into 7
groups, including the numbers across all regions and the number in the 6 regions. Based on
the data for the 25 surveyed schools, the minimum number of teachers, 2, were found in 2
schools located in the Northeast region. The maximum number of teachers was found in a
school located in the South region (10). The average number of teachers for the 25 surveyed
schools was about 5. The data divided by region show that the 12 schools had a range of
122
approximately 1-3 teachers, 9 schools had 4 to 6 teachers, and 3 schools had 7 to 9 teachers.
Only 1 school, located in the South region, had 10 teachers.
Table 37: Numbers of teachers in schools without libraries in 2016 (n=25)
Region 1-3 4-6 7-9 10-12 Minimum Maximum Average

(N) (N) (N) (N) teacher teacher
(N) (N) (N)
North 2 1 0 0 3 5 4
Central 2 1 2 0 3 8 5
Northeast 7 6 1 0 2 9 4
East 1 0 0 0 3 3 3
South 1 0 0 1 4 10 7
Total 12 9 3 1 2 10 5
Table 38 presents the teacher–student ratio in schools without libraries in 2016. The teacher–
student ratio was divided into 7 groups, including the numbers across all regions and the
number of 6 regions. The ratio across the 25 surveyed schools was 1:12. It was found that the
East region had the highest teacher–student ratio, about 1:21, while the lowest teacher–
student ratio occurred in the North regions (1:9).
Table 38: Teacher–student ratio of schools without libraries in 2016
Region Teacher: Student ratio

North 1:9
Central 1:15
Northeast 1:14
East 1:21
South 1:11
Total 1:12
Table 39 shows that the greatest number of computers in a school was about 17, while the
lowest number of computers across all regions was 1. The highest number of computers was
found in the South region (17), followed by the Central (15) and Northeast regions (12),
respectively. The lowest number of computers was found in a school located in the
123
Northeast region (1). The average number of computers among the schools in the 6 regions
was between 5 and 11.
Table 39: Number of computers (n=25)
Region 1-10 11-20 Minimum Maximum Average

(N) (N) (N) (N) (N)
North 3 0 5 10 7
Central 3 2 2 15 8
Northeast 13 1 1 12 5
East 1 0 5 5 5
South 1 1 5 17 11
Total 21 4 1 17 6
The school budget for 2016 is provided in Table 40. The highest budget of schools without
libraries, found in the South region, was about 500,000 baht (19,230 AUD). The lowest school
budget, found in the North region, was 53,000 baht (2,038 AUD). The average budgets across
6 regions ranged widely between 85,000 and 328,900 baht (3,270-12,650 AUD). Most schools
of the Central, Northeast and South regions (11) were allocated a budget of between
200,001 and 400,000 THB (7,692-15,384 AUD), except for the North and East regions.
Noticeably, no schools had a budget allocation less than 50,000 THB (1,923 AUD).
Table 40: Size of schools budget in school without libraries in 2016 (n=25)
Region 50,001- 100,101- 200,001- 400,001 - Minimum Maximum Average

100,000 200,000 400,000 1,000,000 (THB) (THB) (THB)
THB THB THB THB
(N) (N) (N) (N)
North 1 2 0 0 53,000 138,600 101,200
Central 1 0 4 0 79,800 364,267 424,524
Northeast 4 3 7 0 70,000 346,000 194,169
East 1 0 0 0 85,000 85,000 85,000
South 1 0 2 1 157,800 500,000 328,900
Total 7 6 11 1 53,000 500,000 201,533

124
4.3 School libraries’ characteristics
Questions in Part 1 Section 3 of the questionnaire asked the principals to provide some basic
information, related to their school libraries, which would contribute the empirical data about
the actual condition of these school libraries. Consequently, the findings identify the patterns
of school libraries among 6 regions in rural Thailand.
Table 41 presents the information of the existing school libraries across the 6 regions and
also among the 375 surveyed schools. Further percentages were calculated based on a total
sample size of each region. Of the 375 schools sampled, 350 schools had libraries, and 25
schools had no libraries. The highest numbers of schools with libraries were found in the
Northeast region (159). Noticeably, the schools located in the West region all had libraries.
The righthand column of the table shows that the highest percentage of schools without
libraries was found in the Northeast region (14, 8.1%), followed by the Central (5, 6.8%) and
East regions (1, 5.9%).

125
Table 41: Number of schools with and without libraries (n=375)
Region School with School without School with School without

library library library library
(N) (N) (%) (%)
North 52 3 94.5 5.5
Central 69 5 93.2 6.8
Northeast 159 14 91.9 8.1
East 16 1 94.1 5.9
West 13 0 100.0 0.0
South 41 2 95.3 4.7
Total 350 25 93.3 6.7
Table 42 offers the reasons for not having a school library. Twenty-two principals (88.0%)
revealed that the main reason for not having libraries was inadequate budget. Another 6
(24.0%) respondents indicated that the library was not a priority at the moment. There were
12 principals (48.0%) who gave other reasons for not having a school library, including a lack
of room or building (10), a lack of staff (1), and a library damaged by flooding (1).
Table 42: Reasons for not having a school library (n=25)
Reasons N %
Inadequate budget 22 88.0
Low priority 6 24.0
Other 12 48.0
#Multiple responses
Table 43 shows that a majority of the respondents who had no library in their schools had a
plan to set up a library. Eleven principals planned to set up their libraries when the budgets
are made available; nine principals intended to set up school libraries in 2016. Two principals
wished to set up school libraries in 2017. However, three principals had no plan to construct
a library in the near future.

126
Table 43: The plan to set up a school library in the near future (n=25)
Plan to set up a library Intention to set up a school library N %
Yes When budgets are made available 11 44.0

Starting in 2016 9 36.0
Starting in 2017 2 8.0
No 3 12.0
Total 25 100.0
Current conditions of libraries of small public primary school in rural Thailand
The first open-ended questions of the questionnaire asked the participants to describe the
current conditions of the libraries of small public primary schools in rural Thailand. This
question allowed respondents to provide more than one view. A majority of respondents
(366) gave their opinions about the conditions of the school libraries; 9 respondents did not.
The answers were grouped into 6 themes: administration, physical’s facilities, collection,
activities, services and staff.
Table 44 shows that most commonly the principals considered their libraries’ conditions to
be poor in collections (218), physical facilities (217) and staff (126). A majority of principals
thought Thai’s rural libraries were poor in administration because of their insufficient
management (44), budget (35) and library system (18). However, 12 principals noted that
their libraries were in good condition and 9 principals rated the condition of their libraries as
fair.
A majority of principals considered their libraries to be poor, particularly in building/room/
space utilisation (87), in indoor environment (57), and in information and communication
technology (39) but 14 principals noted that their libraries were in good condition and 9
principals rated the condition of their libraries as fair.
Principals gave their opinions that their library collections lacked books (201), digital media
(14), and serials (3). Some principals viewed that their libraries as having good (19) or fair
collections (9). For the libraries’ activities, services and staff, principals did not provide
127
specific details, but 126 principals indicated that their libraries had insufficient staff, 63
noted insufficient activities, and 60 referred to insufficient services. On the contrary, 11
principals said that their libraries’ activities, services and staff were good; and another 9
principals viewed these activities, services and staff to be fair.
Table 44: Current conditions of libraries (n=375)
Current conditions Good (N) Fair (N) Poor (N)
Administration 12 9 100
(9) Government’s policy 3
44
(10) Library administration
35
(11) Budget 18
(12) Library system
Physical’s facilities 14 9 217
- Indoor environment 57
- Building/room/space utilisation 87
- Furniture and equipment 35
- ICT 39
Collections 19 9 218
- Book 201
- Serials 3
- Digital media 14
Activities 11 9 63
Services 11 9 60
Staff 11 9 126
#Multiple responses
The information below gives some examples of principals’ opinions about the current
conditions of the libraries of small public primary schools in rural Thailand.
Administration
“Staff who are responsible for the libraries lack time to take care of the library because their majority
duty is teaching. Therefore, they can only administrate the libraries when they have free time.” (Principal
School 91)
128
Physical’s facilities
“Libraries are combined with classrooms because of limited places and locations. The library should have
completely separate locations. The rural school libraries lack media, technology and telecommunication
infrastructures, which is totally different from urban school libraries.” (Principal School 12)
Collections
“The libraries of small public primary school in rural Thailand have faced problems such as lacking books,
qualified teacher-librarians and budget. The libraries look like storage rooms, were not able to support
teaching and learning for teachers and students. Students are not encouraged to use the libraries.
Moreover, the teachers lack awareness in supporting students to have and develop information literacy
skills. Some libraries’ collections were provided by the Ministry of Education, while others were donated
by other organisations. Additionally, the donated books are not proper for students’ ages.” (Principal
School 67)
Activities
“Libraries lack computers and internet connection to support students to be independent learners. Most
libraries lack teacher-librarians because they were assigned to be responsible for mainly teaching
students. Therefore, the libraries lack providing a variety of activities and services developing the reading
habit and reading culture based on which is their job responsibility.” (Principal School 260)
Services
“Most libraries lack abilities to achieve the school library standard, particularly, the lack of teacher-
librarians, library services and technology and communication infrastructures.” (Principal School 151)
Staff
“Rural school libraries lack qualified librarians who have knowledge of library management.” (Principal
School 308)
“Those school libraries lack teacher-librarians who are professionally trained persons.” (Principal School
446)
Causes contributing to the current condition of libraries of small public primary schools in
rural Thailand
Open-ended question number 2 asked the principals to suggest the causes that contributed
to the current condition of libraries of small public primary schools in rural Thailand that the
principals had described in the first open-ended question. Most respondents (364) gave
reasons, but 11 respondents had no comment. Table 45 shows that 294 of the respondents
revealed that their small budget allocation was a major cause contributing to the current
conditions of the school libraries. A minor cause was insufficient staff (126). The principals
129
noted that their schools lacked teacher-librarians and qualified librarians. Some respondents
suggested that the causes involved insufficient physical facilities (35), lacking support from
libraries’ stakeholders (14), insufficient collections (13) and lacking reading promotion
activities (5). A small number of principals gave positive explanations for their libraries,
involving sufficient administration (4), and sufficient stakeholder supports (5).
Table 45: Causes contributing to the current conditions of libraries (n=375)
Causes contributed to the current conditions of libraries

Insufficient (N) Sufficient (N)
Administration 294 Administration 4

- A small amount of budget allocation 269 (13) Adequate budget 1
- Focusing on curriculum-centred classrooms 4 (14) Principal’s support 3
- Lacking concern and clear library policy of Thai 11
government
- Lacking concern and support of local affiliations 4
- Lacking principal’ s support and library 9
awareness
Physical facilities 35 - -
- Poor condition of indoor environment 1
- Lacking building/room/space utilisation 22
- Lacking furniture and equipment 1
- Lacking ICT 11
Collections 13 - -
- Inadequate books 6
- Lacking up-to-date books 2
- Plenty of damaged books 1
- Lacking a variety of books 1
- Lacking high quality books 2
- Influences of new media 4
Activities 5 - -
- Lacking reading promotion activities
Staff 126 - -
- Lacking full-time staff, teacher-librarian,
librarian
Stakeholders’ supports 14 Stakeholders’ supports 5
130
Causes contributed to the current conditions of libraries

Insufficient (N) Sufficient (N)
- Lacking local communities’ support 9 - Local communities’ support 3
- Lacking public and private organizations’ 15 - Public and private organizations’ 2
support support
#Multiple responses
The information below provides examples of causes that contribute to the current
conditions of the libraries of small public primary schools in rural Thailand.
“Thai government lacks concern about the current situations of the small schools. The government
focuses on Education Reform by closing and merging those schools, whereas parents and local
communities need to maintain the schools. Parents do not want their children studying far away from
their homes because of high expenditures.” (Principal School 305)
“A lack of clear and efficient policy” (Principal School 394)
“The approved budget did not meet the requirement of the schools. For example, the school requested a
budget for buying computers and printers but the local affiliation approved the budget for buying
cabinets.” (Principal School 252)
“An insufficient number of teachers; one teacher has to teach in many grades and has to work on extra
tasks. The teachers have overload duties and responsibilities.” (Principal School 178)
“Teachers or staff who manage the libraries lacking knowledge in a library management.” (Principal
School 442)
“An insufficient internet connection; a lack of high speed internet” (Principal School 21, 62, 165, 190, 207,
233)
Role of libraries of small public primary schools on students’ academic achievement, as
perceived by principals
Opinions regarding the role of libraries of small public primary schools on students’
academic achievement were acquired from 365 respondents; 10 respondents left the
question without any answers. Table 46 shows that a majority of principals considered that
the role of the library in small public primary schools was to enhance students’ academic
131
achievement (189), to develop students’ information literacy (102) and to raise reading
literacy levels (85). Most answers claimed that the school library’s role had positive impacts
on students’ academic achievement; for example, enhancing students’ academic
achievement (189), information literacy (102), reading literacy (85), learning skills (36), writing
literacy (9), critical thinking (9), and supporting reading for pleasure (2). A small number of
principals reflected that the school library had a low impact (38) or no impact (8) on students’
academic achievement.
relation to students’ academic achievement (n=375)
Principals’ perceptions of the role of small public primary school libraries in relation to N
Schools libraries have impact on students’ academic achievement in terms of: 432
- Increasing students’ academic achievement 189
- Developing information literacy 102
- Developing reading literacy 85
- Increasing learning skills 36
- Developing writing literacy 9
- Developing critical thinking 9
- Supporting reading for pleasure 2
Schools libraries have low impact on students’ academic achievement 38
Schools libraries have no impact on students’ academic achievement 8
#Multiple responses
The following information gives examples of principals’ opinions regarding the role of
libraries in small public primary schools on students’ academic achievement.

“I truly believe that the school libraries have a high impact on students’ performances. Good libraries
[good library’s environment] are vital in developing effective and efficient learning for students,
particularly students in rural schools.” (Principal School 23)
“School library has an extremely impact on students’ academic achievement because it provides a
diversity of resources, information and knowledge. It also supports students to develop their reading
habits. Library is a world of learning, which enriches students’ mind.” (Principal School 252)
132
“School libraries support students to develop their reading habits, reading literacy, information literacy
leading to increase students’ academic grades.” (Principal School 184)
“School libraries are places loaded with a wealth of information and knowledge available for students.
Students can read books despite the school loss of electric power. Students can develop their information
literacy skills via using the libraries. Therefore, the libraries have a positive impact on students’ academic
achievement.” (Principal School 252)
“School libraries are the places that help rural students to improve their learning. If the schools lack
libraries, they will affect students’ reading and writing literacy.” (Principal School 131)
“Library helps students to gain general knowledge and their experiences. Students are able to find
information and knowledge influencing their learning skills. For example, fiction helps them to develop
their reading skills and increase their imaginations for better creative thinking.” (Principal School 387)
“Library has less impact on students’ academic achievement because students achieve their grade from
learning in the classroom.” (Principal school 108, 330)
“School libraries cannot directly impact students’ academic achievement on their own; it depends on
many factors such as the enthusiastic of students and teacher support. Even though a school library fully
functions in supporting learning, if students do not interest in using libraries, the libraries is definitely
useless and cannot increase student learning outcome.” (Principal school 120)
Principals’ perceived requirements for improving the condition of libraries of small public
primary schools in rural Thailand
The last open-ended question in the survey Part 1 asked the principals to provide their
perceived requirements for improving the condition of libraries of small public primary
schools in rural Thailand. Table 47 shows that a majority of respondents (364) gave
requirements, while 11 respondents had no comment. Two hundred and seventy-six
principals perceived that effective administration was the greatest requirement for
improving the condition of the libraries. Effective administration involved government
policy, government support, budget allocation, curriculums, library management systems,

local affiliation support, principal support and schooling assessment. Other perceived
requirements for improving the condition of the libraries was having sufficient staff (186),
which included full-time staff, teacher librarians and librarians, and having teacher
133
awareness about the roles of library. Another 75 principals identified that having sufficient
library physical facilities was required to improve the condition of those libraries.
Table 47: Principals’ perceived requirements for improving the condition of libraries of
small public primary schools in rural Thailand (n=375)
Principals’ perceived requirements for improving the condition of libraries of small public N

Effective administration 276
- Adequate library budget 199
- Government supports and awareness 32
- Principal’s awareness 24
- Local affiliation supports 11
- Clearly policy from the government 5
- Integrated curriculum with library 3
- Library administration 3
- Sufficient library system 1
Sufficient staff 186

- Full-time staff 74
- Teacher awareness 49
- Teacher-librarians 45
- Librarian 18
Sufficient libraries’ physical facilities 75
- Indoor environment 16
- ICT 29
- Internet 13
Sufficient collections 52
- Book 38
- Digital media 14
Local communities’ supports 29
Public and private organisations’ supports 28
Sufficient activities 15
Parents’ supports 13
Sufficient library network 2

134
Principals’ perceived requirements for improving the condition of libraries of small public N
#Multiple responses
Further information below provides the respondents’ perceived requirements for improving
the condition of the libraries in small public primary schools in rural Thailand.
“Budget allocation from the government” (Principal School 15, 73, 89, 104, 119...)
“The government awareness about the important of school libraries, the principal concern, local
communities’ supports and sufficient budget” (Principal School 13)
“Principal’s vision regarding the library’s development in order to support students’ learning, abilities to
achieve an adequate fund and budget for the libraries, developing training programmes for teachers on
librarianship.” (Principal School 25)
“Providing sufficient library budget, my library was impossible to reinvent into a living library, modern
libraries, digital libraries or virtual learning space because the budget allocation for construction or
maintenance of school buildings depended on the decision of the Educational Service Area, and the
decision-making process for allocating the budget might take a long time because of the large number
of schools asking for a budget to improve their school buildings” (Principal School 181)
“Providing full-time staff who are responsible for the libraries.” (Principal School 45, 56)
“Providing sufficient libraries’ facilities such as computers, ICT, internet for information retrieval”
(Principal School 139)
“Providing a separate room for a library” (Principal School 38, 60, 115, 138, 317…)
4.3.1 Library administration
This section provides information about the library administration of the 350 schools with
libraries. Library administration covered the library policy and plan, the amount of library
budget, the proportion of the school library budget, and a person who managed the library.
Chart 4 shows the availability of a library policy and plan divided across 6 criteria. Over half
of the libraries had a policy and plan covering all criteria. The most common criterion was
providing a teacher or staff to manage a school library (318), followed by implementing a

135
library plan into a school development plan (301), and providing a school library budget
(278). Of the 350 schools, 157 principals reported that their libraries could not reach the
minimum standard for school libraries. Another 93 respondents noted that their schools had
no library evaluation. The chart shows that 85 schools had no library organisational
structure. Almost 50% of the school studies (141) had all 6 criteria.
Chart 4: Policy and plan of school library (n=350)
512
256
128
Number of schools
64
32
16
8
4
2
1 An imple-
mentation of a Teacher or
A library The minimum
library plan staff to A school library A school library
organisation standard for
into a school manage a budget evaluation
structure school library
development school library
plan
Have 301 265 318 278 192 256
Do not have 48 85 32 71 157 93
Missing number 0 0 0 1 1 1
Chart 5 illustrates the amount of school libraries’ budgets sourced from the national budget,
government subsidies, student fees, supplementary donation from government sector,

private sector and local communities, and other places. The largest portion of the library
budget was derived from the supplementary donation of local communities (530,000 THB/
20,385 AUD), followed by the supplementary donation from the private sector (500,000
THB/19,230 AUD), and others (350,000 THB/13,460 AUD). The smallest portion of the library
budget came from student fees (100 THB/4 AUD). Noticeably, the smallest portion of the
library budget from all sources was from 100 up to 1,000 baht. The average library budget
was 26,258 baht (1,000 AUD), but most libraries had a budget of approximately 5,000 baht
(190 AUD) per year (n=65).

136
The price of children’s literature in Thailand is from 35 to 1,000 baht (1.34-35 AUD), and the
average price of children’s literature depends on the type of book. The average price of a
comic book is about 66 baht, while fiction, cartoon book, traditional literature, and
informational book prices are approximately 205 baht/8 AUD (The publishers and booksellers
association of Thailand, 2014). Furthermore, the average price for a personal computer in
Thailand is approximately 22,000 baht/ 846 AUD (Boonsorn, 2016, September 6). Chart 5 also
shows that with the smallest total library budget (400 baht/15 AUD), the school can buy
approximately 6 fiction books or 11 Aesop books per year.
Chart 5: Sources of the library budget in 2016 (n=350)
1,048,576
524,288
262,144
131,072
65,536
32,768
Amount of library budget
16,384
8,192
4,096
2,048
1,024
512
256
128
64
32
16
8
4
2
1
Govern- Govern- Local Private
National Students Total
ment ment community sector Others
budget fees budget
subsidies donations donation donation
Minimum 500 200 100 1,000 1,000 200 500 400
Maximum 195,000 192,500 3,000 100,000 530,000 500,000 350,000 550,000
Average 4,927.07 3,713.82 10.29 865.71 8,034.12 4,473.08 4,234.00 52,488.00
Table 48 presents the proportion of school library budget sourced from the national budget.
Three hundred and six schools spent less than 5% of the national budget on their libraries.
Another 18 schools spent 6%, followed by 19 schools that spent 7%. Seven principals spent
more than 7% of national budget for their libraries.
Table 48: Proportion of school library budget derived from the national budget (n=350)
Proportion of school library budget N %

sourced from the national budget
Less than 5% 306 87.5

137
6% 18 5.1
7% 19 5.4
Other 7 2.0
Total 350 100.0
Table 49 shows that a great majority of libraries (292; 83.4%) were managed by teachers who
have been chosen by the school and allocated some hours to manage the library. A minority
of libraries (45; 12.9%) were managed by staff, and 9 were managed by a full-time teacher-
librarian (2.6%). A noticeable difference is that only one school had a qualified librarian (0.3%),
while 3 school libraries (0.9%) had no staff.
Table 49: The school libraries staff (n=350)
School library staff and management N %
Full-time teacher-librarian 9 2.6
Qualified librarian 1 0.3
Teacher chosen by the school and allocated some hours 292 83.4
to manage the library
Staff 45 12.8
Have no a library staff 3 0.9
Total 350 100.0
A majority of school library staff graduated in Elementary Education (46), followed by Thai
language (22), and English Language (8). Other staff graduated in various majors including
Social Science, Computer Science, Sciences, History, Hospitality Management, Home

Economics, Physical Education, Community Development, Animal Science, Performing Arts,
Mathematics, Agriculture Science, Special Educational Needs, and Biology.
4.3.2 Library’s physical facilities
The surveys also sought data about the library’s physical facilities, in order to describe the
characteristics of libraries of small public primary schools in rural Thailand. Therefore, this
section provides information regarding physical facilities’ conditions, library’s name,
quantity of infrastructures and materials.

138
Table 50 shows that 257 schools had separate rooms for libraries, while 93 schools had no
separate room for a library. Most commonly, the schools with a separate room for a library
were found in the Northeast (107), Central (57) and North regions (40). Interestingly, the
schools most commonly without a separate room for a library were found in the same
regions: the Northeast (52), Central (12) and North (12). Remarkably, Table 50 shows the
percentage of schools with and without a separate room for the library. The percentage was
calculated based on a total sample size of each region. Of the 6 regions, the highest
percentage of schools having a separate library were found in the Central region (82.6%),
followed by the South (78.0%), North and West regions (76.9%). The lowest percentage of
schools without a separate library were found in the Northeast (32.7%), East (31.3%), North
and West regions (each 23.1%).
Table 50: Separate room for a library (n=350)
Region Schools having a Schools having a Schools without a Schools without

separated room separated room separated room a separated
for library (N) for library (%) for library (N) room for library
(%)
North 40 76.9 12 23.1
Central 57 82.6 12 17.4
Northeast 107 67.3 52 32.7
East 11 68.7 5 31.3
West 10 76.9 3 23.1
South 32 78.0 9 22.0
Total 257 73.4 93 26.6
The principals of the schools without a separate room for a library further reported the
conditions of their school libraries, as shown in Table 51. A majority of principals (70)
described their libraries as being combined with other rooms, such as school infirmary,
computer laboratory, principal’s room and teacher’s room. Additionally, one library was
combined with an ASEAN study centre. Books in those libraries were kept for students to
borrow. A minority of principals (15) said that their libraries were combined with other places
in the schools, such as a common room, cafeteria, hall or pavilion where the books were
139
kept and which learners used as a reading corner. Eight principals indicated that their school
libraries were combined with classrooms.
Table 51: The library condition of the schools without a separate room (n=93)
Description Number Percent

Combined with other rooms (school infirmary, computer laboratory, 70 75.3
principal’s room, teacher’s room, ASEAN study centre)
Other places in school (common room, cafeteria, hall, pavilion, etc.) 15 16.1
Other (Combined with a classroom) 8 8.6
Total 93 100.0
Table 52 presents the name of the school libraries. A great majority of schools (326) called
their libraries a school library; other schools gave their libraries different titles, such as
books corner (2), living library (1), and reading room and mini theatre (1). Some schools
named their libraries after donors, such as knowledge café and NBD’s park, implementing
knowledge with Nana Steel, and SukkaThammo library.
Table 52: Library name (n=350)
Name N %
School library 326 93.1
Resource centre 3 0.9
Learning centre 2 0.6
Learning resource centre 7 2.0
Other 13 3.4
Total 350 100.0
Table 53 provides information about library size. A majority of principals (271) described their
libraries as occupying 48 m2 or 1 classroom. A minority of schools (45) had library sizes smaller
than 1 classroom, while 33 libraries occupied 94 m2, or 2 classrooms. One school had a library
size larger than 2 classrooms.

140
Table 53: Library size (n=350)
Size (1 classroom = 48 m2) N %
Smaller than 1 classroom 45 12.9
1 classroom 271 77.4
2 classrooms 33 9.4
Larger than 2 classrooms 1 0.3
Total 350 100.0
Chart 6 illustrates the number of library seats, divided into 6 regions and across all regions.
Based on the data across all regions, the greatest number of seats was 154, in the North
region; the smallest number of seats was 0, found in 60 schools spread through all regions.
The average number of seats across the 350 surveyed schools was about 15. As shown in
Chart 6, the Central region had the highest average number of seats (19), while the lowest
average number (14) were found in the Northeast and South regions.
Chart 6: Number of seats (n=350)

180
160
140
Number of seats
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Whole North Central Northeast East West South
country region region region region region region
Minimum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maximum 154 154 90 60 40 50 40
Average 15 15 19 14 15 18 14
Chart 7 presents the number of computers in libraries. The greatest number of computers
was found in the South region (34), followed by the North (16) and Central regions (12).
Noticeably, the lowest number, 0, occurred in 176 schools across the 350 surveyed schools.
The average number of computers for the 350 libraries was about 1. Among the 6 regions,
141
the highest average numbers were found in the Central and South regions (2); the average
number for other regions was about 1.
Chart 7: Number of computers in library (n=350)

40
Number of computers
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Whole North Central Northeast East West South
country region region region region region region
Minimum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maximum 34 16 12 10 5 4 34
Average 1 1 2 1 1 1 2
Table 54 presents the availability of wi-fi connections in the libraries. Over half of the
libraries (194) had no wi-fi connections; while 156 (41.1%) libraries had wi-fi connections. Most
libraries without wi-fi connections were in the Northeast (103), South (25), North (24) and
Central regions (24). Table 54 shows the percentage of schools with and without wi-fi
connections, based on the total sample size of each region. The greatest percentage of
school libraries with wi-fi connections were mostly found in the West (69.2%), Northeast
(59.5%) and South regions (58.1%). The greatest percentage of school libraries without wi-fi
connections were in the Central (67.6%), North (56.4%) and East regions (47.1%).
Table 54: Number of wi-fi connections available in library (n=350)
Region Library with wi-fi Library with wi-fi Library without wi-fi Library without wi-fi
(N) (%) (N) (%)
North 28 43.6 24 56.4
Central 45 32.4 24 67.6
Northeast 56 59.5 103 40.5
East 7 52.9 9 47.1
West 4 69.2 9 30.8
South 16 58.1 25 41.9

142
Total 156 41.1 194 58.9
Table 55 shows the availability of library furniture and equipment for facilitated library
services. A majority of schools had furniture and equipment for facilitated library services
(263). In contrast, 87 schools had no such furniture and equipment. The most libraries with
furniture and equipment were in the Northeast (112), Central (57), and North regions (39);
the most schools without furniture and equipment were found in the Northeast (47), North
(13) and Central regions (12). Table 55 provides the percentage of schools that were with or
without furniture and equipment, calculated based on the total sample size of each region.
Noticeably, the school libraries without furniture and equipment were mostly found in the
East (35.3%), Northeast (27.2%) and North regions (23.6%).
Table 55: The availability of furniture and equipment to facilitate library services (n=350)
Region Have furniture and Have furniture and Do not have Do not have
equipment (N) equipment (%) furniture and furniture and
equipment (N) equipment (%)
North 39 76.4 13 23.6
Central 57 83.8 12 16.2
Northeast 112 72.8 47 27.2
East 10 64.7 6 35.3
West 11 84.6 2 15.4
South 34 83.7 7 16.3
Total 263 76.8 87 23.2
The principals were asked to identify their library’s physical facilities regarding 4 criteria:
being easy to access, having a good quality of library’s indoor environment, having a good
quality of library’s outdoor environment and providing appropriate zoning for users and
services. Chart 8 illustrates that the library’s physical facilities of at least 112 schools covered
the 4 criteria. Some principals claimed that their libraries were easy to access, while 101
libraries were considered not easy to access, such as no library guide signs in their schools. A
great majority of principals (325) identified their school libraries as having a good quality
indoor environment. Chart 8 further shows that 277 school libraries had good quality
143
outdoor environment. Noticeably, 237 schools lacked an appropriate zone for users and
services.
Chart 8: The library physical facilities (n=350)
350
Number of schools
300
250
200
150
100
50
0 Having a good Having a good
Providing an
quality of library's quality of library's
appropriate zoning
Easy to access indoor environment outdoor
for users and
(light, ventilation, environment (clean,
services
atmosphere) decorated)
Have 248 325 277 112
Do not have 101 25 73 237
Missing number 1 0 0 1
4.3.3 Library collections
As part of the survey, principals were asked to provide information about library collections.
The library collections data related to the number of books, journals/magazines,
newspapers, audio visual and electronic media, types of books, library classification system,
and library management system.
Table 56 presents the minimum, maximum and average number of books in those libraries
in 2016. The data on the number of books was divided into 6 regions and a summary across
all surveyed schools. Of the 350 schools studied, 347 gave the number of books, whereas 3
schools did not. The minimum number of books was 50; the maximum number was 15,000.
The average number of books was 1,083. The data divided by region shows that the greatest
number of books were found in the Central region, (approximately 15,000 books), followed
by the West (13,560), North and Northeast regions (12,000). The smallest number of books,
50 books, were found in 2 schools located in the Central region, followed by the Northeast
region (80). The lowest number of books in the North, West and South regions were the
same, approximately 100.

144
The average number of books across the entire country was about 1,083. Noticeably, the
highest average number of books was found in the West region (1,900), while the lowest
number was found in the Northeast region (782). Most libraries in the entire country had
approximately 500 books, found in the Central, Northeast, West and South regions. The
highest number of books in the North region was about 1,000, while the West was 300. The
last column provides the student–books ratio: which was 1:15 across the 350 surveyed
libraries. The highest student–books ratio was found in the West region (1:24). The smallest
student-books ratio was found in the Northeast region (1:11).
Table 56: Number of books (n=347)
Region Minimum Maximum Average Mode Student-books

(N) (N) (N) (N) ratio
North 100 12,000 1,216 1,000 1:18
Central 50 15,000 1,401 500 1:19
Northeast 80 12,000 782 500 1:11
East 200 3,000 1,259 300 1:15
West 100 13,560 1,900 500 1:24
South 100 5,200 1,210 500 1:15
Total 50 15,000 1,083 500 1:15
The principals were asked to identify the number of journals and magazines in their school
libraries. The number of journals and magazines which the libraries received through
subscription or donations was counted by journal/magazine title. Table 57 presents the
number of journals/magazines in the libraries, divided into 6 regions and across all surveyed
libraries. Of the 350 schools studied, 347 gave the number of journals and magazines,
whereas 3 schools did not. The findings show that the greatest number of
journals/magazines was 20, found in 10 schools spreading through every region except the
East. The greatest number of journals/magazines in the East region was 10. The smallest
number of the journals/magazines of all regions was 0, found in 156 schools spreading over
all regions. Noticeably, most libraries in every region (MODE) had no journals/magazines
subscription.
145
The average numbers of journals/magazines of the entire country was 3, while the average
numbers across the 6 regions were between 2 to 4. The last column provides the students–
journal/magazine ratio. The students–journal/magazine ratio across all regions was 24:1. The
libraries located in the North region had the greatest students–journal/magazine ratio (17:1),
while the lowest was found in the South region (41:1).
Table 57: Number of Journals/ magazines (n=347)
Region Minimum Maximum Average Mode Students-journals/

(N) (N) (N) (N) magazines ratio
North 0 20 4 0 17:1
Central 0 20 3 0 24:1
Northeast 0 20 2 0 36:1
East 0 10 3 0 28:1
West 0 20 4 0 20:1
South 0 20 2 0 41:1
Total 0 20 3 0 24:1
Table 58 presents the number of newspaper subscriptions in those libraries, counted by the
newspaper title. The findings show that the greatest number of newspaper subscriptions
was 4, found in 2 schools located in the Northeast region. The smallest number of
newspaper subscriptions for all regions was 0. Over 200 schools, spreading across all
surveyed libraries, had no newspaper subscriptions. The average number of newspaper
subscriptions in the Northeast and South regions was 0, while the average number of other
regions was 1.
Most libraries across all regions had no newspaper subscriptions, which was the same as for
the North, Central, Northeast, and South regions. Most libraries in the East and West regions
had a newspaper subscription for 1 title. The last column provides the students–newspaper
ratio. The students–newspaper ratio of the entire country was 73:1. The libraries located in
the North region had the greatest students–newspaper ratio (67:1), while the lowest ratio
was found in the South region, 81:0.

146
Table 58: Numbers of newspaper subscriptions (n=347)
Region Minimum Maximum Average Mode Students-newspaper

North 0 3 1 0 67:1
Central 0 3 1 0 73:1
Northeast 0 4 0 0 71:0
East 0 2 1 1 83:1
West 0 2 1 1 79:1
South 0 2 0 0 81:0
Whole sample 0 4 1 0 73:1
Table 59 presents the number of audio visual materials in the libraries. Of the 350 schools
studied, 348 gave the number of audio visual materials, whereas 2 schools did not. The
greatest number of audio visuals (231) was found in a school located in the Central region,
which was also the school with the greatest number of books. The greatest number of audio
visual materials in other regions ranged from 10 to 30. As can be seen, the smallest number of
audio visual materials was 0, which was found in 174 schools spreading through all surveyed
schools. The greatest average number of audio visual materials was found in the Central
region (7), while the smallest numbers were found in the West and South regions (2).
Noticeably, most libraries in every region (MODE) had no audio-visual materials.
The last column provides the students–audio visual materials ratio. The students–audio visual
materials ratio of the entire country was 24:1. The libraries located in the Central regions
had the greatest students–audio visual materials ratio (10:1), while the lowest ratio was
found in the West and South regions (40:1).
Table 59: Numbers of audio visual materials (n=348)
Region Minimum Maximum Average Mode Students-audio visuals

North 0 20 3 0 22:1
Central 0 231 7 0 10:1

147
Region Minimum Maximum Average Mode Students-audio visuals

Northeast 0 30 3 0 24:1
East 0 20 3 0 28:1
West 0 10 2 0 40:1
South 0 25 2 0 40:1
Total 0 231 3 0 24:1
Table 60 provides the quantity of electronic media in the libraries, including CD-ROM, DVD-
ROM, CAI (computer Assisted Instruction), e-books, and e-learning. Of the 350 schools
studied, 346 gave the number of electronic media, whereas 4 schools did not. The greatest
number of electronic media (1500) was found in a school located in the Central region,
which was also the school with the greatest number of books, journals/magazines,
newspapers, and audio visuals. The greatest number of electronic media items in the West
region was 20. Noticeably, there were 301 schools that had no electronic media in their
libraries, meaning that most libraries in every region (MODE) had no electronic media.
The greatest average quantity of electronic media was found in the Central region (40),
followed by the Northeast (14) and North regions (9). The lowest average number was 2,
found in a school located in the West region. The last column shows the students–electronic
media ratio. The students–electronic media ratio of the entire country was 4:1. The libraries
located in the Central regions had the greatest students– electronic media ratio (2:1), while
the lowest ratio was found in the West region (39:1).
Table 60: Number of electronic media (n=346)
Region Minimum Maximum Average Mode Students–

(N) (N) (N) (N) electronic media
ratio
North 0 100 9 0 7:1
Central 0 1500 40 0 2:1
Northeast 0 500 14 0 5:1
East 0 50 7 0 12:1
148
Region Minimum Maximum Average Mode Students–

(N) (N) (N) (N) electronic media
ratio
West 0 20 2 0 39:1
South 0 139 8 0 10:1
Total 0 1500 17 0 4:1
Chart 9 illustrates the types of books available in those libraries, including reference books,
textbooks, fiction books/cartoon books and others. A majority of libraries had reference
books (324), fiction books/cartoon books (300) and curriculum books (250). Some principals
defined their other type of book was non-fiction books (17). About 100 libraries had no
textbooks, about 50 libraries had no fiction books/cartoon books, and 26 libraries had no
reference books.
Chart 9: Types of books (n=350)
350
Number of libraries
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Reference books
(dictionaries, Fiction books,
Textbooks Others
encyclopedias, cartoon books
maps, etc.)
Have 324 250 300 17
Do not have 26 100 50 333
Table 61 presents the number of libraries that had a classification system. Nearly half of the
libraries (210, 49.7%) had no library classification system. The greatest number of libraries
without a classification system was found in the Northeast region (95), followed by the
Central (27) and North regions (22). The highest percentage of libraries without a
classification system was found in the Northeast (54.9%), West (53.8%) and East regions
(47.1%).
149
Table 61: Library classification system (n=350)
Region Schools with a Schools with a Schools without a Schools without a

library classification library classification library library classification
system (N) system (%) classification system (%)
system (N)
North 30 60.0 22 40.0
Central 43 63.5 27 36.5
Northeast 64 45.1 95 54.9
East 8 52.9 8 47.1
West 6 46.2 7 53.8
South 25 65.1 15 34.9
Total 176 50.3 210 49.7
Table 62 shows types of classification system available in the libraries. The types of
classification systems include Dewey decimal classification system (DDC), Library of Congress
classification system (LC) and others. A majority of libraries used the DDC (121), while 53
schools used another classification system, which was colour labels. There were 2 schools
located in the North region (Phrae province) using the L.C. Two principals did not know the
types of their library’s classification systems.
Table 62: Types of library’s classification systems (n=176)
Type N %
Dewey decimal Classification system (DDC) 121 68.8
Library of Congress Classification system (LC) 2 1.1
Others 53 30.1
Total 176 100.0
Table 63 presents the number of libraries using a digital management system: only 38
schools using such a system. Most of the library management systems were found in the
Northeast region (13), followed by the Central (10), and North regions (8). The greatest
number of schools without a library management system were found in the South (51),
Central (32), and North and South regions (22). The highest percentage of schools without a
150
library management system, from the total number of the sample in each region, were
found in the South (51.2%), Central (43.2%), and North regions (40.0%).
Table 63: Library management systems (n=176)
Region Schools with a Schools with a Schools without a Schools without a

library management library management library management library management
system (N) system (%) system (N) system (%)
North 8 40.0 22 60.0
Central 10 43.2 32 56.8
Northeast 13 29.5 51 70.5
East 2 35.3 6 64.7
West 1 38.5 5 61.5
South 4 51.2 22 48.8
Total 38 36.8 138 63.2
Table 64 provides the names of the library management systems used. A majority of libraries
used OBEC lib (31), an open source software. In 2010, the Office of Basic Education
Commission and King Mongkut’s Institute of Technology Ladkrabang, Thailand developed
OBEC lib from OpenBiblio. The program was developed for schools administered under the
Office of Basic Education Commission, Thailand (Chanlun, 2013). There were 7 other systems
in use in the surveyed schools: 2 schools were using Microsoft excel to record the
descriptions of their library collections, and only 3 schools used PLS V.3 (Public Library
Services), an open source software developed by Mr.Thiti Boonyos, a teacher of the Central
regional Institute for Non-Formal and Informal Education, Thailand (Boonyos, 2014). Another
school used ULibM (Union Library Management), an open source software developed by
staff of the Academic Resource Centre, Mahasarakham University, Thailand (Aroonpiboon,
2014). In only 1 school had the school’s own staff developed a library automation program,
which they called Dewey.

151
Table 64: Types of library management systems (n=38)
Type N %
Office of Basic Education Library Automation System (OBEC lib) 31 81.6
Others 7 18.4
- Commercial software
- Open source software
- Software developed by school’s own staff
Total 38 100.0
4.3.4 Library activities
This section provides information about library activities, including types of library activities
and library promotion.
Chart 10 presents the library activities offered in those 350 schools with libraries. A majority
of principals (340) specified that their library provided reading promotion and learning
activities, followed by promotional learning activities through experiential learning (268),
and art and culture activities (266). Half of those schools (172) had no information literacy
instruction. A minority of schools (93) had no life skill activities, no technology in literacy
instruction (85), and no art and culture activities (84). One principal stated that his/her school
had no library activities.
Chart 10: Library activities (n=350)

400
350
Number of libraries
300
250
200
150
100
50
0 Promotional
Reading learning
Art and Technology in Information
promotion Life skill activities
Culture literacy literacy Others
and learning activities through
activities instruction instruction
activities experiential
learning
Have 340 266 257 265 178 268 1
Have no 10 84 93 85 172 82 349
152
Table 65 shows the number of regular library activities for all users. Over half of the libraries
(189) had no continuous activities for all users. The greatest number of libraries having
regular activities for all users was found in the Northeast region (66), followed by the Central
(39), and North regions (22). The greatest number of libraries without regular activities for all
users was also found in the Northeast region (93), followed by the North and Central (30),
and South regions (24). The percentage of libraries with and without regular activities for all
users was calculated based on a total sample size of each region.
As can be seen, the greatest percentage of libraries having those activities was found in the
East (64.7%), Central (59.5%) and West regions (53.8%). The greatest percentage of libraries
without those activities was found in the South (55.8%), North (54.5%) and Northeast regions
(53.8%).
Table 65: Regular library activities for all users (n=350)
Region Schools with Schools with Schools without Schools without

library activities library activities library activities for library activities for
for all users (N) for all users (%) all users (N) all users (%)
North 22 45.5 30 54.5
Central 39 59.5 30 40.5
Northeast 66 46.2 93 53.8
East 10 64.7 6 35.3
West 7 53.8 6 46.2
South 17 44.2 24 55.8
Total 161 49.6 189 50.4
The number of libraries with and without promotion for library’s services and activities is
presented in Table 66. Nearly 70% of libraries (225) had no continuous promotion related to
library services and activities for all users. The greatest number of schools having such public
relations was found in the Northeast region (54), followed by the Central (28), and North
regions (19). Many libraries without continuous public relations for their services and
activities were found in the Northeast (105), followed by the Central (41), and North regions
(33). The percentage of libraries with and without continuous promotion for services and
153
activities for all users was calculated based on a total sample size of each region. The
greatest percentage of libraries with those promotions were found in the East (52.9%),
Central (44.6%) and North regions (40.0%). The greatest percentage of libraries without
promotion were found in the South region (69.8%), West region (61.5%) and Northeast region
(60.7%).
Table 66: Promotion of library services and activities (n=350)
Region Library with public Library with public Library without Library without
relations for relations for services public relations for public relations for
services and and activities for all services and services and
activities for all users (%) activities for all users activities for all users
users (N) (N) (%)
North 19 40.0 33 60.0
Central 28 44.6 41 55.4
Northeast 54 39.3 105 60.7
East 8 52.9 8 47.1
West 5 38.5 8 61.5
South 11 30.2 30 69.8
Total 125 40.0 225 60.0
4.3.5 Library services
This section provides information from the 350 libraries regarding library services, including
the types of library services, number of days open and types of library users.
The principals were asked to identify the library services in their schools. All principals were
allowed to give multiple answers. Chart 11 illustrates that over 50% of libraries provided
services, which included providing library rules and regulations, library timetables, library
instruction programs, lending services and reading services. Over 75% of libraries were
without services at all, including reference services, proactive services, information literacy
instruction, computer and internet.
154
A majority of principals (251) specified that their libraries provided reading services. A
minority of libraries provided library rules and regulations (222), and lending services (209).
The smallest number of those services was reference services (50), followed by proactive
services (55), and information literacy instruction (55). Only 4 schools provided another
library service, which was a bookmobile.
Proactive services refer to services or actions that library staff offer before any action was
required. For example, library staff would advise teachers about new books that might be
appropriate to their fields and might benefit their teaching (Cayaban, 2009).
Chart 11: Library services (n=350)
400
350
Number of libraries
300
250
200
150
100
50
0 Proactive
service
Providing Infor- Compute
Providing Library (exhi-
library Library mation r and
library instruc- Lending Reading Referenc bition,
rules and visit literacy internet Others
time- tion service service e service current
regu- statistic instruc- for
tables program aware-
lations tion retrieval
ness
service)
Have 222 181 180 209 188 251 50 52 55 79 4
Do not have 128 169 170 141 162 99 300 298 295 271 346
Table 67 presents the days the library is open. A great majority of libraries (326, 93.1%)
opened every working day. Some libraries opened occasionally (11, 3.1%), or opened three
day a week (6, 1.7%). Only one school library opened 2 days a week (0.3%).
Table 67: Number of days open for library (n=350)
Day N %
1 4 1.1
2 1 0.3
3 6 1.7
4 2 0.6
155
Day N %
Every working day 326 93.1
Open occasionally 11 3.1
Total 350 100.0
Chart 12 shows types of school library users. A great majority of library users were students
(346), followed by teachers (295) and staff (167). Approximately 88 schools allowed students’
parents to use their libraries. Approximately 59 schools allowed communities around their
schools to use the libraries.
Chart 12: School library users (n=350)
400
350
Number of libraries
300
250
200
150
100
50
0 Communities
Students Teachers Staff Parents
around the school
Have 346 295 167 88 59
Do not have 4 55 183 262 291
4.3.6 Library staff
The last part of the survey part 1 asked the 350 principals to provide information regarding
library staff. The library staff information involved number of library staff, number of
volunteer students, and collaboration between librarians and school library stakeholders
such as principals, teachers, and other libraries. The information is presented in Tables 68-71
and Chart 13.
Table 68 presents the number of staff working in the library. Over 80% of the respondents’
schools (288) had only 1 staff member working in their libraries. About 47 schools (13.4%) had
2 staff members working in the libraries. Nine respondents (2.6%) answered that their school
library had more than 3 staff.

156
Table 68: Number of staff working in the library (n=350)
Number of staff N %
1 288 82.3
2 47 13.4
3 6 1.7
More than 3 9 2.6
Total 350 100.0
Table 69 presents the number of library volunteer students. The greatest number of
volunteer students was in the Northeast (138), followed by the Central (64) and North
regions (46). The greatest number of schools without volunteer students was found in the
Northeast (21), North (6), and Central and South regions (5). The percentage of schools having
volunteer students was calculated based on a total sample size of each region. This shows
that 100% of schools located in the West region had volunteer students. A majority of
libraries without volunteer students were found in the Northeast (20.2%), North (16.4%) and
South regions (16.3%). Nationally, approximately 83.2% had library volunteer students.
Table 69: School library volunteer students (n=350)
Region Library with Library with Library without Library without

volunteer volunteer volunteer volunteer students
students (N) students (%) students (N) (%)
North 46 83.6 6 16.4
Central 64 86.5 5 13.5
Northeast 138 79.8 21 20.2
East 15 88.2 1 11.8
West 13 100.0 0 0.0
South 36 83.7 5 16.3
Total 312 83.2 38 16.8
The number of volunteer students working in the libraries is presented in Table 70. The
greatest number of volunteer students was found in the Northeast region (50), followed by
the North (27) and Central regions (16). The smallest number was only 1, found in the Central
157
region. The average number of volunteer students was from 5 to 7. As can be seen, the
highest average number of volunteer students was found in 2 regions, the Northeast and
South regions (7).
Table 70: Number of volunteer students (n=346)
Region Minimum Maximum Average

(N) (N) (N)
North 2 27 6
Central 1 16 5
Northeast 2 50 7
East 3 12 6
West 2 10 5
South 2 15 7
Total 1 50 6
Table 71 provides the number of schools where collaborations between librarians and
principals occurred in curriculum development. Most libraries having those collaborations
were found in the Northeast region (141), followed by the Central (62) and North regions (50),
while The West (10), East (15) and South regions (36) had the smallest number of libraries
collaborating. Most libraries without collaboration were found in the Northeast region (18).
The percentage of libraries having collaboration between librarians and principals in

curriculum development, calculated based on a total sample size of each region, shows that
90.9% of libraries in the North region had collaboration, followed by the East (88.2%) and
Central regions (83.8%). The highest percentage of libraries without collaboration occurred in
the West (23.1), Northeast (18.5) and South regions (16.3).

158
Table 71: Collaboration between librarian and principal in curriculum development (n=350)

librarians and librarians and librarians and librarians and
principals principals principals principals
collaborations (N) collaborations (%) collaborations (N) collaborations (%)
North 50 90.9 2 9.1
Central 62 83.8 7 16.2
Northeast 141 81.5 18 18.5
East 15 88.2 1 11.8
West 10 76.9 3 23.1
South 36 83.7 5 16.3
Total 314 83.7 36 16.3
Table 72 provides the number of schools where the collaborations between librarians and
teachers occurred in supporting the library for teaching and learning. The information was
divided into 6 regions and the entire country. The majority of libraries with librarian and
teacher collaborations to support the library for teaching and learning was found in the
Northeast region (140). The greatest number of libraries without such collaboration was also
in the Northeast region (19). Over 80% of librarians collaborated with teachers in supporting
the library for teaching and learning. The libraries with the greatest percentage in these
collaborations were found in the South region (88.4%), followed by the East (88.2%) and West
regions (84.6%). The greatest percentage of libraries which had no collaboration occurred in
the Northeast (19.1%), followed by the North (18.2%) and Central regions (17.6%).
Table 72: Collaboration between librarian and teachers in supporting library for teaching
and learning (n=350)

teachers teachers teachers teachers
North 45 81.8 7 18.2
Central 61 82.4 8 17.6

159

teachers teachers teachers teachers
Northeast 140 80.9 19 19.1
East 15 88.2 1 11.8
West 11 84.6 2 15.4
South 38 88.4 3 11.6
Total 310 82.7 40 17.3
Chart 13 illustrates the types of library collaboration among the librarians and teachers. Over
half the librarians and teachers had collaborated in providing library promotion (274) and in
developing learning activities in the library (229). Approximately 127 libraries had
collaborations between librarian and teachers in integrating plans into subject areas,
followed by collaborations in library assessment (102) and in book recommendations (70).
There were 4 libraries collaborating with teaching in the classrooms.
Chart 13: Types of library collaborations between the librarians and teachers (n=350)
400
350
Number of libraries
300
250
200
150
100
50
0 Developing
Integrating Book Collaborating in
learning Library
library plan into recommendatio library Others
activities in assessment
subject areas ns promotion
library
Have 127 70 229 102 274 4
Do not have 223 280 121 248 76 346
Table 73 shows the number of school where collaboration between school libraries and
other libraries occurred. There was a small amount of such collaboration, with most found in
16 schools located in the Northeast region, followed by the Central (10) and North regions
(5). The percentage of libraries having collaboration with other libraries, which was
calculated based on a total sample size of each region, shows that the greatest percentage
160
of those collaboration was found in the East region (23.5%), followed by West (15.4%) and
Central regions (13.5%). The greatest percentage of libraries without collaboration was found
in the South region (95.3%), followed by the North (90.9%) and Northeast regions (90.8%).
Table 73: Collaboration between school libraries and other libraries (n=350)
Region Library with other Library with other Library without other Library without
libraries libraries libraries other libraries
North 5 9.1 47 90.9
Central 10 13.5 59 86.5
Northeast 16 9.2 143 90.8
East 4 23.5 12 76.5
West 2 15.4 11 84.6
South 2 4.7 39 95.3
Total 39 10.4 311 89.6
4.4 Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and limitations of libraries
Part 2 of the survey comprised four open-ended questions. These questions asked the
principals to describe those strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and limitations of small

public primary school libraries that have impact on students’ academic achievement.
4.4.1 Strengths
Chart 14 provides a number of principals’ views about the strengths of their libraries. The
libraries’ strengths are divided into 6 themes including sufficient library administration,
physical facilities, collections, activities, services, and staff. A great majority of principals
(309) indicated their library’s strengths, while 41 principals did not. The most common
strength of these school libraries was having sufficient library collections (106). A minority of
principals (88) described that their libraries had sufficient physical facilities, followed by
those having sufficient services (17) and staff (15). There were 29 principals who answered
that their school libraries had no strengths.

161
Chart 14: Library strengths (n=350)
120
100
Number of libraries
80
60
40
20
Sufficient
0
school and Sufficient Sufficient
Sufficient Sufficient Sufficient Do not
school library' s library Wrong Missing
library library library have
library physical collection- answer data
activities services staff strenght
administra facilities s
tion
Frequency 9 88 106 31 17 15 29 14 41
The following quotes are examples of principals’ explanations about their school libraries’
strengths.
“Our library provides sufficient collections, which adequate for all students.” (Principal School 49, 62,
242, 423)
“Our school has supported reading promotion continuously for 8 years. Every student is allocated to use
the library every day at 12.00 – 12.15 pm.” (Principal School 275)
“Library provided sufficient collections, and has collaborated with one foundation offering many
activities for our library regularly.” (Principal School 293)
“School provides library corners in every classroom. Teachers and students collaborated in book
recommendations.” (Principal School 353)
“The advantages of a small room and a small number of students made our library easy to manage.
Moreover, a ratio of student-books is appropriate.” (Principal School 37, 75, 172)
“Our library is clean. Nakornsawan Rajabhat University donated 209,800 baht and helped construct our
library.” (Principal School 262)
“School has a good administration. It is easy to manage because of a small size of school and a small
number of students.” (Principal School 60)

162
“Principal has concern about the important of library and encourages students to use the library.”
(Principal School 115, 206)
4.4.2 Weaknesses
Chart 15 shows the libraries’ weaknesses, which are divided into 6 themes including
insufficient library administration, physical facilities, collections, activities, services, and

staff. A great majority of principals acknowledged the school libraries’ weakness (321),
whereas 29 principals did not. As can be seen, 121 principals described their library’s
weakness as insufficient collections, followed by insufficient physical facilities (66),
insufficient staff (56), and insufficient administration (32).
Chart 15: Library weaknesses (n=350)

140
120
Number of libraries
100
80
60
40
20
0 Insufficient
school and Insufficient
Insufficient Insufficient Insufficient
school library' s Insufficient Having no Wrong
library library library Missing data
library physical library staff weakness answer
collections activities services
administrati facilities
on
Frequency 32 66 121 10 9 56 5 22 29
The information below is the principals’ explanations about their libraries’ weaknesses,
particularly identifying insufficient library collections, physical facilities, staff, administration,

and services as important.
“Lacking electronic media and the existing books are outdated.” (Principal School 21, 113, 339, 440)
“School library lacks continuous activities for all users.” (Principal School 15, 137)
“Inadequate books” (Principal School 45, 140, 162, 243, 357…)
“Lacking journals and magazines” (Principal School 70)

163
“A number of books and books’ contents are not proper to students’ ages.” (Principal School 220, 330)
“Poor library’s environment such as small space, lacking library decorations” (Principal School 14, 159,
190)
“School library has no a separated room for a library” (Principal School 35, 40)
“Lacking full-time staff who are responsible for the library.” (Principal School 13, 108, 168, 191)
“Teacher or staff who is responsible for the library is not a qualified librarian.” (Principal School 29, 43,
88)
“Lacking teachers who have skills and sufficient knowledge in library science” (Principal School 47, 178,
195, 205, 331)
“Lacking a library classification” (Principal School 64, 222)
“Inadequate library budget” (Principal School 151, 163, 367, 247, 421, 426)
“The library has insufficient administration. The school is without a qualified librarian who has skills and
knowledge in library administration.” (Principal School 192)
“Insufficient library services” (Principal School 9, 207, 408)
4.4.3 Opportunities
The current opportunities of school libraries to impact students’ academic achievement, as
presented by the principals, are shown in Chart 16. The libraries’ opportunities were divided
into 9 themes: government supports, parents’ support, local community support, private
organisation support, donations, public and private organisation support, library networks,
and the advancement of the internet.
Chart 16 indicates that 288 principals listed their libraries’ opportunities whereas 49
respondents gave unrelated answers. Mostly unrelated answers were about the libraries’
strengths such as good collections and physical facilities. Another 54 principals
acknowledged their library opportunities as being support from the local community,
followed by public and private organisation support (45), and government support (45).
164
Another 27 principals described their libraries as having no opportunity to impact students’
Chart 16: Library opportunities (n=350)

70
60
Number of libraries
50
40
30
20
10
0 Public
Local Private and Having
Govern- Library Advance
Parents’ commu- organi- Donati- private no Wrong Missing
ment net- -ment of
supports nities’ sations’ on organi- opportu- answer data
supports works internet
supports supports sations' nity
supports
Frequency 45 11 54 19 22 45 7 9 27 49 62
The following information provides an explanation about the libraries’ opportunities
including the government supports, parents’ supports, local community supports, private
organisation supports, donation, public and private organisation supports, library networks,
and advancement of internet.
“Local communities donated money for construct a separated library building.” (Principal School 57,
373, 426…)
“Local communities concerned about educational development.” (Principal School 125, 332)
“School got supports from public and private organisations.” (Principal School 82, 110, 299…)
“Public and private organisations donated money for the library” (Principal School 144, 243)
“The government allocated budget for buying learning materials and library resources.”
“Local affiliation provides the library project such as providing award to school and staff that have
excellent reading promotion activities.” (Principal School 205)
“The government policy related to reading promotion.” (Principal School 231)

165
“School has collaboration with private organisation to organise reading promotion activities.”
“Parents support all activities that the school requested.” (Principal School 140, 391)
“An advancement of internet” (Principal School 17, 207)
“Decreasing price of technology and telecommunication” (Principal School 455)
“Library staff attended field trips, seminars related to the library development. Staff also shared their
knowledge with other libraries.” (Principal School 44, 170…)
“Public library provided staff to assist our library.” (Principal School 178)
“Library networks from other libraries and organisations such as academic libraries, school libraries.”
(Principal School 319, 355)
“School library invited guest speaker to organise reading promotion activities.” (Principal School 336)
4.4.4 Limitations
Chart 17 shows what library limitations impact students’ academic achievement. The
limitations found were grouped into 8 themes: government administration, parents’ support,
local community supports, internet connection, disaster, advancement of technology, private

organisation supports, and location. A majority of principals provided unrelated answers
about their libraries’ weaknesses, such as a poor library environment, lacking resources and
lacking staff (88). The most common limitations regarding the libraries came from the
government (89). The government-related limitations included government policy, lacking a
direct library budget, and providing a small amount in a school budget. The minority of
principals (31) described their libraries’ limitations as coming from the local communities,
included the local people’s low socioeconomic status, the illiteracy among the local people,
and the lack of awareness about the role of the library. Another 28 respondents said that the
limitations of libraries came from the students’ parents because they were from a low
socioeconomic status and lacked support in encouraging students to read or use the library.
166
Chart 17: Library limitations impact on student achievement (n=350)

100
90
80
Number of libraries
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 Advance Having
Local Internet Private
Govern- -ment of no Wrong Missing
Parents commu- connec- Disaster organi- Location
ment techno- limita- answer data
nities tion sations
logy tion
Frequency 89 28 31 7 2 1 13 8 25 88 58
The following information shows examples of the stated library limitations, which included
those related to government, parents, local communities, internet connection, technology,
private organisation and locations.
“A lack of library budget allocation from the government, particularly, the provided budget for the
library’s activities.” (Principal School 40)
“The government always think that the investment in the small schools is too expensive and not worth-
fit.” (Principal School 84)
“The government lacks concern about the role of library in small school and need to reduce a number of
small schools by closing and merging.” (Principal School 181, 305)
“A lack of supports from the local affiliation and the Office of Basic Education Commission” (Principal
School 206, 301, 362, 437)
“The government considers the school budget and staff through a number of students.” (Principal School 217)
“Local people are illiterate.” (Principal School 19)
“Local people are in low socioeconomic, they cannot donate much money for the school.” (Principal
School 39, 89, 141, 160…)
“Lacking collaboration from local communities” (Principal School 266, 425, 442)
“Parents lack collaboration in developing library.” (Principal School 115, 317)
“Parents are illiterate therefore they cannot teach their children to read and cannot encourage them to
have reading habits.” (Principal School 243)
“A lack of supports from private organisations” (Principal School 32, 45, 208, 353…)
167
“Most private organisations prefer to do the donation for the large schools and the schools of the
development work of Her Royal Highness Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn.” (Principal School 163)
“School located in poverty areas which is far away from the city and communities.” (Principal School 90,
177, 378, 427)
“Library located so close to the street. Therefore, there are a lot of dust and noise disturbing users.”
“School located in the area where having no signal to connect the internet.” (Principal School 38, 145, 228)
“Poor internet connection” (Principal School 69, 272, 320, 380)
“School faced with flooding every year.” (Principal School 47)
“During rainy season, it rains a lot and affects electricity power loss.” (Principal School 252)
“An advancement of technology, games and internet” (Principal School 108)
4.5 Conclusion
Of the 375 schools studied, 350 had libraries, whereas 25 schools had no libraries. The
characteristics of the libraries were generated from the responses of the 350 principals of
primary schools that have libraries. The results showed that most libraries were lacking
resources in their collections, physical facilities and staff. The strengths of the libraries were
having sufficient library collections, physical facilities and services. The weaknesses were
insufficient library collections, physical facilities and number of staff. The opportunities were
from local communities, private organisations and government support. The limitations
were from the government administration, from local community support and from
students’ parental support.
Of the 375 schools studied, 25 schools had no libraries. Most schools without libraries were
found in the Northeast region (14). The main reason given for not having libraries was an
inadequate budget. A majority of the principals who had no library in their schools had a
plan to set up a library in 2016, while some principals had no plan to construct a library in
the near future. The results of survey part 1 and 2 were important to identify the patterns of
library characteristics of the small public primary schools in rural Thailand, shown in Chapter
5.
168
Chapter 5: Pattern of library characteristics
This chapter presents the survey findings obtained from 350 principals of public primary
schools that have a library. In order to answer research question 1, which asked what the
characteristics of school libraries of small public primary school in rural Thailand are,
information related to school and school library demographics in rural Thailand was
gathered. This section demonstrates the two patterns of the current characteristics of school
libraries in rural Thailand: the high- and low-level groups. The details of how two clusters
were classified and how they are different from each other are described in this chapter.
5.1 Number of clusters
The two-step cluster analysis provides a two-cluster solution based on 342 cases. Another 8
cases were excluded because they were connected with clusters of the same or larger size.
The selected algorithm, the Schwarz Bayesian Criterion (BIC), can measure the efficiency of
the parameterised model by predicting a large amount of data. Moreover, BIC produces a
small number of clusters. The change in BIC between adjacent numbers of units and variable
clusters is small (Bhat & Kumar, 2010). The analyses ran the algorithm 15 times in order to
extract the best solution. The result shows that there are 2 different clusters of libraries in
small public primary schools in rural Thailand.
The clusters were generated by 26 categorical variables and 8 continuous variables. The
categorical variables were:
(1) Regions
(2) Number of staff
(3) The achievement of the library standard
(4) The existence of library plan
(5) The existence of library organisation structure
(6) Library staff
(7) Library budget
(8) Library assessment
(9) Library administrator
169
(10) Separate library room

(11) Library wi-fi connection
(12) Library infrastructure

(13) Classification system
(14) Library automation system
(15) Library volunteer
(16) The existence of a good quality indoor environment
(17) The existence of a good quality outdoor environment
(18) Easy access library
(19) Appropriate zoning for users
(20) Continuous library activities
(21) Continuous public relations about library services and activities
(22) Open day
(23) Collaboration between librarians and principals in curriculum development
(24) Collaboration between librarians and teachers in supporting library for
teaching and learning
(25) Information literacy instruction
(26) Reading promotion and learning activities.
The continuous variables were:
(1) Amount of school budget

(2) Number of seats
(3) Number of computers
(4) Number of books
(5) Amount of electronic media
(6) Amount of national budget
(7) Amount of local community budget
(8) Library size
The continuous variables are standardised by default because of mixtures of continuous and
categorical variables. Consequently, the option for distance measure was the only log-
likelihood option (Norušis, 2012).

170
Table 74, which shows the output of the auto-clustering statistical table in SPSS output,
illustrates the optimal number of clusters in the research results. Even though the lowest BIC
coefficient is for four clusters, the optimal number provided by the SPSS algorithm is two
because the largest ratio of distances is for two clusters. Figure 6 also shows the meaningful
test and valid solution as a line graph. The elbow in the curve provides the correct number of
clusters in the data set: 2 clusters was the meaningful result.
Table 74: Auto-Clustering
Figure 6: Auto-Clustering, BIC line graph

171
Table 75 provides a cluster distribution in which the number of cases was 340. Another 2
cases were outlier cases; 8 cases were excluded from this analysis to make the cluster
formation more reliable. As can be seen, the number of cases in cluster 2 was 172, which is
greater than in cluster 1 (168).
Table 75: Cluster distribution
Figure 7 shows the cluster size between clusters 1 and 2. The size of the smaller cluster was
49.4%, whereas the larger cluster was 50.6%. The ratio of the larger cluster to the smaller
cluster was 1.02. As a rule of thumb, a ratio under 3.00 is considered good because the
largest cluster in the cluster set is not larger more than 2 times larger than any other cluster.
Figure 7: Cluster size

172
Figure 8 shows the model summary and the cluster quality. The model indicates the
algorithm of this analysis, which is the two-step cluster. The two clusters were generated by
34 variables. The model indicates a fair result. The model was measured by the Silhouette
method, which measures the similarity of an object to its own cluster and compared the
similarity of an object to other clusters (Norušis, 2012).
Figure 8: Model summary
Figure 9 presents the importance of each variable in the cluster formation. The greatest
features for the cluster were the availability of providing activities for all users continuously,
followed by engaging in public relations about the library services and activities for all users
continuously, and having a school library assessment. The least important feature was the
number of staff, which had almost no effect on the cluster formation. Further, the figure
shows the ranking of importance for features, from most to least.

173
Figure 9: Predictor importance
5.2 Clusters description
The two-step cluster analysis generated two clusters: high and low levels. The high-level
cluster (Cluster 1) included libraries with a higher level of administration, physical facilities,
collections, activities, services and staff. The low-level cluster (Cluster 2) included libraries
with a lower level of administration, physical facilities, collections, activities, services and
staff. These two clusters were found in every region, but over 50% of the high-level group
were found in the Central, East, West and South regions, while over 50% of the low-level
group were found in the North and Northeast regions.
Figure 11 illustrates the cluster comparison, arranged by the greatest importance to the
least importance of each variable in the cluster formation, in descending order. The x-axis of
the bar chart presents the 34 variables that form the clusters. The y-axis presents the
predictor importance scores, ranging from 0.0 to 1.0. The variables with the greatest
174
importance had values greater than or equal to 0.4. The variables with the greatest predictor
importance were:
(1) The existence of providing activities for all users continuously

(2) The existence of regular promotion of library services and activities for all users
(3) The existence of school library assessment
(4) The achievement of a minimum standard for school library
(5) The existence of a library organisation structure
(6) The existence of library furniture and equipment for library services
(7) The existence of easy access library
(8) The existence of a library’s classification system
(9) The existence of good quality outdoor library environment (clean, decorated)
(10) The existence of appropriate zoning for users and services
Figure 10 shows the results only in forms of dot plots, cluster 1 as blue and cluster 2 as red.
The dot plots represent the results of the categorical variables. As shown in Figure 10, these
are the most important of the variables having values greater than or equal to 0.4. Other
results of variables having values lower than 0.4 were in the form of dot plots and boxplots
shown in Appendix F, which shows a cluster comparison of all variables. The categorical
variables are shown as dot plots, cluster 1 as blue and cluster 2 as red. The dot size indicates
the most frequent/modal category for each cluster. The continuous variables are shown as
boxplots representing medians and standard deviation. Cluster 1 is presented as blue box
plots, and cluster 2 as red box plots.
Figure 11 shows the cluster comparison of 10 variables in the form of bar charts. The bar
charts show cell distribution in each cluster, measured by the number of schools which
belong to each criterion in each cluster, compared to the overall population in each
criterion. The colour of all cell distribution is red, while the colour of overall population is
semi-transparent red.
As shown in Figures 10 and 11, the ten greatest variables are obviously present in the
difference of dot sizes and dot distribution. There are 4 variables that clearly show the
175
difference of dot plots distributed, while 6 variables show the difference of dot sizes,
distributed in the same criteria. This means that the libraries of high- and low-level clusters
had obvious differences in activities, public relations, school library evaluation, achievement
of minimum standard for school library, library organisation structure, furniture and
equipment for library services, easy access library, classification system, outdoor library
environment and appropriate zoning for users and services.
176
Figure 10: Cluster comparison by dot plots
Have Do not have
Have Do not have
Have Do not have
Have Do not have
Have Do not have

177
Have Do not have
Have Do not have
Have Do not have
Have Do not have
Have Do not have

178
Figure 11: Within-cluster variation for 10 greatest variables that define two clusters
Providing activities for all users continuously

Cluster 1 Cluster 2
Regular promotion of library services and activities for all users

Cluster 1 Cluster 2
School library assessment

Cluster 1 Cluster 2
179
Achievement of mimimun standard for school library

Cluster 1 Cluster 2
Library organisation structure

Cluster 1 Cluster 2
Library furniture and equipment for library services

Cluster 1 Cluster 2
180
Easy access library

Cluster 1 Cluster 2
Library classification system

Cluster 1 Cluster 2
Good quality outdoor library environment

Cluster 1 Cluster 2
181
Appropriate zoning for users and services

Cluster 1 Cluster 2
Figures 12 to 45 provide the differences of data within 2 clusters for each variable. The
figures are arranged by the most to least importance variables in the cluster formation. The
categorical variables’ results are presented in terms of frequency and percentage table,
while the continuous variables’ results are presented in terms of mean and standard
deviation.
Figure 12 shows the cluster frequency and percentage of regular activities provided for all
users: 158 libraries had regular activities for all users: 81% of them were libraries in cluster 1;
17.7% libraries in cluster 2. Meanwhile, 184 libraries did not have regular activities for all
users; 78.3% of them were libraries in cluster 2, while 21.7% of them were libraries in cluster
1. This means that most libraries in cluster 1 had continuous activities for all users, while
most libraries in cluster 2 did not.
Figure 12: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of regular activities for
all users
182
Figure 13 presents the cluster frequency and percentage of regular library promotion of
library services and activities for all users. One hundred and twenty-two libraries provided
regular promotion of library services and activities for all users continuously; 86.9% of them
were libraries in cluster 1, while 11.5% were libraries in cluster 2. Meanwhile, 220 libraries
did not have regular promotion of library services and activities for all users; 71.8% of them
were libraries in cluster 2, while 28.2% of them were libraries in cluster 1. This means that
most libraries in cluster 1 provided regular promotion of library services and activities for all
users, while most libraries in cluster 2 did not.
Figure 13: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of regular library
promotion of library services and activities for all users
Figure 14 shows the cluster frequency and percentage of library evaluation. Two hundred
and fifty libraries had library assessment; 64.4% of them were libraries in cluster 1, while
34.8% were libraries in cluster 2. Meanwhile, 92 libraries did not have library assessment;
92.4% of them were libraries in cluster 2, while 7.6% of them were libraries in cluster 1. This
means that most libraries in cluster 1 had library assessment, while most libraries in cluster
2 did not.
Figure 14: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of library assessment
Figure 15 provides the cluster frequency and percentage of reaching the minimum standard
for school library 2013 provided by the Office of Basic Education Commission. One hundred
183
and eighty-five libraries met the minimum standard for school library 2013; 71.4% of them
were libraries in cluster 1, while 27.6% were libraries in cluster 2. Meanwhile, 157 libraries
did not reach the minimum standard for school library 2013; 77.1% of them were libraries in
cluster 2, while 22.9% of them were libraries in cluster 1. This means that most libraries in
cluster 1 achieved the minimum standard for school library 2013, while most libraries in
cluster 2 did not.
Figure 15: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the achievement of minimum

standard for school library
Figure 16 presents the cluster frequency and percentage of library organisation structure.
Two hundred and sixty-one libraries had a library organisation structure, 61.3% of them were
libraries in cluster 1, while 37.9% were libraries in cluster 2. Eighty-one libraries lacked library
organisation structure, 90.1% were in cluster 2, while 9.9% were in cluster 1. This means that
most libraries in cluster 1 had library organisation structure, while most libraries in cluster 2
did not.
Figure 16: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of library organisation
structure
Figure 17 presents the cluster frequency and percentage of adequate furniture and
equipment for library services. Two hundred and fifty-eight libraries had adequate furniture
and equipment for library services; 60.9% of them were libraries in cluster 1, while 38.4%
were libraries in cluster 2. Meanwhile, 84 libraries lacked furniture and equipment for library
184
services; 86.9% of them were libraries in cluster 2, while 13.1% of them were libraries in
cluster 1. This means that most libraries in cluster 1 had adequate furniture and equipment
for library services, while most libraries in cluster 2 did not.
Figure 17: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of adequate furniture
and equipment for library services
Figure 18 presents the cluster frequency and percentage of easy access to library. Two
hundred and forty-three libraries had easy access; 62.1% of them were libraries in cluster 1,
while 37% were libraries in cluster 2. Meanwhile, 99 libraries did not have easy access; 82.8%
of them were libraries in cluster 2, while 17.2% of them were libraries in cluster 1. This means
that most libraries in cluster 1 had easy access, while most libraries in cluster 2 did not.
Figure 18: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of easy access to library
Figure 19 shows the cluster frequency and percentage of having a library classification
system. One hundred and seventy-three libraries had a library classification system; 68.8% of
them were libraries in cluster 1, while 30.1% were libraries in cluster 2. Meanwhile, 169
libraries did not have a library classification system; 71% of them were libraries in cluster 2,
while 29% of them were libraries in cluster 1. This means that most libraries in cluster 1 had a
library classification system, while most libraries in cluster 2 did not.

185
Figure 19: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of library classification
system
Figure 20 shows the cluster frequency and percentage of having a good quality library
outdoor environment. Two hundred and seventy-two libraries had a good quality library
outdoor environment; 59.2% of them were libraries in cluster 1, while 40.1% were libraries in
cluster 2. Of the 70 libraries that lacked a good quality library outdoor environment; 90% were
in cluster 2, while 10% were in cluster 1. This means that most libraries in cluster 1 had a
good quality library outdoor environment, while most libraries in cluster 2 did not.
Figure 20: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of existence of a good quality library
outdoor environment
Figure 21 presents the cluster frequency and percentage of appropriate zoning for users and
services. One hundred and eight libraries had appropriate zoning for users and services; 75.9%
of them were libraries in cluster 1, while 23.1% were libraries in cluster 2. Meanwhile, 234
libraries did not have appropriate zoning for users and services; 62.8% of them were libraries
in cluster 2, while 36.8% of them were libraries in cluster 1. This means that most libraries in
cluster 1 had appropriate zoning for users and services, while most libraries in cluster 2 did
not.
186
Figure 21: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of appropriate zoning for
users and services
Even though 24 of the 34 variables had a predictor importance score of less than 0.4 and had
weak predictor scores to form clusters, their results present different values between the
two clusters. Figures 22-45 show the cluster frequency and percentage of variables that had
a weak influence on the cluster formation.
Figure 22 presents the cluster frequency and percentage of implementation of a library plan
into a school development plan. Two hundred and ninety-four libraries implemented a library
plan into a school development plan; 56.1% of them were libraries in cluster 1, while 43.2%
were libraries in cluster 2. Meanwhile, of the 48 libraries did not implement a library plan into
a school development plan, 93.8% of them were libraries in cluster 2, while 6.3% of them were
libraries in cluster 1. This means that most libraries in cluster 1 implemented a library plan
into a school development plan. Cluster 1 had 3 libraries that did not implement the plan.
Meanwhile, a majority of libraries in cluster 2 implemented a library plan into a school

development plan but 45 of them did not.
Figure 22: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of implementation a library plan into a
school development plan

187
Figure 23 presents the cluster frequency and percentage of an adequate library budget. Two
hundred and seventy-two libraries had an adequate library budget; 57.7% of them were
libraries in cluster 1, while 41.5% were libraries in cluster 2. Meanwhile, 70 libraries did not
have an adequate library budget; 84.3% of them were libraries in cluster 2, while 15.7% of
them were libraries in cluster 1. This means that most libraries in clusters 1 and 2 had an
adequate library budget, but 11 libraries in cluster 1 and 59 libraries in cluster 2 did not.
Figure 23: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of existence of adequate library budget
Figure 24 presents the cluster frequency and percentage of library volunteers. Three hundred
and six libraries had library volunteers; 54.6% of them were libraries in cluster 1, while 44.8%
were libraries in cluster 2. Meanwhile, 36 libraries did not have library volunteers; 97.2% of
them were libraries in cluster 2, while 2.8% of them were libraries in cluster 1. This means
that most libraries in cluster 1 and 2 had library volunteers but only 1 library in cluster 1 and
35 libraries in cluster 2 did not.
Figure 24: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of library volunteer
Figure 25 presents the cluster frequency and percentage of librarian–teachers collaboration in
supporting the library for teaching and learning. Three hundred and three libraries had
collaboration between librarians and teachers in supporting the library for teaching and
learning; 54.5% were in cluster 1, while 44.9% were in cluster 2. Meanwhile, 39 libraries did
not have librarian–teacher collaboration; 92.3% were in cluster 2, while 7.7% were in cluster 1.
188
This means that most libraries in cluster 1 and 2 had collaboration between librarians and
teachers in supporting the library for teaching and learning; only 3 libraries in cluster 1 and 36
libraries in cluster 2 did not.
Figure 25: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of librarian–teacher

collaboration in supporting library for teaching and learning
Figure 26 presents the cluster frequency and percentage of library wi-fi connection. One
hundred and fifty-two libraries had wi-fi connection, 65.1% were in cluster 1, while 33.6% were
in cluster 2. Meanwhile, 190 libraries did not have wi-fi connection, 63.7% were in cluster 2,
while 36.3% were in cluster 1. This means that most libraries in cluster 1 had wi-fi connection,
while most libraries in cluster 2 did not.
Figure 26: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of library wi-fi connection
Figure 27 shows the cluster frequency and percentage of information literacy instruction.
Fifty-three libraries provided information literacy instruction; 79.2% were in cluster 1, while
18.9% were in cluster 2. Of the 289 libraries not providinginformation literacy instruction,
56.1% were in cluster 2, while 43.6% were in cluster 1. This means that most libraries in
clusters 1 and 2 did not provide information literacy instruction.

189
Figure 27: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of availability of information literacy

instruction
Figure 28 provides the cluster frequency and percentage of having a library management
system. Thirty-eight libraries had a library management system; 84.2% were in cluster 1, while
13.2% were in cluster 2. Meanwhile, 304 libraries did not have a library management system;
means that most libraries in both cluster 1 and 2 lacked a library management system.
Figure 28: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of library management
system
Figure 29 shows the cluster frequency and percentage of teachers and staff to manage their
school library. Three hundred and twelve schools had teachers and staff to manage their
libraries; 52.9% of them were libraries in cluster 1, while 46.5% were libraries in cluster 2.
Meanwhile, 30 libraries did not have teachers and staff to manage their school library, 90% of
them were libraries in cluster 2, while 10% of them were libraries in cluster 1. This means
that most libraries in both clusters 1 and 2 had teachers and staff to manage their school
library, while only 3 schools in cluster 1 and 27 schools in cluster 2 lacked teachers and staff to
manage their school library.
190
Figure 29: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of teachers and staff to
manage school library
Figure 30 shows the cluster frequency and percentage of having a good quality library indoor
environment. Three hundred and seventeen schools had a good quality library indoor
environment; 52.4% of them were libraries in cluster 1, while 47% were libraries in cluster 2.
Meanwhile, 25 libraries lacked a good quality library indoor environment, 92% of them were
libraries in cluster 2, while 8% of them were libraries in cluster 1. This means that most
libraries in both cluster 1 and 2 had a good quality library indoor environment, while only 2
schools in cluster 1 and 23 schools in cluster 2 lacked a good quality library indoor environment.
Figure 30: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of existence of good quality indoor
environment
Figure 31 illustrates the cluster frequency and percentage of librarian–principal collaboration
in curriculum development. Three hundred and eight schools had collaborations between
librarians and principals in curriculum development; 52.9% of them were libraries in cluster 1,
while 46.4% were libraries in cluster 2. Meanwhile, 34 libraries lacked these collaborations;
means that most libraries in both cluster 1 and cluster 2 had librarian–principal collaboration
in curriculum development, while 5 schools in cluster 1 and 29 schools in cluster 2 lacked

collaborations between librarians and principals in curriculum development.
191
Figure 31: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of librarian and principal
collaboration in curriculum development
Figure 32 shows the mean and standard deviation of the number of library books within cluster
1 and 2. The average numbers of book in cluster 1 libraries was 1,334, while in cluster 2 the
average was 770, which shows that libraries in cluster 1 had almost twice as many books as
the libraries in cluster 2.
Figure 32: Within-cluster mean and standard deviation of books
Figure 33 presents the mean and standard deviation of seats among clusters 1 and 2. The
libraries in cluster 1 had an average of seating for 17, while cluster 2 averaged 12. Even
though the libraries in cluster 1 had more seating than the libraries in cluster 2, there was
not much difference between the two clusters.
Figure 33: Within-cluster mean and standard deviation of seats
Figure 34 shows the cluster frequency and percentage of library space for users, library staff,
shelving and other services. Two hundred and fifty-two schools had library space for users,
library staff, shelving and other services, 54.4% of them were libraries in cluster 1, while 44.8%
192
were libraries in cluster 2. Meanwhile, 90 libraries lacked library space for users, library staff,
shelving and other services: 65.6% of them were libraries in cluster 2, while 34.4% of them
were libraries in cluster 1. This means that most libraries in both cluster 1 and cluster 2 had
library space for users, library staff, shelving and other services, while 31 schools in cluster 1 and
59 schools in cluster 2 lacked library space for users, library staff, shelving and other services.
Figure 34: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of library space for users,
library staff, shelving and other services
Figure 35 shows the mean and standard deviation of library computers among clusters 1 and 2.
The libraries in cluster 1 had an average computer for 1.66, while the average for cluster 2
was 0.77. The libraries in cluster 1 might have up to 2 computers, while the libraries in
cluster 2 had at most 1 computer.
Figure 35: Within-cluster mean and standard deviation of library computers
Figure 36 shows the mean and standard deviation of library sizes between clusters 1 and 2.
The libraries in cluster 1 had an average size of about 69.32 metre square, while cluster 2
was 62.14 metre square. Even though the size of libraries in cluster 1 was bigger than the
libraries in cluster 2, there was not much difference between the two clusters.
193
Figure 36: Within-cluster mean and standard deviation of library sizes
Figure 37 shows the mean and standard deviation of digital media of the libraries between
clusters 1 and 2. An average digital media collection of libraries in cluster 1 had
approximately 20, while cluster 2 had 4. The digital media collection of the libraries in cluster
1 was 5 times higher than in cluster 2.
Figure 37: Within-cluster mean and standard deviation of digital media
Figure 38 presents the mean and standard deviation of total library budget in 2015 among two
clusters. The average library budget of cluster 1 was 33,715.35 baht (1,300 AUD), while the
budget for cluster 2 was 14,073.19 baht (540AUD). The libraries in cluster 1 had an average
library budget that was 2 times greater than for those in cluster 2.
Figure 38: Within-cluster mean and standard deviation of total library budget
Figure 39 provides the frequency of library open days. A majority of libraries in cluster 1
(51.3%) and cluster 2 (48.1%) were opened every working day. Two libraries in both cluster 1
194
and cluster 2 were opened 1 day a week. Only 1 library in cluster 2 opened 2 days a week. Of
the 6 libraries that opened 3 days a week, one library was in cluster 1, while 5 libraries were
in cluster 2. There were 2 libraries in cluster 1 that opened 4 days a week. Eleven libraries in
cluster 2 opened occasionally.
Figure 39: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the library opening days
Figure 40 shows the cluster frequency and percentage of reading promotion and learning
activities. Three hundred and thirty-two libraries provided reading promotion and learning
activities; 50.3% of them were libraries in cluster 1, while 49.1% were libraries in cluster 2.
Meanwhile, 10 libraries lacked reading promotion and learning activities; 90% of them were
libraries in cluster 2, while 10% of them were libraries in cluster 1. This means that most
libraries in clusters 1 and 2 provided reading promotion and learning activities, while 1 library
in cluster 1 and 9 libraries in cluster 2 lacked reading promotion and learning activities.
Figure 40: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of availability of reading promotion and
learning activities
Figure 41 shows the cluster frequency and percentage of library administrators including full-
time teacher-librarians, school librarians, teachers, and staff or having no staff. Two hundred
and eighty-five libraries were administrated by teachers. Of the teachers chosen by the schools
and allocated specific hours to manage the libraries, 51.9% were in cluster 1, while 47.4% were
in cluster 2. Of the forty-four libraries administrated by staff, 31.8% were in cluster 1, while
68.2% were in cluster 2. This means that most libraries in clusters 1 and 2 had a teacher to
manage libraries, while 14 libraries in cluster 1 and 30 libraries in cluster 2 had staff to manage
their libraries. Figure 41 further shows that 6 libraries in cluster 1 and 3 libraries in cluster 2 had
195
a full-time teacher-librarian. One library in cluster 2 had a librarian, and 3 libraries in cluster 2 had
no staff.
Figure 41: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of the existence of library administrator
Figure 42 provides the mean and standard deviation of the library budget sourced from the
national budget among clusters 1 and 2. The average library budget sourced from the national
budget in cluster 1 was 6,288.18 baht (240 AUD), while that in cluster 2 was 2,721.28 baht
(105AUD). The average library budget sourced from the national budget for libraries in cluster
1 was approximately twice that for cluster 2.
Figure 42: Within-cluster mean and standard deviation of library budget sourced from the
national budget
Figure 43 presents the number and percentage of the school libraries in each region. Libraries
in each region distributed to both clusters. More than half of the libraries in cluster 1 were
located in the Central, East, West and South regions, while over half of the libraries in cluster 2
were located in the North and Northeast regions. This means that the libraries located in the
Central, East, West and South regions are more likely to be in the high-level group, while the
libraries located in the North and Northeast regions are more likely to be in the low-level group.
Figure 43: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of libraries in each region

196
Figure 44 provides the mean and standard deviation of library budgets sourced from local
communities for clusters 1 and 2. The libraries in cluster 1 had an average library budget
sourced from the local communities that was less than cluster 2, but the difference was a
small range. The average library budget sourced from local communities in cluster 1 was
about 2,066.67 baht (80 AUD), while cluster 2 was 2,984.71 baht (115AUD).
Figure 44: Within-cluster mean and standard deviation of supplementary library budget
sourced from local communities
Figure 45 shows the cluster frequency and percentage of library staff. Two hundred and
eighty-two had 1 staff member; 47.5% of them were libraries in cluster 1, while 52.1% were
libraries in cluster 2. Meanwhile, 46 libraries had 2 library staff members; 58.7% of them
were libraries in cluster 1, while 41.3% of them were libraries in cluster 2. This means that
most libraries in clusters 1 and 2 had 1 staff. Figure 47 further shows that 2 libraries in
clusters 1 and 2 each had three staff members. Of the 9 libraries that had more than 3 staff, 5
were in cluster 1, while 4 were in cluster 2.
Figure 45: Within-cluster frequency and percentage of library staff

197
5.3 Summary of the pattern of library characteristics
Figure 46: Pattern of library characteristics
The school library characteristics shown in Chapter 4 clarify that school libraries in rural
Thailand lacked resources in their collections, physical facilities and staff. The results of this
chapter further expand the knowledge of Chapter 4, that a majority of school libraries
located in the North and Northeast regions face the worst situation for developing effective
school libraries.
Even though rural school libraries across all regions face the same problems in developing
effective school libraries, as shown in the previous analysis, do not have major
differentiation in library staff, library collections and infrastructure issues, it can be seen
that the low-level group libraries face more serious problems in library administration and
physical facilities than the high level group libraries.’

198
Figure 46 illustrates the map of Thailand divided into 6 regions. The high-level group libraries
are most found in the Central, East, West and South regions, while the low-level group
libraries are most found in the North and Northeast regions. The libraries belonging to the
high-level group had better conditions in terms of administration and physical facilities. In
the case of library administration, they had more advantages to provide regular promotion
of library services and activities, and library assessment, and to reach the minimum
standard for school libraries of 2013. For the library physical facilities, they had better
conditions of outdoor library environment and library furniture and equipment for library
services than the libraries in the low-level group.
5.4 Conclusion
The 350 libraries in rural small public primary schools were divided into two patterns based
on their characteristics, involving 26 categorical variables and 8 continuous variables. The
two patterns or clusters were of high- and low-level libraries, in terms of administration,
physical facilities, collections, activities, services and staff. Libraries belonging to each cluster
were found in every region but over 50% of the high-level group were found in the Central,
East, West and South regions, while over 50% of the low-level group were most found in the
North and Northeast regions. The next chapter presents the results related to the principals’
perceptions and the impacts influencing those perceptions about the impacts of school
library on students’ academic achievement.
199
200
Chapter 6: Principals’ perceptions and impacts influencing their perceptions
This chapter presents the survey findings part 3 obtained from 350 principals of public
primary schools with a library in rural Thailand. Survey part 3 asked the principals to rate
their perceptions about the impact of the school library on students’ academic achievement.
The results demonstrate the principals’ perceptions of this impact. Moreover, the results of
principals’ perceptions were further analysed with the school’s and principal’s characteristics
to indicate what drives the principals’ perceptions about these impacts of school libraries on
increasing students’ academic achievements.
6.1 Principals’ perceptions about the potential impact of school libraries on students’
academic achievement
Table 76 provides the frequency and percentage of principals’ perceptions about what was
the school library’s potential impact on increasing students’ academic achievement. The
results were derived from 350 principals who had a library in their schools. A majority of
principals considered that the library had a very strong impact on increasing students’
academic achievement. A minority of principals perceived that the library had an extremely
strong impact on students’ academic achievement. However, 0.5% of principals perceived
that the library had an extremely weak impact on increasing students’ academic
achievement.
The following information presents the summary results of the principals’ perceptions about
the potential impact of school libraries on students’ academic achievement.
With regard to the overall potential contribution of the school library program to increasing
students’ academic achievement, the greatest majority of principals perceived that the
library had a very strong impact on raising students’ academic grades (141), standardised test
scores (121), information literacy levels (124), time spent reading both during school (135)
and outside school (125), and time spent reading for pleasure (129). Noticeably, a majority of
principals viewed that the library had an extremely strong impact on increasing students’
201
literacy levels (151). Over 80% of principals perceived the overall potential of the school
library program to have a strong impact on increasing students’ academic achievement,
while 12.6% of principal had other views, including that the school library program had
neither (weak or strong), slightly, very, or extremely weak impacts on students’ academic
achievement.
The perceived impact of library administration’s potential to increase students’ academic
achievement shows that the library had a very strong impact when it had a policy implemented
in the school curriculum (160), a practical and clear library policy (158), and collaboration in
library administration among school library stakeholders (136). A majority of principals perceived
that having a sufficient budget had an extremely strong impact on increasing students’ academic
achievement (169). Over 90% of principals confirmed that the library’s administration potential
had a strong impact on increasing students’ academic achievement, while the remainder of
them believed that the library administration had neither (weak and strong), slightly, very or
extremely weak impacts on students’ academic achievement.
Only one statement related to the library’s physical facilities’ potential to increase students’
academic achievement. This statement asked the principals to rate the quality of library’s
indoor and outdoor environment, its zoning and its ease of access. The greatest majority of
principals indicated that the library’s physical facilities had an extremely strong impact on
increasing students’ academic achievement (171), followed by a very strong (126), and a
slightly strong impact (42). Noticeably, no one perceived that the library’s physical facilities
had an extremely weak impact on increasing students’ academic achievement.
In terms of the potential of library collections and activities to increase students’ academic
achievement, a majority of principals perceived that the quality and quantity of library
collections (165), the quality and variation of library activities (169), and the continuation of
library activities for all users (155) all had an extremely strong impact on increasing students’
academic achievement. A minority of principals perceived that the library collections and
activities had a very strong impact on increasing on students’ academic achievement.

202
Noticeably, no one perceived that the library collections and activities potential had an
extremely weak impact on increasing on students’ academic achievement.
In the case of library services’ potential to increase students’ academic achievement, the
greatest majority of principals perceived that the quality of library services (131), and
flexible scheduling (118) both had a very strong impact on increasing students’ academic
achievement. A majority of principals perceived that providing proactive service had an
extremely strong impact on increasing students’ academic achievement (143). Over 90% of
principals viewed that the library services had extremely, very or slightly strong impacts on
increasing students’ academic achievement, while less than 6% of principals viewed that it
had neither (weak and strong), slightly, very or extremely weak impacts on students’
The last group of potential library impact covered library staff, which included principals,
librarians and teachers. The greatest majority of principals viewed that having a supportive
school principal (182), collaboration between librarians and school principals (174),
collaboration between librarians and teachers (173), certified librarians (162), full-time
librarians, and the dedicated time of librarians had an extremely strong impact on increasing
students’ academic achievement. The majority of principals (136 out of 350) perceived that
collaboration between school library and other libraries had very strong impact on raising
students’ academic achievement. Over 85% of principals viewed that the library staff had
extremely, very or slightly strong impact on increasing students’ academic achievement,
while the remainder viewed that it had neither, slightly, very or extremely weak impact on
203
Slightly weak
Extremely
Neither
Extremely
Slightly
weak
strong
strong
weak
strong
Very
Very
Statements
7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Overall potential contribution of the school library program to increase student achievement
through the following criteria
22.6% 40.3% 24.6% 5.7% 4.3% 2.6% 0.0%

1. Academic grades (79) (141) (86) (20) (15) (0)
19
2.Standardised test 21.4% 34.6% 27.7% 6.6% 6.0% 2.9% 0.9%

scores (75) (121) (97) (23) (21) (10) (3)
3.Students’ literacy 43.1% 36.6% 14.9% 2.6% 1.4% 1.4% 0.0%

levels (151) (128) (52) (9) (5) (5) (0)
4.Students’
29.4% 35.4% 21.7% 8.6% 2.9% 1.4% 0.6%
information literacy (103) (124) (76) (30) (10) (5) (2)
levels
5.Amount of time
29.7% 38.6% 24.0% 4.0% 2.0% 1.4% 0.3%
students spend (104) (135) (84) (14) (7) (5) (1)
reading during school
6.Amount of time
22.9% 35.7% 22.9% 11.4% 4.6% 2.3% 0.3%
students spend (80) (125) (80) (40) (16) (8) (1)
reading outside school
7.Amount of time
18.6% 36.9% 27.4% 9.4% 4.6% 2.6% 0.6%
students spend (65) (129) (126) (33) (16) (9) (2)
reading for pleasure
204
Slightly weak
Extremely
Neither
Extremely
Slightly
weak
strong
strong
weak
strong
Very
Very
Statements
7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Library’s administration potential for increasing student academic achievement through the
following criteria
8.The implementation
31.7% 45.7% 15.7% 3.7% 1.7% 1.4% 0.0%
of library policy in the (111) (160) (55) (13) (6) (5) (0)
school curriculum
9.Practically and 32.3% 45.1% 16.6% 4.0% 1.1% 0.9% 0.0%

clearly library policy (113) (158) (58) (14) (4) (3) (0)
10.Sufficient school 48.3% 30.3% 13.7% 3.7% 1.7% 2.0% 0.3%

library budget (169) (106) (48) (13) (6) (7) (1)
11.Collaboration in
library administration 34.6% 38.9% 16.3% 5.7% 2.6% 1.7% 0.3%
among school library’s (121) (136) (57) (20) (9) (6) (1)
stakeholder
Library’s physical facilities’ potential for increasing student academic achievement through the
following criteria
12.Quality of indoor
and outdoor 48.9% 36.0% 12.0% 2.0% 0.9% 0.3% 0.0%
environment, zoning (171) (126) (42) (7) (3) (1) (0)
and easy to access
Potential for library collections and activities to increase student academic achievement through
the following criteria
13.Quality and 47.1% 38.0% 11.4% 2.3% 0.9% 0.3% 0.0%

quantity of school (165) (133) (40) (8) (3) (1) (0)
library collections
205
Slightly weak
Extremely
Neither
Extremely
Slightly
weak
strong
strong
weak
strong
Very
Very
Statements
7 6 5 4 3 2 1
14.Quality and
48.3% 36.3% 12.6% 2.0% 0.6% 0.3% 0.0%
variation of school (169) (127) (44) (7) (2) (1) (0)
library activities
15.Continuation of
44.3% 37.7% 13.4% 3.4% 0.9% 0.3% 0.0%
library activities for all (155) (132) (47) (12) (3) (1) (0)
users
Potential for library services to increase student academic achievement through the following
criteria
16.Providing proactive 40.9% 39.4% 14.6% 2.6% 1.4% 1.1% 0.0%

services (143) (138) (51) (9) (5) (4) (0)
17.Quality of library 37.4% 42.3% 16.0% 2.0% 1.4% 0.9% 0.0%

services (131) (148) (56) (7) (5) (3) (0)
33.7% 41.7% 18.9% 3.7% 0.9% 0.9% 0.3%

18.Flexible scheduling
(118) (146) (66) (13) (3) (3) (1)
Potential for library staff to increase student academic achievement through the following criteria
19. Supportive school 52.0% 36.6% 10.0% 0.9% 0.6% 0.0% 0.0%
principal (182) (128) (35) (3) (2) (0) (0)
20.Collaboration
49.7% 37.1% 11.7% 0.6% 0.0% 0.6% 0.3%
between librarian and (174) (130) (41) (2) (0) (2) (1)
school principal
206
Slightly weak
Extremely
Neither
Extremely
Slightly
weak
strong
strong
weak
strong
Very
Very
Statements
7 6 5 4 3 2 1
21.Collaboration
49.4% 38.0% 10.6% 0.9% 0.3% 0.9% 0.0%
between librarian and (173) (133) (37) (3) (1) (3) (0)
teachers
22.Collaboration
between school library
and other libraries 27.7% 38.9% 20.0% 8.0% 2.0% 2.6% 0.9%
(public library/school (97) (136) (70) (28) (7) (9) (3)
library/academic
library)
46.3% 30.3% 14.3% 3.1% 1.7% 2.6% 1.7%

23.Qualified librarian
(162) (106) (50) (11) (6) (9) (6)
47.4% 32.6% 12.9% 2.9% 1.1% 2.9% 0.3%

24.Full-time librarian
(166) (114) (45) (10) (4) (10) (1)
25.Dedicated time of 53.1% 31.4% 10.0% 2.6% 0.9% 1.7% 0.3%

librarian (186) (110) (35) (9) (3) (6) (1)
6.2 Factors that drive the principals’ perceptions about the potential impact of school library
on students’ academic achievement
The principals’ background, school background and results of their perceptions about the
potential impact of school library on students’ academic achievement were used to
investigate the factors that influence the principals’ perceptions. Consequently, correlation
and multiple regression analyses were used to examine the relationship between principals’
perceptions and the 5 predictors: principals’ age (AGE), highest academic qualification (EDU),
years of experience as a school principal (EPX1), years of experience as a school principal at

207
present location (EXP2), and school budget (BUDGET). These 5 predictors were selected
because the literature review suggested them as the related factors influencing the
development of an effective school library. In particular, the principals’ demographics played
a significant role in influencing their awareness regarding the importance and benefits of
school library programs in contributing to school quality and student academic achievement
(See Section 2.3.1 : Principals).
Seven models were developed by the researcher to test the hypotheses of this research,
measured by the five factors, in order to examine which factors influence the principals’
perceptions about the library’s potential impact on students’ academic achievement. Each
model includes two hypotheses comprising correlation and without correlation. The seven
models are:
Model 1: Overall potential contribution of school library program can increase student
Model 2: Library administration potential can increase student academic achievement
Model 3: Library physical facilities potential can increase student academic
achievement
Model 4: Library collections and activities potential can increase student academic
achievement
Model 5: Library services potential can increase student academic achievement
Model 6: Library staff potential can increase student academic achievement
Model 7: Overall potential of library administration, physical facilities, collection and
activities, services and staff can increase student academic achievement
The researcher used Pearson’s correlation procedure to determine the strength of the linear
relationship between the principals’ perceptions in the 7 models and the 5 variables before
analysing the data through the multiple regression analysis. Figure 47 shows the Pearson’s
correlations in a matrix. Even though the AGE and EXP1 variables had very weak negative
correlations (r = .00-.19) with the perceptions models, they tended to have negative and
208
significant correlations with the perceptions models. The AGE variable negatively correlated
with all perceptions’ models. The EXP1 variable negatively correlated with the perceptions’
model 1, 2, 5 and 7. Other variables showed no correlation with all models.
Consequently, the AGE and EXP1 variables were used to predict models 1, 2, 5 and 7 of
principals’ perceptions by multiple linear regression, while AGE was used to predict models
3, 4 and 6 by simple regression. The details of the results in each model are presented in
Figures 48-86.
Figure 47: The Pearson’s correlation coefficient value
209
210
Model 1: Overall potential contribution of school library program can increase student
H0: Principals’ age and years of experience as a school principal are not interrelated
with principals’ perceptions about the overall potential contribution of school library
program on student academic achievement.
H1: Principals’ age and years of experience as a school principal are interrelated with
principals’ perceptions about the overall potential contribution of school library
program on student academic achievement.
Figure 48 presents the variable in the model of overall potential contribution’s criteria of
school library on student academic achievement and one model was reported. The method
for the multiple linear regression was Stepwise, in which the insignificant variables were
removed from the regression. The variables included principals’ age (AGE), and years of
experience as a school principal (EXP1).
Figure 48: Variables in the model of overall potential contribution’s criteria of school
library on student academic achievement
Figure 49 shows a model summary of the overall potential contribution of a school library
program to increase student academic achievement. The value of the multiple correlation
coefficient R was 0.137, which indicated a low level of prediction. The independent variable
explains 1.9% of the variability of the dependent variables. The adjusted R2 was 0.016 and the
standard error of the estimate was 0.96369.

211
Figure 49: Model summary of the overall potential contribution’s criteria of school library
on student academic achievement
Figure 50 shows the F-ratio in the ANOVA table tests that determine whether the overall
regression model is statistically well-fitted for the data. The independent variable is
statistically significant and predicted the dependent variable, F(1,348)=6.687, p<0.05.
Figure 50: Statistical significance of the overall potential contribution of the school library
program to student academic achievement
Figure 51 shows the analysis results, in which the principals’ predicted perceptions were
equal to 6.107 – (0.269 x AGE). The principal’s age was coded from 1 to 2 (1= below 51 years
old, 2= above 50 years old). When the perceptions of school principals were predicted, it was
found that principals’ age (β=-0.137, p<0.05) was a significant predictor related to the overall
potential contribution of the school library program to student academic achievement. The
coefficient for the AGE variable was statistically and negatively significant at the 0.05 level.
Since the p-value was less than 0.05, the null hypothesis was rejected. The model was a good
fit, p = .010b. This means that when the principals’ age was less than 51 years old, the
perceptions about the overall potential contribution of the school library program to
student academic achievement increased about 0.104.
212
Figure 51: Estimated model of the overall potential contribution of school library program
on student academic achievement
Figure 52 shows that the EXP1 had no significant impact on predicting this perception’s
model, t = -.818, p > .05.
Figure 52: Excluded variables of the overall potential contribution of school library
program on student academic achievement
Figure 53 shows the homoscedasticity and normality of the residuals with the Q-Q-Plot of
z*pred and z*presid. The plot indicates that the result of the multiple linear regression
analysis had no tendency in terms of error.
Figure 53: Normal P-P Plot of regression standardized residual dependent variable: A
213
Model 2: Library administration’s potential for increasing student academic achievement
H0: Principals’ age and years of experience as a school principal are not interrelated
with principals’ perceptions about the impact of library administration’s potential
contribution on student academic achievement.
H1: Principals’ age and years of experience as a school principal are interrelated with
principals’ perceptions about the impact of library administration’s potential
contribution on student academic achievement.
Figure 54 presents the variable in the model of library administration’s potential
contribution on increasing student academic achievement and one model was reported. The
method for the multiple linear regression was Stepwise, in which the insignificant variables
were removed from the regression. The variables included principals’ age (AGE), and years of
experience as a school principal (EXP1).
Figure 54: Variable in the model of the potential for library administration to increasing
student academic achievement
Figure 55 shows a model summary of library administration’s potential to increase student
academic achievement. The value of the multiple correlation coefficient R was 0.161a, which
indicated a low level of prediction. The independent variable explains 2.3% of the variability
of the dependent variables. The adjusted R2 was 0.023 and the standard error of the
estimate was 0.89620.

214
Figure 55: Model summary of the potential for library’s administration on increasing
Figure 56 shows that the F-ratio in the ANOVA table testing the overall regression model is a
good fit for the data. The independent variables are statistically significant and predicted the
dependent variable, F(1,348)=9.242, p<0.05.
Figure 56: Statistical significance of the potential for library administration’ to increase
found that principals’ age (β=-0.161, p<0.05) was a significant predictor related to the library
administration’s potential for increasing student academic achievement. The coefficient for
the AGE variable was statistically and negatively significant at the 0.05 level. Since the p-
value was less than 0.05, the null hypothesis was rejected. The model was statistically
significant, p = .003b. This means that when the principals’ ages were less than 51 years old,
the perceptions about the library’s administration potential contribution to student
academic achievement increased about 0.097.

215
Figure 57: Estimated model of the potential for library’s administration on increasing
Figure 58 shows that the EXP1 had no significant impact on predicting this perception’s
model, t = -1.576, p > .05.
Figure 58: Excluded variables of the potential for library’s administration on increasing
Figure 59: Normal P-P Plot of regression standardized residual dependent variable: B
216
Model 3: Library physical facilities’ potential to increase student academic achievement
H0: Principals’ age is not interrelated with principals’ perceptions about the potential
impact of library’s physical facilities on student academic achievement.
H1: Principals’ age is interrelated with principals’ perceptions about the potential
impact of library’s physical facilities on student academic achievement.
Figure 60 shows the variable in the model of library physical facilities’ potential impact on
increasing student academic achievement and one model was reported. The method for the
multiple linear regression was Stepwise, in which only the AGE variable was forced to be in the
model.
Figure 60: Variable in the model of the potential for library physical facilities on increasing
Figure 61 shows a model summary of the library’s physical facilities’ potential to increase
student academic achievement. The value of the multiple correlation coefficient R was
0.108a, which indicated a low level of prediction. The independent variable explains 1.2% of
the variability of the dependent variables. The adjusted R2 was 0.009 and the standard error
of the estimate was 0.84977.

217
Figure 61: Model summary of the potential for library physical facilities on increasing
Figure 62 shows that the simple linear regression was calculated to predict the weight of the
principals’ perceptions based on age. The F-ratio in the ANOVA table tests whether the
overall regression model is statistically well-fitted for the data. The independent variables
were statistically significant and predicted the dependent variable, F(1,348)=4.126, p<0.05.
Figure 62: Statistical significance of the potential for library physical facilities on increasing
As shown in Figure 63, the principals’ predicted perceptions were equal to 6.584 – (0.186 x
AGE). The principal’s age was coded from 1 to 2 (1= below 51 years old, 2= above 50 years
old). When the perceptions of school principals were predicted, it was found that principals’
age (β=-0.186, p<0.05) was a significant predictor related to the potential of the library’s
physical facilities increasing student academic achievement. The coefficient for the AGE
variable was statistically and negatively significant at the 0.05 level. Since the p-value was
less than 0.05, the null hypothesis was rejected. The model was statistically significant, p =
.043b. This means that when principals’ ages were less than 51 years old, the perceptions
about the library’s administration potential on student academic achievement increased
about 0.092.
218
Figure 63: Estimated model of the potential for library physical facilities on increasing
Figure 64: Normal P-P Plot of regression standardized residual dependent variable: C
Model 4: Library collections and activities potential on increasing student academic
achievement
H0: Principals’ age is not interrelated in principals’ perceptions about the potential
impact of library collections and activities on student academic achievement.
H1: Principals’ age is interrelated in principals’ perceptions about the potential impact
of library collections and activities on student academic achievement.

219
Figure 65 shows the variable in the model of library collections and activities potential on
increasing student academic achievement and one model was reported. The method for the
multiple linear regression was Stepwise, in which only the AGE variable was forced to be in
the model.
Figure 65: Variable in the model of potential for library collections and activities on
increasing student academic achievement
Figure 66 shows a model summary of the potential for library collections and activities on
increasing student academic achievement. The value of the multiple correlation coefficient R
was 0.136a, which indicated a low level of prediction. The independent variable explains 1.8%
of the variability of the dependent variables. The adjusted R2 was 0.016 and the standard
error of the estimate was 0.80794.
Figure 66: Model summary of the potential for library collections and activities on
Figure 67 illustrates that the simple linear regression was calculated to predict the weight of
the principals’ perceptions based on age. The F-ratio in the ANOVA table tests whether the
220
were/are statistically significantly and predict the dependent variable, F(1,348)=6.527,
p<0.011.
Figure 67: Statistical significance of the potential for library collections and activities on
As shown in the Figure 68, the principals’ predicted perceptions were equal to 6.605 – (0.223
x AGE). The principal’s age was coded from 1 to 2 (1= below 51 years old, 2= above 50 years
age (β=-0.233, p<0.05) was a significant predictor related to the potential of the library’s
collections and activities on increasing student academic achievement. The coefficient for
the AGE variable was statistically and negatively significant at the 0.05 level. Since the p-
value was less than 0.05, the null hypothesis was rejected. The model was statistically
significant, p = .011b. This means that when principals’ ages were lower than 51 years old, the
perceptions about the potential effect of library collections and activities on student
academic achievement increased about 0.087.
Figure 68: Estimated model of the potential for library collections and activities on
221
analysis had no tendency in the errors terms.
Figure 69: Normal P-P Plot of regression standardized residual dependent variable: D
Model 5: Library services’ potential for increasing student academic achievement
H0: Principals’ age is not interrelated in principals’ perceptions about the potential
impact of library services on student academic achievement.
H1: Principals’ age is interrelated in principals’ perceptions about the potential impact
of library services on student academic achievement.
Figure 70 presents the variable in the model of library services’ potential for increasing
student academic achievement and one model was reported. The method for the multiple
linear regression was Stepwise, in which the insignificant variables will be removed from the
regression. The variables included principals’ age (AGE), and year of experience as a school
principal (EXP1).
222
Figure 70: Variable in the model of the potential for library services to increase student
Figure 71 shows a model summary of the potential for library services to increase student
Figure 71: Model summary of the library collections and activities potential on increasing
Figure 72 shows that the F-ratio in the ANOVA table tests whether the overall regression
model is statistically well-fitted for the data. The independent variable is/was statistically
significantly and predicted the dependent variable, F(1,348)=10.661, p<0.05.

223
Figure 72: Statistical significance of the library services potential on increasing student
age (β=-0.172, p<0.05) was a significant predictor related to the potential for library services
to increase student academic achievement. The coefficient for the AGE variable was
statistically and negatively significant at the 0.05 level. Since the p-value was less than 0.05,
the null hypothesis was rejected. The model was statistically significant, p = .001b. This means
that when principals’ ages are lower than 51 years old, the perceptions about the library
services’ potential for increasing student academic achievement increased about 0.095.
Figure 73: Estimated model of the potential for library collections and activities to increase
Figure 74 shows that the EXP1 had no significant impact to predict this perception’s model,
t = -.902, p > .05.

224
Figure 74: Excluded variables of the library services potential on student academic
achievement
Figure 75: Normal P-P Plot of regression standardized residual dependent variable: E
Model 6: Library staff potential for increasing student academic achievement
H0: Principals’ age is not interrelated in principals’ perceptions about library staff
potential for increasing student academic achievement.
H1: Principals’ age is interrelated in principals’ perceptions about library staff potential
for increasing student academic achievement.

225
Figure 76 presents the variable in the model of the potential for library staff to increase
student academic achievement; one model was reported. The method for the multiple linear
regression was Enter, where only the AGE variable was forced to be in the model.
Figure 76: Variable in the model of the potential for library staff to increase student
Figure 77 presents a model summary of library staff’s potential for increasing student
Figure 77: Model summary of the potential for library staff to increase student academic
achievement
Figure 78 illustrates that the simple linear regression was calculated to predict the weight of
the principals’ perceptions based on age. The F-ratio in the ANOVA table tests whether the
are/were statistically significantly and predict the dependent variable, F(1,348)=5.276,
p<0.022.
226
Figure 78: Statistical significance of the potential for library staff to increase student
age (β=-0.210, p<0.05) was a significant predictor related to the staff’s potential for increasing
student academic achievement. The coefficient for the AGE variable was statistically and
negatively significant at the 0.05 level. Since the p-value was less than 0.05, the null
hypothesis was rejected. The model was statistically significant, p = .022b. This means that
when principals’ age is lower than 51 years old, the perceptions about the library staff's
potential effect on student academic achievement increased about 0.091.
Figure 79: Estimated model of the library staff’s potential for increasing student academic
achievement

227
Figure 80: Normal P-P Plot of regression standardized residual dependent variable: E
Model 7: Overall potential of library administration, physical facilities, collection and
activities, services and staff to increase student academic achievement
H0: Principals’ age and highest academic qualification are not interrelated in principals’
perceptions about the overall potential of library administration, physical facilities,

collection and activities, services and staff to increase student academic achievement
H1: Principals’ age and highest academic qualification are interrelated in principals’
perceptions about the overall potential of library administration, physical facilities,

collection and activities, services and staff to increase student academic achievement
Figure 81 presents the variable in the overall potential of library administration, physical
facilities, collection and activities, services and staff to increase student academic
achievement and one model was reported. The method for the multiple linear regression
was Stepwise, in which the insignificant variables will be removed from the regression. The
variables included principals’ age (AGE), and year of experience as a school principal (EXP1).
228
Figure 81: Variables in the model of overall potential of library administration,
physical facilities, collection and activities, services and staff for increasing student
Figure 82 shows a model summary of the overall potential of library administration, physical
achievement. The value of the multiple correlation coefficient R was 0.169, which indicated a
low level of prediction. The independent variable explains 2.9% of the variability of the
dependent variables. The adjusted R2 was 0.026 and the standard error of the estimate was
4.31271.
Figure 82: Model summary of the overall potential of library administration, physical
achievement
Figure 83 shows that the F-ratio in the ANOVA table tests whether the overall regression
model is statistically well-fitted for the data. The independent variable is/was statistically
significantly and predicted the dependent variable, F(1,348)=10.268, p<0.05.

229
Figure 83: Statistical significance of the overall potential of library administration, physical
achievement
found that principals’ age (β=-0.169, p<0.05) was a significant predictor related to the overall
potential of library administration, physical facilities, collection and activities, services and
staff to affect student academic achievement. The coefficient for the AGE variable was
statistically and negatively significant at the 0.05 level. Since the p-value was less than 0.05,
the null hypothesis was rejected. The model was statistically significant, p = .001b. This means
that when the principals’ age is lower than 51 years old, the perceptions about the overall
potential criteria of school libraries affecting student academic achievement increased

about 0.465.
Figure 84: Estimated model of the overall potential criteria of the school library’s effect on
230
Figure 85 shows that the EXP1 had no significant impact to predict this perception’s model,
t = -1.048, p > .05.
Figure 85: Excluded variables of the overall criteria of school library’s potential to increase
Figure 86: Normal P-P Plot of regression standardized residual dependent variable: X_ALL
231
6.3 Conclusion
For the principals’ perceptions about libraries impacting students’ academic achievement,
most of the 350 principals surveyed perceived that the school library had an extremely
strong impact on raising students’ academic achievement (47.6%). A minority of principals
perceived that the school library had a very strong impact on raising students’ academic
achievement (39.5%). Very few principals suggested that the school library had an extremely
weak impact on increasing students’ academic achievement (0.5%).
The factor that most influences the principals’ perceptions about the libraries impacting
students’ academic achievement is the principals’ age, which is negatively and significantly
correlated with the 7 hypotheses. This means that when the principals are younger, they
tend to increase the positive perceptions about the libraries impacting students’ academic
achievement. Meanwhile, the other 4 predictors – the principals’ highest academic
qualification, years of experience as a school principal, years of experience as a school

principal at present location, and the school budget – had no correlation with the principals'
perceptions. The next chapter presents the discussion of findings, key findings, limitations
and suggestions for further research.

232
Chapter 7: Discussion
This chapter discusses the overall research questions about the characteristics of the school
libraries in small public primary schools in rural Thailand, the challenges and opportunities
that those school libraries face, as perceived by the principals, and how school principals
perceive the impacts of these school libraries on students’ academic achievement. The
discussion considers how the findings contribute to the knowledge gap related to the much-
needed basis for identifying the components of an effective library for a rural small public
primary school. In addition, the discussion covers the limitations of this study, the potential
implementations and the recommendations for further research.
7.1 Overview of the research
Schools in rural Thailand have faced a serious long-term problem in developing effective
school libraries, particularly in small public primary schools. Even though the Thai
government has provided some projects and models for developing an effective school
library, these libraries still struggle to be effective (Pongpaiboon, 2011; TK Park, 2011).
Important factors in developing an effective school library include understanding its library’s
characteristics and situation, and having the principals’ awareness of the value of libraries
(Dorrel & Lawson, 2015; IFLA school libraries section standing committee, 2015; Van
Hamersveld, 2007).
Libraries’ characteristics and situations are important evidence needed to determine the
appropriate ways to resolve the libraries’ problems. Even though all school libraries have
responded to the need to provide information resources to schools’ communities, they have
different features and attributes depending on various aspects such as type and size of
school, problems, capabilities, regional geography, and politics (Hildreth, 2007; IFLA, 2015).
With these different characteristics and situations, rural school libraries need specialised
management to be effective (Asselin, 1999; Krashen, 2009). Moreover, the awareness of
library stakeholders about the value of libraries is vital to enhance the capacity of library
programs and to develop library effectiveness. In particular, school principals’ understanding
233
about the value of their libraries impacting students’ academic achievement is vital for the
development of an effective library because the principal has the authority to direct and
manage change in the school (Dorrel & Lawson, 2015; Van Hamersveld, 2007).
In the case of the libraries of small public primary schools in rural Thailand, a large-scale
study about library characteristics and situations and about principals’ awareness of the
value of school libraries impacting student’s academic achievement, has never before been
investigated. Therefore, this study aimed to address this lack. The results reflect how
principals perceive the value a library has for impacting students’ academic achievement;
they also provide a much-needed basis for identifying the components of an effective library
for Thai rural schools. This will form the background for further research in the library and
information field for rural school libraries worldwide.
7.2 Discussion of findings
This section discusses the findings of this research including libraries’ characteristics,
limitations and opportunities, and the pattern of library characteristics. The findings also
include the principals’ perceptions of how libraries impact students’ academic achievement,
as well as what impact drives the principals’ perceptions. The following information provides
a brief overview of the study’s key findings:
(1) The extensive provision of school libraries in rural Thailand is positive, such as the
provision of reading promotion projects and 3Gs models.
(2) Rural school libraries in Thailand are still generally under-resourced and lack
qualified staff; therefore, having a library does not mean that it is well serviced.
(3) Principals know the value of the school library and understand very well the impact
of school library on students’ academic achievement, but are powerless because of
the lack of clear policy related to school library development from the Thai
government and the budgetary and infrastructure constraints.
(4) Rural libraries located in the North and Northeast regions face more serious
problems in administration, physical facilities and activities than in other regions in
234
Thailand. Their problems are challenging and urgently need a sustainable solution to
develop and maintain their qualities as effective school libraries.
(5) The two main factors to help overcome the limitations of rural small public primary
school libraries are internal and external. Internal factors include having supportive
principals, teachers, teacher librarians and students, and the collaboration among
them. External factors involve the Thai government’s legislation and policies, and the
collaborations of parents, local community and other organisations.
7.2.1 Schools and libraries’ characteristics
Research question 1, “What are the characteristics of school libraries of small public primary
schools in rural Thailand?” addresses libraries’ characteristics by investigating the schools
and libraries’ demographic data.
Schools’ characteristics
Infrastructure
Overall, most small public primary schools can be accessed through paved roads and are as
fully served as urban schools with public utilities such as electricity supply and water supply
and with internet connection for most schools, although the signal is poor in some
geographic reasons. The slow speed and unstable internet connection has affected teachers’
and students’ ability to access information sources needed for teaching and learning. This
finding shows that most small public primary schools in rural areas need a high-speed
internet connection to support their teaching and learning.
Recently, the Thai government, aiming to establish a sustainable and value-based economy,
provided a model: Thailand 4.0. Its concepts are related to building digital communities,
instituting digital parks for small and medium-sized business enterprises and creating
innovation for the economy and business development (Tortermvasana, 2016). Education 4.0
is one part of the model; it aims to increase the quality of education, enhance students’
proficiency, and enhance students’ abilities in using, implementing, and creating technology
235
and innovation (Jareonsettasin, 2016). Therefore, to achieve the goal of Education 4.0, the
Thai government highlighted the insufficient internet connections in small schools as an

urgent educational issue in its Education Reform 2016 (Office of the Minister, Minister of
Interior, 2016).
Teacher–student ratio
The standard teacher–student ratio for a small school is 1:16 (Office of the Education
Council, 2014). This study found that the average teacher–student ratio was 1:12, which was
the same as provided by OBEC in 2007. However, Sangnapaboworn’s study (2007) noted that
in 2003 the average teacher–student ratio was only 1:8 or 1:11, which reflected inefficient
administration because of the high investment cost. Similarly, the Office of Basic Education
Commission (OBEC) noted that teachers with lowered class sizes made per-student costs
high (OBEC, 2007). Somkiat indicated that when the numbers of students increased to 35
students per room, the cost per classroom would be reduced by 25% (Prachachat, 2014).
However, while the teacher–student ratio of this research was better than the standard,
these schools are still confronted with an inadequate number of teachers. Even though the
students in the low class sizes may benefit by getting more individualised attention and by
interacting spontaneously with teachers in the classroom, the small ratio does not ensure
the school’s effectiveness: it depends on many factors, not just the teacher–student ratio,
such as the class size, quality of teachers, curriculum, and leadership of schools (Kornfeld,
2010).
This study found that most rural small public primary schools had fewer than 9 teachers: the
average number of teachers was 6. Noticeably, the least number of teachers was 1, while
the greatest number was 14. Moreover, at least one teacher of each school studied has to
take responsibility for managing the school library and providing library provision, which are
extra tasks, giving them a working overload and potentially affecting their teaching.
236
The issue of inadequate numbers of teachers has long engaged rural schools. Samakoses
(2013) noted that an insufficient number of rural teachers required multi-grade teachers
teaching many subjects for which they were unqualified. Moreover, they have to work on
extra tasks, such as secretary, teacher librarian and financial reports (Paichayontvijit, 2014;
SEAMEO Secretariat, 2001 & Yonemura, 2007; Thailand Development Research Institute,
2015; Wannagatesiri, Nukultham, Kruea-In & Thongperm, 2014).
The Office of the Minister of Interior, Thailand (2016) indicated that approximately 84,900
teachers worked in primary schools with a total of 120,632 classrooms. Noticeably, 30% of
the classrooms in small schools (35,691) lacked a class teacher. The medium schools had
class teachers for over 40% of classrooms (90,790 teachers). Moreover, approximately 30,300
teachers were assigned to teach students in a subject that they are not qualified such as
Elementary Education, Early Childhood Education, Thai Language, Mathematics, Science and
Art. The Office of Basic Education Commission aims to have appropriately qualified teachers
in all schools in 2021.
In 2016, the Office of Basic Education Commission provided a draft of standards for qualified
teachers in primary schools in which the number of students determines how many
qualified teachers the small primary schools can have. For example, schools with 100-120
students must have 6 teachers in Elementary Education, Early Childhood Education, Thai
Language, Mathematics, English Language and Social Science. Additionally, primary schools
without kindergarten students can employ Science teachers instead of Early Childhood
teachers (Office of the Minister, Minister of Interior, 2016).
This study revealed that a majority of teacher librarians (Table 49) graduated in a variety of
majors including Elementary Education, Thai language, English Language, Social Science,
Computer Science, Sciences, History, Hospitality Management, Home Economics, Physical
Education, Community Development, Animal Science, Performing Arts, Mathematics,
Agriculture Science, Special Educational Needs, and Biology. This suggests that the teachers
in the schools studied had inappropriate qualifications for small schools. Teachers in these
schools were multigrade-teachers and were teaching students in subjects for which they are
237
not qualified. Similarly, Paichayontvijit’s study (2014) claimed that four small schools studied
in Loei province had three teachers assigned to teach 8 grades, which affected the quality of
teaching and learning.
Many scholars noted that teachers in small schools were not only teaching many grades but
also had to work on extra tasks (Wannagatesiri, Nukultham, Kruea-In, & Thongperm, 2014).
Pradit’s earlier study (2006) had indicated that some teacher librarians did not want to take
responsibility for their libraries because the load of library tasks affected their teaching.
Other research also confirmed that teacher librarians in public school libraries in Thailand
were not qualified librarians and lacked the knowledge and skills to provide and support
library services and activities (Butterfly Book House, 2008; MGR online, 2006; Sangkharat,
2013; TK Park, 2011). As can be seen, an inadequate number of teacher not only influences
the quality of teaching but also affects the library effectiveness, particularly in library
administration, services and staff, because of the duty overload and the responsibilities of
teachers.
School budget
The average budget of the schools studied was approximately 304,079 baht (11,695 AUD).
The smallest budget was 20,000 baht (800AUD), while the largest budget was 4.7 million
baht (191,850 AUD). The largest budget was 240 times higher than the lowest budget, a large
gap. The schools with a large budget had more opportunities and flexibility to allocate and
operate the library resources, services and activities (Pradit, 2006). Schools with a large
number of students are more likely to receive more funding, particularly in school subsidies.
Normally, these schools are funded by the national budget and through subsidies allocated
per head of students per year (OBEC, 2013). Some schools may have extra funds from the
local community, public and private organisation donations.
Rukumnuaykit and Palakawong-na-ayudhya (2015) noted that the majority of small and
medium schools in Thailand were primary schools. The most common large schools were
secondary schools, and the extra-large schools were high schools. In 2016, the Thai
238
government allocated a budget for the Office of Basic Education Commission of

approximately 315,000 million baht (42,470 million AUD), the highest allocated budget
sourced from the Education Ministry (Bureau of the Budget, 2016). Although the budget
allocated in the education sector was very high, the financial system in the education sector
was insufficient. As such Dilaka Lathapipat, Human Resource Economist of the World Bank,
indicated that the proportion of demand for the education budget was very low, particularly
for the school subsidies. In contrast, 70% of the education budget was allocated for staff
salaries, while the rest was allocated for consolidated operating and investment expenses
(Prachachat, 2014). In the same manner, OBEC (2013) noted that a large portion of school
budgets were spent on teachers and staff salaries. Therefore, the rest of the school budget
was inadequate to support the libraries.
Moreover, Dr. Somkiat Tangkitvanich, director of Thailand Development Research Institute,
argued that some rural schools did not get subsidies because the Thai government allocated
subsidies for 40% of students in primary schools, despite the fact that most students in rural
schools were poor. Rural schools lacked strong administration because the budget was tight
and a large portion of their budget was spent on staff salaries. Only 14% of school subsidies
can be used as flexible budget (Prachachat, 2014).
This study indicated that schools with over 60 students and located more than 20 kilometres
from the city tended to receive more donations. Many researchers have found that the
schools located in wealthier areas were more likely to receive a greater amount in donations
than the areas with more poverty (Atagi, 2011; Pinyapong, Virasilp & Somboon, 2007). The
distance of schools to the city in this study cannot indicate the economic condition of the
areas, but the finding coincides with the views of researchers who agree that schools with
large enrolments are flexible, using the subsidies and donated funds to purchase library
materials or even to hire contract teachers, librarians and staff (Atagi, 2011; Pinyapong,
Virasilp & Somboon, 2007). The implication for school library provision is that sufficient
budget needs to be particularly sourced from the national budget because budgets derived
from other sources such as donations are unstable. Therefore, there is apparent need for
239
small public primary schools to be able to enhance their abilities to allocate sufficient library
resources and to operate the library effectively.
Libraries’ characteristics
Of the 375 schools studied, 350 had libraries, while 25 schools had no libraries. The finding
shows that most rural schools had libraries; which differed from the studies of
Cheunwattana (1999) and Rukumnuaykit & Palakawong-na-ayudhya (2015), which found that
most rural schools had no libraries. There has been an improvement in school library
provision since 1999. However, this research clarified that the small public primary school
libraries in rural Thailand were lacking resources in their collections, physical facilities, and
staff. Along these lines, Thailand Knowledge Park (2011) noted that rural school libraries
struggle to improve their quality because of the obstacle to implementing library

infrastructure and library expertise. The same scenario was presented by Sadiman (2004),
that rural schools in Southeast Asia lack good textbooks and other learning materials for
financial and geographic reason. Therefore, having a physical library is not sufficient, without
adequate provision of resources and staff.
Principals of schools without libraries clarified that the main reason for not having libraries
was their schools’ inadequate budgets. Twenty-two of 25 principals from schools without
libraries had a plan to set up a library in the near future, while 3 of these principals had no
plan to construct a library. As noted, Cheunwattana (1999) had illustrated that many rural
schools did not have libraries or that the existing libraries were poorly resourced. This study
illustrated that although the numbers of school without libraries has significantly decreased,
poorly resourced libraries still exist in rural school libraries. A lack of library budget is always
a serious and long-term issue, challenging not only the rural school libraries but also the
urban school libraries and other libraries in Thailand and worldwide (Krolak, 2005; Pradit,
2006; Praphansarn, 2013 & RIN, 2010).

240
Library administration
The school library administration standards developed by the Office of Basic Education
Commission comprise 6 indicators: (1) implementing a library plan into a school development
plan; (2) having a clear library organisation structure; (3) having teachers or staff to manage a
school library; (4) having a school library budget; (5) reaching the minimum standard of
school library for service library users; and (6) having a school library evaluation (OBEC, 2013).
This study found that 50% of libraries studied met all 6 criteria, while the rest failed to meet
some of the criteria. For example, 157 libraries could not reach the minimum standard for a
school library according to the Office of Basic Education Commission. One-third of schools
(93) had no library evaluation, and 85 schools had no library organisation structure.
As previously noted, library evaluation and organisation structure are seen to be key
indicators of school library standards by the Office of Basic Education Commission, Thailand.
The theoretical perspective of Loertscher’s model (2000) emphasises the importance of
library evaluation and organisation structure, which were set as 2 of 4 keys to library
development in the principal’s organisational taxonomy (see Section 2.1.1). As shown in
Figure 89, the findings indicate that approximately 50% of the principals surveyed lacked the
potential to unlock Loertscher’s Key 2 (Building the organisational structure), and Key 4
(Assessing the result) in order to develop effective libraries and achieve the school library
standard.
Even though 79% (276) of schools studied allocated a library budget, the size of budget was
small. The average budget of the libraries seems very high, approximately 26,258 baht (1,000
AUD), but the most common library budget size was 5,000 baht per year (200AUD).
Noticeably, the largest budget sourced from local community donation was 530,000 baht
(20,000 AUD), while the smallest budget, from the student fees, was 100 baht (4 AUD). Most
principals (306, 87.5%) revealed that the library budgets allocated were less than 5% of the
school budget. This information shows that the library budget of these schools does not
reach the minimum standard of school libraries 2013 of the Office of Basic Education
Commission, for which the library budget allocation of small schools must be higher than 5%
241
of the annual school budget (OBEC, 2013). A study by Pradit (2006) argued that an effective
library budget must allocate at least 10,000 baht per year (400 AUD).
As shown in Figure 87, the theoretical perspective of Loertscher’s model (2000) emphasises
the importance of having sufficient library budget, set as Key 1 of the 4 keys to library
development in the principal’s organisational taxonomy (see Section 2.1.1). However, the
findings indicate that approximately 87.5% of principals surveyed lacked the potential to
unlock Key 1 (Acquiring the basics) in order to establish effective libraries and to achieve the
school library standard.
Figure 87: Principals lacked the potential to unlock Keys 1, 2 and 4 of the principal’s
organisational taxonomy to establish effective libraries
Many developed and developing countries, such as Australia, USA, North Nigeria and South
Africa, follow the IFLA/UNESCO school library guidelines, whose allocated school libraries
budget is at least 5% of the per student expenditure (Australian School Library Association,
2016; Gordon, 2015; IFLA school libraries section standing committee, 2015; Musa et. al,
2013; Utah State Board of Education, 2013). In the UK, an annual library budget for primary
schools was based on a minimum of £9.50 per student (Library Association, 2000). However,
insufficient budget happens not only in Thailand but also worldwide. For example, the
School Library Association in UK noted that 61% of UK primary schools allocated an annual
budget for each student that was below the minimum criteria, and many schools provided
242
approximately £4 per student (Adams, 2012). In South Africa, Thulisile’s study (2011) found
that 64.2% of the schools studied did not provide a library budget for their schools because a
library budget policy and plan were not implemented into the school development plan.
From the theoretical perspective of Loertscher’s model (2000), a financial exigency is one of
four keys to acquire the basics of library development in the principal’s organisational
taxonomy. As can be seen, most rural small public primary school libraries in Thailand lack
sufficient budget, which has affected the principals’ potential ability to develop an effective
library. Hansapiromchoke & Kakeaw (2014) also support these findings, that most of small
schools cannot pass the external quality assessment of the national education standards
and quality assessment (ONESQA) because of a lack of resources including budget, learning
materials and teachers.
Library’s physical facilities
Overall, most libraries were called the “School Library”. Some school libraries had different
names, such as resource centre, information centre and learning resource centre, depending
on the vision of each school. The “library” name suggested that these rural schools still held
the traditional image of a library. The principals might perceive that good indoor and
outdoor library environments were from modern furniture and good decoration, which
require a large budget to build a new library or renovate the libraries. Therefore, they were
less likely to upgrade using a name change.
Many libraries in developed countries such as Australia and the United Stated have become
iCentres, learning centres, information centres, innovation centres, e-libraries and digital
libraries. In this, they aim to empower the new role of libraries as the heart of 21st century
learning by creating digital learning environments with ICT (Hay, 2010b; Hay & Todd, 2010;
Gordon, 2014; Hough, 2011; Loertscher et al., 2008). For example, in Australia, over 3000
primary schools reinvented their traditional libraries as iCentres, comprising high technology
facilities supporting students to develop 21st century skills. Consequently, students are able
243
to more flexibly access information from within the school libraries and from external
resources via mobile and handheld technologies (Hay, 2010a).
One principal surveyed stated that his/her library was impossible to reinvent into a living
library, modern library, digital library or virtual learning space (Principals school 181). This is
because the budget allocation for construction or maintenance of school buildings depends
on the decision of the Educational Service Area, and the decision-making process for
allocating the budget might take a long time because of the large number of schools asking
for a budget to improve their school buildings. ASTV (2014) reported that 39,474 school
buildings, governed under the Office of Basic Education Commission, were constructed
more than 30 years ago and required improvement and maintenance.
Sacchanand, Gaikwang, & Lumsakul (2011) described Thailand Knowledge park (TK park) as a
good example of changing the image of the traditional library into a living library through
updating the library’s physical facilities, collections and activities. TK park not only
contributed the image of the living library through its indoor and outdoor environment; it
also focused on public relations by avoiding technical terms and using informal language to
make users feel free to access or participate in the library’s activities.
The principals surveyed perceived that sufficient space and well-designed buildings are
important elements that impact the library environment more than other elements such as
library services and activities. This research demonstrated that 70% of libraries had no
regular promotion of library services and activities for all users. It reflected that the
principals might overlook the importance of library public relations about library services
and activities, which influence the library image and affect the library visits. This is a matter
for concern as the literature review found a good library environment is involved with good
decoration and public relations (Sacchanand, 2010). Even if the physical buildings are not
new and modern, a good library offers a wide range of library services integrating creative
activities, so a welcoming and inviting atmosphere significantly influences the library visit
(Winitjakul, 2011).
244
This research also found that most libraries occupied 48 m2 (the size of 1 classroom). The
average seating among the schools surveyed accommodated 15, while the average number
of computers was only 1. This library size did not meet the school library standard 2013,
which requires that the library size of a small school should occupy 3 classrooms and needs
to provide 1 m2 per student (OBEC, 2013). For the seating capacity, the average number of
seats reached a minimum number as provided in the minimum standards for primary school
library 1992, which was at least 24 seats per 1 classroom, while the school library standards
2013 by OBEC did not provide the exact number of minimum seats in a library (OBEC, 1992,
2013). Most of the principals stated that they used an available classroom as a library; the
others combined the library with other rooms such as classroom, school infirmary or
computer laboratory.
The average number of computers in rural school libraries surveyed was only 1; as well, fifty
percent of libraries had a wi-fi connection, meaning that 194 libraries lacked a wi-fi
connection. With the difficulties in requesting computers for rural schools, the Thai
government has addressed the problem by providing computer mobile units for 56
Educational service areas since 1999. The computer mobile units that can access the areas
contained up to 21 computers, depending on the types of car transporting them. Most
mobile units stopped at each school for 2-5 days per semester, giving very little time for
students to learn and do activities on the computers. This is because the mobile unit had to
serve all the requested schools in each semester (Chuenka, 2007; Moya, 2004; OBEC, 2016).
The mobile units are valuable for the schools without computer but their services are
inadequate to support teaching and learning needs. This is the reason why every school
needs adequate computers and high-speed internet to support teaching and learning.
The principals surveyed in this study rarely mentioned the computer mobile unit. Most
schools had a computer in their libraries, although half (50%) cannot connect to the internet
because the signal could not cover every department of the school. The principals noted that
the signal was poor because of geographic reasons. This is a serious problem for students
245
and teachers in such schools, as they are unable to access the information sources needed
for teaching and learning.
The findings further showed that most libraries were easy to access, had adequate furniture
for library services and had good quality indoor and outdoor environments. However, they
lacked appropriate zoning for users and services. The problems of a small number of
students, collections and library spaces affected the arrangement of an appropriate zoning
for users and services in libraries. Another study showed small schools with space limitations
were affected by the construction of learning facilities, particularly the school libraries. Most
small school libraries were in a dilapidated condition, and lacked the climate of a living
library (Moya, 2004).
Library collections
A most common concern of principals in the survey was the lack of sufficient library
collections. The student–collection ratio of books was 1:15, journals/magazines and audio-
visual was 24:1, the newspaper was 73:1, and the digital media was 4:1. Remarkably, the
average and collection–student ratios of the schools studied seem adequate for students,
but the ratio is not enough to indicate and measure a sufficient size of collections. This is
because some libraries did not provide all kinds of collection. Therefore, in order to indicate
the situation of the adequacy of collection in the libraries studied, other statistics such as
MIN and MODE and principals’ views need to be considered.
The 2013 Thai school library standards stated that the preferred student–book ratio in a
primary school, should be at least 1:10. Other collections were noted as adequate but the
minimum number as provided in the minimum standards for primary school library 1992
was not indicated (OBEC, 1992, 2013). For example, a library should subscribe to at least 1
journal and 1 newspaper (OBEC, 1992). However, while this study found that the average
number of books (1,083), and the student–books ratio (1:15) across the country appeared
adequate for the students, the quality of the books was poor. The students–journal and
newspaper ratios reached the standard provided in the minimum standards for primary
246
school library 1992, but the most common of libraries studied had no subscription, MODE is
0 (See Table 55-56) (OBEC, 1992, 2013).
Most principals admitted that their libraries lacked a variety of books, up-to-date books, and
books of high quality, and included plenty of damaged books. Most books, which were
donated, were not appropriate for students’ age. Other researchers indicated that many
books of rural libraries in Thailand were outdated and not proper for students’ age and most
books were used (second hand) textbooks (Kijkamonthom, 2011; Moya, 2004; Oradee, 2004;
Pedcharat, 2011).
In South Africa, school libraries also face inappropriate book donations. Primary school
principals in Soweto revealed that most library collections were donated books, which were
outdated and inappropriate for student age. The donated books were derived from
developed countries, many of which were not in mother tongue languages. With a lack of
mother tongue language books, students had no choice but to struggle to read English, for
example, disrupting the development of their love for reading habits and own reading
culture (Paton-Ash & Wilmot, 2015). Similarly, Hite (2006) indicated that used book donations
from North America were not useful to libraries in South Africa because the majority of
books were outdated, not in mother tongue languages and had unsuitable content for
people in South Africa, particularly in the cultural context of rural villages. Fortunately, Thai
donors to Thai schools were more likely to donate books in Thai; however, most donated
books were used textbooks (Kijkamonthom, 2011).
This study found that due to the small amount in rural library budgets, the schools surveyed
had inadequate funding to buy good books for young readers, particularly hard cover books
and picture books, because they are more expensive than juvenile books. Similarly, Pradit’s
study (2006) noted that primary schools struggled to buy good quality books for young
students. Inequality in access to books occurred not only in the rural schools; it was also
found in every educational sector in Thailand. Imsuwan (2011) provided significant evidence
that the high price of books affected inequality in access to the books and resources of Thai
people.
247
In 1995, the Ministry of Education Thailand provided Schoolnet, data systems and internet
programs making information, e-learning and digital library accessible to students and
teachers. In 2015, it also developed an Open Education Resources (OER) package containing
over 26,000 learning materials in 1,033 e-books. However, the rural small public schools still
struggle to access the system because of slow speeds and unstable internet connections
(National Electronics and Computer Technology Centre, 2016). Therefore, a quality book
collection is still needed.
Developing countries such as South Africa, Belize and India face difficulties in obtaining
children books and textbooks because of the high prices. In Belize and South Africa, books
are very expensive, as one book costs more than the average daily income (Dent, Goodman
& Kevane, 2014; Shuherk & Scholar, 2009). Malawi lacks book publishers, so local language
books are very rare and outdated (African Library Project, 2016). Indian school libraries have
had plenty of donated books, and expensive books were kept in locked cabinets
(Venkatraman, 2011). Regarding the high price of reading materials, the governments of
India and Zimbabwe solved the problem by providing access to information resources via
technology. Zimbabwe schools involved technology in teaching and learning, such as
providing e-books and taking part in the Open Access Initiative (Muvhunzwi, 2012). The
government of India provided public libraries with free internet access and information
literacy instruction for students and the community in rural areas (Ramani, 2015). This is a
matter for improvement that provides sufficient ICT in rural schools and in other learning
resources nearby the schools such as public libraries. Sufficient ICT not only help rural
schools to save their budget for collections, but also provides a variety of information
resources supporting teaching and learning needs.
This research also found that half of the libraries in the survey had a library classification
system; two-thirds of them used the Dewey Decimal Classification. Only 38 libraries had a
library management system, with most of them using OBEC lib, an open source software
developed by OBEC. Despite the OBEC providing their system to school libraries across the
country, some libraries were still unsuccessful in using the program because they lacked library
expertise, computer technicians or teachers who are expert in computer and information
248
technology management. OBEC (2011) had also found that many primary school libraries did not
use the library management system because they lacked the technology and its infrastructure.
Library activities
Over 75% of libraries provided various activities such as reading promotion and learning
activities, arts and cultural activities, life skills activities, technology in literacy instruction,
and promotional learning activities through experiential learning, but not information
literacy instruction. Noticeably, having half of them not providing the information literacy
instruction for students might affect students’ skills in information seeking and use. This is
because teacher librarians of these schools were not qualified librarians and lacked the
knowledge and skills to provide and support library services and activities. Other research
has also shown that public school libraries in Thailand lacked qualified librarians and did not
provide information literacy instruction for students (Butterfly Book House, 2008; MGR
online, 2006; Sangkharat, 2013; TK Park, 2011).
Regarding the relationship between the qualified librarian and library activities, many
international studies showed that qualified librarians or teacher librarians with full-time
status had a positive impact on student academic achievement because the professional
librarians provide and support library services and activities that enhance students’ literacy
skills (Ainsworth, 1969; Didier, 1982; Hale, 1969; Wilson, & MacNeil, 1999). Coker (2015) also
found that certified teacher-librarians have a strong impact on students’ academic
achievement because students are taught how to retrieve information through information
technology and library facilities.
The theoretical perspective of Loertscher’s model (2000) emphasises the importance of
information literacy instruction as one of the four library media centre program areas,
implemented as the third foundation stone of the school library media program, and
directly impacting students’ academic achievement (see Section 2.1.1). However, this study’s
findings indicate that over 75% of small public primary school libraries in rural Thailand
lacked information literacy instruction, which might affect students’ skills in information
seeking and use influencing their academic achievement.

249
Library services
Half of the libraries provided services such as library rules and regulations, library
timetables, library instruction programs, lending services and reading services. Over 75% of
libraries did not provide reference service, proactive service, information literacy
instruction, computers and internet services. Generally, the reference, proactive and
information literacy instruction programs need skilled staff to deliver specialised

information in any format and to teach library-related skills for students and teachers
(Asselin, 1999; Krashen, 2009; Loertscher, 2000). The lack of staff and library expertise in the
rural schools is likely to affect such library services, which in turn can influence how the
education program of schools affects students’ academic achievement.
In the USA, Illinois schools also were faced with a lack of full-time librarians, but the
government solved the problem by providing schools that shared full-time librarians with
the library’s youth service department; this helped to enhance students’ reading habits and
literacy skills through information literacy instruction programs (Fitzgibbons, 2000). In Africa,
rural schools in Botswana, Ghana, Malawi and Tanzania enhanced their capacity in library
services by using community libraries or rural village libraries. Librarians of Kitengesa
Community Library in rural Uganda taught users to read and write, and provided a book
recommendation service (Goodman, Kevane, & Dent, 2014).
In comparison, in rural Thailand joint-use libraries supported by public libraries do not play a
role in supporting school libraries in formal education because public schools are governed
under the Office of Basic Education Commission and public libraries are governed by the
Office of the Non-Formal and Informal Education. However, the public libraries were
responsible for supporting non-formal and informal education, so had a strong collaboration
and connection with school libraries in these education areas. The collaborations were in
terms of providing community learning centres, book mobile services, literacy promotion
programmes and advocating library expertise (Cheunwattana, 1999; Leowarin, 2010;
Siltragool, 2007; Sungsri, 2009). Therefore, there is apparent need for principals of rural
small public primary school to realise the potential for, and create, a collaborative network
250
with public libraries to enhance the capacities in their libraries collections, services, activities
and staff.
The results of this research confirmed that most libraries opened every working day and
that their users were students, teachers and staff. Moreover, 25% of parents and 16% of
communities accessed and used the libraries. Although the conditions of most libraries were
poor, they still opened their libraries regularly. However, the finding of this research showed
that the library usages of parents and community was very low, similar to Chaisena’s study
(2014), which noted that most school libraries in Thailand lacked library visits from parents
and community because of a lack of collaboration among school libraries, parents and
communities. Library visit of parents and community reflected the awareness of parents and
community of the role and value of the library. This awareness influences the support and
encouragement of their children to read or to use the libraries.
The evidence of parents and communities using libraries reflected that some of them had an
awareness of the role of school libraries. Changket’s study (2011) indicated that parents had an
awareness of the library as a safe place where children can engage with learning. Likewise, the
case study of OBEC and TK park showed that when schools were involved with parents and
community collaboration, the school library was found effective because the library programs
and activities were highly supported (OBEC, 2011).
Many researchers noted that proposals for parents and community to access the libraries
benefited parents and community’s efforts to support their children literacy and learning
development, by gaining the collaborative relationship among parents, community and

libraries which can enrich the library programs and activities (Feinburg, Kuchner & Feldman,
1998; Higgins & Morley, 2014). Although the schools surveyed had a close relationship with
parents and local community, the libraries lacked proactive services influencing parent and
community engagement as a key part of encouraging and providing appropriate support for
students to take advantage of libraries.
251
Library staff
Over 80% of libraries had only 1 teacher librarian and had volunteer students. The average
number of volunteer students was 6. Teacher librarians in Thailand were teachers who have
been chosen by schools and allocated specific hours to manage the libraries. These teacher
librarians held recognised teaching qualifications but they were without any librarian
qualification because the qualification in Library and Information Science (LIS) is not
mandatory for teacher librarians. This study found that only 1 of 350 schools had a qualified
librarian. As many studies provided evidence about Thailand’s school library conditions in
specific district or education service areas, it is clear that lacking qualified librarians occurs
not only in rural schools but also in public primary schools across the entire country
(Butterfly Book House, 2008; MGR online, 2006; Sangkharat, 2013; TK Park, 2011).
The Thai government policy does not identify the librarian position as school staff and does
not allocate funding to hire a librarian. Consequently, some schools hire librarians out of
their own budget, which is derived from the government subsidies and donations. Most
disadvantaged schools in rural areas find it impossible to hire qualified librarians because of
their financial struggles (Pradit, 2006). In the same vein, principals who participated in this
study revealed that their schools found it impossible to have a qualified librarian because a
position for librarian was not provided and schools had insufficient budget to hire a librarian
themselves.
Rural school libraries in both developed and developing countries are often confronted with
a lack of qualified librarians, which creates barriers to establishing effective library
administration, services and activities. In a developing nation like Malaysia, schools lacked
full-time teacher-librarians. Teachers responsible for the care of a library lacked knowledge
and training in Library and Information fields. These teachers had priority in teaching, so
library tasks were extra tasks, giving them a working overload. A serious problem with
school librarians in Malaysia was the isolation of professionals (Lee, Brown, Mekis, & Singh,
2003). This situation is the same in Thailand public schools (Pradit, 2006). The lack of qualified
librarians in schools in Thailand is associated with lack of a government mandated position.

252
In developed countries such as the USA and Japan, legislation treats library staff as a vital
part of the national education policy. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act and
Libraries of the United States make the school library mandatory and acknowledge the
importance of the pedagogical role of school librarians. For example, the library staff should
be a qualified school librarian and the library should have regular collaboration among the
school community to develop and implement library programs with school curriculums
(Maher & McGilvray, 2017; Wright, 2015). This Act is similar to the School Library Law in
Japan, which acknowledges the role of professional librarians as playing a vital role in
education (Sakai, Nakamura, & Kitamura, 2002). The Japanese government emphasised
information literacy instruction in supporting the concept of student-centred learning (Japan
Library Association, 2016). This legislation helped school libraries in those countries succeed
in contributing to effective school libraries that impact students’ academic achievement.
This study found that most libraries had collaborations with principals in curriculum
development and with teachers in supporting the library for teaching and learning. At the
same time the collaborations with other libraries were very rare. Principals in this study
revealed that teacher librarians in rural schools had strengthened relationships with them
and other teachers because a major duty of teacher librarians was teaching and the small
number of staff led them to have close-knit relationships. This finding affirmed the studies by
Schmidt, Murray & Nguyen (2007) and Buaraphan (2013), that small schools had close
collaboration among principals, teachers, staff, parents and communities.
On the other hand, in developed countries like the United States and Canada, the
collaboration and relationship between principals and teacher-librarians was various and
depended on professional and school contexts. For example, instructional library programs
did not exist in some schools in California. Teacher-librarians did not play a large role in
teaching and were not involved with curriculum development and budget and facilities
management. Therefore, librarians or teacher-librarians worked in isolation and had a low
level of collaboration with the principals (Hartzell, 1994, 2000c). In Canada, low collaboration
between principals and teacher-librarians was caused by hiring part-time librarians. The
253
principals viewed the role of the part-time librarians as baby-sitting (Haycock, 2003). Oberg’s
study (1996) found that experienced teacher-librarians in Alberta, Canada had more
collaboration with the principals than novice librarians, because the experienced librarians
had a strong collaborative network and got more trust and attention from the principals
than the novice librarians.
In this study, in terms of collaboration between school libraries and other libraries, 10% of
principals answered that they had collaborated with academic, public and school libraries.
The collaborations were knowledge and expertise sharing within libraries, supporting library
activities and sharing library staff from a public library. The findings provided the same
evidence as Thepkraiwun’s study (2011), which had investigated small school management
under the collaborative network. His finding showed that the small schools in Khon Kean
province lacked collaboration with the schools’ stakeholders, affecting the quality
management of their schools. Suwantha & Pisarnpong’s study (2014) reflected that teacher
librarians of schools located in Chanthaburi mostly needed to develop a school library

network with other libraries.
This study found that 39 of 311 schools studied had collaborations with other libraries. This
suggests that schools in rural Thailand were less likely to be aware of the benefits of
collaboration among other libraries. This is an important matter to address, as many
researchers have noted that the strong collaborations and connections of the public
libraries can contribute the benefit of improving the quality of school libraries (Dent, 2012;
Lance, Rodney and Hamilton-Pennell, 2000a & 2000c; Liu, 2008; Schultz-Jones & Oberg,
2015).
In the case of Thailand, public libraries do not play an essential role in developing school
libraries in formal education, but had a strong collaboration and connection with school
libraries in informal and non-formal education. The collaborations were in terms of providing
community learning centres, book mobile services, literacy promotion programme and
advocating library expertise (Cheunwattana, 1999; Leowarin, 2010; Siltragool, 2007; Sungsri,
2009). Collaboration between school libraries and other libraries in Africa and the United
254
States were in terms of using joint-use libraries (see Section 8.2.1). Those collaborations
benefited rural schools to enhance their capacities in library resources, services and staff
(Goodman, Kevane, & Dent, 2014). Therefore, there is an apparent need for library staff of
small public primary schools in rural Thailand to be aware of the benefits of a collaborative
network with other libraries.
This research showed that teacher librarians, teachers and principals in rural schools had
strong collaborations in curriculum development and supporting teaching and learning but
that collaboration with other libraries was very rare. This is because the libraries studied
lacked professional librarians who would be key persons to build collaborative relationships
with other libraries, and the principals and teacher librarians were less likely to be
concerned about the benefit of collaborative network, when establishing their own effective
school libraries.
7.2.2 Causes contributing to current condition of the libraries
A great majority of the 375 principals surveyed noted that the causes contributing to the
current condition of libraries were small budget allocations, insufficient staff and insufficient
library’s physical facilities. They reported that government allocated the school budgets
depending on the number of students, which affected the shortage of resources and
inefficient administration. Some principals stated that, due to their small school budget, they
cannot allocate a budget for their libraries. This supports research views that most rural
school libraries in Thailand cannot provide effective libraries due to lack of budget,
infrastructure, facilities and professional librarians (Pradit, 2006; TK Park, 2011).
In terms of insufficient staff, many principals said that their schools struggle to have
adequate teachers, so it is impossible to have a qualified librarian. The causes of this issue
were linked to the teacher-student ratio, discussed in the schools’ characteristics section.
Most schools face an inadequate number of teachers, and the existing teachers have to
teach many subjects in many grades. Some of them were assigned specific hours to manage
the libraries, even though they have no library administration knowledge. These teachers
255
have a work overload and cannot afford to be dedicated teacher librarians. Noticeably, only
1 of 350 libraries of this study had a full-time qualified librarian.
As noted in Pradit’s study (2006), some teacher librarians stated that the burden of library
tasks affected their teaching and they did not want to take responsibility for their libraries.
Because there is no mandated librarian position in many public schools, they seldom hire
qualified librarians. If schools need a qualified librarian, the schools have to hire them as
contract teachers and pay the librarians’ salaries on their own (Atagi, 2011). The difficulties
of having qualified librarians are not only caused by insufficient budget, but also arise from
the negative reputation of the school librarian job. Newly-graduated librarians are less likely
to apply for a job in public schools because of low payment, overloaded responsibilities, no
career advancement, and non-permanent employment (Pradit, 2006; Thaipost, 2009).
In terms of insufficient library physical facilities, principals emphasised the condition of

library buildings, which were old, with the library environment looking like a storage room.
These conditions, also noted in Pradit’s study (2006), occurred because many rural schools
had locked up or changed their libraries into a storage room. The principals of this study paid
attention to insufficient computers and internet connection issues. Similarly, OECD (2013a)
noted that computers and internet connectivity of socio-economically disadvantaged
schools were poor when compared to advantaged schools. This situation is now likely to
improve, as the Thai government has also made insufficient internet connection into an
urgent educational issue to resolve in the education reforms of 2016 (Office of the Minister,
Minister of Interior, 2016).
7.2.3 Role of libraries of small public primary schools on students’ academic achievement,
as perceived by principals
Most principals were awareness of the role of the library. They perceived that small public
primary school libraries can enhance students’ academic achievement (50.4%), develop
students’ information literacy (27.2%) and raise reading literacy (22.6%). Likewise, Moya (2004)
and Chaisena (2014) described principals of rural schools as having a good understanding of
256
the role of the school library impacting students’ academic achievement, although these
schools still struggled to develop an effective library because of inefficient administration,

insufficient library physical facilities and lack of qualified staff.
In the same manner, Nganlert, Sirisanglert and Nakfon (2016) studied the roles of learning
resource administration of school principals of Sa-Keaw province. This study found that the
principals of small schools took the roles of learning resource administrator less often than
in large and medium schools because the small schools had limitations in their learning
resources and budget. Furthermore, some small schools had no libraries. In contrast,
Sangkharat (2013) found that principals of Nakorn Ratchasrima Primary Educational Service
Area Office 6 lacked awareness of library administration.
Internationally, many studies have found that school principals are apparently unconcerned
about the importance of the school library and librarians because of their personal
professional level, education level and work experience (Alexander, Smith & Carey, 2003;
Hafsteinsdottir, 1997; Hartzell, 2002a; Hughes, 2013; Lupton, 2016; Naylor and Jenkins,
1988; Pearson, 1989; Veltze, 1992; Wilson & MacNeil, 1999). Naylor and Jenkins (1988)
stated that principals perceived the role of school library and librarians based on their own
teaching experiences as a teacher. They assessed librarians’ job performance through
observations, feedback from members of school communities and conversation with

librarians.
In rural Thailand, teacher librarians were teachers chosen by the principals to manage the
libraries in specific hours. Some schools assigned all teachers, including the principals, to
take care of the library when they had free time. Therefore, the main task of teacher
librarians in rural small public primary schools was teaching, which was different from the
private schools in Thailand and abroad (Akkawatthanangkoon, 2013; Haycock, 2003).
Consequently, the principals realised the role of libraries and the importance of teacher
librarians through their working experiences. Due to a small number of staff in small schools,
principals tended to have a close relationship among teachers and teacher librarians and
worked as a team to administrate their schools.
257
The principals in this research understood that libraries impacted students’ academic
achievement, similar to the study of Lau (2002), which showed that principals in the USA
believed that school libraries have the potential to enhance students’ academic
achievement. Lance (2001) also provided evidence that school libraries have strong impacts
on increasing students’ academic performance. In 2011, OBEC invited 21 supportive
principals from the medium schools to be a part of a best practice living library project. The
results showed that the supportive principals influenced the libraries’ administration and
encouraged teachers to realise the value of libraries impacting students’ academic
achievement and increasing reading literacy.
In addition, many studies showed that information literacy provided by school libraries had
a positive impact on students’ learning outcomes. Schools that more frequently provided
information literacy instruction affected their students to achieve higher test scores. The
information literacy programs developed students’ abilities to use the school library, identify
their information needs, seek information sources, and access, analyse and synthesise
information efficiently, effectively, and ethically (Lance and others, 2005; Lance, Rodney, &
Hamilton-Pennell, 2000b; Todd, Gordon & Lu, 2010, 2011).
Sacchanand’s research in Thailand showed that principals understood the essential link
between information literacy and learning, established by the teacher librarians

(Sacchanand, 2011). However, most of the principals surveyed perceived that information
literacy referred to computer literacy. Singh, Diljit and others (2005) considered that school
principals, teachers and teacher-librarians in Southeast Asian countries understood the
meaning of information literacy differently. Some referred to it as teaching a library’s
orientation, while others implemented information literacy as a part of extra-curricular
activities. The implication of this research and findings is that principals of rural small public
primary schools in Thailand understood very well the roles of school library impacting
students’ academic achievement, particular increasing students’ reading literacy, because
they realised the role of libraries and the importance of teacher librarians through their
working experiences. With a small number of staff in small schools, principals tended to have
258
a close relationship among teachers and teacher librarians and worked as a team to
administrate their schools.
This research also found that, as perceived by the principals, libraries can increase students’
reading literacy. The finding was similar to the study of Huge (2013), which was found that
principals in Gold Coast Australia schools understood that library staff contributed to many
kinds of student literacies, such as digital and reading literacies. Lance, Rodney and Russel
(2007) showed that principals identified the most popular role of the library media specialist
as a reading motivator. Thanakulkit (2005) also found that principals of Demonstration
Secondary Schools in Thailand realised that the role of teacher librarians, particularly in
providing the readers’ advisory services, had a strong influence on students’ reading literacy.
Moreover, principals in this research stated that the school library had positive impacts on
students’ academic achievement and in enhancing students’ academic achievement,
information literacy, reading literacy, learning skills, writing literacy, critical thinking, and
supporting reading for pleasure. These findings, derived from open-ended question number
3, were significantly linked to the semantic differential questions that also reflected the
principals’ perceptions that school libraries had an extremely important impact on students’
academic achievement (see Section 8.2.7).
7.2.4 Requirements for improving the condition of the libraries
The principals responded that effective library administration, effective staff and sufficient
library’s physical facilities were their perceived requirements to improve the condition of
the libraries. For effective administration, the principals noted their need for clear policies
from the government, effective government and local affiliation support for the libraries,
adequate budget allocation, integration of library programs with school curriculum, an
effective library management system, principal support and schooling assessment. Other
requirements to improve the condition of the libraries included having sufficient teacher
librarians, librarians, and particularly teacher awareness about the role of the library, as well
as sufficient library physical facilities.
259
Principals reflected the same evidence as Pradit’s study (2006), which noted government
policy was the most important factor influencing the development of school libraries.
Principals stated that the Thai government lacked practical and clear policies for school
library development; Panmekha, school library expert, also reflected that the government
policy does not completely support the development of school libraries.
The Thailand Education Act 1999 and its revisions in 2002 and 2010, did not directly refer to
the role of school libraries as important learning resources impacting Thai learners’
academic achievement and life-long learning skills (Office of National Education Commission,
2010). Subsequently, the government gave priority and budget to develop and enhance the
quality of other learning resources before those of school libraries. This is because the
government may believe that school libraries are private places where only the school
communities can have access, and where general people are not allowed access. The fact is
that many schools have created library partnerships with public libraries and communities,
which allows people in the local communities to use the school libraries, such as in joint
public-school libraries, and community libraries (Cheunwattana, 1999; Dheeranond, 2014; TK
park, 2011).
Panmeka noted that the government lacked awareness about the role of the library and
qualified librarians. In spite of the government supporting Education Reform and
emphasising student-centred learning, the policies never refer to the role of the library and
librarians in supporting student-centred learning (Pradit, 2006). Moreover, the education
ministry does not provide a librarian position as a permanent employment role in the public
schools. The librarian position was provided as a non-permanent contract teacher.
Unsurprisingly, most rural small public primary schools had teacher librarians who lacked
the knowledge and skills to manage their libraries. In general, teachers who were assigned
to manage the libraries or collaborated with teacher librarians were Thai language teachers
because they had special background and expertise in developing reading and writing skills
through activities (Pradit, 2006).
260
This research found that a majority of teachers who managed the libraries graduated in
Elementary Education, followed by Thai language, and English Language. Due to the lack of
teachers to cover all subject areas, principals of those schools chose teachers who were
willing to manage the libraries. Therefore, teacher librarians in small public primary schools
had graduated in various majors such as Social Science, Computer Science, Sciences,
Performing Arts, and Mathematics.
Regarding inadequate staff and lack of library expertise in rural small public primary schools,
half of the libraries studied did not provide important services and activities to their
students, such as information literacy instruction, reference service, proactive service, and
computer and internet services. Providing effective library services and activities was hard
work for one teacher librarian. The principals realised that having effective staff not only
involved the library staff but also included all teachers.
This study found that most teacher librarians and teachers collaborated in developing
learning activities and library promotion. However, from these causes, teachers lacked
support for students to access the libraries because they were overloaded with teaching and
responsibilities, and there was a lack of awareness about the role of libraries impacting
students’ academic achievement. Pradit’s study (2006) recommended that school libraries
should have more than one staff member or should work as a team to reduce tasks,
empowering the team to create and share powerful ideas to develop effective library
services and activities.
As can be seen, insufficient policy related to school libraries affected many problems in the
schools such as library administration, budget and human resources. Therefore, a clear
policy and plan related to school libraries are needed as an important tool empowering the
Thai government and education stakeholders to take action in developing effective school
libraries. Effective education policies lead not only productivity investment and impact
education success, but also to social and economic benefit (Dodd, 2015).
Regarding the requirement of sufficient library physical facilities, principals realised that the
good condition of library’s physical facilities induced students to access libraries. The finding
261
of the open-ended questionnaire associated with the principals’ perceptions about library’s
physical facilities had an extremely strong impact on increasing students’ academic
achievement. Because of the concept of 3Gs models offered by the Thai government, this
concept comprises good collections, good environment and good librarians. Schools
governed under the Office of Basic Education Commission were encouraged to use the
model for improving their libraries’ quality (OBEC, 2009). In this research, the principals
understood that the keys to creating a good library environment included providing
sufficient library physical facilities, which is similar to Pisitpan’s study (2008), in which most
principals realised that having sufficient library physical facilities is an important element
that makes students feel free and safe to use the libraries and influences them to develop
reading habits and a reading culture.
Furthermore, in 2013, the Office of Basic Education Commission revised the school library
standard because teacher librarians and educational supervisors argued that some
standards, indicators and standard scores should be revised and more practical (OBEC,
2013). The revision was based on studies related to the 3Gs model, Education Reform Policy
(2009-2018), and National Economic and Social Development Plan 2012-2016. The library’s
physical facilities and learning materials were clearly divided as one of five standards. The
library’s physical facilities and learning materials standard were involved with 5 indicators:
appropriate location, library decoration, appropriate zoning and environment support

reading and learning, indoor environment, and library safety policy.
Likewise, the living library project provided by TK Park changed and built the image of a
traditional library into a modern library by creating a library environment well-equipped
with modern technology and with a lively interior design (Sugiharto, 2014). Sacchanand and
Prommapan (2011) also saw the library’s physical facilities as one of five standards,
indicating the living library effectiveness. The standard of library’s physical facilities
comprised easy access, indoor environment, outdoor environment, and appropriate zoning
for users and services. Because of the 3Gs models and the living library project, principals
262
realised that a library’s physical facilities represent an important factor influencing the
library environment, which impacts library effectiveness.
7.2.5 Libraries’ limitations and opportunities
Research question 2 asked what the principals perceived were the challenges and
opportunities that school libraries faced in Thailand. Principals were asked to provide their
library strengths, weaknesses, limitations and opportunities through the open-ended
questionnaire.
Libraries’ limitations
Three hundred and fifty principals identified that the limitations of the rural libraries
stemmed from insufficient government administration, and insufficient community and
students’ parents support. According to the Thai government policy related to school
libraries, in force since the education reform of 1999, some small schools can overcome an
ineffective administration by the professionalism of school principals, effective teachers,
and local community supports (Ngamwittayaphong, 2011; Uparnvit, 2009), but many rural
schools still struggle to have effective libraries (TK Park, 2011).
In terms of insufficient government administration, principals indicated the views that the
Thai government lacks a clear policy, strategies and measurement to bring tangible results
of school libraries effectiveness that will influence student academic achievement. Thailand
lacks library legislation that supports, maintains and responds to school libraries’
effectiveness in order to fulfil a standard of student support for educational development

and skill required (Chaisena, 2014; IFLA, 2015). Even though the Education Act of B.E.2542
(1999), amended in B.E. 2545 (2002), emphasised providing adequate and effective learning
resources, it does not clearly identify the role of the school library, which should be
mandatory, and which every student must access (Dechwittayaporn et al., 2009; Office of
the national education commission, 1999).
Regarding the school-based management concept, 160 primary schools had changed their
education environment from a centralised to a decentralised system to improve the quality

263
of their schools. The inequity of library administration emerged among schools changing
from centralised to decentralised systems, especially the budget allocation. The schools with
close participation with local communities enhanced their capacities to administrate and
operate schools effectively, which positively affected their students’ academic achievement
(Vasuwattanased & Kamnuansilpa, 2012). The schools located in district with low income still
struggle to develop effective education program because of weak local governments, a lack
of clear policy, strategic and plan for improvement programs, inadequate educational
resources, and timeliness and inconsistency in implementing quality and equity
improvement programmes (ONESQA, 2006; SEAMEO Secretariat, 2001).
Insufficient local community and parental support is a significant limitation influencing the
school library effectiveness. Though the results of this research show that the greatest part
of the library budget was derived from local community donation, there were very few
schools that derived a large amount of money. The low socioeconomic status and the low
level of literacy of parents and local people in rural areas affected the school libraries’
effectiveness in terms of inadequate income to support library activities, lacking awareness

about the value of library, lacking encouragement and support of their children to read or to
use the libraries. This finding links to evidence in other literature that most rural parents and
local people were poor, unable to support the library fundraising. Their poor literacy meant
they lacked awareness of how the role of library impacts students’ academic achievement
(Intathep, 2012; Lincharearn, Ardwichai, & Chanin, 2009; Nicaise, Tonguthai & Fripont,
2000).
Libraries’ opportunities
Principals illustrated that the libraries’ opportunities were from the supportive local
communities, private organisations and government. As stated in the literature review,
advocacy groups such as non-government organisations, private groups, charity
organisations, universities and local community have supported the establishment of rural
school libraries in long-term and short-term projects (Dent, Goodman & Kevane, 2014; Liu,
2005; Plumber, 2015; Rocket & Win, 2014).

264
Principals clarified that, due to budget amounts depending on numbers of students, the
rural schools had an inadequate budget, which affected the library administration.
Sometimes supports and aids from Ministry of Education were very slow and the libraries’
supports did not meet the schools’ requirements. Therefore, these schools had to solve
problems by themselves (Choh, 2003). Some schools asked their local community, public and
private organisations to collaborate at their schools’ activities by donating money, learning
materials and equipment to their school libraries (Pradit, 2006).
Despite most principals of this study depicting that insufficient local community and parents
support were their libraries’ limitations, at the same time the principals described that a
supportive local community was their libraries’ opportunity. In rural Thailand, schools have
strengthened relationships with their local communities. Even though most local
communities were low-wealth communities, unable to support school libraries with a
sufficient budget, their support comes in terms of teaching volunteers and labour
(Buaraphan, 2013; Dheeranond, 2014). The National Economic and Social Development Plan
2007-2011 empowered local people to access various learning resources through
educational resources and other resources provided in the communities. Some rural schools
shared their resources with communities, which raised the awareness about the importance
of schools and schools’ resources in local communities (Dechwittayaporn et. al., 2009).
The results of this study showed that libraries’ supports from public and private
organisations were in terms of providing money, education materials, establishing library

building, and supporting libraries’ services and activities, as occurs worldwide. Some
organisations have supported rural libraries continuously, while others have undertaken
short-term projects.
The principals found that the government allocated budget for buying learning materials
and library resources, and provided the policy related to reading promotion. Moreover, the
local affiliation supports the library projects such as providing award to schools and staff
that have excellent reading promotion activities. The Thai government assigned the Office of
Basic Education Commission to promote reading in teaching and learning by establishing

265
guidelines related to promoting reading projects; training schools’ staff and education
service areas to have knowledge and skills in reading promotion activities; supporting
schools’ communities to develop reading habits and reading culture; and creating a library
network to achieve the three characteristics of good library (3Gs models).
However, even with the government’s attempt to improve the reading habits and culture
through the policy and reading promotion project, rural schools still face problems
developing a reading culture, because of the high cost of reading materials, the limited
ability developed in reading comprehension, and the poor quality of learning resources
(Imsuwan, 2011). Rural parents and students cannot pay for good books or access to books
because of the high price of books and reading materials (Kongrut, 2017), caused by the cost
of raw materials, taxes and wages (Imsuwan, 2011; Pongpaiboon, 2011).
Overall, the opportunities for rural small public primary school libraries were in terms of
supports from many sources. However, the key factor for achieving these supports is the
potential of principals. Principals played a vital role in obtaining a library budget and sources
from these supportive groups by developing closer collaborations and networks in their
schools, between the public and private sectors (Wannagatesiri, Nukultham, Kruea-In &
Thongperm, 2014).
7.2.6 Patterns of libraries’ characteristics
Schools and school libraries’ demographic data were taken together in order to analyse and
identify the patterns of libraries’ characteristics. As seen in section 8.2.1 [libraries’
characteristics], libraries of small public primary schools in rural Thailand were lacking
resources in their collections, physical facilities, and staff. The results of cluster analysis
revealed that the patterns of the libraries’ characteristics were divided into 2 groups: high-
and low-level groups.
These high- and low-level groups differed mainly in cases of library’s physical facilities,
followed by library administration and continuous library activities and public relations
about the services and activities (See Figure 11: ten greatest variables for the cluster
266
formation). The libraries belonging to the high-level group had better conditions than those
of the low-level group regarding library administration, physical facilities, collections,
activities, services and staff.
Libraries belonging to both groups were found in every region but the high-level group were
most likely found in the Central, East, West and South regions, while the low-level group
were found mostly in the North and Northeast regions. This finding concurs with the issue of
education’s quality and inequality, which particularly occurred in the North, Northeast
regions and in three provinces located in the Southern border [Yala, Pattani and Narathiwat].
OECD (2013) has asserted that Thailand had a big difference in the quality of libraries among
socio-economically advantaged and disadvantaged schools. Likewise, Carroll (1971) and
Bloom (1982) have found that most disadvantaged schools located in rural areas faced an
insufficient environment issue including a lack of teachers, teachers’ qualities, learning
materials and resources, and infrastructure. Lincharearn, Ardwichai and Chanin (2009)
showed that an insufficient environment in schools is a significant factor influencing the

students’ academic performance.
The North, Northeast regions and 3 provinces at the Southern border were identified as the
poor regions and provinces that face difficulties in achieving educational standards (Atagi,
2011). The evidence from the students’ assessment through the O-NET (The ordinary national
educational test) and PISA (The Programme for International Student Assessment) confirmed
that the students’ test scores were very low in the North, Northeast regions and in 3
provinces in the Southern border (Klainin, 2007; Office of the Minister, Minister of Interior,
2016). The National Statistical Office (2014) revealed that young children living in the
Northeast region had the lowest reading rate and faced the educational inequality in which
Shoraku (2008) and Laovakul (2009) previously described, that students of Northeast region
get the lowest education subsidy per head, lower than the overall average subsidy.
In this study, the findings identified that most libraries in the South region belonged to the
high-level group because the sample of the South region spread over 43 provinces. The
267
sample of three provinces in the Southern border was 18%, so did not have much influence
on the rest of the South region’s sample.
7.2.7 Principals’ perceptions and factors that drive the perceptions about library impacting
Research question 3 examined the principals’ perceptions about libraries impacting
students’ academic achievement and the factors that influence these perceptions. A great
majority of principals perceived that the school library had an extremely strong impact on
raising students’ academic achievement (47.6%), particularly in increasing students’ literacy
levels. A minority of principals perceived that the school library had a very strong impact on
students’ academic achievement, particularly in increasing academic grades, standardised
test scores, information literacy levels, time spent reading during school, outside of schools
and reading for pleasure (39.5%). Meanwhile, 0.5% of principals perceived that the school
library had an extremely weak impact on increasing students’ academic achievement.
A majority of the findings of this research were similar to other studies in both developed
and developing countries. In terms of similarity, the results of this research were similar to a
Texas study, in which most principals perceived that the school library had an impact on
raising students’ academic achievement. For example, a majority of school administrators in
Texas schools (54%) believed that school library programs had a strong impact on students’
academic achievement, particularly in increasing literacy levels, time spent reading during
school, time spent reading for pleasure. A minority of school administrators in Texas schools
(47%) believed that school library programs had impacts on students’ academic achievement
in increasing academic grades, standardised test scores, students’ mastery of the
curriculum, information literacy skills, time spent reading outside of school and time spent
reading as adult and having greater impact on student achievement at elementary level
than they do in secondary level. Only 7% of the school administrators would not believe that
school library programs had any impact on students’ academic achievement (Van
Hamersveld, 2007).
268
A majority of the findings of this research were different from most qualitative research in
developed countries, which found that school principals are less likely to be aware of the
importance of school library and librarians (Dorrell & Lawson, 1995; Hartzell, 2002c;
Kolencik, 2001; Van Hamersveld, 2007). For example, Hartzell (1997) noted that school
administrators overlooked the roles of libraries and teacher-librarians because administrator
and teacher training programs did not emphasise the roles of libraries and teacher-
librarians; librarians or teacher-librarians were perceived as support staff more than
teachers or instructional consultants and the nature of librarian’s work is isolation as one-
person staff in the school. For these reasons, library funding and staff were the first target
for budget cuts by the school administrators’ decision-making teams.
Most libraries in developed countries had qualified librarians or fulltime and part-time
teacher-librarians or professional staff responsible for managing the libraries. However, the
problems of those libraries were that the principals had less expectation about the
instructional role of the librarians and lacked understanding about the value of the
instructional role toward enhancing students’ learning outcomes. These problems were
caused by the occupational invisibility of school librarians and the occupational socialisation
of school principals. For the occupational invisibility of school librarians, the nature of the
librarian’s work is isolation as a one-person staff in the school, and librarians did not play a
large role in teaching. Moreover, librarians had a low profile in educational literature. These
reasons allowed principals to have limited knowledge about the role of librarian impacting
on the quality of teaching and learning (Hartzell, 2002a). The occupational socialisation of
school principals depended on school principals’ educational experiences as students and
classroom teachers (Alexander, Smith & Carey, 2003).
However, some studies in the USA and Australia have indicated that the principals of better-
performing schools understood the roles of school libraries impacting students’ academic
achievement and placed higher value on instructional library programs and librarians (Lance,
Rodney & Russell, 2007; Lau, 2002). The researcher agrees with Lupton’s statement (2016)
269
indicating that the nature of the schools has influenced the principals’ perspective on the
role of teacher-librarians.
Many studies in developing countries also provided the same evidence: that the principals’
perceptions about the role of school library depended on the nature of schools (Paton-Ash &
Wilmot, 2015; Warning & Henri, 2012). For instance, some principals in China were aware of
the roles of school libraries and believed that the libraries can enhance students’ academic
performance affecting their school reputation (Warning & Henri, 2012). In South Africa,
principals of schools in better conditions had greater awareness about the roles and values
of libraries and teacher-libraries affecting on school library development than fee-paying
schools (Paton-Ash & Wilmot, 2015). This finding was similar to the studies of Lance, Rodney
& Russell (2007) and Lau (2002), which noted that the principals of better-performing schools
had better understandings about the roles of school libraries impacting students’ academic
achievement.
Meanwhile in rural Thailand, the libraries were managed by teachers assigning or willing to
manage the libraries. Some schools assigned all teachers, including the principals, to take
care of the library when they had free time. Most school libraries had no qualified or fulltime
staff to manage the libraries. Those teacher librarians had priority tasks in teaching, which
was different from the schools in developed countries. Therefore, the principals realised the
role of libraries and the importance of teacher librarians through their working experiences.
Because of the small number of staff in small schools, principals tended to have a close
relationship among teachers and teacher librarians and worked as a team to administrate
their schools. As can be seen in Tables 72 and 73, the collaboration among teacher librarians
and principals (90%) and the teachers (89%) was very high. It can be seen clearly that teacher-
librarians in developed country had priority tasks in library administration, while teacher
librarians in rural Thailand had priority tasks in teaching, influencing the role expectation
and perception of school principals related to libraries and teacher librarians.
In studies of Thailand, the findings of this research were different from the study of
Akkawatthanangkoon (2013), who argued that secondary school principals lacked library
270
awareness about the role of library, causing ineffective libraries. In the same vein,
Sermvithoon, Techataweewan & Wajiraprechapong (2011) found that principals of small
schools gave less support to libraries than large-sizes school principals because the small
schools lacked library budget and staff. Subsequently, principals gave priority and paid
attention to core learning priority areas more than to the libraries.
This study supports the findings of Moya (2004), Chaisena (2014) and Nganlert, Sirisanglert
and Nakfon (2016), that principals of rural schools had a good understanding about the role
of school library impacting students’ academic achievement but these schools still struggled
to develop an effective library because of inefficient administration, insufficient library

physical facilities and lack of staff. Additionally, most principals in this study stated that the
school library had positive impacts on enhancing students’ academic achievement,
information literacy, reading literacy, learning skills, writing literacy, critical thinking, and
supporting reading for pleasure (See the statistics in Section 5.3: Role of libraries of small
public primary schools on students’ academic achievement, as perceived by principals).
These findings derived from the open-ended question number 3 and its significant link to the
semantic differential questions that reflected how much impact the school library has on
Two major factors came from the semantic differential questions: first, principals believed
that school libraries had an extremely strong impact on increasing students’ literacy levels
and that school library programs had very strong impact on increasing students’ academic
grade, standardised test scores, information literacy levels, amount of time spend reading
during school, amount of time spend reading outside school, and amount of time spend
reading for pleasure. Second, they perceived that a sufficient library budget, quality of
library physical facilities, quality of library collections, activities, proactive services, and
sufficient library staff influenced the increase of students’ academic achievement to a large
degree.
However, the principals of this study understood the value and impacts of school library on
increasing students’ academic achievement; they reflected that their libraries were
271
ineffective because of administration, staff and library’s physical facilities issues. The
principals reflected that if their schools have these elements, their schools may achieve the
minimum standards of school libraries. Noticeably, most principals considered the
traditional school libraries involved with good facilities, staff and building, but did not have
awareness about modern libraries, which integrate ICT capabilities in library administration,
collections, services, activities and staff (see Section 8.2.2).
Overlooking the concept of modern libraries in rural schools may be caused by a lack of
sufficient ICT and hi-speed internet. Principals may not realise that modern libraries, such as
e-libraries and digital libraries, do not need building, space and staff. Moreover, some digital
libraries can be accessed for free, which will not only save school budget for collections,
staff and facilities, but will also effectively enhance libraries’ services and activities for their
students and teachers.
7.2.8 Factors that drive the principals’ perceptions about library impacting students’
The finding clearly presented that the principals of small public primary schools in rural
Thailand perceived that libraries had an extremely important impact on increasing students’
academic achievement; this research further found that principals’ ages were negatively and
significantly correlated with their perceptions. This means that the principals who were
younger than 51 years old tended to increase the positive perceptions about the libraries
impacting students’ academic achievement. Other factors, including the principals’ highest
academic qualification, years of experience as a school principal, years of experience as a

school principal at present location, and school budget, had no correlation with the
principals' perceptions.
Most of the principals were male. One-thirds of principals were aged between 51 and 55
years. Most commonly, principals had achieved a Master’s degree of Education Science and
Teacher Training. Twenty eight percent of principals had experience as a school principal for
272
1-5 years and sixty-four percent of principals had experience as a school principal at their
present location for 1-5 years.
According to Thailand’s primary education legislation, primary education policy since 1978
has focused on increasing primary school enrolment rates and enhancing students’ learning
ability through a teacher-centred approach to the classroom (Sangnapaboworn, 2007). In
1999 the National Education Act was enacted toward the Education for All goals (EFA), which
focused on student-centred learning and the student-centred classroom. These were
implemented into the curricula, learning processed and teacher behaviour by shifting the
focus of teachers’ instruction to the students’ interest (Office of the National Education
Commission, 1999). Afterwards, the National Education Plan (2002-2006), based on the
National Education Act 1999, emphasised education for life-long learning (Israsena, 2007).
Subsequently, the National Education Act 1999 and the National Education Plan (2002-2006)
have influenced teachers and principals’ practices by facilitating educational resources both
inside and outside of the schools including persons, school libraries, public libraries,
museums, parks, zoos, sport centres and community learning centres (Office of the National
Education Commission, 1999).
Since 1999 the principals and teachers have paid more attention to organising learning
activities through learning resources toward the concept of student-centred learning.
Therefore, the principals and teachers who had worked in schools or started studying in
Education Science and Teacher Training since that age, may had more understanding and
awareness about learning resources impacting students’ academic achievement. From this
study’s finding, the principals younger than 51 years tended to have increased positive
perceptions about the libraries impacting students’ academic achievement. This is because
the principals aged above 50 years old were aged between 34 and 44 years during 1999, so
experienced, as teacher or school principal, the concept of the teacher-centred approach. It
can be assumed that they might retain the concept of a teacher-centred approach until now,
which would have influenced their perceptions about how the school library can increase
273
Meanwhile, the principals aged lower than 51 years old were between 20 and 33 years old
during 1999. At that age, they might be graduate students and teachers who totally started
studied or worked with the concept of student-centred learning and the student-centred
classroom. Now that they have shifted their position from a graduate student and teacher to
be a principal, it can be assumed that these principals are more likely to be educated and
cultivated to understand the role of school libraries and other learning resources that
impact student-centred learning and student academic achievement.
The findings of this study indicated that most principals surveyed had certain roles and
expectations in developing effective libraries. For example, over half of the principals
understood their roles by implementing a library plan within a school development plan,
providing a school library budget, and allocating staff to manage a library. However, the
principals viewed the impacts of school libraries on students’ academic achievement
through personal cognition influenced by their ages. This is because the principals’ ages
linked to individuals’ action when they had studied since 1999. As mentioned above, the
researcher assumes that the principals aged lower than 51 years old started studying or
working with the concept of student-centred learning since 1999. Therefore, they tended to
had more understanding about the value and impacts of school libraries on students’
7.3 Key findings
This study provides a snapshot of the current characteristics of school libraries and the
perceptions of the school principals on the impact of school library on student academic
achievement in rural Thailand. This research demonstrated that the number of libraries had
significantly increased, compared with the evidence of Cheunwattana’s study in 1997, which
found that most rural schools had no libraries. This research has shown that currently small
public primary school libraries are lacking resources in their collections, physical facilities,
and staff. The libraries were classified into 2 groups: high and low-level groups. The libraries
belonging to the high-level group had better conditions than the low-level group in cases of
library administration, physical facilities, collections, activities, services and staff. Libraries
274
belonging to both groups were found in every region but the high-level group were most
likely found in the Central, East, West and South regions, while the low-level group were
found mostly in the North and Northeast regions.
The limitations experienced by the rural libraries included insufficient government

administration, and insufficient community and students’ parents support. Principals from
this research provided feedback that the Thai government lacks a clear policy, strategies and
measurements to link the tangible results of school library effectiveness with influencing
student academic achievement. Principals also see that Thailand also lacks a library
legislation which supports, maintains and responds to school libraries’ effectiveness in
fulfilling a standard of student support for educational development and skill requirements.
Insufficient community and students’ parents support were included as a library limitation
because the low socioeconomic status of parents and local community and the low level of
literacy of parents and local people affected the school libraries effectiveness, in terms of
inadequate income to support library activities, lack of awareness about the value of library,
and lack of encouragement and support for their children to read or to use the libraries.
Opportunities for the libraries were from supportive local communities, private
organisations and government. This study showed that libraries’ support from public and
private organisations was in terms of providing money, education materials, establishing a

library building, and supporting libraries’ services and activities, as occurs worldwide.
Although most principals said that insufficient local community and parental support were
their libraries’ limitations, the supportive local community was depicted as their libraries’
opportunities. Even though most local communities were low-wealth communities and
cannot support school libraries with sufficient budget, their support appeared in terms of
teaching volunteers and labour.
The principals’ perceived requirements for improving the condition of the libraries were
effective library administration, effective staff and sufficient library physical facilities. In
particular, library administration needed a clear policy from the government, effective
government and local affiliation supports for the libraries, adequate budget allocation,
275
integration of library program with school curriculums, effective library management

system, principal supports and schooling assessment. To have effective staff, they required
sufficient teacher-librarians and librarians, and teacher awareness about the role of the
library. Regarding the requirement of sufficient library physical facilities, principals realised
that the good condition of library’s physical facilities was a key to create a good library
environment, which induced students to access and use libraries to support their learning.
Moreover, this research clearly demonstrated that the principals who participated in this
research perceived that the school library had an extremely strong impact on raising
students’ academic achievement, particularly in increasing students’ literacy levels. They had
a strong belief that sufficient library budget, library physical facilities, library collections and
activities, proactive services and library staff potential can increase students’ academic
achievement. In light of this, the finding contradicted some studies, which found that the
principals lacked awareness about the role of library and gave less support on libraries
(Akkawatthanangkoon, 2013; Sermvithoon, Techataweewan & Wajiraprechapong, 2011). The
implication here is that a clear government policy related to school library development is
an apparent need for rural small public primary school libraries because it empowers the
provision of a school library program, benefiting the school library system and influencing
the school libraries to be effective in their administration, operation, services, activities and
staff.
The results of this study contribute to the knowledge related to the much-needed basis for
identifying the components of an effective school library for a rural small public primary
school library. The knowledge will help the Thai government and school library stakeholders
to increase their attention and priorities regarding the quality of the school libraries in small
public primary schools in rural Thailand. It will also help international cross-cultural
understandings about school libraries of small public primary schools in rural Thailand more
widely, especially for other developing countries. This knowledge can be a foundation for
further research in the library and information field.

276
7.4 Limitations
Though this research achieved its objectives, there were some inevitable limitations. The
first limitation is associated with the research scope. This research focused on small public
primary school libraries in rural Thailand. Consequently, the findings of this research may
not be applicable to schools located in urban areas, or to medium and large schools in both
Thailand and worldwide.
A second limitation concerns the data collection instrument. This research conducted a
survey through a mixture of questionnaires aimed to gather the characteristics, limitations

and opportunities of small public primary school libraries in rural Thailand, and the
principals’ perceptions about the impact of library on students’ academic achievement. Due
to the limitation of closed-ended questions, the respondents had limited options for their
responses. Additionally, some answers of open-ended questions showed interesting answers
but the respondents did not provide extended details. The large number of participants
spread over 6 regions of Thailand created time and financial constraints; it was impossible
to conduct a longitudinal study or qualitative research through the in-depth interview
technique in this research. However, collecting data through questionnaires provided
convenience to the researcher to collect data in a short time and save on costs.
The last limitation of this study is the translation across the language of the questionnaire.
This study collected data in the Thai language and then analysed and presented the finding
in the English language. If the researcher cannot understand the local context, specific issues
and cultural meaning, the results could be misinterpreted and misunderstood and elements
will be lost in translation (Birbili, 2000). The researcher employed a back-translation
technique (Werner, & Campbell, 1970), in which the original version of questionnaire was
translated into Thai and then was translated back into English language by a second
bilingual person. This technique can increase the chance of retaining the original meaning
(Deenan, 2003). Moreover, a cross-check translation was conducted in the pilot study in
order to find the possible translation mistakes and to ensure the respondents’
comprehension.
277
7.5 Suggestions for future research
The findings of this research generated a number of topics which would be useful for further
research. This research was prompted by the limitation of research related to rural school
libraries worldwide. Even though this research addressed the current situation of roles of
rural school libraries and the principals’ perceptions about library impacting students’
academic achievement in rural Thailand context, other interesting and important topics still
remain. Three suggestions for further research are outlined in this section.
7.5.1 Expanding the knowledge of this study by undertaking detailed case studies or
experiments in relation to library development in rural Thailand
This research provides a snapshot of the current characteristics, limits and possibilities of
rural small public primary schools in Thailand. Key findings that emerged from questions 1
and 2 of the research only began to provide fundamental knowledge related to the much-
needed basis for identifying the components of an effective school library in rural Thailand.
The key finding that emerged from research question 3 showed that principals perceived
that the library had a strong impact on students’ academic achievement. However, the
findings from all questions did not deliver in-depth information regarding an effective school
library in rural Thailand, and the results were constructed based on principals’ perceptions
related to the current situation, characteristics and the impact of school library on student
academic achievement in rural Thailand.
Therefore, further research needs to expand the current knowledge by investigating the
perceptions of other stakeholders related to rural school libraries such as the use of libraries
and the needs to develop an effective school library. Moreover, the researcher may
undertake detailed case studies or doing experiments in order to find the appropriate ways,
guidelines, models, frameworks or theories to develop an effective school library in rural
Thailand. Further research may conduct evidence-based practice in rural school libraries to
identify the best practice of rural school libraries that can overcome the schools’ limitations,
or can examine how the library programs increase students’ academic achievement.
Researchers may investigate the entire country as a longitudinal study or may focus on one
278
particular group, such as the libraries of the low-level group in the North and Northeast
regions, or a specific region or Educational Service Area. This would possibly generate
explicit knowledge to develop an effective school library in rural Thailand.
7.5.2 Further investigating about the role of principals in relation to library support and
development in rural Thailand
This research investigated only the principals’ perceptions about the library’s impact on
students’ academic achievement. A worthwhile extension of this research would be to
examine the role and approach of principals in supporting library programs in rural schools.
The answers of these questions will indicate the effectiveness of principals’ practices and
procedure, and will inform principals’ work performances and best practice leading to the
development of effective libraries in rural Thailand.
7.5.3 Conducting a longitudinal study about library impacting students’ academic
achievement in rural areas
Although this research delivers the much-needed basis for identifying the components of an
effective library for rural small public primary schools, it is necessary for further research to
examine in greater detail how the library impacts students’ academic achievement. This
research only investigated the principals’ perceptions about the role of libraries and did not
measure how the library programs increase students’ academic achievement. Therefore,
additional research requires measuring how library programs impact students’ academic
achievement, particularly through standardised test scores, literacy levels or information

literacy levels. A longitudinal methodology may suit and expand and deepen the knowledge
of this research. It would possibly generate explicit evidence to develop an effective school
library program impacting students’ academic achievement in rural Thailand.
7.6 Conclusion
This chapter has discussed the principals’ perception of public primary school libraries,
library characteristics and the effectiveness in rural Thailand. The discussion addressed the
279
gaps in this research through the findings and literature reviews. It indicates how this study
makes a significant contribution to knowledge related to the much-needed basis for
identifying the components of an effective school library for rural small public primary
schools. The discussion also contributes the needed evidence to reduce libraries’ limitations,
and highlighting the opportunities to enhance and develop an effective library.
Moreover, this chapter has led to greater awareness and understanding about the role of
school libraries in students’ academic achievement. The Thai government and school library
stakeholders are encouraged to increase their attention and to prioritise the quality of
school libraries in small public primary schools in rural Thailand. The suggestions for further
research presented in this chapter will enable other researchers to develop productive
research in the library and information field. The next chapter provides recommendations
for policy makers and practitioners.

280
Chapter 8: Recommendation
The findings and implications of this research generate recommendations that are divided
into 2 categories for policy makers and practitioners. Table 77 below briefly provides a list of
recommendations associated with the key findings of this research.
Table 77: Lists of recommendations

Levels Recommendations Key findings
Policy maker
Thai 1. Updating the National Education Act 1. The Thai government appeared overlook
government 1999 by recognising the importance the importance of the pedagogical role of
of the pedagogical role of school school libraries and school librarians as a
libraries and school librarians. vital part of the National Education Act
1999. This Act mentions only the aim to
support and establish learning resources,
but does not directly address school
libraries.
2. Providing a clear and specific policy 2. The Thai government appeared to lack a
related to the school libraries and clear policy involved with vital elements
rural school libraries. for developing effective school libraries,
particularly in small schools, as a clear
administration policy, a policy on school
human resource, and a policy on library
collaboration.
3. Considering the need to equip the 3. Rural schools face a serious problem of
small school in rural areas with ITCs, insufficient ICT and internet connection.
particularly high speed broadband
internets.
4. Determining the degrees or levels of 4. Parents and local communities lacked
parents’ and communities’ participation in the schools and school
participation in schools’ planning, libraries development.
decision-making and operation
leading an effective community
engagement impacting the school
libraries effectiveness and student’s
academic achievement in rural
Thailand.
5. Conducting and supporting more on 5. Research related to school libraries
research related to existing barriers development, particularly in rural areas is
to developing effective school very limited.
libraries and learning resources in
the small schools and examining the
root causes behind the inability of
school libraries to achieve the
library standards, particularly in
small schools.
281
Levels Recommendations Key findings

Policy maker
Thai Library 1. Proposing new Thailand national 1. Thailand has a variety of school library
Association standards and guidelines for standards, depending on type of schools
school library, which provide and education system.
practices and guidelines for all
schools to achieve the same goals
and directions across the country.
Education 1. Universities across Thailand, 1. Only two universities in Thailand had
Faculties particularly the Education Faculty curricula related to education and
and and the Department of Library and librarianship, producing graduated
Department Information Sciences, could students holding a degree in Education,
of Library consider developing curriculum who can work as a teacher-librarian in
and related to education and education institutions
Information librarianship.
Sciences
Practitioner
School 1. Enhancing the knowledge of the 1. Principals’ understandings related to the
principals government policy related to government policy vision and goals are not
learning resources development clear enough, which affected their vision
and school library standards. and goals into establishing the conditions
necessary for school library stakeholders
to be responsible for developing effective
libraries.
2. Be aware and be prepare about 2. Most principals were familiar with
reinventing the traditional school traditional school libraries involving
libraries into modern libraries by good facilities, staff and building, but did
integrating of ICT capabilities in not have awareness about modern
library administration, collections, libraries, which integrate ICT capabilities
services, activities and staff. in library administration, collections,
services, activities and staff.
3. Prioritise focusing on library 3. The principals may not be able to deal with
services and activities outside the the problems of library’s physical facilities
library, such as classrooms and in a short time because the decision-
local community resources as well making and budget allocation for
as focusing on develop library improving the schools’ physical facilities
building and physical facilities. might take a long time and slow processes.
4. Collaborating with the internal and 4. Schools in rural Thailand were less likely
external school community to to be aware of the benefits of
promote capacity development of collaboration among external school
the school library in areas, such as communities such as public libraries.
professional network, library
network and community.
5. Supporting and providing 5. Library staff or Teachers responsible for
opportunities for teacher librarians the care of a library lacked knowledge and
and library staff to enhance their training in Library and Information fields.
knowledge and skills related to the
library and information field.
282
8.1 Recommendations for policy makers
Based on the findings of this research, the following recommendations are suggested for
policy makers in order to manage school library issues and develop effective school libraries
in rural Thailand:
(1) The Thai government is encouraged to consider updating the National Education Act
1999 to recognise the importance of the pedagogical role of school libraries and
school librarians by including them into Section 25 or another new section, which
will empower the provision of school library program benefiting school library
system and libraries’ stakeholders. This is because the current Education Act B.C.
1999, Section 25 noted only the aim to support and establish learning resources
including public libraries, museums, arts centre, zoos, park, botanic gardens, science
park, sports centre, information resource and others; the Act does not directly
address school libraries (Office of National Education Commission, 2010).
Moreover, the legislation could be treated as one vital part of the national education
policy, making the school library mandatory and acknowledging the importance of
the pedagogical role of school libraries and school librarians. The importance of the
pedagogical role of school libraries and school librarians could be clearly provided, in
the same way that the Elementary and Secondary Education Act & Libraries of the
United States (Maher & McGilvray, 2017; Wright, 2015), are defined:
- The library staff should include a qualified school librarian.
- The library should have a good quality and quantity of collections,

materials and technologies.
- The library should have regular collaboration among school community

to develop and implement library programs with school curriculums.
- The library should support the development of students’ digital literacy
skills.
The National Education Act and the national education policy will lead the
government and school library stakeholders to establish effective strategies and
283
plans, both long- and short-term, affecting the development of effective school
libraries in the entire country. For example, if the roles of school libraries are included
in the Thai National Education Act, it will lead the Thai government to provide
permanent positions for qualified librarians, to support more funding for school
libraries annual basis, and to support grants and partnership opportunities for
various development projects related to school libraries.
These updatings will support and encourage all school library stakeholders to be
aware of the value and importance of school libraries and school library programs,
particularly the potential of them in supporting and increasing the quality of Thai
education. For example, the updating of the National Education Act and the national
education policy may influence all schools to integrate information literacy programs
into all subjects, which causes to strengthen cooperation between teachers and
library staff (librarians, teacher librarians and teacher-librarians), especially in
developing effective school libraries.
If the Thai government accomplished this updating of the National Education Act by
fulfilling the importance of the pedagogical role of school libraries and school
librarians, it will be possible to establish effective school libraries across the country
by enacting the School Library Law. The School Library Law would be a powerful tool
for libraries to change and develop effectively. It not only empowers the role of
libraries and librarians, but also forces the government’s supporting grants and
funding for collaboration to contribute to effective school libraries.
As evidence from Japan and Sweden shows, School Library Laws that have been
enacted significantly enhance the role of school libraries in their education (IFLA,
2012; Japan Library Association, 2016). Since 1996, Sweden included the School
Library Act into a part of the Education Act (IFLA, 2012). In 2010, the New Education
Act made school libraries mandatory and all students in educational institutions have
to have access the libraries (IFLA, 2012). Similarly, the School Library Law in Japan
acknowledged the role of school libraries and professional librarians as playing a vital
284
role in education (Sakai, Nakamura, & Kitamura, 2002). The Japan government
granted a large amount of budget (one million AUD) to improve libraries’ collections
and facilities, emphasising information literacy instruction to support the concept of

student-centred learning (Japan Library Association, 2016). As can be seen, the School
Library Law helped them succeed in contributing to effective school libraries

impacting students’ academic achievement.
(2) The Thai government could provide a clear, specific policy related to school libraries
and to rural school libraries. Although the Thai government launched the Thai Khem
Khaeng project to improve libraries’ quality by using 3Gs models in 2010, and a policy
implementation on reading habit promotion at the primary education level in formal

and non-formal education in 2014, many researchers, experts and principals have
noted that the Thai government appeared to lacked a clear policy involving vital
elements for developing effective school libraries, particularly in small schools, such
as a clear administration policy, a policy on school human resource, and a policy on
library collaboration.
A clear administration policy and framework would be beneficial for small school
libraries comprising all education sectors such as Educational Service Areas, local
affiliations, school administrators, and school committees. Such a policy would
support all educational sectors having clear responsibilities and accountability for
the school library administration and its operation.
More developed policy on school human resources would recognise the librarian
positions as school staff and would allocate funding to hire librarians (Pradit, 2006).
This response could be linked to the official budget in supporting the library staff, to
ensure that most schools can hire a professional librarian and library staff.
Moreover, the Thai government could provide a collaborative library policy that
enables and encourages the development of a school library network to help
develop and enhance the quality of school libraries. This policy will influence all
schools to build a library network, which benefits and empowers them to share
285
ideas, school and library resources and activities in order to maximise resources and
increase the quality and variation and continuation of library activities.
A useful model for such a policy is that of the government of Alberta, Canada, which
released a collaborative library policy involving school, academic and public libraries.
It benefits Albertans in terms of minimized barriers in accessing library services and

resources, while the libraries benefit by improving efficient and effective library
service delivery, and supporting external relations with library stakeholders and
library resource-sharing (Alberta government, 2013).
(3) The Thai Library Association could take a strong role in developing school library
standards that address current problems in Thailand associated with the variety and
complexity of institutions, and schools in different types and systems, governed
under different institutions. A revised standard would discontinue the practice of
each institute providing its own library standards and indicators. It would also
standardise the minimum standards and library practices for each school, which are
totally different.
The proposed new Thailand national standards and guidelines for school library
would provide practices and guidelines for all schools to achieve the same goals and
directions across the country. Many good examples of states and countries provide
national school library standards and guidelines. For example, Texas has its school
library programs: Standards and guidelines for Texas, which were developed by the
Texas State Library and Archives Commissioners in 2005. These standards and
guidelines include 4 levels of library programs comprising exemplary, recognized,

acceptable, and below standard (Texas State Library and Archives Commissioners,
2005).
Another example is the standards for school library media programs in Maryland,
which were adopted by the American Association of School Libraries and the
Association for Educational Communications and Technology. These standards,
aligned with the state’s goals and objectives, relied on the national standards that
286
aim to develop independent learners (Maryland State Department of Education,
2000).
The Thai Library Association would be responsible, as it is a professional organisation

aiming to support library networks and librarianship, for supporting the
development of effective libraries. It could draw upon knowledge, experts and
networks in Information and Library fields both in country and worldwide. The Thai
Library Association has experience in developing library standards, and in conducting

academic and professional conferences, exhibitions, seminars, and publications
related to libraries (Chaovalit, 1990). Therefore, the Thai Library Association is the
most appropriate organisation to qualify the development of school library

standards and indicators for the country. The role of the Thai government would be
to empower and have awareness about the role of the Thai Library Association in
developing effective school libraries. The Ministry of Education can have confidence
in the Thai Library Association because its members’ expertise characteristics, skills
and specific knowledge can be drawn upon to increase the development of school
libraries effectively and efficiently.
(4) The Thai government is urged to consider the need to equip the small schools in
rural areas with ITC, particularly high-speed broadband internet. This is because of
the potential of ICT to eradicate the barriers to accessing learning resources for
teaching and learning. If small schools are fully equipped with ICT, their teachers and
students will access a variety of learning resources that will have impact on the
students’ literacy, information literacy and digital literacy and that will eliminate the
digital divide in rural areas. ICT will benefit schools that have limited space, furniture
and room to establish an effective library. The schools can access many types of
libraries such as e-libraries, digital libraries, library web portals and virtual libraries.
For example, the National Science and Technology Development Agency and the
Office of Basic Education Commission established eDLTV (electronic Distance
Learning Television) under Her Royal Highness Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn
287
Remarks. The content of e-learning is derived from DLTV programs. Afterwards, the
eDLTV was developed into the Massive Open Online Courses (MOOC), which gives
everyone access to the learning system via the internet. The eDLTV connects to the
Open Educational Resource (OER) providing over a thousand e-books through the
website (NECTEC-ACE, 2016; Wonglekha, 2015). With the benefits of ICT and free
electronic learning resources, the rural schools may not need a large budget for
library building construction, which will save costs for the library’s physical facilities
and library staff.
The schools with libraries could then have opportunities to access a wide range of
collections of printed and electronic resources, which can help increase students’
literacy skills, information literacy and digital literacy. The schools also could develop
their libraries into modern libraries integrating with ICT, which not only support
students to become 21st century learners or lifelong learners, but also support the
country to establish a sustainable and value-based economy and achieve the goal of
Education 4.0 (Jareonsettasin, 2016; Office of the Minister, Minister of Interior,
2016).
It is important to recognise that providing ICT is not enough to maintain and

increase the school library qualities. It is essential to integrate information literacy
instruction into the school curriculum and to provide for qualified librarians or
teacher-librarians to play an important role in the teaching of information literacy
for students and the provision of in-service professional development for teachers.
This is because information literacy is essential for students and teachers to locate,
evaluate and use information effectively and ethically, a foundation of effective
citizenship skills for education and life success (Welsh Information Literacy Project,
2004).
(5) The Thai government could actively encourage parents and local community
participation in school libraries to increase the quality of education in rural areas.
Allowing the local community to participate in school libraries is a way to create a

288
strong community partnership with school libraries. Involving parents and
communities in a process of school management creates a sense of ownership that

will encourage them to participate in the school’s development (Njunwa, 2010).
Consequently, the community will increase their awareness of the importance of

learning resources in both material resources and human resources, affecting
students’ academic achievement, and will have more engagement with school
libraries’ services and activities. Conversely, schools could benefit greatly by having a
greater variety of learning resources, maximising the use of resources, reducing

costs and increasing efficiency (Marie, 2007).
This research and literature review showed that the local community is one of the
small schools’ best opportunities in terms of teaching volunteers, labour and
donated money (Buaraphan, 2013; Dheeranond, 2014). Schools without libraries or
that have a library in poor condition could use the communities’ resources as a part
of their school library collections. Many countries such as Australia, the USA, China
and Kenya have been successful in establishing joint-use libraries, and library
community libraries in this way (Dunford, 1998; Hildreth, 2007; Karelitz, 1998; KPPM
Organisation strategists, 2012; Liu, 2008).
A clear policy, strategies and action for decentralised governance, particularly with
parents and local communities, is necessary to realise community collaboration. The
government could determine the degrees or levels of parents’ and communities’
participation in schools’ planning, decision-making and operation, which will lead to
effective community engagement impacting the school libraries effectiveness and

their student academic achievement in rural Thailand.
(6) To support such school library reform, the Thai government might conduct more
research on existing barriers to developing effective school libraries and learning

resources in the small schools and examine the root causes behind the inability of
school libraries to achieve the library standards, particularly in small schools. This
would address an apparent need to establish an effective administration strategy,

289
guidelines and frameworks to support the development of effective long-term
solutions to enhance the quality of libraries and education at small schools.
(7) Universities across Thailand, particularly the Education Faculty and the Department
of Library and Information Sciences, could consider developing curriculum related to

education and librarianship. Only two universities, Rajabhat Mahasarakham
University and Surin Rajabhat University, have a curriculum related to education and
librarianship. Students who graduated from these universities hold a degree in
Education, which enables them to work as a teacher-librarian in education
institutions (Rajabhat Mahasarakham University, 2013; Surin Rajabhat University,
2016).
However, most Departments of Library and Information Sciences in Thailand are

aligned with Humanities and Social Sciences faculties. Students of these
Departments, who complete a degree in Bachelor of Arts, cannot apply for work in
schools as a teacher-librarian. Students who have completed the library degree and
would like to work as a teacher-librarian must have a Teacher Certificate (Teachers
Council of Thailand, 2012).
To achieve the Teacher Certificate, first and foremost, graduated students need to
pass the test on Professional Standards of the Teachers Council of Thailand. They
can then get the provisional teaching permit, which gives the permission to the
employer to employ them as a teacher. The provisional teaching permit is granted
for 2 years. When they have experience in teaching for more than one year and pass
the assessment of teaching at the schools they have worked with, they can submit a
certification letter issued by an education institution to the Teachers Council of
Thailand, which will issue a permanent teaching license (Teachers Council of
Thailand, 2012).
This would address an apparent need for academic institutions to establish

curriculum related to education and librarianship that produces teacher-librarians
supporting the requirement of education institutions in Thailand and that supports

290
students in Library and Information Science to have more opportunities to work in

schools as a teacher-librarian.
8.2 Recommendations for practitioners
The following recommendations were developed to provide guidance to practitioners in

order to cope with school library issues and to develop an effective school library in rural
Thailand:
(1) Knowledge of policy: It would be beneficial for principals to enhance their knowledge
of the government policy related to learning resources development and school

library standards. This understanding will form the basis for developing their schools’
vision, mission and strategies based on the government policy direction. If the vision
and goals are clear, the principals and teachers can establish the conditions
necessary for school library stakeholders to be responsible for developing effective
libraries, such as providing a library organisation structure, assigning library
stakeholder responsibilities, integrating the library program into the school
curriculum, auditing and evaluating the library, providing professional development
activities for teachers and teacher librarians, and creating library networks.
Moreover, understanding of library standards will assist the principals to measure

and evaluate their libraries’ conditions, which will help not only to achieve school
library standard, but also to address the much-needed components that will to
develop and increase their libraries’ effectiveness.
(2) Reform of school libraries: Principals might be aware and be prepared to reinvent the
traditional school libraries as modern libraries by integrating ICT capabilities in library

administration, collections, services, activities and staff. As the government has
planned to provide sufficient ICT and high speed internet for schools across the
country (Office of the Minister, Minister of Interior, 2016), the principals can now
develop their libraries into modern libraries.
For example, the principals could consider policies and plans to develop modern
libraries, such as implementing information and digital literacy instructions into the
291
school curriculum. The principals could also support teacher librarians or library staff
to develop the professional knowledge skills and serving for modern libraries, which
will establish effective library services and activities supporting the basic needs for
students to become learners in 21st century (Choemprayong, 2013).
Principals need to develop greater familiarity with the roles of libraries, not only the
place for providing various formats of library collections [printed materials, digital
media, databases], and delivering library services and activities, but also the gateway
for students to engage and develop their own knowledge and innovations.
Furthermore, the principals could consider developing and maintaining

collaborations among the library stakeholders. Such collaborations not only increase
access to information via many sources but also save school budgets for collections
and for enhancing the network in supporting libraries’ services and activities.
Modern libraries with their library buildings and physical facilities needed modern
libraries features that cater for effective ICT, and effective school librarians (Afolabi &
Abidoye, 2011). Effective ICT will allow the libraries to provide effective services and
activities from various resources to the users. Effective school librarians will utilise
ICT to provide a strong library program, facilitate large and robust collections, and
provide instructional information, computer, and digital literacy skills for students
(Asselin, 1999; Asselin, Branch, & Oberg (Eds.), 2003; Krashen, 2009). Therefore, it is
possible for rural school libraries in Thailand to develop their traditional libraries into
modern libraries.
(3) Library presence beyond the physical library: The principals could prioritise focus on
library services and activities outside the library, such as classrooms and local
community resources, as well as focusing on developing library buildings and physical
facilities. The principals may not be able to deal with the problems of library’s
physical facilities in a short time because the decision-making and budget allocation
for improving the schools’ physical facilities is a slow process and might take a long
time. Although the Ministry of Education allocates the education service areas to
292
approve the budget, making the process faster and easier, the education service
areas cannot deal with the process in a short time, for example, approximately
40,000 schools across the country have asked for a building maintenance budget
(ASTV, 2014).
Even though the library’s physical facilities and its indoor and outdoor environment
can encourage the students to access the libraries, the effectiveness of library
services and activities is essential to the core mission of schools making students
become critical thinkers and lifelong learners. Therefore, the principals could provide
leadership in supporting library services and activities by collaborating with their

school library stakeholders. Moreover, the principals could continue to collaborate
with teachers, teacher librarians and parents to encourage students to use the
libraries services and activities. Consistency in library promotion will not only
encourage students to continue to use and engage with the library, but will also
increase consistency in library services and activities development.
(4) Collaboration: Principals could collaborate with the internal and external school
community to promote capacity development of the school library in areas such as

professional network, library network and community. For example, the
collaboration among principals, teachers, teacher librarians and staff in the schools
can empower all team members to contribute and share ideas, thus developing an
effective school library. Moreover, the teachers will gain an awareness and
understanding of the importance of the library in influencing students’ academic
achievement.
Collaboration with other school libraries can benefit the principals and team
members by sharing expertise and working together at both strategic and
operational levels. Principals can learn and get advice from other schools with
effective libraries or can share the resources of their schools in order to maximise
resources and reduce library collections costs.
293
Principals and team members can benefit from other library networks such as public
and academic libraries. The schools can ask the public libraries to provide access to
resources and services that their students need. The public libraries may establish
the collaboration in terms of joint-use libraries, which help to maximise the use of
resources, increase the diversity of collections, reduce costs and increase the
efficiency of full-time staff members of public libraries (Fitzgibbons, 2000; Marie,
2007).
Academic libraries also can provide access to resources and services to school
libraries. Moreover, they can assist the school libraries by giving expert
recommendations and practices. In particular, the academic institutions advocate the
Library and Information Science program; they have many experts and members to
provide support, advice and hands-on training to help teacher librarians manage an
effective library. Thailand has almost 100 public universities and 70 private
universities and institutes spread across 6 regions (Ministry of Education, 2016).
In particular, most provinces have one Rajabhat University that aims to provide
education and knowledge for local development. These universities have a close
relationship with local communities (Phinthuphan, 2008). Moreover, the Department
of Library and Information Sciences and academic libraries in many universities have
annual projects to provide and develop academic services for local libraries,
especially in rural schools. For example, the Department of Information Science,
Chiang Mai Rajabhat University has an academic service project for developing rural
libraries every year (Department of Information Science, Chiang Mai Rajabhat
University, 2016). Therefore, principals could make connections with these
institutions to ask for guidance and suggestions as mentors.
Principals could engage parents and other people in the local community, as well as
in public and private organisations. These collaborations will make a close and strong
relationship that helps schools to produce effective libraries. For example, parents
and local community members cannot support the school libraries with sufficient
294
budget but they can support by providing library volunteers and labour (Buaraphan,
2013; Dheeranond, 2014). Moreover, some schools have already shared their
resources with their communities, which enhance local awareness about the
importance of school resources on their children’s academic achievement
(Dechwittayaporn et al., 2009). Subsequently, the parents will support and encourage
their children to access library.
Furthermore, the strong relationship between school libraries and external

organisations benefits schools in terms of money and education material support.
Many public and private organisations have continued to support libraries, helping
the schools reduce their burden on the budget for developing effective libraries.
Moreover, the connection to external organisations has the power to increase and
expand capacity to help and collaborate widely, which one principal cannot do alone.
However, the principals should actively collaborate and keep in touch with the
school library stakeholders in order to develop greater relationship and success in
library development.
(5) Professional development for library staff: Principals could regularly support and
provide opportunities for teacher librarians and library staff to enhance their
knowledge and skills in the library and information field. Principals could provide
funding for teacher librarians and library staff to attending seminars, workshops and
conferences related to library and information fields and to information technology
fields. For example, the Thai Library Association and Department of Library and
Information Sciences organise training, conferences, seminars and workshops

related to new trend, technology and innovations, associating with the library
development from both inside and outside Thailand (Thai Library Association, 2017).
Teacher librarians and staff can learn about current trends, issues and technology
related to library and information, which will increase the new knowledge and skills,
and create more connections and collaborations within professional communities
and library stakeholders, such as librarians, library experts and vendors.
295
The following figure provides a much-needed effective rural library framework based on the
findings, discussions and recommendations of this study. It is a planning framework for
practical school library improvement that addresses a much-needed basis for the effective
rural library to benefit from the policy makers at all levels, such as Ministry of Education,
local affiliation and school principals. The framework illustrates two main factors that will
help overcome the limitations of rural small public primary school libraries, such as
insufficient collections, physical facilities and staff. These are internal and external factors.
Internal factors include the supportive principals, teacher and teacher librarians, and the
collaboration among them, plus the administration and operations in schools that directly
contribute to effective school libraries, such as providing library programs, services and
activities. The external factors are involved with the Thai government legislation and
policies, and the collaborations of parents, local community and other organisations, to
support the development of effective schools and school libraries.
Loerstcher’s model offers a concept that is the foundation for the framework. It includes
three basic foundation stones: information infrastructure, direct services to teachers and
students, and the four library media centre programs [collaboration, reading, enhance
learning through technology, and information literacy] (Loertscher, 2000). This framework
will enable school libraries to enhance students’ academic achievement and help them to
become 21st life-long learners. Furthermore, the schools which are fully supported with ICT
can transform the traditional libraries into modern libraries, not only to enhance students’
academic achievement, but also to build and boost the school library capacities to support
teaching and learning in the digital era.
296
Figure 88: A much-needed effective rural library framework
Enhanced
Contemporary Libraries
(School libraries fully support with ICT)
Effective rural small public

Internal factors primary school library External factors
- Supportive principals, teacher - Sufficient legislation and
Implement with resources in library collections,
and teacher librarians policies from the Thai
physical facilities, services, activities and staff
- Collaboration partnership government
among principals, teacher, - Collaborations of parents, local
teacher librarians and students community and other
organisations (e.g. public
Three basic foundation libraries, universities, academic
stones of school library libraries, Thai Library
media program Association, local affiliations)
(Loertscher, 2000)
- Information infrastructure
- Direct services to teachers and
students
- 4 Library media centre program
areas (collaboration, reading,
enhance learning through
technology, and information
literacy)
Library platform
Budget | Space| Collection (ICT) | Librarian
8.3 Conclusion
Principals’ perceptions about the impacts of school libraries on students’ academic
achievement, particularly in developed countries, has been investigated by many

researchers. However, in developing countries such research is very limited. Before the 21st
century, most studies found that school principals worldwide had less awareness about the
roles of school libraries and librarians impacting students’ academic achievement. This lack
of awareness was caused by many reasons: the nature of the librarian working in isolation as
one-person staff in the school; librarians di not playing a large role in teaching; librarians
with a low profile in educational literature; and school principals’ own educational
experiences as students and classroom teachers (Alexander, Smith & Carey, 2003).
297
More recently, the advancement of technology impacted schools enhances the quality of
teaching and learning by providing a digital education environment in order to support
students as 21st century learners or lifelong learners. Consequently, school libraries have
shifted their roles from information storage to being a dynamic agent of student learning,
and they now provide all formats of resources, as online access and shared information
resources are possible through various devices without the limitations of place and time
(Fastrack, 2014; IFLA, 2016; Todd, 2004). Many studies have demonstrated that school
libraries have a positive impact on students’ information literacy skills, digital literacy skills,
computer literacy skills and multimedia skills, all of which are necessary abilities for 21st
century education (Dey, 2012; Fagbola, Uzoigwe, & Ajegbomogun, 2011; Hughes, 2013;
Ranaweera, 2008). Some studies have found that principals had a good understanding of the
roles and value of school libraries impacting students’ academic achievement, particularly
the role of enhancing information literacy skills (Hughes, 2013; Lau, 2012; Shandu, 2014).
This research not only identified the current characteristics, limitations and opportunities of
small public primary school libraries in rural Thailand, but also addressed the principals’
perceptions of the library impacting students’ academic achievement and the impacts that
drive those principals’ perceptions. Investigating the situations and conditions of small public
primary school libraries in rural Thailand is significant: by providing these situations and
conditions, it identifies possible contributors to develop an effective school library in small

schools in rural Thailand. These perceptions of school principals about the impacts of school
libraries on students’ academic achievement are an important mechanism for developing an
effective library. This is because the school principal has the authority to direct and manage
in facilitating change in the school (Van Hamersveld, 2007) and therefore can contribute to
an effective school library (IFLA, 2015).
This research found that most rural small public primary school libraries were lacking
resources in their collections, physical facilities and staff, with the worst such situation
occurring in the North and Northeast regions. The opportunities for those libraries most
likely derived from local communities, private organisations and government support, while
298
the limitations were caused by insufficient government administration and insufficient local
community and students’ parents support.
Most of the 350 principals surveyed perceived that the school library had an extremely
strong impact on raising students’ academic achievement (47.6%), followed by very strong
impact (39.5%). Very few principals considered that the school library had an extremely weak
impact on increasing students’ academic achievement (0.5%). The factor that influenced the
principals’ perceptions about the libraries impacting students’ academic achievement was
the principals’ age. This suggests that when the principals are younger, they tend to have
more positive perceptions about the libraries impacting students’ academic achievement.
Since 1999 the National Education Act was enacted toward achieving the Education for All
goals (EFA), which focused on student-centred learning and student-centred classroom. The
principals who ages are lower than 51 years began their education studies with the concept
of student-centred learning. These principals are more likely to be educated and cultivated
to understand the role of school libraries and other learning resources, which impact
student-centred learning and student academic achievement.
The findings show that the extensive provision of school libraries in rural Thailand has been
positive through the provision of reading promotion projects and 3Gs models. However,
rural school libraries in Thailand are still generally under-resourced and lack qualified staff;
therefore, just having a library does not mean they are well serviced. Even though principals
know the value of the school library and understand very well its impact on students’
academic achievement, they are powerless because of both a lack of clear government
policy related to school library development, and their budgetary and infrastructure
constraints. The worst situations of school libraries occurred in the North and Northeast
regions, where their problems are challenging and urgently need a sustainable solution to
develop and maintain their qualities of effective school libraries.
Two main factors to help overcome the limitations of rural small public primary school
libraries are the internal and external factors. Internal factors include having supportive
299
principals, teachers, teacher librarians and students, and having collaboration among them.
External factors are involved with the Thai government legislation and policies, and the
collaborations of parents, local community and other organisations.
As can be seen, this research has identified a much-needed foundation that is important for
developing an effective school library. Although principals are an important factor, directing
and managing change in libraries, the collaborations among the library stakeholders are
significant factors leading to developing and enhancing effective school libraries. This
chapter has suggested ways for policy makers and practitioners to better manage with
school library issues and to develop an effective school library in rural Thailand.
In the light of this research, the researcher hopes that the Thai government and school
library stakeholders will prioritise school libraries and their potential to support learning,
literacy and social development. The researcher also expects that this research will help
build international cross-cultural understanding about school libraries in small public
primary schools, both in rural Thailand and, more widely, in other developing countries. The
knowledge will be beneficial to the Thai government, school library communities and
stakeholders, both in Thailand and internationally, to establish and develop effective school
libraries that can lead to educational and professional success.
300
References
Achterman, D. (2008). Haves, halves and have-nots: School libraries and student achievement
in California. (Doctoral dissertation). University of North Texas. Retrieved from:
http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc9800/
Adams, T. (2012). School libraries in 2012-the SLA survey. Retrieved from:

file:///C:/Users/n9003479/Downloads/school-libraries-in-2012%20(1).pdf
Afolabi, A. F. & Abidoye, J. A. (2011). The integration of information and communication

technology in library operations towards effective library services. In proceeding of the
the 1st International Technology, Education and Environment Conference. Paper
presented at the International Conference on Teaching, Learning and Change 2011,
Omoku, Nigeria (pp. 620-628). Retrieved from: http://www.hrmars.com/admin/pics/
267.pdf
African Library Project. (2016). Wungwero book foundation (WBF) Malawi. Retrieved from:
https://www.africanlibraryproject.org/our-african-libraries/library-partners-in-africa/31-
african-libraries-overview/african-library-pages/136-library-partner-wungwero-book-
foundation-malawi
Ainsworth, L. (1969). An objective measure of the impact of a library learning centre. School
Libraries, 18(Winter), 33-35
Akkawatthanangkoon, K (2013). The study of the school librarians in performing their duty
from the viewpoint of school directors, teachers and students in the secondary school
under the Secondary Educational Service Area Office 26. (Master’s thesis, Rajabhat
Maha Sarakham University, Thailand). Retrieved from: http://202.29.22.172/fulltext/
2556/111029/chapter1.pdf
Alberta government. (2013). Collaborative Library Policy- February 2013. Retrieved from:
http://www.municipalaffairs.alberta.ca/documents/libraries/Government_of_Alberta-
Collaborative_Library_Policy.pdf
Albright, S. C., Winston, W. L., & Zappe, C. J. (2009). Data analysis & decision making with
microsoft excel (Rev. 3rd (Internaitonal Student). ed.). Mason, OH: South-
Western/Cengage Learning.
301
Alcázar, L., Rogers, F. H., Chaudhury, N., Hammer, J., Kremer, M., & Muralidharan, K. (2006).
Why are teachers absent? Probing service delivery in Peruvian primary schools.
International Journal of Educational Research, 45(3), 117-136.
doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2006.11.007
Alexander, L. B., Smith, R. C., & Carey, J. O. (2003). Education reform and the school library
media specialist: Perceptions of principals. Knowledge Quest, 32(2), 10-13.
Ambhanwong, S. (1967). Libraries and librarianship in Thailand. Library Journal, 2, 198-199.
American Library Association, American Association of School Librarians. (2003). Program

standards school library media specialist preparation. Retrieved from: http://www.
ala.org/aasl/sites/ala.org.aasl/files/content/aasleducation/schoollibrary/ala-
aasl_slms2003.pdf
American Library Association and the Association for Educational Communications and
Technology. (1998). Information power: Building partnerships for learning. Chicago, IL:
ALA & AECT.
American Association of School Librarians (AASL). (2007). Standards for the 21st-Century
Learner. Retrieved from: http://ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/guidelinesandstandards/
learningstandards/ AASL_Lear ningStandards.pdf
American Association of School Librarians and Association for Educational Communications

and Technology. (1998). Information power: Building partnerships for learning. Chicago:
American Library Association.
Ard-am, O. (2010). Do the elderly have no value?: A synthesis of knowledge about the value of
the elderly. In Thaweesit, S. and Boonyamanon, S. (Ed.), Population and Society 2010:
The value of the elderly in the view of Thai society. Institute for Population and Social
Research. Mahidol University. Paper No. 372. Nakhon Pathom: Population and Social. (in
Thai).
Aroonpiboon, B. (2014). ULibM: an automation library system for Thai (in Thai). Retrieved
from http://www.thailibrary.in.th/2014/08/04/ulibm/
Asselin, M. (1999). Balanced literacy. Teacher Librarian, 27(1), 69-70. Retrieved from
http://web.b.ebscohost.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/ehost/detail/detail?vid=5&sid=711a
3bc8-dba2-43f2-9859-85c1a5cf3cc6%40sessionmgr112&hid=118&bdata= JnNpdGU9Z
Whvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#An=2409233&db=afh
302
Asselin, M., Branch, J. & Oberg, D., Eds. (2003). Achieving information literacy: Standards for
school library programs in Canada. Ottawa, ON: The Canadian School Library
Association and the Association for Teacher-Librarianship in Canada.
ASTV. (2014, September 30). Government have planned to spend 8 billion baht for construct
school building toward economic policy (in Thai). ASTV. Retrieved from:
http://www.manager.co.th/qol/viewnews.aspx?NewsID=9570000112065
Atagi, R. (2011). Secondary teacher policy research in Asia: Secondary teachers in Thailand.
Bangkok: UNESCO Bangkok. Retrieved from: http://www.uis.unesco.org/Library/
Documents/secondary-teacher-policy-research-asia-thailand-education-2011-en.pdf
Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA). (2016). Statement on school libraries
resource centre funding. Retrieved from: http://www.asla.org.au/site/DefaultSite
/filesystem/ documents/policy_school_library_funding.pdf
Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA). (2014). AITSL standards for teacher
librarian practice. Retrieved from: https://www.alia.org.au/sites/default/ files/ AITSL%20
Standards% 20for%20teacher%20librarian%20practice%202014.pdf
Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA). (2001). Learning for the future:
developing information services in schools. (2nd ed.). Carlton South,Vic.: Curriculum
Corporation.
Australian School Library Association. (2009). Statement on school libraries and information
and communication technologies. Retrieved from: http://www.asla.org.au/site/
DefaultSite/filesystem/documents/policy_School%20Libraries_ict.pdf
Babbie, E. R. (2013). The practice of social research. Andover; Belmont, Calif: Wadsworth.
Barrett, L. (2010). Effective school libraries: Evidence of impact on student academic

achievement. The School librarian, 58(3), 136-139.
Barrett, B. H., Beck, R., Binder, C., Cook, D. A., Engelmann, S., Greer, R. D, …Watkins, C. L.
(1991). The right to effective education. The Behavior Analyst, 14(1), 79-82. Retrieved
from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2733438/?page=1
Bates, A., Shifflet, R. & Lin, M. (2013). In Hattie, J. & Anderman, E. M. (eds.), International Guide
to Student Achievement. (pp. 7-9). New York, NY: Routledge.
Baughman, J. C. (2002). School libraries and MCAS scores. Paper presented at a symposium
sponsored by the graduate school of library and information science, Simmons
303
College. Boston, MA. Retrieved from: http://artemis.simmons.edu/baughman/mcas-

school-libraries/Baughman%20Paper.pdf
Baughman, J. C. & Eldrighoff, M. (1999). Massachusetts School Library Media Survey. Retrieved
from http://artemis.simmons.edu/~baughman/survey/
Baumbach, D. (2002. Making the grade: The status of school library media centres in the
Sunshine State and how they contribute to student achievement. Spring: hi Willow
Research and Publishing)
Baxter, S. J., and Smalley, A.W. (2003). Check it out! the results of the school library media
census: Final report. St. Paul: Metronet. Retrieved from: http://www.metrolibraries.
net/res/pdfs/2002final_report.pdf
Becker, D.E. (1970). Social studies achievement of pupils in schools with libraries and schools
without libraries. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
(University Microfilms No. 70-22868)
Benavot, A. & Köseleci, N. (2015). Seeking quality in education: the growth of national
learning assessments, 1990-2013: Background paper prepared for the Education for all
global monitoring report 2015, Education for All 2000-2015: achievements and
challenges. Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/
002337/233733e.pdf
Bertelsmann Stiftung. (2014). Bertelsmann Stiftung, BTI 2014: Thailand Country Report.
Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Stiftung.
Bhat, H. S. & Kumar, N. (2010). On the derivation of the Bayesian Information Criterion.
Retrieved from: http://nscs00.ucmerced.edu/~nkumar4/BhatKumarBIC.pdf
Birbili, M. (2000). Translating from one language to another. Social Research Update. 31.
Retrieved from: http://sru.soc.surrey.ac.uk/SRU31.html
Bishop, K., & Larimer, N. (1999). Literacy through collaboration. Teacher Librarian, 27(1), pp.
15-20.
Blai, B. (1975). Poor academic performance--why? Retrieved from: http://search.proquest.

com/docview/64044158?accountid=13380
Bloom, B. S. (1982). All our children learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.

304
Bloom, B. S. (1976). Human Chartacteristics and School Learning. New York : McGraw-Hill
Bluestien, D. L. (2015). Academic achievement, the world of work, and social justice. Retrieved
from: http://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/offices/omc/pdf/Global% 20Trends.pdf
Boelens, H., Boekhorst, A. & Mangale, D. N. (2012). School Libraries for 19 Public Primary
Schools in Rural Kenya: A Pilot Study. Retrieved from: http://www.albertkb.nl/
mediapool/60/608240/data/Kenya-School-Libraries-Report-2012-2.pdf
Boonsorn, N. (2016, September 6). Consumption’s trend of smart phones in Thailand.

Thansettakij (in Thai). Retrieved from https://www.thansettakij.com/2016/09/06/ 93366
Boonyos, T. (2014). Public Library Services program: PLS V.3 (in Thai). Retrieved from
http://www. crnfe.ac.th/thiti.html
Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code

development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Boyle, S., Brock, A., Mace, J., Sibbons, M. (2002). Researching the poor: the “costs” of sending
children to school. Synthesis Report. London: DFID.
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 3(2), pp. 77-101. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/1478088706
qp063oa
Brown, J.K. (2008). Student-centred instruction: involving students in their own education.
Music Educators Journal, 94(5).
Brozo, W., Shiel, G., & Topping, K. (2007). Engagement in reading: Lessons learned from three
PISA countries. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51, 304-315.
doi:10.1598/JAAL.51.4.2
Bruce, C. S. (1997). Seven Faces of Information Literacy. Adelaide: AULSIB Press.
Buaraphan, K. (2013). Educational quality of small schools in Thailand. European Journal of

Social Sciences, 41(1), 130-147.
Buchanan, W. (1982). The principal and role expectations of the library media specialist. The
Clearing House, 55(6), 253-255. Retrieved from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/
pdf/10.1080/00098655.1982.9958239
305
Bureau of Academic Affairs and Educational Standards. (2010). Good story from libraries: Case
study of developing best practice for living school libraries (in Thai). Bangkok: Bureau of
Academic Affairs and Educational Standards.
Bureau of the Budget, the Prime Minister’s Office. (2016). Budget Act for fiscal year 2016.
(Rev. ed.). Retrieved from: http://www.bb.go.th/budget_book/e-Book2559/FILE ROOM/
CABILIBRARY59/DRAWER01/GENERAL/DATA0000/00000572.pdf
Burgin, R., Bracy, P. B., & Brown, K. (2003). An essential connection: How quality school library
media programs improve student achievement in North Carolina. Retrieved from:
http://www.rburgin.com/NCSchools2003/NCSchoolStudy.pdf
Burns, R. (2000). Introduction to research methods. London: Sage
Burns, R. P. & Burns, R. (2009). Business research methods and statistics using SPSS. Thousand
Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.
Butterfly Book House. (2008). Progress report (in Thai). Retrieved from: http://www.
bflybook.com/BookSharingSystemList.aspx?ArticleCategoryID=13
Campbell, J. M. (1991). Principal-school library media relations as perceived by selected North

Carolina elementary principals and school library media specialists. (Doctoral
dissertation) University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
Carol, S. (1997). The school librarian’s role in the electronic age. Retrieved from:
http://www.ericdigests.org/1997-3/librarian.html
Carroll, J.B. (1989). The Carroll model : A 25-year retrospective and prospective view.
Educational Researcher. 18, 26-31.
Carr, J. (Ed.). (2008). Leadership for Excellence: Insights into the National School Library Media
Program of the Year Award Winners. Chicago: ALA.
Cayaban, I. T. (2009). Proactive and effective management of readers' queries and

transactions. Retrieved from: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/
search?q=cache:PDNaCkckuZoJ :paarl.wikispaces.com/file/view/Enrique%
2BCayaban%2B-%2BPROACTIVE%2B%2526% 2BEFFECTIVE%2BREADERS%2527.ppt
+&cd=10&hl=th&ct=clnk&gl=au
Changket, S. (2011). Development of community library: A model for the promotion of lifelong
learning (in Thai). (Doctoral dissertation). Silpakorn University. Retrieved from:
http://www.thapra.lib.su.ac.th/objects/thesis/fulltext/snamcn/Somjintana_Changket_Docto
r/fulltext.pdf
306
Chanlun, J. (2013). Integrated library systems in school libraries (in Thai). Library Journal, 57(1),
1-13.
Chansok, P. (2010). Reading reform through Sweden reading policy (in Thai). Interview with
Orathai Ard-am. Retrieved from: http://www.moe.go.th/moe/th/news/detail.
php?NewsID=20311&Key=hotnews
Chaisena, M. (2014). Development of school library in the learning society (in Thai). Journal of
Humanities and Social Science, 5(2), 55-68.
Chaisena, M. (2006). Development of public library in knowledge based society (in Thai). Khon
Kean: Khon Kean University.
Chaovalit, M. (1990). Thai Library Association of Her Royal Highness Princess Maha Chakri
Sirindhorn. In Thai Junior Encyclopedia Project. Retrieved from:
http://kanchanapisek.or.th/kp6/sub/book/book.php?book=12&chap=2&page=t12-2-
infodetail16.html
Chavalit, M. (1989). Education and training of library and information personnel. Seminar on
Education and Training for Library and Information Personnel, COCI–Project: Intra–
ASEAN Cultural Programme Exchange of ASEAN Librarians, Thailand.
Chen, C. & Tsai, Y. (2012). Interactive augmented reality system for enhancing library
instruction in elementary schools. Computers & Education, 59(2), 638-652. Retrieved
from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131512000589
Choemprayong, S. (2013). Library and research (in Thai). Paper presented at Live and Learn in
the Modern Library, CAR Conference 2013. Chulalongkorn University Office of
Academic Resources, Chulalongkorn University, February 28, 2013.
Cheunwattana, A. (1999). Delivering and promoting library service in rural Thailand. In IFLA
Council and General conference. Conference Programme and proceeding (65th
Bangkok, Thailand, August 20-28, 1999). Retrieved from: http://www.ifla.org/IV/
ifla65/papers/023-114e.htm.
Cheunwattana, A. & Fitzgibbons, S. A. (1999). The provision of library and information services
to rural communities Thailand. Retrieved from: https://worldlibraries.
dom.edu/index.php/worldlib/article/view/464/419
Choh, N. L. (2013). Libraries in Southeast Asia: A force for social development! Retrieved from
http://library.ifla.org/268/1/201-choh-en.pdf
307
Chuenka, S. (2007). A study of achievement of knowledge, attitude and skill for knowledge-
acquisition by child centred learning from computer mobile unit (in Thai). (Master
thesis). Silapakorn University.
Church, A. P. (2010). Secondary school principals’ perceptions of the school librarian’s

instructional role. School Library Research: Research Journal of the American
Association of School librarians. Retrieved from: http://www.ala.org/aasl/sites/ala.
org.aasl/files/content/aaslpubsandjournals/slr/vol13/SLR_SecondarySchool_V13.pdf
Church, A. P. (2007). Elementary school principals' perceptions of the instructional role of the
school library media specialist (Order No. 3288684). Available from ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Global. (304706196). Retrieved from http://gateway.library.
qut.edu.au/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/docview/30470
6196?accountid=13380
Coatney, S. (2009). Learning to lead. School Library Monthly, 26(2), 41-43. Retrieved from:
http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=5&
sid=0ce82e83-e02b-4671-8f7c-e6552d97af19%40sessionmgr4004&hid=4107
Coker, E. (2015). Certified Teacher-Librarians, library quality and student achievement in

Washington State public schools: The Washington State school library impact study.
Retrieved from https://wala.memberclicks.net/assets/WLMA/Advocacy/
wslitreport_final%204_9_15.pdf
Colclough, C., Rose, P. & Tembon, M. (2000). Gender inequalities in primary schooling: The
roles of poverty and adverse cultural practice. International Journal of Educational
Development, 20(1), 5–27.
Commonwealth of Australia. (2013). Thailand regulatory fact sheet. Retrieved from:

https://internationaleducation.gov.au/International-network/thailand/Publications/
Documents/AEI%20Thailand%20Fact%20Sheet%20March%202014%20Updates%20Word
%20Version%20(2).pdf
Connaway, L. S., & Powell, R. R. (2010). Basic research methods for librarians. Santa Barbara,
Calif: Libraries Unlimited.
Council of Australian University Librarians. (2004). The Learning and Teaching Performance
Fund Issues Paper. Retrieved from: http://www.caul.edu.au/content/upload/files/gov-
inqu/LearningTeachingPerfFund.doc
308
Creswell, J. W. (2015). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks,

California: SAGE.
Cunningham, J. (2012). Student achievement in charter school. Retrieved from

http://www.ncsl.org/research/education/charter-schools-in-the-states.aspx
Czaja,R. (1998). Questionnaire pretesting comes of age. Marketing Bulletin, 9, 52-66.

Retrieved from http://marketing-bulletin.massey.ac.nz/marketing_bulletin_ articles.html
Daniel, J. (2012). Sampling essentials: Practical guidelines for making sampling choices.
London: SAGE Publications Inc. doi: http://dx.doi.org.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/ 10.4135/
9781452272047
Daly, K. (2007). Effective use of the school library in supporting information literacy
development in Sabbatical Report. Retrieved from http://www.educational
leaders.govt.nz/content/download/682/5760/file/kathleen-daly-sabbatical-report.pdf
Darling-Hammond. (2010). Steady work: How Finland is building a strong teaching and
learning system. Rethinking Schools, 24(4). Retrieved from: http://pasisahlberg.com/ wp-
content/uploads/2012/12/Steady-Work-Darling-Hammond.pdf
Dechwittayaporn, C.,Pusumlee, Y., Snitwongse, S., Atisinjongkol, K., Sreshthabutra, P.,

Rohitchat, S. & Jirakraisiri, J. (2009). The study of Thailand’s reading promotion policy:
comparative study between Thailand’s policy and foreign countries policies (in Thai).
Retrieved from: http://www.tkpark.or.th/stocks/extra/0005a3.pdf
Deenan, A. (2003). Back-translation technique: Method to understand cross-cultural research.

Retrieved from: http://www.nursinglibrary.org/vhl/handle/10755/158632
Dent, V. F. (2012). An exploratory study of the impact of the rural Uganda village library and
other factors on the academic achievement of secondary school students. Long Island
University, Greenvale, NY.
Dent, V. F. (2006). Observations of school library impact at two rural Uganda schools. New
Library World, 107(9/10), 403-421. doi: 10.1108/03074800610702598
Dent, V. F., Goodman, G., & Kevane, M. (2014). Rural Library Services in African Countries:
History, Development, and Characteristics. In Rural Community Libraries in Africa:
Challenges and Impacts (pp. 1-17). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-5043-5.ch001
309
Department of Information Science, Chiang Mai Rajabhat University. (2016). Report of

academic service 2016 (in Thai). Chiang Mai: Chiang Mai Rajabhat University.
Dey, Tulima. (2012). Cybrarian: The Librarian of Future Digital Library. Retrieved from:
http://www.ijidt.com/index.php/ijidt/article/viewFile/99/99
Dheeranond, N. (2014). Small school create big communities in rural Thailand. Retrieved
from: http://www.actionaid.org/brasil/shared/small-schools-create-big-communities-rural-
thailand
Didier, E.K. (1982). Relationships between student achievement in reading and library media
programs and personnel. Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan. (University
Microfilms No. 82-14981)
DiPaola, M. F., Walther-Thomas, C., Florida Univ., Gainesville. Centre on Personnel Studies in
Special Education, & National Clearinghouse for Professions in Special Education,
Arlington, VA. (2003). Principals and special education: The critical role of school
leaders.Centre on Personnel Studies in Special Education (COPSSE). Retrieved from:
http://www.personnelcentre.org/pdf/copsse_principals.pdf
Dodd, T. (2015). Good education policies lead to massive economic benefit. Retrieved from:
http://www.afr.com/news/policy/education/afr12educationobserved-20150710-gi9cxq
Doiron, R., & Davies, J. (1998). Partners in learning: Students, teachers, and the school library.
Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
Doran, J. A. (2004). Effective school characteristics and student achievement correlates as

perceived by teachers in American style international schools (Doctoral dissertation).
Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (305083066). Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/305083066?accountid=13380
Dorrell, L. D. & Lawson, V. L. (1995). What are principals’ perceptions of the school library
media specialist? Retrieved from: http://bul.sagepub.com/content/79/573/72.full.pdf
Draper, J. (2014). PISA Thailand regional breakdown shows inequalities between Bangkok and
upper north with the rest of Thailand. Retrieved from: http://isaanrecord.
com/2014/02/21/pisa-thailand-regional-breakdown-shows-inequalities-between-
bangkok-and-upper-north-with-the-rest-of-thailand/
Draper, R. J. (2008). Redefining content-area literacy teacher education: Finding my voice

through collaboration. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), pp. 60–83.
310
Duke, N. K. (2000). For the rich it’s richer: Print experiences and environments offered to
children in very low- and very high-socioeconomic status first-grade classrooms.
American Educational Research Journal, 17, 441-478.
Dunford, H. (1998). Joint-use libraries as services for remote areas. Asian Libraries, 7(8), 177-
183.
Edmunds, K. M. & Bauserman, K. L. (2006). What teachers can learn about reading motivation
through conversations with children. Reading Teacher, 59, 414-424.
doi:10.1598/RT.59.5.1
Engin-Demir, C., & Taneri, P. O. (2011). Quality of education in rural schools: A needs
assessment study (ankara-kalecik sample). International Online Journal of Educational
Sciences, 3(1), 91-112.
Epstein, M. J. & Yuthas, K. (2012). Redefining education in the developing world. Stanford
Social Innovation review. Retrieved from: http://www.ssireview.org/pdf/Winter_
2012_Redefining_Education_in_the_Developing_World.pdf
Evans, G. E. & Alire, C. A. (2016). Management Basics for Information Professionals. Chicago, IL:
Neal-Schuman.
Faculty of Architecture and Environmental Design, Maejo University. (2006). Theory in urban
and regional planning (in Thai). Chiangmai: Faculty of Architecture and Environmental
Design.
Fagbola, O., Uzoigwe, C., & Ajegbomogun, V. O. (2011). Libraries driving access to knowleage
in the 21st century in developing countries: An overview. Retrieved from:
http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~mbolin/fagbola-uzoigwe-ajegbomogun.htm
Fastrack. (2014). The new age of school libraries. Schoolnews. Retrieved from:
http://www.schoolnews.co.nz/2014/03/the-new-age-of-school-libraries/
Feinburg, S., Kuchner, J. F. & Feldman, S. (1998). Learning environment for young children.
Retrieved from: http://www.ala.org/offices/sites/ala.org.offices/files/content/
publishing/editions/samplers/feinberg.pdf
311
Fitzgibbons, S. A. (2000). School and public library relationships: Essential ingredients in

implementing educational reforms and improving student learning. School Library
Media Research: Research Journal of the American Association of School Librarians.
Retrieved from: http://www.ala.org/aasl/sites/ala.org.aasl/files/content/
aaslpubsandjournals/slr/vol3/SLMR_SchoolPublicLibRelationships_V3.pdf
Francis, B. H., Lance, K. C. & Lietzau, Z. (2010). School librarians continue to help student
achieve standards: The third Colorado study. Retrieved from: http://www.lrs.org/
documents/closer_look/CO3_2010_Closer_Look_Report.pdf
Frantsi, H., Kolu, K. & Salminen, S. (2002). A good school library. Finland : The School Library
Association in Finland.
Fry, G. W. (2013). Student performances in PISA tests a wake-up call for Thailand. The Nation.
Retrieve from http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/ Student-performances-in-
PISA-tests-a-wake-up-call--30222719.html).
Futalibrarian. (2013). Use of information communication technology (ICT) in the library (library
autmation). Retrieved from: https://futalib.wordpress.com/2013/01/13/use-of-
information-and-communication-technology-ict-in-the-library-library-automation/
Gardiner, M. (2008). Education in rural areas: Issues in education policy number 4.

Johannesburg, SouthAfrica: Centre for Education policy Development (CEPD).
Galleta, A. (2013). Mastering the semi-structured interview and beyond: From research design
to analysis and publication. New York: NYU Press.
Gelfand, M. A. (1962). The national library, and library development and training in Thailand.
Retrieved from: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001570/ 157038eb.pdf
Getzels, J. W. & Guba, E. G. (1957). Social behaviour and the administrative process. The School
Review. 65(4), 423-441. Retrieved from: http://www.kean.edu/~lelovitz/docs/ EDD6005/
Getzels%20Guba.pdf
Gev, Y. (2001). The role profile of a self-management school principal in israel. (BL:
DXN050291)
Gillespie, A. M. (2008). A case study: A small school's strategy to make connections with the
school community. In ASLA Online III Virtual Conference - 2008: Under Construction: A
World Without Walls, 5th to 26th May 2008.
312
Goodman, G., Kevane, M., & Dent, V. F. (2014). Rural community libraries in Africa: Challenges
and impacts. US: IGI Global.
Gordon, C. A. (2015). What makes a school library good? An action research casebook study.
Synergy, 13(2). Retrieved from: http://www.slav.vic.edu.au/synergy/volume-13-number-2-
2015/research-into-practice/579-what-makes-a-school-library-good-an-action-research-
casebook-study-.html
Gordon, C. A. (2014). The next generation of school library. Synergy, 12(1). Retrieved from:
http://www.slav.vic.edu.au/synergy/volume-12-number-1-2014/perspectives-global/369-
the-next-generation-of-school-library-.html
Gordon, C. A. (2013). Help wanted: Reinventing school libraries in the digital age. Synergy,
11(1). Retrieved from: http://www.slav.vic.edu.au/synergy/volume-11-number-1-
2013/research-into-practice/283-help-wanted-reinventing-school-libraries-in-the-digital-
age.html
Grissom, J. A., & Loeb, S. (2009). Triangulating principal effectiveness: How perspectives of
parents, teachers, and assistant principals identify the central importance of
managerial skills (National Centre for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education
Research [CALDER] Working Paper 35). Retrieved from: www.urban.org/Uploaded
PDF/1001443-TriangulatingPrincipal-Effectiveness.pdf
Guest, G., 1963, MacQueen, K. M., & Namey, E. E. (2012). Applied thematic analysis. Los
Angeles: Sage Publications. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org.ezp01.library.qut.
edu.au/10.4135/9781483384436
Henderson, J. (2007). Exploring the combined public/school library. Knowledge Quest, 35(3).
34-37.
Hafner, J. A., Keyes, E. J. & Keyes, C. E. (2016). Thailand. In The Encyclopedia Britannica.
Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/place/Thailand/Land
Hafsteinsdottir, Hafdis Dögg: The attitude of Icelandic principals towards school libraries.
Paper presented at IFLA council and general conference. Sect. School libraries and
resource centres, Copenhagen, 1997. Retrieved from: http://www.ifla.org/IV/ifla63/
63hafh.htm
Hale, I. W. (1969). The Influence of Library Services Upon the Academic Achievement of
Twelfth Grade Students at Crestwood Senior High School, Chesapeake, Virginia.
Athens, Georgia: Georgia University, Department of Library Education.
313
Hallinger, P. (2012). Synthesis of finding from 15 years of educational reform in Thailand:

Lessons on leading educational change in East Asia. INVALSI Conference, Rome Italy,
October 3-5, 2012.
Hansapiromchoke, P. & Kakeaw, J. (2014). The approach for developing the quality of small-
sized schools in the community. Srinakharinwirot Research and Development (Journal
of Humanities and Social Sciences), 6(12), 95-108. Retrieved from:
http://ejournals.swu.ac.th/index.php/swurd/article/viewFile/5043/4801
Hart, C., Mulhall, P., Berry, A., Loughran, J. and Gunstone, R. (2000). What is the purpose of
this experiment? Or can students learn something from doing experiments? Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 37(7), 655-675. Retrieved from: https://www.mah.se/
pages/28044/artikel.pdf
Hart, G. & Zinn, S. (2007). The conundrum of school libraries in South Africa. Retrieved from:
https://repository.uwc.ac.za/handle/10566/698
Hartzell, G. (2002c). Why should principals support school libraries? ERIC Digest. Syracuse, NY:
ERIC Clearinghouse on Information & Technology.
Hartzell, G. N. (1997). The invisible school librarian: Why other educators are blind to your
value. School Library Journal, 43(11), pp. 24–29.
Hartzell, G. (1994). Building Influence for the School Librarian. Worthington, OH: Linworth
Hattie, J. & Anderman, E. M. (2013). Introduction. In Hattie, J. & Anderman, E. M. (eds.),

International Guide to Student Achievement. (pp. xix-xx). New York, NY: Routledge.
Hay, L. (2010a). Chapter 9: Developing an information paradigm approach to build and

support the home-school nexus. In M. Lee & G. Finger (Eds.), Developing a networked
school community: A guide to realising the vision (pp. 143-158). Camberwell, Vic.: ACER
Press.
Hay, L. (2010b). Shift happens. It’s time to rethink, rebuild and rebrand. Access, 24(4), 5-10.
Hay, L. (2006b). Student learning through Australian school libraries part 2: What students
define and value as school library support, Synergy 4(2), pp. 27–38.
Hay, L. (2005b). Student learning through Australian school libraries part 1: A statistical
analysis of student perceptions, Synergy 3(2), pp. 17–30.
314
Hay, L., & Henri, J. (1995). Leadership for collaboration: Making vision work. Paper presented
at the IFLA Conference, School Libraries Programme Session, Istanbul, Turkey.
Retrieved from: www.ifla.org/IV/ifla61/61-hayl.htm.
Hay, L. & Todd, R. J. (2010). Report of the school libraries 21C online discussion, commissioned
by school libraries and information literacy unit, curriculum K-12 directorate, NSW
department of education and training. Retrieved from http://www.
curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/schoollibraries/assets/pdf/21c_report.pdf
Haycock, K. (2007). Collaboration: Critical success factors for student learning. School Libraries
Worldwide, 13(1), pp. 25-35. Retrieved from: http://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/ slis_pub/24/
Haycock, K. (2003). The crisis in Canada’s school libraries: The case for reform and re-
investment. Toronto, ON: Association of Canadian Publishers.
Heeks, R. (2000). Government Data: Understanding the Barriers to Citizen Access and Use,
iGovernment Working Paper Series, No. 10. Retrieved from http://www.sed.manche
ster.ac.uk/idpm/research/publications/wp/igovernment/documents/igov_wp10.pdf
Henri, J., & Boyd, S. (2002). Teacher librarian influence: Principal and teacher librarian
perspectives. School Libraries Worldwide, 8(2), pp. 1-17.
Henri, J., Hay, L., & Oberg, D. (2002a). An international study on principal influence and
information services in schools: Synergy in themes and methods. School Libraries
Worldwide, 8(1), 49-70.
Higgins, D. & Morley, S. (2014). Engaging indigenous parents in their children’s education.
Retrieved from: http://www.aihw.gov.au/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=
60129548210
Hildreth, S. (2007). Rural libraries: the heart of our communities. Public library, 46(2), 7-11.
Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/pla/sites/ala.org.pla/files/content/publications/
publiclibraries/pastissues/pl_46n2.pdf
Hillman, A. L. & Jenkner, E. (2004). Educating children in poor countries. Economic Issues, 33.
Retrieved from: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/issues/issues33/
Hite, M. T. (2006). Traditional book donation to Sub-Saharan Africa: An inquiry into policy,
practice and appropriate information provision. (Master’s thesis). University of North
Carolina. Retrieved from: https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/indexablecontent/uuid:b0733540-c360-
4eb2-965a-0bb41cef58c8
315
Hough, M. (2011). Libraries as iCentres: helping school. ACCESS, 25(1), pp. 5-9. Retrieved from:
http://www.asla.org.au/publications/access/access-commentaries/icentres. aspx
Hoxsuwan, S. (2012). Channels of information on innovative teaching of teachers affecting

the inspiration for the development of teaching (in Thai).Journal of Administration and
Development, Mahasarakham University, 4(3). Retrieved from: http://www.kmutt.
ac.th/jif/public_html/Download/Format_Checker/010.pdf
Hughes, H. (2013). School libraries, teacher-librarians and their contribution to student

literacy in Gold Coast schools. Brisbane: School Library Association of Queensland.
Retrieved from: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/60260/38/60260b.pdf
Hughes, H., Bozorgian, H., & Allan, C. (2014). School libraries, teacher-librarians and student
outcomes : presenting and using the evidence. School Libraries Worldwide. 20(1), 29-
50.
Hunt, Francis (2008). Dropping out from school: A cross-country review of literature. Retrieved
from http://www.create-rpc.org/pdf_documents/PTA16.pdf
IBM. (2014). IBM SPSS statistics desktop version 23. Retrieved from: ftp://public.dhe.ibm.
com/software/analytics/spss/documentation/statistics/23.0/en/client/DesktopQuickStart/I
BM_SPSS_Statistics_Desktop_Quick_Start_Guide.pdf
IFLA. (2016). Law libraries section. Retrieved from: http://www.ifla.org/law-libraries
IFLA. (2012). A government mandate for school libraries in Sweden. Retrieved from:
http://www.ifla.org/node/7926
IFLA school libraries section standing committee. (2015). IFLA school library guidelines. (2nd
revised edition). Retrieved from: http://www.ifla.org/publications/ node/9512
Immroth, B., & Lukenbill, W. B. (2007). Promoting information literacy & teacher-librarian
collaboration through social marketing strategies: A human information behavior
study. Texas Library Journal, 83(2), pp. 62-67.
Imsuwan, C. (2011). Gaps and equity in access to books and learning resources. In TK. Park
(Ed.), Thailand Conference on Reading 2011 (pp. 152-158). Retrieved from:
https://www.tkpark.or.th/stocks/extra/0006d3.pdf
Intarakamhang, R. & Ratanakorn, N. (1981). School libraries. Bangkok: Department of Library

Science, Humanities faculty, Ramkhamhaeng University.
316
Intathep, L. (2012). Free education policy needs Overhaul, Ombudsman Report says. Bangkok
Post. Retrieved from http://www.bangkokpost com/news/local/280208/free-educator
Israsena, V. (2007). Thai teachers’ beliefs about learner-centred education: Implications for
success for life Thailand. (Doctoral dissertation). University of North Texas, North Texas,
the United States.
Iwhiwhu, E. B. (2008). Information repackaging and library services: a challenge to information

professionals in Nigeria. Library Philosophy and Practice. Retrieved from
http://unllib.unl.edu/lpp/iwhiwhu3.htm
Japan Library Association. (2016). Brief information on libraries in Japan. Retrieved from:
https://www.jla.or.jp/portals/0/html/libraries-e.html
Jallade, L., Radi, M. & Cuenin, S. (2001). Education policies and strategies 1: National
education policies and programmes and international cooperation: What role for
UNESCO? USA: UNESCO. Retrieved from: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/
001226/122617eo.pdf
Jareonsettasin, T. (2016). Thailand education 4.0: the context of sustainable development in

education (in Thai). Retrieved from: http://www.moe.go.th/websm/2016/aug/ 345.html
Johnson, B. & Turner, L. A. (2003). Data collection strategies in mixed methods research. In A.
Tashakkori & C. Teddlies (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioural
research (pp. 297-319). Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications.
Johnson, L. L. (Ed.). (2012). Is the library important? Multivariate studies at the national and
international level. JOLLE UGA: Journal of Language & Literacy Education, 8(1), 26-36.
Joshi, B. & Srivastava, R. (2009). Self-esteem and academic achievement of adolescents,

Journal of the Indian Academy of applied Psychology, 35(Special issue), 33-39.
Kachel, D. E. & Graduate Students. (2011). School library research summarized: A graduate
class project. Manfield University. Retrieved from: http://sl-it.mansfield.edu/ upload/MU-
LibAdvoBklt2013.pdf
317
Kadlic, M. & Lesiak, M. A. (2003). Early reading and scientifically-based research: Implications
for practice in early childhood education programs. Paper presented at National
Association of States Title I Directors Conference, the Salt Palace Convention Centre,
Salt Lake City, Utah, 5-8 at February 2003. Retrieved from
http://www.schoodoodle.com/shop/images/Early_Reading_Scientifically_Based_Researc
h.pdf
Kent, A. (1987). Encyclopedia of library and information science. New York: Marcel Dekker.
Kaplan, A. G. (2006). Benign neglect: Principals’ knowledge of and attitudes towards school
library media specialists. Dissertation Abstracts International 67 (06A), 1998. (UMI No.
3220729)
Karelitz, T. (1998). Combined school-public libraries in Israel at the elementary school level: An
evaluative study. Master thesis, Bar-Ilan University. Retrieved from:
http://www.is.biu.ac.il/library/theses_abs/Karelitz_e.pdf
Kaser, D., Stone, C. W. and Byrd, C. K. (1967). Library development in eight Asian countries.
Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press.
Keengwe, J. & Onchwari, G. (2017). Handbook of research on learner-centred pedagogy in

teacher education and professional development. Pennsylvania: IGI Global.
Kevane, M. & Sissao, A. J. (2008). How much do village libraries increase reading? Results of a
survey of 10th grader in Burkana Faso, Libri, 58, 202-210. Retrieved from
http://fieldmarshamfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/tumblr/References/ Kevane%20-
%20Village%20libraries%20increase%20reading%202008.pdf
Khaopa, W. (2011). Teachers TV making it work for Thailand. The Nation. Retrieved
from http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2011/09/26/national/Teachers-TV-making-it-
work-for-Thailand-30166121.html
Kijkamonthom, J. (2011). Donated books will ruin the country, isn’t it? (in Thai). Retrieved
from: https://prachatai.com/journal/2011/04/33953
Klainin, S. (2007). Overview of PISA project (in Thai). Bangkok, IPST.
Kolencik, P. L. (2001). Principals and teacher-librarians: Building collaborative partnerships in

the learning community. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh,
the United States. Retrieved from: http://search.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.
au/pqdtglobal/docview/250022148/D4065ED52B6A4D4BPQ/1?accountid=13380
318
Kongrut, A. (2017). Let’s develop a culture of reading. Bangkok Post. Retrieved from:
http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/1184985/lets-develop-a-culture-of-
reading
Koondee, W. (2012). The state of the “3 Good” library operation style of schools under the
Primary Education Service Area 1. (Master’s thesis). Ubon Ratchatani Rajabhat
University, Ubon Ratchatani, Thailand.
Kornfeld, M. (2010). The effects of the class size on student academic achievement in a rural
state. (Doctoral dissertation). The University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont.
KPPM Organization strategists. (2012). Review of school community libraries future models of
service delivery. Retrieved from: https://www.libraries.sa.gov.au/webdata/
resources/files/School%20Community%20Libraries%20Review%202012.pdf
Krashen, S. D. (2004). The power of reading: insights from the research. Portsmouth, NH ;
London; Westport, Conn: Libraries Unlimited.
Krashen, S. D. (2009). Anything but reading. Knowledge Quest, 37(5), 18-25. Retrieved from:
https://korcos.wikispaces.com/file/view/Krashen-+Anything+But+Reading.pdf
Krolak, L. (2005). The role of libraries in the creation of literate environment. Background
paper prepared for the education for all global monitoring report 2006 literacy for life.
Retrieved from http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/literacy-and-reading/publications/ role-of-
libraries-in-creation-of-literate-environments.pdf
Krosnick, J. A. & Presser, S. (2010). Question and questionnaires design. In P. V. Marsden & J. D.
Wright (Eds.), Handbook of survey research (pp. 263-313). Wa, UK: Emerald.
Kuhlthau, C. C. (2001). Rethinking libraries for the information age school: Vital roles in inquiry
learning. Keynote Address International Association of School Librarianship
Conference & International Research Forum on Research in School Librarianship.
Aukland, New Zealand. Retrieved from: http://dh43libr4r3.wikispaces.com/file/view/
Rethinking+Libraries+for+the+Information+Age+School.pdf
Lambert, L. (1998). Build leadership capacity in schools. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development,
Lance, K. C. (2001). Proof of the Power: Recent Research on the Impact of School Library
Media Programs on the Academic Achievement of U.S. Public School Students, ERIC
319
Digest. EDO-IR-2001-05 October 2001. Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information

& Technology.
Lance, K.C. (2000c). Measuring up to standards: The impact of school library programs and
information literacy in Pennsylvania schools. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=
ED446771
Lance, K. C. (1994). The impact of school library media centres on academic achievement.
School library media quarterly, 22(3), 167-172. Retrieved from: http://eric.ed.gov/
?id=ed353989
Lance, K. C., Rodney, M. J. & Hamilton-Pennell, C. (2005). Powerful libraries make powerful
learners: The Illinois study. Canton, IL: Illinois School Library Media Association.
Retrieved from: http://library.alaska.gov/pdf/anc/infoemxs.pdf
Lance, K. C., Rodney, M. J., & Hamilton-Pennell, C. (2002). How school libraries improve
outcomes for children: The New Mexico study. Salt Lake City: HiWillow.
Lance, K. C., Rodney, M. J. & Hamilton-Pennell, C. (2000a). How school librarians help kids
achieve standards: The second Colorado study. Colorado, U.S.: Hi Willow Research and
Publishing.
Lance, K. C., Rodney, M. J., & Hamilton-Pennell, C. (2000b). Measuring up to standards: The
impact of school library programs and information literacy in Pennsylvania schools.
Greensberg: Pennsylvania. Retrieved from: http://teachersites.schoolworld.com/
webpages/nwelibrary/files/measuring_up_to_standards.pdf
Lance, K. C., Rodney, M. J. & Hamilton-Pennell, C. (2000c). Measuring up to standards: The

impact of school library programs & information literacy in Pennsylvania schools.
Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania Department of Education's Office of Commonwealth 53
Libraries. Retrieved from http://www.statelibrary.state.pa.uk/libraries/lib/
libraries/measuringup.pdf
Lance, K. C., Rodney, M. J. & Russell, B. (2007). How students, teachers, and principals benefit
from strong school libraries: The Indiana study. Retrieved from: http://c.
ymcdn.com/sites/www.ilfonline.org/resource/resmgr/aisle/executivesummary.pdf
Lance, K. C., Rodney, M. J. & Schwarz, B. (2010). Collaboration works-When it happens! the
Idaho school library impact study. Teacher Librarian, 37(5), pp. 30–36.
320
Lance, K. C., Rodney, M. J. & Schwarz, B. (2009). The Idaho school library impact study- 2009:
How Idaho librarians, teachers, and administrators collaborate for student success.
Idaho Commission for libraries. Retrieved from: http://libraries.idaho.gov/doc/idaho-
school-library-impact-study-2009
Lance, K. C., & Schwarz, B. (2012). How Pennsylvania school libraries pay off: Investments in
student achievement and academic standards. Retrieved from: http://files.eric.ed.
gov/fulltext/ED543418.pdf
Laovakul, D. (2009). Regional Disparity in Thailand. Paper presented at Addressing Regional

Disparity: Thailand's Experience and International Lessons by the World Bank, Fiscal
Policy Office, Ministry of finance & Office of the National Economics and Social
Development Board at Siam City Hotel, 9 September, 2009.
Lassonde, C. A., and Isreael, S. E. (2010). Teacher collaboration for professional learning:
facilitating study, research, and inquiry communities. San Francisco: JosseyBass.
Latham, D. (2013). Preparing teachers and librarians to collaborate to teach 21 st century skills:
View of LIS and Education Faculty. School Library Research, 16. Retrieved from:
http://www.ala.org/aasl/sites/ala.org.aasl/files/content/aaslpubsandjournals/slr/vol16/SLR_
PreparingTeachersLibrarianstoCollaborate_V16.pdf
Lau, J. (2005). Guidelines on information literacy for lifelong learning. Retrieved from
http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/information-literacy/publications/ifla-guidelines-en.pdf
Lau, D. (2002). What does your boss think about you?. New York: Media Source. Retrieved
from: http://search.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/docview/211747498/
fulltextPDF?accountid=13380
Laukkanen, R. (2008). Finnish strategy for high-level education for all. In N. Soguel & P. Jaccard
(Eds.), Governance and Performance of Education Systems, pp. 305-324. The
Netherlands: Springer.
Laerd statistics. (2013). Cronbach’s Alpha using SPSS statistics. Retrieved from:
https://statistics.laerd.com/spss-tutorials/cronbachs-alpha-using-spss-statistics.php
Lee, S. H. (2011). Korean national strategy for library development and reading promotion for
children and young adults. Paper presented at the world Library and Information
Congress: 77th IFLA General Conference and Assembly, San Juan, Puerto Rico, 13-18
August 2011. Retrieved from: http://www.ifla.org/past-wlic/2011/114-lee-en.pdf
321
Lee, S., Brown, G., Mekis, C., & Singh, D. (2003). Education for school librarians: Trends and
issues from selected developing countries. Paper presented at World library and
information congress: 69th IFLA general conference and council, 1-9 August 2003,
Berlin. Retrieved from: http://archive.ifla.org/IV/ ifla69/papers/069e-Lee_Brown_
Mekis_Singh.pdfLeedy
Leithwood, K. (1998). Organizational learning and transformational leadership. In: Johanssen,

O. & Lindberg, L. (Eds.), Exploring New Horizons in school leadership. Conference
proceeding, March 25-27, 1998. Skrifter från Centrum för skolledarutveckling 1998: 4,
Umeå universitet.
Leonard, L. J. (2002). Schools as professional communities: Addressing the collaborative

change. International Electronic Journal of Leadership in Learning, 6(17). Retrieved from
http://www.ucalgary.ca/~iejll/volume6/leonard.html
Leowarin, S. (2010). Community learning centres in Thailand. Journal AED-Adult Education abd
Development, 74. Retrieved from: https://www.dvv-international.de/adult-education-
and-development/editions/aed-742010/experiences-from-asia/community-learning-
centres-in-thailand/
The Library Association, UK. (2000). The primary school library guidelines. Retrieved from:
https://librarynext.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/primary.pdf
Lincharearn, A., Ardwichai, S. & Chanin, P. (2009). The study of causes impacted on low O-Net
scores of grade 6 and grade 12 students (in Thai). Bangkok: NIETS.
Liu, G. Z. (2008). School libraries serving rural communities in China: the evergreen model.
School Libraries Worldwide, 14(1), 1-20. Retrieved from http://www.evergreen
education.org/Evergreen/data/2008/EvergreenModelPaper_rev.pdf
Liu, G. Z. (2005). Evergreen bringing information resources to rural China. Wahington, DC:
Council on Library and Information Resources. Retrieved from http://www.clir.org/
pubs/reports/reports/pub130/pub130.pdf
The Local Government Association. (2014). School community libraries handbook: Revision
draft 18th July 2014. Retrieved from http://www.lga.sa.gov.au/webdata/resources/
files/SCL_Handbook_November_2007_Document_and_appendices.pdf
Lockheed, M. E., Fuller, B. & Nyirongo, R. (1989). Family effects on students’ academic
achievement in Thailand and Malawi. Sociology of Education, 62(4), 239-256. Retrieved
from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2112829
322
Lockwood, A. T. (1997). The changing role of principals: An interview with Phillip Hallinger.
North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. Available: http://www.ncrel.org/cscd/
pubs/lead31/31hallin.htm
Loertscher, D., Koechlin, C. & Zwaan, S. (2008). Building a learning commons where learners
win! Reinventing school libraries and computer labs. Utah: Hi Willow Research and
Publishing.
Loertscher, D. V. (2000). Taxonomies of the school library media program. (2nd ed.). San Jose,
California. Hi Willow Research & Publishing.
Loertscher, D. V. (1998). Taxonomies of the school library media program. Englewood,

Colorado: Libraries unlimited.
Lonsdale, M. (2003). Impact of school libraries on student achievement: A review of the

research ; report for the australian school library association. Melbourne: Australian
Council for Educational Research.
Lounkaew, K. (2013). Explaining urban and rural differences in educational achievement in

Thailand: Evidence from PISA literacy data. Economics of Education Review. 37, pp.
213-225.
Lupton, Mandy (2016) Adding value: Principals’ perceptions of the role of the teacher-
librarian. School Libraries Worldwide, 22(1), pp. 49-61.
Maher, K. & McGilvray, J. (2017). Elementary and secondary education act & libraries.
Retrieved from: http://www.districtdispatch.org/policy-issues/educationschool-libraries/
Marcoux, B. (2005). Perceptions of the role and functions of the school library professional in
K-12 education by school principals. In M. Orey, J. McClendon, & R.M. Branch (Eds.).
Educational media and technology yearbook, 2005 edition, Volume thirty (225-235.)
Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Marie, K. L. (2007). One plus one equals three: Joint-use libraries in urban areas—The ultimate
form of library cooperation. Library Administration & Management, 21(1). Retrieved
from: http://www.stpaul.gov/DocumentCentre/Home/View/9749
Maryland State Department of Education. (2000). Standards for school library media
programs in Maryland. Retrieved from: http://test.msde.maryland.gov/programs/
Documents/ITSLM/slm/StandardsSchoolLibraryMediaProgramsMD.pdf
323
McConnaha, V. (1972). The effect of an elementary school library at high school level.
California School Libraries, 43 (Summer), 24-29.
MaGhee, M. W. & Jansen, B. A. (2010). The principal’s guide to a powerful library media
program. Santa Barbara, CA: Linworth.
McMillen, R.D. (1965). An analysis of library programs and a determination of the educational
justification of these programs in selected elementary schools of Ohio. (Doctoral
dissertation). Western Reserve University, Cincinnati, Ohio. (University Microfilms No.
66-08017)
Mfum-Mensah, O. (2002). Impact of non-formal primary education programs: A case study of

Northen Ghana. Retrieved from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED471859.pdf
MGR online. (26 April 2006). Lonely life of librarians (in Thai). MGR online [Bangkok]. Retrieved
from: http://www2.manager.co.th/QOL/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=
9490000054977
Microsoft. (2017). Excel specifications and limits. Retrieved from: https://support.office.

com/en-us/article/Excel-specifications-and-limits-1672b34d-7043-467e-8e27-
269d656771c3
Mills, A. J., Durepos, G. & Wiebe, E. (2010). Encyclopedia of case study research: Thematic
analysis. SAGE Research Methods. doi: 10.4135/9781412957397
Ministry of Education, Thailand. (2016). Education statistics. Retrieved from: http://www.

mis.moe.go.th/MIS2015/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=141&Itemid=
241
Ministry of Education, Thailand. (1998). History of Thai education. Retrieved from:

http://www.moe.go.th/main2/article/e-hist01.htm
Montiel-Overall, P. (2010). Further understanding of collaboration: A case study of how it

works with teachers and librarians. School Libraries Worldwide, 16(2), pp. 31–54.
Montiel-Overall, P. (2008). Teacher and librarian collaboration: A qualitative study. Library &
Information Science Research, 30, pp. 145-155. Retrieved from: http://ac.els-
cdn.com/S074081880800011X/1-s2.0-S074081880800011X-main.pdf?_tid=6f10ed32-
eaa1-11e6-ac6f-00000aab0f02&acdnat=1486189155_af350e1dd5fa3f8b817
c43cef445a974
324
Montiel-Overall, P. (2007). Research on teacher and librarian collaboration: An examination of

underlying structures of models. Library & Information Science Research, 29(2), pp. 277-
292. doi:10.1016/j.lisr.2007.04.006
Montiel-Overall, P. (2005). Toward a theory of collaboration for teachers and librarians.

School Library Media Research, 8, 1-31. Retrieved from: http://www.ala.org/aasl/
sites/ala.org.aasl/files/content/aaslpubsandjournals/slr/vol8/SLMR_TheoryofCollaboratio
n_V8.pdf
Moya, N. (2004). Factors influencing small schools’ qualities: official inspection area 16 (in
Thai). Retrieved from: http://www.reo14.moe.go.th/index.php/ oldresearchs/-2547/144---
13
Mudd, S. & Heavens, A. (2009). Library cooperation in the 21st century: Combining forces to
achieve more. Retrieve from: http://www.oclc.org/content/dam/oclc/publications/
newsletters/nextspace/nextspace_012.pdf
Munshi, M. N. (2005). Status of school library development in Bangladesh. Sri Lanka Journal of
Librarianship & Information Management, 1(1), 1-6. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4038/
sllim.v1i1.429
Musa, H U., Kurfi, A. L., Abdulrasheed, R. H., Abdulkarim, M., & Haruna, M. (2013). Proposed
information resource management policy for school libraries in Zaria. International
Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention, 2(6), 53-57. Retrieved from:
http://www.ijhssi.org/papers/v2(6)/Version-3/J0263053057.pdf
Muvhunzwi, A. (2012). Bridging the divide: Integrating and positioning school libraries and
curriculum with the emerging technologies: case study of celebration school user
community. Paper presented at 14th LIASA Conference, Durban 1-5 October 2012.
Retrieved from: http://eprints.rclis.org/18825/1/Bridging%20the%20divide%20-
intergration%20of%20libraries%20curricuum%20and%20emerging%20technologies-
1.pdf
The National Electronics and Computer Technology Centre (NECTEC). (2016). NECTEC
transferred Schoolnet to Ministry of Education Thailand (in Thai). SchoolNet News,1.
Retrieved from: https://www.nectec.or.th/schoolnet/farewell/acrobat_web/press.pdf
325
The National Institute of Educational Testing Service. (2009). Average O-net scores of students
in Prathom 6 (in Thai). Retrieved from http://www.niets.or.th/index.
php/research_th/view/8
The National Institute of Educational Testing Service. (2013). A strategic planning for Thailand
educational reform. Bangkok: NIETS.
National Science Teachers Association. (2007). The integral role of laboratory investigation in
science instruction. Retrieved from: http://www.nsta.org/docs/PositionStatement
_LabScience.pdf
National Statistical Office, Ministry of Information and Communication Technology,

Thailand. (2016). Statistical data. (in Thai). Retrieved from:
http://web.nso.go.th/en/census/poph/prelim_e.htm
National Statistical Office, Ministry of Information and Communication Technology,

Thailand. (2014). Statistical table. (in Thai). Retrieved from: http://web.nso.go.th/
en/survey/education/data/educat_aged%206%20years_11.pdf
Naylor, A. P., & Jenkins, K. D. (1988). An investigation of principals’ perceptions of library

media specialists’ performance evaluation technology. School Library Media Quarterly.
16(3), 234-243.
NECTEC-ACE. (2016). MOOC and the future of Thailand education. Retrieved from:
https://www.nectec.or.th/ace2016/event-program/mooc_education/
Nekatibeb, T. (2002), Low Participation of Female Students in Primary Education: A Case

Study of Dropouts from the Amhara and Oromia Regional States in Ethiopia.
International institute for Capacity Building in Africa, UNESCO, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Neuman, D. (2011). Learning in information-rich environments: I-LEARN and the construction

of knowledge in the 21st century. PA, USA: Springer.
Neuman, W. L. (2011). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches.

Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Ngamwittayaphong, A. (2011). Factors affecting the promotion of a reading culture in

Thailand. Paper presented at Thailand Conference on reading 2011, August 24-25,
2011, Amari Watergate Hotel, Bangkok, Thailand.
326
Nganlert, S., Sirisanglert, K., & Nakfon, J. (2016). Roles on learning resource administration of
school administrators under the office of Sa Kaeo Primary Education Service Area 1.
STOU Education Journal. 9(1), 144-127. Retrieved from: http://edjournal.stou.ac.th/
filejournal/10_9_660.pdf
Ngorosho, D. (2011). Literacy skills of Kiswahili speaking children in Rural Tanzania: The role of
home environment. Vasa: Åbo Akademi University. Retrieved from: http://doria32-
kk.lib.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/67004/ngorosho_damaris.pdf?sequence=4
Nicaise, L., Tonguthai, P. & Fripont, I. (2000). School dropout in Thailand: causes and remedies.
Leuven: HIVA. Retrieved from: https://perswww.kuleuven.be/
~u0014508/articles/School_dropout_in_thailand.pdf
Njunwa, M. K. (2010). Community participation as a tool for development: Local community’s

participation in primary education development in Morogoro, Tanzania-A case of
Kilakala and Mindu Primary Schools. (Master’s thesis). University of Agder,
Kristianansand.
Norušis, M. J. (2012). IBM SPSS statistics 19 statistical procedures companion. Saddle River,
N.J: Prentice Hall.
NSW government. (2015). Library policy- schools. Retrieved from: https://www.det.nsw. edu.au/
policies/curriculum/schools/libraries/PD20050221.shtml
O’Connell, Judy. (2012). Learning without frontiers: School libraries and meta-literacy in
action. Access, 26(1), 4-7. Retrieved from http://www.asla.org.au/publications/access/
access-commentaries/school-libraries-and-meta-literacy.aspx
Oberg, D. (1996). Principal support—what does it mean to teacher-librarians? Worcester,

England: Annual Conference of the International Association of School Librarianship.
Retrieved from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED400851.pdf
Oberg, D. (1990). The school library program and the culture of the school. Emergency
Librarian, 18(1), 9.
OECD/UNESCO. (2016). Education in Thailand: An OECD-UNESCO Perspective, Reviews of

National Policies for Education. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved
from:http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264259119-en
OECD. (2013a). PISA 2012 Results: What Makes Schools Successful? Resources, Policies and
Practices (Volume IV). Paris: OECD Publishing.
327
The Office of Basic Education Commission (OBEC). (2016). Small-size school (in Thai). Retrieved
from: http://www.moe.go.th/small_sch/information1.htm
The Office of the Basic Education Commission (OBEC). (2015). Annual report 2015: Office of
Basic Education Commission (in Thai). Retrieved from: http://plan.bopp-
obec.info/tmp/upload/2016-05-02-16-19-05.pdf
The Office of Basic Education Commission (OBEC). (2015). Lists of schools participating in
living library project. Retrieved from: http://www.obec.go.th/documents/60335
The Office of the Basic Education Commission (OBEC). (2014). Database of small school (in
Thai). Retrieved from: http://www.moe.go.th
The Office of the Basic Education Commission (OBEC). (2013). School library standards (in
Thai). Bangkok: The Office of Basic Education Commission.
The Office of Basic Education Commission (OBEC). (2013). Educational statistic in brief (in
Thai). Bangkok: Office of the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of education.
The Office of the Basic Education Commission (OBEC). (2011). Good stories of libraries: Best
practice of developing living library (in Thai). Bangkok: The Office of Basic Education
Commission. Retrieved from: http://academic.obec.go.th/media/ aw600%20Cre.pdf
The Office of Basic Education Commission (OBEC). (2009). A project improving the libraries’
quality through 3Gs models (in Thai). Bangkok: Office of the Permanent Secretary,
Ministry of education.
The Office of Basic Education Commission (OBEC). (2009). School library standards and
indicators for developing effective libraries (in Thai). Bangkok: The Office of the Basic
Education Commission.
The Office of Basic Education Commission (OBEC). (2002/2003). Education in Thailand

2002/2003. Bangkok: Amarin Printing and Publishing. Retrieved from:
http://www.spr.ac.th/web/ebook/pdf/education03/pdf.pdf
The Office of Basic Education Commission (OBEC). (1992). The minimum standards for primary
school library (in Thai). Bangkok: The Office of Basic Education Commission.
The Office of the Education Council. (2004). Education in Thailand 2004 (in Thai). Bangkok:
Ministry of Education.
The Office of the Federal Register (U.S.). (1991). The code of federal regulations of the United
States of America. USA: U.S. Government Printing Office.
328
The Office of the Minister, Minister of Interior, Thailand. (2016). The direction of the
education reform (in Thai). Retrieved from http://www.moe.go.th/moe/th/news/
detail.php?NewsID=45500&Key=news20
The Office of the National Education Commission. (2010). National education act of B.E. 2542
(1999).(3rd ed.). Retrieved from: https://www.mwit.ac.th/~person/01-
Statutes/NationalEducation.pdf
The Office of the National Education Commission. (1999). National education act of B.E. 2542
(1999). Retrieved from: http://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/upload/Thailand/Thailand_
Education_Act_1999.pdf
The Office for National Education Standards and Quality Assessment (ONESQA). (2008).
Annual Report, Office for National Education Standards and Quality Assessment (in
Thai). Retrieved from: http://203. 144.163.91/onesqa/th/reportyear/show_all
Goverment.php?DownloadGroupID=76
The Office for National Education Standards and Quality Assessment (ONESQA). (2006).
Thailand Decentralised local governance system (in Thai). Retrieved from:
http://admin.e-library.onecapps.org/Book/194.pdf
The Office of the National Primary Education Commission. (1992). The minimum school
library standards. Bangkok: Kurusapa.
The office of National Primary Educational Commission. (1984). Primary school library project.
Bangkok: The office of National Primary Educational Commission.
Office of the Permanent Secretary. (2014) Educational Statistics in Brief 2013, Office of the
Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Education of Thailand, Bangkok. Retrieved from:
www.mis.moe.go.th/mis-th/images/statistic/Statistic/ statistics2556.pdf.
Office of the Private Education Commission. (2014). Manual for private school evaluation (in
Thai). Retrieved from: www.buriramps1.net/files/คู่มือการประเมิ น%20มาตรฐานสากล.pdf
The Ontario Library Associations. (2006). School libraries & student achievement in Ontario.
Ontario: The Ontario Library Associations. Retrieved from http://www.peoplefor
education.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/School-Libraries-2006.pdf
Oradee, M. (2004). Understanding of book, reading and book sharing system. Nationweekend
(in Thai), (690). Retrieved from: http://www.bflybook.com/Article/
BookNation4/BookNation4.htm (in Thai).
329
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2014). PISA 2012 results
in focus: What 15-year-olds know and what they can do with what they know. Paris:
OECD.
Organisation for Economic Co-opertion and Development (OECD). (2013a). PISA 2012 results:
What makes schools successful (Volume IV): Resources, policies and practices. Paris:
OECD Publishing. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1787/9789264201156-en
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2012). Equity and quality
in education: supporting disadvantaged students and schools. Retrieved from
http://www.oecd.org/edu/school/50293148.pdf
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2010). Results: Learning
to learn- student engagement, strategies and practices (volume III). Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264083943-en
Owens, R. G. (1970). Organizational behavior in schools. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:

Prentice-Hall.
Oyesola, G. O. (2000). Physical Facilities and Productivity in Fagbamiye and D.O. Durosaro
(Eds.), Education and Productivity in Nigeria, Ilorin: Haytee press and publishing.
O'Reilly, M., Ronzoni, P. D., & Dogra, N. (2013). Research with children: Theory & practice.
London: SAGE.
Paichayontvijit, T. (2014). Small school networking projects make the grade. Bangkok Post.
Retrieved from http://www.bangkokpost.com/opinion/opinion/440181/small-school-
networking-projects-make-the-grade
Panmekha, P. (1982). School library theories and practices. (in Thai). Bangkok: Department of
Information Studies, Srinakharinwirot University.
Panmekha, P. (1979). School library administration and operation. (in Thai). Bangkok:
Department of Information Studies, Srinakharinwirot University.
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2007). Framework for 21st century learning. Retrieved
from: http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/docs/P21_framework_0816.pdf
Paton-Ash, M. & Wilmot, D. (2015). Issues and Challenges facing school libraries in selected
primary schools in Guatung Province, South Africa. South African Journal of Education,
35(1). Retrieved from: http://www.ajol.info/index.php/saje/article/viewFile/
113796/103511
330
Pearson, R. C. (1989). A critical relationship: Rural and small school principals and librarians.
Retrieved from: http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED390589
Pedcharat, R. (2011, March 28). Unwanted books. Bangkokbiznews. Retrieved from:

http://www.bangkokbiznews.com
Peterson, M. (2009). The purpose of schools. Retrieved from: http://www.wholeschooling.

net/WS/WSPrncples/WS%200%20purpose%20schls.html
Phinthuphan, H. (2008). Community partnerships in education administration. Retrieved from:

http://facstaff.swu.ac.th/huan.doc
Phraharuthai Nonthaburi School. (2012). Digital library. Retrieved from: http://www.ptn.ac.

th/indexs.php#
Pickard, A. J. (2007). Research methods in information. London: Facet.
Pinyapong, K., Virasilp, P., & Somboon, U. (2007). Development of private secondary schools in
Thailand. Retrieved from: http://www.unesco.org/iiep/PDF/pubs/Thailand.pdf
Pisitpan, S. (2008). School administrator perceptions in supporting the primary school

libraries’ performance in Bangkok Metropolitan Area. (in Thai). (Master’s thesis,
Srinakarinwirot University)
Pithiyanuwat, S. (2005). Result of the external assessment (in Thai). Retrieved from:
http://www. onesqa.or.th/th/download/index4.php?PageShow=2&System
ModuleKey=61&myCalendarDateMonth=00&myCalendarDateYear=0000
Plumber, P. P. (2015, January 12). Lokhande picks the rural school library. Outlook. Retrieved
from http://www.outlookindia.com/article/storybook-man/292966
Pongpaiboon, P. (2011). Reading promotion policy: overview, challenges and development

strategy (in Thai). Paper presented at Thailand Conference on Reading 2011 by TK Park,
Bangkok, August 24-25, 2011.
Popham, J. & Baker, E. (1970). Systematic Instruction. Eaglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Prachachat. (2014, May 8-11). Prachachat report: High funding in Thai education but low
academic achievement (in Thai). Prachachat. Retrieved from: http://tdri.or.th/tdri-
insight/prachachat-2014-05-07/
331
Pradit, A. (2006). The success factors and reading promotion techniques in 10 Primary Schools
within Bangkok and the nearby provinces. Paper presents at the 30th IBBY Congress in
Macau, 2006. Retrieved from: http://www.ibby.org/626.0.html
Praphansarn. (2013). Why do we need to encourage reading as a national agenda? (in Thai).
Retrieved from: http://www.praphansarn.com/article/detail/326
Prior, J. (2009). Environmental print: Real-world early reading. Dimension of Early Childhood,
37(1), 9-13.
Prior, J., & Gerard, M. R. (2004). Environmental print in the classroom: Meaningful connections
for learning to read. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Programme for International Student Assessment, Thailand & the Institute for the
Promotion of Teaching Science and Technology. (2014). PISA 2012 results in
Mathematics, Reading and Science: What students know and what they can do.
Bangkok, Thailand: IPST.
Pryor, J. & Amphiah, J. G. (2003). Understandings of education in an African village: the impact
of information and communication technologies. Retrieved from https://www.
sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=umea-conference-jan-2014-
understandings-of-education-in-an-african-village.pdf&site=41
The publishers and booksellers association of Thailand. (2014). The best publication business
in 2014 from SE-ED book centre’s database (in Thai). PUBAT Journal, 40. Retrieved from
http://www.pubat.or.th/document/20141106114546.pdf.
Ragle, K. S. (2011). The perceptions of high school teachers on the roles and responsibilities of
library media specialists. Advances in Library Administration and Organization, 30, pp.
289-334.
Rajabhat Mahasarakham University. (2013). Curriculum of Bachelor of Education Program in

Library Education and English. Retrieved from: http://edurmu.org/home/
index.php/en/2014-08-05-17-49-16
Surin Rajabhat University. (2016). Curriculum of Bachelor of Education Program in Library and
Information Sciences. Retrieved from: http://ictedu.srru.ac.th/?page_id=482
Ramani, S. (2015). The internet and education in the developing world – hopes and reality.
Smart Learning Environments. doi: 10.1186/s40561-015-0015-x. Retrieved from:
https://slejournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40561-015-0015-x
332
Ranaweera, P. (2008). Importance of Information Literacy skills for an Information Literate

society. In NACLIS 2008, Colombo (Sri Lanka), 24th June 2008. [Conference paper].
Retrieved from: http://eprints.rclis.org/11956/
Rapporteur, A. H., Halász, G. & Pont, B. (2007). School leadership for the systematic
improvement in Finland: A case study report for the OECD activity improving school
leadership. Retrieved from: http://www.oecd.org/edu/school/39928629.pdf
Reitz, J. M. (2004). Dictionary for library and information science. Westport, CT: Libraries
Unlimited. Retrieved from: http://www.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_l.aspx
A respondent who works in a school located in Southern Thailand. (2016). Village water
supply [photograph].Retrieved from https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/
#section_query/in%3Ainbox/15514aa31b84fee2
Riedling, A. (2003). Invest time in collaboration, communication efforts. Teacher Librarian,

31(1), p. 43. Retrieved from: http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/12123781/ invest-
time-collaboration-communication-efforts
Riesert, J. (1967). Role of the principal. The Indiana Elementary principal 1 (1967), 2.
Research Information Network (RIN). (2010). Challenges for academic libraries in difficult
economic times: A guide for senior institutional managers and policy makers. Retrieved
from http://www.rin.ac.uk/challenges-for-libraries-FINAL-March 10[1].pdf
Rishworth, A., & Australia. Parliament. House of Representatives. Standing Committee on

Education and Employment. (2011). School libraries and teacher librarians in 21st
century australia. Canberra: Standing Committee on Education and Employment.
Robert, A. R. (2010) The benefits of school libraries in rural Australia. Retrieved from:
http://bitethedust.com.au/bitingthedust/2010/06/15/the-benefits-of-school-libraries-in-
rural-australia/
Roberts, J., Jurgens, J., & Burchinal, M. (2005). The role of home literacy practices in preschool
children's language and emergent literacy skills. Journal of Speech, Language, and
Hearing Research, 48, 345-359.
Rocket, W. & Win, W. W. (2014). Picturing: The promise of libraries in Myanmar. Retrieved
from http://asiafoundation.org/in-asia/2014/04/02/picturing-the-promise-of-libraries-in-
myanmar/
333
Rodney, M. J., Lance, K. C. & Hamilton-Pennell, C. (2002). Make the connection: Quality school
library media program impact academic achievement in Iowa. Bettendorf, IA: Iowa
Area Education Agencies. Retrieved from: http://www.iowaaeaonline.org/pages/
uploaded_files/Make%20The%20Connection.pdf
Rose, P., & Al‐Samarrai, S. (2001). Household constraints on schooling by gender: Empirical
evidence from Ethiopia. Comparative Education Review, 45(1), 36-63.
doi:10.1086/447644
Roskos, K. & Neuman, S. (1994). Play settings as literacy environments: Their effects on
children’s literacy behaviors. In D.F. Lancy (Ed.), Children’s Emergent Literacy: From the
research to practice, Westport, CT: Praeger, pp. 251-264.
Rukumnuaykit, P & Palakawong-na-ayudhya. (2015). School budget and students’

performance empirical findings from Thailand. Development Economic Review, 9(2).
Retrieved from: http://www.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/NER/article/view/40396
Rumberger, R. W. (2001). Who drops out of school and why. (Rev. ed.). Paper prepared for the
National Research Council, Committee on Educational Excellence and Testing Equity
Workshop, “School Completion in Standards-Based Reform: Facts and Strategies,”
Washington, D.C., July 17-18, 2000.
Russel, S. (2000). Librarians: Collaborative relationships. Retrieved from:

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED444605.pdf
Saavedra, A. R. & Darleen Opfer, V. (2012). Learning 21st-century skills requires 21st-century
teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(2), 8-13. Retrieved from: http://pdk.sagepub.com/
content/94/2/8.full
Sacchanand, C. (2015). Role of Thai library association in the development of Thai library
standards [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from: http://www.tla.or.th/document/
standard/library1.ppt
Sacchanand, C. (2011). Development of the information literacy standards for Thai students
http://www.tla.or.th/document/ standard/library1.ppt. TLA Research Journal. 4(1).
Retrieved from: http://ird.stou.ac.th/dbresearch/uploads/67/%E0%B8%9A%E0%B8% 97
%E0%B8%84%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%94%E0%B8%A2% E0%B9%88%E0%B8%AD.pdf
Sacchanand, C. (2011). Developing strategies to create information literate Thai students.

Paper presented at the world Library and Information Congress: 77th IFLA General
334
Conference and Assembly, San Juan, Puerto Rico, 13-18 August 2011. Retrieved from:
http://www.ifla.org/past-wlic/2011/199-sacchanand-en.pdf
Sacchanand, C. (2010). Living library administration [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from:

http://academic.obec.go.th /web/news/d/463
Sacchanand, C. (2007). An analysis and evaluation of public library in Thailand. Thai Library
Association research Journal. 1(1), p. 1-15.
Sacchanand, C & Gaikwang, K. (2012). Development of the information literacy indicators for
Thai students (in Thai). TLA Research Journal. 4(1), 1-14.
Sacchanand, C. & Prommapan, B. (2011). The development of TK Park Living Library Standards
and Indicators. Manutsat Paratat: Journal of Humanities. 33(2), 1-18. Retrieved from
http://ejournals.swu.ac.th/index.php/hm/article/view/3054/3073
Sadiman, A. S. (2004). Challenges in education in Southeast Asia. Paper presented at the

International Seminar on “Toward cross border cooperation between South and
Southeast Asia: The important of India’s North East playing bridge and buffer role”,
Kazaringa, India, 16-19 November 2004.
Saengpassa, C. (2016). Teacher of the nation. The Nation. Retrieved from: http://www.
nationmultimedia.com/news/life/special/30298639
Saengpassa, C. & Khaopa, W. (2012). O-Net test “stuck in 20th century”, academic says. The
Nation. Retrieved from: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/O-Net-test-stuck-in-
20th-century-academic-says-30176752.html
Sagor, R. (2000). Guiding school improvement with action research. Alexandria, Va:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Saiyasombat, S. & Siam voices. (2012). Thai education failures- Part3: PISA scores & a
challenge for 21st century. Retrieved from: http://asiancorrespondent.com/77060/ thai-
education-failures-part-3-pisa-scores-and-a-challenge-for-the-21st-century/)
Sakai, C., Nakamura, Y., & Kitamura, Y. (2002). Japanese librarians learning from American
school librarianship. Multimedia School. Retrieved from: http://www.infotoday.com/
mmschools/may02/sakai_nakamura_kitamura.htm
335
Sakulsumpaopol, N. (2010). The roles of school principals in implementing change in

elementary and secondary schools in Thailand. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).
Victoria University, Victoria, AU.
Samakoses, V. (21 May 2013). Reducing the number of small schools. Bangkokbiznews.
Retrieved from: http://thaipublica.org/2013/05/reduce-the-number-of-small-schools/
Sanghi, S. (2011). Human resource management. Delhi: Macmillan publisher India.
Sangkharat, P. (2013). Library administrators in the Basic Education Institution, under Nakorn
Ratchasrima Primary Educational Service Area Office 6 (Master’s thesis, Pathumthani
University, Pathumtani, Thailand). Retrieved from:
http://www.ptu.ac.th/StudentServe/input/thesis/[1][220916094559].pdf
Sangnapaboworn, W. (2007). The development of primary education in Thailand and its

present challenges: From quantity to quality through effective management. In A.
Yonemura (Ed.), Universalization of Primary Education in the Historical and
Developmental perspective (pp. 259-303). Chiba: Institute of Developing Economies
SAS Institute. (1999). Chapter 7 descriptive statistics. Retrieved from https://ciser.cornell.
edu/sasdoc/saspdf/analyst/chap7.pdf
Scholastic Library Publishing. (2016). School libraries work! A compendium of research

supporting the effectiveness of school libraries. Retrieved from
http://www.scholastic.com.au/assets/pdfs/schoollibraries-work.pdf
Scholastic Research & Results. (2008). School libraries work! Retrieved from
http://www.scholastic.com/content/collateral_resources/pdf/s/slw3_2008.pdf
Sclafani, J. D. (2004). The educated parent: Recent trends in raising children. Connecticut:
Praeger Publisher.
Schmidt, M., Murray, C., & Nguyen, H. (2007). Cohesive communities, improved outcomes: A
case for small schools. Education Canada, 47(4), 59-62.
Schultz-Jones, B. & Oberg, D. (Eds.). (2015). Global action on school library guidelines. German:
Degruyter.
Sermvithoon, S., Techataweewan, W., & Wajiraprechapong, T. (2011). The role of school
administrators in supporting the secondary school libraries’ performances in Bangkok
metropolitan area and its vicinity. Journal of Library and Information Science, SWU.
4(2), 1-14. Retrieved from: file:///C:/Users/n9003479/Downloads/2159-7034-1-PB%20(5).pdf
336
Shandu, L. Z. Z. (2014). Challenges in the utilisation and provision of school library services in
Katlehong secondary schools (Gauteng province, South Africa). (Master’s thesis,
University of Zululand). Retrieved from: http://uzspace.uzulu.ac.za/bitstream/handle/
10530/1401/Challenges+in+the+utilisation+and+provision+of+school+library+services+in+
Katlehong+Secondary+Schools+(Gauteng+Province,+South+Africa)..pdf;jsessionid=A9EDF
972098766C45F74F7C6A99681E9?sequence=1
Shannon, D. M. (2009). Principals’ perspectives of school librarians. School Librares Worldwide.

15(2), pp. 1-22. Retrieved from: http://www.iasl-
online.org/Resources/Documents/slw/v15/15_2Shannon.pdf
Sheskin, D. (2004). Handbook of parametric and nonparametric statistical procedures. Boca

Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
Shoraku, A. (2008). Educational movement toward school-based management in East Asia:

Cambodia, Indonesia and Thailand. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization.
Shrestha, S. (2013). The changing role of community libraries: Emerging centres for
sustainable development. Retrieved from http://library.ifla.org/216/1/150-strestha-en.pdf
Shuherk, A. & Scholar, M. (2009). More than books and shelves: Fostering a literacy-rich
environment in Belize. Retrieved from: http://www.defiance.edu/mcmaster/
documents/journal-2009-10-fostering-literacy.pdf
Sirichote, P. & Manmart, L. (1989). A evaluation of the primary school library program, the
office of the National Primary Education Commission a case study of Amphoe Muang
School Group libraries Changwat Khon Kaen. Khon Kaen: Khon Kaen University.
Siltragool, W. (2007). Thailand on-formal education. Retrieved from: http://unesdoc.unesco.

org/images/0015/001555/155581e.pdf
Singh, Diljit and others (2005). Development of information literacy through school libraries
in South-East Asian countries. Bangkok: UNESCO Bangkok. (IFAP Project 461RAS5027).
Siqueira, I. (2015). A school library guideline for disadvantaged school children in Brazil.
Retrieved from: http://library.ifla.org/1114/1/101-siqueira-en.pdf
Siwakoti, S. (2009). Status of school library development in Nepal. Sri Lanka Journal of
Librarianship & Information Management, 1(1), 13-19. doi: http://dx.doi.org/
10.4038/sllim.v1i1.427
337
Smith, E. G. (2001). Texas school libraries: Standards, resources, services, and students’
performance. Retrieved from: http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED455850
Suankularb Wittayalai School. (2006). Policies, vision and mission of Suankularb Wittayalai
School library. Retrieved from: http://library.sk.ac.th/index.php?option=com
_content&task=view&id=13&Itemid=41
Sugiharto, S. (2014, December 8). TK Park: Thailand’s living library. The Jakarta Post. Retrieved
from: http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2014/12/08/tk-park-thailand-s-living-
library.html
Sungchai, K. (1989). The operation of private school libraries in formal and vocation education
(in Thai). Bangkok: Kurusapa.
Sungsri, S. (2009). Lifelong learning in Thailand: Policy and implementation. Paper presented
at ASEM Education and Research Hub for Lifelong Learning Research Network 4
“National strategies of Lifelong Learning with regard to citizens’ motivation and
barriers against continuing education and training”, The University of Latvia, Riga,2009.
Suwantha, D. & Pisarnpong, K. (2014). Model of academic services providing network

developing for school libraries in Chanthaburi province. Journal of Social Sciences and
Humanities, Burapha University, 22(39), 241-261.
Suwanthanongchai, O., Jenkwao, S., & Sithitool, T. (2015). State and problems of the school
library management under the Jirisdiction of Pathumthani primary education service
area office 2. Paper resented at the 6th Hatyai National Conference, Hatyai University,
2015, June 26.
Swann, A. (2013). The importance of collaboration between the school library professional
and teaching staff: A selective literature review. Jean Arnot Memorial Fellowship 2013
Entry. Retrieved from: http://www.sl.nsw.gov.au/about/awards/docs/ASWANN_
Arnot_2013_commended.pdf
Symaco, L. P. (2013). Education in South-East Asia. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Tallman, J., & Van Deusen, D. J. (1994). Collaborative unit planning- schedule, time, and
participants. Part three: The 1993-1994 AASL / Highsmith Research Award Study. School
Library Media Quarterly. 23(1), 33-37.
Taylor & Francis Group. (2014). Use of social media by the library current practices and future
opportunities. Retrieved from: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/access/white-paper-
social-media.pdf
338
Taylor-Powell, E. (1998). Questionnaire design: Asking questions with a purpose. Retrieved

from http://learningstore.uwex.edu/assets/pdfs/g3658-2.pdf
Teachers Council of Thailand. (2012). Exam and courses required for TCT teaching licence.
Retrieved from: http://site.ksp.or.th/about.php?site=testingeva&SiteMenuID=31
Texas State Library and Archives Commissioners. (2005). School library programs: Standards
and guidelines for Texas. Retrieved from: https://www.tsl.texas.gov/ld/schoollibs/
index.html
Thai Library Association. (2017). Training/ Seminars/ Conferences. Retrieved from: http://i-
regist.igenco.co.th/tla0/training.php
Thailand Development Research Institute. (2015). Educational challenges beyond Pisa.

Retrieved from: http://tdri.or.th/tdri-insight/educational-challenges-beyond-pisa/
Thailand Knowledge Park. (2011). Thailand conference on reading 2011. Bangkok: TK Park.
Thailand Knowledge Park. (2009). The study of Thailand’s reading promotion policy:
Comparative study between Thailand’s policy and Foreign countries policies (in Thai).
Bangkok: TK Park.
Thaipost (March 12th, 2009). Serious issues of lacking library professionals (in Thai). Thaipost.
Thanakulkit, T. (2005). The administration of libraries of demonstration secondary schools in
the public universities. (Master’s Thesis). Khon Kean University. Retrieved from:
http://doi.nrct.go.th/ListDoi/listDetail?Resolve_DOI=10.14457/KKU.the.2005.16
Thayer-Hart, N., Dykema, J. Elver, K., Schaeffer, N. C. & Stevenson, J. (2010). Survey
fundamentals: A guide to designing and implementing surveys. Retrieved from
http://oqi.wisc.edu/resourcelibrary/uploads/resources/Survey_Guide.pdf
Thepkraiwan, P. (2011). The development of collaborative network model for educational

quality management in small sized primary schools. Journal of Education
Administration Khon Kean University, 7(2). Retrieved from: https://www.tci-
thaijo.org/index.php/EDMKKU/index
Tilke, A. (2002). Managing school library and information service: a practical handbook.
London: Facet Publishing.
339
Todd, R. J. (2005a). Information leadership in a culture of change’ in selected papers from the
34th annual conference of the International Association of School Librarians (IASL) &
the 9th International Forum on Research in School Librarianship. Hong Kong, China.
Todd, R. J. (2005b). Report of phase two of Delaware school library survey: Student learning
through Delaware school libraries, part 1 background, theoretical framework,
methodology and findings. Delaware: CISSL.
Todd, R. J. (2004). How effective are effective school libraries?: Students’ perspective from
Ohio. Orana, 40(1), 9-21.
Todd, R. J., Gordon, C. A. & Lu, Y-L. (2011). One common goal: Student learning. Report of
findings and recommendations of the New Jersey school library survey. Phase 2. On
behalf of the New Jersey Association of School Librarians (NJASL) USA. Centre for
International Scholarship in School Libraries. Retrieved from: http://www.njasl.info /wp-
content/NJ_study/2011_Phase2Report.pdf
Todd, R. J., Gordon, C. A. & Lu, Y-L. (2010). One common goal: Student learning. Report of
findings and recommendations of the New Jersey school library survey. Phase 1. On
behalf of the New Jersey Association of School Librarians (NJASL) USA. Centre for
International Scholarship in School Libraries. Retrieved from : http://www.njasl. info/wp-
content/NJ_study/2010_Phase1Report.pdf
Todd, R. J., & Kuhlthau, C. C. (2005). Student learning through Ohio school libraries, part 1:
How effective school libraries help students. School Libraries Worldwide, 11(1), 63-87.
Tortermvasana, K. (2016). ICT pushed drive towards “Thailand 4.0”. Bangkok Post. Retrieved
from: http://www.bangkokpost.com/tech/local-news/990257/ict-pushes-drive-towards-
thailand-4-0
Trebbe, G. (2015). Information literacy as a value: New perspective for developing a

secondary education library program (Order No. 10090203). Available from ProQuest
Dissertations & Theses Global. (1779253270). Retrieved from http://gateway.library.
qut.edu.au/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/docview/17792
53270?accountid=13380
Tryon, G. F. (1978). Role perceptions of the elementary school principal as perceived by

superintendents, board presidents, secondary principals, elementary teachers, and
elementary principals. Retrieved from: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=7424&context=rtd
340
Thulisile, N. G. (2011). Budgeting constraints for school libraries: A study of selected schools in
the Nkangala region, Mpumalanga. (Master’s Thesis). University of Limpopo. Retrieved
from: http://ul.netd.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10386/1022/Nsingwane_gt_
2011.pdf?sequence=3
Tyler J. H. & Lofstrom, M. (2009). Finishing high school: Alternative pathways and dropout
recovery. The Future of Children, 19(1), 77-103.
Uhegbu, A. N. (2001). Deterrents to information service for community development. Library

Review, 50(5), 237-242.
UNESCO. (2015). Asia-Pacific regional education for all report: A synthesis of the national EFA
reports. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002332/ 233236E.pdf
UNESCO. (2015). Report by the IBE Council on the activities of the International Bureau of
Education (IBE) (2014-2015). Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from: http://unesdoc.
unesco.org/images/0023/002336/233698e.pdf
UNESCO. (2014). Teaching and learning: Achieving quality for all. Retrieved from:
http://www.uis.unesco.org/Library/Documents/gmr-2013-14-teaching-and-learning-
education-for-all-2014-en.pdf
UNESCO. (2012). Global education digest 2012: Opportunities lost: The impact of grade
repetition and early school leaving. Canada: UNESCO Institute for Statistics.
UNESCO. (2011). UNESCO national education support strategy (UNESS) Thailand. Retrieved
from: http://doc.iiep.unesco.org/cgi-bin/wwwi32.exe/%5Bin=epidoc1.in%5D/
?t2000=032294/(100)
UNESCO-IBE. (2006/07). World data on education. Retrieved from http://www.ibe.unesco. org/

Countries/WDE/2006/ASIA_and_the_PACIFIC/Thailand/Thailand.pdfThe
UNESCO/IFLA. (2002). UNESCO/IFLA school library manifesto. Retrieved from http://www.

unesco.org/webworld/libraries/manifestos/school_manifesto.html
UNESCO Institute for Statistics. (2015). Education: Gross enrolment ratio by level of education.
Retrieved from: http://data.uis.unesco.org/?queryid=142#
UNESCO-UIS. (2015). UIS data centre website. Retrieved from: www.uis.unesco.org/Edu

cation/Pages/default.aspx
341
United Nations Development Programme. (2014). Advance human development through the
ASEAN community: Thailand human development report 2014. Retrieved from:
http://www.th.undp.org/content/dam/thailand/docs/publications/nhdr14_en.pdf
University of Pittsburgh. (2017). School of Information Sciences. Retrieved from:

http://www.ischool.pitt.edu/lis/degrees/slcp/
Uparnvit, P. A comparative analysis of effective administration model of small-sized leading

schools in remote areas: A case study of Ban Nongyaplong School under the
jurisdiction of the Office of Burirum Educational Service Area1 and Ban Meajong
School under the jurisdiction of the Office of Chiang Mai Educational Service Area1 (in
Thai). Journal of Educational Administration Burapha University, 3(2), 29-46.
U.S. Department of Education. (2013). The equity and excellence commission for each and
every child: A report to the secretary. Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.
Retrieved from: https://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/eec/equity-excellence-
commission-report.pdf
Utah State Board of Education. (2013). Requirements for school library programs: Summary
by States. Retrieved from: http://www.schools.utah.gov/CURR/library/Resources/
Standards.aspx
Vajarodaya, K. (2007). Twelfth anniversary of the distance learning foundation: free and open
low-cost distance education via satellite and internet, Wang Klaikangwon Model. Paper
presented at the 4th International Conference on eLearning for Knowledge-Based
Society, Muang Thong Thani. Retrieved from: http://www.elearningap.com/
eLAP2007/Proceedings/P03eLearningAP_TwelfthAnniversary.pdf
Van Hamersveld, C. E. (2007). A survey of school administrators’ beliefs regarding the

potential of school library programs to impact student achievement. (Doctoral
dissertation) Capella University, Minneapolis, the United States.
Vasuwattanased, S & Kamnuansilpa, P. (2012). An evaluation of achievement of schools

transferred to be under the management responsibility of Chiangmai provincial
administration organisation (in Thai). Paper presented in Graduate Research
Conference, Khon Kaen University, 2012. Retrieved from: https://gsbooks.gs.kku.
ac.th/55/cdgrc13/files/ hmp18.pdf
Veltze, L. (1992). School library media program information in the principalship preparation
program. School Library Media Annual. 10, 129-134.
342
Venkatraman, V. (2011). Hippocampus writes a new chapter for children’s libraries. Retrieved
from: http://vijeejournalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/ hippocampus.pdf
Verger, A., Altinyelken, H. K., & Novelli, M. (2012). Global education policy and international
development: New agendas, issues and policies. US: Bloomsbury UK.
Walker, C. (2005). Are you the gatekeeper or the keymaster?: The role of the library media
specialist in reading. Knowledge Quest, 33(5), 46-47. Retrieved from
http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com.login.ezp
roxy.library.ualberta.ca/pqdweb?did=879540371&sid=4&Fmt=3&clientId=12301
&RQT=309&VName=PQD
The Wallace Foundation. (2011). The school principal as leader: Guiding schools to better
teaching and learning. Retrieved from http://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-
centre/school-leadership/effective-principal-leadership/Documents/The-School-Principal-
as-Leader-Guiding-Schools-to-Better-Teaching-and-Learning.pdf
Wannagatesiri, T., Nukultham, K., Kruea-In, N., & Thongperm, A. (2014). Lesson learned from
the experiences of small schools in Thailand. Procedia- social and Behavioural Science,
141, 1095-1100. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.05.184
Warning, P. & Henri, J. (2012). The school librarian in rural China: A stranger among her
people. In A.Tella, & A.O. Issa (Eds.), Library and Information Science in Developing
Countries: Contemporary Issues (pp. 108-124). US.: Information Science Reference.
Welsh Information Literacy Project. (2004). Information literacy: Benefits for schools.
Retrieved from: https://libraries.wales/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Information
_literacy_-_benefits_for_schools.pdf
Werner, O. and Campbell, D. (1970). Translating, working through interpreters and the
problem of decentreing. In: R. Naroll and R. Cohen (eds.), Handbook of Cultural
Anthropology. New York: American Museum of National History.
Williams, D., Coles, L. & Wavell, C. (2002). Impact of school library services on achievement
and learning in primary schools: Critical literature review of the impact of school library
provision on achievement and learning in primary level student. London: The Council
for Museums, Archives and Libraries and Department for Education & Skills. Retrieved
from https://www4.rgu.ac.uk/files/ACF1C8D.pdf
343
Williams, D. and Wavell, C. (2001) The Impact of the School Library Resource Centre on
Learning. Aberdeen: The Robert Gordon University for Resource, The Council for
Museums, Archives and Libraries.
Williamson, K. & Johanson, G. (2013). Research methods: Information, systems and contexts.
Prahran, Vic: Tilde University Press.
Willson, E.J. (1965). Evaluating urban centralized elementary school libraries. Doctoral
dissertation, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan. (University Microfilms No. 66-
10123)
Wimberley, C. E. (2011). Teacher Collaboration and Student Achievement. Retrieved from:

http://search.proquest.com/docview/916917552
Winitjakul, W. (2011). Living library: Thailand Knowledge park. Paper presented at TK forum
2011, Thailand Knowledge park, Bangkok. Retrieved from: https://www.tkpark.or.th/
stocks/extra/000575.pdf
Wilson, P., & MacNeil, A. J. (1999). What do principals really learn about school library media
centres in university principal preparation programs? A national study and plan for
reform. National Forum of Teacher Education Journal. 9(2), 18-23.
Wondsirinawarat, M, Paleehajinda, T, Butterflybook publishing, & National Research Council

of Thailand. (2010). The study of book sharing system in small primary schools. (in Thai)
Bangkok: National Research Council of Thailand.
Wonglekha, F. (2015). Open education resources project (in Thai). Dailynews. Retrieved from:
http://www.moe.go.th/moe/th/news/detail.php?NewsID=40282&Key= news_research
The World Bank. (2013). Achieving learning for all. Washington D.C.: The World Bank.
Wright, J. (2015). Congress passes strong support for U.S. school libraries in Elementary and
Secondary Education Act. Retrieved from: http://www.ala.org/news/press-
releases/2015/07/congress-passes-strong-support-us-school-libraries-elementary-and-
secondary
Yamkasikorn, M. (2010). What s Thai teacher TV?. Retrieved from: http://www.thaiteachers tv.
net/2010/04/blog-post.html
344
Yonemura, A. (Ed). (2005). Interim report 2005: Universalization of primary education in the
historical and developmental perspective. Chiba, Japan: Institute of Developing
Economies Japan External Trade Organization.
Zohrabi, M. (2013). Mixed method research: Instrument, validity, reliability and reporting
findings. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(2), 254-262. doi:
10.4304/tpls.3.2.254-262
345
346
Appendix A: Infographic: School libraries and their role in rural Thailand: Perceptions of public
primary school principals

347
348
349
Appendix B: Informed consent
PARTICIPANT INFORMATION FOR QUT RESEARCH PROJECT
School Library and its Role in Rural Thailand:

A Survey of Perception of Public Primary School Principals
QUT Ethics Approval Number 1500001154
RESEARCH TEAM
Principal Researcher: Nilobon Wimolsittichai PhD student
Associate Researchers: Dr Taizan Chan Principle Supervisor
Professor Christine Bruce Associate Supervisor
Professor Chutima Sacchanand External Supervisor
Science and Engineering Faculty, Queensland University of Technology (QUT)
DESCRIPTION
This project is being undertaken as part of a PhD study for Nilobon Wimolsittichai.
The purpose of this project is to provide a snapshot of the current characteristics of rural school libraries and
perceptions of the school principals of the impacts of school library on students’ academic achievement in rural
areas. The result will illustrate the much-needed basis for identifying the components of an effective library for
a small public primary school in rural areas which all of these outcomes will provide an important insight into
the current state of the libraries in small public primary schools which is currently unknown, and serve to
contribute to the foundation of for building an effective school library for students’ academic achievement in
rural Thailand.
You are invited to participate in this project because you are school principals of public primary school in rural
Thailand.
PARTICIPATION
Participation will involve completing an anonymous survey with checklist questions, semantic differential scale
questions (weak – strong perception) and open-ended questions that will take approximately 30 minutes of your
time. Three main questions include: What are the characteristics of school libraries of small public primary
schools in rural Thailand?, How do school principals perceive the impact of the school library on students’
academic achievement?, and What are the challenges and opportunities facing school libraries in Thailand as
Your participation in this project is entirely voluntary. If you agree to participate you do not have to complete
any question(s) you are uncomfortable answering. Your decision to participate or not participate will in no way
impact upon your current or future relationship with QUT. However as the survey is anonymous once it has been
submitted it will not be possible to withdraw.
350
EXPECTED BENEFITS
It is expected that this project will not directly benefit you. However, it may benefit school library in terms of
providing knowledge related to the much-needed basis for identifying the components of an effective school
library for a rural small public primary school library. The knowledge will help the Thai government and school
library stakeholders to increase their attention and priority to the quality of the school libraries of small public
primary schools in rural Thailand. It will also help international cross-cultural understandings about school
libraries of small public primary school in rural Thailand more widely, especially for developing countries. The
foundation of the knowledge will support the Thai government, school libraries communities and stakeholders
in both Thailand and international to cope with school library issues linking to education success in Thailand.
Moreover, the knowledge can be a foundation for further research in library and information field.
RISKS
There are no risks beyond normal day-to-day living associated with your participation in this project.
PRIVACY AND CONFIDENTIALITY

All comments and responses are anonymous and will be treated confidentially unless required by law. The
names of individual persons are not required in any of the responses.
Any data collected as part of this project will be stored securely as per QUT’s Management of research data
policy. Non-identifiable data collected in this project may be used as comparative data in future projects or stored
on an open access database for secondary analysis.
CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE
The return of the completed survey is accepted as an indication of your consent to participate in this project.
Submitting the completed online survey is accepted as an indication of your consent to participate in this project.
QUESTIONS / FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROJECT

If you have any questions or require further information please contact one of the researchers listed below.
Nilobon Wimolsittichai nilobon.wimolsittichai@hdr.qut.edu.au +61 3138 9507

Taizan Chan t.chan@qut.edu.au
Christine Bruce c.bruce@qut.edu.au
Chutima Sacchanand chutimastou@gmail.com
CONCERNS / COMPLAINTS REGARDING THE CONDUCT OF THE PROJECT

QUT is committed to research integrity and the ethical conduct of research projects. However, if you do have
any concerns or complaints about the ethical conduct of the project you may contact the QUT Research Ethics
Advisory Team on +61 7 3138 5123 or email ethicscontact@qut.edu.au. The QUT Research Ethics Advisory Team
is not connected with the research project and can facilitate a resolution to your concern in an impartial manner.
Thank you for helping with this research project. Please keep this sheet for your information.
351
Appendix C: The Survey Regarding the public primary school library, and its role and the
impact of the library on students’ academic achievement in rural Thailand

352
353
354
355
356
357
Appendix D: The Survey Regarding the public primary school library, and its role and the
impact of the library on students’ academic achievement in rural Thailand (in Thai)
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
Appendix E: Pre-testing and pilot study
Pre-testing
In order to establish an effective questionnaire, pre-testing and a pilot study were
conducted. The questionnaire was developed in 2 versions: English and Thai. The
questionnaire in English was developed first, then checked and revised by supervisors. It was
then translated into Thai, reviewed by an external supervisor and by Thai scholars who are
expert in research methodology and school libraries. The Thai questionnaire was then tested
by Thai lecturers in Library and Information schools.
After pre-testing, the suggestions and advice from supervisors and Thai scholars were used
to check for the content validity of the research, such as unclear, ambiguous and erroneous
questions. For example, the questions which asked the participants to rate the quality and
currency of library collections were deleted because the answers would derive from
personal opinion. Therefore, the questions were changed to ask about the availability of
library collections. The questionnaires, both English and Thai, were revised, then again
reviewed by all supervisors before the pilot study was conducted.
Pilot study
The questionnaires were revised and the ethical clearance was approved on 27 January
2016; the researcher developed an online survey through KeySurvey. The target population
of the pilot study is 40 principals in rural schools in Thailand. The online survey was launched
on 14 March 2016, and took place from 14 to 31 March 2016. The online surveys were sent
via e-mail and the participants were given the option to return their feedback through the
online survey or via e-mail.
The majority of comments were positive (n=28), such as appropriate questions, good and
informative questions and answers. Some comments from the pilot study reflected errors in
the questionnaire, including wording issues and design issues such as length, sequence and
layout of questionnaires. The comments are
366
1) The questionnaire is too long to complete (Principal school 10).
2) The second part of the questionnaire asking principals to tick checkboxes

relating the condition of libraries confused the principals because it has too
many options (Principal school 17 & 25)
3) Some statements in the last part of the questionnaires need to be clearer

(Principal school 7 & 11)
4) All schools do not have a librarian position therefore all participants could not
provide correct answers (Principal school 33)
This pilot study had no issue related to participant availability and access. There were no
problems or errors in using the KeySurvey system. The results of the pilot study were
analysed automatically by the KeySurvey system. The results are descriptive data presented
in terms of frequency and percentage tables with simple graphics. However, the cluster
analysis and multiple regression analysis were not tested in the pilot study because sample
size is not large enough to evaluate the reliability of the data, and because the aim of
conducting the pilot study was not to test the hypotheses. The third part of the
questionnaire contained rating scale questions that measured the reliability of the
instrument by using Cronbach’s Alpha technique in SPSS. The results showed that the
reliability of the questions was 0.961, which indicates the excellent level of internal
consistency of the scales with the pilot study sample (Laerd statistics, 2013). The results of
the Cronbach’s Alpha are given in Figures 89-91.
Figure 89 shows the case processing summary. Thirty-three of forty cases are valid, with 7
cases excluded. The alpha coefficient for the 29 items (statements) is 0.961, which suggests
that the items have relatively excellent internal consistency and the instrument is
considered acceptable.
367
Figure 89: Output for Cronbach’s Alpha
Figure 90 presents the item statistics including mean, standard deviation and number of
cases.
Figure 90: Item-statistics
Figure 91 presents the item-total statistics including scale mean and scale variance if the
item was deleted, and corrected item-total correlation and Cronbach’s Alpha if items were
deleted. Noticeably, the last column shows that if the researcher deleted every single item,
the Cronbach’s Alpha results of all items were almost the same (0.960-0.961). This means that
even though some items were deleted, the level of internal consistency of the scales
remains excellent and can be considered acceptable.
368
Figure 91: Item-total statistics
Pilot study results
Principals’ characteristics
The target population for the survey was principals who work in public primary schools in
rural Thailand. Figures 92 to 96 present the principals’ characteristics of the full survey
sample (n=40). The information relates to principals’ gender, age groups, highest academic
qualification, academic field, years of experience as a school principal and years of

experience as a school principal at the present location.
Figure 92 shows the gender of the full survey sample. The majority of the principals 21
(52.5%) were male, whereas 19 (47.5%) were female.

369
Figure 92: Gender of principals in pilot study (n=40)
Figure 93 presents the age distribution of survey participants, showing that a majority of
principals (14, 35.0%) were aged 51-55, followed by those aged between 41 and 45 years (13,
32.5%). The lowest percentage (5.0%) occurs in the age range of 31-35 years old.
Figure 93: Age of respondents in pilot study (n=40)
Figure 94 presents the profile of principals regarding their highest educational qualification
and academic field. The majority of the principals (32, 80.1%) had achieved a master degree
and 4 (10.0%) held a bachelor degree, and 4 (10.0%) had achieved doctoral degree.
Figure 94: Highest academic qualification of principals in pilot study (n=40)

370
Table 78 shows the academic fields of principals. The distribution of the principals by
completed number and percentage of their academic field revealed that 31 (77.5%) principals
graduated with a master degree in Education Science and Teaching Training, followed by
doctoral degree (4, 10.0%) and bachelor degree of Education Science and Teacher Training (4,
10.0%), with only 1 (2.5%) in Chemistry.
Table 78: Highest academic qualification of principals in pilot study (n=40)

N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%)
instruction, Early childhood education, , Physical education, Educational
Leadership in education administration, Environmental education
Total 5 31 4 40
(12.5) (77.5) (10.0) (100.0)
Figure 95 indicates the distribution of the participants by total number of years and
percentage of their years of experience as a school principal. The most common experience
as a school principal was 1-5 years (approximately 13, 32.5%), followed by 6-10 years (12,
30.0%) and 16-20 years (6, 15.0%). Only 4 had experience of 21 years or more.
Figure 95: Years of experience as a school principal in pilot study (n=40)

371
The years of working experience as a school principal at their present location appear in
Figure 96. The most common length of working experience as a school principal at their
present location was 1-5 years, for 29 (72.5%), followed by 6-10 years, for 5 (12.5%), and 11-15
and above 21 years, both for 3 (7.5%).
Figure 96: Years of experience as a school principal in pilot study (n=40)
Schools’ characteristics
Questions in Part 1 Section 2 of the questionnaire asked the principals to provide some basic
information related to their schools including region, province and Educational Service Area,
electricity supply, water supply, and number of students.
Data related to the basic information of the entire school are presented in Tables 78-80 and
Figures 97-99. Table 79 presents the basic information of respondents’ schools including
region, province and Educational Service Area of the respondents’ schools. Because the
target populations of this research are spread across 6 regions of Thailand, the number of
schools in each region differs depending on population.
Table 79: Regions and provinces of participants’ schools in pilot study (n=40)
Region Province Educational N %
Services Area
North Phayao 2 2 5.0
Central Kamphaeng Phet, Nakhon Sawan, Sukhothai, 1-3 8 20.0

Saraburi
Northeast Kalasin, Khon Kean, Chaiyaphum, Surin 1-4 20 50.0
East Chanthaburi, Chon Buri 2-3 3 7.5

372
Region Province Educational N %

Services Area
West Kanchanaburi 1 1 2.5
South Trang, Songkhla, Satun 1-2 6 15.0
Total - 40 100.0
Table 80 shows the distance in kilometres of respondents’ schools to city by region. The
average distance from school to city among regions was between 14 and 30 kilometres
(comparing the distance between regions). The furthest school distance to city was 55
kilometres, in Satun, the southern province of Thailand. The nearest school distance to city
was 1 kilometre, in one school located in Saraburi, the Central region and in another school
in Chon Buri, the East region.
Table 80: Distance from school to city in pilot study (n=40)
Region 1-20 21-40 Minimum Maximum Average

(N) (N) (km)/(N) (km)/(N) (km)
North 2 - 2/1 8/1 5
Central 7 1 1/1 28/1 11
Northeast 18 2 3/2 25/1 13
East 1 2 1/1 30/1 19
West - 1 30/1 30/1 30
South 4 2 7/2 55/1 18
Whole sample 32 8 1/2 55/1 14
Figure 97 shows that a great majority of the schools can be accessed by paved road (40,
100%), and 5 schools (12.5%) can be accessed by unpaved road. There were 2 schools (5.0%)
where access is by path or by sea, lake or river.

373
Figure 97: Transport access types available to the schools in pilot study (n=40)
Figure 98 presents the availability of electric supply for the schools. As can be seen, 100% of
those schools had access to electricity.
Figure 98: Availability of electricity supply in pilot study (n=40)
Figure 99 presents the availability of water supply for the schools. As can be seen, 87.5% of
those schools had water supply, while 5 (12.5%) of them were without water supply.
Figure 99: Availability of water supply in pilot study (n=40)
Table 81 presents the number of students in schools. The information includes the range,
minimum, maximum and average number, which was divided into 7 groups, including the
numbers of student across all regions and the 6 regions. Based on the data across all regions,
the minimum number of students was 26, found in a school located in the North region.
374
Meanwhile, the maximum number of students was found in a school located in the South
region (481).
The average number of students across all regions was about 97. The data divided by region
shows that the majority of schools of every region (13) had above 100 students, followed by
81-100 (8), and 41-60 (7). The average numbers of students among 5 regions were ranged
widely. The East region had an average of about 161 students, followed by the West (149),
and South (139). The North region had an average of only 53 students.
Table 81: Numbers of students of schools in pilot study (n=40)
(N) (N) (N) (N)
North 0 1 0 1 0 0 26 79 53
Central 0 1 0 0 2 5 37 149 104
Northeast 1 1 6 4 5 3 17 147 73
East 0 0 0 0 1 2 96 198 161
West 0 0 0 0 0 1 149 149 149
South 1 0 1 1 1 2 33 481 139
Whole sample 2 3 7 6 8 13 26 481 97
School libraries’ characteristics in pilot study
Questions in Part 1 Section3 of the questionnaire asked the principals to provide some basic
information related to their school libraries, including the library availability, library
limitations and opportunities, library administration, physical facilities, collections, services,
activities and staff.
Figure 100 presents information on existing school libraries. Thirty-seven schools had
libraries. Three schools had no libraries: one school in the Central region and two schools in
the Northeast region.

375
Figure 100: Information on the existing school libraries (n=40)
Figure 101 provides the reasons for not having a school library. Principals were allowed to
provide more than one answer. Three principals revealed that the main reason for not
having a library was inadequate budget. Another principal indicated that establishing a
library is not the main priority of that school at this moment.
Figure 101: Reasons for not having a school library (n=3)
Figure 102 shows that a majority of the respondents who had no library in their schools had
a plan to set up a library.
376
Figure 102: The plan to set up a school library in the near future (n=3)
Current conditions of libraries of small public primary school in rural Thailand in pilot study
The first open-ended questions of the questionnaire asked the participants to describe the
current conditions of the libraries in small public primary school in rural Thailand. This
question allowed respondents to provide more than one view. The answers were grouped
into 6 themes: administration, physical’s facilities, collection, activities, services and staff.
Table 82 shows that the most common principals’ views were that the libraries’ conditions
were poor in collections (38), physical facilities (28) and administration (5). For the library
administration, a majority of principal’s views were that Thai rural libraries were poor
because of insufficient budget (2), library system (2) and management (1).
For the library’s physical facilities, a majority of principals viewed that those libraries were
poor, particularly in building/room/space utilisation (11), information and communication
technology (8) and indoor environment (6). Only one principal acknowledged that the
library’s physical facilities were in good condition; another principal noted that the condition
of the library was fair.
About the library collections, principals gave their opinions that their libraries lacked books
(27), digital media (10), and serials (1). There was only one principal who viewed the
collection as fair. Meanwhile, 7 principals nominated inadequate staff.

377
Table 82: Current conditions of libraries
Current conditions Good (N) Fair (N) Poor (N)
Administration - - 5
(15) Library administration 1
- -
(16) Budget 2
- -
(17) Library system 2
- -
Physical’s facilities 1 1 28
- Indoor environment - 1 6
- Building/room/space utilisation 1 - 11
- Furniture and equipment - - 3
- ICT - - 8
Collections - 1 38
- Book - 1 27
- Serials - 1
-
- Digital media - 10
-
Staff - - 7
#Multiple responses
Causes contributing to the current condition of libraries of small public primary schools in
rural Thailand in pilot study
Open-ended question number 2 asked the principals to provide the causes that contributed
to the current condition of those libraries of small public primary schools in rural Thailand
that the principals had included in the opening Section Question 1. Table 83 shows that 32
respondents revealed that a small budget allocation was a major cause contributing to the
current conditions of the school libraries. A minority cause was inadequate staff (13). Some
respondents selected causes involving libraries having insufficient physical facilities (10),
lacking support from principals (5) and lacking ICT (4).

378
Table 83: Causes contributing to the current condition of libraries of small public primary
schools in rural Thailand in pilot study (n=40)
Causes contributed to the current conditions of libraries in pilot study

Insufficient (N)
Administration 41
- A small number of budget allocation 32
- Focusing on curriculum-centred classrooms 1
- Lacking local affiliations’ supports and library awareness 3
- Lacking principal’s support and library awareness 5
Physical’s facilities 10
- Poor condition of indoor environment 1
- Lacking building/room/space utilisation 5
- Lacking ICT 4
Staff 13
- Lacking full-time staff, teacher-librarian, librarian 13
Stakeholders’ supports 2
- Lacking local communities’ supports 1
- Lacking public and private organizations’ supports 1
#Multiple responses
Role of libraries of small public primary schools in students’ academic achievement, as
perceived by principals in pilot study
The principals’ opinions regarding the role of libraries of small public primary schools in
students’ academic achievement came from all 40 respondents. Table 84 shows that a
majority of principals acknowledged that the role of the library in small public primary
schools was to enhance students’ academic achievement (17), followed by raising reading
literacy (10) and developing students’ information literacy and increasing learning skills (7). All
answers claimed that the school library’s role had positive impacts, including enhancement,
on students’ academic achievement (41). Noticeably, no principal reflected that the school
library had no or low impact on students’ academic achievement

379
relation to students’ academic achievement in pilot study (n=40)
Principals’ perceptions of the role of small public primary school libraries in relation to N
Schools libraries have impact on students’ academic achievement in terms of: 41
- Increasing students’ academic achievement 17
- Developing information literacy 7
- Developing reading literacy 10
- Increasing learning skills 7
#Multiple responses
Principals’ perceived requirements for improving the condition of libraries of small public
primary schools in rural Thailand in pilot study
The last open-ended question in survey part 1 asked the principals to provide their
perceived requirements for improving the condition of the libraries of small public primary
schools in rural Thailand. Table 85 shows that 38 principals regarded effective administration
as the greatest requirement. Effective administration involved government policy,
government supports, budget allocation, and curriculum. Another perceived requirement to
improve the condition of the libraries was having sufficient staff (18), which included full-
time staff, teacher-librarians and teacher awareness about the roles of the library. Another 8
principals identified having sufficient library physical facilities and collections as

requirements for improving the condition of those libraries.
Table 85: Principals’ perceived requirements for improving the condition of libraries of
small public primary schools in rural Thailand (n=40)
Principals’ perceived requirements for improving the condition of N
libraries of small public primary schools in rural Thailand in pilot study

Effective administration 38
- Adequate library budget 19
- Government supports and awareness 2
- Principal’s awareness 12
- Local affiliation supports 3
- Clearly policy from the government 2

380
Principals’ perceived requirements for improving the condition of N
libraries of small public primary schools in rural Thailand in pilot study

- Integrated curriculum with library 1
Sufficient staff 18
- Full-time staff 5
- Teacher awareness 8
- Teacher-librarians 5
Sufficient libraries’ physical facilities 8
- ICT 1
- Internet 1
Sufficient collections 8
- Book 6
- Digital media 2
Local communities’ supports 4
Public and private organisations’ supports 2
Sufficient activities 2
Parents’ supports 1
#Multiple responses
Library’s physical facilities
Figure 103 presents the names given to the school libraries: all 37 schools called their
libraries a school library.
Figure 103: Library name in pilot study (n=37)

381
Figure 104 shows that 23 schools had separate rooms for libraries. Seven schools had
classroom libraries. Four school libraries were combined with other rooms such as school
infirmary, computer laboratory, principal’s room and teacher’s room. Three other principals
described their libraries as being combined with other places in the schools such as common
room, cafeteria, hall, and pavilion where the books were kept and which learners used as a
reading corner.
Figure 104: Library room condition in pilot study (n=37)
Figure 105 shows the availability of library facilities. A majority of schools had furniture and
equipment to facilitate library services (23). In contrast, 14 schools had no such furniture or
equipment.
382
Figure 105: Library facilities in pilot study (n=37)
Figure 106 provides information about library size. A majority of principals (33) noted that their
libraries occupied 48 m2, or 1 classroom. A minority of school libraries (3) occupied 2 classrooms.
Two schools had a library size smaller than 1 classroom. Only one school library was larger than
2 classrooms.
Figure 106: Library size in pilot study (n=37)
Table 86 illustrates the number of library seats, divided into 6 regions and across all regions.
Based on the data for the entire country, the greatest number of seats was 50, in the
Northeast region. Meanwhile, the smallest number of seats was 1, found in a school in the
Northeast region. The average number of seats across all regions was about 18. As shown in
Table 86, the North region had the highest average number of seats (30), while the lowest
average number (10) was found in the West region.

383
Table 86: Numbers of seats in pilot study (n=37)
Region Minimum seat Maximum seat Average

(N) (N) (N)
North 30 30 30
Central 8 30 20
Northeast 1 50 17
East 20 20 20
West 10 10 10
South 10 40 24
Whole sample 1 50 18
Table 87 illustrates the number of library computers, divided into 6 regions and across all
regions. Based on the data across all regions, the greatest number of computers, 10, were in
the Northeast region. Meanwhile, the smallest number of computers was 0, found in 21
schools in every region. The average number of library computers across all regions was
about 1. As shown in table 87, the Central, Northeast and South regions had the highest
average number of computers (2), while the lowest average number (0) was found in the
West region.
Table 87: Numbers of library computers in pilot study (n=37)

computer computer (N)
(N) (N)
North 0 2 1
Central 0 4 2
Northeast 0 10 2
East 0 1 1
West 0 0 0
South 0 5 2
Whole sample 0 10 1
Figure 107 shows the wi-fi connections available in the library. A majority of schools had wi-fi
connections available in the library (28), while 9 schools had no wi-fi connections available in
the library.
384
Figure 107: Wi-fi connections available in library in pilot study (n=37)
Library collections
Figure 108 presents the types of books and materials available in those libraries, including
reference books, curriculum books, fiction books/cartoon books, audio visuals, newspaper,
journals, online databases, digital media, and others. A majority of libraries had reference
books (32), fiction books/cartoon books (29) and curriculum books (22).
Figure 108: Types of books available in library in pilot study (n=37)
Table 88 illustrates the number of books, divided into 6 regions and across all regions. For
the number of books across all regions, the greatest number of books was 3,500, in the
385
South region. The smallest number of books was 82, found in a school in the Northeast
region. The average number of books across all regions was about 690. As shown in Table 88,
the Central region had the highest average number of books (1,180), while the lowest
average number (452) was found in the East region.
Table 88: Numbers of books in pilot study (n=37)

(N) (N) (N)
North 100 1,992 1,046
Central 400 3,000 1,180
Northeast 82 1,000 471
East 400 500 452
West 500 500 500
South 100 3,500 900
Whole sample 82 3,500 690
The principals were asked to identify the number of journals and magazines in their school
libraries. The number of journals and magazines, counted by journal/magazine title, included
those the libraries subscribed to or received through donations. Table 89 presents the
number of journals/magazines in the libraries, divided into 6 regions and across all regions.
The findings show that the greatest number of journals/magazines was 20, found in 3
schools in the Northeast region. The smallest number of journals/magazines in all regions
was 0, found in 23 schools spread over all regions except the West region. The average
numbers of journals/magazines for the entire regions was 11, while the average number
across all regions was between 0 and 13.
Table 89: Numbers of journals/magazines in pilot study (n=37)

(N) (N) (N)
North 0 0 0
Central 0 2 1
Northeast 0 20 13
East 0 4 1
386

(N) (N) (N)
West 10 10 10
South 0 10 3
Table 90 presents the number of newspapers in the libraries, divided into 6 regions and
across all regions. The findings show that the greatest number of newspapers was 4, found
in schools in the Northeast, West and South regions. The smallest number of the
newspapers of all regions was 0, found in 19 schools spread over all regions except the West
region. The average number of newspapers for the entire regions was 1, while the average
number across all 6 regions was between 1 and 2.
Table 90: Numbers of newspapers in pilot study (n=37)

(N) (N) (N)
North 0 1 1
Central 0 3 1
Northeast 0 4 1
East 0 2 1
West 4 4 1
South 0 4 2
Whole sample 0 4 1
Table 91 presents the number of audio visual materials in the libraries, divided into 6
regions and the entire country. The findings show that the greatest number of audio visual
materials was 200, found in schools in the North region. The smallest number of audio visual
materials for all regions was 0, found in 19 schools spread over the entire regions except the
West region. The average number of audio visual materials across all regions was 6.
387
Table 91: Numbers of audio visual materials in pilot study (n=37)

(N) (N) (N)
North 0 200 100
Central 0 2 1
Northeast 0 10 1
East 0 2 1
West 4 2 1
South 0 1 0
Table 92 presents the number of digital media items in the libraries, divided into 6 regions
and across all regions. The findings show that the greatest number of digital media was 100,
found in schools in the Northeast region. The smallest number of digital media of all regions
was 0, found in 26 schools spread over the entire regions except the West region. The
average number of digital media of the entire regions was 5.
Table 92: Numbers of digital media in pilot study (n=37)

(N) (N) (N)
North 0 0 0
Central 0 2 0
Northeast 0 100 8
East 0 15 6
West 10 10 10
South 0 5 1
Figure 109 shows the quality of library collections in the 37 pilot study schools. A majority of
schools indicated that their library collection was fair (18). Seven principals answered that
their library collection was good. Another 7 principals indicated that their library collection
was poor. Five principals indicated the condition of their library collections as very poor.
388
Figure 109: Qualities of library collections in pilot study (n=37)
Figure 110 shows the currency of library collections in the 37 pilot study schools. A majority
of schools indicated that the currency of their library collections was outdated (20). Eight
principals noted that the currency of their library collections was good. Five principals
indicated that their library collection was very outdated. Four principals had no idea about
the condition of their library collections.
Figure 110: Currency of library collections in pilot study (n=37)
Figure 111 presents the library classification systems in the libraries. Twenty-two libraries
(59.47%) had no library classification system, while 15 schools (40.54%) used the Dewey
Decimal Classification system.

389
Figure 111: Library classification system in pilot study (n=37)
Figure 112 presents the use of digital library management systems in the libraries. Thirty-two
libraries (86.49%) had no library management system, while 5 schools (13.51%) had a library
management system. Four of these libraries used the OBEClib program; one library used its
own program, developed by school staff.
Figure 112: Library management system in pilot study (n=37)
Library administration
This section provides information about library administration of 37 schools. The library
administration covered a library policy and plan, a library budget, a criterion of having a
school library budget and having a person who managed the library.
Figure 113 shows the availability of a library policy. Most libraries had a policy (34, 91.89%);
only 3 libraries had no library policy.

390
Figure 113: Library policy in pilot study (n=37)
Figure 114 shows the availability of a library budget. Most libraries had a library budget (28,
75.68%), while 9 libraries did not.
Figure 114: Library budget in pilot study (n=37)
Table 93 illustrates the size of the school library budgets of the entire regions. The findings
show that the largest library budget was 50,000 baht, found in a school in the Central
region. The smallest budget was 0 baht, found in 9 schools spread over the entire regions
except the South region. The average library budget in the entire regions was 6,081 baht.
Table 93: Size of library budget in pilot study (n=37)

budget budget (N)
(N) (N)
North 0 10,000 5,000
Central 0 50,000 9,643
Northeast 0 20,000 3,917
East 3,000 10,000 7,667
West 0 0 0
South 2000 15,000 9,000
Whole sample 0 50,000 6,081

391
Figure 115 presents the sources of school library budgets, including the national budget,
government subsidies, student fees, supplementary donation from government sector,
private sector and local communities, and other places. The majority of schools derived their
library budget from the national budget (25, 89.29%), followed by supplementary donations
from public and private sectors (4, 14.28%) and from local communities (3, 10.71%).
Figure 115: Sources of library budget in pilot study (n=37)
Figure 116 presents the proportion of the school library budget sourced from the national
budget. Twenty-four schools spent less than 5% of the national budget for their libraries.
Another 3 schools spent 7%. One principal spent 10% of the national budget for the library.
Figure 116: Proportion of school library budget deriving from the national budget (n=37)
392
Library staff
Figure 117 presents the qualification of staff working in the library. Over 70% of the
respondents’ schools (27) had one teacher librarian working in their library. There were 6
schools (16.22%) that had contract teachers working in the libraries. Interestingly, 2 schools
in Kamphaeng Phet and Khon Kean provinces (5.41%) had teacher-librarians who had
qualifications in Library and Information sciences.
Figure 117: Library staff in pilot study (n=37)
Figure 118 presents the number of staff working in the library. Over 80% of the respondents’
schools (30) had only 1 staff member working in their library. Four schools (13.4%) had 2 staff
members working in the libraries. Interestingly, one school, located in Kalasin province
(2.7%), had more than 3 staff working in the library.

393
Figure 118: A number of staff working in the library (n=37)
Figure 119 presents the qualifications of staff working in the library. Over 80% of the staff
(30) graduated with a bachelor degree in Education Science and Teaching Training or others
such as Humanities, Religions and Theology and Social Sciences. One school located in Surin
province (2.7%) had staff graduated with a master degree in Library and Information Sciences.
Interestingly, six schools (16.22%) had staff with a bachelor degree in Library and Information
Sciences.
Figure 119: Qualifications of staff working in the library in pilot study (n=37)
Figure 120 presents the collaborations between librarians and principals in curriculum
development. Thirty-five schools (86.49%) had such collaborations, while five schools did not
(13.51%).
394
Figure 120: Collaboration between librarian and principal in curriculum development in

pilot study (n=37)
Figure 121 presents the quality of collaborations between librarians and principals in
curriculum development. A majority of principals (17, 53.13%) indicated that the
collaboration between librarians and principals in curriculum development was fair. Ten
principals answered that the collaboration was good. Two principals indicated that the
collaboration was excellent. The two other principals answered that the collaboration was
poor (6.25%). Noticeably, one principal indicated that the collaboration was very poor (3.13%).
Figure 121: Quality of collaboration between librarian and principal in curriculum
development in pilot study (n=37)
Library services
This section provides information regarding library services, including types of library users,
open days and types of library services.
395
Figure 122 shows types of school library users. One hundred percent of libraries had students
as users; followed by teacher (72.97%) and staff (48.65%). Nine schools allowed nearby
communities around their schools to use their libraries.
Figure 122: School library users in pilot study (n=37)
Figure 123 presents the number of library open days. A great majority of libraries (35, 94.6%)
opened every working day. One library in Khonkean province opened occasionally (2.7%), and
one library in Saraburi province opened 3 days a week (2.7%).
Figure 123: Number of open days for library in pilot study (n=37)
The principals were asked to identify the library services in their schools. All principals were
allowed to give multiple answers. Figure 124 illustrates that 100% of libraries provided
reading services, followed by lending services (67.57%) and reference services (24.32%). Eight
libraries provided computers for information retrieval, online databases and library
396
instructions (21.62%). Noticeably, only three libraries, in Kalasin, Knonkean and Surin
provinces, provided information literacy instruction (8.11%).
Figure 124: Library services in pilot study (n=37)
Figure 125 illustrates that 22 schools did not provide a library instruction program in their
curriculums (59.46%), while 15 schools did (40.54%).
Figure 125: Library instruction program in school curriculum in pilot study (n=37)
Library activities
This section provides information about library activities. Figure 126 presents the library
activities offered in the schools surveyed. A majority of principals specified that their
libraries provided reading promotion (25), followed by a reading club (22), and book fair (11).
Four schools had information literacy instruction activities and author visits (10.81%).
397
Figure 126: Library activities (n=37)
Figure 127 presents the collaborations between teacher librarians and teachers. Thirty-one
schools had such collaborations, while 6 schools did not.
Figure 127: Collaboration between teacher librarians and teachers in pilot study (n=37)
Figure 128 presents the quality of collaboration between librarians and teachers in teaching.
A majority of principals (13, 41.94%) indicated that the collaboration was good or fair. Three
principals noted that the quality of collaboration between librarians and teachers was poor
(9.68%). Two principals, in Payao and Kalasin provinces, indicated that the collaboration was
excellent (6.45%).
398
Figure 128: Collaboration between teacher librarians and teachers in teaching in pilot
study (n=37)
Figure 129 presents the principals’ opinion whether teacher librarians can increase the
ability of teachers in teaching. A majority of principals (16, 51.61%) answered that teacher
librarians had a moderate impact on increasing teachers’ abilities in teaching. Seven
principals indicated that teacher librarians had a strong impact on increasing teachers’
abilities in teaching (22.58%). Three principals, in Payao, Kalasin and Chaiyapoom provinces,
answered that teacher librarians had an extremely strong impact on increasing teachers’
abilities in teaching.
Figure 129: Collaborations between teacher librarians and teachers in increasing the
ability of teachers in teaching in pilot study (n=37)
399
Opportunities and limitations of libraries in pilot study
Part 2 of the survey comprised two checklist questions and two open-ended questions. The
questions asked the principals to suggest the opportunities and limitations of small public
primary school libraries to impact on students’ academic achievement.
Table 94 presents the limitations of the study libraries. A majority of principals indicated that
their libraries had inadequate financial support from the government and lacked library
resources such as books, journals and computers (32, 86.49%), inadequate information
resources such as books, journals and computers (27, 72.97%) and a lack of financial support
from the government (23, 62.16%).
Table 94: Limitations of libraries in pilot study (n=37)

Limitations Lacking Inadequate Poor/ low
N (%) N (%) quality N (%)
Library infrastructure (building, room, space, technology 23 23 18

system) (62.16) (62.16) (48.65)
Proper library facilities (lights, chairs, exhibition display 22 23 19

board, etc.) (59.46) (62.16) (51.35)
Library and information resources (books, journals, 32 27 26

computers, etc.) (86.49) (72.97) (70.27)
4 4
Library policy -
(10.81) (10.81)
27 32
Financial support by government -
(72.97) (86.49)
18 16
Financial support by financial assistance and sponsorship -
(48.65) (43.24)
21 20
Qualified librarian -
(56.76) (54.05)
8
Librarian’s pay scale - -
(21.62)
8
Professional status for librarian / librarian’s opportunities - -
for promotion (21.62)
13
Skills and knowledge of librarian / staff - -
(35.14)
400
Limitations Lacking Inadequate Poor/ low

N (%) N (%) quality N (%)
16
Full-time librarian / teacher-librarian - -
(43.24)
12 12
Library instructional program -
(32.43) (32.43)
9 10 12
Library service provision
(24.32) (27.03) (32.43)
7 7 10
Library visits / flexible time to visit library
(18.92) (18.92) (27.03)
7 8
Collaboration between librarian and teachers -
(18.92) (21.62)
3 4
Collaboration between librarian and principal -
(8.11) (10.81)
9 7
Collaboration between school library and other libraries -
(24.32) (18.92)
Chart 18 shows what the principals perceived to be the worst limitation of the study
libraries impacting on students’ academic achievement. A majority of principals indicated
that the greatest limitations of their libraries were insufficient library collections (13),
followed by insufficient library physical facilities (9) and insufficient school funding (4).
Chart 18: The worst limitations of libraries in pilot study (n=37)

14
12
10
Number of libraries
8
6
4
2
0 Insufficient
Insufficient collaboration
Insufficient
Insufficient library' s Insufficient Insufficient Insufficient between
library
funding physical library activities library services library staff teacher-
collections
facilities librarians and
teachers
Frequency 4 9 13 1 1 3 1
Table 95 presents the strengths or opportunities of the study libraries. A majority of
principals indicated that the strengths or opportunities of their libraries were effective
401
infrastructure (12, 34.29%), followed by sufficient infrastructure (11, 30.56%), and sufficient
library facilities (10, 27.78%).
Table 95: Strengths and opportunities of libraries in pilot study (n=37)

Effective/
Sufficient
Opportunities good
N (%)
N (%)
Library infrastructure (building, room, space, technology 11 12
system) (30.56) (34.29)
Proper library facilities (lights, chairs, exhibition display 10 6
board, etc.) (27.78) (17.14)
Library and information resources (books, journals, 5 2
computers, etc.) (13.89) (5.71)
7 2
Library policy
(19.44) (5.71)
1
Financial support by government -
(2.78)
1
Financial support by financial assistance and sponsorship -
(2.78)
Qualified librarian - -
Librarian’s pay scale - -
Professional status for librarian / librarian’s opportunities for - -

promotion
Skills and knowledge of librarian / staff - -
Full-time librarian / teacher-librarian - -
1 2
Library instructional program
(2.78) (5.71)
10 5
Library service provision
(27.78) (14.29)
10 7
Library visits
(27.78) (20.0)
12
Flexible time to visit library -
(34.29)
7 6
Collaboration between librarian and teachers
(19.44) (17.14)
5 6
Collaboration between librarian and principal
(13.89) (17.14)
Collaboration between school library and other libraries - -
Chart 19 shows what the principals perceived to be the greatest strengths or opportunities
of the study libraries impacting on students’ academic achievement. A majority of principals
402
indicated that these included were effective library services (12), followed by good library
physical facilities (6) and sufficient library collections (4).
Chart 19: The greatest opportunities of libraries in pilot study (n=37)
14
12
Number of libraries
10
8
6
4
2
0 Effective
Good library Supportive
Sufficient Efficient Effective library collaboration
physical principals and
collections administration services among library
facilities teachers
stakeholders
Frequency 4 3 12 3 6 1
Principals’ perceptions about the potential impact of school libraries on students’ academic
achievement
Table 96 provides the frequency and percentage of perceptions about the potential impact
of a school library has on increasing students’ academic achievement. The results were
derived from 37 principals who had a library in their schools. A majority of principals
considered that the library had an extremely strong impact on increasing students’ academic
achievement. A minority of principals perceived that this impact was very strong. Only one
principal perceived that the library had a slightly weak impact on increasing students’
The following information presents a summary of the results of the principals’ perceptions
about the potential impact of school libraries on students’ academic achievement.
For the overall potential contribution of a school library program that can increase students’
academic achievement, the greatest number of principals perceived that the library had an
extremely strong impact on time spent reading during school (18), increasing literacy levels
(18) and raising students’ information literacy levels (16). Noticeably, a majority of principals
403
considered that the library had an extremely strong impact on reading for pleasure (20),
standardised test scores (18), increasing students’ literacy levels and time spent reading
outside school (16).
The perceived impact of library administration’s potential to increase students’ academic
achievement shows that the library had a very strong impact when it had a supportive principal
(18), library promotion support (17) and collaboration among library stakeholders (16). A majority
of principals perceived that a library policy implemented in the school curriculum (16) and
sufficient budget had an extremely strong impact on increasing students’ academic achievement
(16). All principals confirmed that the library’s administration potential had a positive impact on
increasing students’ academic achievement.
In the case of library staff, the greatest majority of principals acknowledged that certified
librarians (17) and fulltime teacher-librarians had an extremely strong impact on increasing
students’ academic achievement, followed by the dedicated time of librarians, which had an
extremely strong impact on students’ academic achievement.
In terms of the library collections’ potential to increase students’ academic achievement, a
majority of principals perceived that the quality and quantity of library collections (23),
quality and currency (19) and quantity of collections (17) had an extremely strong impact on
increasing students’ academic achievement. A minority of principals perceived that the ICT in
libraries (18) had very strong impact on increasing students’ academic achievement.
In the cases of the potential for the library services and activities to increase students’
academic achievement, the greatest number of principals perceived that the reading
promotion had an extremely strong impact on increasing students’ academic achievement
(21). A majority of principals perceived that providing library instruction (19), in service
training to teachers (18) and lending service (18) had a strong impact on increasing students’
404
Only one statement related to the potential for the library’s physical facilities to increase
students’ academic achievement. This statement asked the principals to rate the quality of
their library’s indoor and outdoor environment, its zoning and its ease of access. The
greatest majority of principals indicated that the library’s physical facilities had an extremely
strong impact on increasing students’ academic achievement (17), followed by very strong
(16), and slightly strong impact (4). Noticeably, no one perceived that the library’s physical
facilities had an extremely weak impact on increasing students’ academic achievement.
students’ academic achievement in pilot study
Slightly weak
Extremely
Neither
Extremely
Slightly
weak
strong
strong
weak
strong
Very
Statements Very
7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Overall potential contribution of a school library program to increase student achievement through
the following criteria
37.84% 35.14% 24.32% 2.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

1. Academic grades (14) (13) (9) (1) (0) (0) (0)
2.Standardised test 27.78% 50.0% 19.44% 2.78% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

scores (10) (18) (7) (1) (0) (0) (0)
3.Students’ literacy 50.0% 44.44% 5.56% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

levels (18) (16) (2) (0) (0) (0) (0)
4.Students’
45.71% 34.29% 17.14% 2.86% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
information literacy (16) (12) (6) (1) (0) (0) (0)
levels
5.Amount of time
students spend 48.65% 40.54% 10.81% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
reading during (18) (15) (4) (0) (0) (0) (0)
school
6.Amount of time
students spend 37.84% 43.24% 13.51% 2.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
reading outside (14) (16) (5) (1) (0) (0) (0)
school
405
Slightly weak
Extremely
Neither
Extremely
Slightly
weak
strong
strong
weak
strong
Very
Very
Statements
7 6 5 4 3 2 1
7.Amount of time
students spend 35.14% 54.05 10.81% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
reading for pleasure (13) (20) (4) (0) (0) (0) (0)
Library’s administration potential for increasing student academic achievement through the
following criteria
8. School library 37.84% 45.95% 16.22% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

policy (14) (17) (6) (0) (0) (0) (0)
9. The
implementation of 43.24% 43.24% 10.81% 2.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
library policy in the (16) (16) (4) (1) (0) (0) (0)
school curriculum
10. School library 43.24% 35.14% 16.22% 5.41% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
budget (16) (13) (6) (2) (0) (0) (0)
11. Collaboration
40.54% 43.24% 13.51% 2.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
between principal (15) (16) (5) (1) (0) (0) (0)
and librarian
12. Collaboration
between teachers
and librarian
38.89% 44.44% 13.89% 2.78% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
influence on (14) (16) (5) (1) (0) (0) (0)
increasing students’
academic
achievement.
13. Collaboration
between school
27.03% 43.24% 21.26% 8.11% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
library and other
(10) (16) (8) (3) (0) (0) (0)
libraries (public
library/ school library/
academic library)
406
Slightly weak
Extremely
Neither
Extremely
Slightly
weak
strong
strong
weak
strong
Very
Very
Statements
7 6 5 4 3 2 1
14. Promoting school 37.84% 45.95% 16.22% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
library program (14) (17) (6) (0) (0) (0) (0)
37.84% 48.65% 13.51% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

15. Supportive
(14) (18) (3) (0) (0) (0) (0)
principal
Library’s staff potential for increasing student academic achievement through the following criteria
16. Certified librarian 45.95% 35.14% 13.51% 5.41% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
(17) (13) (5) (2) (0) (0) (0)
45.95% 35.14% 13.51% 5.41% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

17. Full-time librarian (17) (13) (5) (2) (0) (0) (0)
18. Numbers of 36.11% 38.89% 13.89% 11.11% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

librarian / staff (13) (14) (5) (4) (0) (0) (0)
19. Dedicated time of 38.89% 41.67% 8.33% 11.11% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
librarian (14) (15) (3) (4) (0) (0) (0)
Potential for library collections to increase student academic achievement through the following
criteria
20. Quality of school 62.16% 27.03% 10.81% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
library collections (23) (10) (4) (0) (0) (0) (0)
21. Quantity of
45.95% 43.24% 10.81% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
school library (17) (16) (4) (0) (0) (0) (0)
collections
407
Slightly weak
Extremely
Neither
Extremely
Slightly
weak
strong
strong
weak
strong
Very
Very
Statements
7 6 5 4 3 2 1
22. Currency and 52.78% 38.89% 8.33% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
varied collections (19) (14) (3) (0) (0) (0) (0)
23. Information 43.24% 48.65% 8.11% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

technology (16) (18) (3) (0) (0) (0) (0)
Potential for library services to increase student academic achievement through the following
criteria
24. Library
37.84% 51.35% 8.11% 2.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
instructional (14) (19) (3) (1) (0) (0) (0)
program
25. Reading incentive 56.76% 32.43% 8.11% 2.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
activities (21) (12) (3) (1) (0) (0) (0)
26. In-service training 40.54% 48.65% 10.81% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
to teacher (15) (18) (4) (0) (0) (0) (0)
27. Circulation of 32.43% 48.65% 13.51% 2.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

materials (12) (18) (5) (1) (0) (0) (0)
28. Flexible 34.87% 43.24% 18.92% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

scheduling (14) (16) (7) (0) (0) (0) (0)
Potential for library environment to increase student academic achievement through the following
criteria
408
Slightly weak
Extremely
Neither
Extremely
Slightly
weak
strong
strong
weak
strong
Very
Very
Statements
7 6 5 4 3 2 1
29. School library’s 45.95% 43.24% 10.81% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
environment (17) (16) (4) (0) (0) (0) (0)
409
Appendix F: Cluster comparison by dot plots and boxplots

410

Nilobon Wimolsittichai Thesis

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Nilobon Wimolsittichai Thesis

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

i

SCHOOL LIBRARIES AND THEIR ROLES IN RURAL THAILAND:

Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of

3.7 Ethical considerations ............................................................................................... 93

Appendix B: Informed consent ..................................................................................... 349

Table 2: Examples of checklists, open-ended questions and contingency questions asking

school principals to give information about school library’s demographics .......... 84

opportunities for rural small public primary school libraries ................................. 85

Table 5: Gender of principals .................................................................................................. 97

Table 6: Age of respondents ................................................................................................... 97

Table 7: Highest academic qualification of principals ............................................................ 98

Table 8: Years of experience as a school principal ................................................................. 99

Table 9: Gender of principals of schools with libraries ......................................................... 100

Table 10: Age of principals of schools with libraries ............................................................ 100

Table 13: Gender: principals of schools without libraries ..................................................... 103

Table 14: Age: principals of schools without libraries ........................................................... 103

Table 17: Regions and provinces of participants’ schools .................................................... 106

Table 18: Distance from school to city ................................................................................. 107

Table 20: Range of numbers of students in school in 2016 .................................................. 110

Table 21: Numbers of teachers in 2016 ................................................................................ 110

Table 22: Teacher–student ratio in 2016 .............................................................................. 111

Table 23: Number of computers ........................................................................................... 111

Table 24: Size of schools budget in 2016 .............................................................................. 112

Table 39: Number of computers ........................................................................................... 123

Table 44: Current conditions of libraries .............................................................................. 127

relation to students’ academic achievement ...................................................... 131

public primary schools in rural Thailand .............................................................. 133

Table 49: The school libraries staff ....................................................................................... 137

Table 50: Separate room for a library ................................................................................... 138

Table 52: Library name ......................................................................................................... 139

Table 53: Library size ............................................................................................................. 140

Table 54: Number of wi-fi connections available in library .................................................. 141

Table 56: Number of books ................................................................................................... 144

Table 57: Number of Journals/ magazines ............................................................................ 145

Table 58: Numbers of newspaper subscriptions .................................................................. 146

Table 59: Numbers of audio visual materials ....................................................................... 146

Table 60: Number of electronic media ................................................................................. 147

Table 61: Library classification system .................................................................................. 149

Table 62: Types of library’s classification systems ................................................................ 149

Table 63: Library management systems ................................................................................. 150

Table 64: Types of library management systems ................................................................. 150

Table 66: Promotion of library services and activities .......................................................... 153

Table 67: Number of days open for library ........................................................................... 154

Table 68: Number of staff working in the library ................................................................. 156

Table 69: School library volunteer students ......................................................................... 156

Table 70: Number of volunteer students ............................................................................. 157

learning ................................................................................................................. 158

Table 74: Auto-Clustering ....................................................................................................... 170

Table 75: Cluster distribution ................................................................................................. 171

students’ academic achievement .......................................................................... 203

Table 77: Lists of recommendations ...................................................................................... 280

Table 81: Numbers of students of schools in pilot study ..................................................... 374

Table 82: Current conditions of libraries ................................................................................ 377

schools in rural Thailand in pilot study ................................................................ 378

relation to students’ academic achievement in pilot study ................................ 379

public primary schools in rural Thailand .............................................................. 379

Table 87: Numbers of library computers in pilot study ........................................................ 383

Table 88: Numbers of books in pilot study ........................................................................... 385

Table 89: Numbers of journals/magazines in pilot study ...................................................... 385

Table 90: Numbers of newspapers in pilot study ................................................................. 386

Table 92: Numbers of digital media in pilot study ................................................................ 387

Table 93: Size of library budget in pilot study ...................................................................... 390

Table 94: Limitations of libraries in pilot study .................................................................... 399

students’ academic achievement in pilot study .................................................... 404