Michael Sullivan
Connecting
Boys with
Books
2
Closing the Reading Gap
Michael Sullivan (BA in history, Harvard College, 1989; MLS, Simmons College,
1999) is the author of Connecting Boys with Books (American Library Association,
2003), Fundamentals of Children’s Ser­vices (American Library Association, 2005), Escapade Johnson and Mayhem at Mount Moosilauke (Big Guy Books, 2006), and Escapade
Johnson and the Coffee Shop of the Living Dead (Publishing Works, 2008). He has spoken
widely on the topic of boys and reading and is an adjunct faculty member at Simmons College Graduate School of Library and Information Science in Boston and
Plymouth State University in Plymouth, New Hampshire. He has been a children’s
librarian and library director in public libraries for more than fifteen years, most
recently as director of the Weeks Public Library in Greenland, New Hampshire.
While extensive effort has gone into ensuring the reliability of information appearing in this book, the
publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, on the accuracy or reliability of the information, and
does not assume and hereby disclaims any liability to any person for any loss or damage caused by
errors or omissions in this publication.
The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard
for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1992.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Sullivan, Michael, 1967 Aug. 30–
Connecting boys with books 2 : closing the reading gap / Michael Sullivan.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-0-8389-0979-9 (alk. paper)
1. Boys—Books and reading—United States. 2. Teenage boys—Books and reading—United
States. 3. Reading—Sex differences—United States. 4. Reading promotion—United States. 5. Sex
differences in education—United States. 6. Children’s libraries—Activity programs—United States.
7. Young adults’ libraries—Activity programs—United States. 8. School libraries—Activity programs—
United States. I. Title.
Z1039.B67S85 2009
028.5'5083—dc22
2008034925
Copyright © 2009 by the American Library Association. All rights reserved except those which may be
granted by Sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Revision Act of 1976.
ISBN-13: 978-0-8389-0979-9
Printed in the United States of America
13 12 11 10 09 5 4 3 2 1
Contents
C hapter 1
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
Chapter 7
Chapter 8
Introduction: Five Years on the Front Lines
1
A Blueprint for Boys and Reading
5
The Reading Gap
14
Boys and Girls Are Different
24
Read for Fun, Read Forever
36
Exposing Boys to Story
47
Honoring Boys’ Literature
59
Promoting Reading to Boys
73
Creating the Culture of Literacy
87
Conclusion: Boys and Reading—
What the Future Holds
99
Bibliography
105
Index
111
v
Chapter 1
A Blueprint for Boys and Reading
It may seem counterintuitive, but I begin this work on the special reading needs
of boys by writing about girls and their special needs in math and science. In
2005, Lawrence Summers, then president of Harvard University, caused an
uproar when he intimated that innate differences in levels of ability between
men and women were at least partially to blame for the disparity between the
number of men and women in top math and science faculty positions.1 The
furor over these comments was justified, for they contradicted three decades
of experience in education. One of the nation’s top educators should have
known that differences in approach do not necessarily translate into differences
in ability.
In the late 1970s through the 1990s, the “Girl Power” movement revolutionized education in the United States and reached beyond to affect every corner
of our society. It was inspired by several realizations, primary of which was that
girls were not succeeding in the areas of math and science, a deficit that gained
popular and national attention with the American Association of University
Women report How Schools Shortchange Girls.2 We, at least those of us who are
not presidents of Ivy League colleges, saw that it was not that girls’ brains could
not handle math and science, but that the way we taught these subjects did not
speak to girls. For girls to succeed, we needed to pay special attention to how
girls learn and to make girls see this as an area in which they could succeed.
But the acknowledgment of the math and science gap was just the beginning. We realized that the culture of our schools failed to reward the way girls
relate to the world. Classroom atmospheres were competitive, active, and as
such intimidating and unwelcoming to many girls.3 Note that this is many, not
all—a theme that continues throughout this discussion. While the teachers’
attention was focused on the loudest and most aggressive students, many girls
faded into the background and their self-esteem suffered. As Shirley P. Brown
and Paula Alidia Roy report, “Researchers began to see that a more cooperative
5
6 A Blueprint for Boys and Reading
framework for learning as well as an emphasis on personal connections served
girls more effectively than a competitive, impersonal environment.”4
Finally, we realized that certain institutions and activities were effectively
closed to girls, including many voluntary associations and societies, sports programs, and even college itself. In 1970, only 41 percent of college students were
female, and even if a woman graduated from college she was likely to suffer from
restricted opportunities when pitted against a man who had shared a table at the
Rotary Club, or the golf course, with the person making a hiring decision.5
What did we do about these realizations? Beginning with educators and
eventually reaching all of society, we addressed the problems head-on. We took
steps to promote science and math to girls, changing how these were taught
to better fit the way girls learn. We instituted single-gender classes, girls-only
intensive classes that focused on the learning styles that tended to speak to girls.
We offered scholarships to help girls who wanted to study in these fields. In all
classes, we put a greater emphasis on a more inclusive atmosphere for all.
The changes were not limited to the classroom. Throughout our culture,
we made an effort to make our institutions safe and supportive. The idea of
male-only associations crumbled, and though they certainly still exist they are as
marginalized today as they were institutional in 1970. Title IX, passed in 1972,
addressed glaring inequities in scholastic and college sports, opening to young
women the advantages of healthy competition and the social bonds that are
formed on the sports field. Girl-centered social orga­nizations got into the act. In
the 1990s, the Girl Scouts launched their STEM program (science, technology,
engineering, and math) and partnered with such companies as Lockheed Martin
and Intel.6 Perhaps the crowning achievement of the Girl Power movement
is the success in opening higher education to women. By 2006, 57 percent of
American college students were female.7
The Girl Power movement may be best remembered by the powerful writing that inspired it, and that it in turn inspired. The breadth of this writing
shows the interconnectedness of the issues faced by girls—educational, social,
and psychological. The trail of great books reaches back to Carol Gilligan’s In
a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development (Harvard University
Press, 1982) and stretches through Peggy Orenstein’s Schoolgirls: Young Women,
Self-Esteem, and the Confidence Gap (Doubleday, 1994), Mary Bray Pipher’s Reviving
Ophelia (Putnam, 1994), Joan Ryan’s Little Girls in Pretty Boxes: The Making and
Breaking of Elite Gymnasts and Figure Skaters (Doubleday, 1995), and possibly most
powerfully Myra Sadker’s Failing at Fairness: How Our Schools Cheat Girls (Scribner,
1994), among others.
A Blueprint for Boys and Reading 7
The result of this focus and these society-wide changes was without a doubt
the most positive and powerful transformation in education in the past century.
We saw a great injustice, and we made basic, structural, and far-reaching changes
in order to address it. We recognized that girls, on average, have different needs,
strengths, and approaches to learning than boys. We adjusted our society to give
girls a fair chance to succeed. We did not allow a fear of gender bias to stop us
from addressing real problems.
In this brief history, we find the hope and the blueprint for addressing the
reading gap that boys face today. Replace girls with boys and math and science
with reading, and we face an analogous situation. Indeed, the reading gap among
twelfth graders today is twice as large in favor of girls as the math gap is in favor
of boys, and the gender gap in writing is six times as wide as the gender gap in
math.8 The problem is one we have faced before. We know we can fix it, we
know how we can fix it, and we know we must.
No Girls Allowed
Knowing we have a problem to fix does not mean that the task will be easily
accomplished; that, too, we may learn from the Girl Power movement. Social inertia is never easy to overcome. A small example from small-town New England
may illustrate this. A public library in a tiny New Hampshire town decided to
make a concentrated effort at programming for boys in response to the acknowledged reading gap. Those in charge thought they needed a powerful kickoff program to raise awareness and, showing a good understanding of the issues, chose
a storytelling program as that beginning. They asked me to come up and tell
stories, and I was happy to oblige.
In planning the program, we made a difficult decision, and one that nobody
should make lightly. We could have offered the program as one for the whole
family but of special interest to boys, but we feared that this would not produce
the desired atmosphere. We did not want mothers to drag in their sons, plop
them down in a chair, and tell them to pay attention to something that would
be good for them. Instead, we wanted to do some role modeling; we wanted
fathers, uncles, grandfathers, and brothers to come in with the boys and share
the experience. So we decided to make the program for guys alone.
Then we needed a name for the program, so we went back to the old television sitcoms and the ever-present tree house behind the suburban home. What
was painted in big red letters on that ubiquitous hideaway? “No Girls Allowed!”
That is what we named our program, thinking we were being funny. The local
8 A Blueprint for Boys and Reading
middle school did not agree. It refused to participate in the publicity, claiming
the program was discriminatory. Then the school wrote a letter to the director
of the public library insisting that the library not be involved in such a program
either. And then, somehow, that letter made it into the local newspaper.
This was a small town of a few thousand people, quiet and serene. This fuss
became the biggest news story of the year. There were editorials and responses,
arguments in the street and the local supermarket. As I drove up that evening,
I expected to have to cross a picket line in order to tell stories. There were no
picketers, just eighty-five boys, fathers, grandfathers, and uncles ready to engage
in a public library storytelling. That should be proof enough that attempting to
ban something is the surest way to make it popular.
It was a grand night. The children’s librarian who orga­nized the event
warmed up the audience with interactive games that got the crowd shouting,
laughing, and jumping up and down until the bookshelves themselves were
swaying. Then she announced that, since this was a program for guys alone, she
was leaving the crowd to me. We told and listened to stories for more than an
hour, and by the time we were done my ears were ringing as if I had been at a
rock concert.
Chess for Girls
After my overly publicized storytelling event, I began to think about our attitude
toward boys, girls, and specific gender-based needs. Earlier during that school
year I had offered a program at my local elementary school called “Chess for
Girls” as part of their enrichment program. The reason was simple: as a chess
teacher and coach, I had always had trouble convincing girls to participate. I
knew that there was nothing about being a girl that made them incapable of
playing chess; the problem was a combination of social factors and the way we
teach chess to kids. Most chess teachers are male and teach from a male perspective, and most girls who walk into a chess program know immediately they
are outnumbered and shy away.
The intention of Chess for Girls was to handpick eight girls, give them six
weeks of intensive training, raise their skills, confidence, and camaraderie, and
have them stand together against the boys. Chess, like reading, is too valuable to
be offered to only half of our children. Did anybody have a problem with this
program? Well, actually, a few boys did. They accused me of conspiring to teach
the girls to beat them, which was absolutely true, but if they and their compatriots had been nicer to the girls the first time around I would not have needed
A Blueprint for Boys and Reading 9
to do so. Other than that, Chess for Girls went unchallenged. Nobody claimed
it was discriminatory or wrote angry letters to the press. Indeed, the local Educational Partnership Council, the business booster group for the school district,
gave me an award that year for innovative programming in the local public
school, and the one program they mentioned by name was Chess for Girls.
What are we to make of this? On one hand we have storytelling for boys,
and on the other we have chess for girls. One draws protests; the other garners
awards. As a matter of fact, we talk about gender all the time. We regularly
address problems through the lens of gender. It is only that we find it much
easier to talk about the special needs of girls. We must get past this.
Don’t Talk to Us about Boys
Why do we not talk about the special needs of boys, especially in education?
Part of the problem is history. Efforts to fight for women’s equality in our
society have left us with the impression that men who fight for the rights of
boys must be doing so at the expense of girls. As late as 2006, the Washington
Post ran an article claiming that “the boy crisis . . . is largely a manufactured one,
the product of a backlash against the women’s movement.”9 Kathy Sanford
charges that “girls are often blamed for the troubles boys experience developing
literacy skills because they are said to siphon off the resources and attention that
boys should have.”10 Although a few pundits on the ideological edge make such
assertions, to my knowledge no serious scholarship or respectable educator has
claimed this in at least the past five years.
In her feminist/queer critique of the literature of boys’ illiteracies, Mollie
V. Blackburn says of Michael W. Smith and Jeffrey D. Wilhelm (prominent
researchers on boys and reading), “They distance themselves from the literature
that blames feminism by plainly stating that they are not interested in critiquing feminism or in arguing that girls are advantaged over boys.”11 Indeed, those
who are doing real work on behalf of boys should emulate this approach, and
those who do blame feminism and girls’ success for problems boys have should
be simply ignored. To blame mainstream educators for the words of fringe elements is beyond unfair, and it does nothing to either help boys or protect girls.
Although there is plenty of evidence that such backlashes exist, it is unfair to
paint all or even a significant number of those who advocate for boys with this
broad brush.
There is also a belief that boys have brought this crisis on themselves,
choosing not to perform or deciding that studying is not as much fun as sports.
10 A Blueprint for Boys and Reading
We generally accept now that gender as an influence has often been disguised
as something else such as behavioral or personality issues.12 Still, echoes of this
belief remain in our attitudes toward boys’ behavior in classrooms and elsewhere. As a result, efforts to address reading issues in terms of gender are often
cast as efforts to lower standards and excuse laziness and uninterest. Critics have
charged that the “kind of classroom that is now being described as ‘boy-friendly’
. . . would de-emphasize reading and verbal skills, and would rely on rote learning and discipline . . . really a remedial program in disguise.”13 This reflects the
prevailing culture, one of standards where artificially defined benchmarks are
used as a shortcut to serious investigation and understanding. If a segment, even
a majority, of our population fails to meet these standards, then the problem
must lie in the population, not in the standards. Are standards really what matter
to us as a society? It appears to be so.
Nature versus Nurture
One familiar reason not to talk about gender is the idea that gender is an entirely
social construct and as such has no place in education; if boys and girls are substantially alike biologically, the argument goes, then all differences are imposed
on them by a society that is gender biased. Certainly, if this were true, then any
gender-based approach to education would be inherently harmful. In her article
“Gendered Literacy,” Kathy Sanford makes the case as strongly as any, flatly
stating that “gender is a construct that shapes literacy experiences for adolescents in school.”14 She goes on to assert that children blindly accept gender
roles imposed on them by adults and for evidence points to how children act
in just the way adults would expect them to act based on their gender. I argue
that at least some of the time boys and girls act in ways one would expect of
them because they are expressing an honest, gender-specific way of seeing the
world.
Of course, this premise that gender is a purely social construct is as implausible as the idea that all differences between the sexes are biologically determined. The debate should not be nature verses nurture, or even how much
is nature and how much nurture. The real questions at hand are these: which
factors are shaped predominantly by biology and which factors by socialization,
and how can our understanding of these factors help us improve the lot of boys,
and for that matter girls?
Dan Kindlon and Michael Thompson, in their powerful book Raising Cain,
speak about the damage done by a society that imposes an artificial definition of
A Blueprint for Boys and Reading 11
maleness on boys that turns them away from their inner life, encourages them
to suppress feelings, and leaves them unable to either understand themselves
or express themselves emotionally. It is a great work on the nurture side of the
boy problem. But even these authors acknowledge that nature has its place. On
nature verses nurture, they write, “Clearly everything we do is influenced heavily by both.” They remind us in fact that the two influences cannot wholly be
separated. “It is now widely recognized that environmental factors can affect
the structure of our brain.”15
Socialization can magnify biological differences as well:
A boy’s early ease with throwing a ball or climbing may begin with
developmental readiness, but his skill and interest grow when he finds
encouragement for his hobby at home. A girl’s greater ease with reading
and language also appears to begin with an early neurological advantage,
enhanced when she is encouraged in her reading habit.16
Clearly we must keep an eye on both nature and nurture.
Kindlon and Thompson make it clear that their book is not “an attempt
to ‘turn boys into girls’ by helping them to become more attuned to their emotional lives. . . . both genders will be better off if boys are better understood.”17
Their example is one to aspire to. In their book, primarily about the nurture side
of the argument, they carefully acknowledge the nature side as well and look
for success through understanding rather than judgment. My work deals more
heavily with the nature side, but it would be incomplete if it did not acknowledge that socialization is a powerful force in boys’ lives and that understanding
that interplay is crucial to our success.
Furthermore, the various needs of boys cannot be looked at as entirely
distinct. Raising Cain addresses the emotional lives of boys, whereas I look at
the reading lives of boys. I freely acknowledge that the presiding view of masculinity makes it difficult for many boys to connect with reading, even if they
are strongly inclined to do so. Conversely, reading problems can be a major
obstacle to boys enjoying rich emotional lives. Kindlon and Thompson discuss
boys’ need to explore and express their inner selves. I promote reading as a
supportive and social activity, presenting language-related activities that foster
communication, especially communication with male role models. Ultimately
this book explores ways to improve boys’ reading ability as well as the amount
of time boys spend reading. If boys have trouble expressing themselves, that is
at least partly because they lack the needed communication skills; boys who read
are more likely to have at their disposal the words to express themselves.
12 A Blueprint for Boys and Reading
Other Considerations
We also hesitate to focus on gender issues because other factors, such as race
and socioeconomic status, seem so much worse. The influence of these societal
factors is undeniable. Indeed, in the city of Boston, 104 white females graduate
from high school for every 100 white males, but 139 black females graduate for
every 100 black males.18 Sixty percent of college students may be female, but
there are twice as many black girls as black boys in college.19
In 2004, the National Assessment of Educational Progress found that the
reading gender gap spans every racial and ethnic group, and boys trail girls in
reading regardless of income, disability, or English-speaking ability. Twentythree percent of white high school seniors with college-educated parents scored
“below basic” in reading, as did 34 percent of Hispanic males and 44 percent of
black males. In comparison, 7 percent of white females, 19 percent of Hispanic
females, and 33 percent of black females scored “below basic.”20
All this does not mean that gender is not an issue, just that factors such
as race and economics exacerbate it. To be poor, black, and male means to be
especially at risk. Still, without any of these other risk factors, males do not succeed at the same rate as girls. According to Jacqueline King of the American
Council on Education, only 43 percent of middle-class white college students
are male.21
Exceptions and the Rule
One final way in which we deny the role of gender in reading and education
is negation by exception. The argument is simple: “I know boys who read.”
Although exceptions do not always prove a rule, neither do they disprove it.
Not all boys fail at reading, and not all boys follow some script of maleness,
just as girls differ one from another. That does not excuse us from looking at
trends and generalities that describe large parts of our population. When we
talk about the problem of boys and reading, we are talking about the boys who
have trouble with reading. Not all boys struggle, but many do, and those who
struggle tend to struggle for many of the same reasons. It is those boys we need
to address.
Notes
1. Cheryl Fields, “Summers on Women in Science,” Change, May/June 2005, 8.
2. American Association of University Women Education Foundation, How Schools Shortchange
Girls (Annapolis Junction, MD: American Association of University Women, 1992), cited
A Blueprint for Boys and Reading 13
in Bronwyn T. Williams, “Girl Power in a Digital World: Considering the Complexity of
Gender, Literacy, and Technology,” Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, December 2006/
January 2007, 301.
3. Ibid.
4. Shirley P. Brown and Paula Alidia Roy, “A Gender-Inclusive Approach to English/Language
Arts Methods: Literacy with a Critical Lens,” in Gender in the Classroom: Foundations, Skills,
Methods, and Strategies across the Curriculum, ed. David Sadker and Ellen S. Silber (Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum, 2007), 168–69.
5. National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Institute of Educational Sciences, Digest of
Educational Statistics 2007 (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2008), 269.
6. Lynne Shallcross, “Girl Power,” ASEE Prism, February 2007, 31.
7. NCES, Digest of Educational Statistics 2007, 269.
8. James M. Royer and Rachel E. Wing, “Making Sense of Sex Differences in Reading and Math
Assessment: The Practice and Engagement Hypothesis,” Issues in Education, 2002, 77; and
Michael W. Smith and Jeffrey D. Wilhelm, Reading Don’t Fix No Chevys: Literacy in the Lives of
Young Men (Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 2002), 1.
9. Caryl Rivers and Rosalind Chait Barnett, “The Myth of ‘The Boy Crisis,’” Washington Post,
April 9, 2006, B01.
10. Kathy Sanford, “Gendered Literacy Experiences: The Effects of Expectation and Opportunity for Boys’ and Girls’ Learning,” Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, December 2005/
January 2006, 303.
11. Mollie V. Blackburn, “Boys and Literacies: What Difference Does Gender Make?” Reading
Research Quarterly, April/May/June 2003, 280.
12. Kathy Sanford, Heather Blair, and Raymond Chodzinski, “A Conversation about Boys and
Literacy,” Teaching and Learning, Spring 2007, 4.
13. Rivers and Barnett, “Myth of ‘The Boy Crisis,’” B01.
14. Sanford, “Gendered Literacy Experiences,” 303–4.
15. Dan Kindlon and Michael Thompson, Raising Cain: Protecting the Emotional Life of Boys (New
York: Ballantine, 2000), 12.
16. Ibid., 31.
17. Ibid., xix.
18. Rivers and Barnett, “Myth of ‘The Boy Crisis,’” B01.
19. Richard Whitmire, “Boy Trouble,” New Republic, January 23, 2006, 16; and Angela Phillips,
The Trouble with Boys (New York: Basic Books, 1994), 18.
20. Bill Costello, “Leveraging Gender Differences to Boost Test Scores,” Principal, January/
February 2008, 50.
21. Whitmire, “Boy Trouble,” 16.
Chapter
Index 1
A
The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time
Indian (Alexie), 66, 67
academic achievement and reading gap,
17–18
Accelerated Reader program, 43
action/adventure books, 65
suggested books, 71
active learning, 79–80
ADHD. See attention-deficit/
hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)
adult books, appeals to boys of, 102
Alex Rider Adventures series (Horowitz),
71
Alexie, Sherman, 66, 67
Aliens Ate My Homework (Coville), 58
aliteracy, 99
Ambrose, Stephen E., 97
American Association of University
Women, 5
Anderson, M. T., 70
appeals to boys
of award books, 96
of boys books, 74
and fiction, 60–62
Armstrong, William H., 66
The Art of the Story-Teller (Shedlock), 58
The Art of War (Sun Tzu), 97
attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder
(ADHD)
and brain development in boys, 26
concerns about, 2
as typical boy behavior, 19
audiobooks vs. reading aloud, 55
award books
and appeals to boys, 96
bias toward girls books, 49
prevalence of dead dogs in, 66–68
B
Backyard Ballistics (Gurstelle), 69
Band of Brothers (Ambrose), 97
barbershops and promotion of reading,
94
The Bartimaeus Trilogy series (Stroud),
70
Baseball Card Adventures series
(Gutman), 69
bathroom reading, 30
Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era
(McPherson), 97
bedtime reading, 37
Better Than Life (Pennac), 96, 97
bibliotherapy, 60–62
The Big Field (Lupica), 70
Big Guy Books, 63
bill of rights, for readers, 96
biological differences, 10–11. See also
brain development
Blackburn, Mollie, 9
Blacker, Terence, 69
The Blind Side: Evolution of a Game
(Lewis), 69
book groups
as communal reading, 95
female approaches to, 31
111
112 Index
book groups (cont.)
lack of appeal to men, 75
sample discussion plans, 82–85
boredom by reading, 60
Borgenicht, David, 69, 85
Bowling Alone (Putnam), 95, 97
Boy 2 Girl (Blacker), 69
Boy Scouts, 55, 96
The Boy Who Saved Baseball (Ritter), 70
boys
brain development in, 24–25
as self-identified non-readers, 38–39
as subject of research, 9–10
Boys and Girls Learn Differently! (Gurian),
34
“Boys Booked on Barbershops”
program, 94
boys’ literature, 59–72
absence of Newbery Awards for,
66–68
appeals to girls, 74
characteristics of, 60–62
fantasy and science fiction, 64–65
horror, 65–66
humor, 63–64
nonfiction, 62–63
puzzles and riddles, 66
sports and action/adventure, 65
trends, 2, 102
boys’ reading, importance of, 1, 103
Bradley, James, 97
brain development
and activities while reading, 85
gender differences, 25–27
and reading gap, 24–25
role of research, 101
Brozo, William, 34, 68, 75–76
Bruchac, Joseph, 71, 102
Bryson, Bill, 82–83
C
The Caine Mutiny (Wouk), 97
Captain Underpants series (Pilkey), 68, 102
Card, Orson Scott, 94, 97, 102
“Chess for Girls” program, 8–9
The Chicken Doesn’t Skate (Korman), 58
child-driven reading. See self-selected
reading
children reading to younger children, 54
children’s librarians, marginalization of, 3.
See also librarians
Chin, Karen, 68
choice of reading matter, importance
of, 76
Christopher, Matt, 102
The City of Ember (DuPrau), 70
classrooms
rearrangement of, 79–80
single-gender, 32–34
Clement, Andrew, 82–83
Code Talker (Bruchac), 71
coded language, preferences for, 66
Colfer, Eoin, 69
comic books, 63
community leaders, reading aloud by, 52
connectedness, 28
Connecting Boys with Books: What Libraries
Can Do (Sullivan), 34, 57
control of reading choices, importance
of, 76
Cool Stuff 2.0 and How It Works
(Woodford and Woodcock), 69
cooperative learning and girls’ style of
learning, 6
Cover-Up: Mystery at the Super Bowl
(Feinstein), 58
Coville, Bruce, 58
culture of literacy, 87–98
and home environment, 88
and libraries, 94–95
need for, 87
and research, 101
in schools, 89–91, 92–93, 95
and society, 2, 93–94, 95–97, 100
and standardized testing, 91–92
suggested reading, 97
custodians as role models, 52, 92
Index 113
D
F
Daniel Boone (Daugherty), 67
Daugherty, James, 67
Defect (Weaver), 70
Delaney, Michael, 70
The Demonata series (Shan), 71
depression (illness)
in boys, 21
in Newbery Award books, 67
depression (economic) in Newbery
Award books, 67
Deuker, Carl, 58
differentiated assessment, 100
differentiated instruction, 99
Dino Dung: The Scoop on Fossil Feces (Chin
and Holmes), 68
Dinosaurs: The Most Complete, Up-to-Date
Encyclopedia for Dinosaur Lovers of
All Ages (Holtz and Rey), 69
Dirty Job (Moore), 70
diversity in teaching of reading, 74
Drift X series (Strasser), 71
“Drop Everything and Read” programs,
93
drop-outs from schools, 90
Duey, Kathleen, 70
DuPrau, Jeanne, 70
Failing at Fairness (Sadker), 6
fantasy and science fiction, 64–65, 102
suggested books, 70
Farmer, Nancy, 70
fathers, 81. See also parents
federal government, role of, 43, 89–90,
100–101. See also No Child Left
Behind (NCLB)
Feed (Anderson), 70
Feinstein, John, 58, 69, 102
fiction
lack of appeal to boys, 60–62
prevalence of in award lists, 67
Fields of Fire (Webb), 97
First Light (Stead), 70
First to Fight: An Inside View of the U.S.
Marine Corps (Krulak), 97
The Five Ancestors series (Shan), 68–71
Flags of Our Fathers (Bradley), 97
Flanagan, John, 70
Fleischman, John, 68
Fleisher, Paul, 68
Football Genius (Green), 58
football team, reading to, 53–54
suggested books, 58
Forester, C. S., 94, 97
Freedman, Russell, 67
free-reading assignments, 75–76. See also
self-selected reading
Fulghum, Robert, 64
E
edgy subjects in literature, 61–62
Elliott, David, 58
emotional lives of boys, 11
empathy, 27
Ender’s Game (Card), 97
Escapade Johnson and Mayhem at Mount
Moosilauke (Sullivan), 58
Escapade Johnson series (Sullivan), 69
escapist literature, 65
Everest series (Korman), 71
The Evidence Suggests Otherwise (Mead),
14–15
externalization vs. internalization, 27
extremes, exploration of, 61–62
G
Gantos, Jack, 69
Garfinkle, D. L., 69
The Gatekeepers series (Horowitz), 70
Gatorade principle, 57
Gender Blender (Nelson), 69
gender differences, 24–35
brain development, 24–27
nature vs. nurture argument, 10–11
role modeling, 29–31
gender gap, 12, 14, 90, 99
114 Index
gender-segregated classrooms, 32–34
gender-separated library programs, 33–34
genre fiction, 61
George, Jean Craighead, 73
Getting Air (Gutman), 71
The Ghost’s Grave (Kehlert), 70
Gilligan, Carol, 6
Gipson, Fred, 66
Girl Power movement, 5–7, 100
Girl Scouts, 6
girls
brain development in, 24–25
efforts to remedy inequalities, 103
enjoyment of boys’ books, 74
and Girl Power movement, 5–6
Gleitzman, Morris, 69
Go Big or Go Home (Hobbs), 71
Golden Thirteen: Recollections of the First
Black Naval Officers (Stillwell), 97
gothic horror
boys’ preferences for, 65–66
suggested books, 70–71
trends, 102
grammar instruction, 42–43
graphic novels, 63
The Grassland Trilogy series (Ward), 70
Green, Tim, 58
Grisham, John, 69, 102
Gurian, Michael, 24, 34
Gurstelle, William, 69
Gutman, Dan, 69, 71
Gym Candy (Deuker), 58
H
Hannaford, Carla, 18–19, 45
Hearn, Lian, 70
Heinlein, Robert A., 94, 97
Hiaasen, Carl, 69
higher education, reading gap in, 20
Hirsch, James S., 97
Hobbs, Will, 71
Holmes, Thom, 68
Holtz, Thomas R., 69
home environment, 88
Hoot (Hiaasen), 69
Hornfischer, James D, 97
Horowitz, Anthony, 70, 71
horror. See gothic horror
Houdini (Krull), 53
The House of the Scorpion (Farmer), 70
How Angel Peterson Got His Name, and
Other Outrageous Tales of Extreme
Sports (Paulsen), 70
Howe, James, 67–68
humor
absence of in Newbery Award books,
66
literature preferred by boys, 63–64
suggested books, 69
Humphries, Chris, 70
I
illustrations
combined with reading aloud, 52–53
importance of, 62–63
In a Different Voice (Gilligan), 6
internalization vs. externalization, 27
International Reading Association, Young
Adults’ Choices project, 67
interpersonal relations, 28
Is That a Dead Dog in Your Locker?
(Strasser), 69
It’s Disgusting and We Ate It! True Food Facts
from around the World and throughout
History (Solheim), 69
J
Jenkins, A. M., 70
Joey Pigza series (Gantos), 69
Julie of the Wolves (George), 73
K
Kehlert, Peg, 70
kindergarten, teaching of reading in, 37
Kindlon, Dan, 10–11
King, Stephen, 102
Korman, Gordon, 2, 58, 69, 71, 102
Index 115
Krashen, Stephen, 40–44, 45
Krulak, Victor H., 97
Krull, Kathleen, 53
L
Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ’s
Childhood Pal (Moore), 69
The Last Apprentice series (Delaney),
70
The Last Book in the Universe (Philbrick),
70
The Last Burp of Mac McGerp
(Smallcomb), 69
Last Shot: A Final Four Mystery (Feinstein),
69
Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors
(Hornfischer), 97
learning disabilities, diagnoses of, 39
learning styles
favored by girls, 6
and standardized testing, 91
and storytelling as way of
demonstrating, 57
structure in, 29
and use of illustrations, 63
The Legend of Spud Murphy (Colfer), 69
Lewis, Michael, 69
librarians
gender stereotypes of, 29
salaries for, 94–95
See also school librarians
life-long reading, promotion of, 51
“light” reading, 41
Lincoln (Freedman), 67
listening, benefits of, 48, 55–57
literature. See adult books, appeals to
boys of; boys’ literature
Little Girls in Pretty Boxes (Ryan), 6
Little House series (Wilder), 47
Little League, 96
Loser (Spinelli), 58, 83–84
lunch-time programs, 50–53
suggested books for, 58
Lupica, Mike, 58, 70, 102
M
MacDonald, Margaret Read, 58
magazines, preferences for, 59
male adults as role models, 30–31, 78
male librarians, 29
male school employees and promotion of
reading, 78
male teachers, reading aloud by, 51–52
manga, 63
Maniac Magee (Spinelli), 73, 74
Many Children Left Behind (Meier), 97
Markle, Sandra, 69
Martino, Alfred C., 70
Masoff, Joy, 69
Master and Commander (O’Brian), 97
Matt Cruse series (Oppel), 70
Maximum Ride series (Patterson), 70, 102
McPherson, James M., 97
Mead, Sara, 14–15
Meier, Deborah, 97
men, 30, 31, 78
mental health of boys and reading gap,
20–21
Mikaelsen, Ben, 71
Misreading Masculinity (Newkirk), 34
Moore, Christopher, 69, 70
morphing literacy, 77
motivation and gender differences, 28
multitasking, 85. See also sensory
stimulation; stimuli for brain
development
music during reading, 79
My Life in Dog Years (Paulsen), 53
N
National Assessment of Educational
Progress (NAEP), 12, 14,
90, 99
national education policy, 2. See also
federal government, role of
NCLB (No Child Left Behind), 2, 43,
89–92, 100
Nelson, Blake, 69
116 Index
Newbery Award books
and appeals to boys, 96
prevalence of dead dogs in, 66–68
Newkirk, Thomas, 34
newspapers, preferences for, 59
Night of the Howling Dogs (Salisbury), 71
Night Road (Jenkins), 70
No Bended Knee: The Battle for Guadalcanal
(Twining), 97
No Child Left Behind (NCLB), 2, 43,
89–92, 100
nonfiction
preferences for, 62–63
and reading for comprehension, 43
in reading lists, 44
suggested books, 68–69
O
O’Brian, Patrick, 97
Off the Crossbar (Skuy), 70
Oh Yuck! The Encyclopedia of Everything
Nasty (Masoff), 69
Old Yeller (Gipson), 66
“One Book, One Community” programs,
95
online reading, preferences for, 59
Oppel, Kenneth, 70
Orenstein, Peggy, 6
Outside and Inside Mummies (Markle), 69
P
Parasites: Latching On to a Free Lunch
(Fleisher), 68
parents
and culture of literacy, 92
role in reading, 2–3, 88
See also fathers
Parker, Robert, 102
Patterson, James, 70, 102
Paulsen, Gary, 53, 70
Pearson, Ridley, 102
Pennac, Daniel, 96, 97
Percy Jackson and the Olympians series
(Riordan), 70
periodical literature, preferences
for, 59
Philbrick, Nathaniel, 84–85
Philbrick, Rodman, 70, 71
Phineas Gage: A Gruesome but True Story
about Brain Science (Fleischman), 68
physical activity and brain development,
26
Pilkey, Dav, 68, 102
Pinned (Martino), 70
Pipher, Mary Bray, 6
Piven, Joshua, 69, 85
Playing for Pizza (Grisham), 69
politicians as volunteers for reading aloud
programs, 52
Pollack, William, 21
The Power of Reading: Insights from the
Research (Krashen), 40–44, 45
Pratchett, Terry, 70
programs
chess for girls, 8–9
for male adults, 78
for one gender only, 33–34
sample book group discussion plans,
82–85
storytelling for boys, 7–8
See also book groups
promotion of reading, 73–86
active learning, 79–80
book groups, 80–82
in boys’ groups, 95–96
as cultural value, 93–94
examples, 83–85
role of gender in, 77
in schools, 93
self-selected reading, 75–76
Putnam, Robert D., 95, 97
puzzles and riddles, preferences for, 66
Q
quiet in libraries, 80
Index 117
R
race and gender issues, 12
The Radioactive Boy Scout (Silverstein), 69
Raising Cain (Kindlon and Thompson),
10–11
Raising Ophelia (Pipher), 6
The Ranger’s Apprentice series
(Flanagan), 70
Rawls, Wilson, 66
The Read Out Loud Handbook (Trelease),
58
Reader’s Bill of Rights, 96
reading
and brain structure, 25–27
importance of skill, 14–15
social component of, 31
reading aloud, 47–58
importance of, 47–48
at lunchtime, 49–52
other venues, 52–55
reading comprehension instruction, 43
Reading Don’t Fix No Chevys (Smith),
16, 34
reading for pleasure
and amount of reading, 41
and difficulty of material, 40
reading gap, 14–23
and academic achievement, 17–18
attitudes toward reading, 16–17
in higher education, 20
and learning disability programs,
18–20
in level of skill, 14–16
and mental health of boys, 20–21
in time spent reading, 16
reading levels
and choice of reading matter, 41
and difficulty of reading for boys, 49
tyranny of, 39–41
reading lists, disadvantages of, 44
reading management programs, 43–45
reading specialists, 92
Real Boys (Pollack), 21
recess, elimination of, 26
recommendations from peers, 76, 77
remedial reading programs, 18–19, 42–43
research, role of, 2, 101
A Resurrection of Magic series (Duey),
70
Revenge of the Whale (Philbrick), 84–85
Rey, Luis V., 69
Rifleman Dodd (Forester), 97
Riordan, Rick, 70
risky behaviors, 27–28
Ritter, John H., 70
Roberts, Ken, 58
role modeling
absence of, 29–31
for adults in story hours, 88
reading as male activity, 78
school administrators seen reading, 51
team approach to reading aloud, 53
Rotary Clubs, storytelling to, 56–57
The Runestone Saga series (Humphries),
70
Ryan, Joan, 6
S
Sachar, Louis, 58
Sadker, Myra, 6
Safari Journal (Talbot), 63
Salisbury, Graham, 71
Sawyer, Ruth, 58
Sax, Leonard, 25, 27, 34, 37, 39
The Scary States of America (Teitelbaum),
71
school administrators
and promotion of literacy, 92–93
reading aloud by, 51
school custodians, 52, 92
school librarians
marginalization of, 3
and promotion of life-long reading, 51
support for, 93
See also librarians
school library and culture of literacy, 93
118 Index
Schooled (Korman), 69
Schoolgirls (Orenstein), 6
schools
and culture of literacy, 92–93
effect of standardized testing in,
89–91
response to standardized testing,
91–92
Schusterman, Neal, 70
science fiction. See fantasy and science
fiction
Scieszka, Jon, 2, 102
Screaming Mummies of the Pharaoh’s Tomb II
(Howe), 67–68
self-selected reading, 75–76. See also freereading assignments
sensory stimulation, 26–27
series books
appeals of series, 61
fantasy and science fiction series,
64–65
Shan, Darren, 102, 71
Shedlock, Marie L., 58
Sideways Stories from Wayside School (Sachar),
58
silent sustained reading (SSR) programs,
79
Silverstein, Ken, 69
Singer, Marilyn, 69
single-gender education, 32–34, 39
sitting still, difficulty of, 79, 81. See
also physical activity and brain
development
Skuy, David, 70
Smallcomb, Pam, 69
Smart Moves (Hannaford), 18–19, 45
Smith, Michael W., 9, 16–17, 31, 34, 64
socialization and biological differences,
11, 27–28
Solheim, James, 69
solitary readers, men as, 31, 78
Solway, Andrew, 69
Sounder (Armstrong), 66
speaking shoulder to shoulder, 81
Spignesi, Stephen, 71
Spinelli, Jerry, 58, 73, 74, 83–84
sports books
absence of Newbery Awards for, 66
preferred by boys, 65
suggested books, 69–70
trends, 102
SSR (silent sustained reading) programs,
79
standardized testing, effects of, 43–45,
89–91, 100
Starship Troopers (Heinlein), 97
Stead, Rebecca, 70
Stillwell, Paul, 97
stimuli for brain development, 26–27, 80
Stine, R. L., 102
Stone, Jeff, 68–71
story, importance of, 45. See also
promotion of reading; reading
aloud
story hours
exclusion of adults from, 88
pleasures of, 36–37
The Storyteller’s Start-Up Book
(MacDonald), 58
storytelling, 3, 55–57
suggested books, 58
Strasser, Todd, 2, 69, 71, 102
Stroud, Jonathan, 70
structure in learning styles, 29
suicide rates, 21
Sullivan, Michael, 34, 57, 58, 69
Summers, Lawrence, 5
Sun Tzu, 97
Supernatural Rubber Chicken series
(Garfinkle), 69
Swear to Howdy (Van Draanen), 58
T
Talbot, Hudson, 63
Tales of the Otori series (Hearn), 70
Index 119
teachers
attempts to remedy gender gap,
99–100, 101
and culture of literacy, 92
gender stereotypes of, 30
salaries for, 94–95
teaching of reading
encouraging diversity, 74
failures of, 37–39
and reading levels, 39–40
skills vs. promotion of, 42–43
suggested books, 45
teens reading to younger children, 54
Teitelbaum, Michael, 71
testing in schools. See standardized
testing, effects of
third graders and reading, 38
Thompson, Michael, 10–11
Thud (Pratchett), 70
The Thumb in the Box (Roberts), 58
time spent reading, 16, 41
Title IX, 6
To Be a Boy, To Be a Reader (Brozo), 34
Toad Rage (Gleitzman), 69
Touching Spirit Bear (Mikaelsen), 71
The Transmogrification of Roscoe Wizzle
(Elliott), 58
Trelease, Jim, 58
Twining, Merrill B, 97
Two Souls Indivisible: The Friendship That
Saved Two POWs in Vietnam
(Hirsch), 97
Two-Minute Drill (Lupica), 58
U
Unwind (Schusterman), 70
U.S. Marine Corps reading list, 94, 97
V
Van Draanen, Wendelin, 58
violence in horror literature, 65–66
visual fiction, 63
vocabulary instruction, 42
volunteers for reading aloud programs, 52
W
A Walk in the Woods (Bryson), 82–83
walking
and book groups, 82
while reading, 79
Ward, David, 70
The Way of the Storyteller (Sawyer), 58
Weaver, Will, 70
Webb, James, 97
A Week in the Woods (Clement), 82–83
The Weird 100: A Collection of the Strange
and the Unexplained (Spignesi), 71
What Stinks? (Singer), 69
What’s Living in Your Bedroom? (Solway), 69
Where the Red Fern Grows (Rawls), 66
Why Gender Matters (Sax), 25, 27, 34
Wilder, Laura Ingalls, 47
Wilhelm, Jeffrey, 9, 16–17, 31, 64
Women’s History Month, 76
Woodcock, Jon, 69
Woodford, Chris, 69
The Worst-Case Scenario Survival Handbook:
Extreme Edition (Piven and
Borgenicht), 69, 85
Wouk, Herman, 97
writing programs, 54
Y
The Young Man and the Sea (Philbrick), 71
n his hugely successful Connecting Boys with Books (2003), Sullivan delved into
the problem that reading skills of preadolescent boys lag behind those of
girls in the same age group. In this companion book, Sullivan digs even deeper,
melding his own experiences as an activist with perspectives gleaned from other
industry experts to help you
• Learn about the books that boys love to read
• Uncover the signs that point to the reading gap
• Find creative new programming ideas to match boys’ interests
• Establish a strategic blueprint for boys and reading
Connecting Boys with Books 2
I
Drawing on more than 20 years of experience, Sullivan shows how to re-create
the sense of excitement that boys felt when they first heard a picture book being
read aloud.
You may also be interested in
Michael Sullivan
Connecting
Boys with
Books
2
Closing the Reading Gap
Sullivan
Visit www.alastore.ala.org
American Library Association
50 East Huron Street
Chicago, IL 60611
sullivan_cover_final.indd 1
ALA
1-866-SHOP ALA
(1-866-746-7252)
www.alastore.ala.org
11/25/2008 11:05:26 AM