Joan wrote to me yesterday suggesting that I take a special look at Matoko Rich’s front-page article, “A New Assignment: Pick Books You Like,” about the implementation of Nancie Atwell’s approach to reader’s workshop in a gifted classroom.  She threw down a gauntlet that I felt I had to take: point out the fact that nowhere in the article about choice were school libraries mentioned. 

Now, I didn’t really feel that the article captured the full story of reader’s workshop, and I do so grow weary of the extolling of $1000 classroom libraries (though I know how difficult it is for teachers to fork over that kind of money) when quarter of a million dollar collections are just down the hall.  For the record, I’m not opposed to classroom libraries per se but I do worry that they give an artificial sense of balance when they far-too-often over-feature the teacher’s preferences and/or fiction, which often isn’t what kids want.  It took Laura’s schoolwide classroom libraries experiment, in fact, to help me see this situation differently.  (Stay tuned - coming to the Nov/Dec issue of Knowledge Quest!)

Anyway, here’s what I submitted in the comments section of the article:

As a former English teacher turned school librarian and children’s literature adjunct lecturer, I read this story with interest and the comments with even more fascination. Those commenters who pointed out that reader’s workshop is a much more scaffolded experience than is described in the article are correct - THE DAILY FIVE (Boushey & Moser, 2006) is one example of how reader’s workshop can be a balance of mini-lessons, mini-conferencing with the teacher, assessment, independent reading at one’s own level (but with a wide range of genre/content choices within that level), conversing about literature, and more. Doubtless, Ms. McNeill has organized her reader’s workshop experience so it extends beyond book reviews.  As many of us know, it is difficult to synthesize the nuances of K-12 education in a short news article, and yet it is often in those nuances that the core ideas are found.

It takes effort for a teacher to set up a well-balanced reader’s workshop, and getting systems started and nurtured over time can tax even a master teacher.I would encourage teachers to consider bringing their school librarian (also known as teacher-librarian or school library media specialist) into the reader’s workshop process. 

First, we can help steer kids toward books that match their learning needs and their personal interests.  Even a $1000 classroom library (bought with precious personal money) cannot compete with the range of formats and genres available in a school library.  (As a comparison, my small school library has an estimated value of $225,000, with ongoing annual funding so that the collection is continually refreshed with new materials.) A certified school librarian has specialized training in reviewing children’s literature and developing a library collection that is responsive to the needs of its community.  This expertise can be put to use either by taking advantage of the school library’s collection or by partnering with the school librarian to develop a robust, well-rounded classroom library.

More importantly, a school librarian is an instructional partner.  Most school librarians possess dual certification as teachers and as librarians.  As certified teachers, quality school librarians can co-facilitate a reader’s workshop experience, conference with students, co-plan and co-teach mini-lessons, jointly assess student progress, and serve as a second teacher.  Imagine the powerful impact that can begin when we cut the student-to-teacher ratio in half.  (See http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/aaslissues/positionstatements/roleinreading.cfm for the American Association of School Librarians’ Position Statement on the Library Media Specialist’s Role in Reading.)

In tough economic times, school librarians and school library funding are in jeopardy.  If your school has both, are you taking advantage of what they have to offer? (And if they aren’t responsive to your needs, does your administrator know so corrective action can be taken?)

What do you think?

Bookmark to:  

I read a few days ago on the CHILD_LIT listserv that Reading Rainbow is ceasing production after 26 (!!) years on the air.  The NPR story is here and excerpted below:

[John, Grant, head of content at WNED Buffalo, RR’s home station] says the funding crunch is partially to blame, but the decision to end Reading Rainbow can also be traced to a shift in the philosophy of educational television programming. The change started with the Department of Education under the Bush administration, he explains, which wanted to see a much heavier focus on the basic tools of reading — like phonics and spelling.

Grant says that PBS, CPB and the Department of Education put significant funding toward programming that would teach kids how to read — but that’s not what Reading Rainbow was trying to do … “[the show] encouraged kids to pick up a book and to read.”

Linda Simensky, vice president for children’s programming at PBS, says that when Reading Rainbow was developed in the early 1980s, it was an era when the question was: “How do we get kids to read books?” Since then, she explains, research has shown that teaching the mechanics of reading should be the network’s priority.

Research has directed programming toward phonics and reading fundamentals as the front line of the literacy fight. Reading Rainbow occupied a more luxurious space — the show operated on the assumption that kids already had basic reading skills and instead focused on fostering a love of books . . .

Reading Rainbow’s impending absence leaves many open questions about today’s literacy challenges, and what television’s role should be in addressing them.

Once I recuperated from the idea that Reading Rainbow was over a quarter of a century old and, by association, that made me, uh, OK, moving on … I started unpacking all that this decision means.

First, as a librarian in an upper middle-class district, the great majority of my students do read.  So how are my students benefiting from programming that focuses on phonics and mechanics? They need something else … an ongoing enthusiasm for reading, a community of readers, a gentle nudge to keep going … which is exactly what Reading Rainbow did, with a keen eye for great literature. (And yes, I know I’m one of the “lucky ones” and that many of you work in different situations where students do need much more reading support … though I wonder … do they look to PBS for it?)

Secondly, does reading stop at mechanics? No way! I talked with a librarian recently who loved Accelerated Reader.  Being a reluctant AR monitor myself, I asked why.  She pointed out that boys in 2nd or 3rd grade loved it, felt it was a challenge, etc.  But what about girls? Not so much, she said.  What about boys in 4th or 5th grade? Not so much.  So why put all the kids through AR if it was only working with a small group? And what about the 5th grade slump, especially among boys? It’s just a reminder to me that just going through the motions - be it sounding it out or sludging through book after book to earn points - is not how we define reading, much less a love for reading.  I want kids who will read without being rewarded in points for going through the motions.  And so do my colleagues in urban districts.

Next, what are the implications for libraries? We librarians have long been spokespeople for voluntary reading, for making a wide variety of choices available to kids (while admittedly seeding the collection with Great Books You Might Not Pick Out On Your Own But Will Enthusiastically Read If We “Sell” Them To You), and for fostering that RR-type love for books. Are we booklovin’ our way into extinction by not focusing on phonics? (Though most of us do find that we weave it in and out of the books we choose for Storytime, we surely don’t follow up with phonics worksheets.) This tension - do we self-label as book advocates? or is that setting ourselves up for obsolescence? - showed up on the AASL Forum listserv in response to an American School Board Journal advocating for school libraries. 

As we inch closer to the start of the school year (first day of school isn’t until 9/8, but we’re all hard at work anyway!), and as I think about how elementary school libraries, in particular, can be more responsive to the learning needs of students, moving beyond construction paper projects and into meaningful learning, I’m starting to feel like we’re at this Reading Rainbow crossroads.  I love books and stories and Storytime. I love community conversations focused around books and information.  I love the idea that we can extend those literary conversation into inquiry work. 

Like so many librarians, I don’t want to give up stories.  (And, luckily in my district, I don’t have to.)  Building a RR-style community of readers is something I’m proud of.  Yes, I’m high tech, and yes, I want to be academically rigorous.  But there’s just nothing that beats Storytime when the room is hushed with anticipation as we collectively inhale as the page turns …

There’s still room to love reading.  Really.

Bookmark to:  

I’ve been cleaning out my “need to read” email and found this article from the Washington Post (via ASCD SmartBrief) about Twitter and education.  “‘Some Professors’ Jitters Over Twitter are Easing,” by Susan Kinzie (6/26/09) talks about how various college professors and even elementary school classrooms are using Twitter.

I love how Twitter helps us synthesize ideas down to the essence, and I am very excited to hear about Albert Whitman’s upcoming experiment to Tweet in the voices of the Boxcar Children, but … if you work in an elementary school, be cautious.  The first term in the Twitter User Agreement says:

You must be 13 years or older to use this site.

Will Twitter sue you if you put kids on Twitter? Probably not.  But it puts elementary educators at risk with the parent community or administrators.

Apparently, part of the Children’s Internet Protection Act had to do with protecting kids who were aged 13 or below.  So in general, check with the User Agreement for a Web site before you leap in.

Now that we know Twitter is useful but that there are possible issues when using it with younger kids, who’s going to invent a plug-in for Moodle or a different closed environment that emulates Twitter in a safe way for kids?

Image:William Hogarth’s The Graham Children, from the National Gallery (UK) project, Takeonepicture.org.  Caption added with Big Huge Lab’s Captioner

Bookmark to: