May 1999

Staff -- School Library Journal, 5/1/1999

Collection Collaboration
I do not intend for this letter to be an attack on Terezka Jirasek, the librarian at John Spry Community School described in Renèe Olson's January 1999 SLJ editorial. Ms. Jirasek is obviously a student-centered librarian. I am, however, as cross as I can be with Ms. Olson's misplaced and untutored enthusiasm for an unacceptable book selection process -- the kids choose the books for the media center by "poring over wholesalers' catalogs."I thought this kind of selection went out the window when we began to see professional librarians in our schools instead of the dedicated volunteers and clerks who had been running our libraries.

Perhaps the editorial did not describe the entire collection development process and the entire library budget story. Money is so precious in libraries these days, and the description of the school as having only "23 percent of the children reading at grade level" says volumes about the needs that both the students and teachers in this school have for a well-selected collection of diverse resources. School librarians across the country have chosen or been forced to spend huge parts of their budgets on commercially selected books to gratify the great urge to test and make competitive everything students do. If we are going to turn the rest of our limited budgets and one of our three major unique professional functions over to our users, let's at least urge a selection process that has more chance of developing a collection to meet all needs.

Marilyn Miller
Professor Emeritus
University of North Carolina
Greensboro, NC

Editor's Note
I applaud Ms. Miller's fervent defense of professionally selected book collections for children, just as I am moved by Ms. Jirasek's ability to deeply involve students in their school library. What my January editorial apparently failed to make clear was that Jirasek herself, with the help of her library advisory board, which consists of the principal and faculty members, selects the vast majority of the collection. Only a small fraction of her budget is devoted to her student selection committee project. This approach gives Jirasek's students high-quality children's literature, but also the chance to develop a lifelong connection to libraries that might not blossom without their active involvement. -- Renèe Olson, Editor-in-Chief

An Insidious Message
In how many libraries does Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex (But Were Afraid to Ask) (McKay, 1969) gleam insidiously from the shelves, posing as a reference book and containing, in its chapter on homosexuality, the conclusion that the life of a homosexual is one of loneliness and despair?

If Baby Be-Bop (HarperCollins, 1995) (News, February 1999) had been written when I was 16 and it fell into my hands, what a healthy balance it would have provided to that damaging, misleading chapter in Sex and to every portrayal of a homosexual villain in a '70s crime drama.

John Vasile
New York, NY

Why Lexiles Make Sense
The purpose of this letter is to clear up several misunderstandings in Michael Baum's letter (January 1999), which was prompted by a September 1998 SLJ article, "Company Touts System to Match Students and Books".

First, most readability formulas in common use measure similar semantic and syntactic features of text. Only the Lexile Framework, however, measures every word in a book and places readers and text on a common scale. It is this combination of features that makes book measures and forecasts about reader comprehension rates precise and useful to teachers, parents, librarians, and students. The vast majority of readability equations do not enable users to denominate reader performance in the same metric as is used to measure books. For a scholarly examination of readability formulas, see Jeanne Chall and Edgar Dale's book, Readability Revisited (Brookline, 1995). Chall and Dale not only point out the Lexile Framework's scientific basis, but also many of its unique features that differentiate it from other readability formulas.In use today are three dozen readability formulas and 250 reading scales, each denominated in its own proprietary metric. For the most part, these various metrics are not exchangeable as are, for example, the Celsius and Fahrenheit metrics for measuring temperature. This staggering number of ways to measure the same reading dimension promotes confusion. What the Lexile Framework promises is an open standard that all book and test publishers can embrace. Recent press releases (available at www.lexile.com) document that companies such as Scholastic, Harcourt Educational Measurement, Rigby Education, and Addison Wesley, among others, have seen the value of an open standard.

Using grade equivalents to measure readers or level text is like using a ruler with inches of different lengths. The failings of grade equivalents have been recognized for years, and major education associations (i.e., the International Reading Association, American Psychological Association, and American Educational Research Association) have passed resolutions against their use. The fact that educators still want to use grade equivalents is a testament to the unmet need that teachers have for linking assessment and instruction. Educators' fervent hope has been that grade equivalents could forge that link. Unfortunately, they have not, do not, and will not. The Lexile Framework offers a unit of measurement that is invariant throughout the reading continuum, making it possible for teachers to target readers and books. Targeted readers read more and readers who read more read better!

The prospect of a standard metric for measuring readers and books is viewed by teachers, parents, librarians, community leaders, and legislators as an overwhelmingly positive development. But standards are not dictated by fiat. They evolve as the user community chooses one metric over others. The voting process is not complete, but the early exit polls look promising for the Lexile Framework.

A. Jackson Stenner
Chairman and CEO
MetaMetrics, Inc.
Research Triangle Park, NC

Editor's Note
MetaMetrics is the developer of the Lexile Framework.

Basics Will Prevail
I am bothered by Barbara Stripling's letter in the March issue of SLJ. As a school librarian, I disagree with the new librarianship advocated by Ms. Stripling. I am particularly bothered by two statements in her letter, which I realize that I am quoting out of context: "Of course collection development is important, but.Ö"and "School librarians are teachers, we don't simply serve teachers."Any time that we change the emphasis on who we are, we change the emphasis on what we do. If we emphasize teaching, the other aspects of school librarianship, such as collection building, are going to be relegated to secondary status. This is a mistake.

I am sure that Ms. Stripling has only the best of intentions with her "real world of school librarianship,"but I'm assuming that as a middle school librarian, I, too, have a claim to the "real world."In the end, basics will prevail. The best educational programs will be those with librarians who concentrate on building good collections and serving their teachers and students. Am I a teacher? No, we have plenty of fine teachers in our school. I'm the librarian.

W.B. Dixon
Librarian
Gettysburg Area Middle School
Gettysburg, PA

A Practical Program for All
I enjoyed reading "The Big Easy" (Practically Speaking, February 1999), an article written jointly by a library media specialist and a reading specialist. What a wonderful idea to create the Morton-Forer Collection, later known as "the easy-to-finish"collection.

I am not as lucky as Kay Morton. I work alone. But my program, "Share a Book,"did inspire students in grades four to six to read and, the following week, to share with their fellow students. Then came the exchange of books and discussion of why students liked or disliked the books. The mystery stories of Donald Sobol did enhance reading, leading to a general discussion to solve the mysteries.

The students that participated have their names printed in the monthly school newsletter under the title "Library Corner." Several parents called me to express their appreciation of the program and others said "please help my child volunteer to share"his/her book.
It works for solo librarians.

Madeleine Hoss
Librarian
Metcalf Laboratory School
Normal, IL

Dedication Brings Success
I would like to respond to a letter by Frank J. Indriso III (December 1998). As a high school media specialist, I believe media specialists/librarians, both school and public, have the responsibility to uphold a patron's right to intellectual freedom. I do not believe for one minute that I am "spiting"myself or doing something that would create a "headache"when I stand up against censorship. A challenge for any media specialist/librarian would be to attempt to define what the public would consider to be, as Indriso wrote, "controversial materials in public school libraries that would offend or upset children and/or their parents." How about the Internet, National Geographic, and thousands of other periodicals that rest on library shelves, hundreds of challenged books such as Where the Wild Things Are (Harper, 1963) or Catcher in the Rye (Little, Brown, 1951), newspaper articles and videotapes?

My philosophy as a media specialist is to provide patrons with the best possible services. I dedicate myself to the school community in hopes that all of our students will succeed. I believe that I have a positive working relationship with the community of Delsea Regional High School. One method I utilize in our media center is to develop and maintain a selection and reconsideration policy that is approved by the board of education and school administration.

I have read the article "Connecticut Librarian Sues School District over Transfer"(October 1998) that Frank Indriso refers to and can safely guess that there was more to the story than what Indriso read. One does not have to lose his or her job over refusing to remove a book from a library shelf. The issue is not being insubordinate or dodging a challenged book. The issue is to follow a process of referring the individual challenging a book to a reconsideration committee, where a hearing can take place. This committee should consist of a media specialist/librarian, administrator, teacher, board member, and community members. It is not necessary to become a martyr as long as there is a solid policy and a strong committee. If the committee agrees to allow the material to remain, then opponents of censorship gain another victory. However, if the committee majority decides to remove the book, then so be it. The media specialist can still stand against censorship and vote to keep the material but needs to follow the judgement of the entire committee. If the committee is strong and a clear reconsideration plan is in place, the probability of the material remaining increases.

Being a team player does not guarantee patrons will like you, and confrontation may still arise depending on the circumstances. Take pride in what you do and then observe the respect you and the media center will acquire. This goes a long way and will prove to be a success!

Michael S. Dennison
Educational Media Specialist
Delsea Regional High School
Franklinville, NJ

Corrections
The Scott O'Dell Award for Historical Fiction is administered by an independent advisory board that has no affiliation with the Bulletin of the Center for Children's Books, as we reported (Awards, March 1999).

An award winner listed in our February 1999 issue was described incorrectly. She is Carol Diggory Shields, youth services coordinator for the Salinas (CA) Public Library System. Shields is based at the John Steinbeck Library in Salinas.

Hero (Peachtree, 1997), by S.L. Rottman, should have been included in our reprint of the Young Adult Library Association's "Best Books"list (March1999). Another Rottman title, Rough Waters (Peachtree, 1998) should have been on the "Quick Picks"list. Our list of "Popular Paperbacks for Young Adults" was also incomplete. The full list is at www.ala.org/yalsa/booklists/poppaper99.html.