CCBC-Net Archives
ALA/ALSC Notable Children's Books
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Ginny Moore Kruse <gmkruse>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 15:58:04 -0600
I agree with Ruth Gordon about the rule that the final Notable Children's Books list absolutely must include all ALSC award & honor books.
This rule has always seemed to me to compromise the year-long hard work of reading and evaluation done by the volunteer ALSC members who serve on this committee. They often pay their own travel/lodging expenses to attend two conferences a year in order to serve on the Committee. They already wonder to what extent their work of reading and evaluating thousands of books over the course of one year makes any difference. Most certainly their collective judgments are usually not fully reflected when "their" list is published according to that particular rule.
I understand what Katy wrote, and it's a sensible rationale. (You're correct, Ruth. She's always so logical!) I think I would stop grumbling about the application of the rule, if at the bottom of each published Notable Children's Books List there was a note to this effect: "All ALSC Award Books & Honor Books are automatically included on this list." To me that could be one way to manage what is otherwise a contradictory annual situation. And, yes, it can be quite confusing to observers who pay attention to negative comments during a Notables discussion and then see those same books appear on the final list.
One of my most valuable professional opportunities to learn about book evaluation and discussion came years ago when I had the time and opportunity to observe some of the public discussions of the Notable Children's Books Committees. At one point Ruth and Katy served on the same Notables Committee, and I continue to remember their committee's provocative, dicey discussions as setting a very high standard.
Mikes have been used during the public discussions, and there will be mikes for members of the Notable Children's Books Committee's discussions during the ALA Midwinter Conference in Boston next month. Observers who can't hear the discussion need to remember - just as the committee needs to keep in mind - that although this committee meeting is open to observers, it isn't a public program, and the observers are not an audience.
Much more could be said - and even argued - but probably this discussion should appropriately be continued on the ALA/ALSC listserv. It's boring for the many non-ALA folks in the CCBC-Net community. Even though this conversation concerns the infrastructure of one of the organizational faves of the year, it's actually not about specific personal faves. Back to them! - Ginny
Ginny Moore Kruse gmkruse at education.wisc.edu
Received on Fri 17 Dec 2004 03:58:04 PM CST
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 15:58:04 -0600
I agree with Ruth Gordon about the rule that the final Notable Children's Books list absolutely must include all ALSC award & honor books.
This rule has always seemed to me to compromise the year-long hard work of reading and evaluation done by the volunteer ALSC members who serve on this committee. They often pay their own travel/lodging expenses to attend two conferences a year in order to serve on the Committee. They already wonder to what extent their work of reading and evaluating thousands of books over the course of one year makes any difference. Most certainly their collective judgments are usually not fully reflected when "their" list is published according to that particular rule.
I understand what Katy wrote, and it's a sensible rationale. (You're correct, Ruth. She's always so logical!) I think I would stop grumbling about the application of the rule, if at the bottom of each published Notable Children's Books List there was a note to this effect: "All ALSC Award Books & Honor Books are automatically included on this list." To me that could be one way to manage what is otherwise a contradictory annual situation. And, yes, it can be quite confusing to observers who pay attention to negative comments during a Notables discussion and then see those same books appear on the final list.
One of my most valuable professional opportunities to learn about book evaluation and discussion came years ago when I had the time and opportunity to observe some of the public discussions of the Notable Children's Books Committees. At one point Ruth and Katy served on the same Notables Committee, and I continue to remember their committee's provocative, dicey discussions as setting a very high standard.
Mikes have been used during the public discussions, and there will be mikes for members of the Notable Children's Books Committee's discussions during the ALA Midwinter Conference in Boston next month. Observers who can't hear the discussion need to remember - just as the committee needs to keep in mind - that although this committee meeting is open to observers, it isn't a public program, and the observers are not an audience.
Much more could be said - and even argued - but probably this discussion should appropriately be continued on the ALA/ALSC listserv. It's boring for the many non-ALA folks in the CCBC-Net community. Even though this conversation concerns the infrastructure of one of the organizational faves of the year, it's actually not about specific personal faves. Back to them! - Ginny
Ginny Moore Kruse gmkruse at education.wisc.edu
Received on Fri 17 Dec 2004 03:58:04 PM CST
