Tween Development

There is substantial overlap between the Search Institute’s and the AACAP’S lists. Developmentally tweens are closer to teens than to children. However, by definition tweens are in between both groups. Though the word tween is of recent vintage, the experience of this in-between group goes back at least a hundred years. The expression of these physical, cognitive and emotional changes have remained constant through time and place. Tweens of the past longed for more independence, just like tweens of today. They also experienced profound cognitive changes, and struggled to understand physical changes taking place in their bodies. The onset of secondary sex characteristics is the only difference between tweens of the past and those of the present. Tween girls are maturing earlier than ever before.

In her novels, Judy Blume eloquently describes developmental anxieties common to tween girls. Her literary creations wrestle with coming to terms with getting their periods and developing breasts. They worry over what is cool and what is not, and how best to deal with the opposite sex. I vividly remember dealing about these issues as a tween. However, I don’t remember looking forward to these changes as Margaret Simon does in Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret. Kit Pearson’s Elizabeth Chambers’ ambivalence about developing is reflective of my own experiences at that age. I would argue that the perception of these changes can be viewed along a continuum. At one end, children avidly anticipate maturing, while those at the other end detest change. I was a part of the latter group. Change was anathema to me. I wanted everything to continue on as it used to be, and I held onto my childhood for as long as possible. Most children fall somewhere in the middle, both ambivalent and excited about the profound changes that are happening to their bodies, minds and emotions. 

Reading Up

In her book blog, Jen Robinson highlights some of the issues about kids reading books that are developmentally or intellectually unsuitable for their age. In our society that is growing increasingly competitive by the minute, parents want to be able to give their children a head start on the competition. They mistakenly equate reading-up with advantages, but, as Robinson accurately notes, unknowingly these parents’ good intentions often contribute to life-long problems. Pushing kids to read books beyond their emotional or cognitive comfort zone is a terrible idea, for it disallows children from engaging with texts that speaks to their experiences and passions. Few kids that are pushed to read loftier and more difficult tomes will develop into readers. Numerous studies about passionate readers’ childhoods illustrate the importance of engaging readers with appropriate books that captures the hearts and minds of young readers. In study after study, Ross, McKechnie, and Rothbauer (2006) showcase the importance of giving children the power to choose their own books. Studies conclusively state that, contrary to popular belief, the reading of series books in childhood does not impair children’s ability to identify themselves as readers, and does not limit their ability to choose literary works later in life.

Robinson argues that children should be allowed to read more difficult fare, provided that the decision to read these books stems from the child. I agree with her logic, but only up to a point. Today children are blessed with an endless sea of appropriate fare. There is a book out there to satisfy every interest, and there are hundreds of children’s classics to choose for more advanced readers. If I was a librarian acting in a reader’s advisory capacity, and was asked by parents to choose books for advanced readers, I would gently guide them to the section of the library that houses the older tomes. In my mind, at least, there is little point in encouraging tweens to read books written for an older audience. However, I realize that some tweens may desire to read books for teens or adults and should be given the permission to do so. Tweens are wise readers, and will simply put down the book if it becomes too difficult. Hopefully they will return to these works when they are older.

Ross, C. A, McKechnie L. (E.F.) & P. M. Rothbauer., ed. (2006) Reading matters: What

 the research reveals about reading, libraries and community. Westport,

Connecticut: Libraries Unlimited.

http://jkrbooks.typepad.com/blog/2010/11/reading-and-grade-levels-keeping-it-fun-a-booklights-reissue.html

Literature Circles

Middle-school teacher, Elena Aguilar (2010), outlines the potential of literature circles to motivate reluctant readers. Through a literature circle Aguilar’s six-year-old son cultivated a passion for reading. Literature circles work because they put children in charge of their learning, making them active participants. Members of each circle vote on the books chosen, and play a major role in interpreting each text. Librarians or teachers do need to be able to offer guidance to the circle, however, the onus of each literary circle is on the participants, not the teacher or librarian. Decision-making primarily rests with child members. While an adult figure can interject or change topic when members grow argumentative and the discussion runs its course, it is good policy to allow the discussion to run with minimal adult involvement. The ability to decide which books are read and how to interpret these books throws children into active roles, significantly increasing the chances that they will fall in love with reading. Moreover, literary circles work because they make the learning process fun. Viewing learning as a game instead of a chore is a major part of the battle towards making learning a life-long pursuit. Every child should be given an opportunity to participate in a literary circle.

School and public libraries can offer literature circles for children and adults. Groups can range from those structured to satisfy highly-specified interests to general topics. For example, a group of tweens girls passionate about Anne of Green Gables might decide to read not only L.M. Montgomery’s oeuvre but also comparable works of fiction by Montgomery’s contemporaries, as well as  historical and biographical texts that describe late-nineteenth and early twentieth-century life. A range of genres should be included in every group. Aguilar notes that reluctant readers and boys often prefer nonfiction, so it is imperative that circles encourage members to think outside the fiction box.

http://www.edutopia.org/blog/literature-circles-how-to-and-reasons-why-elena-aguilar

Research on Boys and Reading

Ross, McKechnie, and Rothbauer (2006) summarize research on boys and reading, placing studies into three camps. Research in the first, essentialist category asserts that nature or genetics accounts for reading disparities between gender groups. Essentialist studies argue that reading preferences and learning styles are situated in the brain, and that these hard-wired differences can explain boys’ attitudes towards reading. “Identifying and providing boy-friendly reading materials and encouraging boys to interact with texts in male appropriate-ways is consistent with the essentialist approach to gender differences in reading” (p. 90-1). In Connecting boys with books 2, Michael Sullivan (2009) expands upon his earlier research on boys and reading (2003), offering that it is “not that boys’ brains can not handle reading, but that the way we teach reading does not speak” to boys (p. 5). It is important to remember that boys mature at later ages than girls, and that a lot of the differences we find between the reading experiences of boys and girls can be partially explained by brain development. The average boy is

a year and a half behind girls in reading throughout their school years. . . . 

The corpus collosum is, on average, 10 percent larger in girls than it is in boys. 

This means that boys are more likely to work with half of their brains, leaning 

toward either analytical or creative approaches, whereas girls tend to approach 

problems holistically, using some analysis and some creativity. . . . Reading. . . .

requires the use of both hemispheres of the brain (p. 25).

The gender reading gap is increasing at an alarming pace (Sullivan, 2003, 2009). Eighty-five percent of students in remedial classes are boys. Boys are more likely than girls to commit suicide, and to be diagnosed with ADHD. Moreover, as they grow, so does the reading gap. High-school boys are even less likely than those in middle or elementary school to identify as readers. When the effects of gender are coupled with race and socioeconomic class, the potential for turning boys into readers reduces significantly. Fewer African-American men graduate from college than African-American women and they are even less likely to earn a college degree than Caucasian men. Moreover, boys from impoverished households have less opportunities to engage with texts when compared to boys from affluent families;  as a result, they are significantly less likely to develop into readers.

The second category expands upon the essentialists’ arguments. Social constructivists assert that the majority of boys grow up to dislike reading, for reading is viewed as a feminized act (Ross, McKechnie, and Rothbauer, 2006). The majority of children’s librarians and reading teachers are women, and there are precious few male role models to inspire boys to pick up books. Whenever boys do see men reading, they’re reading periodicals or nonfictional literature. Moreover, compared to women, the majority of male readers view reading as a solitary pursuit. Librarians and teachers generally dislike boys’ genre preferences – nonfiction and fantasy. The majority of books which teachers or librarians choose prioritizes girls’ tastes. “Preference is given to books that are morally functional, that assist personal development and socialization. Books trump magazines; print trumps the visual; the serious trumps the humorous; fiction trumps nonfiction” (p. 91). Research has repeatedly shown that selectors invariably opt for girl-appropriate books, only carrying “one-third” of books that boys prefer (Worthy, Moorman and Turner, 1999). The reluctance of school and public libraries to purchase copies of boy-friendly books poignantly demonstrates the extent of inequalities at work within libraries. By withholding books that hold meaning to boys, libraries disallow boys from identifying themselves as readers.

The final category asserts that boys reject reading not because it is a feminized activity, but because it is tied with school (Ross, McKechnie, and Rothbauer, 2006). School-type questions differ from how boys naturally approach nonfictional texts; instead of reading about how to solve “a clear and immediate” problem, as happens outside of school, boys are asked to respond to specific questions; the central problem with this approach is that it prioritizes girls’ analytical method. I take issue with this category, arguing that all children, even girls, experience school-related angst. However, I readily support students’ right to choose which books are read. Atwell (2007), Krashen (2004), and Miller (2007) have documented the negative effects of teacher-chosen texts. One of the major reasons why boys and girls fail to identify themselves as readers is because teacher-chosen texts do not speak to them, and because reading assignments encourage the idea that reading is only useful when responding to teacher-driven questions. These negative feelings towards books, which are formed in school, bleed over into non-school reading. Books become forever associated with school.

What can libraries do to inspire boys to read and to identify as readers? Libraries need to order books that are meaningful to boys, and should offer a plethora of alternatives for boys to engage in text. Librarians need to understand the differences in which boys learn and express themselves, and need to refashion library spaces to make them equally appealing to both boys and girls. Boys need to see men reading and libraries can increase the likelihood of this by sponsoring boy only discussion-groups, read-alouds, and storytelling (Sullivan, 2003, 2009). Instead of a story-writing contest, why not encourage photo-or-drawing submissions? By creating a culture of books where boys’ reading preferences are valued, the possibilities of turning boys into readers significantly broaden.

Atwell, N. (2007). The reading zone: How to help kids become skilled, passionate,

habitual, critical readers. New York: Scholastic.

Krashen, S. D. (2004). The power of reading: Insights from the research. Westport,

Connecticut: Libraries Unlimited.

Miller, Donalyn. (2009). The Book Whisperer: Awakening the Inner Reader in Every

             Child. San Francisco, CA: . John Wiley & Sons.

Sullivan, M. (2003) Connecting boys with books: What libraries can do. Chicago: ALA.

Sullivan, M. (2009). Connecting boys with books 2: Closing the reading gap. Chicago:

ALA.

Ross, C. A, McKechnie L. (E.F.) & P. M. Rothbauer., ed. (2006) Reading matters: what

 the research reveals about reading, libraries and community. Westport,

Connecticut: Libraries Unlimited.

Worthy, J., Moorman, M., and M. Turner. (1999). What Johnny likes to read is hard to find in school.

            Reading Research Quarterly, 34(1): 12-27.

Realistic Tween Fiction: How Realistic is it?

The Secret Language of Girls. By Frances O’Roark Dowell. Atheneum, 2004. 256 pages. Tr. $17.99 ISBN - 978-0689844218

Eleven-year old Kate and Marylin have been best friends and neighbors since nursery school, however, their relationship soon hits a snag. Flannery, an older girl on their block is partly responsible for this rift. Marilyn, now interested in makeup and boys, no longer wishes to spend time with her unsophisticated friend, Kate. Marilyn’s snub hurts Kate. With time Kate becomes accustomed to the changes in Marilyn, though a part of her still longs for her friend. Is it possible for Kate and Marilyn to renew their friendship, or is this rift merely a normal part of development?

Frances O’Roarck Dowell’s prose is relatable to tweens’ lives. In writing about the rift between lifelong friends, Dowell poignantly explains the difficulties that come with development. Thinking back to your own middle-school years, you’ll remember how cruel girls can suddenly become to one another. In middle school it suddenly matters what girls wear, whether they wear makeup, and who they choose as friends. Uniqueness isn’t valued, and those that don’t fit in like Kate are often shunned. When the story begins Kate isn’t interested in boys or makeup; she’d much rather read, write, and play basketball. The story outlines Kate and Marylin’s growth. Kate decides that she likes boys, and agrees to a relationship with one, but soon learns that love is complicated. By turning this boy into her boyfriend, she experiences a range of new emotions. She desperately wants to confide in Marylin, but they aren’t on talking terms. Marilyn, in contrast, develops a crush on her teacher, and decides to join the cheerleading squad. Marilyn's young brother, Petey, wise beyond his years, notices that her new friends are actually a bad influence on his sister, and longs for the old-times to return. In acquiescing to her friends’ cruel plans, Marilyn exemplifies the poor choices tweens often make in order to fit in. Paisley, Kate’s new friend, poignantly illustrates how you can choose to be yourself, and still get others to appreciate you. Finally Marilyn learns this lesson, and it appears that Marilyn and Kate will return to being friends again.

Interpersonal Interactions: The Importance of Developing a Relationship with Each Tween

Lesesne demonstrates that often half of the battle in the process of encouraging tweens to read is getting them to recognize that reading material is omnipresent. In our jobs as librarians, we must work to disabuse tweens of the belief that reading books and textbooks is genuine reading, while reading magazines, blogs, and comics is not. We need to assure young readers that whenever they pick up that beloved magazine or comic book, they are engaged in the process of reading. Tweens need to understand that all readers choose from a variety of genres, and that it is perfectly acceptable to read lighter fare. In our work with tweens, we must ensure that we provide them with the same level of respect and opportunities to grow in their identity as readers that we afford to other more advanced readers.

As a group, tweens are far from monolithic. They encompass disparate levels of maturity, reading levels and passions, avocations, social intelligence, and informational requirements. Collections that serve this group, therefore, must consist of a variety of engaging material that addresses the developmental needs of tweens. Selectors should engage tweens in the selection process, getting them to weigh-in on purchasing decisions. Series books often play an influential role in turning kids into readers, and should play a fundamental role in each collection. Moreover, collections must ensure that chosen books appeal to a range of ages, tastes, and reading levels.

In addition to providing a balanced collection, librarians must ensure that they are meeting the individual needs of tweens. Meeting individually enables librarians to tailor their recommendations, providing tweens with the knowledge that there is someone in their lives that cares for them, and who understands the importance of questioning values, exploring the world, and growing as a person.

Reading Logs vs. Reading Notebooks

One of the early lessons Miller (2009) notes is that students abhor reading logs. They only work for students with strong support systems, where parents actually monitor that their children read. However, even here they fail. Tweens that read nightly may feel that their teacher doesn’t trust that they are actually reading. On the opposite side of the spectrum, reading logs fail to motivate reluctant readers.

Miller no longer instructs her students to keep track of time spent reading at home. Instead, she trusts that her students are reading. “Enthusiastic readers who eagerly tell me about what they read the night before are the only evidence I need that students are reading at home (p. 144).” However, she does make use of reader’s notebooks. What is the difference between the two?

The distinction between a “reading log” and “reading notebook” may seem slight on the surface, but peeling back the outer layers reveals important distinctions. Reader’s notebooks are student-centered learning tools, which allow students to monitor their own reading progress. Students are in charge of the books they choose to read, and reading is, therefore, pleasurable. Student record the books they’ve read, even those they haven’t finished. They also keep track of books they hope to read. And they aesthetically engage with every book, writing about what they liked or disliked.

So, while both mediums allow students to keep track of their reading, the feel of reader's notebooks is very different. Reading logs are extrinsically motivated, focused on teacher demands, whereas reading notebooks are intrinsically motivated, focused on the individuality of each student. For reading to become a life-long habit, it needs to become intrinsic. With reader’s notebooks, it’s all right if students give up on a book, having only read a few pages. Noting a book that’s failed to please provides students with an opportunity of furthering their identity as readers. By clearly defining what it was about the work that disappointed, readers can hone onto their critical muscles. Making a note of the disappointing book also allows readers to return to the book at a later date.

Miller, Donalyn. (2009). The book whisperer: Awakening the inner reader in every child. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.