Solving Hard Problems with People You Admire

Today's post is all about work. My work. Just compiling some things that have popped onto my radar this week.

To start, I'm planning a storytime session (10 weeks) for the first time since the winter-spring of 2020, which feels like an eternity ago. I also have someone on my team--which I lead but don't supervise--who is new to our library this year and will be doing her first storytimes. When I was deep into my particular planning process, I thought it might help her to see it. So I sent the following to her in an email:

As I said yesterday, please feel free to pick my brain, ask questions, look to me for help as you begin doing your own storytimes. Starting out can be a very intimidating process (it was for me), but don’t be scared. Nervous, okay, but you have nothing to fear. The only thing you can really do wrong is be boring for the kids, not be engaging for them (which is harder than it sounds). But there are many, many ways to get it right. There are so many good things you can do, so many ways to make it a valuable and engaging experience for your audience that you will only be able to accomplish a few of them during any one storytime. Which is great, because it leaves lots of room for you to find your own personal style. You can pick and choose among the good things to find the ones that make sense for you. Try new things, see what fits, and discard what doesn’t. You’ll do great.

I don’t want to overwhelm you with lots of unsolicited advice and information beyond that, but since I am working on my own planning for the fall right now I thought I’d at least share my style to give you one example of how you might do things.

I am admittedly, consciously more book-heavy than most who do storytimes. I generally present more books, longer books than anyone else and spend more time reading (versus other activities) over the course of a storytime than they do. That is a choice--since it’s my style—and I try to constantly evaluate it to make sure I’m not tipping too far to that extreme. It’s a style that works for some in the audience better than others, but I’ve found it a successful approach. (I also use more recorded movement music than some so the kids get a chance to get their wiggles out between books.)

(And this is my approach for Preschool Storytime; when doing Toddler or Baby I take a different approach).

So, anyway, that’s what you see in this photo I took this morning:

Since I consider books the heart of the Preschool Storytime experience, I start my planning by selecting the books. I constantly keep track of books I like that I think will work well for storytime, then when it’s time to plan for a new session I check them all out (this pile is larger than normal since it’s 2-3 years’ worth of pandemic list instead of the more typical 4-6 months). Then I take the pile and read the books again, one at a time, evaluating them for their storytime appropriateness; things like:

 - Do they have the right amount of text/time to read aloud;

 - Can the pictures be seen easily and clearly from the back of the room;

 - Are they interesting and engaging and age-appropriate for 3-6 year-olds;

 - Do they appeal to me so that I can read them with joy, animation, and fun;

 - Do they have options for interaction or participation?

If I think they have potential, I note themes and set them on the table. As I go through the pile(s) I try to match and group different books. Sometimes the connections are clear and obvious, sometimes they only make sense to me, but I keep trying to make connections. Eventually, I have everything I want to use on the table. Then I start putting them into piles for each weekly storytime. I try to make sure each pile consists of books that not only connect well and flow into each other, I try to have a progression from a longer one or two at the beginning to a quick and easy one or two at the end--both so the overall length of the storytime works out right and so that the sitting still to listen gets easier over the course of the 30ish minutes, so my demands for their attention match what the kids can manage. I try to make sure the books work as a set.

I find out later--during the implementation of each storytime--that I’m right about some of my expectations and wrong about others. Some books work even better than I’d hoped, some work much worse (or not at all). Sometimes a book will work with one audience but not with another, depending on who they are or their mood or my mood (how I present it). It’s always a bit of a surprise and it all works out okay in the end. You roll with the punches, keep the show going, and everyone still has a good, happy time.

That’s a lot of words, so I’ll stop with that for today. (Which makes sense since it’s where I am in the planning process right now anyway.) I’m attaching a few samples of my planning documents (and handouts) so you can see some of the things I’ve done over the years.

I hope this is helpful (ignore if not).

Oh, one more thing. About 10 years ago I came across a series of blog posts that a librarian had written that I thought was excellent--so good, in fact, that I made a post on my own blog about it and linking to it. I think it’s one of the best introductions to “The Art of Storytime” that I know. I highly recommend reading it. Here’s the link: The Art of Storytime.

Here are images of one of the attachments I included, a two-sided handout I gave out with that storytime:

Also from an email yesterday, I sent my team a link to a blog post by David Epstein--which I receive each week as an email newsletter. Here's the link with what I consider the key excerpts:

A Practical Guide To Building Team Culture (Including Remote-Team Culture)

You know that warm, energizing feeling you get when you’re in a good group? That buzz of connection, creativity, and possibility? What you’re actually feeling is psychological safety (big shout-out to Amy Edmondson, who pioneered this work). And psychological safety doesn’t just happen — it’s built through the continual exchange of belonging cues. Belonging cues are small, repeated behaviors that send a clear signal: You matter. I hear you. We care. We share a future. . . . 

Safety is not about wrapping people in fleece and making them comfortable. Rather it’s about creating conditions where you can be uncomfortable together. Where minority viewpoints are unafraid to speak up and be heard. So on a deeper level it’s really about curiosity and humility. In great groups, people aren’t behaving like rugged individualists; to the contrary, they’re always looking for opportunities to give and receive help. . . . 

My favorite study on this comes from Francesca Gino and Bradley Staats, who did a one-hour intervention with new hires at a call center. Group A got a standard hour of training, learned the history of the company, met a star performer. For Group B, they flipped it. Instead of telling the group about the company, they asked Group B a series of questions that served as belonging cues — questions like, What happens on your best day? What happens on your worst day? If we were marooned on a desert island, what skills would you bring to our survival? Seven months later, retention in Group B was 270% higher than in Group A. That is, Group B felt more connected, more in sync. Group chemistry feels like magic, but it’s not magic — it’s belonging cues, delivered at the right time. And there’s no time better than Day One. . . . 

When I started studying culture, I assumed that smoothness was a good thing. I thought that great cultures are tension-free places where people rarely disagree, where everybody’s aligned all of the time.

The truth is exactly the opposite. Great cultures actually contain more tension. Because people aren’t afraid to disagree, to argue energetically about big issues — then go out for a beer. Because the relationships are strong enough to explore hard problems together. In weak cultures, you get what I call Smoothness Disease — that tendency to want to pretend that everything is good. To walk past disagreements. To pretend that everything is good when it really isn’t.

The feeling of being in a great culture isn’t smoothness — it’s the feeling of solving hard problems with people you admire. That’s a special feeling, and it’s the reason that people inside great cultures love it so much. . . . 

Don’t be afraid to question your group’s values and assumptions. I’ve met a lot of good leaders who do that by cultivating what I call “productive disgruntlement.” They remain curious and questioning; they don’t drink the Kool-Aid. They are always asking: Do we really believe this? Does this still work? Where do we need to evolve? This is particularly important to do when you’re successful. Because success is the strongest narcotic ever created; it tends to blind us toward danger, as well as opportunities to get better.

A few people have already responded and we're starting to get some good dialogue about it. All I sent was the link to the entire post with the subject "interesting reading;" I didn't highlight what I did above. One of my teammates focused on a different part of the interview and wrote back:

Okay. I read it, trying to have an open mind. But I'm not convinced. For example:

Every icebreaker begins with terror and avoidance — do we have to do this? And then when people take the leap, things shift. The room comes alive. When they’re done well (i.e., not for inauthentic or manipulative reasons, but with curiosity and good will), people don’t merely tolerate the experience, they are lit up by it. 

That simply is not true for everyone.

1) Who is your biggest hero? 2) What was your biggest heartbreak? 3) What is your family history? 4) What is your hope for the coming year? Then have each person share their answers with the group, spending about 5 minutes each.

I would be horrified. I might leave the room. I would definitely either avoid most of those questions or make something up that isn't true.

Does  my reaction make me less of a person? Or a bad person? I don't think so. Just because some people like those activities, I don't have to feel comfortable with them. And I don't believe there is anything wrong with not wanting to share those things. If someone is interested in knowing more about me, it'll take time. Not an uncomfortable spotlight.

So now I've shared something about myself without even being asked to! 😊

I responded:

“An uncomfortable question popped into Jaya's mind. "Roz, don't take this the wrong way," she began, "but is it possible that you are defective?" 

 

"Don't say that, Jaya!" cried her brother.

 

"No, it is okay," said the robot. "I have asked myself that same question. I do not feel defective. I feel . . . different. Is being different the same as being defective?"

 

"I don't think so," said Jaya. "Or else we're all a little defective.”

 

― Peter Brown, The Wild Robot Escapes

Thank you for engaging with the reading and sharing your thoughts, Beth. As you noted, by doing so you're actually accomplishing what the post advocates. And that was the part of it that least resonated with me, as well; I, too, have trouble being spontaneously honest and vulnerable in the way they expect those prompts to encourage, so I'm not convinced they'll work for me the way the author says they will. I'm the same.

 

But that's okay, because we're all a little defective.

 

One thing I try to remember when reading things like this is they're largely written with the business world in mind, which I believe is generally characterized by different personalities and values than the library world. So we're not their primary audience and they might present things differently if writing for us. So I interpret the messages a bit and feel free to disagree with the parts that don't ring true to me.

 

Here are the parts that I pulled out as most useful for myself:

[see above]

What matters is getting to the psychological safety to solve hard problems together, and we don't have to use icebreakers to get there. We just have to be willing to be defective together. 🙂

That seems to have been a helpful response, because they replied:

"What matters is getting to the psychological safety to solve hard problems together, and we don't have to use icebreakers to get there. We just have to be willing to be defective together. 🙂"

I can totally do that!!

We just have to be willing to be defective together.

And one of my team members emailed this news article to us yesterday.

Oklahoma Threatens Librarians: ‘Don’t Use the Word Abortion’

Library workers across Oklahoma’s Metropolitan Library System (MLS) were shocked this week after receiving instructions to avoid using the word “abortion” and not to help patrons locate abortion-related information on either library computers or their own devices. Workers were warned that they could be held legally liable and face penalties under the state's abortion laws. . . . 

Civil penalties include a $10,000 fine plus jail time and the staff member will lose their job due to being informed by MLS and disregarding the warning. . . . 

With 19 branch locations and more than 400 employees, MLS is the largest library system in Oklahoma. . . . 

Like Texas, Oklahoma has a law that lets individuals sue one another if they believe someone has obtained an abortion or assisted someone in obtaining an abortion. This means a person seeking abortion information could easily be an agitator using the law to target library workers. . . . 

When the sharing of information is criminalized or otherwise prohibited, free expression rights are imperiled. The blocking of access to abortion information on public library computers and the silencing of librarians, if true, constitutes a significant impingement on the right to access information, and infringes these public employees’ rights as they seek to serve their patrons by sharing information that is arguably of public concern.

I shared something similar about those new laws a couple of weeks ago, in The Key to the Mythic Mode Is Ambivalence. Though it seems the story is a little bit old and there have been further ones where the library system moderated their interpretation of that law somewhat:

• Backlash Causes Oklahoma City Library to Clarify Guidelines on Abortion Information
• Oklahoma City Library Official Says Abortion Censorship Rumor False

Even so, the laws exist and these kinds of ramifications are occurring. From the article I linked in that previous post:

These laws “allow you to stalk, surveil, harass, impede upon individual’s constitutional rights,” says Michele Goodwin, a specialist in constitutional law at the University of California, Irvine School of Law. “And that is why this is so dangerous to democracy.” . . . 

“You cannot have state-mandated reproductive laws taking away these choices from women in a country and a robust democracy,” says Erica Chenoweth, a Harvard professor who studies political violence and mass movements. “They’re just incompatible.” . . . 

“Encouraging citizens to spy and denounce each other, it feels extremely authoritarian,” says Barbara Sutton, a professor and chair of the Department of Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies at University at Albany, SUNY. . . . 

Just the fact that the library had to consider those kinds of repercussions is wrong. How wrong? The original article links to section 53 of the "American Library Association's Policy Manual." Here it is with a few subsections I pulled out:

53. INTELLECTUAL FREEDOM

53.4 Governmental Intimidation

The American Library Association opposes any use of government prerogatives which leads to the intimidation of the individual or the citizenry from the exercise of free expression. ALA encourages resistance to such abuse of government power, and supports those against whom such governmental power has been employed.

53.8 Libraries: An American Value

Libraries in America are cornerstones of the communities they serve. Free access to the books, ideas, resources and information in America's libraries is imperative for education, employment, enjoyment, and self-government.

Libraries are a legacy to each generation, offering the heritage of the past and the promise of the future. To ensure that libraries flourish and have the freedom to promote and protect the public good in the 21st century, we believe certain principles must be guaranteed.

To that end, we affirm this contract with the people we serve:

We defend the constitutional rights of all individuals, including children and teenagers, to use the library's resources and services;

We value our nation's diversity and strive to reflect that diversity by providing a full spectrum of resources and services to the communities we serve;

We affirm the responsibility and the right of all parents and guardians to guide their own children's use of the library and its resources and services;

We connect people and ideas by helping each person select and effectively use the library's resources;

We protect each individual's privacy and confidentiality in the use of library resources and services;

We protect the rights of individuals to express their opinions about library resources and services;

We celebrate and preserve our democratic society by making available the widest possible range of viewpoints, opinions and ideas, so that all individuals have the opportunity to become lifelong learners-informed, literate, educated, and culturally enriched.

Change is constant; but these principles transcend change and endure in a dynamic, technological, social and political environment.

By embracing these principles, libraries in the United States can contribute to a future that values and protects freedom of speech, in a world that celebrates both our similarities and our differences, respects individuals and their beliefs, and holds all persons truly equal and free.

Libraries serve a core democratic function.

The whole section is worth reading. It includes the Library Bill of Rights, the Freedom to Read statement, and more.

Pumpkin vine in my garden

I don't often add nonfiction books to my storytime offerings, but every once in a while I find one I think worth reading. I'm planning to include one this fall. It doesn't have as much narrative as I'd like and the language is bit plainer than I'd prefer, missing some opportunities to be more poetic, but I like this one for the way articulates a simple, wise metaphor.

Seeds

by Carme Lemniscates

Seeds carry the power of life.

So they embark on amazing adventures.

Some take off the distant lands.

Others wait to be carried to their destiny.

Once they find their place, seeds go

through breathtaking transformations.

Seeds have the power to multiply in number:

one pumpkin seed brings dozens of pumpkins.

And each pumpkin brings hundreds of seeds!

Seeds have the power to multiply in size. The tiniest seed in

the world sprouts a beautiful orchid.

Seeds have the power to grow in difficult places.

They can thrive despite all odds.

When we sow a seed, we take part in

this amazing cycle.

And we can plant many different kinds of seeds.

A smile is a powerful seed.

One the can bring joy and friendship.

But there are also seeds that bring anger and misunderstanding.

When those seeds grow, they pull us apart.

Seeds can only bring what they carry.

Pumpkin seeds bring pumpkins; kindness seeds bring kindness.

You have lots of seeds, and you get to decide which ones

to plant and which ones to help grow.

Seeds have whole worlds inside them.

Just like you.

And those are just a few of the things I do at my job.