Stupid school rule?

[upsideup]

DC's school recently introuduced an hour of silent reading per week, dd absolutely loved this (DS doesn't but it has encouraged him to read more). Untill now they have been taking in a book from home, DD10 who spends hours reading for pleasure anyway takes in the book shes reading at home. I dont choose her books and I am also not strict about what she reads, was already aware that some of the books she enjoys were targeted at an age range slightly above hers.
We have had a letter home saying that dd's book this week was rated as 14+ so is not suitable to be read at school and I should send her in with a book suitable for her age so under 10's as teachers are not going to be closely monitoring what books the children are reading. That is ridiculous right?
She had not told us this all week as shes worried shes in trouble with the teacher but her book was taken off her and she was given a random book from the libary by the teacher which is not the sort of thing she likes and was too 'babyish' for her so she spent the whole lesson doing nothing.
To be clear the books she is reading are young teen fiction books, not gory or sexual true crime books, theres maybe mentions of kissing or mild swearing but nothing harmful or frightening for a 10 year old to hear, mine atleast and as its silent reading and not being read aloud surely its nobodies business what shes reading and it should be mine and her dads decision if its suitable or not for her, not the teachers?
We are going stuggle to find a book aimed at under 10s that she enjoys and I also have know idea how to find out what age rating a book has and surely its just a reccomendation to what age group may enjoy the book not a strict rule?
I can see the benefit of quietly reading at school and definately not one of the many parents who complained when the silent reading was introduced but what benefit is forcing her to read a book that she dosnt enjoy and is below her level? Shouldnt she be encouraged to challenge herself and have an enjoyment for reading not punished?

Do your schools do the same? AIBU to want to challenge this stupid rule?

Having been a school librarian, I've been made aware of various books which are not suitable for KS2, despite being written by familiar authors. If a book has a known age restriction, often printed on the back, they should be enforced at school and for the most part at home too. Often it indicates difficulty, but it can also be an indication of themes or issues in the book. Legally, you cannot show a 15 movie or video game to someone under 15, and books should be treated in the same way. A school has a duty to abide by these age restrictions. There are plenty of books which are complex enough without having to be age inappropriate.

Try Michelle Magorian. My favourite is Back Home, although she is best known for Goodnight Mister Tom.

OP, I would suggest that you explain the difficulty, and suggest the school consider changing their rule to allow anything in the 9-12 category. They would still be accomplishing what they want, in that books for that age group would not have unsuitable content, but you would have an expanded range of possible books.

The website your school suggests is American and thus may have a rather different cultural view of what is "appropriate" for children of a certain age than we do here. Also, I couldn't find anything about how they make their judgements. I would particularly be concerned that the age designation could be partially based on average reading ability at that age - in which case it would definitely be inappropriate to limit more advanced readers to their actual age, because young readers need to read more difficult books in order to progress.

I'm not sure why 14+ is deemed inappropriate by teachers when it's not deemed inappropriate by the parents. It's lone reading time and affecting nobody else, and the upshot is that a girl who enjoys reading ended up not reading anything at all. If it's a rule it's a rule but it's one I would challenge. Whats the point in encouraging reading with one hand and discouraging it with the other? Perhaps the school could help to find a solution when a child is beyond her years. It's not like she was taking in her ma's Lena Kennedy's like I was

I'm not sure why 14+ is deemed inappropriate by teachers when it's not deemed inappropriate by the parents

And I'm not sure why it's relevant what the parents think is appropriate. At school, I am responsible for the student. I am professionally obliged to think for myself about whether what they are doing is age-appropriate.

weeburrower1
I'm not sure why 14+ is deemed inappropriate by teachers when it's not deemed inappropriate by the parents.

I suspect -like so many things in schools- that the teacher is protecting themselves against any comeback, should the parents find out that their child is reading a book that they haven't authorised?

Good luck tomorrow.

I can see both sides. I think I’d just roll my eyes and accept it, but try to make it fun finding suitable books.

Once you have a list of acceptable books from the teacher, try to have a bit of fun finding a couple she’ll enjoy. She won’t need too many if she only reads them at school.

Y7 girls are all reading Ruby Redfort, I’m not exactly sure why it’s so popular as it seems quite ‘young’ to me but they are?!

She might even find it relaxing ‘having’ to read books that are ‘younger’.

It’s lovely that she reads to your younger ones 😊

Surely anything from the main section (not teenage) of your local library would be acceptable? There is wide range of these in ours, which would suit most tastes and which wouldn't be "babyish"

What was the book she was given that she didn't like?

Sir Terry Pratchett. Not rude at all; the ‘Discworld’ has some Young Adult/Young Reader books as well as ‘normal’ books. I started reading them when I was 12, and got told off repeatedly for reading them in class whilst waiting for the rest of the class to catch up to the same point I was.... Intelligent and funny books, they’ll stay with her for a lifetime x

But tbh an hour silent reading is a huge amount and I’m wondering what part of the curriculum has been sacrificed for an hour of ‘guided’ reading. If it is not guided then what is the teacher doing during this time?

Exactly. Both my DDs are voracious readers, but I would not be happy if their school implemented this.

Billben

The teacher is usually checking progress in reading logs, talking to individuals about why they are reading, entering data, making suggestions about what to read next etc.

We used to do this and I could quite easily run out of time in an hour, trying to have a short conversation with 30 kids.

Gosh my DS is 2 so I had no idea that schools were now vetting the books children bring in! I hate to think what the school would have thought about some of the books I read. Jane Austen contains extra marital sex, slavery, poverty, desertion, war etc and let's not even start on Dickens!

I'm another one who thinks its daft, but I was reading books like Watership Down in Yr5 and back then (30 years ago mind) the school owned up to not having books suitable for my 'reading age' and I was encouraged to bring my own books from home.

I would also recommend the Animals of Farthing Wood, and the other books by their author Colin Dann. I'd also recommend the Redwall books by Brian Jacques for her, I was hooked on those and happily read them right into my late teens.

If she likes fantasy, then it might also be worth looking at David Eddings and the Belgariad series.

ChristmasAddict

Don't be daft. Jane Austen makes veiled references to the consequences of extramarital sex. It doesn't depict sex. There is a very obvious difference.

That is true pengggwyn but she deals with very adult themes. Why are they more acceptable? I will admit that I am mostly just astounded that books are managed in this way, I had no idea.

Pengggwn

The teacher is usually checking progress in reading logs, talking to individuals about why they are reading, entering data, making suggestions about what to read next etc.

That is not the case, the children do independant silent reading. Wednesday was the first time the teacher paid any interest in what the children were reading, since september they have been reading. I personally dont think thats a bad thing but there is no input by the teacher ever which is why lots of other parents have complained.

ChristmasAddict

They're presented in the abstract, with no overt references to anything sexual, violent etc. It is totally different to what I picked up in a KS3 library once: a graphic depiction of zombies shagging.

upsideup

Well, I said usually.

Jane Austen makes veiled references to the consequences of extramarital sex. It doesn't depict sex. There is a very obvious difference.

Most Jane Austen books on the website that the teacher uses show up as also being for 14+ so are not allowed anyway.

pengggyn
Both Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility are rated 14+ on common sense media, the site the teacher is using to decide which books to ban.

user1498927651

I believe you, but that wasn't the point of what I said.

upsideup

Obviously that will be because of the difficulty level of Austen's prose, not any issue with regards to appropriateness of the content. There will be some conflation in those ratings between the two.

But it doesn't really matter. The teacher needs to err on the side of caution so I understand why she has put in place this rule, even if it seems inflexible to you.

Look, it only affects your dd for an hour a week, so let’s not get too aerated. Just make sure she has an appropriate book for that lesson, and she can read what she wants outside it.

However, I have read this book and agree with the teacher. It’s aimed at teens.

It focuses on the budding relationship between two main characters, and most 10yos, even if they are good readers, are not emotionally mature enough for this.

There are millions of age-appropriate books out there, op. Surely one will suit your dd?

Ok well books have clearly moved on since I was in school pengggwyn, I was thinking that nothing I read as a teenager would really be inappropriate for a mature 10 year old but I agree that a graphic depiction of sex is not appropriate. The most graphic I had at that age was probably Malorie Blackman.

Obviously that will be because of the difficulty level of Austen's prose, not any issue with regards to appropriateness of the content.

Fair enough with the rule with inappropraite content then. But do you think banning children who have a reading age above their actual age and understand more difficult language from reading any book that isnt targeting to 10 or under is benefitial? Would you think my dd should be allowed to read pride and predjudice at school for example or is the rule the rule?
I'm just trying to figure out whether I should talk to the teacher tomorrow and what to say if I do.