I was disappointed that Kelly's "solid ideas for halting the decline of reading" don’t involve school or public libraries. Obviously the economic climate in California is somewhat to blame for the shortsightedness, but since the book is meant to impact others beyond that state’s borders it would have been prudent to include references to the positive impact that can be made by a well-stocked school library, and by collaboration between librarians and teachers who work together to encourage literacy. Those who truly believe “what they [students] read in schools is important; what they read the rest of their lives is more important” must set their students up for future success. I’m all for teachers sharing great books, especially titles that they’ve personally enjoyed. Of course librarians can also book talk titles and generate interest, and when teachers and librarians work together…wow, we can really make an impact on students! Kelly's strict focus on classroom collections strikes me as limiting. I think it’s critical for students to become familiar and comfortable with the culture of libraries so they can take ownership of their book selection in and out of school. Sort of the same idea as if you give a man a fish you feed him for a day, but if you teach him to fish he can feed himself for life. School libraries can be an enjoyable, non-threatening place for students to learn the culture of libraries, how they work and what they have to offer. Lifelong readers need to be comfortable in a free public library, especially in communities with a dearth of book stores. Librarians can help so much with adolescent literacy. Even though Kelly references numerous articles from library publications, I feel as though the text of Readicide marginalizes the positive impact of school libraries.
Tags:
Share
-
▶ Reply to This