# data[].attributes.body
First off, I would ask questions. Why the library? Is there an alternative space that could be utilized? Is the librarian going to be responsible for the management of the learning lab? Is there going to be assistance or one person managing the library and learning lab? Then a conversation about the educational impact that this decision is going to have would need to take place. This where collection of data comes in very handy. Studies have been conducted about the impact that librarians have on a school system. I read that there are schools that have been without an official, certified librarian, and their standardized test scores progressively dropped as they years went by without the librarian. These studies would be what I would bring to the conversation. Ultimately, if the board chooses to repurpose the library, that is their decision and find ways to adapt to the "new normal."

# data[].attributes.body
Thank you to everyone for your contributions to the discussion.

To sum up:

Asking critical questions can help the school board to see that they haven't thought everything through?

Decision makers need to see research and hear anecdotes on the importance of access to physical media.

Stakeholders need an opportunity to provide input.

As librarians, if something like this occurs in your community, it's your responsibility to inform your school community and encourage folks to share their opinions with the school board. Remember that you can't tell people what to say, but you can certainly let them know that a crucial decision is being made and they should have an opportunity to have their voice heard.

# data[].attributes.body
Naomi Miller-Analyst

-To address Dr. Rinio's question that everything is available online, so we do not need physical books.

We must remember that not all books are offered in a digital format. If an author does not agree to a digital format or allow it to be freely distributed it would violate copyright laws. Libraries must ensure it has express permission to be able to do so or it would violate the author's copyright.

# data[].attributes.body
Josephine Soosay - Critic

I might ask for guidance in how the school board proposes to move forward. Stakeholders such as teachers, parents, and even students might want to know the big changes proposed, then I would ask the school board to hold an open session where all stakeholders are invited to have input and their opinions shared. Sometimes, it takes community support to impact the changes necessary in education, in a positive way.

# data[].attributes.body
Naomi Miller- Analyst

It is important to remember that as a librarian you must advocate for your library and your students. You need to make sure you reach out to potential stakeholders to help you advocate. You cannot do this in isolation. As Levitov said in Activism and the School Librarian: Tools for Advocacy and Survival, you must share your lessons, reading and literacy activities, events, famous visitors, and data on how your role is making a positive impact on students' literacy skills. The community will not know of all the wonderful things you do if you do not speak up!

# data[].attributes.body
Abigail Schuh - Synthesizer

In response to Rinio, Deborah, when I hear people say we don't need libraries anymore because everything is online, I like to remind them that we still don't know what the effects of tech use in young students is long term. The research is still inconclusive as to whether digital reading is even as effective as physical books. I am glad JENNIFER ALEXANDER shared "The Anxious Generation," it is such a good read. The

"Oklahoma Education Journal" did a piece in 2024 about reading comprehension in students who read physical books versus those who read digitally.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Turning the Page: What Research Indicates About Print vs. Digital Reading | Published in Oklahoma Education Journal

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By Lidia Altamura. The use of digital devices for reading has surged in schools over the past twenty-five years. But are digital devices as beneficial as printed materials?

# data[].attributes.body
Abigail Schuh - Synthesizer

jeremy neldon and Amanda Granger bring up great concerns about the downsides to reducing library spaces and replacing physical books with digital resources. Unequal access to internet is a big reason why libraries are still utilized today. Community's right to read is entrenched in physical books.

JENNIFER ALEXANDER is also correct in taking a cautious approach. Sometimes shifting digital looks more affordable on paper, but ends up being far more expensive once all the necessary tech purchases, fees, and annual subscriptions are factored in.

# data[].attributes.body
@ Amanda Granger

Regarding unequal access to technology, would this be a concern for discrimination? Even students who have access to the appropriate technology may still lack the digital literacy skills necessary for success. How could we make it more equitable?

Another essential consideration is teacher training and support. How will districts ensure that their teachers and staff are adequately trained to make the switch? Reflecting on COVID, will teachers be expected to figure it out on their own?

# data[].attributes.body
Lori Flory I appreciate your response and the mention of fostering the love of reading.

How are we supposed to encourage the love of reading when children can't identify that we are reading when we are on an electronic device?

What about the board book section in a library? Is holding an iPad and scrolling the pages of a color or letter book the same as having an actual book and feeling the thickness of the pages?

What about books that allow for manipulation or sensory experiences? Will the next generation lose a necessary tactile learning experience?

How would this affect their language development?

# data[].attributes.body
As a staff at my school last year, we all read The Anxious Generation by Jonathan Haidt. I have mentioned it in my other classes this year as well, but I keep going back to it in each discussion we have about screen time and the harm or affects technology is having on our students. I am reminded of the dangers of screen time again in this scenario. Students need to read and track with their eyes and fingers. They need to not have the world at their fingertips when they are trying to stay focused on one task, knowing that anything they want is just a click away. It is so scary to me when they track the actual hours students spend on technology now, and I see the effects in the classroom when I try to keep their attention and keep them off of the screens. Some are truly addicted.

I would recommend this book, or at least the talking points within it, to any focus group that is advocating for more technology time for children. I cannot imagine an elementary school without hundreds of actual books for students to sit and turn pages, while they read and analyze and predict what will happen next.

If you are still raising young children, I would say it is a must read. If you are already finish raising your children, share it with your adult children. Some of the chapters are actually a little unsettling on both levels. If nothing else, it is very thought provoking.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
THE INSTANT #1 NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER * A Wall Street Journal Top 10 Book of 2024 * A New York Times and Washington Post Notable Book * One of Barack Obama's Favorite Books of 2024 * A TIME 100 Must-Read Book of 2024 * Named a Best Book of 2024 by the Economist, the New York Post, and Town & Country * The Goodreads Choice Award Nonfiction Book of the Year * Finalist for the PEN Literary Awards

A must-read for all parents: the generation-defining investigation into the collapse of youth mental health in the era of smartphones, social media, and big tech-and a plan for a healthier, freer childhood.

"With tenacity and candor, Haidt lays out the consequences that have come with allowing kids to drift further into the virtual world . . . While also offering suggestions and solutions that could help protect a new generation of kids." -Shannon Carlin, TIME, 100 Must-Read Books of 2024
After more than a decade of stability or improvement, the mental health of adolescents plunged in the early 2010s. Rates of depression, anxiety, self-harm, and suicide rose sharply, more than doubling on many measures. Why?

In The Anxious Generation, social psychologist Jonathan Haidt lays out the facts about the epidemic of teen mental illness that hit many countries at the same time. He then investigates the nature of childhood, including why children need play and independent exploration to mature into competent, thriving adults. Haidt shows how the "play-based childhood" began to decline in the 1980s, and how it was finally wiped out by the arrival of the "phone-based childhood" in the early 2010s. He presents more than a dozen mechanisms by which this "great rewiring of childhood" has interfered with children's social and neurological development, covering everything from sleep deprivation to attention fragmentation, addiction, loneliness, social contagion, social comparison, and perfectionism. He explains why social media damages girls more than boys and why boys have been withdrawing from the real world into the virtual world, with disastrous consequences for themselves, their families, and their societies.

Most important, Haidt issues a clear call to action. He diagnoses the "collective action problems" that trap us, and then proposes four simple rules that might set us free. He describes steps that parents, teachers, schools, tech companies, and governments can take to end the epidemic of mental illness and restore a more humane childhood.

Haidt has spent his career speaking truth backed by data in the most difficult landscapes-communities polarized by politics and religion, campuses battling culture wars, and now the public health emergency faced by Gen Z. We cannot afford to ignore his findings about protecting our children-and ourselves-from the psychological damage of a phone-based life.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
THE INSTANT #1 NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER * A Wall Street Journal Top 10 Book of 2024 * A New York Times and Washington Post Notable Book * One of Barack Obama's Favorite Books of 2024 * A TIME 100 Must-Read Book of 2024 * Named a Best Book of

# data[].attributes.body
Great points Amanda Granger and Lori Flory.

All learners benefit from the exploration process, or browsing the shelves to find something of interest. Although we can certainly locate new items online, it's a very different process from physically browsing the shelves of a library or bookstore.

Also, all learners have their preferences and needs when it comes to format, whether it's print, digital, or audio. Librarians can help learners access resources in the format that best meets their needs.

# data[].attributes.body
The argument of "everything a person needs is now online" is not entirely true. Yes, a lot of information can be obtained digitally. However, as Amanda Granger stated, we don't all have the same access to this digital information. Librarians are equipped to foster one's love for reading BOOKS. In regards to the younger kids, what about the memorable stories of Dr. Seuss? He has made reading enjoyable for youngsters! His rhyming patterns along with the made up words makes reading his work FUN! As librarians, it is our duty to provide equitable access to a variety of reading materials.

# data[].attributes.body
Amanda Granger - Analyst

The argument that “we don’t need physical materials anymore because everything’s online” is a bit misleading. There is a lot of great digital content out there, and it’s an important part of modern learning. But not all students have equal access to it. Some kids don’t have reliable internet at home, or they’re sharing devices with siblings. Just because something exists online doesn’t mean every student can use it. That’s why the AASL standards stress the importance of equitable access—libraries are often the one place where all students can count on finding what they need, no matter their situation.

Also, research shows that many students understand and remember more when they read print, especially younger kids and those with learning differences. Printed books help with focus and comprehension in ways digital text often doesn’t. That ties directly into what the ISTE and AASL standards say about building strong, thoughtful readers who can really engage with what they’re learning. There’s also something special about browsing a shelf and discovering a book you weren’t even looking for. It builds curiosity and a love for reading that algorithms and search bars just can’t replicate (AASL “Explore” standard—helping students develop interests, empathy, and a wider worldview).

Going all-digital assumes someone is carefully selecting that content, but not all online stuff is high-quality, age-appropriate, or even safe. That’s where librarians come in—they help students learn to spot misinformation and use online tools responsibly. Without them, kids are on their own in an overwhelming digital world. We do need to embrace digital learning, but a well-rounded library should include both the physical and the digital.

# data[].attributes.body
Great points and questions everyone!

One argument I’ve seen repeated over the years is that everything people need now is online. We don’t need libraries of physical materials because it’s all available digitally.

What would you say in response to that?

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Jennifer Alexander on the fact that a digital learning lab cannot replace a library. In our already "digital age", students are exposed to more and more media. What does this say about enhancing one's love for reading?

Some questions I have for this group of stakeholders:

1. Why does the library have to be the "room" that is repurposed? What about some of our other "classroom areas" (our previously used intervention rooms), or part of our newly built academy building?

2. Our school district, in order to eliminate space as well as positions, has previously repurposed the "computer labs" into additional classrooms. The desktop computers have all been disposed of. ALL students are issued a chromebook to use for digital learning. So, if we're repurposing a space for digital learning, are we doing away with the individual chromebooks?

3. Our building once had a "computer lab" before we were able to purchase the chromebooks. That "lab" was transformed into a larger and accessible Special Ed. room. Are we moving backwards?

4. Will these chromebooks be a part of the repurposed room, or will they be replaced with desktop computers? Where is the funding coming from?

5. In the event that this proposal is approved, who decides which of our library books will remain and which will be discarded?

6. Has this proposal been well planned out? What is the long range goal?

7. If implemented, will this be a one to two year change, or are we looking into a five or even a ten year plan?

8. What about the Library Bill of Rights? Aren't we supposed to provide books as well as other resources for information as well as for the interest of our students?

9. In addition to reducing the amount of books, have "you" considered what else the library is used for? Students are learning and implementing research and inquiry skills.

# data[].attributes.body
Amanda Granger - Analyst

While it’s exciting that the district wants to invest in digital learning, the plan to downsize the library and shift funding away from librarian-led programs raises some serious concerns. Research consistently shows that strong school libraries—with certified librarians and diverse collections—have a positive impact on student achievement, especially for students who may already face barriers like limited internet access or fewer resources at home.

If we eliminate or reduce librarian-led programs, we risk widening these gaps. For many students—especially those who may not have internet at home—the school library is their main access point to both print and digital learning tools. The shift shouldn’t be about either/or; it should be about both/and. How can we move toward digital innovation without losing the essential supports that libraries provide? Students need access to both digital and physical resources, and they need the guidance of trained librarians to make the most of them.

I’d ask the board to reimagine the stereotypical role of the library. Keep the certified librarian in place, maintain a strong collection of print books, and add in digital tools and collaborative spaces to blend the best of both worlds—future-forward technology and proven educational support.

To get more people involved, I’d encourage sharing this message with families, teachers, and students through community meetings, short videos or testimonials, and even simple flyers or social media posts. When stakeholders hear how the library helps real kids every day, they’re more likely to speak up and support a more balanced plan.

# data[].attributes.body
Jeremy Neldon - Analyst

In response to Rinio, Deborah prompt: It seems to me that this school district may also be collapsing classroom learning into digital learning. This makes me wonder if the district is facing major budget constraints and needs to layoff classroom teachers. However, if this IS the case, the argument that JENNIFER ALEXANDER makes regarding cost effectiveness is key.

I would push back that this endeavor would end up costing the district far more when it considers buying apps, software, hardware, training the remaining staff, staffing the learning lab, as well as paying to move and house a very useable collection of books. Not to mention, how this might seriously change the district's assessment and reporting regime. This too will be costly.

Oh, and time and money will also need to be spent to bring parents onboard with all of these big changes.

# data[].attributes.body
Great questions jeremy neldon and JENNIFER ALEXANDER. Those are important considerations that should be shared with the board.

When attempting to convince a decision making body, it's helpful to understand their values and make your pitch in alignment with those. Without knowing the specifics, what do you think might be preciptating this recommendation and how could you use that rationale to help make a case for keeping the collection?

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
A Tech lab can not replace the library environment.

# data[].attributes.body
Repurposing the library space could take a reading environment and changing it into a industrial and impersonal environment.

Questions for a group of stakeholders making the decisions:

1. Which books will be removed?

2. Who will decide on the titles and what is the criteria around those chosen for removal?

3. Are these titles easily available on digital?

4. What research has been done on other library-to-lab conversions and what was the outcome?

5. Could students use iPads and personal devices for check out around the room and take less space away from the library setting?

6. What are the next step and five/ten year plan after this change is implemented?

7. Have the stakeholders considered the other uses of the library that will also be affected with this change?

8. Is the lab cost effective? What is the life span of the equipment that is planned for purchase?

Jeremy's points are also all necessary. Without seeing the data for this site and without knowing how transparent they were, I would suspect that important consideration have been forgotten.

# data[].attributes.body
Jeremy Neldon - Analyst

According to the ALA's Library Bill of Rights, "Books and other library resources should be provided for the interest, information, and enlightenment of all people of the community the library serves. Materials should not be excluded because of the origin, background, or views of those contributing to their creation." Furthermore, according to the ALA's Freedom to Read Statement, "It is in the public interest for publishers and librarians to make available the widest diversity of views and expressions, including those that are unorthodox, unpopular, or considered dangerous by the majority."

Reducing the number of physical books in the collection would seriously infringe on the community's right to read by limiting their access to a "wide variety of views and expressions" Despite Google's Book Project promising to create a digital database of all published works, the fact remains that limiting a library's holdings to mostly digital resources will remove a vast array of titles and information from the hands of the community.

Additionally such an action would inevitably bring up a vexing ethical question: Which books to keep and which books would go? What criteria would be be used? How transparent would the process be? And where would all the "removed books" go? Would they still be accessible to the public in some way? If so, who would manage that?

One effective argument against this plan could be: This is a big service model change that is future facing. To do it effectively, efficiently and ethically, the board would be better served by first commissioning a panel of experts (including librarians) to study the issue of how best to implement its goals of increasing digital learning opportunities for the community, while not compromising the library's current services. Current circulation data of the collection's physical books and materials don't lie - the community loves their books!"