• If libraries check-out to students the very device they ban, then library policy makers seem to be making a choice to be inconsistent.  After all, even though library iPods most likely contain only audio books and educational movies and podcasts, so could a personal iPod. Would it be unacceptable for a student to listen to a podcast like CNN Student News or an Overdrive audio book during a study hall visit to the library?  It’s hard to imagine a librarian not allowing a student to read a book checked-out from another library during such a visit.  Yet, for digital content, that’s essentially what a ban on personal iPods could accomplish.
• Of course students using personal iPods will most likely be listening to music and not a news podcast. And it is for this reason, perhaps, that some libraries have banned the devices. It could be debated whether music listening interferes with homework completion and academic productivity.  But this point about music is less debatable:  In at least some libraries that currently ban iPods, students are still listening to music.  While working on school computers, many students access music stored on their network drive or on a portable flash drive. And since it is nearly impossible to determine if computer headphone use is for music listening or for project purposes, allowing computer listening but not iPod listening also seems to lack consistency.

By no means do these two bullets address all angles of the debate. They do nonetheless list some inconsistencies that might be present within some school library policies. And while every community is different and every school library serves different stakeholders, in their organization most libraries try to be the same thing: logical and consistent.  Books, for example, are consistently shelved according to the logical Dewey numbering system; OPACs and databases allow for using boolean logic and return consistent search results; and library websites provide a logical path of links to consistently reliable information resources. Because policies are designed in different schools with different constituencies and different concerns, it might not be easy (or even possible) for library iPod policies to be logical and consistent.  But if it is possible, then reexamining policy seems warranted.

While noted blogger and speaker David Lee King has recently talked about “quite a few uses for an iPad in a library setting,” I’m wondering if its multiple uses completely undermines its usefulness as a serious reading tool.  After all, unlike Amazon’s Kindle, which in its simplicity provides a more traditional and intimate reading experience, the iPad is loaded with distractions: Safari, YouTube, iTunes, and of course the App Store.  In a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, an author laments the Internet’s constant distractions and interruptions and asks, “Does the Internet Make You Dumber?”  Perhaps the same could be asked of the iPad.  Is the App Store just one more thing promoting a wide-spread turn toward shallow thinking?

Modern libraries are, of course, about much more than books.  I’ve argued, in fact, that libraries should have widespread computers and technology.  Yet, there is definitely a difference between technology for productivity purposes and technology for content consumption purposes.   The Tech Guy Leo Laporte talks about iPads as replacements for entertainment tools, but not computers.  I think he’s right.  My iPad does a lot, but it’s a far cry from my laptop.  That means that the iPad is not a computer but is much more than an ebook reader.  And this, in my view, makes it an awkward fit for a library.

As an educational tool, the iPad’s potential is enormous.  The number of apps in the App Store is growing at an amazing rate.  But, I have to wonder if the educational tool can be justified as a library tool.  Several questions need answering:  Do libraries want to provide this type of entertainment tool, even if it has educational use?  If so, will it be loaned or used strictly in-house?  Would patrons be permitted to add content and apps?  If so, what types?  If not, how could that be prevented?  What content will the library provide? Fiction books?  If so, the iPad would amount to a really costly ereader.  Could the iPad contain reference sources and act as a portable reference collection?  The answer to this is, perhaps in the future, but not presently, as neither the iBooks Store nor the Kindle Store offer many reference titles.  And one final question (from the Library Law Blog): Do prohibitions against lending the Apple software even allow for library usage?

Library mission statements often talk about meeting patron “recreational needs,” “promoting life-long learning,” and providing “access to modern technology.”  Maybe in this language librarians can find support for iPad use.  And maybe I’m just looking at this subject way too narrowly.  As of right now, I’m really not sure.  Besides, I’m on my iPad and I’m now distracted.

With the help of several custodians, I began dismantling my school’s library in July 2008. In my opinion, the library looked like a warehouse, with lots of shelves, little room, less comfort, and no defined learning spaces. It was basically “a box of books,” I had told the committee that interviewed me a couple months earlier. And if a complete library program were to be developed, the box would have to be replaced.

I was fortunate to get the support of my school board when I proposed a complete room redesign. In short, several shelving units were removed, a few were replaced, reference and browsing sections were created in the middle of the room, and new furniture allowed for the creation of defined spaces (e.g. presentation area, large-group and small-group work areas, a space for reading). The most controversial addition to the room was a large, flat-screen TV mounted on the wall. “You weeded books for this?” more than one parent asked. I responded by saying that I had weeded because de-selection is part of good library management. But, in truth, the summer-time weeding project did open up space, which allowed for the floor space redesign and the beginning of a new library program.

With old and under-used (and never-used) volumes removed from the room, I do recognize that some books have perhaps been missed. Yet, I know that a lot more has been gained. In new learning spaces within the library, collaboration among students happens all day long, large-group instruction in information skills happens regularly, and at the same time reading and individual work takes place in adjacent spaces. Further, with the addition of eBooks to the reference collection, book sources are now retrievable seven days a week, 24 hours a day. Kindles? We have two.

The transformation of my small library doesn’t compare, of course, to that of Cushing Academy. It nonetheless is similar, I think, because it’s the result of believing that libraries are meant to connect people with information and that information takes many forms. While there are now fewer books in my library, I argue that there’s now more information. As students search print or electronic sources, discuss an event seen on a TV news program, use a library laptop to jointly build a multimedia project, or show one another an interesting magazine article, information is being rapidly gathered and widely shared. In other words, within the library there has developed a dynamic information exchange.

My commitment to this type of library leads me to this judgment about Cushing: On a ten scale ($12,000 coffee machine aside), where zero is total disagreement and ten is fully agree, I say the Academy’s bold library transformation is a seven. If you believe what students and staff said about the old place, then unless you’re trying to build a warehouse, the change must be viewed positively. Although I would argue for a more balanced blend of print and digital sources, I’d choose their busy library over the quiet warehouse any day. Are some old books being missed? Most likely. Is accessing and taking notes on information sometimes now more challenging? No doubt. But is the library merely a box? No way.

Despite growing up in a household with newspapers and despite the fact that I still enjoy the feel, the layout, and the serendipity of print papers, I do believe the print model is doomed.  This week’s Time magazine reports a 72% decline in the number of media outlets dedicating reporters to Capital Hill.  Ad revenue is down because circulation is down.  It would seem that reporters simply can’t be paid.  The same thing is happening to TV news.  At home and at work, people are increasingly online and getting info throughout their day.  And given that most people don’t even yet know about or use RSS technology, the efficiency of online news gathering will only improve.

I’m afraid that looking toward the past will only leave librarians in the past.  Rather than merely lament the loss of print, it’s perhaps time to embrace the digital and teach about RSS, Bloglines, Google Reader, and the like. It’s time to see sites like the New York Times online as an amazing information tool and not just a poor substitute for the original.  I think that the late NBC reporter Irving R. Levine would have loved it.  He is also mentioned in this week’s Time magazine in a piece written by Tom Brokaw.  Brokaw says that before looking at the daily newspapers, Levine would always don white cotton gloves in order to avoid getting ink on his fingers.  Doubtless there are layout and other disadvantages to digital news publication. Box scores and league standings are, for me, one of the biggest shortcomings.  But a couple of good things are guaranteed with online news:  (1) It’s easily accessed  and  (2)  you’ll never get ink on your hands.

kindle2

Here’s what I knew: Amazon’s Kindle 2, with the ability to make any book large-print and a text-to-speech feature for some books, is a powerful new tool for school libraries attempting to serve a diverse student body. The device could certainly help meet the needs of struggling readers and students with vision problems, for example. Further, with reasonably priced downloadable content from Amazon and many classics freely available on-demand from manybooks.net and other sites, the Kindle could reduce a library’s reliance on a slow inter-library-loan process and thereby benefit all students.

Here’s what I now know: When attempting to integrate Kindles into a school library program you’ll likely face some challenges. Most vexing, for me, has been getting content onto the device. Technically this is easy, but buying content is the problem. Unlike other purchases at Amazon (like the Kindle device itself, for example), all digital content must be tied to a credit card. A credit card is something, I bet, that most schools don’t use. Instead, they probably have a corporate account at Amazon, which allows for a regular purchase-order approach to buying. If a school employee wants Kindle content, then, a personal Amazon account would be needed. This, of course, poses at least one significant problem: All content would be tied to the buyer’s account and could only be managed by the buyer. While Amazon did tell me via email support that digital content can be purchased with gift cards, I called them and pointed out that in order for a gift card to be redeamed, it needs to be tied to a credit card account, which brings me back to the original problem. Right now the only solution seems to be an institutional credit card that could be used for establishing an individual library Kindle account. It’d be nice if Amazon followed Apple’s model in the iTunes store, where a personal credit card can be deactivated from an account once sufficient gift-card credit has been added to the account. (Purchase orders can be used to buy gift cards). That way a library account truly belonging to the school could be easily created.