Banned Book Week--Banned Websites Awareness Day: A Contrast

Banned Book Week has become a mainstay cause and publicity event for libraries across the country. It is an important week to advocate for the intellectual freedom that author and librarians seek to support and uphold in public spaces. I can't help but feel, though, that some of our advocacy can feel rather antiquated today and often puts a softened veneer on the face of censorship. Many of the displays I have seen often highlight books that have been banned in the past, but are in most cases  deemed culturally acceptable now. Even displays that discuss more recent books, such as Harry Potter and Hunger Games, fit into this category. This approach presents censorship  as something fading into obsolescence, and thus takes the urgency out of the message.

Now not all programs follow this model, many have found great ways to better connect children to the issues, whether through viral readings, book clubs, or more, but I think it is hard for children to grasp the concept of banned books if we discuss books they can read. Perhaps the brave, but scary challenge is to discuss those books that continue to be challenging to today's culture. I have seen some great physical displays placing books behind bars, or police caution tape. What if the books behind these barriers were books that actually more relevant to children today? What if books that had actually recently been challenged in the district were displayed and openly discussed? What if web resources were the primary examples used?

I think too often we treat Banned Book Week as a remembrance week. "Remember all the awful things we used to do, but look at how much better we are now." By oversimplifying and antiquating the story of censorship we risk removing the emotion that is central to such cases today. Children are motivated by their own engagement in an issue and librarians miss an opportunity to gain young fervent advocates in this way.

A second concern is the medium we focus on. We spend a whole week discussing banned print books, but only one day advocating for Banned Website Awareness. That inequity does not match the relative role we have placed on these tools in the modern library. As librarians, we have made massive strides over the past decade to better incorporate digital materials and technology initiatives. We have gone so far as to make these standards of our profession. However, while we have been aggressively forward-thinking in providing users access to and information about new mediums, we have fallen behind in defending everyone's right to access information via the internet.

For children, I think this is an even bigger area where we can engage them to become participants in their own advocacy. This ascribes to the active-based learning that teachers and librarians are seeking to promote everywhere. A great Banned Website Day project I saw on the New York Times' Learning Network blog asked students to explore if there were restrictions and filters placed on their school computer use, and to challenge these practices by examining their effects. Such programs appeal to kids through the technologies that they are using, present the urgency and presentness of these issues, and allow for direct student advocacy. This type of contemporary engagement is too often missing from Banned Book Week. I think we need to shift the focus in our advocacy against censorship in the same ways that we have shifted our focus in our libraries.

Blog Comments

Here are my comments on professional blogs:

School Library Monthly: Share the Wealth

What a great post. We all come up with so many great ideas in development, but they do not mean much until we place them in practice. I think the question you ask and the framework for answering it are great.
But Barbara Jansen’s question is a great one: “what will you do on Monday based on what you learned and contributed this weekend.”
You really took this to heart and the graphical answer does a great job at getting down to brass tacks. That is an approach I am going to steal myself. The more we can do to think about these great ideas and approaches in the context of our own situations and our own users, the more effective we will be. Thanks for your insight!
PS: Isn’t it funny that those forms we fill out can include such rote questions, when we work so hard in our everyday lives to design inquiry-based assignments with thoughtful questions? Always seemed ironic to me!



YALSA: BULLYING NOT JUST AN ISSUE FOR ONE MONTH

You could not be more right.

This is such a real issues, and one that everyone needs to continue to help grow awareness about. It is something that librarians can help not only with information and resources, such as the ones you provide, but also by being the adult and intervening.  Particularly when we as librarians often oversee the more informal interactions of students, we have to stand up against bullying, or even the hint of it right away.

But this bullying extends well beyond the school halls today, as the two examples you cite mention. The role of technology and web 2.0 have changed the nature of bullying, and we must be cognizant to the confrontations students can face online. This is where libraries and information literacy can continue to help. Children no longer "turn off" their social selves when they get home but have to learn how to effectively and safely enmesh these technological tools with their own self-development. Its challenging.

The more adults can help in this process the better. But bullying is an ongoing problem, and one we cannot ignore, even after its month in the spotlight.

Thank you for continuing to highlight this issue!


YALSA: Connect, Create, Collaborate: The Next Big Thing in Teen Spaces

 I love the great discussion here.

As to what Megan, Fernando, and Mark reference, space is going to be an ongoing issue. In some ways, those long "banks of desktops" play a significant role, no matter how much we dislike them; they often physically define the space for teens or other users. But if technology is moving us away from that, it has serious ramifications. I believe it is because librarians have fought so hard to find spaces in their libraries for teens, that it is crucial to start thinking about the future of these spaces now.

If the physical space of a library is changing, there will be renewed battles over claiming that space for different library users. If youth service librarians don't have a plan--whether it is the beautiful and creative ideas that Linda Braun suggests, or something more appropriate for your district and community, it is important to begin that conversation now so that as change continues to come, librarians are prepared to protect the teen spaces we have worked so hard to carve out. Finding more square footage can be a huge blessing to everyone in the library, but can only be fully realized if a long-term plan is developed to seamlessly move into that imagined future. 

Pew Report: Young American Reading Habits

A few weeks ago, the Pew Internet and American Life project published their results concerning the reading habits of young Americans, age 16-29. Linda Braun, at the YALSA blog has published a 3-part posting commenting on this report. Her posts were built through the Storify web tool, that allows you to amalgamate social media context into a more linear sourced story. This is not only a fantastic new tool that I have discovered, but Braun's postings really get at the ways that youth service  librarians can interpret and apply the Pew findings.

Much of the discussion in Braun's postings focuses on digital reading and e-books in the library. The Pew study presents some pretty compelling evidence for the possible benefits of expanding such programs for teens. While teens still remain one of the least likely age-groups to utilize e-readers, evidence seems to point that this is more an issue of access, than interest. Pew mentioned that 58% of those who do not have an e-reader would be interested or very interested in pre-loaded e-reader borrowing. There is a strong desire amongst young readers for instant access, and digital material offers this. Its also why Braun notes how essential it is for libraries to build up their web presence with strong usability options for teens. Her postings provide a good overview of the Pew findings.

In offering some advice going forward, Braun recognizes that expanding e-reader programs can be very expensive for libraries. She offers a number of sources including the ALA's Digital Content Working Group, with resources and information for librarians. I would go a step further, though, and emphasize another Pew statistic: those under 30 were more likely to read off of their cell phone or computer than an e-reader. Instead of focusing so much on the devices, we can find ways for more people to access digital materials with the devices they already have. Encouraging e-reader growth is good, but should be second to the content.

While Braun and I might disagree slightly as to the importance of e-reader devices, we would agree that content is the biggest factor.  Braun finishes her 3-part conversation by offering some further reading about the convoluted and contentious world of e-publishing. I think changing the nature of the library-publisher relationship concerning digital content will be critical going forward as the nature of "ownership" begins to take on new meanings. The Pew research shows that teens are reading, they are reading for pleasure, and they are using the library. These are all great. But we can do an even better job of giving young adults instant access to content, and access to sources of interest for their age group.

Finally, I'm also really compelled by the storify.com tool. It appears to be almost a more dynamic version of wikipedia, where one can directly follow the tweets/blogs/links to additional content. The storify board serves as an organizational tool to connect these different sources towards an overarching message. This is the first time I have seen this tool and will be sure to explore it further. Let me know if any of you have used Storify and how you like it.

Pulling Back the Curtain on Libraries as a Teaching Tool

The mantra in 21st-century teaching in a nutshell is inquiry-based, experiential learning with scaffolding and modeling built in to structure the learning experience. These strategies and approaches can be better implemented in library instruction to improve media literacy.

I think one way for us to better tackle information literacy is to better explain and allow others to experience what it is that librarians do. User experiences in libraries have been improving dramatically thanks to the serious exploration into how users are searching for and utilizing information and library spaces. But while we think a lot about how users engage with librarians, library webpages, library resources and databases, we think less about these interactions as teaching moments. The reference librarian used to be able to guide patrons to databases and show them the steps needed to access sources. Now much of that has been turned over to always-accessible Libguides and similar "How-To" resources. None of these tools, though, really teach those skills in the ways that educational research and psychology reveal to be the most effective.

So the challenge remains, particularly for school librarians but also for public youth-service librarians, how can we better teach good media literacy practices and research skills and effectively incorporate them into an inquiry-based curriculum. Luckily, libraries tend to start with the advantage of having the computers and technology that can engage students and continue to operate as essential cognitive tools. Certain media activities and tools, such as photography, videography, social networking, even powerpoint, can be easily be utilized in active learning environments. 

Other skills, such as responsible researching, can be harder to maneuver. I could not agree more with Frances Jacobson Harris' critique of the worksheet as a largely ineffective tool for teaching students about source authority and evaluation. I do not believe that many of these "check-the-box/proceed-to-the-next-step" approaches improve student practices. While slightly more advanced than the "just say no" approach of telling children what is right and wrong, it ultimately lacks much application and engagement by the students. In her book I Found It on the Internet: Coming of Age Online, Harris has some great active-based learning examples that better engage the student. She incorporates quasi- and non-academic sources into a fuller discussion about the ways different news stories are covered in different outlets and platforms and asks students to discover these nuances. The most collaborative assignment she describes asks students to take the evaluation skills they learned and practiced in class back home to guide parents through a website, a great example of how far-reaching an effective collaborative assignment can reach.

I think more can be done, though, to be transparent to students about the research process today. As Harris notes of search engines, "the search process itself can mask authorship." A common assignment that I have seen asks children to find out how google works. Many are shocked to find out that few people really know due to the protected algorithm. But librarians can do more than just provide these "aha" moments. As Next-Generation Catalogs become more prevalent, it is important that librarians build in active assignments that help students better understand not only how google.com works, but also how the library OPAC works, and what exactly students may be finding through these sources, and the linked databases available to libraries.  We have lots of "how-to" guides, but fewer resources that engage the mechanics and finding structures of such tools.

One assignment I have been brainstorming is to allow children to choose and contrast a variety of different sources--either from a controlled list or open-ended--and then ask them to track the steps necessary to get that source from its initial production (writing, recording, creation, etc) to the computer screen the student now views. The teacher and librarian can model a few of these paths for students first and perhaps discuss some of the traits of search engines as well. By looking at the steps needed for a blog to reach the user, versus mapping the steps for an academic journal all the way through the library database subscriptions might help clarify the authorship component of evaluation. Furthermore, such assignments could be easily linked to other class components like student web publishing, and/or student-edited literary or research journals as well, making it interdisciplinary and collaborative. I think an important follow-up could be to ask students to turn that critical eye back upon their own publishing. How would another user see their publication through a critical evaluation lens? and are there ways to improve that authority?  These are important questions and concerns that can improve how students utilize the library and research.

There are some great ideas for teaching media literacy out there, and numerous media literacy toolkits. These can be valuable tools, but it is important to be sure that these tools are effectively reaching students. If we want students to be more media and research savvy, we have to trust that they can learn and understand the ways librarians incorporate and structure those media and research tools. As Harris notes: "We know from educational research and our own experience that such learning is most successful when it is built into activities that occur over time, across the curriculum, collaboratively, and in the context of application. It makes a great deal of sense to put students more directly in the driver's seat" (176). Lets try to pull back the curtain on library practices as much as we can, not only for our adult users, but also for our children and students.

Harris, Frances Jacobson. I Found It On The Internet: Coming Of Age Online. Chicago : American Library Association, 2011. Print.

Alone Together: Technology and Socializing

NPR never fails to provide a wealth of good information and talking points. I came across this great review and discussion in NPR Books. Author Sherry Turkle's new book Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other examines the changes and consequences of our increasingly digital and plugged-in worlds. She postulates that even in this digitally connected world, we often find ourselves feeling very much alone.

Some of the important topics she covers with application for Youth Service Librarians include the impact of digital devices on young children in the midst of developing individual identities, the impact of facebook and social networking on teen identity and teen's inability to reinvent themselves today, and the psychology of cyber-bullying in a virtual, rather than face-to-face world. I was particularly interested in the inability for children to separate the school day from the home because of these digital social ties. Whereas children used to be able play with identity, and "shut off" their social selves and social identities once in the privacy of homes, they now continue those social interactions and contests throughout the day and evening.

As someone who so often espouses the virtues of technology and the need for libraries to continue to expand and develop their digital outreach, this interview led me to pause. While I still think we must continue to implement these digital technologies, we have to be sure to redouble our efforts to teach media literacy and responsible digital use. In particular, cyber-bullying is an area that librarians can take a real leadership role in discussing the issues, providing opportunities for discussion and solutions, and display available tools and resources to counteract such behavior. 

Interestingly, this month's K-12 Professional Book Club at the University of Illinois will address this same issue. Dorothy L. Espelage, a UIUC faculty member and one of the co-authors of Bullying Prevention & Intervention:  Realistic Strategies for Schools, will be in attendance on Tuesday, November 6th to discuss her book (co-authors Susan M. Swearer, Dorothy L. Espelage, and Scott A. Napolitano).  This session will also be offered online, if anyone is interested. I look forward to finding the time to read both of these books--I think they will potentially work well in concert--and I hope to be able to virtually attend this session. 

As we continue to develop digital and mobile libraries, we constantly have to make sure we are considering the consequences of such technologies upon our young people so that we can both best utilize these tools, and ensure they complement a supportive and nurturing youth environment.

Undergrads and Information Technology

Check out this great infographic from the Educause Center for Applied Research.
ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2012
You can check out the whole study here.


Some of the interesting findings include the fact that students see blended-learning courses as the norm now, and expect to be able to use web interfaces to access course information. Perhaps more interesting, though, is how students use technology. Students desired a separation between much of their social networking tools (texting, facebook) and their course-work and interactions with their teachers. While students may not want teachers intruding on these social spaces, it is essential to be able to reach them through the devices they are using most: mobile smartphones. Schools do seem to be making a good effort to meet the mobile needs of their students and should continue to follow the models that are available.

I think the biggest takeaway from this study, though, is about students' attitudes towards technology and tech skills. Large majorities viewed technical proficiency as very important for their futures. And while many said they received adequate training, a majority still sought better training from their instructors, and nearly half felt they entered college without thorough preparation for using technology. Students were much more concerned about gaining these types of training than in utilizing the most cutting-edge technologies in their classes. It is important, then, for schools to prioritize skill-building exercises and resources to introducing "newer" and "better" technologies.

I think this holds particular relevance for K-12 librarians who can be the bridge to provide the better technical skill-training that students are looking for in their preparation for college. Technology is clearly an area of engagement for students, who see "real-life" skills they desire. This engagement can serve as a tool for librarians to enhance their role in inter-disciplinary curriculum and instruction. I think this ECAR study is a great resource to use to convince administrators of the importance of technology instruction and enhancing the library's role in the school environment.

What stands out to you from these ECAR findings?

MOOC's and their Place in Libraries

The most recent Chronicle of Higher Education special report covers the fascinating world of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). With a growing attention, participation, and curiosity about these offerings, we should start thinking about the role of MOOCs in our libraries.

Through interfaces like Coursera, EdX, and others, individuals now have access to a vast array of free, online courses offered by some of the top universities, including Harvard, MIT, Princeton, UC-Berkeley, and UVA. While these offerings are still somewhat amorphous, and do not currently offer credit, they do offer full-featured online class environments, including detailed assignments, and video-archived lectures and discussion forums. There is much still unsettled about these courses and how they will operate going forward, but there does seem to be a major groundswell for such offerings, from both the university perspective as well as the broader public.

Because there is such public interest in MOOCs, it is important for libraries to think about how such massive courses can support our principles. Just as collaborations between schools and libraries have proven to be so effective, collaborations between MOOCs and libraries also offer some great potentials. Of course, the relationship is a different one, though. One phenomena that has developed out of these MOOCS are local discussion groups forming and meeting in places like coffee-houses, libraries, etc. If the public library were to publicize this as a program it could further facilitate such peer connections, foster community, increase knowledge, and all cost the library very little. This also helps to overcome one of the major concerns over MOOCs, that they eliminate important face-to-face time.

There is also value in these courses, though, for teen service librarians. I can envision MOOC-inspired educational and informational programming for young adult users. Similar discussion groups based around a MOOC course or lecture are easy opportunities to capitalize on this popularity and hopefully bring teens into the library space. By offering college-style courses, certain teens who are seeking further enrichment have an environment to express that. Furthermore, from an informational perspective, what better way to give teens a sense of a college course, than to participate in a college course through MOOC? Just as teen programming often includes support for standardized test preparation, and college-seeking resources available in the library, they can also provide an environment to discuss a modeled college course through MOOCs.

I would be interested to hear of libraries that have started such programs and if they have found engagement with the public. Do you see other ways that MOOCs can be incorporated into libraries and the broader reading community?  While much is still unkown concerning MOOcs, with the budget challenges that so many libraries face, the wealth of free instruction available should be seen as a valuable resource going forward.

The Library's "Ground Game"

As we move ever closer to election day, we hear more and more in the news about the importance of each political party's ground game. While this has been called the first social media election, and we have been fascinated with the high-tech campaign applications and the use of social networking, many in the media are once again pointing back to the old-fashioned ground game as a vital difference-maker in the next few weeks.  Yahoo News's Walter Shapiro discussed this in a recent article, noting that while "the voter contact lists may be based on sophisticated algorithms... the streetwalkers and the door-knockers of politics still depend on time-honored techniques like broad smiles, practiced pitches and infinite patience."

I think this is a great analogy to what we as librarians face today. We can encourage eye-catching technology, we can develop great city-wide and national programs, but in developing these advanced and complex plans, we can not ignore the importance of the "ground game."  I see this often in the public libraries I visit. Access to great digital resources, and great web designs are important and do encourage users and visitors. Great pedagogically-sound early learning resources made publicly available in libraries offer another great opportunity to encourage early reading. But all these efforts are often only as effective as the on-the-ground interaction that librarians can provide for visitors.

The importance of the reference desk librarian can not be lost in the flood of technology. Similar to the political campaigns, it is the broad smiles, ready answers, and infinite patience of the youth services librarian that can make or break a child's experience with books and reading, or provide a care-giver with the critical resources to encourage such skills. A good reference desk librarian can help build a lifelong connection to the library. But the opposite is also true. As libraries face budget constraints, I too often find that the librarian sitting at the children's reference desk is not a specialist in that field, and is unable to provide users with the answers and resources they need. Alternatively, an aloof and disengaged reference desk librarian can similarly dampen user's experiences.

I am a major proponent of technology in the library. And I am also very committed to creating and disseminating learning resources to libraries to help encourage early reading. These programs and technologies can be essential to improving library usage and teaching best practices. But, it is important to remember that in most cases, these tools are only as valuable as "ground game librarians" can make them. We have to support our local and branch librarians to best facilitate the use of our far-reaching library resources.

Librarydoor: The Scarlet P ?

Check out this blog post and the Arthur cartoon about plagiarism:

Librarydoor: The Scarlet P ?: Try this  Plagiarism Arthur episode -- This is a short  winner. Not only does this short two minute cartoon support CCS   Writing 8 but it h...

Library Leadership in the News

 Check out this great article from Education Week.

Common Core Thrusts Librarians Into Leadership Role


Somebody referred me to this article this week and I think it is a great example of the role the modern school librarian can take in the larger administration going forward.  As we go forward librarians will continue to be leaders in connecting curriculum.  The article talks a lot about the common core and as curriculums become more and more cross-disciplinary, the library and librarians will be able to serve a greater role in offering both a space and human resources to facilitate those connections across subjects. The Common Core standards they speak of emphasize the inquiry-based models that cognitive studies research has supported.

These initiatives have not only brought more students and projects to the library--whether reading, writing, or research--but have also led to a significant increase in support for teachers as well as instructional opportunities for librarians through teacher-librarian collaboration. "Materials are almost secondary; it's really about helping teachers think about new ways to provide instruction and helping them see that there is someone in the building who already knows how to do that." noted librarian Jennifer LaGarde [check out her blog at http://www.librarygirl.net/]. More and more, librarians are being incorporated more fully into curricular development and planning, which stands to benefit the entire community. I think this is the next crucial step in placing libraries at the hub of academic settings. All this despite budget challenges to libraries, too. It is great to see such leadership roles being discussed beyond just the library community!

Do also check out the comments, though. I think they give you a really good sense about some of the resistance that  core standards still face from many teachers and parents.

You will have to register as a guest to read it, but at Edweek, that's not a bad thing!

I hope you enjoy this quick read.

Early Literacy Skills and Technology

Researchers, psychologists, librarians, and parents all seem to agree that it is never too early to start reading to your child. Even in utero reading could have benefits in building aural connections between the child and the parents’ voices. All agree, the earlier we start, the better.

But is there a time when it is too early to utilize technology in reading?

……..

I am always interested in the possibilities and challenges that technology offers to the modern library. Technology and media has already drastically transformed our adult and teen library spaces. I wonder how/if technology can benefit early literacy programs in the library. Obviously we can utilize library web pages to offer resources for parents and to market our programs, but are there advantages or disadvantages to introducing technological tools into storytelling and early childhood programs? Do these tools inhibit the shared reading environment?

Studies have found a significant correlation between when shared reading begins for a child and language scores at the age of four and that 9 out of 10 of those children who begin schooling as poor readers in 1^st grade will still be a poor reader in 4^th grade.  We also know that children aged 4-6 living in a high-TV household, are far less capable of reading (34% vs 56%).[1]  But at the same time, all I ever hear from parents is how the iPad is the most important new learning tool for young children, replete with a wealth of educational applications. Now I don’t mean to imply that television and an educational iPad application are the same experience. The iPad inherently demands a more shared experience than television does, but I don’t believe an iPad demands the level of sharing that book-reading, or group storytime can offer. 

Furthermore, having shared reading time between child and caregiver is essential, but as Every Child Ready to Read emphasizes, it is also important how you read with a child to emphasize early literary skills. For young children sensory experience is so important to how they learn. Whether that’s tactile, aural, visible, or even oral, these are all experiences that young children can have with a physical book, and with the physical space of children’s libraries. And young children also improve memory retention when they are emotionally involved, something that can be hard to replicate through technology. Ultimately, if we can use technology while maintaining the social, loving, dialogic, parent-child relationship that lies at the core of shared reading they can be a benefit, but these elements can NOT get lost in the sweep of this digital era.

That said, don’t we also have a responsibility to prepare our children for that digital world? Such goals are becoming essential to curricular goals as children grow older. What age or level of development do you think is right to introduce such tools? How are you using today's tech tools--computers, electronic games, tablet devices—in your early literacy program, if at all? I am very curious about the role of technology in early childhood development and would love to hear some of your experiences!

---

[1] Statistics cited in Saroj Nadkarni Ghoting and Pamela Martin-Díaz, Early Literacy Storytimes @ Your Library: Partnering with Caregivers for Success  p6-10; Also see Maryanne Wolf, and Catherine J. Stoodley. Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of the Reading Brain. Ch. 4, pp. 81-107

Study Like a Scholar, Scholar

While settling into the work week on this Monday morning, I have been reading a lot about user-need and library instruction. Somehow that vein of inquiry has brought me here.

Check out this video from the Brigham Young University's Library Multimedia Crew. Sure, its over 2 years old, but if its not new to you, it is to me. If you have not seen it, check it out. Its kinda awesome.

Do you think this type of video is something that can actually help market the school/university library? Is it worth the investment of time and money? What if it weren't so darn good?

Let  me know what you think.

Cheers!

More on Accelerated Reader

In the first part, I discussed the merits of Accelerated Reader despite its failures to live up to its purported claims. In this post, I want to delve in a little deeper into some of the aspects of the incentives program, testing, and content that I find problematic. Do check out the

INCENTIVE: Accelerated Reader does offer a wealth of content. It provides the opportunity for school systems to instantly broaden the reading library for students. These are all tremendous advantages. However, by incentivizing the program, Accelerated Reader has driven students towards reading only those books that can earn them rewards, and/or that have testing developed to coincide with the reading. In any incentivized program, we do have to be wary of the reader’s motivation. We are trying to instill intrinsic motivations, so we do have to weigh the effect that extrinsic motivations will have upon long-term reading. Nancy Everhart, Eliza Dresang, M.B. Kotrla and others have done much to challenge AR’s incentives system.

COMPETITION: The underlying element of competition is problematic. Many summer reading programs have eliminated the individual competitive aspect of their programs because of concerns if it live up to best practices. Yet, it seems, AR promotes this.  As Everhart’s study shows, it does not appear that AR has taken into account the psychological impact of publicly tracking achievement and creating  a competitive environment. As Everhart and others have shown, often times such competitions can actually lead to a disengagement with reading for many participants. Furthermore, when these competitions are tied to points and incentives, many students end up strategically reading many short, low-reading level books in order to accumulate more points, thus really challenging the goals of the program and the underlying motivations.  

CONTENT: Further, AR promotes incentives while limiting the sources that can provide the student with those incentives.  While AR has a huge database of books available, those that can earn incentives are much more limited. These numbers are further limited when settings are instilled to limit reading material to various reading levels. Many also feel that these assigned reading difficulty levels are arbitrary and do more to harm than to help.  The result is that many children do not have the wealth of sources that the numerical database seems to promise. Furthermore, the gender distinctions that Everhart discusses are fascinating, and most often tied to content. Boys are reluctant to participate for fear of being seen as reading at low levels, much more so than girls. A lot of this is still tied to the limited content and the arbitrary designations that AR has built in to its program.

TESTING: Perhaps the biggest concern for me, though, is the testing dynamic of AR. In some schools the quizzes that AR provides are incorporated into student grading. On the surface, this seems to be reasonable, as time is being devoted to reading, so assessment should follow. However, a quick examination of those tests reveals the worst kind of assessment. As Dresang and Kotrla point out, rote memorization of book content is the only thing tested in AR quizzes. This places them at the base level of Bloom’s Taxonomy.[1] Comprehension, application, comparison, and analysis are utterly lacking. Rote memorization is NOT the best teaching practices of today.

I think we can see here why many experts have linked AR to success in NCLB testing. The flaws of NCLB have been detailed ad nauseum elsewhere, but the increased emphasis on quantifying results has led to more rote testing at lower levels of learning objectives.  It is thus not surprising that AR and NCLB would correlate highly, as Dresang and Kotrla have found.

Overall, I still believe there can be value in these programs. They do encourage reading, and if we believe in the ability of summer reading to motivate (often through community incentive) then we have to recognize the capability that AR has to do some of the same work. That said, the materials and curriculum provided are lacking. They fail to promote good cognitive learning.

SOURCES: Eliza T. Dresang, and M. Bowie Kotrla, “School Libraries and the Transformation of Readers and Reading,” in Handbook of Research on Children's and Young Adult Literature, ed Wolf et al, Routledge, 2010.

Everhart, Nancy, “A Crosscultural Inquiry into the Levels of Implementation of Accelerated Reader and Its Effect on Motivation and Extent of Reading: Perspectives from Scotland and England” American Association of School Librarians, Accessed September 5, 2012, http://www.ala.org/aasl/aaslpubsandjournals/slmrb/slmrcontents/volume82005/reader.

---

[1] Eliza T. Dresang, and M. Bowie Kotrla, “School Libraries and the Transformation of Readers and Reading,” in Handbook of Research on Children's and Young Adult Literature, ed Wolf et al, Routledge, 2010.