Data Visualization for Instruction

Goal:  The Media Specialist will analyze patron circulation data.

Objective #1:  Using Crystal Reports, the Media Specialist will analyze student patron circulation data for transactions between the selected dates 08/21/2012-06/01/2013. 

Objective #2:  Using the annual circulation data report for the 2012-2013 school year, the Media Specialist will complete a comparative analysis of average yearly transactions based on gender, FCAT Reading level, and lunch status.

Objective #3:  Using the comparative analysis, the Media Specialist will target specific populations to increase their circulation for the 2013-2014 school year.

Comparison by Gender

I was expecting girls to check out more books than boys.  However, in a comparison of the average number of books checked out per year by boys versus girls, I discovered that boys check out an average of almost two books more than girls per year.  Research has pegged boys as the “reluctant readers” and girls as the avid readers, so I was pleasantly surprised to discover that my boys are readers!  Our school population is 70% female and 30% male, which contributed to my belief that girls would check out more books, on average, than boys.  So I began to wonder what could account for the boys checking out more books.  My theory was that perhaps more boys are enrolled in Reading classes than girls, but after consulting with the Reading Coach, this theory was quickly dispelled.  According to our Reading Coach, the gender representation in our Reading classes is proportional to the overall gender ratio at the school.  So, my other theory I have that might account for this, is that boys (in my observations) tend to check out more non-fiction, Manga, graphic novels, and magazines than girls.  These genres can often be read faster than fiction and biographies.  Therefore, the male patrons would have a faster turn-over rate for the items they checkout, and come back to the Media Center for more frequent checkouts.

 

Comparison by Lunch Status

I expected that students who receive free or reduced-price lunch would check out books more frequently than the other students.  Since free and reduced-price lunch eligibility is based on socio-economic status, I theorized that students who were less able to afford lunch, would also be less likely to purchase their books and reading materials from a bookstore or buy them on a tablet or other electronic device.  The data surprised me in that I expected a greater difference between the three student groups (i.e., those receiving free, receiving reduced-price, and receiving what I termed "full-price" lunch).  However, the differences, small as they were, did seem to lend support to my theory.  The data shows that students who are eligible for free lunch check out the most books, on average, per year. The students who receive reduced-price lunch follow a close second.  Finally, the students who either did not apply or are not eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, checkout the least books, comparatively.

 

Comparison by FCAT Reading Level

I was expecting a positive correlation between students' FCAT Reading Level and average number of yearly transactions.  However, instead of an inclined line, my data visualization revealed no evident correlation between these sets of data.  Students who scored a 2 on the FCAT Reading test, checked out the most books on average, followed by those who scored a 1.  Possible explanations for these results may include the fact that lower-level seventh and eighth grade students are required to take a Reading class for remediation, and as part of the curriculum, Reading classes have regularly-scheduled bi-weekly visits to the Media Center where students are required to check out books.  This would at least in part account for the higher number of checkouts for lower level readers.  Another theory is that, as research has shown, more socio-economically privileged students have higher standardized test scores, and have a greater ability to purchase books and technology (such as eReaders), and therefore would not frequent libraries as often as their less-privileged counterparts.