Avid reader kid dominates reading contest, library director miffed

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by Mivo

I think my chief concern is really only the "pitching people against each other" thing, like in a rat race. I feel it's very possible to achieve great things, and motivate people, without the gold stars for doing well. It's not about wanting to encourage mediocrity, but about motivating kids to improve for reasons other than want to win.

It works for some people and not others. Achieving great things takes sacrifices. Reading 63 books in 6 weeks doesn't require fast reading, it requires giving up on TV and computer time, on playing outside and going on trips.

[Billi]

Originally Posted by mycurlylocks

Every child that reads, deserves a prize.

Why? What is wrong with this other kid, that perhaps doesn't read one single book during his summer holidays, but spends his time outdoors, plays with other children in the woods or at the lakes, lives the adventures that the first kid only reads about?

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by Billi

Why? What is wrong with this other kid, that perhaps doesn't read one single book during his summer holidays, but spends his time outdoors, plays with other children in the woods or at the lakes, lives the adventures that the first kid only reads about?

That's me. I never read books on my own as a kid. The only ones I read were the ones forced upon me by my teachers; and even then, I sometimes refused to read some of them.

I was an adventuring monkey, swinging through the trees, hiking, camping, snorkeling, exploring caves, etc. If I saw a sign that said "keep out" or "restricted area", that was an invitation for me to enter and explore. For the most part, my hobbies took me to the great outdoors (rock collecting, photography).

[Sregener]

Here's another idea that works well in a "competition": set a goal for the entire library. "Let's see if we can have 1,000 books read this summer. If we hit the goal, then everyone who contributes at least 10 books will get prize X." That turns the 63-book reader into the team star, while encouraging everyone else to read, too. You can give special acknowledgement (not prizes) to the "top readers" at the end, but everyone who reads 10 books wins. Thus, the encouragement is "everyone do your part", not "everyone try to beat the superstar."

But expecting a kid who is a slow reader to want to read more in the hopes they'll beat a fast reader isn't going to work, no matter what. And most kids like to win, and don't like to lose, so they'll choose not to do things they don't think they can win.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

Reminds me of a SciFi story I read, where the people with good vison were required to wear glasses that made their vision worse, and fast runners were hobbled and smart people had to wear headphones playing loud distracting sounds. The goal was an equal society.

While people are entitled to their opinions, I can't understand someone in a position of authority over children victimizing one of them that way. Calling him a hog to the press is inexcusable. He may read fast or he may read a lot. I doubt if he does it to be a hog. Just likes reading more than most. I didn't read 10 books a week at that age, but I could have if I wanted to spend less time on other things. I am sure many of the other children could as well. Those that can't read one no matter how hard they try are probably not in the 'contest'.

Rather than embarrassing and basically punishing the child in a thoroughly unprofessional manner, she could have made a rule that the previous years winner could not compete for a year, or made part of the prize a job assisting with next years contest and thus disqualified him. Or perhaps not spoken to the press without first engaging her brain.

Helen

Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut
Love the 'Handicapper General'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut
Love the 'Handicapper General'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron

That's one of the stories in Welcome to the Monkey House. I need to read that collection.

[fjtorres]

Heh.
Such a "minor" incident, such varied responses...
Never really expected anybody to be against the kid.

Interesting to see how the primary split correlates to the split on certain other ebook related topics.
And how easy it is to detect most people's location by their attitude.

Definitely a Venus/Mars values issue.

Definitely need to dig up my old copy of Vonnegut; he remains as relevant as ever. Perhaps more so since this split in attitude is likely to lead to the next great global conflict.

The issue of high achievers in all its forms is not going away. It merely turns political from here on out.

Its been educational...

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by Xen

As a side note, when I was working on my doctorate in Psychology, I was shocked to discover that the vast majority of my classmates had an ingrained belief that emotionally healthy people DO NOT READ FOR PLEASURE. I was told this is clearly an escape mechanism and is a sign of emotional instability.

This came up during a case study of an 11 or 12 year old child who read a lot. This was interpreted by the group discussing the case as a clear sign of emotional problems in the child that the therapist should explore, and that reading should be discouraged and replaced with other activities felt to be more "normal".

What kind of activities did they think were "normal" for a child that age? Watching TV and playing video games. Texting. Having 100 friends on Fakebook. I kid you not. It made me seriously doubt the mental stability of most of my classmates.

You did it... I have to call in sick to the forum for not posting in the next few days. I can't type because I can't stop laughing.

Originally Posted by fjtorres

But the dumbasses went first.
Smartasses are the pinnacle of human evolution.

Often, they're also the pinnacle of stupidity, by just wanting "to try ONE more thing", even though all evidence seems to point out that it's going to fail horribly and that there will be lots of problems.

Ask the people in the financial world...

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Switching to a name-in-a-hat drawing would be a travesty. There are polite ways to say "previous winners aren't eligible" without removing all the competition.

I actually know of some contests that have this from the get-go, with rules such as these:

- You can only win once. If you do, you're not allowed to enter anymore.
- If you win, you can't enter the next year.
- You can only win 3 times. (One after another, or spread over a larger period of time.) After winning the third time, you get an honorary award, and cannot enter ever again.

Most of them however, are competitions with subjective judgements such as "who made the most beautiful drawing", or "who can play a certain piece of the piano with the best improvisations".

In a running competition where you can actually measure objectively how fast someone is, this wouldn't work, because you know you are excluding someone who's probably (still) the best.

[Jovvi]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

And by 'encourage reading' what do you mean? You seem to treat this as an 'all or nothing' situation. Only compete if you have a chance of winning. Why does the younger brother bother to compete then?

Do you look at the forum members that have in their signature the number of books that they read this year and decide that there is no point in reading another book this year because you aren't going to read more than them? Should we demand that those who read 100 books per year not rub this in the faces of those who don't have the time for it?


I think that knowing that another kid was able to read 63 books in 6 weeks can actually motivate other kids to read more. If reading 10 books in 6 weeks is all that is needed, and the library discourages spreading the word that a 9 year old can read much more than that I think that the others are going to read less, not more.

I do not treat it as an "all or nothing" situation, and no I don´t get discouraged by members that share the number of books they have read in their signature. Possible because I read about about 10-15 books a week (in english for myself) and somtimes I also read 20-30 children to YA books in swedish for my work. I don´t se reading as a competition but a joy. For me reading is like breathing and if it was a competition i would stand a fighting chance to "win".

Fine, give the kid a prize, I still think he´s in it for the joy of reading now just lets gett other kids discover the joy of reading too. I think this should be about that.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by Sregener

Here's another idea that works well in a "competition": set a goal for the entire library. "Let's see if we can have 1,000 books read this summer. If we hit the goal, then everyone who contributes at least 10 books will get prize X." That turns the 63-book reader into the team star, while encouraging everyone else to read, too. You can give special acknowledgement (not prizes) to the "top readers" at the end, but everyone who reads 10 books wins. Thus, the encouragement is "everyone do your part", not "everyone try to beat the superstar."

But expecting a kid who is a slow reader to want to read more in the hopes they'll beat a fast reader isn't going to work, no matter what. And most kids like to win, and don't like to lose, so they'll choose not to do things they don't think they can win.

Where did you get the idea that the library had so many prizes to give?

And how exactly would this work? Do you get 100 children in the competition? No, that wouldn't work, because every kid that reads a book over the 10 lowers the incentive for the others to read 10 books. Do you get 50 children in the competition? No, that wouldn't work, because if 40 of them only read 10 books, the other 10 have to collectively read 600, and that would mean 60 books per child, and if the library could get 10 children in a competition to read 60 books each we wouldn't have this thread.

In a 'team effort' situation, the ones who don't want to put in the effort aren't going to put in the effort. Are you trying to tell me that if you are at the last days of summer and you need another 10 books to get to 1000 you are going to expect the ones who need a week to read a book to get you over the limit, or the ones who can read a book per day?

[cortman]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

Reminds me of a SciFi story I read, where the people with good vison were required to wear glasses that made their vision worse, and fast runners were hobbled and smart people had to wear headphones playing loud distracting sounds. The goal was an equal society.

While people are entitled to their opinions, I can't understand someone in a position of authority over children victimizing one of them that way. Calling him a hog to the press is inexcusable. He may read fast or he may read a lot. I doubt if he does it to be a hog. Just likes reading more than most. I didn't read 10 books a week at that age, but I could have if I wanted to spend less time on other things. I am sure many of the other children could as well. Those that can't read one no matter how hard they try are probably not in the 'contest'.

Rather than embarrassing and basically punishing the child in a thoroughly unprofessional manner, she could have made a rule that the previous years winner could not compete for a year, or made part of the prize a job assisting with next years contest and thus disqualified him. Or perhaps not spoken to the press without first engaging her brain.

Helen

^ This puts it extremely well. In our current dialogue of political correctness excelling is not safe, it would seem.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by Jovvi

I do not treat it as an "all or nothing" situation, and no I don´t get discouraged by members that share the number of books they have read in their signature. Possible because I read about about 10-15 books a week (in english for myself) and somtimes I also read 20-30 children to YA books in swedish for my work. I don´t se reading as a competition but a joy. For me reading is like breathing and if it was a competition i would stand a fighting chance to "win".

Fine, give the kid a prize, I still think he´s in it for the joy of reading now just lets gett other kids discover the joy of reading too. I think this should be about that.

And the other kids aren't in it for the joy of reading? They aren't participating for the challenge of finding books on new topics?

[Jovvi]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

And the other kids aren't in it for the joy of reading? They aren't participating for the challenge of finding books on new topics?

I think you are the one to make this a all or nothing situation! I never said none of the other kids were in it for the joy of reading, I said that by making it a competition that already have an allmost certain winner it could put of some kids that are slower reader and have not yet found that joy in books that this kid clearly already have found.

So, do you think that next year this kid will say "I´m not allowed to compete and win this year so I will not read this year"?

I don´t agree with the way that librarian put blame on the child, it´s not his fault that the other kids can´t keep up with him. It´s the rules that are wrong and several people here have suggested ways to change them.

[exaltedwombat]

We're heading for Longest Thread Ever! All over a reading inititative that maybe wasn't organized QUITE the way we'd have done it :-)