by Georgina Trebbe, Ed. D, LSLT
Georgina is the librarian teacher at Minnechuag Regions High School and an adjunct professor at Simmons University. She serves as the Advocacy Chair for the MSLA. This article was first published in the MSLA Forum Fall 2026 Edition.
Each spring, licensed school library teachers all over Massachusetts nervously wait during budget season to
be notified if their positions will remain or be cut. After all, the generic term “librarian” has become an economic austerity measure for a quick budget reduction due to the familiarity heuristic (Tversky & Kahneman, 1973). Another budgetary strategy by school district administrators is to place an unlicensed individual, not one professionally trained, in the library. In both instances, reducing or replacing licensed school library teachers with lower-cost alternatives is a misguided cost cutting measure driven by stakeholder misunderstanding, which ultimately deprives students and educators of crucial academic
support. It is essential that Massachusetts educators, communities, and public school families understand
the pathways and contradictory policies that affect school libraries and licensed school library teachers. Better understanding the roles and responsibilities of a licensed school library teacher helps the school community make sense of the decisions about the position that directly influences a student’s pathway to equitable education.
“Reducing or replacing licensed school library teachers with lower-cost alternatives is a misguided cost cutting measure driven by stakeholder misunderstanding, which ultimately deprives students and educators of crucial academic support.”
First explored by Tversky and Kahneman (1973), the familiarity heuristic is the tendency of a person, when faced with a consideration, to subconsciously select “what relevant instances come to mind” (1973) in order to determine meaning. How does familiarity heuristic connect with the term “librarian”? Rather than
defining the licensed school library teacher through responsibilities that focus on instructional and curriculum work (AASL, 2025), district leaders may rely on generic meanings that “come to mind based on individual familiar experiences” (1973). The risk is that a district leader may define the “librarian” using nonprofessional tasks they assume are what school “librarians” do such as circulation duties, routine maintenance as well as clerical and prep-time coverage (Harlan, Mathison, Hwang, 2026: Bell, Kuon, & Lambert, 2014). What emerges is an illusory correlation, or bias, where the two factors considered do not
actually have a relationship (Tversky & Kahneman, 1973). Frequently, the result of illusory correlation is that school district budget stakeholders easily cut the licensed school library teacher position altogether. Often what is reasoned is that limited illusionary definition contains little value when considering the savings of a full teacher’s salary.
With yearly school budget angst throughout Massachusetts, the data shows Massachusetts schools have reduced licensed school library teachers by over 220 positions (27%) since 2007 (DESE, 2026). Focusing on just the last three years, 60% of all Massachusetts schools do not employ a licensed school library
teacher. This means 60% of all Massachusetts students do not have a learning experience with a licensed school library teacher who is an education professional. In addition, these schools do not receive state funded library resources paid for by every Massachusetts tax payer (MLS, 2026). With equity as a piece of
the core strategies of the DESE’s strategic plan, Massachusetts leadership at all levels needs to ask the question that if students learning without access to a licensed school library teacher and without access to Massachusetts funded resources are experiencing inequitable access to a fully funded Massachusetts
education (603 CMR 26.05)?
“The data shows Massachusetts schools have reduced licensed school library teachers by over 220 positions (27%) since 2007 (DESE, 2026).”
A second phenomenon that should be factored into 60% of schools without a licensed school library teacher is when district administrators place an unlicensed and untrained individual in the school library. Harland, Mathison, and Hwang (2026) determined the duties, roles, and responsibilities between the professionally trained licensed school library teacher and the untrained library personnel are blurred, “eluding the professional skills and knowledge” necessary for the profession. The study noted that school district administrators expect untrained and unlicensed library staff to support circulation, technical services, collection management, record keeping, student supervision and to “perform complex information and instructional tasks without corresponding professional preparation or credentials” (Harlan,
Mathison, Hwang, 2026). The administrative blurring has the potential of putting the professional trained and untrained library personnel in competition with each other when the roles are actually different by definition. This situation is different from using a generalized definition of “librarian,” and in a way is much
worse. The hiring of an untrained and unlicensed person to support a school library with specific trained professional responsibilities indicates the school district clearly understands its choice. By requiring the untrained and unlicensed to complete the roles and responsibilities of a licensed school librarian the
school district is filling a teacher position without an actual licensed teacher, on the cheap. In marketing, this is the-bait-and-switch. The bait is that the community sees a nice person in the library who is generically identified as the “librarian” and, thus, parents and families place trust in schools by assuming a
professionally trained and licensed school librarian teacher is employed to support students. However the switch is that the district has employed a lower paid employee requiring the person to complete many of the duties that a licensed school librarian would better perform and would be trained in emerging technologies and issues facing the profession.
But how are school district administrators able to assign an untrained and unlicensed individual to the library and expect them to perform professionally trained required duties? A dive into Massachusetts education laws and the Massachusetts Association of School Committees policy suggestions helps us
understand there is no clear pathway, which leaves the term “library” up to interpretation. Massachusetts requires superintendents to determine necessary positions to support the district’s educational goals(MGL c71 § 59). School committees review the budget to approve or disapprove. Debates related to
positions are not uncommon when tax dollar efficiency is at stake (MGL c71 § 34). Massachusetts law also provides for individual school principals to run their schools as each determines, under the supervision of the superintendent who again answers to the school committee (MGL c71 § 59B). Between these stakeholders they complete need-assessments, budgetary conversations, and consider district consistencies, all while seeking community support. Because Massachusetts education laws do not
directly speak to school library hiring requirements this is left to local control, which means distinct policies are in place for each school district that guide the hiring and assigned responsibilities of school library personnel. A set of policies is important because they guide school district practices, so how do Massachusetts school districts begin to develop one?
The Massachusetts Association of School Committees (MASC) has a template of policies that school districts can use as a foundation for their own local policies. Member school districts can publicly post local district policies on the MASC website. Massachusetts school committees review the template of
policies and make changes that best reflect their community. Suggested MASC policies contain references to Massachusetts education law, and/or Code Regulation (CMR). School library policies within the MASC template are part of Section I-Instruction. Within these sections IJL-Library Materials
Selection and Adoption, IJLA-Library Resources and IJ-Instructional Materials are the foundation for how school library policies are developed. Some schools may cross-reference other policies such as KEC Public Complaints about the Curriculum or Instructional Materials. Confusing within IJL-Library
Materials Selection and Adoption is the line, “The librarian will recommend materials to be included in the school library” (MASC, 2026), because nowhere in MASC’s template is “librarian” defined or responsibilities assigned, leaving the definition of role and responsibilities up to local control.
With each school district defining and interpreting the positions and responsibilities of “librarian” differently, Massachusetts has developed inconsistent understandings, laying the foundation for
inequities in Massachusetts school library services across the state. As a result, “librarian” becomes the designee of the superintendent with input from principals based on their understanding. As we see by the 27% reduction of Massachusetts licensed school library teachers since 2007, tightening budgets are often used as the bigger priority compared to the actual values associated with hiring for the position, because the values that are widely understood are coming from a limited illusionary definition of what a librarian is. As a result, the principal by law can pass the responsibilities to the untrained and unlicensed professional with superintendent and school committee approval.
However, this does not come without serious consequences. The responsibility of selecting and reevaluating materials outlines the careful thought that is put into these actions (MASC, IJLA, 2026).
While the licensed school library teacher is guided by rigorous professional training, the untrained and unlicensed personnel have their own experiences to inform their decisions. Such illusionary correlation is also a part of these actions, including the possibility of individual biases influencing the adding or removing of materials from the collection. When a person’s bias is involved in selecting education materials, it potentially goes against school district policy. The recent An Act Regarding Free Expression requiring policies to guide the selection and challenges to school library materials (MGL c.71 § 82B) may
force the Massachusetts Association of School Committees, local unions and school districts to reevaluate policies and practices associated with the school library. Policy violations often result in administrative corrections or something more serious. Having a law in the mix may lead to significant changes.
Finally, Massachusetts school district individual unit contracts may have the last word when it comes to defining the roles and responsibilities between a licensed teacher and unlicensed personnel. While licensed school library teachers recognize the value and importance of education support personnel (ESP) also called paraprofessionals, there is a line that is crossed when it comes to library roles and responsibilities. Contracts often bargain to ensure ESP’s are not taken advantage of in the classroom with added teacher responsibilities. As a result, union leaders have the power to bargain the roles and responsibilities of school library unlicensed ESP, requiring them to be done by licensed full time equivalent (FTE) units only.
“We cannot forget the students, the reason why educators educate.”
With misunderstandings of the Massachusetts licensed school library teacher profession maybe it is time to take another look with stakeholders. A re-evaluation should consider influences of economic austerity and inconsistent understanding of “librarian.” The MASC references the American Library Association within its
policies, so perhaps it is time to take a closer look at its subsidiary the American Association of School Libraries as a clarification resource. In addition, we cannot forget the students, the reason why educators educate. We must continually inquire if the choices made in law, policy and at the local level cause inequity of
student learning experiences in the school library and if these choices truly violate Massachusetts education
laws and policies. There is lots to unpack.
References
American Association of School Librarians, (2025). National school library standards for learners, school librarians, and
school libraries (2nd ed.). ALA Editions.
Bell, M. A., Kuon, T., & Lambert, J., (2014, August). Iceberg: The cold, hard facts about school librarians’ duties. Library
Media Connection, 33(1). https://schoollibraryconnection.com/content/article/1949166
Code of Massachusetts Regulations, (2026). Commonwealth of Massachusetts, https://www.mass.gov/code-ofmassachusetts-
regulations-cmr
Massachusetts Association of School Committees (MASC), (2026). Reference Manual,
https://policies.sparqdata.com/masc/browse/masterset/master/z20000001
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE), (2026).Educators by Age Groups Report
(District) – Full-time Equivalents – Librarians and Media Center Directors, School and District Profiles.
https://profiles.doe.mass.edu/statereport/agestaffing.aspx
Massachusetts General Law (MGL), (2026).Chapter 71, Section 34,Support of schools; appropriations; recommendations.
https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXII/Chapter71/Section34
Massachusetts General Law(MGL) , (2026). Chapter 71, Section 59, Superintendent of schools; appointment; compensation;
powers and duties.
https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXII/Chapter71/Section59
Massachusetts General Law (MGL), (2026). Chapter 71, Section 59B, Principals; appointment; compensation; duties;
appointments of other personnel. https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXII/Chapter71/Section59B
Massachusetts Library System (MLS), (2026). FY2026 Funding, Statewide Database: Home. https://guides.masslibsystem.org/databases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D., (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology,
5(2), 207–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9