As online learning becomes more common and more and more resources are converted to digital form, some people have suggested that public libraries should be shut down and, in their place, everyone should be given an iPad with an e-reader subscription.
Proponents of this idea state that it will save local cities and towns money because libraries are expensive to maintain. They also believe it will encourage more people to read because they won’t have to travel to a library to get a book; they can simply click on what they want to read and read it from wherever they are. They could also access more materials because libraries won’t have to buy physical copies of books; they can simply rent out as many digital copies as they need.
However, it would be a serious mistake to replace libraries with tablets. First, digital books and resources are associated with less learning and more problems than print resources. A study done on tablet vs book reading found that people read 20-30% slower on tablets, retain 20% less information, and understand 10% less of what they read compared to people who read the same information in print. Additionally, staring too long at a screen has been shown to cause numerous health problems, including blurred vision, dizziness, dry eyes, headaches, and eye strain, at much higher instances than reading print does. People who use tablets and mobile devices excessively also have a higher incidence of more serious health issues such as fibromyalgia, shoulder and back pain, carpal tunnel syndrome, and muscle strain. I know that whenever I read from my e-reader for too long, my eyes begin to feel tired and my neck hurts. We should not add to these problems by giving people, especially young people, more reasons to look at screens.
Second, it is incredibly narrow-minded to assume that the only service libraries offer is book lending. Libraries have a multitude of benefits, and many are only available if the library has a physical location. Some of these benefits include acting as a quiet study space, giving people a way to converse with their neighbors, holding classes on a variety of topics, providing jobs, answering patron questions, and keeping the community connected. One neighborhood found that, after a local library instituted community events such as play times for toddlers and parents, job fairs for teenagers, and meeting spaces for senior citizens, over a third of residents reported feeling more connected to their community. Similarly, a Pew survey conducted in 2015 found that nearly two-thirds of American adults feel that closing their local library would have a major impact on their community. People see libraries as a way to connect with others and get their questions answered, benefits tablets can’t offer nearly as well or as easily.
While replacing libraries with tablets may seem like a simple solution, it would encourage people to spend even more time looking at digital screens, despite the myriad issues surrounding them. It would also end access to many of the benefits of libraries that people have come to rely on. In many areas, libraries are such an important part of the community network that they could never be replaced by a simple object.
As online learning becomes more common and more and more resources
are converted
to digital form,
some
people
have suggested that public libraries should
be shut
down and, in their place, everyone should be
given
an iPad with an e-reader subscription.
Proponents of this
idea
state that it will save local cities and towns money
because
libraries are expensive to maintain. They
also
believe it will encourage more
people
to
read
because
they won’t
have to
travel to a library to
get
a
book
; they can
simply
click on what they want to
read
and
read
it from wherever they are. They could
also
access more materials
because
libraries won’t
have to
buy
physical copies of
books
; they can
simply
rent out as
many
digital copies as they need.
However
, it would be a serious mistake to replace libraries with tablets.
First
, digital
books
and resources
are associated
with less learning and more problems than print resources. A study done on tablet vs
book
reading found that
people
read
20-30% slower on tablets, retain 20% less information, and understand 10% less of what they
read
compared to
people
who
read
the same information in print.
Additionally
, staring too long at a screen has
been shown
to cause numerous health problems, including blurred vision, dizziness, dry eyes, headaches, and eye strain, at much higher instances than reading print does.
People
who
use
tablets and mobile devices
excessively
also
have a higher incidence of more serious health issues such as fibromyalgia, shoulder and back pain, carpal tunnel syndrome, and muscle strain. I know that whenever I
read
from my e-reader for too long, my eyes
begin
to feel tired and my neck hurts. We should not
add
to these problems by giving
people
,
especially
young
people
, more reasons to look at screens.
Second, it is
incredibly
narrow-minded to assume that the
only
service libraries offer is
book
lending. Libraries have a multitude of
benefits
, and
many
are
only
available if the library has a physical location.
Some
of these
benefits
include acting as a quiet study space, giving
people
a way to converse with their neighbors, holding classes on a variety of topics, providing jobs, answering patron questions, and keeping the
community
connected. One neighborhood found that, after a local library instituted
community
events
such as play times for toddlers and parents, job fairs for
teenagers
, and meeting spaces for senior citizens, over a third of residents reported feeling more connected to their
community
.
Similarly
, a Pew survey conducted in 2015 found that
nearly
two-thirds of American adults feel that closing their local library would have a major impact on their
community
.
People
see
libraries as a way to connect with others and
get
their questions answered,
benefits
tablets can’t offer
nearly
as well
or as
easily
.
While replacing libraries with tablets may seem like a simple solution, it would encourage
people
to spend even more time looking at digital screens, despite the myriad issues surrounding them. It would
also
end
access to
many
of the
benefits
of libraries that
people
have
come
to rely on. In
many
areas, libraries are such an
important
part of the
community
network that they could never
be replaced
by a simple object.