Advertisement
Articles

Reading: Outmoded or a la Mode? | Peer to Peer Review

A colleague and I decided to find out

E-Mail This Link


Enter recipient's e-mail:


Close
Email
Print |
RSS |
Share | |
Barbara Fister, Gustavus Adolphus College, St. Peter, MN Oct 28, 2010

Barbara_Fister(Original Import)I was delighted when College & Research Libraries started offering preprints of accepted articles. It always makes me feel in the loop and at the cutting edge to see papers in the raw, months before they appear in print. I'm even more excited about it when an article I helped write gets introduced to the world quickly.

Okay, sue me for showing off, but I'm really excited about this project.

You know how kids today don't like to read? Can't focus for more than five seconds? Are so intent on multitasking, visual stimulation, and interactivity that they turn their noses up at books? You've heard all this before, right? (Usually at a library conference from a middle-aged male librarian in a suit pontificating about how to transform our libraries for the millennial generation.) Because when people think of libraries, they think of books, which are an outmoded technology. If we don't do something about it, we are so screwed.

Does this suggest students would prefer a clean, well-lighted place like this perhaps? I swear, a morgue would be more inviting. And, by the way, does anyone ever remember that Hemingway's "A Clean, Well-Lighted Place" is about old age, loneliness, existential despair, and suicide?

Speaking for students or speaking to them?
The strange thing was, in casual conversations with college students, I could never confirm any of the stereotypes about their habits and preferences that I hear so frequently at library conferences. Though schools boast of innovatively "bookless" libraries, students like to study surrounded by those old-fashioned objects and when it comes to textbooks, they repeatedly say they prefer print—not always, not all of them, but in published reports it's typically a substantial majority. (Textbook publishers, not surprisingly, would prefer a future that has no used books for sale; they will make a lot more money if everything goes digital.)

Most of all, I couldn't get students to tell me that, in fact, they dislike books. That reading is a drag. That they would much rather fiddle with Facebook than read a novel. I'm familiar with all the terrible news about the decline of reading, particularly among youth. I just never seemed to run into any students who would say "oh, for sure. Books are so, like, over. Man, I hate those outmoded suckers." I had to take the word of national studies and library pundits—who would probably be stumped if asked the title of the last novel they read.

Going to the source
So my youthful and avid-reader colleague Julie Gilbert and I did something radical: we decided to ask students what they think. A student researcher helped us design a survey. The student made arrangements to administer it anonymously in dozens of classes spread across the curriculum from first through senior year, collecting responses from a sample that is representative of our student body, and then we crunched the numbers. We found out—

Are you sitting down?

A whopping 93 percent of our students reported that enjoy reading for pleasure. All kinds of reading: books, magazines, newspapers. Reading on the Internet (though that scored lower than reading in print). Women like to read a bit more than men, and there's some variation among majors—over 99 percent of humanities majors say they like to read, while only 90 percent of social sciences and pre-professional majors confess to enjoyment of reading—but still, that's a majority solid enough it could be called a landslide.

You might be thinking, "but you work at the Little College on the Prairie, where all the children are above average." Much as we would like to think so, we have solid data that suggests that on this measure, at least, they aren't. In a study that involved students at a wide variety of institutions, including community colleges and comprehensive universities, our incoming students were no more likely that the average student at all types of institutions to engage in unassigned reading. Moreover, as we uncovered previous studies, they tended to find the same thing. Students like to read for pleasure.

So why don't they read?
Interestingly, when we surveyed hundreds of a librarians and a much smaller sample of writing instructors we found that 40 percent or more of these groups assumed students don't read much because they simply don't enjoy it. Not according to students.

The problem is that students have piles of assigned reading to complete and very active social lives and more often than not a job as well as athletic and music commitments, not to mention that often significant relationships are developing—that's what you do when you are starting adulthood—and they say, with good reason, they simply don't have time. I suspect most of their professors would make the same claim.

In fact, I vividly recall a retired English professor chortling because for the first time in decades he finally had time to read. So, before you say "ah, they're just making excuses," check your own priorities.

Also, ask students what reading means to them. They tell me it means warm memories of being read to in childhood by a parent, a teacher, or a librarian. It means books reflect and shape their identities. What they have chosen to read and retain are expressions of who they are and where they have been. As one student wrote, "my bookshelf is not just a bookshelf. It's a time warp."

Okay, but what does this have to with academic libraries?
We're trying some new things as a result of this study. We're gathering reading suggestions from faculty that we put on bookmarks for students to take with them on breaks, we now let them check out as many books as they want out for the entire summer, we're creating more displays and having monthly book drawings. And, in the spring, we're offering a new course, a half-semester partial credit pass/fail "reading workshop" with this fresh-off-the-press catalog description:

In this course students will read and discuss two or more books, including a contemporary work of fiction or non-fiction announced in advance and a book chosen by the student. Students will publish reviews of the books they read to a book-related social network, will reflect on their own reading histories and practices, and will explore the place of books and literacy in contemporary culture.

Will anyone sign up? We don't know yet. Spring registration doesn't start until next month. But, if the college can offer fitness courses involving rock-climbing and canoeing, why not this kind of fitness? Like most schools, the phrase "life-long learning" is in our mission statement. Having some ideas about what one enjoys reading and what reading might provide besides a grade seems an important and portable skill.

What does this mean for academic libraries in general? It probably doesn’t mean redirecting scarce funds toward more popular titles, since students have so little time to read just for fun. But at least we can stop assuming they don’t want to read and can instead think of ways to encourage a taste for reading that will last after college.


Barbara Fister is a librarian at Gustavus Adolphus College, St. Peter, MN, a contributor to ACRLog, and an author of crime fiction. Her latest mystery, Through the Cracks (see review), was published in May by Minotaur Books.




Reader Comments (4)


"The problem is that students have piles of assigned reading to complete and very active social lives and more often than not a job as well as athletic and music commitments, not to mention that often significant relationships are developing—that's what you do when you are starting adulthood—and they say, with good reason, they simply don't have time. I suspect most of their professors would make the same claim." So, they supposedly really enjoy reading, they just haven't made time in their lives during which to be alone and read. Part of placing a priority on reading involves making time to do it. (I also have a problem with the methodology where we're supposed to take their word for it that they enjoy reading. Who wants to tell a questioner that he or she dislikes reading, even if it's true?). So no matter how much they say they value reading, if they're filling their time up to the hilt with social activities, that tells me they're not actually that drawn to it after all. Faculty members have families to raise and life responsibilities & careers to maintain. Young people have more free time in which to read. So it's not fair to equate the two on the same level.

Posted by Jon on October 29, 2010 11:52:56AM

It was an anonymous survey. There was no incentive to make false claims. And busy as I am with professional work and family life, I don't have to read and analze 600 pages of text, study for exams, and make new friends - oh, and work twenty hours a week, which is a pretty typical weekly student schedule. Some students do make time, but frankly I cut them more slack than you do. I read a lot, but few of my colleagues read more than a dozen books just for fun annualy - yet seem quick to chide students who DO read lots - because it's assigned.

Posted by Barbara on October 29, 2010 03:30:07PM

Wow, talk about misrepresenting what Eli said! His "outmoded" talk NEVER suggested READING was outmoded, just that 'the codex' is, and in ten years time, you will find he was right. He's not the only library-type saying this either. Check out Tim Spalding's (founder of librarything.com) take. Also, Eli suggested that libraries are only screwed if they DON'T move from distributing commercial materials, back to their roots (think: Library of Alexandria).

Posted by J2theP on November 3, 2010 12:15:23PM

I didn't say Eli claimed reading was outmoded. What I heard him say, and what I quoted him as saying, is "libraries are screwed" because they are tied in people's minds to books - to the codex. I think the commercial model for publishing is due a huge overhaul, and it's getting one, like it or not, but I'd rather find out from the people we serve whether they think we should stop distributing books they want to read than to assume we know better than they what they should be doing with their time. We tried that around 1900 - when we called it "the fiction problem" and tried to encourage people to spend their time in less frivolous modes of mindless consumption. We lost that one. Thank goodness.

Posted by Barbara Fister on November 4, 2010 09:02:31PM

Previous | Next

Comments that include profanity, personal attacks, or antisocial behavior such as "spamming", "trolling", or any other inappropriate material will be removed from the site. We will take steps to block users who violate any of our terms of use. You are fully responsible for the content you post. All comments must comply with the Terms and Conditions of this site and by submitting comments you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Your name: *

Your email address: * (We won't publish this.)



* = Required information


 

Welcome the LJ Archives.

This archive site is the home to all LJ articles published prior to January 2012;
Advertisement

LJ Reviews Database

LJ Reviews Center

Latest Stories



From the Blogs



Advertisement

Advertisement

Connect with Library Journal


Follow on Twitter








About Us | Advertising Information | Submissions | Site Map | Contact Us | RSS | Subscriptions
©2011 Media Source, Inc., All rights reserved.
Use of this Web site is subject to its Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
Media Source Inc. Media Source Inc. Media Source Inc. Media Source Inc. Media Source Inc. Media Source Inc.