Blogs
-
01Sep2010
Libraries raise literacy standards and must be funded
Posted by Jonathan Douglas
The debate about libraries in a period of cuts and austerity has kicked off. Many campaigning voices are advocating passionately for libraries. This is great. However the danger is that the debate becomes focused on personal experiences of the value of libraries rather than on the evidence for why libraries make a difference to society and therefore warrant public funding.
The evidence suggests that there are three vital roles which libraries have in raising literacy levels, the role which sits at the heart of their identity:
- Libraries provide families with babies and preschool children, with a vital literacy resource. They have a vital and well documented role to play in enriching the home learning environment of many families through rhyme times, outreach and free access to books.
- Libraries provide school aged children with books, resources and space where they can learn to love reading. Research has shown that a child’s enjoyment of reading is a vital factor in social mobility.
- For adults with low literacy skills libraries offer access to information and resources to re-engage them with learning. A first step for many on the path back into learning, libraries offer as much support or anonymity as adult learners need.
The factor that unites these three roles is radical: All three of these roles are most effective for the most deprived in society. Libraries make the most difference to those who have the fewest books at home, where parental engagement is likely to be weakest and amongst those least likely to buy books or value reading. Libraries have a disproportionate benefit for the most disadvantaged.
The irony of the current debate is that many of the most powerful advocates for libraries appreciate their value from more advantaged, more literary perspectives. We must not lose sight of the social purpose of libraries. We must not mistake them for a state-subsidised version of Waterstones.
Libraries are fundamentally an agency for creating a fairer society through learning, creating literacy and offering access to knowledge. This is why they merit state funding. This is why in the Spending Review they warrant support.
For more on the proposed privatisation of libraries see:
http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/news/2367_libraries_could_face_privatisation
A discussion titled ‘Have libraries had their day?’ took place on Radio 5 Live this morning. You can read comments here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/5live/connect/
On Radio 4 this morning, Arts Correspondent David Sillito discusses how the library service could be reshaped to attract more customers. Listen to David’s views here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8938000/8938794.stm
Most read
- A new curriculum, a new definition for literacy?
- Latest overview of adult literacy in the UK
- Local Government’s Role in Education: the way forward in 2013
- Can teaching speaking and listening change behaviour in secondary classes?
- Buzzing about books - using talk and peer recommendation to hook pupils into reading
Blogs by the same author
- Will the Olympic Games inspire a nation of readers? in Blogs by Jonathan Douglas
- Literacy in unexpected places in Blogs by Jonathan Douglas
- Could do better: latest overview of adult literacy in the UK in Blogs by Jonathan Douglas
- New political group to focus on literacy in Blogs by Jonathan Douglas
- Literacy and social mobility: An overview of the Party Conferences in Blogs by Jonathan Douglas
3 Comments
TimCoates replied on 1 Oct 2010 at 17:08
I do find this article hard to understand. The role of libraries is reasonably clear - they exist for people who want to use them. That is how they fulfill their social purpose.
Most people who want to use them are already literate and use them to find things to read and for their own information.
We pay for them through tax because there are many people at all stages of their lives who can't afford to buy all that they need to read - or find a private place to work and study of the kind a library provides. They are not just for the poor or the illiterate, they are for everyone.
There are many people, and I am one, who worry about the declining collections of books. Over ten years we have lost twenty million books from libraries. That's why we stress the need for collections to improve and more to be spent on them.
How can libraries improve literacy without books? Why polarise the argument in the way that has been done here? Of course libraries help to encourage literacy, but that is not their only role or the one that should dominate what they do. And they can't do it unless they have new clean abundant book stocks. .. which is why people make the comparison with book shops. It seems obvious.
vwalker replied on 20 Oct 2010 at 11:49
Describing the role of libraries as being there for people who want to use them is hardly clear! That could apply to any service such as a hospital, a community centre, a post office!
It seems to me that Tim is making exactly the same point as the previous article - libraries are there to support everyone with their reading and information needs. They may well contribute to the general literacy level of society which is an added benefit.
Stefania replied on 1 Dec 2010 at 09:43
This is a site dedicated to literacy, so Mr Douglas s argument makes the point that the least advantaged are set to lose the most when libraries close. I think the middle classes have a choice, if they stay behind and read in the library, browse or not, whilst for the poor is like time out, away from a stressful home environment, I quite liked the description of being as annonymous as you wish to be in a library, just yourself with your own thoughts, possibly ,,stealing,, a bit of learning for yourself, away from peer pressure and/or other numbing routines elsewhere
Libraries are also for the literacy accomplished, to be sure, but they are already equipped to weather the scorchingly dry learning climate, they would probably set up book clubs ! What will the most disadvantaged do ?