Listserv


 * Artifact #6 Listserv Memo**

Memo


 * To:**[[image:file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/LAS/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/msohtmlclip1/06/clip_image001.gif width="163" height="1056"]] Jill Jones, Woodland Elementary Head Media Specialist
 * From:** Laurie Smith, Woodland Elementary Assistant Media Specialist
 * Date:** October 21, 2008
 * Re:** child_lit listserv


 * Message:**

As librarians, we promote early literacy in many different ways. We serve as instructors, book recommenders, and information literacy teachers among others. For years, we’ve recognized the enormous impact children’s library services can have on community life, as it builds character and teaches that all are workers in a common cause (Hazeltine, 5). To achieve such effects, there is an absolute necessity for trained, skilled and well-informed librarians. Since the 1950s, the role of the School Library Media Specialist has changed radically, from that of a passive helper to an active instructor (Craver, 1). In order to effectively serve our newfound roles as active instructors, it is imperative to stay well informed on conversations, innovations and research in the field of librarianship. Technology has greatly increased our ability to widely disseminate and ascertain knowledge through listservs, blogs, forums and the like. One such example, the child_lit listserv, serves as a compelling and enlightening way to stay informed on child services librarianship.

Child_lit is an unmoderated discussion group that allows posting members to examine the theory and criticism of literature for children and young adults. Initially created to allow researchers engaged in original scholarship to communicate ideas, the list now contains discussions of children’s literature authorship, illustration, publication, promotion, readership, reception, criticism and literature's changing social functions and implications. (child_lit website)


 * Audience and Logistics**

The welcome page states that the list is open to all interested in discussing the concepts mentioned above. It was formulated as a way of sharing opinions and theories between researchers; however, there are posts from a great many more groups of people than researchers. Authors, librarians, graduate students, professors and editors regularly post and respond to comments and anyone can subscribe to the list. The only credentials required are an email address and a name. There are no requirements for posting, responding, or viewing the archives, which are available to subscribers going back to January 1997. Many responses are from frequent posters; however, new subscribers generally receive a warm reception. Postings can be emailed as they come, viewed as a digest, or viewed on the archives.

Occasionally, posters troll the listserv by posting offensive or abusive materials. This is rare and, once it is determined that the poster is a troll, commonly ignored. Much of this can be avoided by steering clear of topics with questionable subject lines.

The child_lit community seems to be a friendly, intellectual and good-natured group, willing to answer even the most obscure questions (oftentimes //especially// the most obscure questions!) Disagreements are frequent, but arguments are not. Despite the fact that users are often virtually anonymous, common courtesy and politeness prevails. Most posters include a signature line with their name, title and frequently their blog or website. The list itself can be difficult to navigate at first. The digest is somewhat hard to follow, yet the one-at-a-time method results in a flood of emails to the inbox. Viewing the archives in thread form is simpler, yet problematic in that subscribers cannot view it until the end of each week. Thus, the digest form is preferable but requires some time to become familiar with it.


 * Topics**

Intended primarily for topics examining the theory and criticism of literature for children and young adults, sub-topics can vary wildly. Posts range from an article about “Biblioburro” – a book mobile concept that carries 4,800 books by donkey to underserved children in Columbia – to political diatribes, to inquiries about the hairstyle of ancient Japanese boatmen. Many of the posts link to relevant articles detailing news in the field – author interviews, new releases, or fresh research. Others pose questions to be answered, such as requests for young adult novels about girls in sports. Posters present their own opinions, as well as quotes from others, such as the poster who responds with Orson Scott’s Card assertion that "if a book cover has rivets, then it is science fiction, and if it has trees or leaves, it is fantasy" when asked the difference (Elin). The resources include valuable, up-to-date links to various news articles and ground-breaking developments, both in the field of children’s literature and librarianship.

One example of a controversial thread involved an assertion that vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin attempted to ban books from the Wasilla Public Library while mayor. Waller Hastings, a professor of Library and Information Science at Rutgers University, posted a message from his “Facebook friend” listing the books Palin had allegedly banned while in office (Waller). Some posters responded that many of the books were not yet published when she was in office, as others eagerly asked for citations so they could forward the message on. Others quickly posted articles that attempted to get to the bottom of the story, quoting witnesses who claimed that Palin did inquire into censoring but did not mention the list of books specifically. As the urban legend spread, posters called the Wasilla Public Library to validate the story but were sent to voicemail (Levin). Finally, because it could not be verified, posters called for a termination of a discussion that had been circulated for “obvious political reasons” (Hixon). Another poster argued that calling attention to political candidates’ dealings with libraries is in fact appropriate and that, “right here is where it should be happening” (Cummins).

This topic received a great deal of attention from the posters on this listserv for good reason. In such a hotly contested election, political debates are ubiquitous. Librarians must inform themselves on the candidates’ stances on issues dealing with children’s literature. The child_lit listserv is a valuable resource because it presents an arena for such discussions and inquiries. Hastings’s post provoked a great deal of independent research by listserv readers and created a more informed library community.

Additionally, this topic demonstrates the usefulness of the listserv in that it establishes how urban legends are created, spread, and, sometimes, halted. A post from a “Facebook friend” is hardly a reputable source of information. However, Hastings seemed to believe it and others quickly followed suit. It demonstrates the merit of the child_lit community in that they quickly researched and evaluated the story to determine what was true and what was imagined. Here, the listserv serves as a veritable panel of experts that can help librarians learn, evaluate and digest new information. Without the discussion of the group, Hastings and others on Facebook may have never learned the real story.

Another thread that quickly escalated also surrounded a controversial topic: popularity versus quality. A poster, Fairrosa, posted a link to an article by Anita Silvey. In it, Silvey argues that the Newberry committee no longer awards books to the best book, but the “quirkiest.” Many subscribers responded, arguing that a popular book is not a bad book, and that the committee should strive to choose books that would be popular and enjoyable with children. A committee member, Miriam Lang Budin, responded that their task is not to find the most popular book, but the most distinguished. A passionate debate ensued, in which posters debated the importance of child-appeal versus literary merit. This topic received a great deal of attention from the diverse members of the listserv. It’s a contentious issue that, when brought up among passionate people, became very animated. High quality books often don’t circulate as heavily in libraries as “popular” books, but both popularity and quality can co-exist as they each contribute something different (Genco, 2.) However, which of these books should be awarded the Newberry? Is it too much to ask for //both// popularity and quality from a book? These questions touch a nerve with bibliophiles and, no matter which side of the argument one falls on, reading the discussion can only contribute to one’s literary aptitude. It attests to the value of the listserv that posters could passionately, yet intellectually, argue their points and, while not reaching any landmark conclusions, still come away from the discussion with a well-formed opinion on the subject.


 * Recommendations for Use**

This listserv is a valuable addition to any school librarian interested in keeping abreast of current events in the children’s literature realm. It covers relevant issues from a variety of viewpoints and has an intellectually diverse reader and poster base. Unlike blogs, listservs offer a wide range of opinions and promotes healthy debate and discussion through email.

This listserv would be best used in conjunction with more veritable information sources. This is an excellent resource for breaking news, but, as demonstrated with the “Sarah Palin Bans Books!” thread, verification is needed for accuracy. A good method would be to subscribe to the listserv and, when something is intriguing, follow up with a reputable source such as the American Library Association’s website or a scholarly journal, such as //School Library Journal//.

Additionally, the sheer magnitude of the emails can become oppressive. The daily digest is an excellent way to scan through the topics and select those of interest without becoming overwhelmed.


 * Conclusion**

The child_lit listserv is an active mailing list comprised of passionate, informed people. Keeping abreast of such innovators’ thoughts and comments is crucial to creating a school media center that remains fresh and relevant. Since the facts and opinions provided are not necessarily authoritative, verification is necessary. However, once verified, the knowledge gained from the child_lit listserv will undoubtedly enable you to become a more informed, more articulate advocate for the children at Woodland Elementary School.