and teachers. Teachers are advised to offer parents another choice beyond what the teacher has assigned, with the stipulation that the child will still have to complete the same reading/writing assignments, with the same grading standards, the only difference being reading content.
https://ncte.org/statement/rating-books/
Overview
Unfettered student access to high-quality literature through curricula, independent choice reading, and “full authentic texts rather than adaptations” (NCTE, 2006, ¶7) is a central tenet in English education, and to that end, NCTE has developed policies that strongly discourage censoring practices in schools at all grade levels. Letter ratings, content warnings, and all forms of “red-flagging”—whether in classroom, school, or community libraries, or inserted via mandate into course syllabi—constitute blatant forms of censorship. According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, a red flag is a near-universal signal of danger (Red Flag, 2018). The term, in its widely used verb form, to red-flag something, is an expression noting that some person or institution has marked something as a danger, real or imagined. Thus, red-flagging a book marks it as somehow dangerous.
In fact, the practice of red-flagging is what is dangerous. It reduces complex literary works to a few isolated features. Red-flagging and rating books for controversial content undermines the process of book selection based on educational criteria and significantly reduces students’ access to a range of available, high-quality literature.
Because an “intransigent minority” (Taleb, 2018, p. 69) objects vocally and persistently to isolated features of a particular book instead of viewing its merit as a whole, school and community personnel sometimes succumb to political and/or personal pressure and incorporate red-flagging practices. Sadly, in order to avoid book controversies, some school districts have undertaken the practice of red-flagging books that have been challenged in other schools by using letter ratings and/or content warnings, while stopping short of actual book-banning. Instead, the practice leads parents, teachers, and entire school districts down a slippery slope toward censorship.
Nature of the Problem
Gatekeeping and labeling.
First, it is important to note that “most challenges (formal attempts to remove or restrict access to library materials and services) go unreported” (ALA, 2018, ¶1). Second, the practice of gatekeeping results in books never hitting the open shelves for fear of being banned or challenged. This is essentially a predetermination that a book is not suitable for consumption by the consumer. Books may be consigned to a protected shelf where students need special permission to check them out. And, books may be removed temporarily when other local area schools are experiencing a challenge. The third common practice is the labeling of books. Whether the labels designate reading levels, lexiles, or problematic content, the bottom line is that labeling accomplishes two negative outcomes: it narrows students’ ability to choose books based on interest, and it infringes on students’ privacy since the labels can be seen by others.
Statement of purpose. The purpose of this position statement on red-flagging is twofold. First, it upholds NCTE’s assertions that students’ and teachers’ unimpeded access to quality literature has to be assured. Second, it emphasizes how red-flagging books can severely limit choice of quality reading materials for students and educators alike. Since choice is key in the support and development of readers of all ages (Guthrie & Wigfield, 2000; Ivey & Johnston, 2013), censoriously curtailing those choices can be detrimental to students (Wigfield, Gladstone, & Turci, 2016) and can impede teachers’ professional efforts to promote lifelong reading and learning...
Usurping the prerogatives of educators and families alike, red-flagging privileges the concerns of a few individuals over a majority of parents and over the professional judgment of teachers and librarians who review and select the books for their students. Red-flagging or rating books by emphasizing only the “mature” content in particular books, or by creating a list of previously banned or challenged books, will encourage two negative outcomes. First, it will embolden those seeking to stimulate continuing controversy; and second, it will have a paradoxical effect on students by inciting student reading choices for prurient reasons while at the same time discouraging students’ reading of works of literary merit.
Such ratings narrow the curriculum to only books that are deemed “safe” and deny students access to a wide variety of reading material. Moreover, how one person defines “safe” is likely to be different from another. What content is problematic? The American Library Association’s Office of Intellectual Freedom website offers an annual infographic (ALA, 2016) depicting the top ten challenged books and their reasons, which included among the top reasons books that were “sexually explicit,” used “offensive language,” or incorporated LGBT content.
Core Values:
As English language arts teachers, we
-- appreciate the dialogue and communication with parents, administrators, and other stakeholders regarding the literary value of texts;
-- utilize our professional judgment when selecting texts to be taught in the classroom;
-- discourage formal “ratings” of a text, including those that deem books “safe” or “appropriate” for the reader without considering the literary and curricular value of the text;
-- oppose identifying a book as “safe” or “unsafe” based on its content...
= new reply since forum marked as read
