Comparison of Collections

Comparison of Collections of Different Types of Elementary School in Regards to Controversial Versus Conventional Books Dawn Bish, Lisa Upper, Crystal Haith LIS 600

Comparison of Collections

Introduction

"a novel is a mirror that walks a great route. It presents to your eyes both the blue sky and the mud of the mire along the route. And the man who carries the mirror in his pocket will be accused by you of being immoral! Accuse instead the great road where the mire is, and also the road inspector who let the water collect and the mire form."(Stendahl found in Turin 2003) Libraries and librarians are charged with selecting and maintaining a diverse selection of materials for the population they serve as stated in the Library Bill of Rights (ALA, 1993, 2000, 2004, 2008). There have been several interpretations of the ALA Library Bill of Rights including the protection of the rights of all types of people regardless of gender, gender identification, sexual orientation, origin, lifestyle or age (ALA, 1993, 2000, 2004 2008). The role of the school library media specialist is to enhance collections with challenging, engaging and entertaining materials that represent the diversity of the user community; a role that can become difficult when developing elementary school collections. As previously stated, it is the ethical duty of the librarian to present the most diverse collection possible. The ALA Library Bill of Rights provides guidance and guidelines to assist the librarian in selection and material content of a collection, including providing materials and information presenting all points of view.

Comparison of Collections Literature Review

Parents, professionals, and concerned parties often censor childrens literature in order to protect children from exposure to content they deem inappropriate. However admirable this may appear, it is in direct violation of a childs right to access a variety of subjects and situations in reading material. Marie Kelsey (2007) states:
Despite the imperative for schools to teach students to seek out, critically analyze, and apply information, censors-and they can be parents, teachers, administrators, and even community membersbelieve they know what is best for all students to read and what information children should not receive in the name of protection. This restrictive view is often based on an unarticulated assumption between ideas and actions; if students read about drugs or sex, for example, they may be inclined to indulge.

For the last forty years, the courts have upheld the belief that information is not detrimental to children (Kelsey, 2007). Each school library is required to follow the First Amendment to the Bill of Rights that guarantee freedom of speech, and is interpreted to include not only dissemination of speech via various media, but also access to such speech. In Board of Education v. Pico, the only case of school library censorship to reach the U.S. Supreme Court, a plurality of the justices recognized that minors have a right to receive information (Adams, 2008). However, a childs rights under the First Amendment may be limited depending on the type of school they attend. The First Amendment forbids government restrictions on speech; due to the absence of government funding, a private school can restrict access to reading material without being in violation of the First Amendment. Public schools have a more difficult job when addressing the First Amendment rights of minors. For example, school policy and site-based leadership teams determine age-appropriate material for each school (e.g. an elementary school student would not have access to high school materials). School boards have a broader influence over curriculum

Comparison of Collections

and may restrict materials used for a specific course but have much less influence over library collection content. When the restriction on the right to receive information takes place in a school library on the other hand, the courts are more reluctant to give the school board such broad discretion. In the Supreme Court case Board of Education v. Pico, Justice Brennan wrote that although local school boards must be permitted to establish and apply their curriculum with broad discretion in order to transmit community values, at the same time, school boards are bound to uphold the First Amendment (Adams, 2008). Adams states the following as interpretation of the Pico case: (2008)
The Justices in the Pico case were divided in their opinion. There was no majority vote on the key issues of the case, and the case was later settled. Although this means that the opinion has little value as a binding precedent setting opinion on school library censorship, lower courts have cited Pico for the principles expressed in Justice Brennan's opinion. These include:

School boards may remove materials from a school library if they find the books pervasively vulgar and educationally unsuitable. School boards may not remove books from school library shelves simply because they dislike the ideas contained in those books. School boards may not remove school library books in order to try to proscribe what they deem to be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion or other matters of opinion.

The Pico opinion emphasized that book removal from the school library was the issue. There is no First Amendment requirement for a library to purchase a particular item. However, once that item has been acquired, a school board may not remove it based merely on the ideas contained therein.

In short, according to the principles of the Pico case, a public school may remove a book from its curriculum but may not remove a book from the library if it has already been purchased.

Comparison of Collections

Data Sources

In this study we looked at three distinctly different schools (public, private and magnet) and compared the literature available to students (See Graphs 1 and 2 and Figures 1 and 2 for school demographics). Note that the magnet school follows the Montessori elementary school model and the private school ascribes to the Classical Trivium model and a Christian worldview. We compared these elementary schools due to comparable student population and library collection. Differences in demographic makeup and philosophical ideologies were also of interest in this study.

Publi c Privat e Magn et

Number of students 492 387 388

Table 1

School Demographics % African American 22% 3% 46% % White 65% 94% 35% % Hispanic 6% 0% 10% % Asian 1% 3% 3% %Multi Racial 5% not available 6%

Public Privat e Magne t

Table 2

Comparison of Collections

Graph 1

School Demographics

Comparison of Collections

Graph 2

Comparison of Collections

Hypothesis

The general hypothesis of this paper is as follows: The collections of disparate elementary schools will differ regarding controversial and conventional books. A continuum of controversial to conventional books will be seen from magnet to public to private schools. The three types of elementary schools discussed are public, private and magnet schools; the working definitions in this paper are as follows: Public school- a school funded at the state and federal level, open to all children in the catchment area. Private school- a school that does not accept public funds, to which there is an application and enrollment process and tuition paid. Magnet school- a publicly-funded school that is part of the school district and provides instruction in specific and diverse curriculum including but not limited to: technology, advanced academics, Spanish Immersion, Montessori, and the arts. Enrollment in a magnet school is contingent on either a lottery or academic qualifications. Students in a magnet schools district are accepted by merit of residence. In the context of this study, controversial material is defined as any literature that has been challenged by a professional, parent, or organization due to perceived inappropriate content. Inappropriate content is defined as not being age-appropriate or of a subject deemed problematic in nature (sexuality, language, evolution, religion) or issues (homosexuality, single parent households, interracial marriages) not considered the norm by some portion of the population. The Banned and Challenged Books of 2007-2008 (Doyle 2007) will be used as the

Comparison of Collections

reference for what books are deemed the most controversial. These challenged books represent all age/grade levels and include books more suitable for the teenage reader; as this papers topic deals with elementary schools, all of the books listed do not apply to young readers and have been removed (See Appendix A for the list of books the researchers adapted for elementary school students). Conventional books are those books considered appropriate for children of all ages. These books cover a variety of topics not considered problematic in nature. The researchers used The Book Tree, a Christian Reference for Childrens Literature, 2nd edition by Elizabeth McCallum and Jane Scott (2008) as the basis for conventional books. Since the list is quite comprehensive, books were randomly chosen from The Book Tree (See Appendix B).

Methods

A checklist was developed which included controversial and conventional books and columns for inclusion in, and accessibility to the listed books; if accessibility was limited, in what way was it restricted (See Appendix C). The researchers presented the list to each school chosen to for study. Due to time constraints and lack of funding, only one of each school model was chosen. The researchers believe that: The magnet school would have more of the controversial titles in its collection due to the parents choice of a specialized program over the childs home school, and the specialized makeup of the students attending a magnet school. Also, in most magnet schools, the teachers must complete additional course work to meet criteria (e.g. Montessori teachers must be certified in Montessori methodology).

Comparison of Collections

10

The public school would have a variety of both controversial and conventional books, but would have fewer controversial books in their collections than the magnet school.

The private school would have most if not all of the conventional books on the list but would have fewer controversial books due to its conservative nature.

The research team contacted and presented the checklist to the librarians of the chosen schools (See Appendix C for the study checklist). Data was separated by book inclusion/exclusion and percentage of controversial and conventional books in library holdings (see Table 3 and Graph 3).

Findings

Our hypothesis was that the magnet school would have more of the controversial books, the public school would have a mixture of both, but fewer controversial books than the magnet school, and the private school would have all the conventional books and the fewest number of controversial books. However, the data indicated an error in the hypothesis; of the controversial books listed the public schools contained 50% and the magnet school contained 37.5%. A larger sampling of public and magnet schools is necessary to verify significant difference. The private school hypothesis held, as it contained only 6% of the controversial books and all the conventional books.

Comparison of Collections The researchers found it interesting that the public school did not have all of the

11

conventional books. Monetary issues, population being served and lack of circulation may be reasons for omission and merits further research. Of note: the magnet school librarian marked a smiley face on the checklist in the columns indicating exclusion of books on homosexual themes; the researchers inferred librarian bias. This same librarian was surprised that not all the conventional books titles listed were in the librarys collection and planned for their immediate acquisition.

Type of School Public Private Magnet

Conservative Controversial Books Books 71% 100% 95%

Table 3

50% 6% 37.50%

Graph 3

Comparison of Collections Conclusion

12

Admittedly, this action research project must be considered a pilot study due to limited sampling and data. More research and data need to be collected to determine if there is a significant difference in the collections of public, private or magnet schools. However, as private schools have more latitude when it comes to First Amendment rights, there may always be a lack of controversial materials in this type of library. Researchers agreed that individual librarian values may be significant in deciding collection content in addition to school model and purpose. Librarians may not realize that this is censorship, believing they are protecting children from inappropriate content, unintentionally violating the ALA Library Bill of Rights. An example from the study, one of the libraries had all but the last title in the Harry Potter series. The librarian stated she considered Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows too violent for an elementary school student. But is it up to the librarian to censor what a child can and cannot read? Under the law and current library practice, a parent may choose to censor only his/her own childrens access to information (Cain, 2006). In a recent study done by School Library Journal, librarians were given a survey concerning self-censorship of library collection. Participants were asked to answer a number of questions including: Which of the following has influenced your decision not to buy a book? Have you ever had to deal with a book challenge? Has that book challenge affected your book buying decision?

Of the participants surveyed, 23% said that their personal beliefs and values have influenced their decision to purchase a book. This is a relatively small percentage and the number may not

Comparison of Collections

13

be entirely accurate; librarians may unintentionally censor their collections or if censorship is intentional, a librarian may not admit it. Whelan (2009) states:
When it comes to self-censorship, its almost impossible to quantify because no one is monitoring it or collecting stats, and theres no open discussion on the subject. Although well never know the level of self-censorship over these books, one 2007 study by the University of Central Arkansas shows that less than one percent of school libraries in that conservative state have books containing gay subjects or story linesa clear sign that some heavyduty cherry-picking is going on.

In conclusion, the researchers raised more questions than they answered in this research project. The researchers began their study wanting to compare controversial versus conventional books in a variety of elementary schools and ended with these questions: Is it the type of school that dictates what goes into a library or is it the librarian? Does the librarian have the right to limit access to what is considered controversial under the guise of protecting children? How does a librarian build a collection that selects and maintains a diverse selection of material for the elementary school student? How does a librarian dismiss personal viewpoints in selecting the library collection while furthering the childs information-seeking and research-seeking abilities and foster the childs love of learning? Who is ultimately responsible for censoring what a child can and cannot read? Is it not the role of the parent or guardian to supervise what their child is reading rather than relying on school personnel? Each of these questions warrants further discussion and research. .

Comparison of Collections References

14

Helen R. Adams, Ensuring Intellectual Freedom and Access to Information in the School Library Media Program (Libraries Unlimited: 2008) http://lu.com/showbook.cfm?isbn=9781591585398, accessed on April 2, 2009. ALA, Library Bill of Rights, Adopted June 18, 1948, by the ALA Council; amended February 2, 1961; amended June 28, 1967; amended January 23, 1980; inclusion of age reaffirmed January 24, 1996. Retrieved February 10, 2009 from ALA website: http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/statementspols/statementsif/librarybillrights.cfm. ALA, Interpretations of Library Bill of Rights, Adopted June 30, 1993, by the ALA Council; amended July 12, 2000, June 30, 2004, July 2, 2008. Retrieved February 10, 2009 from ALA website: http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/statementspols/statementsif/interpretations/default.cf m. Cain, Charlene C. (2006). Librarians and Censorship: The Ethical Imperative. Louisiana Libr 68 No3 Wint 2006 Doyle, Robert P. (2007). Books Challenged or Banned in 2007-2008, Retrieved February 10, 2009 from ILA website: http://www.ila.org/pdf/2008banned.pdf. McCallum, Elizabeth and Scott, Jane. (2008). The Book Tree, a Christian Reference for Childrens Literature, 2nd edition Turin, Joelle. (2003). Disturbing books. Bookbird, 41(3), 6. Retrieved March 27, 2009, from research Library database. (Document ID: 378417591). Whelan, D. L. (2009, February 1). A Dirty Little Secret: Self-censorship. School Library Journal Retrieved April 6, 2009, from research Library database.

Comparison of Collections

15

Appendix A List of Elementary School, age appropriate challenged books from Robert P. Doyles Books that have been challenged or Banned in 2007-2008 (2007)

1. Allan, Nicholas. Where Willy Went 2. De Hann, Linda and Stern Nijland. King and King 3. Opie, Iona Archibald with Peter Opie, eds. I Saw Esau: The Schoolchilds Pocket Book 4. Pullman, Phillip. The Golden Compass 5. Richardson, Justin, and Peter Parnell. And Tango Makes Three 6. Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone 7. Schreier, Alta. Vamos a Cuba (A Visit to Cuba) 8. Gordon, Sharon. Cuba 9. Grover, Vicki. The Starplace 10. Howe, James. Totally Joe 11. Mercado, Nancy E, ed. Tripping over the Lunch Lady and Other Short Stories 12. Myers, Walter Dean. Fallen Angels 13. Steer, Dugald. Wizardology, The Book of the Secrets of Merlin 14. Taylor, Mildred D. The Land

Comparison of Collections

16

Appendix B List of conventional books taken from The Book Tree (McCullam and Scott2008)

1. Richard Atwater. Mr. Popper's Penguins 2. Aesop. Aesop's Fables 3. Rudyard Kipling. Just So Stories 4. C.S.Lewis. The Chronicles of Narnia 5. George Seldon. The Cricket in Times Square 6. E.B.White. Charlotte's Web 7. Margery Williams. The Velveteen Rabbit 8. retold by D'Aulaires. Greek Myths 9. Robert Louis Stevenson. A Child's Garden of Verses 10. Shel Silverstein. Various Poetry Selections 11. Margaret Davidson. Helen Keller 12. Patricia MacLachlin. Sarah, Plain and Tall 13. Robert C. OBrien. Mrs. Frisby and the rats of NIMH 14. Scott O'Dell. Island of the Blue Dolphins 15. Ester Forbes. Johnny Tremain 16. Irene Hunt. Across Five Aprils 17. Jean Lee Latham. Carry On, Mr. Bowditch 18. Elizabeth George Speare. The Sign of the Beaver 19. Harold Keith. Rifles for Watie 20. Carol Ryrie Brink. Caddie Woodlawn 21. Francis Hogsdon Burnett. The Secret Garden

Appendix Accessible to all C In Collection If not accessible to all, Checklist of controversial and conventional books given to librarians yes/no yes/no please explain Richard Atwater. Mr. Popper's Penguins Aesop. Aesop's Fables Rudyard Kipling. Just So Stories C.S.Lewis. The Chronicles of Narnia George Seldon. The Cricket in Times Square E.B.White. Charlotte's Web Margery Williams. The Velveteen Rabbit retold by D'Aulaires. Greek Myths Robert Louis Stevenson. A Child's Garden of Verses Shel Silverstein. Various Poetry Selections Margaret Davidson. Helen Keller Patricia MacLachlin. Sarah, Plain and Tall Robert C. OBrien. Mrs. Frisby and the rats of NIMH Scott O'Dell. Island of the Blue Dolphins Ester Forbes. Johnny Tremain Irene Hunt. Across Five Aprils Jean Lee Latham. Carry On, Mr. Bowditch Elizabeth George Speare. The Sign of the Beaver Harold Keith. Rifles for Watie Carol Ryrie Brink. Caddie Woodlawn Francis Hogsdon Burnett. The Secret Garden
Allan, Nicholas. Where Willy Went De Hann, Linda and Stern Nijland. King and King Opie, Iona Archibald with Peter Opie, eds. I Saw Esau: The Schoolchilds Pocket Book Pullman, Phillip. The Golden Compass Richardson, Justin, and Peter Parnell. And Tango Makes Three Rowling, J.K. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone Schreier, Alta. Vamos a Cuba (A Visit to Cuba) Gordon, Sharon. Cuba Grover, Vicki. The Starplace

Comparison of Collections

17

Comparison of Collections

18

Comparison of Collections

19

Appendix D Compilation of All books in the collections of Public, Private and Magnet Schools

Author and book

Richard Atwater. Mr. Popper's Penguins Aesop. Aesop's Fables Rudyard Kipling. Just So Stories C.S.Lewis. The Chronicles of Narnia George Seldon. The Cricket in Times Square E.B.White. Charlotte's Web Margery Williams. The Velveteen Rabbit retold by D'Aulaires. Greek Myths Robert Louis Stevenson. A Child's Garden of Verses Shel Silverstein. Various Poetry Selections Margaret Davidson. Helen Keller Patricia MacLachlin. Sarah, Plain and Tall Robert C. OBrien. Mrs. Frisby and the rats of NIMH Scott O'Dell. Island of the Blue Dolphins Ester Forbes. Johnny Tremain Irene Hunt. Across Five Aprils Jean Lee Latham. Carry On, Mr. Bowditch Elizabeth George Speare. The Sign of the Beaver Harold Keith. Rifles for Watie Carol Ryrie Brink. Caddie Woodlawn

Public
Yes

Private
Yes

Magnet

Accessible to all yes/no

limit access to any books on the list

Yes All three 20 Comparison of Collections schools did not Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes

If not accessible to all, please explain N/a

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes but different author Yes Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes