A long time ago, I worked as a youth services librarian in a public library. The management, always eager to report big numbers, set a goal for our department to increase registration for the Summer Reading Club. I took on the challenge. I went with a colleague to schools in June, arranged for assemblies of students to hear all about the super stuff we did in the summer and we signed the kids up by the hundreds. Piece of cake. Goal exceeded.

But our statistics for program participation that summer went through the floor. Hmmmm. It was not as much fun to have to explain that.

The lesson learned from the Club participation and the near obsession with simple/quantitative library statistics was that the real achievement should have been much more than the numbers. And a real gap in the planning was the a lack of substantive objectives. What was the goal of our program anyway? To have a large number of participants? To increase circulation?

The reward was evident in the service we provided, the fun activities we held and the joy of engaging with young people at the library desk to talk about their reading. I appreciate that library management must report to a board and the natural and most effective way to build the perception of a successful program  is to report impressive numbers. And support is largely based on the need expressed through these statistics. I get that. It is also important for us to understand deeply that our role is more than that. And sometimes, it is difficult to capture the outcomes of initiatives. It is important to consider practice too and the need for all librarians, even the ones who report the numbers, to think critically about what we do. Yes, I increased the rate of registration, but did that mean more children visited the library? Even if they visited, it is difficult to determine if they signed out books (and is that a criterion for successful Reading Clubs?) If they did sign out books, I do not know if they were read, or enjoyed, or if they were at a reading level that benefited reading development. And to add an information literacy element here…just because a library user reads, he or she is not necessarily informed. How are we addressing these concerns in our library programs? How can they be measured?

I was reminded of the big picture the following year when I heard a presentation about Stephen Krashen’s writing about free voluntary reading. The importance of FVR should be an emphasis of Summer Reading Clubs and other structured (sometimes over-structured) programs. Reading research should be informing our reading programs and should also be informing our colleagues, library boards and communities.

So thank you Stephen Krashen, you made me a better librarian! I look forward to your presentation at YSL4.