Posts Tagged ‘LRS’

consensus of mediocrity versus disruptive innovation

Attached below is the entire correspondence:

  1. a committee is formed.
  2. the committee decides “democratically” what needs to be done.
  3. the emphasis, as per administration is on “consensus” not on expertise and per LRS staff on “democratic” (meaning who has more votes), not on expertise.

Who is John Galt?

From:
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 9:19 AM
To: Miltenoff, Plamen <pmiltenoff@stcloudstate.edu>
Subject: FW: Green Screen for Library Lawn Party?

Hi Plamen.  Honestly and respectfully, the idea didn’t move forward because the planning group wasn’t excited about it and the scavenger hunt group had other ideas for ways they wanted to administer the scavenger hunt.

I apologize for not reaching out proactively to tell you that.

From: Miltenoff, Plamen
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 5:00 PM
To:
Cc:
Subject: RE: Green Screen for Library Lawn Party?

I am mighty curious why ideas, which had been repeatedly offered by IMS faculty to the lawn party committee were not considered and responded to, but ideas, which the lawn party committee thinks that fit the ideas of the IMS faculty are proposed.

Just curious. Don’t expecting answers. Not that they are coming anyhow…

—————-

Plamen Miltenoff, Ph.D., MLIS

Professor

320-308-3072

pmiltenoff@stcloudstate.edu

http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/faculty/

worse then no hope is false hope: based on my experience working with administration

 

From:
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 3:47 PM
To:
Cc:
Subject: Re: Green Screen for Library Lawn Party?

Our green screen has never been set up for these types of activities. It would be really complex to set it up. I’m quite leery of promoting something with no support and no prospect of support. There are no funds for student help and no one available to manage it. Before our days were cut, I offered to continue with some management, using my normal set of extra duty days. Now there are really no resources to operate the studio.

I think this would be logistically difficult to do and not useful for campus communication.

From:
Date: Monday, July 20, 2015 at 12:42 PM
To:
Subject: Green Screen for Library Lawn Party?

Hi    .  We continue to brainstorm ideas for promotion of library services for the Library Lawn Party.  Wanting to learn a little more about the green screen…thinking it would be a nice promotion for the studio.  Would you have ideas for how we could incorporate the green screen into the event?  We could get students down to the studio and in front of the screen.

Perhaps we could have them read something on cue cards and then edit it together…you’ve probably seen things like that…where each word in a string is spoken by a different person.

Or could we somehow put students in front of it and put something crazy in the background and have the image stream to a monitor somewhere?

Would either of these ideas be feasible?  Would it be difficult??

Recommendations for games and gaming at LRS

Gaming and Gamification in academic and library settings (paper)
Short URL: http://scsu.mn/1F008Re 

Based on the literature regarding games, gaming, gamification, game-based learning, and serious games, several clear trends emerge:

  1. Gaming and gamification in the sense of game-based learning is about using games and game-like tactics in the education process, for greater engagement and better learning outcomes. However, this is only the first level of such initiative. The second and higher level is about involving students in the game-building and gamification of the learning process (as per Vygotsky’s Zone of…) thus achieving student-centered and experiential learning.
  2. When hosting games and gaming in any library, “in-person” or electronic/online games are welcome but not sufficient to fulfill their promise, especially in an academic library. Per (1), an academic library has the responsibility to involve students and guide them in learning how to engage in the building process required in true game-based learning.
  3. Game-based learning, gaming and gamification in particular, in educational (academic library) settings must consider mobile devices and the BYOD movement in particular as intrinsic parts of the entire process. Approaching the initiative primarily by acquiring online “in-person” games, or game consoles has the same limited educational potential as only hosting games, rather than elevating the students to full guided engagement with game-based learning. If public relations and raised profile are the main goals for the academic library, such an approach is justified. If the academic library seeks to maximize the value of game-based learning, then the library must consider: a. gaming consoles, b. mobile devices as part of a BYOD initiative and c. cloud-based / social games, such as MineCraft, SimCity etc.
  4. Design for game-based learning, gaming and gamification in educational (academic library) settings must include multiple forms of assessment and reward, e.g. badges, leaderboards and/or certificates as an intrinsic part of the entire process. Merely hosting games in the academic library cannot guarantee true game-based learning. The academic library, as the forefront of a game-based learning initiative on campus, must work with faculty on understanding and fine tuning badges and similar new forms of assessment and reward, as they effectively implement large scale game-based learning, focused on the students’ learning gains.

Recommendations for LRS

  1. In regard to LRS, the gaming and gamification process must be organized and led by faculty, including housing and distributing the hardware, software and applications, when needed.
  2. The attached paper and the respective conclusions summarized in four points demand educational and experiential background, which is above the limits of the LRS staff. In addition, the LRS staff has clearly admitted that the pedagogical value of gaming and gamification is beyond their interest. This recommendation is not contradicting to the fact and opportunity for LRS staff to participate in the process and contribute to the process; it just negates the possibility of staff mandating and leading the process, since it will keep the gaming and gamification process on a very rudimentary level.
  3. The process must be further led by faculty with a terminal degree in education (Ph.D.) and experience in the educational field, since, as proved by the attached paper and 4 point conclusion, the goal is not a public-library type of hosting activities, but rather involving students in a pedagogically-sound creative process, with the respective opportunity for assessment and future collaboration with instructors across campus. This recommendation is not contradicting the fact and opportunity for LRS library faculty to participate actively in the process and contribute to the process. It just safeguards from restricting the process to the realm of “public-library” type of hosting activities, but failing to elevate them to the needs of an academic campus and connecting with instructors across campus.
  4. This conclusions adhere to and are derived from the document recommended by the LRS dean, discussed and accepted by LRS faculty in 2013 about new trends and directions in academic libraries, namely diversification of LRS faculty; breaking from the traditional library mold of including faculty from different disciplines with different opinions and ideas.

on digital literacy and old habits

“Academic libraries are concerned about the digital literacy of their users but their programs continue to be focused on the information components defined by the President’s Commission on Information Literacy.” (p. 45)

Cordell, R.  (2013). Library Instruction in the 21st Century. In: Rosanne, M (Ed.) Library Reference Services and Information Literacy: Models for Academic Institutions: Models for Academic Institutions. IGI Global.

More on digital literacy in this blog:

http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=library+digital+literacy

LRS and mobile devices: meeting of May 27

Good afternoon,

Tom Hergert, Chris Stanley, Plamen Miltenoff and Marian Rengel discussed various aspects on mobile devices.
It was a great conversation, since we barely touched on technological aspects, but rather brainstormed on how to structure these meetings so most can benefit.
Questions/Issues/Ideas addressed:

how to choose a devices and what to use it for
do/can tablets help you work from home. Similarly to taking a laptop to work at home: how does this reflect on the social stigma of co-workers (“you are not at your office”)
can we expand the conversation beyond LRS and attract more participants by moving the monthly meeting from LRS to any of the coffee shops on campus (iSelf, LRS, Atwood)?
is there a “timer/timing” app, which can help me easily calculate the time was really “busy” with work-related tasks?
the structure of this group: who the we cater to and how
clickers were mentioned

Please feel most welcome to enter your responses to the billeted list above and any other ideas under the following IMS blog entry:
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2014/05/29/lrs-and-mobile-devices-meeting-of-may-27/
Here are the links to the blog entries from the previous meetings:

LRS and mobile devices: Please join us in exploring…

LRS and mobile devices: Please join us in exploring…

Mobile Devices for Teaching and Learning: A Discussion

SMUG (smart mobile users’ group)

Contact us and contribute via social media:

IMS blog: http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/ (keyword: mobile devices)

Twitter: https://twitter.com/SCSUtechinstruc

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/InforMediaServices?ref=hl

Pinterest: http://www.pinterest.com/scsutechnology/

Instagram: http://instagram.com/scsutechinstruct

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_UMIE5r6YB8KzTF5nZJFyA

Google +: https://plus.google.com/u/0/115966710162153290760/posts/p/pub

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/scsuinstructionaltechnology