Discussion threads was RE: GEN: Labels as censorship

[Robert Eiffert <beiffert@COMCAST.NET>]

We do have discussions about NCLB, advocacy, funding, etc. They tend to be
short and dealing with a particular issue (someone writes about what is
going on in building) or a 'get it off chest' post. Resources pointed to are
usually good. The types and levels of discussions we have here are because
they are important to the operation of our programs. Experienced
practitioners, newly minted, and pre-service readers utilize this resource
for the quality of responses and diversity of opinions stated.

Currently, there is a thread (Target: Discuss the big issues) that could
fit. Carol Brown says she'd '..love to see a discussion evolve...'

The middle-lit list (http://www.interversity.org/lists/ncte-middle2/) ,
developed from NCTE Middle, operates similarly to ours.

WWWEDU (http://www.edwebproject.org/wwwedu.faq.html) tends to have longer
threads, and delves more into theory and paradigm. It may be due to our
having a more homogenous group, as they have college through elem
instructors and dept heads involved in more of their discussions. EdTech
(http://www.h-net.org/~edweb/), with a similar subscriber list, also
occasionally has sustained threads, dealing with policy issues.

Child_lit, out of Rutgers
(http://email.rutgers.edu/archives/child_lit.html), will select a book and
have long threads discussing it, usually a few chapters a week or so.



Robert Eiffert, Librarian
Pacific Middle School
Evergreen SD 114 Vancouver WA
beiffert@egreen.wednet.edu
pac.egreen.wednet.edu/library
robert@crypticmachinery.net




> -----Original Message-----
> From: School Library Media & Network Communications
> [mailto:LM_NET@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of Paula Yohe
> Sent: Sunday, February 29, 2004 2:56 PM
> To: LM_NET@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> Subject: Re: GEN: Labels as censorship
>
>
> I am probably going to get some criticism for this but
> I could no longer not comment on this discussion.
>
> Whether you are for labeling books or not --- the sad
> part of this entire discussion is the number of
> responses it has generated on this listserv.
>
> The important issues of public relations, advocacy,
> NCLB issues, etc. do not elicit the kind of responses
> that discussion of book labeling and reading incentive
> programs do.
>
> This is a sad commentary on what is being focused on
> instead of advocacy for libraries and the fact the
> media specialists do not need to be highly qualified
> under NCLB - fudning issues - where is the discussion
> and concern ---
>
> If media centers and media specialists are going to
> survive - let's focus on the important issues. Band
> together and speak out to others about the role of
> media centers and media specialists -
>
> In the grand scheme - book labeling pro or con is not
> a big issue. The existence of media centers should be
> the concern.
>
> Paula
>

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-
All LM_NET postings are protected by copyright law.
To change your LM_NET status, e-mail to: listserv@listserv.syr.edu
In the message write EITHER: 1) SIGNOFF LM_NET  2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL
3) SET LM_NET MAIL  4) SET LM_NET DIGEST  * Allow for confirmation.
LM_NET Help & Information: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/
Archive: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/archive/
EL-Announce with LM_NET Select: http://elann.biglist.com/el-announce/
LM_NET Supporters: http://www.eduref.org/lm_net/ven.html
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-