Hey all,
This will be a shorter post, as the weekend is coming! Plus, I ramble too much anyways!
Library attribute #3 – Socializing
As mentioned in a previous discussion, libraries are a social place, and virtual or digital libraries also need to be social places. Maybe this will start simply with discussions and chat rooms for books, courses, etc. Perhaps online meetings rooms or web conference capabilities will be the first wave of online socializing, but the future could be endless.
At this point, there are two directions this conversation could go. 1) We could talk about the benefits and drawbacks of F2F vs Digital communities and socializing. Anyone who has been in our ETAD 802 course knows how vibrant a topic that is.
However, and this may be unfair, since this is my blog and I have already been a part of a discussion on this topic, I would like to look quickly at a second vein.
Libraries obligation to provide a social access point to the community.
This is really an immense topic, so here are a few parameters to sharpen the focus.
a) Let’s only look at school libraries, and in particular non-university school libraries.
b) Let’s focus purely on social use of technology, NOT academic or research uses
I realize these may be unfair limits, but in my mind they seem to make sense.
Now to the discussion
When we talked before about libraries as social places, one of the biggest benefits was that they are open to everyone. Money and class don’t matter, anyone can go into the library and socialize.
But what about the online forms of socializing?
There has been an explosion of digital and technological ways of communicating; ways that have revolutionized how we as humans can interact across vast distances. The prevalence of cell phones, tablets, laptops, etc. has created the image that everyone is wired and hooked up; or else a luddite and being purposely obstinate.
There are other groups though, who are NOT riding this wave, and perhaps not due to their own choice.
I purposely put the above guidelines into place for a reason, as I do see public libraries and university libraries providing courses on online etiquette and usage, while having multiple computers set up for patrons to simply browse around.The question though, is should elementary and secondary schools also be embracing such an idea? Do schools have an obligation to provide training and education on how to be ‘wired’ in today’s world to their students? And perhaps most importantly, do schools have an obligation to provide access to these technologies and resources for students who do not have them at home?
It seems that this very topic has been at the forefront of discussions on whether classrooms should adopt Cell Phone integrated coursework, or tablet course work, especially if not all the students can afford the technology. If they do, should the school provide the technology for those who don’t have it themselves, or for everyone, or not at all?
To me, this topic though goes beyond simply purchasing and providing everyone with a piece of technology. This extends to a mindset that we ‘owe’ it to our students to train them and give them access to the newest ways to learn? Ways that they may not have exposure to otherwise.
It would be easy to further frame this as a question of “should schools level the playing field when it comes to technology by ensuring that there won’t be have/have not students.”
However, the question still goes much deeper than that.
I want to close with a short experience I had teaching some years ago.
Midway through a school year, several students in one of the classes I taught started to exhibit very spotty attendance. After digging into the situation I little more, we as a school found out that they were not attending because they were staying home to look after younger siblings who were not yet school age. Naturally, we tried to stress the importance of regular school attendance, etc. but the reply we received back from them was “Why should we attend when what we are being taught doesn’t apply to our lives?” Our way of structuring school wasn’t meeting their needs, and so they decided it would be a better use of time to stay home and help their families. Doing algebra and reading Shakespeare didn’t matter one bit to them, yet I would say most curriculums out there would disagree on their value assessment.
In that light, do schools, SHOULD schools seek to provide access to, and training in, technology and online social communities? Do they owe it to their students? Does it really matter to the student who doesn’t have the gadgets though? Is it a good or bad use of a school libraries resources?
One last disclaimer, I am not talking about Internet Access here, which I believe was just recently adopted as a basic Human Right by the UN.
If the world is becoming more social and we are socializing through technology, do school libraries owe it to their students to ensure they aren’t left behind? Or is that the “Have’s” projecting OUR values and priorities onto the “Have Not’s”?
Tough questions requiring sober thoughts.
Ryan
In the words of Mikhail Gorbachev:
“If not me, who? And if not now, when?”
Similar quotes have been attributed to others, but I like that Gorbachev said it when he was trying to open the Soviet Union.
I do think school libraries should play a strong part in providing access and in providing support to make that access worthwhile. I value social media, so of course I think that means that the library has a role to play in supporting online communities and personal learning networks for students. There is definitely a big equity issue when it comes to technology of all sorts, but at least libraries are places where access is possible. Maybe that access can’t be ubiquitous, and maybe we can’t provide everything for everyone. But can’t we start? And it seems to me that libraries are one of the best places to begin.
I agree with what you are saying, libraries do have a role to play; perhaps a CRUCIAL role to play. However I wonder if it is really the role we want them to play?
When Gorbachev sought to open the Soviet Union, he clearly had positive and great intentions. But he also realized that process would fundamentally change the face of the nation. In the end, things got far worse during the transformation to the Russian State that now exists; probably to a degree that Gorbachev could not have imagined. Change did end up being positive, and it required his bravery and actions, but it may not have been the change he ultimately foresaw.
So what right? I think everyone would agree technology offers opportunities for learning and community building – at least everyone who is reading this right now probably does. What I truly want to know though, is that technological know-how and ability really the best service we can give to students who may not ever have need of it, or access to use those skills, due to economic, family, or other reasons?
For us to say that digital communities need to be taught and supported is great, and probably correct to a certain extent. But that still smacks of a top-down approach to tell students, regardless of situation, that this is what they should know. To spend resources on helping students achieve proficiency and awareness of a world that may be light years away from their day to day situation can help inspire them, or it can just make them feel further away and more isolated from the ‘Have’ world.
I envision a far different scenario where students are part of defining what it is they want to learn, and then we use technology and resources to help support them in that endeavor. Libraries and schools should spend money and effort closing the technology gap for all students, but should it be a matter of policy and curriculum? I don’t think so.
I feel we have so may other areas where we are still failing students that could make a direct daily impact in their lives, that perhaps we are looking too far to the future and missing the here and now? Blasphemous I know! Lol. 🙂
Agreed, and you’re not blasphemous in the slightest. These are exactly the tough questions we need to address. I wasn’t thinking of top-down at all, and in fact, I’m not sure I would want this to be part of a formal curriculum. But I do think we have a responsibility to support kids in developing, refining, and making good use of PLNs, because without them, they will lead more impoverished lives as learners. And all of this is part of a larger agenda to get students to see themselves as life long learners.
I know there are other priorities in schools, and some are immediate and undeniable. But I don’t want to think of it as an either-or, zero sum activity. We have a bunch of important things to do, and I honestly believe this is one of them.