Quote:
Originally Posted by Sregener
We're talking very hypotheticals here, and I did say there should be a minimum to qualify for a prize. And I have children, so I know what constitutes a "prize." Bookmarks, pencils, rulers, other things that can be bought in bulk at a low per-cost price. And I've seen many of these with corporate sponsorships, where a local business covers the cost of the prizes. I've seen "free" kid's meals, where the odds are really good the kid isn't going to eat by themselves, so the parents' meal costs offset some of the loss. My opinion of those businesses is generally positive, since they've invested a little in encouraging kids to do something that is good for them.
Obviously, a library would have to establish a goal that was neither too easy nor too hard for the kids to reach. And that's based on their individual patronage.
Or, alternatively, they could establish a time requirement rather than a books finished requirement, which would level the playing field with fast and slow readers.
There is no perfect idea that is going to work for every situation. But this library seemed to think that making the kids compete to see who would read the most would be a way to encourage reading and found it to have some unintended consequences. It's no surprise, since governments have a long history of doing things with the best of intentions and the worst of results.
|
This year, according to the article, the top prize was a t-shirt. Since they are motivating the children with '10 books and you receive an invitation to the party at the end of the program' it is possible that the sponsorship money is used for that party.