Games in Libraries

Video games can cause debate not only in the effects of violence, but also in whether or not they should be used in schools and libraries. With some people’s negative views of video games it can be hard to defend using library funds and space for games. There is quite a bit of research that defends the value of video games, and could be used to back up a decision to incorporate video games into a school or public library. Gaming promotes literacy, by needing problem solving skills, making hypotheses, etc., as well as often requiring quite a bit of reading to play the game. For example, Pokemon games can have lots of text that must be read carefully. MMPOGs (massive multiplayer online games) promote literacy as well. Researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison studied the learning that takes place: “‘[MMPOG] play is a thoroughly literate activity involving manipulation meaning and achieving particular ends.’ Some of the literate activities taking place in MMPOGs are ‘researching equipment, making maps, managing resources, investing currencies, building models, designing strategies, debating facts and theories, and writing.’”(Quoted by Faris in Children & Libraries, UIUC Ebscohost article here).

On The Shifted Librarian Blog, Jenny Levine has posted quite a bit lately about whether gaming promotes Reading, How Gaming Promotes Reading and Library Usage, and How School Libraries Can Use Board Games. These give anecdotal evidence and quantitative examples of how libraries can use games to bridge to literacy and publicize the library for teens. School Library Journal's Digital Reshift blog also recently posted obvious reasons why your library needs a Wii, and 10 Reasons Why Your Library Needs a Wii (Part 2).

By introducing games in libraries, the libraries attract a part of the population that otherwise would not be served, increase the library’s role in teens’ lives and serve as more of a community hub. Video games may draw teens into the library, and then librarians can work to connect with them in other ways, too. There are Last year, at the Chadron Public Library in Nebraska, teens “borrowed 20 to 30 books a month. Now it's well over 300 each month. The reason: video games.” (Libraries Lure with Video Games) Teens coming into the library to play video games may also realize that the stereotypes they have about libraries are not true; it isn’t just stuffy quietness and books.

I think another important aspect of reaching underserved youth is for potential service later. Teens might not be interested in or not have time for recreational reading, which is what many library users think is a very important service of the library. Teens might not choose to read at that point in their life, but if they have a good relationship with the library they might use it for other things later on.

A few weeks ago in class, Carol mentioned the historical core foundations for libraries’ existence: collection/preservation, organization, and access. These reasons for libraries also relate to a young adult librarian and his or her role, and gaming can easily fit into and reinforce each of these roles.

The young adult librarian should build a collection of material that includes vibrant quality material that is relevant to teens. This includes not just books but music, audio books, magazines, and movies. Incorporating games into the library’s collection includes gaming magazines (like PlayStation: The Official Magazine), manga series that have crossovers (like .Hack), and other books that relate to video games.

Of course, the youth librarian should organize the collection so youth can easily find material without frustration. However, just organizing or decorating a cool teen space is a good start but not enough. They need to relate to young people and welcome them to the library. This includes respecting young people and providing services for them: helping them with information needs, research, and recreational needs. Traditionally recreational needs meant helping young people find books, but this idea can include a lot more. Just like a knitting program or craft program can bring a group of people together using the library as a social space, a library game event provides a safe, fun environment for kids.

The idea of access also can be related to using games in the library. Teen librarians can set out the gaming magazines and related books in an easily seen location, like right by the computers if a lot of teens come to use them. Posters and fliers about gaming events could be placed there. It also should include other interactions with young people to help get to know them more. Related to this, the young adult librarian should create and facilitate programming for teens that is also relevant to young people, which will encourage them to come to the library.

I think different libraries are at vastly different ends of the spectrum in their views and knowledge of using gaming. I don’t have any experience using it and am not working in a library now, but would be excited by the potential of incorporating it into a youth services program. What kinds of experience have you had?

Programming: The New Literacy

Marc Prensky (the guy who popularized the phrases "digital natives" and "digital immigrants") has loads of provocative items on his website. Here's a link to a new article of his from Edutopia (an online forum sponsored through the generosity of filmmaker George Lucas):

Programming: The New Literacy

So, what do you think? Is programming where we're headed next?

decoding.... our class.

This post may make me sound a bit skeptical of what we've been talking about in class recently, but I am actually not that way at all. I am just really new to the concept of media literacy. Coming from a background of working in DC and doing media policy research, this is a new language [in the spirit of this week's readings] for me to learn. So I am really just trying to grasp what our readings and discussions have been trying to get at.

I think it is really awesome that academics are recognizing and teaching others that literacy is much broader than is conventionally conceived. Literacy in the modern world not only means knowing how to read books -- it also means reading stuff online or in popular magazines. And it also means being literate in other ways -- in the world of images and sounds, in decoding visual and aural cues and being able to produce them. This is a fundamentally important point to emphasize to students of all ages, because the current education system makes little or no effort to put things into this kind of perspective, instead buying into the old-skool high culture/low culture debate. Yawn! But this kind of indoctrination affects me too. Even as I spend most of the day working in one way or another online, I feel pretty useless at the end of the day when I think about the fact that I have only read a few pages of a book. Thinking like that is pretty sad and unnecessary, but unfortunately it still flows in my veins. [and may be the reason for what I say in the rest of my posting]

At the same time, this new way of thinking leaves me confused. As I mentioned, I have a background in policy. So of course, I am going to focus on the importance of political activism in everything that I do and think. And when I begin to think of every form of literacy as equal, it becomes hard for me to differentiate between the kind of education that develops my imagination and leads to personal development, and the kind of education that teaches me about more 'structural' issues in the world around me.

For example, if I tell a kid to surf around on youtube and find interesting videos, that will teach them to become literate in how people her age communicate with each other (if they aren't already). If I tell her to read the New York Times instead, she'll learn about things going on in the world (that NYT editors deem adequate to report). Are our readings trying to argue that these two forms of learning/literacy are equally valid?

If so, that's cool, but I am confused about what that kind of education would look like. I mean, what would be the context in which teaching about all forms of literacy would take place? And how do kids tell the difference between things that are important politically (i.e. teaching them about media ownership and the structures of the media system, for instance) vs. things that are important for their personal development (decoding advertising, media representation, etc).

I'm kind of having problems articulating what I'm trying to ask. I guess my main question is, are teachers and librarians supposed to educate kids about things that are totally new to them (that like 6 big companies own a lot of the media they see and hear in the US) or about things that they already participate in (youtube, facebook)?

Yes, I can see how this question presupposes that teachers and librarians are teaching. And that should not always be the case, i.e. teachers are also learning from their students. That's definitely true, because otherwise education never moves forward, it just stagnates at the Iliad and the Odyssey and the American Revolution.

But still, though, I think kids do need direction and someone to help them move forward. And I guess I am not totally understanding how teaching them how to read In Touch Weekly broadens their perspective very much. Can't they learn how to read this and other magazines on their own if they are taught in school about the workings of the advertising and media industries?

Or am I thinking about this all wrong? I am sure that I am, because it usually takes me a little while to catch on to things, being that I am a retard. I am probably coming off as the jerky high culturalist who thinks reading the newspaper is way more important than watching cartoons. I don't think that, I think I'm just missing the point.

Anyone? Anyone?