Parents, Teacher, Students, Values, and Censorship

I'm pretty sure I need to bid farewell to children's literature. Teaching it to undergrads becomes a problem for me when what the text is doing is second to how the text is used in the classroom, and when the text's purpose--that is, how it wants the reader to respond to it--conflicts with my values as a parent. Especially since all they ever want to talk about is the text's usefulness for talking about something other than the text.

Over and over again, I see and hear discussions of who has a right--and it is always discussed in terms of rights--to decide what is taught in the classroom. On the one hand, I teach books, so I uphold my own right to decide this. But I have a degree in my subject field--not an education degree--and I teach literature, not "opening children's minds to the reality of life" and "encouraging children to actively question the values of their parents," which is apparently the goal of reading and literature classes on the elementary, middle, and high school levels. I wonder to myself when "intellectually challenging" became conflated with "controversial" or "socially and politically relevant"--there does not seem to be much distinction. This must mean that Shakespeare, Dante, and Homer are no longer intellectually challenging, and no teenager is going to get as much of a thrill from Grendel's mother, Ophelia's death, or the Cyclops's eye as from some hot, steamy sex scene in a third-rate historical novel. That's not dumbing down the curriculum, apparently, that's making it "relevant." Did you know that a rape scene automatically makes a text "relevant"? It's true. So romance-novel readers rejoice.

Yes, this is a rant, in part. Because "censorship" is a term that is bantered about irresponsibly. Am I in favor of censorship? No. Am I afraid to expose my child to challenging topics? No. Do I think I know better than the average teacher of elementary, middle, or high school what is appropriate and challenging for my child's grade level? Um. . . Yes. But that's beside the point, really.

I have a few major concerns about the selection of books for gradeschool curricula:

1. First, the idea that to get students "interested" you have to have something that's forbidden in some way, or something that ties DIRECTLY into some contemporary "issue" that we're all supposed to care about.
2. Second, the idea that because kids "will be exposed to this anyway," teachers are obligated or justified in making it the subject of class discussion, analysis, and inquiry.
3. The idea that kids "can handle it." Kids can handle a lot. They are resilient. Does that mean we need to thrust it upon them?
4. The notion that parents want to limit children to their own (parents' own) values and thereby prevent children from figuring things out for themselves.

The last is by far the most significant. I actually saw it stated in exactly that way in a children's lit textbook geared for education majors as an answer to why books are challenged or censored. It represents the extreme arrogance of teachers and education majors in dealing with parents and children. It shows a disregard for the parent as well as the child. The child, this suggests, should intentionally be sent mixed messages so that s/he can, from a relative "blank slate" position, build up his/her own worldview from the pieces. How can that be a good thing? As parents, if we do not monitor our children, know what they are reading, how they are getting along in school, then we are bad and uninvolved, and have no room to complain. But if we foster in them a certain way of viewing the world around them, and wish for them to understand the world from the position of our own values first, while they are young and open to our instruction, before they evaluate these values from the vantage point of greater personal experience, we are also bad.

I don't want to keep them sheltered from the world, but I do want to give them a solid foundation without someone presenting a worldview that is contrary and asserting it over the one I struggle to instill. Exposure to ideas is one thing; asserting certain ideas over others is something else. So much has to do with the context in which something is introduced. And since I can't control the context in which a teacher presents something, and since at-home "damage control" pits me against the teacher and invites my child to take sides, I would like to have some consideration shown to me and my RIGHT to instill my values in my child when the teacher is selecting the books to be taught in a class. There is plenty of room for challenging, stimulating material without pissing off the parents. I see nothing wrong with parents suggesting that a book be substituted for another, depending on the book and the context. If I were teaching a book that fictionalized and dramatized aspects of Pope John Paul II's Theology of the Body at a public high school, would I be subject to censorship? How about if I taught a novel about a boy who struggled with his impulses toward homosexuality, only to decide on chastity, convert to Catholicism, and become a priest? Surely, this would not be tolerated in a public school. I would venture to say that such a book would be called dangerous and hate-filled. Such things will never *be* presented as alternate views. But why should the assumption of casual sex be touted as exposure to multiple viewpoints? I see no multiple voices. Only the reinforcement of the messages from society, media, advertising. Somehow, these are not questioned. Secular does not equal sexual. The sex lives of young people are fetishized by the media, the publishing industry, and teachers.

But I'm not sure this is really about sex for me. It's just the easiest way to talk about it. It's about teachers' disrespect for parents. Why should a parent's theoretical/anticipated position on curricula be demeaned in a textbook? And why should a teacher's worldview or talentless, lame attempt to stimulate discussion through shock be labeled as progressive and enlightened? And what is it about children that makes teachers want to "expose them to life"? Experience is lived for a reason. Context often dictates what we must do in response to a situation, and how we must cope. Books can help with this. Until the books are used to dictate a correct, "valid" response for everyone. Or to directly contradict certain ways of living life. Or to promote certain lifestyle choices as preferable to others. Then, we might have issues. And I might ask that you reconsider your syllabus. Because then it's about your agenda, not my child's mental development. When they turn 18 or enter college (whichever comes first), then challenge them to think about what they believe. I should have done my job by then. But make sure you respect them even then, if the answers they give are intelligent and well-reasoned.

And in the meantime, tell me. . . Why are rape and (pre-)teen sex more "relevant" than cultural concepts of hospitality? Death and dying? The individual in society? Human pursuit of the divine?

Gifted/Talented -or- Just Another School District Failure

I have been engaged in a constant battle since my son was in third grade (perhaps second) to try to make sure that he was being challenged. Pre-K through second, the issue was not as bad because he was at a Montessori school, and because the results were usually pretty transparent. It was clear to me that he was learning. In third grade, at the same Montessori, we found that he was frequently kept from advancing because of silly procedural issues. He didn't memorize phonics marks because he found it pointless, so he could not advance to the next "level" of spelling words. Well, clearly he had outgrown this particular way of learning, which should be permissible in a Montessori curriculum. Heck! A traditional Montessori curriculum wouldn't have had them taking traditional spelling tests anyway. So rather than keeping him there for 4th grade, we sent him to the only Catholic school in the area, which was $100/month less than his Montessori for parishoners in the area (though we paid 12 months rather than 9, which makes up part of that difference), with terrible results. The teacher was demeaning & incompetent. The principal refused to admit the problem, until she stood to lose 4+ students, all from the same teacher's class! So while the students still have to put up with this teacher, they put up with her for fewer hours in the day. We left early last year, a decision I chronicle here and here. So we decided to move into the "good" school district--the one with "exemplary" schools rather than schools that are struggling to meet the state's minimum requirements. The only other option would have been the local Episcopal school, which has a nifty college prep curriculum but a hefty price tag. I also suspected that my son would be at an academic disadvantage because of his recent bad educational experiences. At St. Parish School, he was held to the lowest standard of mediocrity--marginally better than the schools in the district, but not at all impressive. Case in point--they issued him a final report card with all A's for a 6-week period in which he did not attend the school.

So we begin a new school year with hope that things will be better. So far, it has been acceptable. I have had to get to the bottom of reports of threats for talking, etc., but I have found that what the teacher sees as a "warning," my son takes as a "threat," and I have accepted that this is just something to get used to. :P What has been more difficult is the fact that, while he is held to a slightly higher standard of mediocrity, and has more interesting school work, which provides a teeny bit more motivation, he is still, for all practical purposes, bored & unmotivated. Except in orchestra, which may be the saving grace of this school year.

I know it is a hotly debated educational issue, but I have problems with classes that are not divided by ability. I see no reason why slower and more advanced students alike should be held to middle-of-the-road standards. It creates resentment and impedes learning for all but those deemed to be "average"--whatever that means!! The concept of an "average" child is itself misguided. But that's how public schools operate, even when there is an acknowledgment that some students are more advanced. Here, there is no such acknowledgment. There is Enrichment Math, for which I can only assume he did not qualify, since I have heard nothing about a nomination, and Gifted and Talented (G/T).

Now, I know all about G/T. I know the philosophies behind it, the testing procedures, the characteristics of a G/T child. I was in G/T from 2nd grade until I graduated from high school. I always expected that my son would qualify or, if not, that he would come very close, or fit the intelligence requirements but perhaps not the personality requirements (for lack of a better word). You see, as my husband & I have discussed, there are traits beyond intelligence that qualify one for G/T, and these generally have a negative side. G/T students are self-motivated prefer to work alone: interpret--antisocial and procrastinators. They have "alternative" ways of experiencing the world: interpret--unorganized. My husband was never tested for G/T, having been in the Catholic school system from the beginning. G/T students (to prevent them form getting snotty) were always told that G/T has "nothing to do with intelligence" (which is partially true). It has to do with critical thinking/logic and creativity. Honors, therefore, is something different. I was honors and G/T (the two are often complimentary). We agree that my husband, the much more social and organized of the two of us, was/is "Honors," and in many things more advanced than I.

My son is likely a combination, though it is difficult for me, as a parent, to anticipate whether he leans more to the G/T side or not. I would like to think so, in part because it would explain the laziness--G/T students require a different kind of motivation and give up if they feel something is not worth their while (I know), but there are few opportunities for me to observe such things. I tried, therefore, to have my son tested during the testing period last school year (roughly March or April 2007), at the end of 4th grade. However, since he was out of the school system, he was tested instead at the beginning of this year. The test consisted of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (a pretty "standard" standardized test--ha ha--that he took in 3rd grade with good results) and a Cognitive Abilities Test, of which I know little. In addition, I filled out an extensive questionnaire about personality traits that we have noticed. Unfortunately, his scores were very low. Not below the 50th percentile, but lower than I would have expected. I received a form letter with his scores and an empty promise that there would be other enrichment opportunities, yada yada, blah blah blah. Naturally, I questioned. And expressed my doubts that there would be any other opportunity for challenge, since there is no acknowledgment of advanced abilities in the classroom. The reply came today.

And the basic problem is that this school district sees G/T testing as a matter of knowledge rather than innate ability (or potential to learn) and critical thinking. The ITBS test he took was the one normally administered at the end of 6th grade. So as a beginning 5th grader, he was expected to score above 96% of the students who take the test--students who, unlike my son, have had the benefit of the 5th and 6th grade curricula! This, of, course, explained why his scores seemed artificially low. Rather than testing for innate ability, he was being tested on concepts--and the jump from 4th grade to the end of 6th is considerable. So unless I or his previous school had been teaching him on an advanced level already, which I/they were not doing, he would have had no chance of passing the test.

The teacher administering the test made it clear that I was the one who requested the testing be done at the beginning of the year rather than wait until the Spring. Well, yes, as I wanted him to have the benefit of a challenge this year rather than wait until 6th grade. Why shouldn't I? Should I be willing to squander another year of his already disappointing education while I wait for the standard testing period? Apparently, yes. You see, this admonition had the sound of an admission that the testing for in-district students was easier than for transfers from another school district. After all, they are tested one year in advance of where they are. In March of this year, my son was in 4th, and would likely have been given the 5th grade test. However, in September of this year, he is in 5th grade, and therefore (without the benefit of another years' education) was given the 6th grade test. So he is handicapped from the beginning, fails the test, and I look like another quack parent who can't accept that her child is not as smart as she thinks. And on top of that, I get a lecture on the different between a "percentage" and a "percentile." Because no one who didn't major in education can possibly understand that difference!

So she directs my above-average, not-being-challenged, finishes-all-of-his-homework-in-class child to optional after school "clubs" like the "Scrabble" club. My response: that I expect the education to occur during school hours. My conclusion: education is a battle. No matter where you go. If you are a parent who cares, that is, or has high standards. At least there is orchestra.

Homeschoolers: Chalk all of this up to another reason to continue what you are doing.

5th Grade Library Blues

Just to give all of you homeschoolers a taste of what you're missing! ;) The school year started on Monday (I started teaching last night), and while it's too early to gauge, I have great hopes that this year will be better for my son (and, hence, for me) than the last. There will, of course, be little glitches along the way. Try to imagine what prompted this email:

Dear Ms. Librarian,

My name is Literacy-chic, and we visited on "meet the teacher" night. You might remember that I was accompanied by my son, my husband, and my very mobile toddler, and we talked specifically about fantasy and about the difficulty of finding appropriate books at my son's reading level.

I wanted to email you today to see if I could clarify your policies on checking out books--specifically, what guidelines govern their selection of books. My son returned from library (from Ms. Language Arts Teacher's class) without a library book today because, while he was interested in several books, they were all part of different series, and he was told that he had to start from the beginning of the series, or read the series in publication order. When he looked for the appropriate books, they had apparently been checked out by other students.

You must realize, first of all, that this is the consequence of having library on a Wednesday. The students who have library earlier in the week--or even earlier in the day--have a much better selection of books than those who have library later in the week (or day). So if the students are limited by the fact that their chosen books are part of a series, they are then further limited by the library's holdings and other children's selections. In order for every child to read every series in its proper order, the library should ideally have enough copies of each volume for every child who wants to read it at a given time. Of course, this is not possible. When I was in 6th grade, I was introduced to the Chronicles of Narnia by a school librarian. The books were not available in their publication order (which has since been changed by MacMillan), but I was able to read them when they were returned (in more or less . In addition, the library was missing a volume--The Magician's Nephew, but I was able to continue reading the series in spite of that, and read that book at a later date, after buying a copy for myself. I don't feel that this circumstance lessened my enjoyment or my understanding of the series. In fact, I wrote my M.A. thesis on the Chronicles of Narnia.

The Chronicles of Narnia are an excellent example of how children's books published serially can function. As I mentioned, the original publication order of the books has, within the past 10 or 15 years, been altered from the original publication order as it was at the time of the author's death, with little more than the whim of a publisher and Lewis's letter to a 6-year-old child to substantiate this decision. However, while I personally prefer the original order of publication for reasons of authorial development and the structure of the series as a whole, I must admit that it does not lessen children's enjoyment of the books to have the order changed. Their experience of reading the books is different, but not necessarily inferior.

The test of a good children's book, even if it is a part of a series, is its ability to stand on its own. I read the first two Harry Potter books, became disillusioned with the writing, and then resumed after I saw The Order of the Phoenix because that story seemed so compelling to me. I might have never finished the series (and I'm still working on it) had I felt the need to read the books in their publication order. This same experience might be true for my son, or for any other child--that the desire to read some books in the series is stronger than others, and by starting in the middle, he or she might have the desire to read the entire series from the beginning. On the other hand, if reading the early books seems like it is forced upon the child, or a chore, or if the books are simply not available when he is ready and willing to read them, the child might not read the series at all, which would certainly not be the desirable outcome.

My ideal is for my son to be inspired to read, and to choose library books, with your help and advice at times, that he will really enjoy. If the availability of books becomes a problem, leading to frustration or to his inability to find a book in the specified time, then this goal is not being accomplished. Do you have any suggestions for how we might be able to work through this problem? Might he be able to check out the next book in line, even if the first (or whichever is next in queue) is unavailable?

I am cc-ing Mrs. Language Arts Teacher, so she will know why my son is reading a book from home (Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix) rather than a book from the library. He had not checked out a book, was afraid of a detention for being tardy, and was probably a bit discouraged when she came to tell the class it was time to return to class.

Thank you for considering my perspective on this. Children's literature happens to be a passion that we share!

Sincerely,

Literacy-chic