It’s called “school reform” with a focus on “student achievement,” but I shudder to think where we have come as a nation that many public schools don’t have a library, and won’t ever get one unless someone can beg a grant from a foundation or corporation.

I saw this firsthand at the middle school/high school where I taught English in New York’s South Bronx. Touting itself as a model of school reform, this self-proclaimed “institute” was presented as a showcase of high standards and a passion for learning. Though set in the congressional district with the lowest per-capita income in the nation, the school was—the administration incessantly assured parents—the fast track to success.

The problem was, for its 350 students this school had little more than classrooms on the third floor of a former elementary school set between a hospital and a jail.

Dressed in uniforms resembling the old Catholic school outfit, the students looked the part of “scholars,” as the administration referred to them. But from what I could see, the kids really were just bit players in a tragedy entitled, “They Stole the American Public School Experience from Us and Called It Reform.”

A public school is supposed to have a music program. We only had a boom box and a bunch of drums and African gourds. A public school is supposed to have art. We had none. A public school is supposed to have a library. We didn’t.

We did, however, have a librarian. Ms. Page had been “thrust” upon our school when, after decades as the librarian in a large public high school, she was pushed out as it closed to make way for several new, smaller, reform-oriented “academies,” “institutes,” and “centers.” As a librarian without a library, she prepared a library-oriented bulletin board and was used as an administration utility player.

Sports? They were limited to baseball in a nearby park and basketball in the gym we shared with another school in the building. That is, until a teacher got a grant for an archery program that enabled a dozen ninth graders to spread out in the cafeteria after school to shoot at targets.

The power of grants became especially clear when the principal of the other small school in our building secured funding for a library. A hard-charging young fellow who knew his way around charities and foundations, he generated $500,000 a year from outside sources. He outdid himself with his school’s library.

Set on the second floor behind glass windows, it was a brand-new, high-tech oasis. It was gorgeous. Stack after stack of books, a line of brand-new computers. Carpet. Tables. Comfortable chairs.

Not that our students were permitted to use it while I taught there. I nonetheless led my eighth graders through for a tour, and they were dumbstruck. Even the most outrageous of them walked gently and touched nothing, knowing that this was a very special place.

Indeed it was. A school without its own library is now all too common. A crowd-sourced Google map, “A Nation Without School Libraries,” is dense with pins noting hundreds of schools—and school districts—without libraries or librarians.

Today, so much of what Americans have long taken for granted as the typical public-school experience is being eliminated—especially in schools opened under the banner of “school reform” and “student achievement.” Each year, as budgets shrink and test scores guide decisions, more and more school districts nationwide trim the “fat,” programs that enrich students’ lives culturally and help them grow and develop as people, but aren’t specifically academic. As a result, basics—even a school library—have become “extras” that are not taxpayer supported.

Once, students held bake sales and car washes to fund some activities. Now, principals, teachers, and parents have been forced to assume that role on a grand scale to pay for books, athletic equipment, after-school activities. Instead of cupcakes and soapsuds, they use today’s equivalent of the hat in hand—the grant application—to beg foundations and corporations to underwrite what, until recently, most Americans would have considered the birthright of students in our public schools.

John Owens is a former teacher and author of Confessions of a Bad Teacher, published by Sourcebooks.

We think of today’s youth as constantly connected. Smartphones serve as extra appendages, and the coolness factor goes up for whoever discovers the latest mobile app first.

More than ever, education is contingent upon Internet access. No problem, because today’s teens are digital natives, right? Wrong. Even if they are, not all have Internet access at home. How are teens who rely on library services being affected by public library budget cuts?

Recent data shows that students are usually compiling bibliographies, outlining papers, and synthesizing research between 8 and 10 p.m. during the school week. In other words, students tend to work when most libraries are closed.

How do they compensate? According to a recent Wall Street Journal article, many students are using free WiFi at McDonald’s restaurants to do schoolwork. There are almost as many WiFi access points in McDonald’s (12,000) as there are in public libraries (15,000) in the United States.

This trend is potentially detrimental to students. Obviously, if they have questions, a librarian isn’t available to help. We won’t even discuss the other negative impacts of spending hours at a fast food restaurant.

Defining the gap

We work as information literacy librarians and content developers for EasyBib, an online citation and research tool, and its new platform, ResearchReady. We estimate that our user base represents about 50 percent of the U.S. student population. Our research confirms what news outlets already report: There is a gap between when students need libraries and when libraries are open.

According to a 2010 Pew Internet study, one third of American households with an annual income under $30,000 did not have an Internet broadband connection at home. At the same time, many public libraries facing massive budget cuts reduced their hours when neighborhoods needed them most. Particularly in urban areas, community needs have shifted dramatically since the economic downturn, and more people rely on library resources. Additionally, many rural libraries are often closed before students even get out of school.

The Arkoma Public Library in rural Oklahoma, for example, was the source of over 1,500 visits to EasyBib during the 2011–2012 school year. But the library often closes between the hours of 5 and 7 p.m. By contrast, Seattle Public Library patrons made approximately 1,000 visits to EasyBib during the 2011–2012 school year. During the week of June 10–16, when EasyBib usage was at its peak there, Seattle libraries were in operation until 8 p.m.—pretty decent in terms of open hours. Nonetheless, neither setting could help students during their prime research hours of 8 to 10 p.m.

What are the trade-offs?

One could argue that this issue could be resolved by keeping the library open later. Given the costs of running a library, this is easier said than done. Keeping the lights on, paying staff, and running computers for two more hours every day adds up quickly—but it might be worth it to serve this key constituency better. Libraries face the difficult choice of weighing the costs against the benefits of staying open to serve a small but critical group of patrons. What are the trade-offs?

Finding a way to keep library doors open isn’t always easy. We urge local governments, libraries, and communities to consider all students and their research needs when proposing budgets and closing hours.

Emily Gover and Caity Selleck are information literacy librarians and content developers for EasyBib and its new platform, ResearchReady. Emily received her MSIS from the University at Albany and is a former academic librarian at Berry College in Georgia. Caity received her MLIS from Queens College and has worked at the Queens Public Library and the New York Transit Museum.

Districts are using technology to innovate and change the ways students learn and teachers teach. For example, the Vancouver (WA) Public Schools have a roadmap for student learning that includes blended and online courses, Bring Your Own Device, 1:1 programs, and an increasing use of mobile devices by students, teachers, and administrators. We are not alone. Many districts are experimenting with similar initiatives, not to mention learning management systems and the increased use of digital resources in lieu of textbooks and library books.

Given this shift to mobile and personalized learning, teacher librarians must ante up for digital resources to meet the needs of students and teachers. As I look at the survey’s statistics on the use of ebooks and digital resources, I don’t see a widespread or sufficient commitment among school libraries. One of the highest levels of reported technology growth in the 2012 survey was the use of ebooks. Forty seven percent of respondents indicated usage with students and teachers, up from 31 percent in 2011. Additionally, 25 percent indicated that they planned to use ebooks in the next year. If those intentions translate to action, that would mean that in 2013, 72 percent of libraries would have and use ebooks.

But the willingness to play is not matched by a commitment to pay for these resources. When measuring ebooks as part of library collections, data reveals that digital titles remain more a novelty than a core resource. For those with ebooks in their libraries, the average number of titles owned was 265. And only 31 percent reported having reference or noncirculating ebooks in their collections. Many school library collections boast tens of thousands of print titles. This gap speaks for itself.

The survey also suggests that many libraries haven’t transitioned to online. A number of libraries fail to provide (or even provide access to) any digital information resources. Nine percent of school libraries indicated that they do not have a library website of any kind. Among those that do, one in five lacks links to electronic resources on that site. Despite an apparent two-fold increase from 2011, the number of teacher librarians who report using free Web-based resources in 2012 (78 percent), begs two questions: What were they using in 2011, and what are the others using? In many cases, it’s not a digital subscription: only 62 percent of teacher librarians report using digital subscriptions in 2012, up from 54 percent the previous year.

To use another poker analogy, school libraries have no choice but to be “all in” with ebooks, etexts, online databases, and digital resources. In my district and others, 1:1 programs now exist in which students are issued laptops or tablets, which they can use both at home and in school. In many cases, these initiatives include the use of learning management systems, online textbooks, and digital content that provides a wealth of information and content, often embedded in the courses themselves. For the first time, there’s no good reason for a print textbook. More ominously, there are also fewer reasons for a school library, especially one with only 265 ebooks. While we have strong libraries and teacher librarians throughout our district, our newest STEM magnet school opened last fall with no physical library and is currently without a teacher librarian.

Teacher librarians need to learn and master a new game. The knowledge and use of technology and digital resources must be ubiquitous, pervasive, effective, and thorough. The survey clearly demonstrates this is not happening. For every teacher librarian who uses a tablet computer, there are three who don’t. For every school librarian who uses Web 2.0 tools such as Edmodo, Diigo, and Pinterest, many colleagues do not. Aside from ebooks and subscription databases, most teacher librarians report that they play no role in purchasing or recommending purchase of technology for their schools.

Respondents listed several reasons why they haven’t embraced digital resources and educational technology in their libraries and schools—funding, training, and uncertainty. Vancouver has found ways to address these issues so that teacher librarians stay in the game, lead and support student learning, and align their school library programs with the strategic needs and direction of the district.

Funding. Everyone faces budgetary challenges. But teacher librarians have choices about where and how monies are spent. In Vancouver, our teacher librarians have begun several collaborative efforts to invest in ebooks, building on a longstanding district-wide suite of digital resources. There’s a conscious and coordinated effort to build and grow digital collections to support student learning. As iPads become more common, we are now seeking ways to leverage these tools to access ebooks and other online resources.

Training. Vancouver trains teacher librarians to be technology leaders in their schools. Now in its fifth year, this program has built valuable confidence and expertise so that teacher librarians are the first—rather than the last—to learn and adopt educational technologies. Teacher librarians have learned how to use Web 2.0 tools like Google Drive, Wallwisher, and Prezi to lead both building and district training efforts.

Uncertainty. As an early adopter of online resources and now ebooks, I understand the uncertainty associated with digital publishing. With competing platforms, vendors, and formats, there’s a chance of putting money on the table and being dealt a difficult hand. Despite that, I don’t think we have a choice. We’ve placed some bets on promising vendors knowing that our savvy populations require our collections to be mobile, digital, and relevant now, not next year.

As a longtime teacher librarian, I believe that we are perfectly poised to lead, teach, and support students and teachers in 21st-century schools. We have a small pile of chips in the form of information skills, systemic vision, and a longtime role as collaborators and educational leaders. But here’s the hand we’ve been dealt—our students, our teachers, and our schools are digital. And in many cases, our libraries, collections, and skills are not. The average age of survey respondents was 50 years old, meaning that like me, most of us knew libraries when the rules were different. The good news from the 2012 survey is that many teacher librarians are very much in the game. Now all us need to see that bet and raise it. Game on!

Mark Ray is the Vancouver (WA) Public Schools’ manager of instructional technology and library services and a former state teacher of the year.

The Glee crew may want to consider a more progressive approach to its librarian, because as it turns out, librarians are some of Glee’s biggest fans. From June 2011 to February 2012, more than 600 school librarians, teachers, students, and other school library supporters responded to an online poll called “We Want a Librarian on Glee” that asked fans whom they would cast in the role of McKinley High’s school librarian. The poll was posted on the Colorado Libraries’ blog by library consultant and Glee enthusiast Keith Curry Lance, and it asked respondents how often they would like to see the librarian character appear on the show, whom they would cast in the role, and what plotlines they’d like to see involving the librarian.

Most people said that they would like to see the librarian as a recurring character that appears in several episodes each season. The overwhelming majority of respondents also made it clear that they want the librarian stereotypes smashed. As one real-life librarian demanded, “Absolutely no stereotypes. We want the librarian to play an integral part of the learning in the school. No shushing. No bun. No whipping off the glasses and jumping on a motorcycle to show how hot you can be.” They want a hip, energetic, fully engaged professional—someone attractive but not sexualized. Such a fully developed and integrated character’s plotlines would involve musical research projects, advanced technology in the library, and, of course, plenty of singing and dancing if poll respondents get their way.

As for casting, the suggestions were all over the map—from Johnny Rotten of the Sex Pistols to RuPaul to Oprah. Tina Fey, who may not defy the glasses-wearing stereotype but would certainly liven up the stacks with humor, took the top spot with 35 votes. A close second with 30 votes was Parker Posey, who played the hip, young librarian-in-training in the 1995 film Party Girl. Other female favorites were Zooey Deschanel, Lady Gaga, Megan Mullally, Meryl Streep, Bette Midler, Whoopi Goldberg, and Ellen Degeneres. Dozens of other A-list actresses and singers such as Natalie Portman, Jennifer Aniston, Anne Hathaway, Christina Aguilera, and Jennifer Lopez each got several votes. The leading male vote-getter was Justin Timberlake with nine votes. Other top guys included George Clooney, Neil Patrick Harris, and established onscreen librarians Noah Wyle (The Librarian) and Anthony Stewart Head (Buffy the Vampire Slayer). Three respondents nominated Grammy Award–winning R&B artist Cee Lo Green, whose song “Forget You” was covered by Gwyneth Paltrow in Glee’s second season. Other, more eccentric, suggestions included Tom Waits, Pink, Meatloaf, Kid Rock, and Sarah Palin.

If thousands of Facebook fans can convince Saturday Night Live producers to cast Betty White on that show, then surely thousands of passionate school librarians can persuade an innovative, stereotype-defying show like Glee to make a risky choice by casting one of these talented performers as a modern-day librarian. It’s time to infiltrate popular culture to show the public what school librarians really do.