Does not come to discussions prepared. As a result, fails to support statements with evidence from texts and other research.
Few attempts to ask questions or build on ideas shared.
Frequently violates the “dos and don’ts of online communication.”
Limited participation in discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-led) with various partners.
Does not consistently come to discussions prepared. Limited preparation and inability to support statements with evidence from texts and other research reflects lack of preparation.
Limited attempts to ask questions, build on ideas shared, or invite quieter voices into the conversation.
Hesitant to respond to other perspectives and fails to summarize points or make connections.
Occasionally violates the “dos and don’ts of online communication.”
Participates in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-led) with diverse partners.
Comes to discussions prepared, having read and researched material. Draws on that preparation by referring to evidence from texts and other research on the topic.
Attempts to drive conversations forward by asking questions, building on ideas shared, and inviting quieter voices into the conversation.
Responds to diverse perspectives, summarizes points, and makes connections.
Respects the “dos and don’ts for online communication.”
Initiates and participates effectively in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-led) with diverse partners.
Comes to discussions prepared with a unique perspective, having read and researched material; explicitly draws on that preparation by referring to evidence from texts and other research on the topic.
Propels conversations by posing and responding to questions that relate to the current discussion. (Adds depth by providing a new, unique perspective to the discussion.)
Responds thoughtfully to diverse perspectives, summarizes points of agreement and disagreement, and makes new connections. Leans in and actively listens.
Makes eye contact, speaks loud enough to be heard, and body language is strong.
Respects the “dos and don’ts for online communication.”
Reflects surface level understanding of information.
Unable or unwilling to evaluate quality of information or draw conclusions about information found.
Does not try to solve problems or help others solve problems. Lets others do the work.
Does not actively seek answers to questions or attempt to find information. Does not seek out peers or ask teacher for guidance or support.
Attempts to dive below the surface when analyzing information but work lacks depth.
Struggles to evaluate the quality of information and does not draw insightful conclusions about information found.
Does not suggest or refine solutions, but is willing to try out solutions suggested by others.
Asks teachers or other students for answers but does not use online tools, like Google and YouTube, to attempt to answer questions or find information.
Demonstrates a solid understanding of the information.
Evaluates the quality of information and makes inferences/draws conclusions.
Refines solutions suggested by others.
Attempts to use online tools, like Google and YouTube, to seek answers and find information.
Demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of the information.
Effectively evaluates the quality of information and makes inferences/draws conclusion that are insightful.
Actively looks for and suggests solutions to problems.
Uses online tools, like Google and YouTube, to proactively seek answers and find information.
Does not use resources to support the team’s work.
Attempts to listen to, share with, and support the efforts of team members are limited or inconsistent.
Does not always listen when team members talk and requires redirection by team members and/or teacher.
Body language does not reflect engagement in the process. Focus on leaning in, asking questions, actively listening (e.g. make eye contact).
Occasionally offers feedback. At times, becomes impatient or frustrated with the process making teamwork more challenging.
Limited attempts to move between roles.
Does not consistently use resources to support the team’s work.
Listens to, shares with, and supports the efforts of team members.
Listens when team members talk.
Attempts to engage in group tasks; however, body language does not consistently communicate interest or attention. Body language reflects engagement in the process, but there is room for improvement.
Offers feedback and treats team members with respect. At times, becomes impatient or frustrated with the process making teamwork more challenging.
Attempts to be flexible and move between roles; at times dominates a particular role. This is an area of potential growth.
Uses resources to support the team’s work.
Consistently listens to, shares with, and supports the efforts of team members.
Leans in and actively listens when team members talk.
Body language communicates interest in team tasks and engagement in the process.
Offers constructive feedback, treats team members with respect, and is patient with the process.
Creates balance on the team moving between responsibilities without dominating any one role.
Uses resources effectively to support the team’s work.
an August 2017 working paper, “Education Technology: An Evidence-Based Review,” published by the National Bureau of Economic Research with clear tables on which technology improves learning and which doesn’t.
1. Computers and internet access alone don’t boost learning
Handing out laptops, providing high-speed internet access or buying most other kinds of hardware doesn’t on its own boost academic outcomes. The research shows that student achievement doesn’t rise when kids are using computers more, and it sometimes decreases.
2. Some math software shows promise
math programs such as SimCalc and ASSISTments. One popular program, DreamBox, showed small gains for students, as well. Only one piece of software that taught reading, Intelligent Tutoring for the Structure Strategy (ITSS), showed promise, suggesting that it is possible to create good educational software outside of math, but it’s a lot harder.
One commonality of the software that seems to work is that it somehow “personalizes” instruction. Sometimes students start with a pre-test so the computer can determine what they don’t know and then sends each student the right lessons, or a series of worksheet problems, to help fill in the gaps. Other times, the computer ascertains a student’s gaps as he works through problems and makes mistakes, giving personalized feedback. Teachers also get data reports to help pinpoint where students are struggling.
3. Cheap can be effective
a study in San Francisco where texts reminded mothers to read to their preschoolers. That boosted children’s literacy scores.
your library IT’s approach to managing tech support within the framework of moving IT projects forward. Also, how big is your IT team vs your staff?
We have created an environment at our library where staff anticipate almost instant tech support. While this is great for our staff and patrons it’s proven not so great for the IT department as our IT projects that must get done take longer than they should and seem to roll endlessly. It can feel like we’re sacrificing the “big boulders” for endless minutia.
I wondered if you all could tell me your library IT’s approach to managing tech support within the framework of moving IT projects forward.
Also, how big is your IT team vs your staff?
Thank you,
Madeleine Madeleine Sturmer IT Manager | Teton County Library msturmer@tclib.org | 307.733.2164 x143
+++++++++++++++++++++
While the responses will vary widely based on size, type and IT-issues approaches, I can share one.
Providence College is a private, medium-sized (4,300 FTE students) Masters-I institution.
Our library is a fully integrated (horizontally and vertically) Commons (Library+Commons = no silos, traditional+technology-rich, open 116 hours/week for a primarily residential campus.
IT issues are tiered (e.g., 1-5 in complexity) and we have in-house IT specialists (two – one M-F days, one S-Th evenings) and many “back-up specialists”. The IT specialists handle most tiers-1-3 issues (sometimes tier 4) very promptly and refer tier 4-5 issues to central IT. All Library+Commons staff are hired with “relative high-tech/digital expertise, so that there is an articulated in-house IT team. This means that most IT issues are handled in-house and promptly. Library+Commons IT reports up to the Assistant Director and Head of Technology & Access.
the biggest challenge (and the most important) is to get the word out to the staff about how it works. I spoke at multiple all staff meetings about the process, put out a lot of documentation, and spoke at multiple meetings of various teams and departments to get the word out. Once you have a structure you have to support and enforce it. Getting your administration on board is vital-if the director or associate director thinks that they can “jump the queue” it won’t work. They have to understand that for the good of the whole, they might have to wait for something that is non-emergency.
Hope that helps-glad to provide further info offline if needed.
Who: Jerry Wellik
Where: Maple Room Atwood
When: Mondays, 9AM
What: Qi Gong / meditation
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
more on meditation in the classroom in this IMS blog https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=meditation
My note: it is NOT about creating masses of programmers and driving the salaries down, as the author claims; it is about fostering a generation, which is technology literate. A doctor, knowing how to code will be a better doctor in the era of IoT; a philosopher knowing how to code will be better in the era of digital humanities.
For the completely uninitiated, RSS is just a standardized way of presenting text and images in a feed that can be used by a variety of apps and web services. It is just like how Twitter has a standard way of presenting text and images that all the various Twitter clients understand.
As we’ve already alluded to, when you follow the news via social media, you’re relying on other people bringing you the news, unless you’re following individual news stories. RSS is like getting your newspaper of choice delivered to the front door rather than relying on heading down to the local bar to listen in on what everyone’s shouting about.
With only one page to visit rather than dozens to catch up on, you can spend less time aimlessly drifting around and more time catching up on the posts that matter.
It’s not just for news
Basically anything you might want to keep track of and not miss because of the cacophony of voices on social media,
The always-useful IFTTT (If This Then That) is fluent in RSS, giving you even more ways to make use of RSS. You can build applets to generate tweets or Facebook posts or Instagram updates from a particular feed. Zapier is another service that can take RSS feeds from anywhere in the web and plug them into other apps and platforms.
Code4Lib 2018 is a loosely-structured conference that provides people working at the intersection of libraries/archives/museums/cultural heritage and technology with a chance to share ideas, be inspired, and forge collaborations. For more information about the Code4Lib community, please visit http://code4lib.org/about/.
The conference will be held at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in Washington, DC, from February 13, 2018 – February 16, 2018. More information about Code4lib 2018 is available on this year’s conference website http://2018.code4lib.org.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Mark Gill and Plamen Miltenoff proposal:
Gamification of Library Orientation and Instruction
Abstract
The rapid advent in the technologies of augmented and virtual reality (VR) in the last several years and the surge down in price creates possibilities for its increasing and ubiquitous application in education. A collaboration by a librarian and VR specialist led to testing opportunities to apply 360 video in academic library orientation. The team seeks to bank on the inherited interest of Millennials toward these technologies and their inextricable part of a growing gaming environment in education. A virtual introduction via 360 video aims to familiarize patrons with the library and its services: http://bit.ly/VRlib. I short Surveymonkey survey following the virtual introduction assesses learning outcomes and allows further instruction when necessary. Patrons can use any electronic devices from desktop to any size mobile devices. Patrons can also watch in panorama mode, and are provided with goggles if they would like to experience the VR mode.
The next step is an introduction to basic bibliographic instruction, followed by a gamified “scavenger hunt”-kind of exercise, which aims to gamify students’ ability to perform basic research: http://bit.ly/learnlib. The game is web-based and it can be played on any electronic devices from desktops to mobile devices. The game is followed by a short Google Form survey, which assesses learning outcomes and allows further work shall any knowledge gaps occur.
The team relies on the constructivist theory of assisting patrons in building their knowledge in their own pace and on their own terms, rather than being lectured and guided by a librarian only.
This proposal envisions half a day activities for participants to study the opportunities presented by 360 video camera and acquire the necessary skills to collect quickly useful footage and process it for the library needs. The second half of the day is allocated for learning Adobe Dreamweaver to manipulate the preexisting “templates” (HTML and jQuery code) for the game and adapt the content and the format to the needs of the participants’ libraries.
Mr. Gill is a Visualization Engineer for the College of Science and Engineering and runs the Visualization Laboratory. He has worked for several major universities as well as Stennis Space Center and Mechdyne, Inc. He holds a Masters of Science in Software Engineering.
Dr. Miltenoff is part of a workgroup within the academic library, which works with faculty, students and staff on the application of new technologies in education. Dr. Miltenoff’s most recent research with Mark Gill is on the impact of Video 360 on students during library orientation:http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/bi/
