District 81 Influence Radar Screen Way Too Sensitive

Last month, on the basis of one person’s complaints, Spokane School District removed the book, “An Alphabet of Rotten Kids,” from an elementary school library.

I had to check into this book to see what made it so vile. After reading it twice, I couldn’t understand what warranted the censoring.

Administrators said the book gave examples of violence, vandalism and disregard for the feelings of others, and that there were no consequences for those behaviors. They said the book had little if any teaching value.

Actually, “An Alphabet of Rotten Kids” is loaded with opportunities for teaching by example - examples of bad behavior. This was evident in the title. Everyone knows that rotten anything is bad, be it apples or kids. Children don’t want to be bad. This book teaches them examples of how not to act.

However, I think the question here isn’t if the book warranted being removed. I am upset with the way in which the removal took place.

It never should have happened in the first place, if the guidelines provided me by District 81 had been followed. District 81’s policy states that the selection of books shall be delegated to the school library media specialist. In this case, that was Woodridge Elementary School’s 22-year veteran librarian, Jacci Bottler.

It would be a physical impossibility for a librarian to read every book that comes out. Librarians must rely on professional reviews, and Bottler was provided with no fewer than six professional reviews - including those from Publishers Weekly, Kirkus Reviews, and Language Arts - extolling “An Alphabet of Rotten Kids” as an excellent choice for a school library.

According to policy, the selection is supervised by the school principal and finally approved by district administrators after the book has met nine points of selection. At no time during this process, which took place in the early 1990s, was the selection of this book challenged.

After the one parent complained about it, the six-member review committee decided the book didn’t belong in the school. The one person who originally selected the book, Bottler, was purposely excluded from the discussion.

Who better to voice the validity of the book than the librarian? A district official said Bottler was represented on the committee because Marilou Harrison, who coordinates libraries for District 81, was a member.

If you needed surgery, who would be more qualified, a surgeon or the hospital administrator?

District administrator Fran Mester said educators want very objective, uninvolved people reviewing the book. Well, who can be farther removed from the education and understanding of children than administrators?

Last March, District 81 removed another book, “Rainbow Jordan,” from the middle school curriculum after a grandparent called it pornographic. Webster’s Dictionary defines pornography as “writings, pictures, etc., intended primarily to arouse sexual desire.”

I just read “Rainbow Jordan” and found it to be a well-written book about an African-American girl trying to come to grips with a hard life. It deals with issues that are very real to many children in the inner cities today. It wasn’t a “Leave It to Beaver” or “Father Knows Best” depiction. Those unrealistic portrayals of life in America lead more than a few people to the psychologist’s couch because life just isn’t that way.

Children today are more aware of real life. They are more sophisticated than we were at their age. They have to be because today’s society is filled with drugs, gangs and violence. They need the tools to prepare them for real life.

Aside from these books, let’s take a look at what has happened.

First, it took only one complaint in each case to remove the books from being available to all students. There was no public hearing so other parents could voice their feelings.

Once the books are removed, there is no avenue to review the matter and consider reinstating them. According to Spokane Public Schools’ Procedure Manual on Instructional Materials, which includes library books, only the complainant may appeal the decision. Associate Superintendent Cynthia Lambarth said the only thing that can be done is to write a letter requesting the board review their procedure in dealing with challenged books. Perhaps a future challenge will have a way of reversing the removal.

School District 81 administrators may have just kicked over a gunnysack of rattlesnakes. The way these books were removed is appalling. The people best suited to clarify the thinking behind the purchase of the book and later, the challenge of it - the librarian and parent - were not allowed to make any statements at all.

Furthermore, there was little if any publicizing of the challenge, the meetings were held behind closed doors and there was no recourse to reverse the board’s decision.

A prudent administration would require public input before deciding on a matter as important as this. It should take more than one complaint to cause removal of a book. And the district should install an appeals process to be used when a book is removed.

What may be unsuitable for one child at a given age may be more than suitable for others. If the parents and grandparents involved didn’t feel these books were suitable for their children, it was their duty to keep their children from being exposed to them.