I sell ALL kinds of crap besides books. At the cashier's table I put all my knick-knacks that can get stolen easily like pens, erasers, highlighters, etc. I refer to this as the POS table, because you wouldn't believe how 80% of the students swarm it to buy stuff like $5.00 pens that break before the day is over. One really crappy item was a "digital organizer" that was made to mimic a PSP but had the functionality of a dollar-store calculator. After one poor kid bought one for $18.00 thinking he had something cool, I felt so bad I boxed up the rest of them.

On Parent Night of the Book Fair, the parents actually encourage their kids to by all the overpriced school supply crap, so I guess I shouldn't feel so bad.

Funny thing is, I couldn't get the video games and software to sell if I tried. Can't blame kids for passing on GameBoy Advance math games in 2009, however.

 Reply

First, as an avid gamer, I understand selling games has been going on for a long time. I understand that many of the games that are advertised may be educational. I also understand that the child and parent have the freedom to choose whether or not to buy it. I think we can agree that this is not an inherently evil practice. In the book order I sent home there was one DS game (Boogie), one Wii game (Nights), and one CD-ROM on typing. There were approx. 7 books that came with "trinkets", 2 stationary sets, an mp3 player, and the 'hottest' item - Guitar Hero carabiner. A handheld LCD screen with 5 note buttons, whammy bar, and folding neck that uses 3 AAA batteries. I heard more buzz about that thing than any other item. There were 121 items, 14 of which were non-books or books with trinkets for a minimal 12% if you round up. Come on, that's nothing.

On the flip side, as teacher and parent, the kids that I want to buy books, that they enjoy and are fun for them, are the first ones to blurt out that they are going to get a game instead. I let my daughter play games. We encourage her to do so. I don't mind if my students play games either, but it's tough to hear that so many of them will go home for hours on end playing games when they struggle to read or perform basic math facts. And, of course, it's usually the student who need the most work that spends the most time playing.

I tell my class that they don't have to buy anything. I encourage them to get books. I discourage them from the games by saying they should get those some other time. When do they just shop for books? For a lot of kids, this is the only time they will ask for books or have the opportunity to get some. Video games are always asked for.

In the end, just because Scholastic has done this for a long time doesn't make it okay to continue. Questioning things is good folks. Why not make two separate orders that teachers and students could choose? Books and Non-books.

It's the 21st century and a lot of people need to embrace the technology we have and kids use. There are a lot of good games and learning opportunities out there and some technophobes need to lighten up.

Wouldn't it be great if parents could be trusted to actually make the right decisions about these matters? If you were a good kid and on top of things at school you could order a game and some stuff. If you were struggling at school you would not get a game.

Most of the time, as a teacher, I have to play the responsible "parent" to my students. Guess what? They don't like it and they get mad at me. Why? Because no one has set boundaries for them. It's no coincidence that some of the kids who perform below grade level are the ones who have 2 TVs in their room, tons of games, eat what they want, and have no bedtime. No boundaries. They will most likely get what they want from the book order. A game.

We don't need the CCFC telling 'us' what to do, because anyone who considers themselves one of 'us' can make the right decisions about things like this on their own because they can see both sides. Games aren't bad. I could get one if I want.

Unfortunately, 'they' should be listening to the CCFC. By 'they' I mean the people who probably can't see why this could ever be a problem.

 Reply

For fuck's sake, I have an advanced degree in education, and wrote a thesis on this. Video games are enjoyable to children, but also fulfill a need that children (and adults) have to learn through play. You don't take away something just because it's enjoyable. Perhaps overplaying games (just like overdoing anything) is harmful, but video games do indeed instill in children patience, motivation, problem-solving, and a host of other skills that help them in real life.

Like shooting zombies. I can't tell you how often that's helped me in academia.

 Reply

The point being, this is not a new phenomenon. Books were always the center of the book club, and I'm sure they always will be. I remember the Scholastic pamphlets, and I can't say I don't notice a change - they never sold N64 games through Scholastic, but PC games were there (Oregon Trail, anyone?).

And it does note, "What to do AFTER School." It's not marketing them as educational materials. And they're marketing to the appropriate age group, too. Call me back when they start selling Grand Theft Auto.

All in all, this should be about books. There isn't a question about it. But this has been going on for almost two decades (if not longer), and I don't know why now is the time to call it out.

 Reply

Way to stay with the times, CCFC!

 Reply