Libraries and PC balance

The February 27, 2021 Minneapolis Star Tribune news[paper included the opinion piece "Woke revolution looms for schools" by conservative columnist Katherine Kersten. In her usual hysterical style, she "reports" on the new social studies standards under development by the department of education. She warns:

The new standards focus primarily on cultivating politically correct attitudes and commitments, rather than preparing students to take on the duties of citizenship by ensuring they understand the chronological story of the key events, actors and ideas that shaped American democracy and the larger world.

George Washington and D-Day rate no mention, though they were highlighted in earlier versions of the standards. Abraham Lincoln and the Battle of Gettysburg are omitted, but students study partus sequitur ventrem — the legal principle adopted in Virginia in 1662 that a child followed the slave or free status of its mother.

World history from classical Greece and Rome to World Wars I and II — a major focus of the current and original 2004 standards — has been virtually eliminated. In its place, for example, as young people study “where buildings can and cannot be built” in the U.S., they will learn about “feng shui” — a pseudoscientific Chinese practice that Merriam-Webster defines as configuring a site or structure to “harmonize with the spiritual forces that inhabit it.”

My immediate reaction to Kersten's concerns was to remind the newspaper readers that school curricula and history itself have always contained bias, which is why school libraries are so critical to a balanced education. Librarians have, as a part of their professional ethical practice, the obligation to provide voices from across the political and cultural spectrum, selected for age-appropriateness, curricular relevance, and responsible editing oversight. We should, I always felt, be carrying both the left-leaning New York Times as well as right-learning Wall Street Journal. That even students in conservative states could find Howard Zin's The Peoples' History of the United States and students in the most liberal states could still find Huck Finn in their school libraries. I would argue that the best defense against conspiracy theories like those perpetrated by QAnon are materials that support a responsible conservative point of view, rather than a heads-on rebuttal.

But then I read in the next day's issue of the Strib "Woke left wants to erase classic literature for kids," in which John Kass' warns:

But the purging of great literature often takes place quietly, among woke teachers and librarians. If the classics aren’t exactly banned outright or burned, they have another way:

To place offending literature on the back shelf, out of the reach of the young, where they’re lost to gather dust in the shadows.

Author Padma Venkatraman wrote an essay titled “Weeding Out Racism’s Invisible Roots: Rethinking Children’s Classics” in the School Library Journal. She supports this purge.

“Challenging old classics is the literary equivalent of replacing statues of racist figures,” she writes. “… Exposing young people to stories in which racism, sexism, ableism, anti-Semitism, and other forms of hate are the norm may sow seeds of bias that can grow into indifference or prejudice.”

And so, the astounding complexity of great literature and great writers is now reduced, as are so many things these days, to angry zealotry and political correctness.

I then found and read Venkatraman piece and it made me ask some very hard questions about the role of school libraries and the selection/weeding practices of school librarians.

The Code of Ethics of the American Library Association says:

VII.    We distinguish between our personal convictions and professional duties and do not allow our personal beliefs to interfere with fair representation of the aims of our institutions or the provision of access to their information resources. 

ALA's  “Library Bill of Rights” clearly states:

II. Libraries should provide materials and information presenting all points of view on current and historical issues. Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval.

And ALA's own “Freedom to Read's”  first statements exhorts:

It is in the public interest for publishers and librarians to make available the widest diversity of views and expressions, including those that are unorthodox, unpopular, or considered dangerous by the majority.

As expressed in “Access to Resources and Services in the School Library Media Program: An Interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights” 

Although the educational level and program of the school necessarily shapes the resources and services of a school library media program, the principles of the Library Bill of Rights apply equally to all libraries, including school library media programs.

Personally, I very much support Venkatraman's suggestion to "actively add to shelves and reading lists, books that win awards celebrating excellence and honoring diversity ...curate books that can become future classics." in order to help created a more culturally empathic society. However, what I believe runs counter to ALA's principles and the good professional practices that they guide is her admonition to keep "racist books out of young readers' hands." 

I have always been a proponent of a well-weeded school library collection. My very first professional article was "Weeding the Neglected Collection" in the November 1990 issue of School Library Journal in which I shared how I tossed old nonfiction  books that reflected gender bias.ie:The Boys' Book of...

Weeding non-fiction based on age, accuracy, lack of use and irrelevance to the curriculum, I can certainly get behind. But waters get murky when we start tossing (or hiding) materials that may be personally offensive or contain philosophies or beliefs contrary to our own. When a practicing librarian, despite having my own political views, I always felt comfortable explaining to my school board and administration that I maintained a thoughtfully chosen, carefully weeded, balanced collection. 

If school libraries are to survive in this politically divided climate,  this balance is more important than ever. Do our hard line community members really need another reason not to fund good library programs - maintaining they support radical social views rather than provide student the resources they need to make informed judgements?