In 1982, there were two Germanies (Germanys?). It was, as much as I hate to admit it, a very long time ago. These are old enough they would have been the “old encyclopedias” for these kids’ parents; they would have been told to find something newer for their elementary school projects.
If the kids have research projects, I do think it would be interesting to have as an extra credit/bonus activity: “After you have finished your work on the topic, see what you can find in the encyclopedias about the subject.” I’d be interested in whether they could figure out how to find things, whether they’d find anything at all, and what they actually did find. But, not at the expense of books or other learning materials with much more relevant, immediate value.
I voted “Keep them and don’t spend time”, although I’d recommend getting a big red rubber stamp with the words “Out of date! Look online instead!” and using it to mark the worst parts (the Soviet Union, China, South Africa, population numbers, etc.).
We had a set of older encyclopedias growing up, and one of the worst transgressions we did back then was cutting out color pictures (flags) from them; my mother was very angry.
That’s what I’d use them for: depending on what the project is, have them find and cut out and use pictures and maps. The text is beyond their comprehension anyway.
I like the idea of giving them to the art teacher, otherwise just junk them. Some people have this idea that books are somehow sacred, and must be preserved at all cost.
I don’t think third-graders are at an age when they’re ready to use old encyclopedias to find out what life was like in the past. Once again, they can do that online. And if you really wanted to do something like that, I’d find something even older than just 1982. More like 100 years ago.
Someone was just looking to get rid of these things, and thought, “meh, I’ll just dump them on some school – they can probably use them.”
When I was in junior high & high school in the 70’s, using my parents’ encyclopedia from 1963 (only 15 years out-of-date, rather than 35), it was relatively worthless. Trying to write a paper on the space race and the most recent article was the X-15…
Don’t spend time, but go through them and find all the out-of-date article and stamp them with a custom-made stamp I ordered? Oooooookay…
Oh, hell yes. And I teach these in a lot of different ways–a few examples:
-CREATIVITY: besides obvious things like writing, students study motion by designing remote-controlled vehicles with household objects and then designing obstacle courses for them, and observing which designs work best against which obstacles.
-RESEARCH: To study landforms, students look at multiple pictures of each sort of landform and write rich questions (not “Is that grass on that hill?” but “What’s the difference between plants on hills and plants in valleys, and why?”); they then choose questions to research and use books I and the librarian have set out for them to find answers to their questions.
-Skepticism: Oh, all the time. When they give a math answer, I almost always say, “Prove it.” Or I’ll show a math problem and make a mistake, and give a small reward to the student that catches the mistake. Or we discuss the news and what comprises fact and what comprises opinion in the news.
-Different thinking in the past: We read a few historical fiction novels/picture books aloud each year and talk about different mindsets; we also read things like Ruby Bridge’s pictorial autobiography, with the worst parts edited out (seriously, that kids’ book is a punch in the goddamned gut). We talk about local history and complexify that shit up, e.g., talking about how the local hero to the Cherokee was also a slave owner.
But I’m not sure encyclopedias are actually a strong tool for any of this at this age, and I’m leaning pretty heavily toward passing them along to the art teacher; I can pretty much guarantee that our excellent librarian won’t want them (I’m on the school media/tech committee and have a decent sense of what kinds of stuff the library needs, and 35-year-old encyclopedias ain’t it).
I would keep them and maybe do a small lesson on their use. But then again, if I was still teaching and at least the 6th grade level, I would probably teach the use of a card catalog and the Dewey Decimal System.
OK — I know like three people under the age of 30 who can still use a card file. But I would probably still do it.
There is zero market for such books. Our local book sale, run in the library basement, will not accept collections like encyclopedias or other multiple-volume works. The exception might be for someone who wants to slice the books up and make a faux-shelf of works for show in a pseudo-house.
Personally, I think that’s a shame. Although the data (images of pages) is available thru many sources, there’s nothing quite like handling the actual books from 60 years ago or more. I would never willingly part with my 1957 Compton’s.
. . . and a great more detail about the two Germanys than could be found in current edition, which must squeeze a lot more information into the same amount of page space.
Encyclopedias contain a constant number of pages. With every bit of new post-1982 detail, older text has to be trashed to make room for it.
I found at least a couple of complete sets (of the 1982 Britannica) for sale on ebay. One seller was asking $350, one $299, one $150 “or best offer.” But those are just what the sellers want; I haven’t been able to find what any have actually sold for (if anything).