Awards with Rewards

Implications and Perceptions for Collection Development for Youth

Abstract

Including award-winning literature in children’s library collections is often openly stated in a library’s collection development policy. Hateley (2012) notes these “meaningful markers” as a way “to grant our wish of someone somewhere, somehow having read all the books, and worked out which one is best” (p. 190). In an age where librarians are pushed to their limits with time, budget, and curriculum, such designators are useful in helping to develop and maintain a quality collection. At the same time, Hateley (2012) enlists readers to acknowledge the unavoidable human subjectivity involved in the judging process of literary book awards:

What must not be forgotten, however, is that this superhuman work is undertaken by humans—passionate and knowledgeable humans, to be sure, but humans nonetheless. To automatically rely on award winners for collection development may mask the necessary fallibility and idiosyncrasies of individual judges or judging panels. (p. 197)

In a study of “Children’s-Choice” State Book Awards in the US, Storey (1992) further notes censorship issues associated with the selection of books on the award lists and, thus, the availability of books to the children readers meant to select the winners. Storey’s (1992) research reports on a survey of school librarians about censorship related to these book awards. The librarians in the study noted that censorship was “expected and accepted” (Storey, 1992, p. 1). They also supported the use of award lists for selection and collection development which is the focus of the current study reported in this paper. Specifically, the purpose was to investigate youth librarians’ perceptions of using award lists for collection development and to also survey their collections for the presence of five children’s book awards.