Kelly Gallagher, author of
Readicide, claims that the joy of reading is dying in the schools. Supposedly teachers are draining the love of reading from teenagers. Definitely this book is a must read (especially with the free download), and a VoiceThread
discussion to hear (thanks Joyce Valenza/SLJ for the post), but is Gallagher talking about our schools? Do you agree with the idea that "
[t]he systematic killing of the love of reading, often exacerbated by the inane, mind-numbing practices found in schools" is a problem the independent schools should discuss? I think we need to be aware of it, read about it, understand the idea and its implications, but I don't think I am seeing it to a great extent at my school. Granted, we don't have to worry about the issue of teaching for the standardized testing, which seems to be a prime suspect in the crime of readicide, but Gallagher considers other suspects as well.
On page 24 Gallagher states,
"[I]f we have any chance of addressing readicide, we must involve the key players (teachers, students, administrators, literacy coaches, superintendents, board members, legislators, newspaper reporters) in hard talk.We have to take an honest, perhaps painful, look at what is happening to young readers in our schools." Where are the librarians or school library media specialists? Shouldn't they be called upon as "key players" in what is happening to young readers? Schools should be demanding better libraries and librarians if they truly believe readicide is an issue in their districts.
Gallagher also contemplates the lack of interesting reading available in schools. He seems to focus on classroom libraries, which should be one focus, but another should be having good school libraries, with great librarians. He says Anaheim, where he teachers, has no bookstores - so where are people to get books? By not mentioning public libraries/librarians either, he essentially removes libraries from the conversation (Aneheim has several
public libraries). How can he write a book with such strong statements about books without considering the value of libraries and librarians in this issue? If teachers are trying to develop lifelong readers, they should encourage the habit of using libraries.
On page 54, Gallagher finally mentions libraries by stating,
"instead of always taking students to the library, it is often much more effective to bring the library to the students." This could be true, and working with the librarian to achieve this is crucial. I agree that classrooms should have small libraries in them, but the students should also have regular encouraged access to a large library (with a collection built by experts).
Readicide, although bringing up good points and ideas to discuss, essentially fails due to the author's choice to ignore the librarian's role in promoting reading for pleasure. The
discussions online about the book state that the extra effort it takes to collaborate with the librarian is a deterrent, and that is why librarians are ignored. This is a bad excuse when an email is all it takes for a librarian to bring a cart of books to a classroom and talk them up for a bit.
On another note, you should read the NEA report:
Reading is on the Rise, and take a sigh of relief.. Although older teens read less poetry and drama, fiction reading is on the rise from 2002.
Which scenario tells your school's story? Or do you have a new one? I always find that just as I think reading may be on the decline, a great 7th grade class of voracious readers enters the middle school, and the second semester seniors awaken from the college applications and want to talk about books they are reading. And sometimes those 9th and 10th graders check out stacks of books. And those juniors... well, at my school, they don't seem to read novels for pleasure too much. Either they aren't reading as much, or they aren't talking about it. Whether it is SAT prep or too much homework, I don't know.
