Category: Schools

Not at all on topic…

Hey!

I had thought about writing something about the Google vs. Universities lawsuit/scandal on going, but there isn’t much new I can write at the moment, and it has been given pretty good coverage across the Internet already.  So, I have decided to go off topic today and give you something short, but still kinda cool.

This has nothing to do with Libraries, but it does have to do with technology, and the advances that we are making with our knowledge as humans.

The Kepler space telescope recently found evidence of a planet that orbits two suns (read about it HERE) and that got me thinking about how fast we are learning and discovering new things; and how hard it is to keep abreast of everything.

Now, this isn’t some whimsical ode to the greatness of humanity and our inevitable march forward, but rather a nod to how quickly we are gathering new information, and how difficult it is to stay ‘current’. It seems in every field there is an explosion of research and progress, and I suppose the question could be asked, is that a result of our connectivity via technology and the internet, or is technology and the internet a product of that explosion of knowledge?

That question could be debated for a long time, and is not a new one.

What I do wonder though, is how far do we see this going, and how, in a world like this, will it be possible for educators to maintain their place for any length of time?

Let me explain.

When I went to elementary and high school, I was taught by many teachers of many different ages. There were definitely some older educators, and I wonder, is that perhaps a relic of the past? Is it even possible for a teacher to stay abreast enough in their field to have a career that is 30 – 40 years long, without becoming outdated or behind the times?

It is nice to think that we may be able to keep on top of a certain part of our fields, and that may ever be possible. But has education become a young man/woman’s game? At least at the elementary and secondary level where their is a much greater range of material that needs to be taught?

Surely that can’t be true, can it?

When I think about how hard it is to adapt curriculum to changes, and of the teachers that we have all worked with that seem behind the times and stuck in their ways, I wonder not ‘will’ this happen to new teachers, but rather, how soon?

Perhaps this is a little pessimistic, but I think it may be a valid, albeit difficult question. Undoubtedly, there is a place for older, more seasoned educators. Experience in invaluable, and helps to make sure things aren’t changed so quickly that unforeseen, or perhaps foreseeable, problems don’t needlessly arise.

But is the day coming when after 10 years, 15 years, 5 years even, that what you teach will be outdated?

In other words, how long can you stay on topic, before the topic has left you behind?

Ryan

iPads, inclusion, and ethics…

I apologize about the lateness and brevity of this post – I’m feeling rather off today, but I still wanted to share something that fits with what we’ve been talking about in the last few posts.

As I was scanning Tame the Web, a libraries,technology and people Blog by Michael Stephens, I noticed an entry from this past Sunday about Freed-Hardeman University (FHU) introducing iPads, Digital Text Books, and Faculty training in these technologies as part of a program called iKnow2.0.

The basic thrust of the linked piece was that Freed-Hardemen was going to issue all new Freshmen iPads upon their entry into the iKnow program in Fall 2012, and are working to put together an entire educational system, including the retraining of professors and staff, centered around using this technology.

To my knowledge, this marks one of the first post-secondary, and perhaps first ever, complete move towards tablet based education. While the concept has been talked about before, the scope and depth of this program seems to outstrip any other efforts, reaching even into retraining staff on how to use the equipment.

Not to mention that they are supplying the technology to students themselves.

The real gem in all of this is that at the same time they are announcing a partnership with Inkling, a company that works to produce interactive and enriched content for iPad. The goal is, in their own words, to “reinvent the way people learn on the campus of Freed-Hardeman.”

That’s a pretty bold statement, and one the bears some watching.

Amidst all of this excitement though, there was one sentence fragment that did give me pause however.

Near the top, FHU states that they will be establishing minimum MacBook requirements for students. While that did non specify whether it was ownership, or merely proficiency, I cant help but feel that this is a bad decision.

Obviously, if at the early stages they are mainly concerned with getting people into their new program who can make the most of what they have to offer, then I can understand. But I still don’t agree.

Isn’t the point of technology and digital education to make learning more available to everyone? A move like this strikes me as a step in the opposite direction, away from inclusion and towards exclusion based on either 1) Wealth to afford the technology, or 2) An upbringing that allowed you access to technology (in other words, middle/upper class). Surely that can’t be an acceptable dividing line?

Beyond all of that though is the question: If your limiting your program only to those who have the ability to make the best use of what you are designing, isn’t that a design flaw to begin with? If you must be sufficiently talented to get anything out of the program, then perhaps the program itself isn’t organized in the most useful, and educational way.

This isn’t a grade-point level, or some requirement that is open to everyone. Anyone can take Math 30, Bio 30, etc. This points to skills that only a select percentage of the population have the opportunity to develop, and even worse, one that is tied to material wealth and access.

To me, that’s the opposite of what the new wave of education is supposed to provide, and at the very core, against the ethos of our educational system.

What do you think? Am I reading to much into all of this? Outside of this caveat, what do you think of the total program? In your mind, what would make it a success, and allow it to spread?

Ryan

Big Brother a good thing?

Hey and thanks for stopping by!

Have you heard of Flash Robs?

A short description would be to start with your average Flash MOB, a social network and text-message organized group, comprised mainly of youths, who ‘spontaneously/on purpose descend on a particular area to do something unexpected. In this example they aren’t kids, but you get the idea.) Now, add in theft, violence, occasional assault, and other crimes. You have a Flash Rob.

And they are starting to sweep the continent.

A short Google search reveals them in Ottawa, Washington, Maryland, etc.

Organized online or via text.

Police are baffled on what to do.

So what does that have to do with us?

It seems the question is: how much monitoring should be allowed of online activity and text messages?

I don’t want this to turn into a knee-jerk reaction of monitor everything, or conversely to simply decree it as invasion of privacy.

Somewhere in the middle there has to be an answer.

Perhaps more poignant to us, what degree of responsibility do we are facilitators, educators, and adults have to ensure that technology in our spheres is not being used for illegal activity? And how can we do that?

At one point I taught in a school that had a program installed on every computer that allowed an administrator to log everything that went on that computer, complete with the ability to pull up a live screen shot of what was on any of the monitors in the school at any moment. That seems extreme, but yet I could understand the motive behind it – to a point. While I think there could be a strong argument that was an invasion of privacy, was it really? If you use public technology, should you be subject to that kind of close monitoring?

What about in schools? We have all seen the signs about not going to inappropriate websites; do we simply add in that anyone caught engaging in criminal/questionable activity will also lose their computer time? That seems weak, and a half measure at best. So what can be done, if anything? It’s hard enough to keep tabs on a single child, let alone a library full of them.

And that doesn’t even touch on Cell Phone usage.

There will be some who rightly say it comes down to parenting, and it does. But at the same time, we want our schools, libraries, and classrooms to be communities, and that means we have to take a certain responsibility for upbringing, instilling morals, and yes, correction and discipline – beyond just passing the actual problem on to others to deal with (parent, principals, police, etc).

I’m really stumped on this one as you may be able to tell. We want to people to engage in technology, in a digital and multimedia universe, and I think that is an admirable goal. But by doing so, we seem to open ourselves up to problem and challenges that we couldn’t imagine. Trying to stay abreast of them can seem daunting, but don’t we owe it to our students, ourselves, and society as a whole to pay more attention and seek answers?

How to do it though becomes a slippery slope. We don’t want the government and institutions in out computers and minds all the time. We want freedom of thought, expression, and speech. Those thing by very definition require a reduction in censorship, spying, and control. But what happens when that freedom turns ugly and illegal? This won’t be intervention against revolution and people rising up against tyranny, but crimes we all agree on that are wrong? (We’ll save the philosophical discussion on perhaps our society is set up wrong and hence forcing people to do these things. Or even darker, that we simply have been brainwashed to think this is how society should operate by an already existing ‘Big Brother’.)

How do we stop what is ‘good’ intervention now from becoming ‘bad’ intervention later?

“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance”, but at the same time “A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both, and deserve neither.”

What do you think? How far should we go into monitoring things? Is it even our job? Or are we simply facilitators?

Ryan

 

Personal Reflection…

As mentioned, today is sadly the end of ETAD802, and I wanted to give some closing thoughts.

These past few weeks have started something of a journey for me on the pathway of educational technology. As I have learnt more, some of the divisions I thought existed between digital and print mediums, between the past and the future, have started to erode away. That tension is there, but it is only one way of seeing the challenges and opportunities that await our attention.

It no longer is a about whether technology CAN save the day, or even if technology SHOULD save the day. It’s not Deus Ex Machina. Rather, it is about which of the seemingly infinite paths in front of us we are going to take.

Cliche I know, but still true.

Sometimes we can all get caught up in the excitement of some many new ways of thinking and sharing information.

That is good.

Other times we can get wrapped up in thinking about ‘the good old days’.

Having a sense of the past is also good.

However, the best path lies somewhere in the middle I think, with an openness to both the lessons of the past, and the opportunities of the future. This path is hard though, as it forces us to decide what we really value, and then confront some ideas that may make us uncomfortable.

Libraries are no exception. Rather, as places that appeal to masses of people from all the various strata of life, those challenges become multiplied. Each person is going to have their own opinion of how things should proceed, and trying to find a path that makes everyone happy would be impossible.

But I think there are several salient aspects of libraries that draw people, and as long as they remain primary, the peripherals can change to keep abreast of things.

The same goes for school libraries, though I feel that in many ways they lag farther behind public libraries. The role of a school library seems to be harder to pin down, yet once they are gone they are always missed. To me, that speaks to them being far more then simply internet connections, or places to study, or a room to go and read a story in.

At the very heart of it a school library is a communal experience; a chance to experience learning outside of the normal desk/whiteboard setting. It allows us to learn and interact in a way that sometimes seems forgotten in our Western model of lessons plans, achievement goals, and testing. The sense of wonder and joy in learning seems closer to the surface somehow when education takes a step back from rigidity, and libraries play a crucial role in that. Regardless of medium or mode, whether in paper serials, e-books, audio cassette, or MP3 – as long as that experience of unshackled freedom is maintained, then school libraries will be worth more then their budgetary sums.

Finding ways to help schools appreciate what that brings to education maybe the bigger challenge then format and technology.

We as educators have more tools, ideas, and opportunities then ever before; and they keep on growing. The question is, can we look beyond personal bias, hype, and stubbornness to collaboratively build the best educational system for, and with, our students?

In the end, that is truly what it’s all about.

Ryan

Easy access…

Well folks, this marks post will mark the end of my ‘official’ course-based blog entries. But rest assured, I hope to continue posting on this blog about education, technology, libraries, etc. As a general rule, I will try to keep my current Tuesday/Friday posting schedule, so if you are so inclined, consider this an invitation to stop by. 🙂

There have been many varied and wide-ranging discussion in the past, but I wanted to give some sense of closure to the E-books in schools conversation.

To begin with, as I was reading through things on the Web I found this study on Investopedia about ‘renting’ e-textbooks, and whether it saves students money. The findings indicate that students potentially could save money by renting their textbooks from sites such as Amazon and Barnes and Noble, though savings depend both on the edition and on the length of renting term needed.

What a cool idea!

Having the ability to pick how long you need the book for, and then get access to it at a discounted rate seems like the perfect marriage between cash strapped students, schools, and boards and distributors who still aim to make money off their products.

Obviously, the benefit for schools and institutions could be limitless, as school that are able to use electronic formats, but perhaps not able to forward the digital licenses to purchase copies of books in their budgets, could ‘rent’ copies of them for a school year; with potential savings.Being able to stay abreast of new editions, and getting their hands on new resources for a fraction of the cost, seems like something that could really take off.

However there are drawbacks as well.

The recurring cost of renting textbooks will definitely outpace the onetime purchase expenditure over the course of 2-3 years. While this may make it more accessible in the here and now, overtime it would be more cost-efficient to simply buy the book.

Additionally, since after the rental period is up you lose your access to the book, having a nicely marked up text that you can continually reference as a teacher would not be possible. Yes there are note taking programs that would help mitigate this problem, but it would require some training time to get all teachers on board. (Beyond trying to get them to accept E-books to begin with)

Finally, while it may be fine for elementary and secondary schools, I worry about this movement for university and graduate students. It is a nice way to save money, and with textbook costs rising beyond recognition, that will help ease the burden of University life. However, once again after the rental, the book is gone.

No personal library of course texts to refer to later – without another rental.

No resale income from old textbooks. (And rental prices aren’t so low that wouldn’t be missed)

While I realize the majority of texts are resold anyways, that is a CHOICE that can be made at the end of the semester. If a book is particularly useful, the student can choose to keep it. If not, they sell it. In this format, they have no choice. And it would be another expenditure to either rent it again, or purchase it.

Overall though, this appears to be the wave of the future. What I wonder, is if schools will find anything enticing them to go this route, or if they will stay with the cycle of upgrading textbooks every number of years?

Any other thoughts on this? Did I miss something?

Ryan

Ethics and the E-book

Welcome back!

I’d like to continue a discussion that we started last time about electronic textbooks, and digital publications in general, for schools. Monday’s post showed how the arrival of E-books is happening, and within 5-10 years will make-up a large chunk of textbooks sales, and provide an interesting option for schools and students to look at. Additionally, it was pointed out the ease of publishing works via digital means vs standard printers, and how that makes it far easier for new works to get on the market (and at lower costs).

But what about the ethics of E-book use?

As it stands right now, there are some bitter debates on copyright laws between publishers and consumers. My purpose is not to rehash the same arguments that go back to the Napster/MP3 battles, but rather to look at what does that mean for schools and libraries?

I think we can all agree that digital formats offer wonderful potentials for education, but what about the cost associated with them? What about availability? Is it right to encourage students to download copies of books, that they would ordinarily have to pay for, from file sharing sites for free?

It seems illogical that a school or teacher could encourage circumvention of copyright laws, even if they are deemed unfair, and still retain any ability to instill respect and obedience for other laws in their students. Let alone the legality of encouraging that, even by turning a blind eye, by anyone employed in Education.

Obviously, the debate about the ethical obligation of teachers and schools to instill values in students is a rather old, and sometimes tired, debate. But yet it still raises up passions in people, especially as the situation always changes nearly as fast as the calendar flips.

There are those who would argue that students, schools, educators, and people in general should have free access to knowledge and literature. Any attempt to restrict, even if it is by fees and costs, should be resisted.

Still others would claim that c capitalist society is based on commerce. However, where the overheads are minimal, so should be the costs associated with access to the material. Since the product can be found for free, it’s perfectly fine to do whatever it takes to get it.

Another group may claim that since it can’t be policed effectively, that means it is beyond the pale. Until such time as the laws can be applied, it’s a free for all.

Then there are those who feel that even though you may get away with it, and that it may be a ‘small’ breach of the law, it’s still wrong.

All of these points have merits, and all of them make a compelling personal case for our conduct.

The question though, is what code do SCHOOLS have an obligation to follow? Is it up to the individual educator and board to decide? Or should there be a larger ethos that informs this choice?

I understand that this conversation can cut close to the bone for many people. But that often makes for a good discussion, or at least a good couple minutes of private pondering.

I’m going to close with my own opinion, just so that I’m not hiding behind the discussion.

I think schools CANNOT, SHOULD NOT, and MUST NOT fall prey to the allure of using, tacitly approving or encouraging, and in anyway being party to circumvention of copyright laws. We may not agree with the laws as they are written; it may be cheaper and easier to ignore them; and in the end it may even help our pedagogy in the here and now, but what message does it send to our students and the community as a whole? We can’t choose to only uphold the rules that don’t inconvenience us, and we can’t get mired in philosophical debates with ourselves on legality WITHIN our classroom practices. Work to change rules. Speak up against them. Encourage students to do the same. But DO NOT encourage them to, do not lead by example in showing them how to, ignore the rules.

Ryan

They’re coming!!

Hey!

After a nice week at in beautiful Meadow Lake Provincial Park, I’m back! Though the weather today feels more fall-ish then August probably should.

In the spirit of giving us something to keep our minds warm, I’d like to start broaching the topic of electronic textbooks.

We’ve spent a lot of time chatting about digital libraries, e-books, formats, etc., but what about the nitty gritty of actual digital textbooks use?

I stumbled upon an interesting blog/publication on this very topic, which makes the argument that digital textbook sales will make up nearly 14% of overall sales within 5 years, and may be up to 50% of the market by the end of the decade.

Even if those numbers as a little ambitious, the fact that digital textbooks are here to stay is abundantly clear!

But what exactly will that mean for schools, teachers, and students?

One of the benefits of digital textbooks would be the accessibility that they offer to all parties, as well as the ability to keep them up to date as newer editions come out. Furthermore, think of all the extra room on desks, cubbyholes, shelves, and classrooms without having them taken up by textbooks.

However, what about the more difficult problems of paying for the digital subscriptions?

It seems that the way the system is currently being designed is that schools/students buy digital licenses to books for a year or two at a time, and that gives them access and online support.

But is that really more cost efficient for schools? What about inner city or poorer districts that don’t have the money to continually update their licenses? Would it be smarter for them to simply purchase hard copies? With less hard-copies being printed though, would that raise the price for the paper versions though?

That doesn’t even begin to touch on the idea of copyright and intellectual properties? On the most basic level, think about photocopying and printing limitations. With more and more difficulty in making copies, does that make these digital textbooks any more accessible?

Finally, I can only imagine that the book producers will be in favor of this move, as they can generate nearly the same amount of revenue without overhead printing costs. Will that encourage them to add in features that allow students and schools to interact with their e-books, or will it be simply a digital port of a printed material? If the ability to interact (say for teachers to link YouTube, websites, media, and other digital forms of education directly into their students textbooks) with their digital texts is included, then this move could provide many new, and exciting ways to educate.

What do you think? Digital Textbooks are here, and the stream will soon turn into a flood. What type of features would you like to see in them? Does anything make you hesitate? Does anything in particular grab your imagination?

Ryan

What do we mean by safe spaces…

Hello everyone!

Just a forewarning, this is a heavy subject, but one that I really want to hear back from you on.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Today I wanted to talk about the second important attribute of libraries that must be maintained, whether on or offline, and that is Safety.

Safety you say? What can you possibly mean by that?

As mentioned before, libraries have the ability to form a 3rd place between the home and the classroom where students can learn. Feeling safe and free to explore, congregate, and socialize at leisure is an experience that virtual libraries need to also embrace.

So how can a website or chat room still provide safety to patrons and students?

To me this means Cyber-bullying must be watched for on library forums on chat rooms, while at the same time some level of freedom and creative expression has to be maintained. If it isn’t, then student won’t feel safe being themselves for the opposite reason, fear of censorship and reprisal.

Beyond that though, is the need to ensure that users of an online resource feel safe to contribute to a discussion or exploration, without fear of being belittled or silenced. This can be a much harder goal to achieve, but internet chat, learning, and meeting can provide a natural medium where there is the right mix of connection, and anonymity, for participants.

However, there is one more aspect of safety that I think libraries need to provide, and it’s a BIG one.

A casual Google search of “Libraries + Safe spaces” and any number of qualifiers such as ‘creating’ etc. yields a wide range of results. Some talking about anti-bullying and safety from violence and unwanted attention, while others are actual documents outlining libraries ‘Safety Codes’.

Stuck in the middle of all of that though, is the idea that libraries are safe spaces for children and people of different lifestyles. This may be stepping into a quagmire, but the topic itself needs to be broached. There is already discussion about ‘self-censorship’ ongoing, and to what extent are libraries responsible for embracing all backgrounds and lifestyles.

One hit from McGill University highlighted an event discussing just this point, with some very interesting data. Over 73% of public and school librarians confessed they made conscious choices not to buy books that were supportive or in favor of the LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and queer/questioning) lifestyles. This included books that were award winners or best sellers, and was largely due to the fear librarians had of parental backlash.

Decisions such as this have been given the label ‘self-censorship’, and the concept is quickly becoming one of the hot button topics in librarian science circles.

For the digital and online capacities of libraries, it also carries several important questions:

– With the ease of lending and loaning that was previously discussed as a potential option in our last post and discussion, to what extent will digital libraries be able to overcome the self-censorship that is quite clearly prevalent in physical library spaces today?

– Conversely, will the lack of an actual physical copy of books make it easier for this type of censorship to continue, and in fact to be buried under the mountains of e-books and publications that would be flooding a suddenly immense online collection?

While the concept of self-censorship is one that could be discussed at great length, I would like to try and keep things focused more generally on the topic of creating libraries that are safe places of students and children, and in particular, how technology could assist in doing so. I must admit though, that I find myself of two very distinct minds when I consider how technology could play into all of this.

As hinted at above, the freedom and ease of access that an online lending system creates should make it far easier for patrons of all ages and backgrounds to be part of the library. Additionally, at the same time perhaps this would shield the libraries, schools, and librarians themselves from criticism and backlash from parents and community members who may not agree with such a policy.

On the other side though, isn’t the mere idea that such actions take place a clear indicator that it is not technology that will solve this problem? That we are dealing with a fundamental issue of liberty and freedom here? If people really don’t want something around, then they will always find a way to keep it hidden or buried, right?

I suppose at the very heart of all of this should be the idea that children and students need to find the library a place where they can feel safe and not judged; and that extends beyond the obvious ideas of cyber-bullying and violence. So far, the majority of libraries seem to be failing these students, and that is heartbreaking.

If the goal of education is to give children and students voices so they can be heard, then any action which takes away those voices, or works to silence them, is a crime of the highest order.

Finding our way along this path will obviously take time and effort, but it is a task that stands in great need of being taken up. I truly feel that the technological potential that libraries are beginning to embrace could, and should, provide a medium for all voices, lifestyles, and children. Furthermore, it should work towards the ideal of libraries being spaces of learning, and safety, for all children.

It may be difficult, but the reward would be another step down the path to creating a safe environment where all students can learn, experience online communities, and flourish.

Ryan

Addendum’s:

I found a good, but short, blog post from someone who attended the conference at McGill here, and another very brief librarian blog post here as well. Sadly, it appears that they didn’t follow up on this topic very much, but I still found some of their opinions interesting.

I also highly recommend the PowerPoint file on the linked McGill website

Finally, for a further introduction to Self-Censorship, I recommend the CCBC (Cooperative Children’s Book Center) article.

“Access” over “Ownership”

Good Day and thanks for dropping by.

I think enough time has been spent on discussing the theory and debate behind technology and virtual libraries, and the conversation needs to turn for the moment into how to move forward.

Accepting technology in libraries is a must; so much so that to refuse is to miss an evolutionary step. This same holds true for school libraries, but how do you make such a transition, and still be meaningful and useful in your school or district?

As has already been talked about, Libraries serve both various social and practical purposes, and these attributes need to also be available (to a certain extent) in a virtual domain. In my opinion, there are 3 key facets to libraries that must be maintained regardless of medium: Access, Safety, Socializing.

Each of these ideas will form their own blog post, but for today, let’s just focus on Access

——————————————————————————————————————————————

At the heart of any collection or library, is the fact that what you have gathered must be of use to people. This may be self-evident, but far too often it is easy to far into the trap of just providing ‘stuff’ without providing the RIGHT ‘stuff’.

But what does that mean in a digital world for libraries?

I stumbled upon an interesting article on CNN that I think speaks to something profound. In an interview with Spotify (Unfortunately not available in Canada yet) founder Daniel Ek, he states “What Spotify is saying is, ownership (of music) is great, but access is the future”.

Ownership is great, but access is the future.

What a profound idea!!

What could this mean for virtual library services, that would no longer be limited to actual serials and catalogues that can be stored in a building? Rather, the entire literary world could truly be at your finger-tips digitally. No more waiting about owning copies of books or resources, rather get an e-copy, or partner with other libraries to increase your footprint and selection and provide ACCESS.

Or for schools! Resources, textbooks, connections with anything would be right there, no wait times, no ordering and 6-12 weeks later it’s there. Instant connectivity; instant resources; instant learning!

Think for a moment of the implications of this. No more outdated texts, no more lost books, graffiti, damaged and destroyed volumes. Whether its kids stories or high school Physics, everything would be right there, just waiting to be accessed.

Of course there will still be issues of licensing, royalties, copyrights, etc. but the concept of libraries not being limited by the physical collection they can OWN could be transformative. If the library and its patrons/students never own a copy of the book, but rather have it for a specified time, or only a set number of accesses, would any of the above fees even really apply? Things to be worked out and legislated I’m sure. But potentially game changing.

However there are also other issues at play that schools would have to deal with.

Firstly, one of the crucial decisions will be in the format of digital materials that will be offered. As I’m becoming more and more aware of, there is an entire market out there filled with various readers and tablets, and most of them all have formats they simply will not support. Since time and competition hasn’t yet thinned the field down to a standard format, what can libraries possibly do?

This ties in closely to what do schools ‘bet’ on when considering buying hardware? If it isn’t the raging Tablet wars between Apple, Android, Blackberry, and a host of others, then it is Kindle, Adobe, etc. If libraries become increasingly virtual, then there will have to be new ways to access that information, both for students and staff, and that will require expenditures. Nothing gets school boards more nervous than spending large amounts of money on something they aren’t sure about.

So, how can a school and library know which steps are going to be the right one? And if they can’t, how can they avoid simply sitting on the sidelines waiting for winners to appear so they can join the party? Doing so would put libraries at the backend of technology, not exactly desirable, or useful.

BUT if libraries can embrace the concept of ‘access over ownership’ and turn it to their advantage, then surely the benefits will far outweigh the potential pitfalls. Being able to provide such a service to students and schools would give tools to educators that they could only dream of before. In this way, to NOT move forward would almost be negligent.

Ryan