I’ve been scooting around a little bit lately and here are some things that have been crossing my virtual desk. I’ve also dealt with two wordpress issues [a hack! and an outdated sidebar navigation element] and I’ve upgraded to the latest version of WordPress. If you’re on a Summer schedule, I’d suggest upgrading before things get hectic.
Bernie Margolis, ousted former head of Boston Public Library is starting a new job as the New York State Librarian.
Keith Michael Fiels, executive director of the 67,000-member American Library Association, said Margolis has earned “a great deal of respect throughout the profession” and called him one of ALA’s most active members in standing up to censorship. Margolis, who grew up in Queens and New Rochelle, credits his activism to his dad, who was a fundraiser for the Anti-Defamation League. He calls reading the New Yorker magazine “part of my religious practice.”
So after Bernie Margolis has his contract “un-renewed” the mayor of Boston is looking at seizing control of the moneys that make up the Boston Public Library’s trusts. This means that to spend money from the BPL trusts, the library has to get approval for each specific expenditure from City Hall. Margolis, still at work and annoyed at his ouster has ordered his staff to not send overdue fines collected to the city as was the usual procedure. It’s not totally clear from the article what the ordering of events is. At least one donor is thinking of asking for her money back.
Under current practice, the library trustees approve formation of the trust funds and transfer custody of the funds to City Hall. City Hall then forwards trust proceeds - dividends and other returns on investments - in a lump sum annually to the library.
Library trustees decide what to spend the money on, in accordance with donors’ instructions, and library staff members cut the checks. Library staff members also reconcile the books and file annual reports and tax returns for the board of trustees, which is operated as an independent, nonprofit corporation.
Signori, the city’s collector-treasurer, said her office will no longer be giving the library lump sums. Instead, she said, the trustees will now have to submit invoices to City Hall for processing and payment. If Signori or her staff members believe the expenses do not match donors’ intent or if there is another problem, she says she will raise an issue with trustees.
[thanks kate]
Perhaps inspired by Fahrenheit 451, perhaps inspired by the lingering conversations over the The Bermudez Triangle by Maureen Johnson controversy, I did a little google search and found an almost unbelievable website.
http://www.pabbis.com/
PABBIS stands for Parents Against Bad Books In Schools. (Now I could understand if there was a group called TABBIS or SABBIS standing for Teens Against Boring Books in Schools or Students Against Boring Books in Schools. I would probably have been among the numbers. My own group (of two) was LAASR. Library Aides Against Shelf Reading.)
Overview of PABBIS can be read as either a pdf file or powerpoint presentation. I encourage you to do so...not because I agree with them. But because it's best to learn about them based on what they say about themselves.
You might be shocked at the sensitive, controversial and inappropriate material that can be found in books in K-12 schools. Both in the classroom and library. Parents should be aware of what their children can or must read in school to decide whether it is appropriate for them or not.
Bad is not for us to determine. Bad is what you determine is bad. Bad is what you think is bad for your child. What each parent considers bad varies and depends on their unique situation, family and values. The main purpose of this webpage is to identify some books that might be considered bad and why someone might consider them bad. Another purpose of this webpage is to provide information related to bad books in schools.
In considering what is a good/bad book consider the following:
Age appropriateness
Good taste
What are educational goals/objectives and does book achieve them?
Is book relevant to curriculum, standards of learning, program of instruction?
Is this particular book necessary? Are other books without bad content equal or better in doing the job? Which ones were considered?
The website then proceeds to list hundreds--if not thousands--of books that are potentially "bad" or "dangerous" for your child/teen to read. They also encourage parents to become active within their community by challenging books in their schools' libraries. Here is their what to do page.
The general flavor will be that the book will be assumed good and you must prove it not. Here are some questions to keep in mind regarding why the book was selected for use:
- What are the course/library objectives?
- Were any alternative books available and/or considered to achieve the course/library objectives? If so, what were they?
-What sources were consulted in identifying potential alternative books to achieve the course/library objectives?
- If other books were available and/or considered why was this book selected and all other books rejected (censored)?
- If less controversial books were considered and rejected (censored) explain why.
- What is name and position of individual who approved the book for school system use?
The thing I find most fascinating about this website is that they accuse the school library system of censorship. They make themselves the victims. Their values. Their morals. Their beliefs are being censored from the library. The presence of "bad" books over the presence of "good" books makes a case for censorship in their opinion.
Typically I have remained quiet about this issue. Never been one to thump books and shout out opinions. My opinion on "challenging" or "banning" books is this: it is ridiculous and counter-productive. The best thing to do about a controversial book--if you object to it--is nothing. Draw no attention to it. Don't protest its presence in the libraries. Don't talk about it. Don't write letters of complaint. Ignore it completely. Pretend it doesn't exist. When you challenge a book or protest it, you draw attention to it that it (almost) never would have received otherwise. Sure it might have been read by a handful of students over the course of a year, but challenging it makes it appealing. It brings attention to it. Suddenly there is an interest there. A desire to read something that someone has labeled "bad" or "inappropriate" or "dangerous." Essentially you're saying, "Read this book" when you challenge it. Making it unavailable at the school library will make it something that will fly off the public library shelves. Or the bookstores for that matter. Sometimes a book being "banned" is good for the author. Good for business. Sales increase. Interest increases. They become more read, more popular. They become more famous. There is no way to make a "challenged" book unavailable. And that's a GOOD thing.
I also think it's a misnomer for a book to be labeled "banned." Most people think the word makes it official. National, even. A book could be taken off the shelves in one school district's libraries but be available in EVERY other school library across the nation...and available in public libraries...and bookstores...and whatnot...and still wear the label "banned." It could have been removed for one year or semester, and later placed back on the shelves. Yet it will wear the title "banned" for life. So it is a bit misleading.
There are several different issues going on here. It is one thing to have a book available as part of the library's collection. Another thing to make it required reading for every student within a class or grade. A parent could legitimately not like one of the required books and request an alternative be provided for their son or daughter. But here is the thing...anytime a parent makes it about more than their child...it becomes wrong. It is not one parent's right or responsibility to monitor another parent's child. If they want to be active in monitoring their own child's reading material up into the teen years, fine. Let them. Let them have a say in what their child reads and brings home from the library. Let them be vigilant about it. But that parent has no right to dictate what other students are reading in the classroom or library. Because one parent finds homosexuality offensive in a book, suddenly, the whole school is deprived of that book? Because one person finds violence offensive, the whole student body is denied their right to read it? Who says that the most vocal parent wins the day?
Do parents have the right to monitor what their own child reads? Sure. I'm not really an advocate of strict sheltering though. Why? If you've raised a child for twelve or fifteen years and you still don't trust them to make their own decisions...then you didn't do something right. If you've got a fifteen or sixteen year old child and you haven't taught them your own morals and beliefs...it's a little too late to be concerned. If you're afraid that your son or daughter will pick up a book like Speak (or any other so called "bad" book) and become inspired to give alcohol a try...then you've missed the point of everything. Parents are supposed to be raising kids to be responsible and independent. If the values haven't "stuck" yet...and you've got a teenager...you've got a lot more worries ahead of you than worrying about the language in a book. About the sexual content of a book. If you've raised your son or daughter to *share* your particular views on sex, drugs, drinking, smoking, then exposing them or allowing them to read widely won't hurt them. If they *know* premarital sex is a sin, then reading a book won't convince them otherwise. If they know to say no to drugs, then reading a book about a person who makes different choices (and who usually comes to regret those choices) won't change their minds. Parents should realize that reading a book about a person who does "bad things" won't make your child into a person who does "bad things." If you've raised a child to be smart and to think for themselves, then there is no book that is TOO dangerous. Trying to shelter kids/teens from the 'real' world is more dangerous than allowing them access to it. The key is discussion. It would be better to have them read a book and discuss it with adults...than to never be allowed access to it. If the racism in a book makes it "dangerous" then I say not reading it and discussing it--its implications, etc--is far more dangerous. To pretend that racial atrocities never happened is more dangerous than exposing your kids to the truth of it. They need to see where we've been in order to appreciate how far we've come in society...and how much further we need to go. They need to be exposed to injustice. To violence in some situations. Otherwise, how will they ever learn to deal with the world? Here's the thing, kids and teens should be allowed to think for themselves. If the teen isn't comfortable with a book, they won't read it. They won't be interested in reading it if it is offensive to them. And as far as classroom requirements go, there is usually a value in a book that makes small offenses seem petty when you look at the big picture. If there is one thing I'd like to get across about ANY book, is that you should judge it as a whole. Look at the whole book. Weigh its value. Weigh its merits. Determine its strengths. Its weaknesses. Examine its message. Does the presence of a four lettered word really destroy the value of the whole book? Isn't there a bigger picture? If a book's message is that racism is unjust. That racism is wrong. That the human race is cruel. That a person's worth isn't determined by the color of their skin. Isn't that more important than the presence of a racial slur. Isn't showing the harshness and cruelty of it more important than sugarcoating history? Should we really pretend that all races have always got along? That we've always lived in harmony? That we've never called each other names? That we've never done cruel, hurtful things? Isn't the harsh truth better than sugarcoated lies? Isn't it better to discuss the reality of the world instead of presenting a make-believe world where there are no problems? Does Elsie Dinsmore really have more to offer teen girls than Melinda does from Speak??? Seriously.
Obviously, not every book is appropriate for every age group. What is appropriate for a high school wouldn't be appropriate for an elementary school. What a 17 year old should be allowed access to...is not what a 9 year old should have access to. There is common sense involved. But for the most part, I think librarians use common sense.
[...] few late summer links [web link]librarian.net (26/Aug/2009)“…people have advice bernie margolis now the state [...]