October 1997

Staff -- School Library Journal, 10/1/1997

More Work, No Pay -- No Way

Regarding the article by Karen Browne Ohlrich ("Great Beginnings," June 1997, pp. 34-35), I find it disturbing that librarians feel they need to work over the summer with no pay and bring presents to classroom teachers. Why is it that we are expected to do this? I can't recall hearing of P.E., art, or music teachers being criticized for not performing these extra duties. It's a sad commentary on our profession when we have to do so much more to gain recognition for ourselves.

Don't Forget Reading

I enjoyed Ken Stewart's lively and warm description of his library program in "The Library Blend: One Media Center's Alluring Brew" (August 1997, pp. 26-29). Clearly, he has done a fine job of getting the whole school productively involved with technology in the library. There was, however, a disconcerting silence about books and reading in his otherwise inspiring article. Other than one reference to booktalks, the words "books" and "reading" were absent from his essay. Even as we embrace and promote new technologies, we need to make sure our students recognize the unique and irreplaceable value of books and sustained, extended reading. We can't take it for granted that administrators, teachers, and students will continue to value reading without the enthusiasm of "pro-book" librarians.

Ed. Note: Constance Vidor's article, "The Castle Comes of Age," appears on pp. 24-27.

Questions Concerning AR

In May I once again visited a school in which the librarian pulled me into her small office, closed her door, looked around, and then, in a quiet voice, asked, "What do I do with Accelerated Reader? The PTA bought it and the principal said to use it, but I've got serious concerns about a program based on giving children prizes for reading. What do I do?"

The first few times that happened I was surprised -- not at the question but at the secrecy surrounding the question. Furtive looks, closed doors, hushed voices. Now I'm not surprised. I've seen librarians ridiculed by administrators for asking why they thought taking a test over a book would motivate anyone to read. I've seen librarians belittled by other librarians who have responded to questions about Accelerated Reader (AR) with comments such as, "If you cared about getting kids to read, you'd do anything. You'd give them prizes, show them they can pass tests -- you'd do anything." And now I've seen Judi Paul, founder and chair of Accelerated Reader, defame Dr. Betty Carter, who dared to disturb the Accelerated Reader universe with her article "Hold the Applause! Do Accelerated Reader and Electronic Bookshelf Send the Right Message?" (October 1996, pp. 22-25).

Calling Dr. Carter "a racist woman" in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram (April 21, 1997), Paul provided another reason why many are perhaps hesitant to ask questions about this product. Asking legitimate questions and raising legitimate concerns, Paul revealed, doesn't lead to a scholarly discussion or even debate; it leads to name-calling of the worst kind. But whether or not Paul wants it, teachers, librarians, administrators, and parents are questioning the value of Accelerated Reader. They are asking what happens to reading attitudes and aptitudes of AR students over time. What happens to these students' reading habits once they are in a school that doesn't have Accelerated Reader? They want to know what happens when students aren't given points, pizza, or pencils in exchange for reading. They worry about the validity of their library's selection policy when selection becomes controlled by what is or isn't on the AR list. They want to know what it means when a publishing company can pay AR to have its books included on the AR list. They want to know more than what the AR ads or representatives tell them. But many are asking their questions quietly, for they don't want the ridicule that often accompanies questioning this product.

And so we are back to whispered questions behind closed doors. But not everywhere. Not at School Library Journal. Thank you, SLJ, for not standing behind closed doors. Thank you for not allowing Paul's absurd, unfounded, and unsupported statements about Dr. Carter accomplish what Paul perhaps hoped they would. Thank you for bringing the discussion out in the open and now allowing it to continue.

A Flipped Photo

I suspect your photo of the Golden Gate Bridge (August 1997, p. 33) was reversed when printed. It looks better when I hold it up to a mirror! I wasn't lucky enough to be in San Francisco during ALA's convention, but this city is my favorite in the U.S. to visit. I find your articles interesting and useful.

Insensitive Adoption Photo

Thank you for running our article about books on adoption in your July issue ("Up for Discussion," pp. 32-33). We have one correction. Because we went over our allotted number of words, the annotations were left off the recommended book list. One of the books, Let's Talk About It: Adoption (Putnam, 1995), we recommended with reservations. The book says important things, but the choice of picture on the book's first page is an unhappy one. The photo shows rows of babies in a hospital nursery. This picture can remind adoptees of what is usually the worst time in their life: when they have been separated from their birth mother and have not yet been welcomed into an adoptive family. My coauthor, Susan Love, still has nightmares of hearing babies cry, which she feels comes from that time in her life. Since there is no acknowledgment of these problems in the text, the picture can arouse feelings that are not named for the child and that the child is not helped to work through. While most babies who are adopted within the U.S. these days go quickly from the birth mother to foster or adoptive parents, many international adoptions involve babies who have been in institutions for varying periods of time.

Thank you for permission to reprint the article for our upcoming workshop at the conference of the National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Critique on ALA's Procedures

Regarding "A Stunning Week" (August 1997, p. 33): I want to thank SLJ for reporting the categories of attendance at San Francisco: paid attendance, exhibit only passes, exhibitors, complimentary exhibit passes, etc. I don't recall seeing conference attendance detailed in so many categories before. ALA should publish statistics as to who attends conferences: first-timers, habitues, etc.

If California would support its school and public libraries, I think it would be wonderful if ALA would hold more of its summer meetings in San Francisco.

Members who have concerns and are frustrated by our inability to muster the 1 percent quorum at membership meetings might wish to inform Council members of their views.

I was disappointed that my resolution to provide more information to members did not pass. My idea was that the 150-word Statements of Professional Concerns of all elected At-Large Council members be published, with the percentage of votes received, to let ALA members and Council know what our electorate supported.

Perhaps there would be less dissatisfaction with Council if everyone knew what concerns voting ALA members valued. As an At-Large Councilor I would be pleased to receive communications from library staff. G.P.G. Box 2631, New York, NY 10001 or fax (212) 691-3807.