This year’s theme is LEAP: Leadership, Education, Achievement, Progress. Preconferences begin on April 12, and conference programs run through April 15. Exhibits are also available on April 13 and 14. Online registration is open until March 22.

Award-winning schools are recognized for their outstanding college-prep programs and partnerships among teachers, parents, and community organizations. The award was created by College Board President Gaston Caperton in 2001. To date, the program has awarded approximately $950,000 to high schools throughout the country. In May 2012, the Gaston Caperton Inspiration Award–winning schools were Johnny G. Economedes High School in Edinburg, TX; Fort Lauderdale High School, Fort in Lauderdale, FL; and Woodbury Junior/Senior High School in Woodbury, NJ. The deadline for applying is November 30, so download and complete the application now.

“Too many teachers and librarians don’t market and advocate for themselves and what their library programs are all about,” says the teacher librarian at McLain Community High School. “So communities haven’t been hearing all the good things happening and that gives the impression they’re not needed.”

McQueen hopes to change that in his town and get his community rallying behind issue 3A and 3B. Issue 3A is a mill levy that would raise $39 million a year to add more teachers, reduce class sizes, and ensure teacher librarians stay in schools. The latter, 3B, would raise $99 million to help repair and maintain school sites. The goal is to prevent proposed budget cuts that could include the removal of all middle school librarians and the reduction of elementary school librarians to half time, says McQueen.

“I think this is a national issue,” he says. “But it’s a problem that can be prevented. Too often I have seen school librarians cave in.”

It’s an unusual move for a school librarian who once thought he didn’t like to read—not counting the manuals on Photoshop and four-wheel-drive cars that he would devour.

“When I started my career as a librarian, I secretly thought I didn’t like to read,” he says. “But then I found a lot of boys like to read nonfiction—and a light bulb went off and I realized I do love to read.”

McQueen wants to ensure that other kids have access to books, libraries, and librarians who can help them overcome any resistance to reading as well. Working with other school librarians in his district, McQueen has launched a Facebook page, mobilized walks, recruited colleagues to march in parades—and even borrowed $7,000 to buy stickers and a printer to cover his RV as a moving billboard. He parks daily at a local restaurant, where more than 16,000 cars catch his message to vote yes on 3A and 3B every day. (He’s done the math.)

McQueen plans to continue his campaign to save school libraries until Jefferson County’s November vote— and ensure children have a place where they can discover the joy of reading.

“If libraries don’t brag about the good things they do, then communities don’t think it’s a big deal to cut there,” he says. “So I am very feisty, and so are a handful of my colleagues.”

Friends of the Library
So far, the most inspiring group we’ve worked with is the Friends of the Library, which has been an established group for nearly 10 years. It lobbied county administrators and residents urging them to support a new library. Once the bond was passed, it hosted silent auctions, book sales, and family fun walks to raise funds for resources and scholarships. Partnering with them is critical to our success, because they’ve helped us learn about the local community’s interests and issues, including such topics as new schools and future construction projects.

Being a teen librarian, one of my main needs from the Friends is financial support for teen programs. Our large-scale programs, such as the annual AnimeCon and summer reading, are paid for by budgets set at the administration level, but small (though significant!) programs such as the book club and teen advisory board, as well as prizes for gaming tournaments and materials for craft programs, rely on the Friends for financial support. The Friends are supportive of teen services, but I still need to make a case for why the teen services department deserves their hard-earned funds. When the time comes to request funds, I plan to tell them about the conversations I’ve had with educators, parents, and mostly importantly, teens themselves, who have told me what they need and want from their new library.

Schools
One of our Friends is a volunteer in the public school system and used that relationship to set up a meeting for us with local school librarians. Though not all schools in our jurisdiction were represented, the topics we discussed at the meeting resonated with all of them; we talked about sharing materials, providing space for student-to-student tutoring, in-school visits by librarians, field trips to the library, and getting library cards into the hands of students.

One teen-specific topic we discussed was the last-minute rush to complete the school’s summer reading assignment, when we inevitably run out of assigned books. I advised the librarians to work with teachers to get the list to us as soon as it’s finalized, so come August, we’ll have the books that their kids need. We also discussed an idea to reduce the physical stress on students: lending textbooks to the library to shelve in our reference collection or in our teen center so that kids won’t have to lug those heavy tomes home every night. Sadly, this argument is an age-old one, and it’s usually rejected because of the likelihood that very expensive textbooks may be stolen. Even some colleges and universities refuse to lend textbooks to their students, for fear of never seeing the books again. But the conversation is one worth having, especially if the outcome will benefit teens.

Of course, these partnerships and conversations won’t end when we open our library. Educators have unique perspectives on teens’ needs, and we need to stay in touch with them to understand and respond to those needs.

Mary Kay Biagini, an associate professor at the University of Pittsburgh, presents her study to PA State Legislators.

media centers are in Philadelphia, says a new study that was presented to state legislators on August 22.

Only 128 schools are without school libraries—and 103 of them are in Philadelphia, says Mary Kay Biagini, an associate professor at the University of Pittsburgh, who presented her study to the State House of Representative’s Education Committee on School Libraries. The hearing was a result of an almost two-year process that began with the passage of House Resolution 987 in 2010, which called for a study of Pennsylvania’s school libraries.

The report also found that in schools with librarians, only 44 percent of them were employed full time. Biagini said 75 percent of elementary school librarians had fixed schedules and lacked the time to collaborate with classroom teachers.

In her testimony, Eileen Kern, president of the Pennsylvania School Librarian Association, spoke about the October release of researcher Keith Curry Lance’s Pennsylvania School Library Impact Study, which examines the gap between existing school library programs in Pennsylvania and what’s needed to help students develop 21st century skills.

Meanwhile, Sandra Zelno of the Education Law Center shared school library initiatives from other states and pointed out that while Pennsylvania doesn’t require librarians for public schools, it mandates them for private schools and prisons.

Matthew Hutcheson, superintendent of the Jeannette City School District, spoke about his anguish over budget cuts, which have make it difficult to provide leisure reading materials for students.

“When you remove a qualified librarian from the library, I believe that the library begins to cease to exist,” said Graig Henshaw, a librarian from the York City School District. He and Allison Burrell of the Southern Columbia School District testified that they’re now forced to work at multiple schools. Burrell said she was the “solo librarian” for the district and pointed out that there are at least 25 other school librarians in the state in a similar situation. She called for more assistance for those like herself who struggle to meet the needs of students spread across multiple schools. Henshaw stressed the difficulty school librarians face covering numerous subject areas with so many students.

Former students also had a chance to voice their opinions about the importance of library instruction and the impact teacher layoffs have had on them. Kristy Oren said her high school librarian introduced her to databases and helped her prepare for university-level research at Hamilton College, where she now attends. During Sean Gregory’s four years at Danville High School, he “noticed a subtle but steady decrease in that trademark ease of access” that he came to take for granted in the library when its staff was reduced and eliminated.

Legislators welcomed the various testimonies, with Representative Paul Clymer, who chairs the Education Committee, saying, “I was concerned to learn through the study that, on average, staffing, funding, access, and resources are inadequate for achieving optimal benefit from these specialized educators.”

“This study clearly illustrates that we need to look more closely at this issue and make sure that our school libraries are being used in a way that most benefits the students,” he added.

The study outlined six recommendations, which included restoring the state-level Division of School Library Media Services in the Commonwealth Libraries and appointing a director; creating an information literacy curriculum; having an annual assessment of school library programs; making the state Guidelines for Pennsylvania School Library Programs available to administrators; and providing guidance in the selection of adaptive technologies for the visual disabled and materials in languages other than English.

Representative Mark Longietti, who sponsored the resolution authorizing the study, said he and his colleagues would examine the recommendations to see what could be implemented.

Clymer added, “With the information contained in this study, we can now present a strong case when discussions begin for the 2013-14 state budget for the necessity of providing additional funding for this important educational component.”

Overall, 48 percent of respondents say their budgets have remain unchanged, which the survey says, constitutes a cut if inflation is factored in. Over the course of three years, 38 percent of school librarians reported they had less money, 32 percent said they had more, and 30 percent said their budgets remained unchanged since 2009, says “School Libraries in 2012,” which surveyed 1,000 school librarians from April to May 2012.

But, the report says, comments by respondents show the “real hardship these bald statistics hide,” with one librarian stating, “In 8 years the budget has gone from £3,500 to £750 ($5,500 to $1,178). Last year I was allocated £500 ($785) but argued that it just could not be done and I had already spent more than that in the first month! I eventually received £800 ($1,256) but have had to be very creative about where and on what the money is spent. I’m holding it together but it is a struggle.”

The comments also gave a sense of how grim the situation in U.K. school libraries has become. “I am leaving after 26 years,” reports another librarian. “I doubt if I shall be replaced by a qualified librarian in the Main School Library.” And another stating, “I have too little paid time, to do too much work, with too little resources, especially money.”

While the report states that research in the U.S., Canada, and Australia show that effective school libraries managed by qualified librarians help boost student achievement on standardized tests, budget cuts are a serious obstacle to school libraries achieving these goals.

“As a general rule the larger schools have the larger budgets, but one school surveyed with more than 2,000 pupils only has £2 ($3.15) per pupil to spend, and one academy of more than 1,500 pupils only spends 31p (49 cents) per pupil on library budget, while another spends 62p (97 cents),” the report says. Booktrust, a U.K. lliteracy charity, recommends that secondary schools spend £14 ($22) per pupil on books.

“The results of this survey seem to indicate that there is less and less of a high quality service being provided for our students,” the report concludes. “Without the skills and pleasures that reading and researching can give us we will have a cohort of students lacking essential life and work skills.”

As a result, the U.K. School Library Association recommends that the government support trained school librarians in secondary schools as a “first step towards trained librarians in all schools” and the exploration of “co-location and facility sharing options” between public and school libraries.

“The results of this survey seem to indicate that there is less and less of a high quality service being provided for our students,” says Tricia Adams, director of the School Library Association. “Without the skills and pleasures that reading and researching can give us, we will have a cohort of students lacking even more of the life and work skills that are appropriate for today’s 21st century world of work.”

On a positive note, some respondents said they were being valued as a major contributor to the success in their schools.

“The [school library] acts as the hub of the school for learning activities,” wrote one librarian. “It is a valuable and valued space both by students and teaching colleagues alike.”

Another hitch? The deadline for the school literacy grants is August 10 at 4:30 p.m. EST, which doesn’t give applicants much time to prepare and fill out the lengthy online form.

The American Library Association says it’s grateful that the U.S. Congress-with Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) taking the lead-passed an appropriations bill in December, which created the Innovative Approaches to Literacy Program and made $28.6 million in federal funds available for programs that “improve the quality of elementary and secondary education at the state and local levels and help all students meet challenging state academic content standards and student achievement standards.” The bill specifically states that half of the money must go toward school libraries and the other half toward literacy initiatives such as Reading is Fundamental or Reach Out and Read.

But what took the DOE so long to make the grants available, especially since they were expected in late spring, while schools were still in session? Phone calls and emails to DOE officials in charge of the program went unanswered.

“The American Library Association is disappointed that it took the U.S. Department of Education many months to release this grant application,” says Jeff Kratz, assistant director of ALA’s Office of Government Relations, adding that ALA is still grateful for the federal school library funds, which in effect replaces the Improving Literacy Through School Libraries grants that the DOE zeroed out in May 2011. That program was created in 2001 as the only federal program specifically geared toward providing funds for school libraries-and also was spearheaded by Reed.

Both programs distribute competitive grants to help students in low-income school districts have access to up-to-date school library materials. The Innovative Approaches program is specifically designed to support innovative literacy programs for young children, increase student achievement by using school libraries, and motivate older children to read. According to the DOE, the grants are to be used to “develop and improve literacy skills for children and students from birth through 12th grade within the attendance boundaries of high-need local educational agencies.”

Local education agencies must apply for the grants on behalf of school libraries and can use the money to support school libraries and purchase materials. The DOE has emphasized the need for school libraries when it announced the program, saying, “Many schools and districts across the Nation do not have school libraries that deliver high-quality literacy programming to children and their families. Additionally, many schools do not have qualified library media specialists and library facilities. Where facilities do exist, they are often under-resourced and lack adequate books and other materials. In many communities, high-need children and students have limited access to appropriate age- and grade-level reading material in their homes.”

ALA says it “encourages school librarians to apply for the program grants,” which will amount to about 30 grants in the $150,000 to $750,000 range.

Applicants must register with Grants.gov in order to apply, and the DOE says registration may take five or more business days to complete. “We strongly recommend that you do not wait until the last day to submit your application,” reads the DOE website, explaining that Grants.gov will put a date and time stamp on all applications and then process them after they’re fully uploaded. The time it takes to upload an application will “vary depending on a number of factors, including the size of the application and the speed of your Internet connection, and the time it takes Grants.gov to process the application will vary as well.” If Grants.gov rejects an application, applicants must resubmit successfully before the August 10, 4:30:00 p.m. deadline.

By law, half of the $28.6 million appropriated under Innovative Approaches to Literacy must be allocated to a competitive grant program for underserved school libraries, and the remaining money will be allocated to competitive grants for national nonprofit organizations that work to improve childhood literacy. Funding is expected to be distributed no later than September 2012.

To get tips on how to apply for the literacy grant program, visit the ALA Innovative Approaches to Literacy application guide webpage.

Students at Elmsdale District create a school-wide art project.

“It’s brutal,” says Chignecto-Central Regional School Board (CCRSB) superintendent Gary Clarke, who is still working with school board members and the union to determine how many of the 38.1 full-time school librarians and their support staff will be let go.

The library cuts were worse when the board proposed them in March, but the provincial government stepped in and asked them to reconsider. As a result, Clarke says, the board last week agreed to keep 16.9 library positions, which will be spread out among grades 7 to 12 in the district’s junior and senior high schools. Elementary schools won’t have any school librarians or library staffers.

The Canadian Library Association (CLA) says its “disturbed” by plans to cut the school librarians, explaining that by extension “hundreds of students in the region will no longer have access to qualified staff in their school libraries.” The organization, however, has yet to respond to having some of those jobs recently restored.

“Having a school library is not enough. The libraries need to be staffed by qualified teacher-librarians and technicians, who bring a dedicated skill set to coordinate and supplement the work of teachers,” said CLA President Karen Adams in a statement.

The CLA’s 2003 national study, “Achieving Information Literacy: Standards for School Library Programs in Canada,” says the library is the heart of learning and essential to student success. “Without trained and qualified library staff Nova Scotia will not be able to meet the acceptable standards outlined in this document,” says Linda Shantz-Keresztes, chair of the CLA School Library Issues Advisory Committee. “This should be a serious concern for Nova Scotia parents in advocating for the highest standards in their children’s education through effective school libraries.”

This is the second year the CCRSB has had to make cuts, but the first time it has affected the school librarycommunity, explains Clarke. The area serves 16 elementary schools, 12 middle and junior high schools, and 15 high schools across four counties in Canada, including East Hants, Colchester, Cumberland and Pictou, according to its website.

More than 125 positions in total are expected to be lost for the coming school year, including 55 teachers, says Clarke. By keeping some library positions, more teachers and support staff jobs were let go, as well as plans for major maintenance projects shelved, he adds.

“Our board is trying to find the right balance,” says Clarke (right). “So it’s a situation where you’re picking apart the great programs you have, and library services is one of them. And we’re really disappointed with that.”

Just like in the U.S., school libraries in Canada have experienced deep budget cuts over the years. A recent report by the Canadian research group, People for Education, says the number of elementary schools with teacher-librarians in Ontario dropped to 56 percent in 2010-11, down from 80 percent in 1997-98. It found that 66 percent of secondary schools had teacher-librarians in 2010-11, down from 78 percent in 2000-01. The report says of those elementary schools in Ontario that had teacher-librarians in 2010-11, 80 percent were part-time.

The results of SLJ’s first survey of public library spending habits on children’s and young adult services reveals a disturbing trend: only 30 percent of respondents say their library collaborates with local schools to coordinate book purchases

to support the curriculum—leaving 70 percent that don’t. It’s true that “coordinate book purchases” implies a tight relationship, and collaboration goes both ways, but passive collaboration appears to be the norm, at best, with only nine percent of public libraries surveyed saying they work directly with school librarians and teachers to purchase materials that help with homework assignments. A third of public librarians (34 percent) consider purchasing materials that support homework and the school curriculum, and when it comes to urban libraries, that number rises to 46 percent (see tables 1–3).

What would it mean, we wondered, if we could flip these numbers? Wouldn’t it make our kids stronger, and perhaps make both school and public libraries better?

SLJ has long identified school and public librarians as partners that offer children the library services they need to fuel their imaginations and support their development. Over the years, we’ve covered both arenas, and some of the many examples of collaboration across the country indicate that many of you also recognize the need for this partnership. Given the serious budget crunch all libraries face, there’s no better time than now to join forces to deliver the best services we can. SLJ is committed to helping you reach that goal by beefing up our coverage of successful joint efforts. We’ll also examine the main barriers to collaboration and share helpful tips that each side can offer the other. (See “We Need Tag-Team Librarianship“.)

Position of power

Walk into any of the more than 9,000 public libraries across the United States and you’re sure to find a focus on services to kids and teens. Even if there’s no physical space carved out, you’ll likely encounter dedicated collections and programs aimed at creating readers, school readiness, homework help, and so much more.

You are also likely to discover a person heading up kids’ programming, as 67 percent of all public librarians surveyed say their libraries have dedicated personnel solely working in kids’ or YA services. The average number of children’s/YA personnel on staff is 3.4 overall, ranging from 4.8 in urban libraries to 1.8 in rural libraries (see table 8).

Those professionals don’t just design programs; they also control the purse strings. A full 87 percent of survey respondents have the authority to select or purchase library materials for kids and teens (see table 7). Taken together, that big purse totals about $301 million annually.

The budgets

The majority, or 60 percent, of small or rural libraries combine their children’s and YA materials budget and plan to spend an average of $22,900 this fiscal year. How will that money be split? Respondents estimate that 64 percent will go toward children’s materials and 36 percent toward YA. They also expect an overall net budget decrease of -0.6 percent in the next fiscal year.

Our survey estimates that libraries nationwide spend an average of $30,800 on their children’s services and $13,500 on their YA services, representing a 69 percent/31 percent split (see table 4). The split levels out a bit more in urban libraries to 56 percent for children’s and 44 percent for young adult. Overall, libraries have a total $301 million budget for children’s and YA materials in the current fiscal year.

The squeeze

As public librarians continue to grapple with dipping budgets and rising patron demand, they also predict an additional one percent cut to their children’s and YA materials budgets next year. Urban libraries anticipate the largest hit, with a four percent cut to their children’s budget and three percent for YA.

This forecast conflicts with an expected increase in circulation of children’s and YA materials next year (see table 6), with 69 percent of urban libraries anticipating a hike in the number of children’s books checked out and 63 percent expecting a boost in the number of YA books in circulation. The mean combined children’s and YA circulation for all public libraries last year was 111,000 and the median was 29,000.

Libraries that expect a drop in their kids’ and YA book circulation explain that it’s likely due to transient populations, as well as shrinking budgets and a market flooded with electronic devices. One librarian from Kansas blamed it on “more reliance on media, which can sometimes translate to library usage of alternative formats, but not always (video games, Internet or satellite or cable TV, mobile apps).”

Books and fiction dominate spending

We may live in an e-era, but when it comes to kids and teens in public libraries books still reign, with other materials making some headway but still trailing behind. In fact, books account for 74 percent of children’s/YA materials budgets, followed by 18 percent spent on AV, four percent on reference, and three percent on ebooks (see table 5). Rural libraries, not surprisingly, spend a smaller share on AV and ebooks, with the bulk going toward books.

Two-thirds of library book budgets (69 percent) are spent on fiction titles for children and young adults. Almost two-thirds of children’s funds are allocated toward picture books and chapter books (see tables 9 and 10). Graphic novels are slightly more prevalent in urban areas than in rural ones.

Books and reading also dominate library programs, with most offering storyhours and seasonal reading programs geared toward children and teens. Rural libraries, however, often lack the staff to do it as much. The top attended programs include storyhours/read-alongs, summer/winter reading programs, outreach into the community, gaming nights and special events, and author visits. Book discussion groups are also popular, but are more likely found in suburban libraries.

Collection trends

When it comes to buying, it’s almost evenly split between centralized purchases versus those made at the branch-level. Suburban libraries are more likely to do their own selecting.

Graphic novels, ebooks, and children’s nonfiction rank as the top three formats that librarians strive to add to their collections. Rural libraries are in favor of graphic novels, children’s nonfiction, and YA nonfiction, while their urban counterparts emphasize ebooks, graphic novels, and e-audio/audiobooks, along with foreign-language materials and those with diverse characters.

More than a third of libraries expect an increase in children’s media spending from last year, with only modest increases for YA books and graphic novels. More than half say they don’t plan to buy DVDs or music CDs for young adults.

Some ebooks, few devices

Turning to digital books, 76 percent of suburban and urban libraries offer children’s and YA ebooks, while overall 59 percent of public libraries now offer them (see table 11). (For context, 79 percent of our nation’s public libraries carry ebooks, according to our sister publication, Library Journal’s “2011 Budget and Circulation Survey.”) Naturally, interest in ebooks is growing, but efforts are hampered by the limited offerings of big publishers. The main digital book suppliers are OverDrive and TumbleBooks. Two-thirds of libraries that don’t carry ebooks say they plan to do so or will consider doing so in the next year.

Unfortunately, there’s been a slow delivery of ereaders to younger patrons, with only 16 percent of public libraries saying they offer the devices to children or teens. Of the libraries that have ereaders or tablets, a quarter of them restrict their usage to inside the library. A full 55 percent of libraries that carry ereaders tend to have multiple brands in stock. Nearly two-thirds (69 percent) of all libraries with ereaders for children/teens offer a Nook, half (52 percent) carry the Kindle, and about a quarter have iPads (most often in suburban settings). The future doesn’t look bright for ebook readers either. Only a measly three percent of libraries plan to add the devices for children or teens in the next 12 months.

Top innovations

Savvy staffers, soft furniture, and a dedicated separate space were the three top answers given by respondents when asked to name the best investment their library had made to enhance its service to children and young adults.

Cheap ways to attract kids include buying a large chess set, giving the walls a fresh lick of paint, and adding new comfy seats. “More comfortable seating in both areas” had an important impact, noted one respondent. “Patrons now stay longer and browse more.”

Carving out a separate space for teens and younger kids was cited as invaluable: “For years, the teens have had to gravitate between the adult and children’s areas for services other than selecting materials. Now, they finally have a space of their own.” Although expensive, the best return on investment is to hire staff strictly devoted to serving kids and teens.

Respondents noted that innovative programs, such as a speaker series on important issues like online safety and depression, as well as the creation of a teen blog and digital newsletters, were also crucial to drawing in teens. (A mere 17 percent of libraries say they have a separate digital newsletter for children or teens, while a third include a children’s or teen section in their general library newsletter.)

Regional differences were telling. The top three investments rural libraries sought to entice teens included an updated or expanded collection, more programming, and letting kids check out video games. Suburban libraries satisfied their needs with additional shelves and new furniture in their children’s and teen areas, while urban libraries opted to carve out new teen spaces, hire additional new staff, and renovate their teen and children’s areas.

Technology showed up further down the list, with new AWE Early Literacy Stations dominating the responses. Other tech additions included touch screens for kids’ computers. Overall, the survey found that rural libraries devoted about five public-access computers to kids and teens, while suburban and urban libraries assigned about 10 and 15 to kids, respectively. About 80 percent of public access computers in children’s/YA areas are equipped with an Internet connection.

Indeed, many public library programs have reached out to nearby schools to make critical connections. Those partnerships included middle school booktalks, outreach to school groups, shuttle buses between schools and libraries, and age-appropriate book clubs.

The most encouraging of all responses point to how school and public libraries can work hand-in-hand to deliver the mutual mission to serve kids. “We have begun partnering with the high school library,” notes one respondent. “Library staff regularly take books to the high school for students and teachers. The public library has given cards to all students that want one. The library director presented how-to workshops for all students in using the public library’s remote access collections of ebooks, downloadable audio, language learning, homework help, and reference materials.”

Now that’s something we should all strive to achieve.

“The future is here,” William Gibson once quipped. “It’s just not evenly distributed.” Gibson, the sci-fi writer who coined the term “cyberspace” back in 1982, could easily have been describing the state of technology in today’s K–12 classrooms. Sure, there are lots of stories about schools adopting the very latest digital devices, such as Maine’s Auburn School District giving iPads to each of its more than 250 kindergarteners or Burlington High, outside of Boston, ditching traditional textbooks and equipping every kid with the Apple tablets. But stories like these don’t represent what’s happening in most of our nation’s schools. In fact, the distribution of technology in our classrooms remains radically uneven. It differs by school and grade level. It differs by region. It differs in the make, model, and operating system of various computers. It differs in usage.

The latest official statistics on the availability of technology in public schools come from a 2008 study by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), the federal agency that’s responsible for collecting and analyzing education-related data. Looking back at the last four years of technology innovation, much has changed, including the revolutionary release of the very first iPhone in July 2008 and the iPad less than two years later. Even so, some of NCES’s numbers, though dated, seem quite positive: 100 percent of public schools had one or more instructional computers hooked up to the Internet, and 58 percent had carts with laptops.

Although these statistics make it sound as though computers were ubiquitous in schools half a decade ago, scratching the surface reveals a less positive picture. In 2008, the ratio of students to Internet-connected computers was three-to-one. Eighty-five percent of those machines were more than a year old, and less than 40 percent of schools reported wireless network access for the whole building. Since then, it’s easy to imagine that things have vastly improved—with better computers, better computer-to-student ratios, and better Internet access. And in some cases, that’s true.

But better doesn’t necessarily mean ideal. Take, for example, the West Denver Preparatory Schools (WDP), a public charter school network in Denver, CO. Roughly 90 percent of WDP’s kids are minority students—mostly Latino—and about the same number are eligible for free or reduced-priced meals. WDP offers Dell netbooks—one for approximately every four students—which can be checked out by teachers to write essays and conduct online research, computer-based tutoring, and keyboarding classes. But Dan Carroll, the school’s director of data and technology, says the devices have been “very hard to maintain” and admits that WDP’s four campuses still “use a ton of paper.” Also, students don’t typically take the netbooks off campus, since many of their homes lack Internet access.

Make way for mobiles

Schools were once seen as the place that offered kids better (if not the only) access to computers and the Internet. But with the rise of personal and now mobile computing and the spread of high-speed Internet connections, that’s changed. Today, three-quarters of American households have computers and 68 percent have broadband Internet connections, according to a 2011 report from the Department of Commerce’s Economics & Statistics Administration. There are still widespread disparities in access to technology depending on one’s community, ethnicity, and earnings, though. For instance, about 48 percent of low-income families have a home computer compared with 91 percent of higher-income families, according to a recent report by Common Sense Media, an independent group that advocates for kids.

But even students who don’t have home computers or Internet access are increasingly likely to own a cell phone. “Teens, Smartphones, & Texting,” a March 2012 study by the Pew Internet & American Life Project, has found that 77 percent of young adults ages 12 to 17 own a cell phone, and 31 percent of those ages 14 to 17 have a smartphone. Even among the youngest students, cell phones are increasingly common, with a study of Massachusetts students (which may or may not be representative of the country as a whole) finding that 20 percent of third graders and 39 percent of fifth graders had cell phones.

Despite the pervasiveness of these devices, convincing schools to allow kids to use them on campus has been an uphill battle. But a growing number of schools, such as New Jersey’s New Milford High School (NMHS), let students use their phones, recognizing that even the simplest such gadget can be a tool for communication, calculation, photography, videography, and calculations. As NMHS’s principal, Eric Sheninger, argues, “We live in a world where these devices are a huge part of our students’ lives. Schools should position themselves to not only take advantage of this resource as budgets are tight, but also teach students about the powerful tool they possess.”

There aren’t any official numbers on how many schools have sanctioned kids bringing their own cell phones and other digital devices to class, but “BYOD” (Bring Your Own Device) is just one choice in a flood of new technology options that schools are facing. Should kids be encouraged to bring devices from home or should schools be required to provide them, for instance? And which digital devices are most appropriate for learning—cell phones, laptops, ereaders, or tablets? These options make the issue of computers in the classroom far more complex, too. In no small part because of the rise of consumer technology, many students and teachers—historically not charged with making procurement decisions about school technology—may come to class with more exposure to and knowledge about technology than previous generations.

Of course, BYOD also means that parents—instead of schools—may end up footing the bill for computing devices in the classroom. That’s a concern to people like educator and author Gary Stager, who thinks that BYOD may be the “worst idea of the 21st century,” because it “enshrines inequality.”

“The only way to guarantee equitable educational experiences is for each student to have access to the same materials and learning opportunities,” he wrote on his blog, Stager-to-Go. “BYOD leaves this to chance with more affluent students continuing to have an unfair advantage over their classmates. This is particularly problematic in a society with growing economic disparity.”

Stager worries, in part, that by encouraging students to bring computers from home, institutions will offload the cost of buying technology on parents rather than insisting that the public school should shoulder it. As the demand for and cost of technology increases, it’s certainly a tempting option for many school districts.

After all, the costs of hardware, software, and networking can add up, and during budget crises—particularly when schools are cutting staff—the introduction, maintenance, and upgrade of technology can be a political challenge as well as a financial one. It’s difficult even if a school already has a strong technology infrastructure and a tech-friendly culture in place.

Philadelphia’s Science Leadership Academy (SLA) is a case in point. At this one-to-one laptop school, all 450-plus of its students receive a MacBook when they matriculate. According to Chris Lehmann, SLA’s principal, the school gets four years out of each machine (that is, they’re expected to last from the freshman through the senior year). “You really don’t want to give a senior’s old laptop to a ninth grader,” says Lehmann. “After four years of going to and from school, they are pretty much done.”

But in order to extend the life of these devices—to even get them to make it to the four-year mark—the school has created its own in-house tech shop, where students can learn to perform hardware and software support for their Apple laptops. Even keeping its maintenance costs low, SLA has to budget about $180,000 a year to pay for new laptops. And not only is the Philadelphia school district at large facing deep, deep budget cuts that make this price tag a stretch, but Apple recently announced that the affordable white MacBook—the kind of machine that SLA has long used—will be discontinued.

Hardware obsolescence is one of the things that schools have always had to consider when making tech-purchasing decisions. That is, how long can you anticipate a particular piece of hardware lasting—not just in terms of its continuing functionality, but in terms of its relevance. With the rapid pace of innovation we’re witnessing, this may be more of an issue than ever. But the problem isn’t simply that schools might buy devices that are quickly replaced by newer models with improved features. It’s that the flood of devices currently available (including netbooks, tablets, ereaders, and handhelds) and those that are “hotly anticipated” make the decision of which computer to buy incredibly complicated.

Just ask Rachel Wente-Chaney, chief information officer for the High Desert Education Service District in Redmond, OR. When her district launched a series of trials to determine which laptop to purchase for its classrooms, it discovered that some were too big. Some were too expensive. Too cumbersome to administer over the school network. Too slow to get students up and running in class. “Cost, size, speed” were “the issues we struggled with for years,” explains Wente-Chaney. “And I’ll add an additional one: hands-on time by the tech staff—between imaging and updating, it was a lot.”

Although her district eventually opted to go with Google Chromebooks (instead of Gateway tablets or Thinkpads), it found trade-offs. Chromebooks only support Web-based applications and rely on Internet connectivity to be fully functional. (It’s not just Chromebooks, of course, that suffer these limitations.) When making hardware decisions, schools must weigh the associated software and applications that are available. For example, are student data and projects interoperable—that is, can you easily move files from one type of computer to another (say, from a Windows-based operating system to an Apple-based one or from a mobile device to a laptop)? These types of questions are particularly important if schools house a number of different kinds of devices.

Schools also need to consider the impact of potentially hundreds of devices on their WiFi networks. After all, even if institutions have broadband access (the FCC has a nifty map where you can see the Internet speeds of our nation’s schools, it doesn’t mean that the WiFi is sufficient, particularly if students are streaming video or conducting other tasks that consume a lot of bandwidth.

Schools must also ask if students will be able to access their schoolwork from home—whether kids have the hardware, software, and network access to take advantage of digital course materials and online activities.

To paraphrase Gibson, the distribution of all those things remains uneven. Even if on the surface, statistics make it appear as though every school has computers and every student has a cell phone, the reality is far more complex—in terms of adoption and in terms of usage. Some schools have fully embraced a technological future, equipping students with their own digital devices and supporting teachers with the necessary professional development. Some schools have also changed the way that learning happens, now that students have easier access to information and expertise. But in many places, technology has changed very little about classroom learning—work is just done with a keyboard rather than with pen and paper. Too frequently, computer access remains “special” rather than routine. In many schools, computers are still only found in labs where they’re used most often for exams. And finally, it’s often the case that technology at school hasn’t kept pace with technology at home, especially when it comes to the rise in mobile computing.