Table Of Content

All materials in this journal subject to copyright by the American Library Association may be used for the noncommercial purpose of scientific or educational advancement granted by Sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Revision Act of 1976. Address usage requests to the ALA Office of Rights and Permissions. FEATURE 54 Knowledge Quest | Intellectual Freedom All materials in this journal subject to copyright by the American Library Association may be used for the noncommercial purpose of scientific or educational advancement granted by Sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Revision Act of 1976. Address usage requests to the ALA Office of Rights and Permissions. Ann M. Martin [email protected] How well versed are school fact is “the presence of books Examples of viewpoint-neutral librarians on issues related and other resources in a library labeling include placing stickers to labeling and rating systems? does not indicate endorsement on science fiction, mystery, fantasy, Librarians must recognize the of their content by the library” historical fiction, and other genre difference between using labels (ALA 2015a). Labeling and rating books. Although there may be to create interest in books and systems may give the impression some disagreement as to whether a implementing labeling and rating that the library endorses and favors book falls entirely into one genre, systems that restrict or discourage specific material over other ideas these labels do not suggest moral wide-ranging reading. When and concepts. or doctrinal endorsement. The labeling and rating systems are challenge with viewpoint-neutral put under a microscope, First labeling? “When directional Viewpoint-Neutral Amendment issues that threaten aids are used to forbid access or Directional Labeling students’ intellectual freedom are to suggest moral or doctrinal exposed. Melvil Dewey invented the Dewey Decimal Classification system Motivations for labeling come in in the early 1870s. His system of many forms. Sometimes labeling is cataloging materials created a an attempt to help students more structure for librarians to organize easily find materials. Other times and access materials. Ever since When labeling and it is a reaction to material perceived then, the concept of categorizing as offensive or to mandates from items for ease of access is a rating systems are put administrators. Some labeling hallmark of librarianship (OCLC under a microscope, and ratings systems evolve from 2015). School librarians continue an earnest attempt to assist to design and implement resource it exposes First students attain higher academic location schemes to assist patrons. achievement and reading fluency. This type of viewpoint-neutral Amendment issues Misunderstanding the impact of directional labeling is acceptable prejudicial labeling or ranking because it is a convenience that threaten students' systems creates sticky situations in designed to save time and not an which the library—or librarian—is attempt to prejudice or influence intellectual freedom. seen to be advocating the ideas readers, or discourage access to found in the collection, when the materials. Volume 44, No. 1 | September/October 2015 55 All materials in this journal subject to copyright by the American Library Association may be used for the noncommercial purpose of scientific or educational advancement granted by Sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Revision Act of 1976. Address usage requests to the ALA Office of Rights and Permissions. endorsement, the effect is the same as prejudicial labeling” (ALA 2015a). A symbol on a book indicating Christian fiction falls into the murky area of endorsing Christian religions over other faiths. Being inclusive is essential when placing genre labels on materials. Therefore, discard the Christian designation and create a genre such as “inspirational” to encompass all faiths (ALA 2010). Be cautious about including in your online public access catalog information generated from outside rating and labeling entities. The challenge occurs when either Machine Readable Cataloging (MARC) or Resource Description and Access (RDA) records are provided. School librarians often accept these records because they provide the maximum descriptive information available. Note that cataloging guidelines do not require librarians to provide rating or labeling information. If libraries choose to use this information, “they should cite the source of the rating to their catalog or discovery tool display indicating that the library does not endorse any external rating system” (ALA 2015b). Viewpoint or Prejudicial Labeling Labeling that is not directional is called viewpoint labeling and may be prejudicial. Viewpoint labeling is in conflict with the Library Bill of Rights and students’ right to information because it is designed to restrict access based on a value judgment that the content, language, themes, or views of the author of the resource are appropriate or inappropriate. Prejudicial labeling is used to warn, discourage, or prohibit users from accessing material or to place materials in restricted 56 Knowledge Quest | Intellectual Freedom All materials in this journal subject to copyright by the American Library Association may be used for the noncommercial purpose of scientific or educational advancement granted by Sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Revision Act of 1976. Address usage requests to the ALA Office of Rights and Permissions. locations where students must must be directed in making up readability is one selection depend on staff to access it (ALA their minds about ideas they indicator used by librarians, 2015a). examine. The creation and collection choices must reflect publication of material ratings age-appropriateness, interest, and is a perfect example of the First book quality. Placing AR or Lexile Private and Commercial Amendment’s right of free speech. labels on books sidetracks student Rating Systems “The adoption, enforcement, or reading by leading students to Ratings systems often bias or endorsement, either explicitly or materials that encourage reading prejudice attitudes and decisions implicitly, of any of these rating of words rather than finding books about materials. Whether it is systems by a library violates the of literary quality and student the Film Ratings System (CARA), Library Bill of Rights and may be interest. Common Sense Media, Amazon, unconstitutional” (ALA 2015b). Barnes & Noble, bookalachi, or Readability labels pose a bullying Focus on the Family, all seek risk when students carry books Readability Rating Labels to provide content ratings that that identify their reading levels. influence a reader’s viewpoint for As librarians we are charged with Often low-performing readers or against the material. making professional decisions to come to mind when we think purchase materials covering a wide about bullying, but all students, According to its website, variety of views about a particular including those identified as gifted, Common Sense Media publishes topic (ALA 2015a). Selection are at risk for being bullied when “independent ratings and reviews policies that mandate “providing the book and consequently the for nearly everything kids want materials on opposing sides of student are marked with a reading- to watch, read, play, and learn.” controversial issues in order that level label. “Bullying can threaten Although Common Sense Media young citizens may develop, under students’ physical and emotional states that the reviews are unbiased guidance, the practice of critical safety at school and negatively and developed by expert reviewers, analysis of all media” and require impact their ability to learn” (U.S. it is difficult to find out who rates selection of high-quality materials Dept. of Health and Human their books, what the reviewers’ that “place principle above Services n.d.). credentials are, and how Common personal opinion and reason above Sense Media can claim that the prejudice” assure an inclusive Conclusion reviews are unbiased. Pat Scales, in collection suitable for library users her article “Weighing In: Three (HCPS 2012). Labeling and ratings systems create Bombs, Two Lips, and a Martini challenges that determine how well Glass,” explains how Common If a book is purchased as a result of the librarian succeeds in dodging Sense Media’s rating system is a readability rating system, such as censorship issues and providing doing a disservice to students, the one provided by Renaissance access. School librarians should provides tools for censorship, and Learning’s Accelerated Reading know that viewpoint labeling and encourages looking at topics in (AR) program or by MetaMetrics, rating systems that restrict access materials out of context (2010). the company that provides or interfere with developing a Lexile measures, the librarian diverse and quality collection Rating systems provide misplaced must also consider the interest are powerful tools undermining confidence if used in collection and comprehension level of the students’ right to read. Labeling development. Rating systems material. As explained on the materials based on a biased rating assume that individuals or groups MetaMetrics website, “The Grapes or readability score is censorship. have the ability and authority to of Wrath is a fairly simple book to determine what is appropriate read but may have a theme that is Librarians believe in the premise or inappropriate for others. inappropriate for a certain age that balanced, open access to The rater’s opinion is based on group” (2015). Lexile measures information is a student’s right. standards about whether language and AR scores may indicate a Recognize the difference between or scenes of violence are suitable student can read the words in assisting access with directional or not. But to whom is something the material, but they do not labeling and denying rightful unsuitable? And what or whose necessarily mean that students access to resources through standards are being used? Ratings will understand the context of the viewpoint labeling. Most of all, systems accept that individuals story or information. Although avoid collection-development Volume 44, No. 1 | September/October 2015 57 All materials in this journal subject to copyright by the American Library Association may be used for the noncommercial purpose of scientific or educational advancement granted by Sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Revision Act of 1976. Address usage requests to the ALA Office of Rights and Permissions. To Learn More about selections based on judgments about Access, and Labeling and content, language, themes, or views Works Cited: Rating Systems about the creator of the material. Refrain from labeling materials American Library Association. American Association of School 2010. “Questions and Answers with a readability score. Stay on the Librarians. 2011. “Position on Labeling and Rating Statement on Labeling Books with side of ALA’s Library Bill of Rights Systems.” Intellectual Freedom Reading Levels.” <www.ala.org/ and the First Amendment. Manual, 8th ed. <www.ifmanual. aasl/advocacy/resources/statements/ org/labelingratingqa> (accessed labeling>. March 4, 2015). American Library Association. 2014. ———. 2015a. “Labeling Systems: “Access to Resources and Services An Interpretation of the Library in the School Library Media Bill of Rights.” <www.ala.org/ Program: An Interpretation of Ann M. Martin is advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/ the Library Bill of Rights.” <www. interpretation/labeling-systems> a former educational ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/ (accessed August 13, 2015). librarybill/interpretations/ specialist for library _____. 2015b. “Rating Systems: An accessresources>. Interpretation of the Library services at Virginia’s American Library Association. Bill of Rights.” <www.ala.org/ 2015. “Censorship and First Henrico County Public advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/ Amendment Issues.” <www. interpretations/rating-systems> ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/ Schools. She is a member of AASL and the (accessed August 13, 2015). censorshipfirstamendmentissues>. AASL Publications and Advisory Group. Henrico County Public Schools. American Library Association. 2012. “Guidelines for the She serves as the liaison to the Freedom to 2015. “Intellectual Freedom Selection and Review of and Censorship Q & A.” <www. Read Foundation and is also a member of Instructional Materials.” HCPS: ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/ Policies and Regulations. <http:// censorshipfirstamendmentissues/ ALA BARC (Budget Analysis and Review webapps.henrico.k12.va.us/ ifcensorshipqanda>. policy/chapter.asp#R7-05-008> Committee). She was awarded the 2015 (accessed March 16, 2015). American Library Association. 2015. “Labeling Systems: An AASL Distinguished Service Award. She MetaMetrics. 2012. “How Interpretation of the Library Is the Lexile Measure coauthored (with Suzanna L. Panter) Bill of Rights.” <www.ala.org/ Determined?” <https://lexile. advocacy/intfreedom/library/bill/ the March/April 2015 KQ article “The desk.com/customer/portal/ interpretations>. articles/508829-how-is-the- Paradox of Our Profession” and coauthored lexile-measure-determined-> American Library Association. 2015. (accessed June 15, 2015). “Rating Systems: An Interpretation (with Kathleen R. Roberts) the January/ of the Library Bill of Rights.” OCLC. 2015. “Dewey Services: February 2015 Principal article “Digital <www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/ How One Library Pioneer library/bill/interpretations>. Native Does Not Equal Digital Literacy.” Profoundly Influenced Modern Librarianship.” <www.oclc.org/ American Library Association. 1996. She also wrote the book Empowering dewey/resources/biography. “Library Bill of Rights.” <www. en.html> (accessed June 15, ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/ Leadership: Developing Behaviors 2015). librarybill>. for Success (AASL 2013). She is a past Scales, Pat. 2010. “Weighing In: American Library Association. Three Bombs, Two Lips, and a 2010. “Questions and Answers president of AASL. Martini Glass.” Booklist Online. on Labeling and Rating Systems.” (August 1). <www.booklistonline. <www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/ com/ProductInfo.aspx?pid=4341 librarybill/interpretations/qa- 541&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupp labeling>. ort=1> (accessed March 16, 2015). American Library Association. 2014. U.S. Department of Health “Restricted Access to Library & Human Services. n.d. Materials: An Interpretation of “Prevention at School.” <www. the Library Bill of Rights.” <www. stopbullying.gov/prevention/ ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/ at-school/index.html> (accessed librarybill/interpretations/ May 2, 2015). restrictedaccess>. Freedom to Read Foundation. n.d. “Freedom to Read Foundation: Defending the First Amendment in Libraries and Beyond.” <www. ftrf.org>. 58 Knowledge Quest | Intellectual Freedom