In my last column, I asked readers to write me if they had reversed their school’s practice of putting Accelerated Reader (AR) labels on library books. I was surprised by how many librarians responded. Here’s a sampling of some of the messages I received. Please keep sending me your success stories; they may appear in future columns.

—Pat Scales

When I moved from an elementary school that labeled its library books to a new school, one of the first things I did was to meet with our new principal. I knew that many of the teachers from my former school would be moving along with me and many of them liked AR labels on our library books. I explained that as a result of labeling, our students had no idea how to choose books that really interested them and if the practice continued, they’d never be prepared to use a regular library. Our principal said that he appreciated my passion for wanting our students to learn the right way to use a library and to develop a love of reading. So he very strongly supported my decision to stop labeling books. When the school opened, the decision was met with some resistance from teachers and parents, but having the support of the administration made all the difference.

I’ll never forget my students’ reaction when they came into the library for the first time. I opened my arms, and told them they were free to choose whatever books they wanted to read, and the kids actually applauded! If you’re still unsure about doing away with labels, I’d recommend reading Kelly Gallagher’s Readicide: How Schools Are Killing Reading and What You Should Do About It.

When I arrived at our middle school as the new librarian, I quickly learned that AR was heavily emphasized in the fifth- and sixth-grade curriculums. And I was dismayed when I discovered that many of the library books had AR labels on them. Our teachers use extrinsic rewards to encourage students to earn as many AR points as possible, so our students are very aware of the number of points each book is worth. Although it’s hard for me to fight the reward system, I decided not to put AR labels on our new acquisitions. I haven’t removed the labels from our old books, but as I weed our collection and add new titles, the labeled books are becoming less prominent.

Not putting AR labels on new books hasn’t been a popular decision with many of our teachers, and most of them still label their own classroom libraries. Although I can’t put a stop to what our teachers are doing with AR, I can point out the intrinsic rewards of reading to students when I talk to them one-on-one, and I can do lots of readers’ advisory with them, too.

We’re having an interesting debate about whether to include Alice Sebold’s The Lovely Bones in a middle school library. The debate became heated when someone suggested that they’d include the book, but require students to obtain parental permission to read it. That seems like a perfect solution, but is it a form of censorship?

Please, examine your selection policy regarding purchasing adult materials for the middle school library. Just because a student asks for a book doesn’t mean you have to rush out and purchase it. The Lovely Bones was published and reviewed as an adult book. Its point of view is too tough for most middle school kids to grasp. Don’t forget that we have responsibility for reader guidance. There’s nothing wrong with telling students, “No, we don’t have that book, but we do have a similar book”—and then lead them to it. I can guarantee you that that will satisfy your readers.

And yes, requiring parental permission is a form of censorship. In fact, in the case Counts v. Cedarville School District, a U.S. District Court has already ruled that a library can’t require parental permission to check out a book.