First let's examine what resources are being given to our libraries. The figures represented in the pie charts below are compiled from the National Center for Education Statistics State Profiles, and transmogrified into a more readily conceptualizable form -- the visual-spatial. The pie pieces, and the percentages contained therein, represent Oklahoma's statistic as a percentage of the national average, to compare us to how other states treat their libraries. When you're comparing two states, as with all things, its important to consider the things being scrutinized in context. That's where the red and green color coding comes in. Though for all but one of the statistics, we lag well behind the national average, in 2005, when these numbers were collected, we only had 51% of the population and 48% of the GDP of the average state. These things considered, these figures are considered adequate if they exceed half of the national average, and inadequate if they don't, unless the figure already takes population or wealth into account.
I'm afraid the sad conclusion I'm left with, examining the above numbers closely, is that we woefully neglect to provide our libraries with the resources they need to turn the tide against illiteracy and undereducation. It seems that most of the resources are undersupplied. But there are a few green rings up there, what about those, is there a silver lining? Well, three of those statistics -- total number of libraries, number of internet terminals, and total number of librarians -- can be explained away by the fact the Oklahoma has a low population density. Because of our relatively rural population, we have to have more libraries that usually serve smaller populations, while still being accessible, to put it simply. In other words, our land area is larger than most states, so we need more libraries, and thus more librarians and computer terminals. Though its easy to be disheartened by our poor provisioning of our libraries, there are glimmers to be seen in the data, but only in the part of it that speaks to how our librarians and our people make the most of those scant resources.
Our librarians are giving much more time back to their communities than we'd expect with the resources they've been given. Our children are checking out more books and are more engaged in reading programs than those of the national average. And our people are using digital materials well above the national level. It's true that we have circulation and visitation below the national average, but only barely below: in the case of library visits, negligibly below. And consider that in light of our literacy problems and our rural, low density demographic character. We're averaging almost 7 books checked out per person per year. When you consider the large number of illiterate individuals who are nonetheless considered in that statistic, it looks as though we're doing our best to engage the literary world, the world of knowledge. Let's look at our circulation numbers in greater detail, to see this evidenced.
The above map is made directly from circulation per capita figures taken from the Oklahoma Department of Libraries Annual Report Data (the latest edition is from 2013). Very thorough data exists for library system and branch collections, finances, and performance, though the user interface makes it difficult, or at least not very intuitive, to access the information you desire. I hope the per capita circulation figures supplied in the 2013 report aren't being used to make policy decisions because they misrepresent Oklahoma's actual reading proclivities. They essentially tell a different story from the more accurate depiction of book circulation in the state. When I first made the above map from the data, things began to catch my eye that made me increasingly suspicious of the validity of the figures. For example, Cleveland, Oklahoma, and Tulsa counties are considered only moderate readers in the above map. They are our most educated, wealthy, and densely populated counties. Also, the range of the figures is suspicious, in one county supposedly only 0.66 books per resident per year are being read, while in another county, 42 books per person per year are read. Both of these figures are outlandish.
Well, when you look into the data, it seems that the population figures they were using represent the population of the town in possession of the library. While this might make sense in a densely populated state, in Oklahoma, a relatively rural state, many of the library's patrons are going to live in the surrounding county, well outside of the town and ignored by the population figure represented here. In many counties in Oklahoma, the county seat's population is much lower than that of the surrounding county itself. Another aspect of low density living situations is that for many residents of Oklahoma, those living along the border that is, the closest library is actually in another state. This is true for many people living near Liberal, Kansas, or Siloam Springs and Fort Smith, Arkansas.
If the circulation per capita figure, however, combines the collections data for all the libraries in each county, and considers the population of the county as a whole, the map starts to better jive with expectations, as is represented below. What should be pointed out, and applauded, is what seemed anomalous in the first map -- that those counties in south-central Oklahoma read a lot -- more than the more urban and supposedly more educated and sophisticated residents of Tulsa, Oklahoma City, Norman, and Edmond. Notice also the disappearance of those extreme outliers.
The picture for Oklahoma, as regards reading, shows both causes for concern and for admiration. While in many counties the average circulation is less than 2 books per person per year, many counties are filled with avid readers, and that's something to appreciate. That being said, our education system, already in shambles even before being financially slaughtered by the administration of governor Mary Fallin, under whose direction the state of Oklahoma exceeds every other state in the union in budget cuts to education since the 2008 recession, is disgracefully underfunded, understaffed, and under-respected.
Well, when you look into the data, it seems that the population figures they were using represent the population of the town in possession of the library. While this might make sense in a densely populated state, in Oklahoma, a relatively rural state, many of the library's patrons are going to live in the surrounding county, well outside of the town and ignored by the population figure represented here. In many counties in Oklahoma, the county seat's population is much lower than that of the surrounding county itself. Another aspect of low density living situations is that for many residents of Oklahoma, those living along the border that is, the closest library is actually in another state. This is true for many people living near Liberal, Kansas, or Siloam Springs and Fort Smith, Arkansas.
If the circulation per capita figure, however, combines the collections data for all the libraries in each county, and considers the population of the county as a whole, the map starts to better jive with expectations, as is represented below. What should be pointed out, and applauded, is what seemed anomalous in the first map -- that those counties in south-central Oklahoma read a lot -- more than the more urban and supposedly more educated and sophisticated residents of Tulsa, Oklahoma City, Norman, and Edmond. Notice also the disappearance of those extreme outliers.
The picture for Oklahoma, as regards reading, shows both causes for concern and for admiration. While in many counties the average circulation is less than 2 books per person per year, many counties are filled with avid readers, and that's something to appreciate. That being said, our education system, already in shambles even before being financially slaughtered by the administration of governor Mary Fallin, under whose direction the state of Oklahoma exceeds every other state in the union in budget cuts to education since the 2008 recession, is disgracefully underfunded, understaffed, and under-respected.