I-pad, not I-panacea
The following entry was written in the Fall of 2013; I neglected to publish it then. Now, 10 years on, I thought I would publish it.
I have been playing with my Ipad with all the joy Lt. Shann Childson musters in the face of a shackled wookie. He's the Imperial officer who confronts Han, Luke and Chewbacca as they enter a Death Star prison command center. "Where are you taking this...thing?" he drolls. As I launch-and-close, launch-and-close applications, I can't help but feel my books leering. Actual books made of actual paper, penned and read--damaged in fact--by none other than yours truly. The books' disdain is palpable.
In full disclosure: I prefer the technology of eras by-gone. I am a fountain pen man, at first an Esterbrook fan, more recently a proud owner of my grandfather's Parker big-red. I prefer Watermann's washable-blue to any cartridged ink, and I would trade a toner cartridge for typewriter ribbon on any given Tuesday. Any wrist bearing a bracelet made of removed typewriter keys is a hand worth cleaving off. So I was born skeptical of the new. But I'm not entirely a luddite, either. I know there's a time for a new pen tip, a software update, a better and improved stapler.
Does reading on an Ipad make sense? The positive: It allows you to zoom in on text, pictures, graphics. You can conduct word searches easily, can launch integrated definitions, related contextual materials. Font changes can help the visually challenged. Some ebooks come with audio in multi-variable speed, in various languages to boot. It simulates movement--graphic organizers, video, line drawings. And of course the Ipad provides many supportive studying technologies--email, internet, video, and all the apps humanity can muster.
The downside: You cannot write on pages easily. Annotation supports memory and a deeper reading of texts; the Ipad was made for superficial skimming. Physically, the Ipad's an unweildly script, isn't as durable or consumable as paper. The Ipad robs the reader of spacial and tactile memory when reading. While expensive and heavier, it's also less environmentally friendly than books. When the power is out, and the battery is dead, learning stops. For readers, it's more physically and mentally demanding. The direct reflective light strains the eyes, isn't well suited for long reading periods; the reflected light of the printed page is softer and easier on our eyes. Because it's a multi-tasking device, it likewise distracts in multiple ways. And then video. It has the distraction of videos and all the apps humanity can muster.
I am of course biased. I do believe that the Ipad will not easily replace books in an English classroom setting, because it can't replicate what books do and do well. Wherever students have their own copy of the text--the poem, the play, the novel or story--the Ipad can't replicate a literary experience. At New Trier's English Department, our students have been technologically one-to-one for over a century. Even today, the Ipad doesn't advantage English students as it might, for example, in a Math, Science, or Geography course. Certainly, the Ipad and it's bosom buddy ebook should replace some traditional texts. (Speilvogel's 4-level World History textbook--I'm looking in your direction!)
While I am glad for students with access to an interactive work-management device, that's all the Ipad is. A tool. Like any tool, it does what it does well. What it doesn't do, it doesn't do. And so for the time being, the Ipad will not replace my books. And for your sake, I hope it doesn't replace all of yours too.
“Who can see the barely perceptible line between the man who can not read at all and the man who does not read at all? The literate who can, but does not, read, and the illiterate who neither does nor can?”